ScalingStacks

Proof. [02WV]

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

Proof.

In view of propositions 6.25, 6.27 and the fact that the restriction of the canonical metric to closures of orbits and to toric subvarieties is the canonical metric (corollaries 5.23 and 5.25), we are reduced to treat the case Y=XΣY=X_{\Sigma}.

Thus we assume that XΣX_{\Sigma} has dimension dd. We next prove that XΣX_{\Sigma} is integrable with respect to L¯0can,…,L¯dcan{\overline{L}}_{0}^{{\operatorname{can}}},\dots,{\overline{L}}_{d}^{{\operatorname{can}}} and that the corresponding global height is zero. By a polarization argument, we can reduce to the case Ψ0=⋯=Ψd=Ψ\Psi_{0}=\dots=\Psi_{d}=\Psi. The proof is done by induction on dd. For short, write L=𝒪⁡(DΨ)L={\mathcal{O}}(D_{\Psi}) and s=sΨs=s_{\Psi}.

Let d=0d=0. By equation (2.40), for each v∈𝔐𝕂v\in\mathfrak{M}_{\mathbb{K}},

hL¯v,can⁡(XΣ;s)=−log⁡‖s‖v,Ψ=Ψ⁡(0)=0.\operatorname{h}_{{\overline{L}}^{v,{\operatorname{can}}}}(X_{\Sigma};s)=-\log\|s\|_{v,\Psi}=\Psi(0)=0.

Furthermore, hL¯can⁡(XΣ;s)=∑vnv​hL¯v,can⁡(XΣ;s)=0\operatorname{h}_{{\overline{L}}^{{\operatorname{can}}}}(X_{\Sigma};s)=\sum_{v}n_{v}\operatorname{h}_{{\overline{L}}^{v,{\operatorname{can}}}}(X_{\Sigma};s)=0.

Now let d≥1d\geq 1. By the construction of local heights, for each v∈𝔐𝕂v\in\mathfrak{M}_{\mathbb{K}},

(6.36) hL¯v,can⁡(XΣ,s0,…,sd−1,s)=\displaystyle\operatorname{h}_{{\overline{L}}^{v,{\operatorname{can}}}}(X_{\Sigma};s_{0},\dots,s_{d-1},s)= hL¯v,can⁡(div⁡(s),s0,…,sd−1)\displaystyle\operatorname{h}_{{\overline{L}}^{v,{\operatorname{can}}}}(\operatorname{div}(s);s_{0},\dots,s_{d-1})
−∫XΣv,anlog∥s∥v,Ψc1(L¯v,can)d∧δXΣ.\displaystyle-\int_{X_{\Sigma}^{v,{\text{\rm an}}}}\log\|s\|_{v,\Psi}c_{1}({\overline{L}}^{v,{\operatorname{can}}})^{d}\wedge\delta_{X_{\Sigma}}.

As shown in (6.14), the last term in the equality above vanishes. Hence

hL¯v,can⁡(XΣ,s0,…,sd−1,s)=hL¯v,can⁡(div⁡(s),s0,…,sd−1).\operatorname{h}_{{\overline{L}}^{v,{\operatorname{can}}}}(X_{\Sigma};s_{0},\dots,s_{d-1},s)=\operatorname{h}_{{\overline{L}}^{v,{\operatorname{can}}}}(\operatorname{div}(s);s_{0},\dots,s_{d-1}).

The divisor div⁡(s)\operatorname{div}(s) is a linear combination of subvarieties of the form V⁡(τ)V(\tau), τ∈Σ1\tau\in\Sigma^{1}, and the restriction of the canonical metric to these varieties coincides with their canonical metrics. With the inductive hypothesis, this shows that XΣX_{\Sigma} is integrable with respect to L¯can{\overline{L}}^{{\operatorname{can}}}. Adding up the resulting equalities over all places,

hL¯can⁡(XΣ,s0,…,sd−1,s)=hL¯can⁡(div⁡(s),s0,…,sd−1).\operatorname{h}_{{\overline{L}}^{{\operatorname{can}}}}(X_{\Sigma};s_{0},\dots,s_{d-1},s)=\operatorname{h}_{{\overline{L}}^{{\operatorname{can}}}}(\operatorname{div}(s);s_{0},\dots,s_{d-1}).

Using again the inductive hypothesis, hL¯can⁡(XΣ,s0,…,sd−1,s)∈def⁡(𝕂×)\operatorname{h}_{{\overline{L}}^{{\operatorname{can}}}}(X_{\Sigma};s_{0},\dots,s_{d-1},s)\in\operatorname{def}(\mathbb{K}^{\times}).

We now prove the statements of the theorem. Again by a polarization argument, we can also reduce to the case when L¯0=⋯=L¯d=L¯{\overline{L}}_{0}=\dots={\overline{L}}_{d}={\overline{L}}. By the definition of approachable adelic toric metrics, XΣX_{\Sigma} is also integrable with respect to L¯{\overline{L}}. Furthermore,

hL¯tor⁡(XΣ)=hL¯⁡(XΣ,s0,…,sd)−hL¯can⁡(XΣ,s0,…,sd)\operatorname{h}^{\operatorname{tor}}_{{\overline{L}}}(X_{\Sigma})=\operatorname{h}_{{\overline{L}}}(X_{\Sigma};s_{0},\dots,s_{d})-\operatorname{h}_{{\overline{L}}^{{\operatorname{can}}}}(X_{\Sigma};s_{0},\dots,s_{d})

for any choice of sections sis_{i} intersecting XΣX_{\Sigma} properly. Hence, the classes of hL¯⁡(XΣ)\operatorname{h}_{{\overline{L}}}(X_{\Sigma}) and of hL¯⁡(XΣ,s0,…,sd)\operatorname{h}_{{\overline{L}}}(X_{\Sigma};s_{0},\dots,s_{d}) agree up to def⁡(𝕂×)\operatorname{def}(\mathbb{K}^{\times}). But the latter is the global height of XΣX_{\Sigma} with respect to L¯{\overline{L}}, hence the second statement. ∎

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