ScalingStacks

5 Higher order regularity of the solutions. [029I]

Original official author HTML, exact retained edition. Historical TeX conversion verdicts remain unchanged. Cited-edition alignment and mathematical self-containment are not assessed.

Complete original source context · Original author HTML

5 Higher order regularity of the solutions.

We now prove the following theorem.

Theorem 7

. Let XX be a compact Kähler manifold of complex dimension nn, let ω≥0\omega\geq 0 be a big closed smooth (1,1)(1,1)-form such that {ωn=0}\{\omega^{n}=0\} is a set of zero measure and let Ω>0\Omega>0 be a smooth volume form. Consider also σj∈H0​(X,Ej)\sigma_{j}\in H^{0}(X,E_{j}), τr∈H0​(X,Fr)\tau_{r}\in H^{0}(X,F_{r}), j=1,…,Nj=1,...,N, r=1,…,Mr=1,...,M be non identically zero holomorphic sections of some holomorphic vector bundles over XX, such that the intregral condition

∫X∏j=1N|σj|2​lj⋅∏r=1M|τr|−2​hr​Ω=∫Xωn\displaystyle\int\limits_{X}\,\prod\limits_{j=1}^{N}|\sigma_{j}|^{2l_{j}}\cdot\prod\limits_{r=1}^{M}|\tau_{r}|^{-2h_{r}}\,\Omega=\int\limits_{X}\omega^{n} (5.1)

holds for some real numbers lj≥0,hr≥0l_{j}\geq 0,\,h_{r}\geq 0. Then there exists a unique solution φ∈𝒫^ω\varphi\in\hat{\cal P}_{\omega} of the degenerate complex Monge-Ampère equation

(ω+i​∂∂¯​φ)n=∏j=1N|σj|2​lj⋅∏r=1M|τr|−2​hr​eλ​φ​Ω,λ≥0.\displaystyle(\omega+i\partial\bar{\partial}\varphi)^{n}=\prod\limits_{j=1}^{N}|\sigma_{j}|^{2l_{j}}\cdot\prod\limits_{r=1}^{M}|\tau_{r}|^{-2h_{r}}\,e^{\lambda\varphi}\,\Omega\,,\quad\lambda\geq 0\,. (5.2)

Moreover there exists a complex analytic set Σω⊂X\Sigma_{\omega}\subset X depending only on the (1,1)(1,1)-cohomology class of ω\omega possessing the following properties.

(A). The set Σω\Sigma_{\omega} is empty if and only if the class of ω\omega is Kähler.

(B). If we define the complex analytic sets

S0′:=⋃r{τr=0},S0:=S0′∪(⋃j{σj=0}),\displaystyle S^{\prime}_{0}:=\bigcup_{r}\{\tau_{r}=0\}\,,\quad S_{0}:=S^{\prime}_{0}\cup(\bigcup_{j}\{\sigma_{j}=0\})\,,
S′:=Σω∪S0′,S:=S′∪(⋃j{σj=0}),\displaystyle S^{\prime}:=\Sigma_{\omega}\cup S^{\prime}_{0}\,,\quad S:=S^{\prime}\cup(\bigcup_{j}\{\sigma_{j}=0\})\,,

then in the case n≥2n\geq 2

φ∈𝒫ω∩C0​(X)∩Cα​(X∖S′)∩C∞​(X∖S),\varphi\in{\cal P}_{\omega}\cap C^{0}(X)\cap C^{\alpha}(X\smallsetminus S^{\prime})\cap C^{\infty}(X\smallsetminus S)\,,

for all α∈(0,1)\alpha\in(0,1). If n=1n=1 then φ∈𝒫ω∩C0​(X)∩Cα​(X∖S0′)∩C∞​(X∖S0)\varphi\in{\cal P}_{\omega}\cap C^{0}(X)\cap C^{\alpha}(X\smallsetminus S^{\prime}_{0})\cap C^{\infty}(X\smallsetminus S_{0}) and the class of of ω\omega is Kähler.

Proof.
Step I. We first assume the existence of an effective divisor DD and δ>0\delta>0 such that {ω}−δ​{D}\{\omega\}-\delta\{D\} is a Kähler class. This is certainly the case if XX is projective and {ω}∈H1,1​(X,ℚ)\{\omega\}\in H^{1,1}(X,\mathbb{Q}). So by using the Lelong-Poincaré formula we deduce 0<ωδ=ω−2​π​δ​[D]+δ​i​∂∂¯​log⁡|s|20<\omega_{\delta}=\omega-2\pi\delta[D]+\delta\,i\partial\bar{\partial}\log|s|^{2} with div⁡(s)=D\operatorname{div}(s)=D. By convention we will put δ=0\delta=0 if ω>0\omega>0 and by abusing notations we will denote by DD the support |D||D| of the divisor DD.

IA) Setup of Step I.
We first consider the case n≥2n\geq 2. We can assume without any lost of generality N=M=1N=M=1. Let α>0\alpha>0 be a Kähler metric, let ε∈(0,1)\varepsilon\in(0,1) and let cεc_{\varepsilon} be a normalizing constant for the integral condition

ecε​∫X(|σ|2+εA)l(|τ|2+ε)h​Ω=∫X(ω+ε​α)n,\displaystyle e^{c_{\varepsilon}}\,\int\limits_{X}\frac{(|\sigma|^{2}+\varepsilon^{A})^{l}}{(|\tau|^{2}+\varepsilon)^{h}}\;\Omega=\int\limits_{X}(\omega+\varepsilon\alpha)^{n}\,, (5.3)

with A:=(h+1)/lA:=(h+1)/l. The condition (5.1) combined with lemma 7 implies cε→0c_{\varepsilon}\rightarrow 0, when ε→0+\varepsilon\rightarrow 0^{+}. Consider the standard solutions φε∈C∞​(X)\varphi_{\varepsilon}\in C^{\infty}(X) of the complex Monge-Ampère equations

