ScalingStacks

9.3. Completion of main proofs [03K7]

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

9.3. Completion of main proofs

In this subsection, we prove Theorems 1.1 and 1.5.

Proof of Theorem 1.1.

Recall that by Theorem 9.7, ℳ\mathcal{M} is diffeomorphic to the K3⁡3\K 3 surface.

First, we consider the simpler case that there is only one cluster of monopoles, i.e., m=1m=1. Without loss of generality, one can assume that all the monopoles in the neck region are located on the same torus fiber of 𝕋2×ℝ\mathbb{T}^{2}\times\mathbb{R}.

We start the proof by describing the hyperkähler metrics h^β\hat{h}_{\beta} and the continuous map Fβ:K3⁡3→[0,1]F_{\beta}:\K 3\to[0,1]. Given any sufficiently large parameter β≫1\beta\gg 1, denote by gβg_{\beta} the approximate metric which is almost Ricci-flat and determined by the approximate triple constructed in Section 6 such that

(9.136) C−1​β32≤Diamgβ⁡(ℳ)≤C​β32C^{-1}\beta^{\frac{3}{2}}\leq\diam_{g_{\beta}}(\mathcal{M})\leq C\beta^{\frac{3}{2}}

for some constant C>0C>0 independent of β\beta. By Theorem 9.7, there is a hyperkähler metric g^β\hat{g}_{\beta} such that

(9.137) ‖g^β−gβ‖C0,α​(ℳ)≤C​e−δ0​β\|\hat{g}_{\beta}-g_{\beta}\|_{C^{0,\alpha}(\mathcal{M})}\leq Ce^{-\delta_{0}\beta}

for some C>0C>0 and δ0>0\delta_{0}>0 independent of β\beta. Let h^β\hat{h}_{\beta} be the rescaling of the hyperkähler metric g^β\hat{g}_{\beta} with Diamh^β⁡(ℳ)=1\diam_{\hat{h}_{\beta}}(\mathcal{M})=1. Denote by hβh_{\beta} the rescaling of gβg_{\beta} with Diamhβ⁡(ℳ)=1\diam_{h_{\beta}}(\mathcal{M})=1, then

(9.138) ‖h^β−hβ‖C0,α​(ℳ)≤C​e−δ0​β2.\|\hat{h}_{\beta}-h_{\beta}\|_{C^{0,\alpha}(\mathcal{M})}\leq Ce^{-\frac{\delta_{0}\beta}{2}}.

Now we are ready to define the map Fβ:ℳ→[0,1]F_{\beta}:\mathcal{M}\to[0,1]. First, recalling the notation in Section 6, we extend the function zz on the neck region to ℳ\mathcal{M} as follows

(9.139) z~​(𝒙)={ζ0−−2​T−𝒙∈X4b−∖{z−≥ζ0−}z−​(𝒙)−2​T−𝒙∈X4b−∩{ζ0−≤z−≤T−}z⁡(𝒙)𝒙∈𝒩⁡(T−,T+)2​T+−z+​(𝒙)𝒙∈X4b+∩{ζ0+≤z+≤T+}2​T+−ζ0+𝒙∈X4b+∖{z+≥ζ0+},\displaystyle\tilde{z}(\bm{x})=\begin{cases}\zeta_{0}^{-}-2T_{-}&\bm{x}\in X^{4}_{b_{-}}\setminus\{z_{-}\geq\zeta_{0}^{-}\}\\ z_{-}(\bm{x})-2T_{-}&\bm{x}\in X^{4}_{b_{-}}\cap\{\zeta_{0}^{-}\leq z_{-}\leq T_{-}\}\\ z(\bm{x})&\bm{x}\in\mathcal{N}(T_{-},T_{+})\\ 2T_{+}-z_{+}(\bm{x})&\bm{x}\in X^{4}_{b_{+}}\cap\{\zeta_{0}^{+}\leq z_{+}\leq T_{+}\}\\ 2T_{+}-\zeta_{0}^{+}&\bm{x}\in X^{4}_{b_{+}}\setminus\{z_{+}\geq\zeta_{0}^{+}\}\\ \end{cases},

and then define

(9.140) Fβ​(𝒙)=z~​(𝒙)−ζ0−+2​T−2​(T++T−)−ζ0−−ζ0+.\displaystyle F_{\beta}(\bm{x})=\frac{\tilde{z}(\bm{x})-\zeta_{0}^{-}+2T_{-}}{2(T_{+}+T_{-})-\zeta_{0}^{-}-\zeta_{0}^{+}}.

