2.2. Complex differential geometry: the Hormänder technique [02AY]
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
2.2. Complex differential geometry: the Hormänder technique
We begin by recalling that, under our hypotheses, there is a uniform Sobolev inequality
| (2.2) |
for functions on a manifold in the class , where depend only on [8]. Here of course we are referring to norms defined by the metric . When working with the line bundle it will be convenient to use the norms defined by the rescaled metrics (for integers ). Thus lengths are scaled by and volumes by . We will use the notation etc. to denote norms defined by these rescaled metrics. Then the scaling weight gives
| (2.3) |
So the scaling only helps in the Sobolev inequality. Of course the Ricci tensor of the rescaled metric is bounded between and .
Proposition 2.1.
- (1)
There are constants , depending only on such that if is in and is a holomorphic section of (for any ) we have
- (2)
If is in then for any the Laplacian on is invertible and .
In the second item , with adjoints defined using the rescaled metric, and the statement is that for all
| (2.4) |
This Proposition summarises results which are well-known to workers in the field and which all hinge on various formulae of Bochner-Weitzenbock type. We use the rescaled metrics throughout the discussion. First on sections of we have
so when is holomorphic which implies that
| (2.5) |
where the lack of differentiability of at the zero set is handled in a standard way. (Note that we use the “geometers convention” for the sign of the Laplacian in this paper.) Now the bound on the norm follows from the Moser iteration argument applied to this differential inequality, using the uniform Sobolev inequality (see [22]).
The first derivative bound is obtained in a similar way. Changing notation slightly, for a holomorphic section with we write where
is defined using the connection. Since we have
where . Then for a holomorphic section , and
Now the Bochner-Weitzenbock formula comparing and on has the form
so
It follows that
and the Moser argument applies as before. Notice that, with some labour, the constants could be computed explicitly in terms of .
For the second item in the Proposition we need a Bochner-Weizenbock formula on i.e. sections of the bundle . We decompose the covariant derivative on this bundle into (0,1) and (1,0) parts: . Then the formula we want is
| (2.6) |
Given this we have, in the operator sense, since from which the invertibility and bound on the inverse follow immediately. An efficient way to derive (2.6) is to make the identification
under which becomes identified with
The formula (2.6) then becomes a special case of the Kodaira-Nakano formula ([13] p.154), using the fact that the Ricci form is the curvature of .
With this background in place we move on to recall a version of the “Hörmander” construction of holomorphic sections. Suppose we have the following data
- •
A (non-compact) manifold , a base point and an open neighbourhood of .
- •
A Hermitian line bundle .
- •
A complex structure and Kähler metric on with Kähler form .
- •
A connection on having curvature .
We use this connection to define a -operator on sections of , and hence a holomorphic structure.
We define a “Property (H)” which this data might have. Fix any .
Property (H):
There is a number and a compactly supported section of such that the following hold.
H1:
H2:
H3: For any smooth section of over a neighbourhood of we have
H4:
H5:
Many of the specific numbers here are arbitrary but it is convenient to fix some definite numbers.
We have
Lemma 2.2.
Property (H) is open with respect to variations in (for fixed ) and the topology of convergence in on compact subsets of .
Notice first that for any choice of data there is some constant for which the bound in (H3) holds. This follows from the elliptic estimate
| (2.7) |
and the Sobolev inequality
Here is some interior domain containing . We can write the -operator on functions for a perturbed complex structure as where is a “Beltrami differential”. Similarly if the variation of the connection is given by a -form then the perturbed -operator on sections can be written as
where is the decomposition into type. It follows that if and are small in then the perturbation of the operator is small in the operator norm and it is then clear that the inequality in the third item holds for the perturbed operator, with a slightly larger constant . For the perturbed structure we use the same section , so the first and second item is automatic. Then it is also clear that, for sufficiently small perturbations, the bounds in the fourth and fifth item (with a slightly larger constant ) are also preserved, since we impose strict inequality.
For a connection on a line bundle write for the induced connection on . The following proposition—basically well-known—will provide the core of our proof of Theorem 1.
Proposition 2.3.
Suppose is in and are as above. Suppose that is an open embedding and the data
has Property (H). Then there is a holomorphic section of with norm at most and with at all points a distance (in the scaled metric) less than from .
To prove this we transport the section using the maps and regard it as a smooth section of over , extending by zero. The norms we considered over match up with the -norms over . We write where . By simple Hodge Theory we have . Now
since . Thus
| (2.8) |
Hence in particular
Now work over the image . Applying item (H3) to the section and using (H4), (H5) we get , so . By the derivative bound, exceeds at points a distance less than from .
To sum up we have the following.
Proposition 2.4.
Suppose that are as above and data has Property (H). Then there is some with the following effect. Suppose that is in . If we can find , an open embedding and a bundle isomorphism such that
then there is a holomorphic section of with norm at most and with at all points a distance (in the scaled metric) less than from
This is just a direct combination of Lemma 2.2 and Proposition 2.3. (Here we use the notation to indicate the -norm over .)
To illustrate this, take the case when is the ball of radius in with the standard flat metric and standard Kähler form . Let be the trivial holomorphic line bundle with metric so the trivialising section, say, has norm and the induced connection has curvature as required. Let be the origin and be the unit ball. Let be a standard cut-off function of , equal to when and vanishing when . Define . Then we have . The norm of is slightly less than and . The section is holomorphic over , so we get (H4) and there certainly is some constant as in item (H3) of Property (H), independent of . It is clear that, because of the exponential decay, we can fix so that item (H5) is satisfied. So we have a set of data satisfying Property (H). Now let be a point in some X in . Since the ball is simply connected connections over it are determined up to isomorphism by their curvature tensors. It is then clear that, when is sufficiently large, we can find a map with and such that the pull back of differs by an arbitrarily small amount from the model . Then we construct a holomorphic section of , of controlled norm and of a definite positive size on a definite neighbourhood of .
Remark 2.5.
There are many possible variants of our ÒProperty HÓ which will end up having the same effect. In particular one can avoid the theory. In the context we work in, we have a first derivative bound as in Prop. 2.1 (1), and it is easy to show using this that the norm of controls .