(ω+ε​α+i​∂∂¯​φε)n=ecε​(|σ|2+εA)l(|τ|2+ε)h​eλ​φε​Ω,\displaystyle(\omega+\varepsilon\alpha+i\partial\bar{\partial}\varphi_{\varepsilon})^{n}=e^{c_{\varepsilon}}\,\frac{(|\sigma|^{2}+\varepsilon^{A})^{l}}{(|\tau|^{2}+\varepsilon)^{h}}\;e^{\lambda\varphi_{\varepsilon}}\,\Omega\,, (5.4)

given by Yau’s solution of the Calabi conjecture. Notice that the integral condition (5.3) implies that a non identicaly zero solution φε\varphi_{\varepsilon} changes signs in the case λ>0\lambda>0. By combining lemma 7 with the estimate of theorem 6 we deduce a uniform bound for the oscillations Osc⁡(φε)≤C\operatorname{Osc}(\varphi_{\varepsilon})\leq C. Set now ωδ,ε:=ωδ+ε​α\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}:=\omega_{\delta}+\varepsilon\alpha and ψε:=φε−δ​log⁡|s|2\psi_{\varepsilon}:=\varphi_{\varepsilon}-\delta\log|s|^{2}. Then

0<ω+ε​α+i​∂∂¯​φε=ωδ,ε+i​∂∂¯​ψε\displaystyle 0<\omega+\varepsilon\alpha+i\partial\bar{\partial}\varphi_{\varepsilon}=\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}+i\partial\bar{\partial}\psi_{\varepsilon} (5.5)

over X∖DX\smallsetminus D, and the equation (5.4) rewrites as

(ωδ,ε+i​∂∂¯​ψε)n=eFε+λ​δ​log⁡|s|2+λ​ψε​ωδ,εn\displaystyle(\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}+i\partial\bar{\partial}\psi_{\varepsilon})^{n}=e^{F^{\varepsilon}+\lambda\delta\log|s|^{2}+\lambda\psi_{\varepsilon}}\,\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}^{n} (5.6)

on X∖DX\smallsetminus D, with Fε:=fε+l⋅aε−h⋅bεF^{\varepsilon}:=f^{\varepsilon}+l\cdot a^{\varepsilon}-h\cdot b^{\varepsilon}, and with

fε:=cε+log⁡(Ω/ωδ,εn),aε:=log⁡(|σ|2+εA),bε:=log⁡(|τ|2+ε).f^{\varepsilon}:=c_{\varepsilon}+\log(\Omega/\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}^{n})\,,\quad a^{\varepsilon}:=\log(|\sigma|^{2}+\varepsilon^{A})\,,\quad b^{\varepsilon}:=\log(|\tau|^{2}+\varepsilon)\,.

(Here the supscripts in ε\varepsilon are indices and not powers.) Consider now the function γ1δ,ε:X→ℝ\gamma_{1}^{\delta,\varepsilon}:X\rightarrow\mathbb{R} defined by the formula

γ1δ,ε(x):=minξ∈TX,x⊗2∖0x𝒞X,Jωδ,ε(ξ,ξ)|ξ|ωδ,ε−2.\gamma_{1}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(x):=\min_{\xi\in T^{\otimes 2}_{X,x}\smallsetminus 0_{x}}{\cal C}^{\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}}_{{}_{X,J}}(\xi,\xi)|\xi|_{\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}}^{-2}.

So γ1δ,ε​(x)\gamma_{1}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(x) is the smallest eigenvalue of the Chern curvature form 𝒞X,Jωδ,ε(x){\cal C}^{\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}}_{{}_{X,J}}(x) of the metric ωδ,ε>0\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}>0. It is well known (see [Kat], chap II, sect. 5.1, theorem 5.1, page 107) that the function γ1δ,ε\gamma_{1}^{\delta,\varepsilon} is continuous. We observe that the family of metrics (ωδ,ε)ε(\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon})_{\varepsilon} has bounded geometry. In particular for all ε∈(0,1)\varepsilon\in(0,1)

γ1δ,ε≥Cδ,|fε|≤K0,δ,λ⁡(ωδ−ω)+i​∂∂¯​fε≥−K0,δ​ωδ,ε.\gamma_{1}^{\delta,\varepsilon}\geq C_{\delta}\,,\quad|f^{\varepsilon}|\leq K_{0,\delta}\,,\quad\lambda(\omega_{\delta}-\omega)+i\partial\bar{\partial}f^{\varepsilon}\geq-K_{0,\delta}\,\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}\,.

IB) The Laplacian estimate.
This estimate is obtained as a combination of ideas of Yau, Blocki and Tsuji, [Yau], [Blo2], [Ts]. Consider the continuous function Λε:X→(0,+∞)\Lambda_{\varepsilon}:X\rightarrow(0,+\infty) given by the maximal eigenvalues of ωδ,ε+i​∂∂¯​ψε\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}+i\partial\bar{\partial}\psi_{\varepsilon} with respect to the Kähler metric ωδ,ε\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon},

Λε​(x):=maxξ∈TX,x∖0x⁡(ωδ,ε+i​∂∂¯​ψε)​(ξ,J​ξ)​|ξ|ωδ,ε−2,\Lambda_{\varepsilon}(x):=\max_{\xi\in T_{X,x}\smallsetminus 0_{x}}(\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}+i\partial\bar{\partial}\psi_{\varepsilon})(\xi,J\xi)|\xi|_{\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}}^{-2}\,,

i.e. we extend Λε\Lambda_{\varepsilon} over DD by continuity, as is permitted by (5.5). Consider also the continuous function over X∖DX\smallsetminus D,

Aε:=log⁡Λε−k​ψε+h​bε,A_{\varepsilon}:=\log\Lambda_{\varepsilon}-k\psi_{\varepsilon}+hb^{\varepsilon}\,,

with 0<k:=2​(1+h​K0,δ/2−K1)0<k:=2(1+h\,K_{0,\delta}/2-K_{1}) and

K1:=min⁡{−[λ+(1+l+h)​K0,δ/(2​n)],Cδ}<−λ.K_{1}:=\min\{-[\lambda+(1+l+h)K_{0,\delta}/(2n)]\,,\,C_{\delta}\}<-\lambda\,.