Then it follows directly from the gluing construction that there is some point t1∈(0,1)t_{1}\in(0,1) such that Fβ−1​(t1)F_{\beta}^{-1}(t_{1}) is a singular S1S^{1}-bundle over 𝕋2\mathbb{T}^{2} with exactly (b−+b+)(b_{-}+b_{+}) vanishing circles. In fact, the vanishing circles occur at the monopoles of the neck region 𝒩m04\mathcal{N}_{m_{0}}^{4} constructed in Section 6.1 which is a Gibbons-Hawking space over 𝕋2×ℝ\mathbb{T}^{2}\times\mathbb{R}. Moreover, for each t∈(0,t1)∪(t1,1)t\in(0,t_{1})\cup(t_{1},1), the fiber Fβ−1​(t)F_{\beta}^{-1}(t) is diffeomorphic to a Heisenberg nilmanifold with

(9.141) deg⁡(Fβ−1​(t))={b−,t∈(0,t1),b+,t∈(t1,1).\displaystyle\deg(F_{\beta}^{-1}(t))=\begin{cases}b_{-},&t\in(0,t_{1}),\\ b_{+},&t\in(t_{1},1).\end{cases}

By the explicit construction in Section 6, there is some uniform constant C0>0C_{0}>0 such that for each regular fiber,

(9.142) C0−1​β−1≤Diamh^β⁡(Fβ−1​(t))≤C0​β−1,C0−1​β−2≤Diamh^β⁡(S1)≤C0​β−2.\displaystyle C_{0}^{-1}\beta^{-1}\leq\diam_{\hat{h}_{\beta}}(F_{\beta}^{-1}(t))\leq C_{0}\beta^{-1},\ C_{0}^{-1}\beta^{-2}\leq\diam_{\hat{h}_{\beta}}(S^{1})\leq C_{0}\beta^{-2}.

With these diameter estimates, we are ready to prove the uniform curvature estimates by applying theorem 7.4. Fix any ϵ∈(0,10−2)\epsilon\in(0,10^{-2}), let β>0\beta>0 sufficiently large such that

(9.143) Diamh^β⁡(Fβ−1​(t))<δ0⋅ϵ10,\diam_{\hat{h}_{\beta}}(F_{\beta}^{-1}(t))<\frac{\delta_{0}\cdot\epsilon}{10},

where δ0>0\delta_{0}>0 is the dimensional constant in theorem 7.4. Now for a ball around each regular point Bϵ​(x)⊂Fβ−1​([0,1]∖T2​ϵ​(𝒮))B_{\epsilon}(x)\subset F_{\beta}^{-1}([0,1]\setminus T_{2\epsilon}(\mathcal{S})) with 𝒮≡{0,t1,1}\mathcal{S}\equiv\{0,t_{1},1\}, then

(9.144) Γδ0​ϵ(x)≡Image[π1(Bδ0​ϵ(x))→Bϵ(x)]≅π1(Nil3)\Gamma_{\delta_{0}\epsilon}(x)\equiv\Image[\pi_{1}(B_{\delta_{0}\epsilon}(x))\to B_{\epsilon}(x)]\cong\pi_{1}(\Nil^{3})

and hence rank⁡(Γδ0​ϵ​(x))=3\rank(\Gamma_{\delta_{0}\epsilon}(x))=3. Then by theorem 7.4,

(9.145) supBϵ/2​(x)|Rmh^β|≤C0,ϵ,\sup\limits_{B_{\epsilon/2}(x)}|\Rm_{\hat{h}_{\beta}}|\leq C_{0,\epsilon},

where C0,ϵ>0C_{0,\epsilon}>0 depends only on ϵ\epsilon and is independent of β\beta. The higher order curvature estimates can be proved by considering a local universal cover and applying the standard regularity theory for non-collapsing Einstein metrics. This completes (1) of Theorem 1.1.

