Proof.
We will consider .
Here , are constants to be determined below.
Then we have
| (2.18) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For simplicity of notation, set
|
|
|
Similar as before, we may calculate:
| (2.19) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recall the calculation in (2.7):
| (2.20) |
|
|
|
Again depends only on curvature bound of .
Also
|
|
|
Hence if we plug in (2.19) and (2.20) back to (2.18), we obtain:
| (2.21) |
|
|
|
We notice the following complete square in the above sum:
| (2.22) |
|
|
|
We will drop this complete square in the following.
Next we observe a crucial cancellation, which is the key point of this argument. We look at the last two terms in (2.21) and observe:
| (2.23) |
|
|
|
Hence we have
| (2.24) |
|
|
|
Now we make the choices of , .
We choose and .
With this choice, we now estimate the terms in (2.24), with various constants which depends only on the curvature bound of and .
| (2.25) |
|
|
|
| (2.26) |
|
|
|
| (2.27) |
|
|
|
| (2.28) |
|
|
|
| (2.29) |
|
|
|
Combining all these estimates, we obtain from (2.24) that
| (2.30) |
|
|
|
Here depends only on curvature bound of and . Using Young’s inequality, we have,
|
|
|
Thus,
|
|
|
Hence we get from (2.30) that
| (2.31) |
|
|
|
Suppose that the function achieves maximum at .
Then at point , we have
| (2.32) |
|
|
|
Recall Proposition 2.1 gives an estimate for which depends only on and the curvature bound of . Therefore, we get a bound for with the same dependence.
Hence we have a bound for , with the dependence as stated in the theorem.
But this function achieves maximum at , so we are done.
∎