The singularity of the function ψε\psi_{\varepsilon} imply the existence of a maximum of the function AεA_{\varepsilon} at a certain point xε∈X∖Dx_{\varepsilon}\in X\smallsetminus D. Let gg be a smooth real valued function in a neighborhood of xεx_{\varepsilon} in X∖DX\smallsetminus D such that ωδ,ε=i2​∂∂¯​g\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}=\frac{i}{2}\partial\bar{\partial}g, and let u:=g+2​ψεu:=g+2\psi_{\varepsilon}. Then

ωδ,ε+i​∂∂¯​ψε=i2​∂∂¯​u.\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}+i\partial\bar{\partial}\psi_{\varepsilon}=\frac{i}{2}\partial\bar{\partial}u\,.

In the following calculations we use the notation ul,r¯:=∂2u∂zl​∂z¯ru_{l,\bar{r}}:=\frac{\partial^{2}u}{\partial z_{l}\partial\bar{z}_{r}}. Let (z1,…,zn)(z_{1},\ldots,z_{n}) be ωδ,ε\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}-geodesic holomorphic coordinates with center the point xεx_{\varepsilon} such that the metric ωδ,ε+i​∂∂¯​ψε\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}+i\partial\bar{\partial}\psi_{\varepsilon} can be writen in diagonal form in xεx_{\varepsilon}. Explicitly ωδ,ε=i2​∑l,rgl,r¯​d​zl∧d​z¯r\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}=\frac{i}{2}\sum_{l,r}g_{l,\bar{r}}\,dz_{l}\wedge d\bar{z}_{r}, with

gl,r¯=δl,r−∑j,kCr,lj,k¯​zj​z¯k+O⁡(|z|3),gj,k¯,l,r¯​(xε)=−Cr,lj,k¯,\displaystyle\displaystyle{g_{l,\bar{r}}=\delta_{l,r}-\sum_{j,k}C^{j,\bar{k}}_{r,l}z_{j}\bar{z}_{k}+O(|z|^{3})\,,\quad g_{j,\bar{k},l,\bar{r}}(x_{\varepsilon})=-C^{j,\bar{k}}_{r,l}\,,}
𝒞X,Jωδ,ε(xε)=∑j,k,l,rCr,lj,k¯dzj⊗dzl⊗dz¯k⊗dz¯r.\displaystyle\displaystyle{{\cal C}^{\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}}_{{}_{X,J}}(x_{\varepsilon})=\sum_{j,k,l,r}C^{j,\bar{k}}_{r,l}\,dz_{j}\otimes dz_{l}\otimes d\bar{z}_{k}\otimes d\bar{z}_{r}\,.}

and i2​∂∂¯​u=i2​∑lul,l¯​d​zl∧d​z¯l\frac{i}{2}\partial\bar{\partial}u=\frac{i}{2}\sum_{l}u_{l,\bar{l}}\,dz_{l}\wedge d\bar{z}_{l}, with 0<u1,1¯≤…≤un,n¯0<u_{1,\bar{1}}\leq...\leq u_{n,\bar{n}} at the point xεx_{\varepsilon}. For every ζ∈ℂn\zeta\in\mathbb{C}^{n} we set gζ,ζ¯:=∑l,rgl,r¯​ζl​ζ¯rg_{\zeta,\bar{\zeta}}:=\sum_{l,r}g_{l,\bar{r}}\,\zeta_{l}\,\bar{\zeta}_{r}. Then

Λε​(x)=maxξ∈TX,x∖0x⁡∂∂¯​u​(ξ1,0,ξ0,1)∂∂¯​g​(ξ1,0,ξ0,1)=max|ζ|=1⁡uζ,ζ¯gζ,ζ¯,\Lambda_{\varepsilon}(x)=\max_{\xi\in T_{X,x}\smallsetminus 0_{x}}\,\frac{\partial\bar{\partial}u(\xi^{1,0},\xi^{0,1})}{\partial\bar{\partial}g(\xi^{1,0},\xi^{0,1})}=\max_{|\zeta|=1}\,\frac{u_{\zeta,\bar{\zeta}}}{g_{\zeta,\bar{\zeta}}}\,,

and so Λε​(xε)=un,n¯​(xε)\Lambda_{\varepsilon}(x_{\varepsilon})=u_{n,\bar{n}}(x_{\varepsilon}), un,n¯gn,n¯≤Λε\frac{u_{n,\bar{n}}}{g_{n,\bar{n}}}\leq\Lambda_{\varepsilon}. We also set

A~ε:=log⁡un,n¯gn,n¯−k​ψε+h​bε.\tilde{A}_{\varepsilon}:=\log\frac{u_{n,\bar{n}}}{g_{n,\bar{n}}}-k\psi_{\varepsilon}+hb^{\varepsilon}\,.

Then A~ε≤Aε\tilde{A}_{\varepsilon}\leq A_{\varepsilon}, with A~ε​(xε)=Aε​(xε)\tilde{A}_{\varepsilon}(x_{\varepsilon})=A_{\varepsilon}(x_{\varepsilon}). This implies that A~ε\tilde{A}_{\varepsilon} also reaches a maximum at xεx_{\varepsilon}, thus Δψε​A~ε​(xε)≤0\Delta_{\psi_{\varepsilon}}\tilde{A}_{\varepsilon}(x_{\varepsilon})\leq 0, where Δψε\Delta_{\psi_{\varepsilon}} is the Laplacian respect to the metric ωδ,ε+i​∂∂¯​ψε\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}+i\partial\bar{\partial}\psi_{\varepsilon}. All the subsequent computations in this part of the proof will be made at point xεx_{\varepsilon}. By the local expressions for the Ricci tensor we obtain