Now we proceed to prove (2). We still apply theorem 7.4 to prove curvatures blowing-up behavior around the singular fiber. In fact, if x∈Tϵ/2​(Fβ−1​(t1))x\in T_{\epsilon/2}(F_{\beta}^{-1}(t_{1})), it suffices to show supBϵ/2​(x)|Rmh^β|→∞\sup\limits_{B_{\epsilon/2}(x)}|\Rm_{\hat{h}_{\beta}}|\to\infty as β→∞\beta\to\infty. In fact, notice that

(9.146) Γϵ/2(x)≡Image[π1(Bϵ/2(x))→B1/10(x)]≅ℤ⊕ℤ\Gamma_{\epsilon/2}(x)\equiv\Image[\pi_{1}(B_{\epsilon/2}(x))\to B_{1/10}(x)]\cong\mathbb{Z}\oplus\mathbb{Z}

and hence rank⁡(Γϵ/2​(x))=2<3\rank(\Gamma_{\epsilon/2}(x))=2<3. Therefore, theorem 7.4 implies that

(9.147) supBϵ/2​(x)|Rmh^β|→∞\sup\limits_{B_{\epsilon/2}(x)}|\Rm_{\hat{h}_{\beta}}|\to\infty

as ϵ→0\epsilon\to 0.

The next part is to prove the classification of the bubble limits in (2) of statement of the theorem. Fix the gluing parameter β≫1\beta\gg 1, we analyze the curvature behavior of the approximate metric gβg_{\beta} in the gluing construction at the scale such that

(9.148) C−1​β32≤Diamgβ⁡(ℳ,g)≤C​β32.C^{-1}\beta^{\frac{3}{2}}\leq\diam_{g_{\beta}}(\mathcal{M},g)\leq C\beta^{\frac{3}{2}}.

There are two cases to analyze.

First, let the reference point 𝒙β\bm{x}_{\beta} be a curvature maximum point of a Tian-Yau piece. It follows directly from the construction that, as β→+∞\beta\to+\infty, the curvature |Rmgβ|​(𝒙β)|\Rm_{g_{\beta}}|(\bm{x}_{\beta}) is uniformly bounded but not going to 00. So (ℳ,gβ,𝒙β)(\mathcal{M},g_{\beta},\bm{x}_{\beta}) converges to a complete hyperkähler Tian-Yau space (X4,gT​Y,𝒙∞)(X^{4},g_{TY},\bm{x}_{\infty}) in the pointed CkC^{k}-topology for any k∈ℤ+k\in\mathbb{Z}_{+}. We will show that (ℳ,g^β,𝒙β)(\mathcal{M},\hat{g}_{\beta},\bm{x}_{\beta}) also converges to the same Tian-Yau space (X4,gT​Y,𝒙∞)(X^{4},g_{TY},\bm{x}_{\infty}) in the pointed CkC^{k}-topology for any k∈ℤ+k\in\mathbb{Z}_{+}. In fact, by Theorem 9.7,

(9.149) ‖g^β−gβ‖C0,α​(ℳ)≤C​e−δ​β,\|\hat{g}_{\beta}-g_{\beta}\|_{C^{0,\alpha}(\mathcal{M})}\leq Ce^{-\delta\beta},

which implies that (ℳ,g^β,xβ)(\mathcal{M},\hat{g}_{\beta},x_{\beta}) converges to the same Tian-Yau space (X4,gT​Y,𝒙∞)(X^{4},g_{TY},\bm{x}_{\infty}) in the pointed C0,αC^{0,\alpha}-topology. The stronger convergence follows from a regularity result for non-collapsed Einstein metrics in [AC92]. Since the rescaling factor β32\beta^{\frac{3}{2}} is much smaller than exponential, so the bubble limit of (ℳ,h^β)(\mathcal{M},\hat{h}_{\beta}) around 𝒙β\bm{x}_{\beta} is a complete hyperkähler Tian-Yau space.

Next, we consider the case in which the reference point 𝒙β\bm{x}_{\beta} is very close to one of monopoles, i.e. 𝒙β∈Bβ−12​(pm)\bm{x}_{\beta}\in B_{\beta^{-\frac{1}{2}}}(p_{m}) in terms of the metric h^β\hat{h}_{\beta}, where

(9.150) pm∈𝒫b−+b+≡{p1,…,pb−+b+}.p_{m}\in\mathcal{P}_{b_{-}+b_{+}}\equiv\{p_{1},\ldots,p_{b_{-}+b_{+}}\}.