∂n,n¯2log⁡det⁡(uj,k¯)\displaystyle\partial^{2}_{n,\bar{n}}\log\operatorname{det}(u_{j,\bar{k}}) =\displaystyle= ∑l,p(un,n¯,l,p¯−∑s,tun,l,s¯​us,t¯​un¯,t,p¯)​up,l¯\displaystyle\sum_{l,p}\Big(u_{n,\bar{n},l,\bar{p}}-\sum_{s,t}u_{n,l,\bar{s}}\,u^{s,\bar{t}}\,u_{\bar{n},t,\bar{p}}\Big)u^{p,\bar{l}}
=\displaystyle= ∑pun,n¯,p,p¯up,p¯−∑p,q|un,p,q¯|2up,p¯​uq,q¯,\displaystyle\sum_{p}\frac{u_{n,\bar{n},p,\bar{p}}}{u_{p,\bar{p}}}-\sum_{p,q}\frac{\,|u_{n,p,\bar{q}}|^{2}}{u_{p,\bar{p}}\,u_{q,\bar{q}}}\,,

and in a similar way ∂n,n¯2log⁡det⁡(gj,k¯)=∑pgn,n¯,p,p¯\partial^{2}_{n,\bar{n}}\log\operatorname{det}(g_{j,\bar{k}})=\sum_{p}\,g_{n,\bar{n},p,\bar{p}}. Then by differentiating with respect to ∂n,n¯2\partial^{2}_{n,\bar{n}} the identity (5.6), which rewrites as

log⁡det⁡(uj,k¯)=Fε+λ​δ​log⁡|s|2+λ⁡(u−g)/2+log⁡det⁡(gj,k¯),\log\operatorname{det}(u_{j,\bar{k}})=F^{\varepsilon}+\lambda\delta\log|s|^{2}+\lambda(u-g)/2+\log\operatorname{det}(g_{j,\bar{k}})\,,

we obtain

∑pun,n¯,p,p¯up,p¯−∑p,q|un,p,q¯|2up,p¯​uq,q¯\displaystyle\sum_{p}\frac{u_{n,\bar{n},p,\bar{p}}}{u_{p,\bar{p}}}-\sum_{p,q}\frac{\,|u_{n,p,\bar{q}}|^{2}}{u_{p,\bar{p}}\,u_{q,\bar{q}}} =\displaystyle= fn,n¯ε+λ⁡[(ωδ)n,n−ωn,n]/2\displaystyle f^{\varepsilon}_{n,\bar{n}}+\lambda[(\omega_{\delta})_{n,n}-\omega_{n,n}]/2
+\displaystyle+ l​an,n¯ε−h​bn,n¯ε+λ⁡(un,n¯−1)/2+∑pgn,n¯,p,p¯.\displaystyle la^{\varepsilon}_{n,\bar{n}}-hb^{\varepsilon}_{n,\bar{n}}+\lambda(u_{n,\bar{n}}-1)/2+\sum_{p}\,g_{n,\bar{n},p,\bar{p}}\,.

Combining this with the inequality Δψε​A~ε​(xε)≤0\Delta_{\psi_{\varepsilon}}\tilde{A}_{\varepsilon}(x_{\varepsilon})\leq 0, we get

0\displaystyle 0 ≥\displaystyle\geq ∑pA~p,p¯up,p¯=∑p(un,n¯,p,p¯up,p¯​un,n¯−|un,n¯,p|2up,p¯​un,n¯2+k/2+h​bp,p¯ε−gn,n¯,p,p¯up,p¯)−n​k/2\displaystyle\sum_{p}\frac{\tilde{A}_{p,\bar{p}}}{u_{p,\bar{p}}}=\sum_{p}\left(\frac{u_{n,\bar{n},p,\bar{p}}}{u_{p,\bar{p}}\,u_{n,\bar{n}}}-\frac{\,|u_{n,\bar{n},p}|^{2}}{u_{p,\bar{p}}\,u^{2}_{n,\bar{n}}}+\frac{k/2+hb^{\varepsilon}_{p,\bar{p}}-g_{n,\bar{n},p,\bar{p}}}{u_{p,\bar{p}}}\right)-nk/2
=\displaystyle= ∑p,q|un,p,q¯|2up,p¯​uq,q¯​un,n¯−∑p|un,n¯,p|2up,p¯​un,n¯2\displaystyle\sum_{p,q}\frac{\,|u_{n,p,\bar{q}}|^{2}}{u_{p,\bar{p}}\,u_{q,\bar{q}}\,u_{n,\bar{n}}}-\sum_{p}\frac{\,|u_{n,\bar{n},p}|^{2}}{u_{p,\bar{p}}\,u^{2}_{n,\bar{n}}}
+\displaystyle+ fn,n¯+λ⁡[(ωδ)n,n−ωn,n−1]/2+l​an,n¯ε−h​bn,n¯εun,n¯\displaystyle\frac{f_{n,\bar{n}}+\lambda[(\omega_{\delta})_{n,n}-\omega_{n,n}-1]/2+la^{\varepsilon}_{n,\bar{n}}-hb^{\varepsilon}_{n,\bar{n}}}{u_{n,\bar{n}}}
+\displaystyle+ ∑p(gn,n¯,p,p¯un,n¯+k/2+h​bp,p¯ε−gn,n¯,p,p¯up,p¯)−(n​k−λ)/2.\displaystyle\sum_{p}\left(\frac{g_{n,\bar{n},p,\bar{p}}}{u_{n,\bar{n}}}+\frac{k/2+hb^{\varepsilon}_{p,\bar{p}}-g_{n,\bar{n},p,\bar{p}}}{u_{p,\bar{p}}}\right)-(nk-\lambda)/2\,.

We use now (see the Appendix) the existence of smooth (1,1)(1,1)-forms i​Taε≥0iT^{a^{\varepsilon}}\geq 0, i​Tbε≥0iT^{b^{\varepsilon}}\geq 0, on XX such that

−hi∂∂¯bε\displaystyle-hi\partial\bar{\partial}b^{\varepsilon} ≥\displaystyle\geq −h​K0,δ​ωδ,ε−h​i​Tbε,\displaystyle-hK_{0,\delta}\,\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}-hiT^{b^{\varepsilon}}\,,
h​i​∂∂¯​bε\displaystyle hi\partial\bar{\partial}b^{\varepsilon} ≥\displaystyle\geq −h​K0,δ​ωδ,ε+h​i​Tbε,\displaystyle-hK_{0,\delta}\,\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}+hiT^{b^{\varepsilon}}\,,
l​i​∂∂¯​aε\displaystyle li\partial\bar{\partial}a^{\varepsilon} ≥\displaystyle\geq −l​K0,δ​ωδ,ε.\displaystyle-lK_{0,\delta}\,\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}\,.

By plugging these inequalities in the previous computations we get

0≥−h​Tn,n¯bεun,n¯+∑p(K1−Cp,pn,n¯un,n¯+−K1+Cp,pn,n¯up,p¯+1up,p¯+h​Tp,p¯bεup,p¯)−(n​k−λ)/2\displaystyle 0\geq-\frac{hT_{n,\bar{n}}^{b^{\varepsilon}}}{u_{n,\bar{n}}}+\sum_{p}\left(\frac{K_{1}-C_{p,p}^{n,\bar{n}}}{u_{n,\bar{n}}}+\frac{-K_{1}+C_{p,p}^{n,\bar{n}}}{u_{p,\bar{p}}}+\frac{1}{u_{p,\bar{p}}}+\frac{hT_{p,\bar{p}}^{b^{\varepsilon}}}{u_{p,\bar{p}}}\right)-(nk-\lambda)/2
≥∑p(Cp,pn,n¯−K1)​(un,n¯−up,p¯)up,p¯​un,n¯+∑p1up,p¯−(n​k−λ)/2.\displaystyle\geq\sum_{p}\frac{(C_{p,p}^{n,\bar{n}}-K_{1})(u_{n,\bar{n}}-u_{p,\bar{p}})}{u_{p,\bar{p}}\,u_{n,\bar{n}}}+\sum_{p}\frac{1}{u_{p,\bar{p}}}-(nk-\lambda)/2\,.\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\;\,

Denote by (x1,…,xn)(x_{1},...,x_{n}) the real part of the complex coordinates (z1,…,zn)(z_{1},...,z_{n}). Then the inequality Cp,pn,n¯=𝒞X,Jωδ,ε(∂∂xn⊗∂∂xp,∂∂xn⊗∂∂xp)(x0)≥γ1δ,ε(x0)≥CδC^{n,\bar{n}}_{p,p}={\cal C}^{\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}}_{{}_{X,J}}(\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{n}}\otimes\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{p}},\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{n}}\otimes\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{p}})(x_{0})\geq\gamma_{1}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(x_{0})\geq C_{\delta} implies

0≥∑p1up,p¯−C0≥(un,n¯∏pup,p¯)1n−1−C0=e−λ​ψε−λ​δ​log⁡|s|2−Fεn−1​un,n¯1n−1−C0,\displaystyle 0\geq\sum_{p}\frac{1}{u_{p,\bar{p}}}-C_{0}\geq\left(\frac{u_{n,\bar{n}}}{\prod_{p}u_{p,\bar{p}}}\right)^{\frac{1}{n-1}}-C_{0}=e^{\frac{-\lambda\psi_{\varepsilon}-\lambda\delta\log|s|^{2}-F^{\varepsilon}}{n-1}}\,u_{n,\bar{n}}^{\frac{1}{n-1}}-C_{0}\,,

where C0>0C_{0}>0 and all the following constants are indipendents of ε\varepsilon. Consider now the function Bε:=eAε=Λε​e−k​ψε+h​bεB_{\varepsilon}:=e^{A_{\varepsilon}}=\Lambda_{\varepsilon}\,e^{-k\psi_{\varepsilon}+hb^{\varepsilon}}. Then xεx_{\varepsilon} is also a maximum point for BεB_{\varepsilon} over X∖DX\smallsetminus D and the previous inequality rewrites as

0\displaystyle 0 ≥\displaystyle\geq e(k−λ)​ψε−λ​δ​log⁡|s|2−h​bε−Fεn−1​(xε)​Bε​(xε)1n−1−C0\displaystyle e^{\frac{(k-\lambda)\psi_{\varepsilon}-\lambda\delta\log|s|^{2}-hb^{\varepsilon}-F^{\varepsilon}}{n-1}(x_{\varepsilon})}\,\,B_{\varepsilon}(x_{\varepsilon})^{\frac{1}{n-1}}-C_{0}
=\displaystyle= e(k−λ)​φε−δ​k​log⁡|s|2−l​aε−fεn−1​(xε)​Bε​(xε)1n−1−C0.\displaystyle e^{\frac{(k-\lambda)\varphi_{\varepsilon}-\delta k\log|s|^{2}-la^{\varepsilon}-f^{\varepsilon}}{n-1}(x_{\varepsilon})}\,\,B_{\varepsilon}(x_{\varepsilon})^{\frac{1}{n-1}}-C_{0}\,.

Then by the inequalities k−λ>0,|s|2≤Ck-\lambda>0,\;|s|^{2}\leq C, aε≤Ca^{\varepsilon}\leq C and |fε|≤K0,δ|f^{\varepsilon}|\leq K_{0,\delta}, it follows the estimate

0≥C1​e(k−λ)n−1​minX​φε​Bε​(xε)1n−1−C0.0\geq C_{1}\,e^{\frac{(k-\lambda)}{n-1}\min_{X}\varphi_{\varepsilon}}\,\,B_{\varepsilon}(x_{\varepsilon})^{\frac{1}{n-1}}-C_{0}\,.

In conclusion we have found over X∖DX\smallsetminus D the estimates

0\displaystyle 0 <\displaystyle< 2​n+Δωδ,ε​φε−δ​Δωδ,ε​log⁡|s|2=Trωδ,ε⁡(ωδ,ε+i​∂∂¯​ψε)\displaystyle 2n+\Delta_{\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}}\varphi_{\varepsilon}-\delta\Delta_{\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}}\log|s|^{2}=\operatorname{Tr}_{\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}}(\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}+i\partial\bar{\partial}\psi_{\varepsilon})
≤\displaystyle\leq 2​n​Λε≤2​n​ek​ψε−h​bε​Bε​(xε)≤C2​ek​φε−(k−λ)​minX​φε|s|2​δ​k​(|τ|2+ε)h≤C2​ek​Osc⁡(φε)|s|2​δ​k​|τ|2​h.\displaystyle 2n\Lambda_{\varepsilon}\leq 2n\,e^{k\psi_{\varepsilon}-hb^{\varepsilon}}B_{\varepsilon}(x_{\varepsilon})\leq\frac{C_{2}\,e^{k\varphi_{\varepsilon}-(k-\lambda)\min_{X}\varphi_{\varepsilon}}}{|s|^{2\delta k}(|\tau|^{2}+\varepsilon)^{h}}\leq\frac{C_{2}\,e^{k\operatorname{Osc}(\varphi_{\varepsilon})}}{|s|^{2\delta k}\,|\tau|^{2h}}\,.

The last inequality follows from the fact that λ​minX​φε≤0\lambda\min_{X}\varphi_{\varepsilon}\leq 0, since a non identicaly zero solution φε\varphi_{\varepsilon} changes signs in the case λ>0\lambda>0. Then using the inequality

|δ​Δωδ,ε​log⁡|s|2|=|Trωδ,ε⁡(ω−ωδ)|≤C\left|\delta\Delta_{\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}}\log|s|^{2}\right|=|\operatorname{Tr}_{\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}}(\omega-\omega_{\delta})|\leq C

over X∖DX\smallsetminus D we deduce the singular estimate

−C<2​n+Δωδ,ε​φε≤C2​ek​Osc⁡(φε)|s|2​δ​k​|τ|2​h+C.-C<2n+\Delta_{\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}}\varphi_{\varepsilon}\leq\frac{C_{2}\,e^{k\operatorname{Osc}(\varphi_{\varepsilon})}}{|s|^{2\delta k}\,|\tau|^{2h}}+C\,.

IC) Higher order estimates
An elementary computation yields the singular estimate

C3−1​|s|2​δ​k​(n−1)​|σ|2​l​|τ|2​h​(n−2)​e−k​n​Osc⁡(φε)​ωδ,ε\displaystyle\kern-30.0ptC_{3}^{-1}\,|s|^{2\delta k(n-1)}\,|\sigma|^{2l}\,|\tau|^{2h(n-2)}\,e^{-kn\operatorname{Osc}(\varphi_{\varepsilon})}\,\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon} (5.7)
≤\displaystyle\leq ω+ε​α+i​∂∂¯​φε≤C3​|s|−2​δ​k​|τ|−2​h​ek​Osc⁡(φε)​ωδ,ε.\displaystyle\omega+\varepsilon\alpha+i\partial\bar{\partial}\varphi_{\varepsilon}\leq C_{3}\,|s|^{-2\delta k}\,|\tau|^{-2h}\,e^{k\operatorname{Osc}(\varphi_{\varepsilon})}\,\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}\,.

Morover the fact that φε∈𝒫ω+ε​α\varphi_{\varepsilon}\in{\cal P}_{\omega+\varepsilon\alpha} implies

2​|∂∂¯​φε|ωδ,ε≤Δωδ,ε​φε+2​Trωδ,ε⁡(ω+ε​α).2|\partial\bar{\partial}\varphi_{\varepsilon}|_{\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}}\leq\Delta_{\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}}\varphi_{\varepsilon}+2\operatorname{Tr}_{\omega_{\delta,\varepsilon}}(\omega+\varepsilon\alpha)\,.

We set first

Σω:=⋂{ω}−δ​{D}>0D≥0,δ>0D.\displaystyle\Sigma_{\omega}:=\bigcap_{\{\omega\}-\delta\{D\}>0\atop D\geq 0,\;\delta>0}D\,.

Then by the standard Schauder estimates [Gi-Tru] we find that for any coordinate open set K⊂X∖S′K\subset X\smallsetminus S^{\prime} there are uniform constants CK>0C_{K}>0 such that

maxK⁡|∇φε|≤CK​(maxK⁡Δ​φε+maxK⁡|φε|).\max_{K}|\nabla\varphi_{\varepsilon}|\leq C_{K}\left(\max_{K}\Delta\varphi_{\varepsilon}+\max_{K}|\varphi_{\varepsilon}|\right)\,.

Therefore, we can apply the complex version of Evans-Krylov theory [Ti2] on every compact set K⊂X∖SK\subset X\smallsetminus S to get uniform constants CK,2>0C_{K,2}>0 such that ‖φε‖C2,α​(K)≤CK,2\|\varphi_{\varepsilon}\|_{C^{2,\alpha}(K)}\leq C_{K,2}. Let now U⊂X∖SU\subset X\smallsetminus S be an open set and ξ∈𝒪⁡(TX1,0)​(U)\xi\in{\cal O}(T^{1,0}_{X})(U). By deriving with respect to the complex vector field ξ\xi the complex Monge-Ampère equation (5.4), which we rewrite under the form

(ω+ε​α+i​∂∂¯​φε)n=eHε+λ​φε​αn,\displaystyle(\omega+\varepsilon\alpha+i\partial\bar{\partial}\varphi_{\varepsilon})^{n}=e^{H_{\varepsilon}+\lambda\varphi_{\varepsilon}}\alpha^{n}\,,

with

Hε:=cε+log⁡(Ω/αn)+l​aε−h​bε,H_{\varepsilon}:=c_{\varepsilon}+\log(\Omega/\alpha^{n})+la^{\varepsilon}-hb^{\varepsilon}\,,

we obtain (see the proof of formula 11 in [Pal])

Δφε(ξ.φε)−2λξ.φε=−TrφεLξ(ω+εα)+TrαLξα+2ξ.Hε,\displaystyle\Delta_{\varphi_{\varepsilon}}(\xi\,.\,\varphi_{\varepsilon})-2\lambda\,\xi\,.\,\varphi_{\varepsilon}=-\operatorname{Tr}_{\varphi_{\varepsilon}}L_{\xi}(\omega+\varepsilon\alpha)+\operatorname{Tr}_{\alpha}L_{\xi}\alpha+2\xi\,.\,H_{\varepsilon}\,, (5.8)

where Δφε\Delta_{\varphi_{\varepsilon}} and Trφε\operatorname{Tr}_{\varphi_{\varepsilon}} are respectively the Laplacian and the trace operators with respect to the Kähler metric ω+ε​α+i​∂∂¯​φε>0\omega+\varepsilon\alpha+i\partial\bar{\partial}\varphi_{\varepsilon}>0. By the uniform estimates (5.7) and ‖φε‖C2,α​(K)≤CK,2\|\varphi_{\varepsilon}\|_{C^{2,\alpha}(K)}\leq C_{K,2} it follows that the operator Δφε\Delta_{\varphi_{\varepsilon}} is uniformly elliptic with coefficients uniformly bounded in CαC^{\alpha}-norm at least, over any compact set K⊂UK\subset U. The right hand side of equation (5.8) is also uniformly bounded in CαC^{\alpha}-norm at least. By the standard regularity theory for linear elliptic equations [Gi-Tru] we deduce ∥ξ.φε∥C2,α​(K)≤C′K\|\xi\,.\,\varphi_{\varepsilon}\|_{{C^{2,\alpha}(K)}}\leq C^{\prime}_{K} for all ε>0\varepsilon>0. By conjugation the same hold for ξ¯.φε\bar{\xi}\,.\,\varphi_{\varepsilon}. Thus we obtain the uniform estimate ‖φε‖C3,α​(K)≤CK,3\|\varphi_{\varepsilon}\|_{C^{3,\alpha}(K)}\leq C_{K,3}.
In its turn this estimate implies that the coefficients of the Laplacian Δφε\Delta_{\varphi_{\varepsilon}} and the right hand side of equation (5.8) are uniformly bounded in C1,αC^{1,\alpha}-norm at least. By iteration we get the uniform estimates ‖φε‖Cr,α​(K)≤CK,r\|\varphi_{\varepsilon}\|_{C^{r,\alpha}(K)}\leq C_{K,r} for all ε>0\varepsilon>0 and r∈ℕr\in\mathbb{N}. We deduce that the family (φε)ε>0⊂C∞​(X∖S)(\varphi_{\varepsilon})_{\varepsilon>0}\subset C^{\infty}(X\smallsetminus S) is precompact in the smooth topology.
On the other hand the uniqueness result of theorem 6, combined with the arguments which showed the existence of a continuous solution φ\varphi imply the uniform convergence of the family φε\varphi_{\varepsilon} towards φ\varphi, thus this convergence is achieved in the C∞C^{\infty} topology over X∖SX\smallsetminus S. In this way we get smoothness of the solution φ\varphi over X∖SX\smallsetminus S. The regularity statement in the case n=1n=1 follows immediately from the latter considerations.

Step II.
IIA) Setup of step II.
We start with a few definitions adapted to our situation.

Definition 2

Let 𝒥⊂𝒪X{\cal J}\subset{\cal O}_{X} be a coherent ideal sheaf over a compact complex manifold.
A) A modification of XX is a bimeromorphic morphism μ:X~→X\mu:\tilde{X}\rightarrow X of compact complex manifolds with connected fibers.
B) A log resolution of the sheaf 𝒥{\cal J} is a modification μ:X~→X\mu:\tilde{X}\rightarrow X such that μ∗​𝒥=𝒪⁡(−D)\mu^{*}{\cal J}={\cal O}(-D), with DD an effective divisor with normal crossing and such that the restriction X~∖|D|→X∖V⁡(𝒥)\tilde{X}\smallsetminus|D|\rightarrow X\smallsetminus V({\cal J}) is a biholomorphism.

Let now TT be a closed positive (1,1)(1,1)-current. There are two ways to associate an ideal sheaf to TT. One can define the ideal sheaf 𝒥⁡(T)⊂𝒪X{\cal J}(T)\subset{\cal O}_{X} of germs f∈𝒪xf\in{\cal O}_{x} such that ∫|f|2​e−φ<+∞\int|f|^{2}e^{-\varphi}<+\infty, where φ\varphi is a local plurisubharmonic potential of TT in a neighborhood of xx. One can also define the ideal sheaf 𝒥T⊂𝒪X{\cal J}^{T}\subset{\cal O}_{X} of germs f∈𝒪xf\in{\cal O}_{x} such that |f|2​e−φ≤C|f|^{2}e^{-\varphi}\leq C. The sheaf 𝒥⁡(T){\cal J}(T) is coherent by a result of Nadel [Nad] and V⁡(𝒥T)=V⁡(𝒥k​T)V({\cal J}^{T})=V({\cal J}^{kT}) for all k∈ℝ>0k\in\mathbb{R}_{>0}.

Definition 3

. A closed positive (1,1)(1,1)-current TT over a compact complex manifold XX possesses analytic singularities if there exists k∈ℕ>0k\in\mathbb{N}_{>0} such that;
a) the ideal sheaf 𝒥k​T{\cal J}^{kT} is coherent,
b) if μ:X~→X\mu:\tilde{X}\rightarrow X a modification such that μ∗​𝒥k​T=𝒪⁡(−D)\mu^{*}{\cal J}^{kT}={\cal O}(-D), with DD an effective divisor with normal crossing, then μ∗​T=λ⁡[D]+α\mu^{*}T=\lambda[D]+\alpha, with λ∈ℝ>0\lambda\in\mathbb{R}_{>0} and α\alpha smooth.

Consider now a polarized compact Kähler manifold (X,ω)(X,\omega) and a class χ∈H1,1​(X,ℝ)\chi\in H^{1,1}(X,\mathbb{R}). We define the set of Kähler currents

χ>0:={T∈χ∣∃ε>0:T≥εω}.\chi_{>0}:=\{T\in\chi\,\mid\,\exists\varepsilon>0\,:\,T\geq\varepsilon\omega\,\}\,.

If χ\chi is nef and big then χ>0≠∅\chi_{>0}\not=\emptyset by a result in [De-Pa]. By the regularization theorem in [Dem1] we deduce that for all T∈χ>0T\in\chi_{>0} and for all integers k≫0k\gg 0 there exists Tk∈χ>0T_{k}\in\chi_{>0} such that 𝒥k​T=𝒥⁡(k​T)¯{\cal J}^{kT}=\overline{{\cal J}(kT)} and μ∗​Tk=2​π​k−1​[D]+α\mu^{*}T_{k}=2\pi k^{-1}[D]+\alpha, with α\alpha smooth, for any modification μ\mu such that μ∗​𝒥​(k​T)=𝒪⁡(−D)\mu^{*}{\cal J}(kT)={\cal O}(-D), with DD an effective divisor with normal crossing. Notice that μ∗​𝒥⁡(k​T)¯=𝒪⁡(−D)\mu^{*}\overline{{\cal J}(kT)}={\cal O}(-D). We deduce that the subset χ>0a​s⊂χ>0\chi^{as}_{>0}\subset\chi_{>0} of Kähler currents with analytic singularities is also non empty. By the proof of theorem 3.4 in [De-Pa] we deduce the following generalization of Kodaira’s lemma.

Lemma 8

. Let XX be a compact Kähler manifold and χ∈H1,1​(X,ℝ)\chi\in H^{1,1}(X,\mathbb{R}) a class which is nef and big. Then for all T∈χ>0a​sT\in\chi^{as}_{>0} there exists a log resolution μ\mu of the coherent ideal sheaf 𝒥k​T{\cal J}^{kT}, μ∗​𝒥k​T=𝒪⁡(−D)\mu^{*}{\cal J}^{kT}={\cal O}(-D), an effective divisor D′D^{\prime} with |D′|=|D||D^{\prime}|=|D| and r∈ℕ>0r\in\mathbb{N}_{>0} such that the class μ∗​χ−2​π​r−1​{D′}\mu^{*}\chi-2\pi r^{-1}\{D^{\prime}\} is Kähler.

We define in the end the complex analytic set

Σχ:=⋂T∈χ>0a​sV⁡(𝒥T).\Sigma_{\chi}:=\bigcap_{T\in\chi^{as}_{>0}}V({\cal J}^{T})\,.

IIB) Application of step I.
Back to our situation, fix T∈χ>0a​sT\in\chi^{as}_{>0} and consider a log resolution μ:X~→X\mu:\tilde{X}\rightarrow X of the coherent ideal sheaf 𝒥k​T{\cal J}^{kT}. Let f≥0f\geq 0 be the integrand in the first inegral in (5.1). Then the integral condition (5.1) implies

0<∫X~μ∗​ωn=∫X~(f​Ω∘μ)⋅(Λn​∂μ)∧(Λn​∂μ)¯=∫X~(f∘μ)​|Λn​∂μ|α,β2​Ω′0<\int\limits_{\tilde{X}}\mu^{*}\omega^{n}=\int\limits_{\tilde{X}}(f\Omega\circ\mu)\cdot(\Lambda^{n}\partial\mu)\wedge\overline{(\Lambda^{n}\partial\mu)}=\int\limits_{\tilde{X}}(f\circ\mu)\left|\Lambda^{n}\partial\mu\right|^{2}_{\alpha,\beta}\,\Omega^{\prime}\,

where α,β>0\alpha,\beta>0 are hermitian forms respectively over XX and X~\tilde{X},

|Λn​∂μ|α,β2:=αn⋅(Λn​∂μ)∧(Λn​∂μ)¯βnandΩ′=(Ωαn∘μ)​βn>0.\left|\Lambda^{n}\partial\mu\right|^{2}_{\alpha,\beta}:=\frac{\alpha^{n}\cdot(\Lambda^{n}\partial\mu)\wedge\overline{(\Lambda^{n}\partial\mu)}}{\beta^{n}}\,\qquad\mbox{and}\qquad\Omega^{\prime}=\left(\frac{\Omega}{\alpha^{n}}\circ\mu\right)\beta^{n}>0\,.

Therefore by the generalised Kodaira’s lemma 8 we can solve the degenerate complex Monge-Ampère equation

(μ∗​ω+i​∂∂¯​Φ)n=(f∘μ)​|Λn​∂μ|α,β2​eλ​Φ​Ω′,(\mu^{*}\omega+i\partial\bar{\partial}\Phi)^{n}=(f\circ\mu)\left|\Lambda^{n}\partial\mu\right|^{2}_{\alpha,\beta}e^{\lambda\Phi}\,\Omega^{\prime}\,,

with the method of step I, so as to obtain a solution

Φ∈𝒫μ∗​ω∩C0​(X~)∩Cα​(X~∖(D∪μ−1​S0′))∩C∞​(X~∖(D∪μ−1​S0)).\Phi\in{\cal P}_{\mu^{*}\omega}\cap C^{0}(\tilde{X})\cap C^{\alpha}(\tilde{X}\smallsetminus(D\cup\mu^{-1}S^{\prime}_{0}))\cap C^{\infty}(\tilde{X}\smallsetminus(D\cup\mu^{-1}S_{0}))\,.

Remark in fact that |div⁡(Λn​∂μ)|⊂|D||\operatorname{div}(\Lambda^{n}\partial\mu)|\subset|D| by our definition of a log resolution. Let now jq:μ−1​(q)↪X~j_{q}:\mu^{-1}(q)\hookrightarrow\tilde{X}, q∈V⁡(𝒥T)q\in V({\cal J}^{T}) be the inclusion map. By hypothesis μ−1​(q)\mu^{-1}(q) is compact and connected and obviously jq∗​μ∗​ω=0j_{q}^{*}\mu^{*}\omega=0. Then by the hypothesis μ∗​ω+i​∂∂¯​Φ≥0\mu^{*}\omega+i\partial\bar{\partial}\Phi\geq 0 we deduce i​∂∂¯​(Φ∘jq)≥0i\partial\bar{\partial}(\Phi\circ j_{q})\geq 0, which implies that Φ\Phi is constant along the fibers μ−1​(q)\mu^{-1}(q). Therefore we can define φ:=π∗​Φ∈𝒫ω∩C0​(X)\varphi:=\pi_{*}\Phi\in{\cal P}_{\omega}\cap C^{0}(X). The fact that φ\varphi is bounded implies that the current (ω+i​∂∂¯​φ)n(\omega+i\partial\bar{\partial}\varphi)^{n} does not carry any mass on complex analytic sets. Thus φ\varphi is the solution of the complex Monge-Ampère equation (5.2) with the required regularity over the set X∖V⁡(𝒥T)X\smallsetminus V({\cal J}^{T}). Then the conclusion about the regularity of the solution φ\varphi follows by letting T∈χ>0a​sT\in\chi^{as}_{>0} vary. We finally remark that if Σω\Sigma_{\omega} is empty then the class of ω\omega is Kähler. In fact chose the volume form Ω>0\Omega>0 such that ∫Xωn=∫XΩ\int_{X}\omega^{n}=\int_{X}\Omega. By the previous arguments we can find a unique solution φ\varphi of the equation (ω+i​∂∂¯​φ)n=Ω>0(\omega+i\partial\bar{\partial}\varphi)^{n}=\Omega>0, which is smooth, thus ω+i​∂∂¯​φ>0\omega+i\partial\bar{\partial}\varphi>0 is a Kähler metric. In the case n=1n=1 the solution φ\varphi of the equation ω+i​∂∂¯​φ=Ω>0\omega+i\partial\bar{\partial}\varphi=\Omega>0 is allways smoth. □\Box

Original mathematics by the credited authors. Source-backed reader collection; mathematical self-containment is not assessed.