Applying Lemma 7.9, then

(9.151) (ℳ,β⋅gβ,𝒙β)⟶(ℝ4,gT​N,𝒙∞),(\mathcal{M},\beta\cdot g_{\beta},\bm{x}_{\beta})\longrightarrow(\mathbb{R}^{4},g_{TN},\bm{x}_{\infty}),

where gT​Ng_{TN} is the Taub-NUT metric and the convergence is with respect to the pointed CkC^{k}-topology for any k∈ℤ+k\in\mathbb{Z}_{+}. Applying the error estimate (9.149) and the same arguments as the above, (ℳ,β⋅hβ,𝒙β)(\mathcal{M},\beta\cdot h_{\beta},\bm{x}_{\beta}) converges to (ℝ4,gT​N,𝒙∞),(\mathbb{R}^{4},g_{TN},\bm{x}_{\infty}), in the pointed CkC^{k}-topology for any k∈ℤ+k\in\mathbb{Z}_{+}. This implies that in terms of the hyperkähler metric h^β\hat{h}_{\beta}, we have the pointed CkC^{k}-convergence for any k∈ℤ+k\in\mathbb{Z}_{+},

(9.152) (ℳ,β4⋅h^β,𝒙β)⟶(ℝ4,gT​N,𝒙∞).(\mathcal{M},\beta^{4}\cdot\hat{h}_{\beta},\bm{x}_{\beta})\longrightarrow(\mathbb{R}^{4},g_{TN},\bm{x}_{\infty}).

So the proof of (2) is done.

The above completes the proof in the case with 1 singular point of convergence in the interior of the interval. Next we are in a position to give a generalization of the gluing construction in Section 6 to produce multiple singular points of convergence in the interior of the interval.

First, we fix two hyperkähler Tian-Yau spaces (Xb−4,gb−,p−)(X_{b_{-}}^{4},g_{b_{-}},p_{-}) and (Xb+4,gb+,p+)(X_{b_{+}}^{4},g_{b_{+}},p_{+}) with b−,b+∈{1,…,9}b_{-},b_{+}\in\{1,\ldots,9\}. Let {wj}j=1m\{w_{j}\}_{j=1}^{m} be positive integers satisfying

(9.153) w1+…+wm=b−+b+.w_{1}+\ldots+w_{m}=b_{-}+b_{+}.

For each 1≤j≤m1\leq j\leq m, we choose the neck region 𝒩wj4\mathcal{N}_{w_{j}}^{4} as a Gibbons-Hawking space over a finite flat cylinder (𝕋2×[−Tj,Tj+1],g0)(\mathbb{T}^{2}\times[-T_{j},T_{j+1}],g_{0}) with wjw_{j}-monopoles. As in the construction of Section 7, each pair of monopoles in 𝒩wj4\mathcal{N}_{w_{j}}^{4} has a definite and bounded distance. Now let Gj:𝕋2×ℝ→ℝG_{j}:\mathbb{T}^{2}\times\mathbb{R}\to\mathbb{R} be a global sign-changing Green’s function which satisfies

(9.154) −Δg0​Gj=2​π​∑s=1wjδps-\Delta_{g_{0}}G_{j}=2\pi\sum\limits_{s=1}^{w_{j}}\delta_{p_{s}}

and there are constants βj−,βj+∈ℝ\beta_{j}^{-},\beta_{j}^{+}\in\mathbb{R} and kj−>0k_{j}^{-}>0, kj+<0k_{j}^{+}<0 such that

(9.155) |∇g0k(Gj−(kj−z+βj−))|≤Ckeλ1​z,z<−100β,|∇g0k(Gj−(kj+z+βj+))|≤Cke−λ1​z,z>100β,kj−=−kj+=π​wjArea⁡(𝕋2).\displaystyle\begin{split}&|\nabla_{g_{0}}^{k}(G_{j}-(k_{j}^{-}z+\beta_{j}^{-}))|\leq C_{k}e^{\lambda_{1}z},\ z<-100\beta,\\ &|\nabla_{g_{0}}^{k}(G_{j}-(k_{j}^{+}z+\beta_{j}^{+}))|\leq C_{k}e^{-\lambda_{1}z},\ z>100\beta,\\ &k_{j}^{-}=-k_{j}^{+}=\frac{\pi w_{j}}{\Area(\mathbb{T}^{2})}.\end{split}

Note that the first step of gluing is to modify the above Green’s function by adding a linear function, i.e. let

(9.156) Vj≡Gj+(ℓj​z+βj)V_{j}\equiv G_{j}+(\ell_{j}z+\beta_{j})

such that two adjacent neck regions have compatible slopes, that is,

(9.157) kj+1−+ℓj+1=kj++ℓjk1−+ℓ1=2​π​b−A.\displaystyle\begin{split}k_{j+1}^{-}+\ell_{j+1}&=k_{j}^{+}+\ell_{j}\\ k_{1}^{-}+\ell_{1}&=\frac{2\pi b_{-}}{A}.\end{split}

Immediately, we have k1++ℓ1=2​π​(b−−w1)Ak_{1}^{+}+\ell_{1}=\frac{2\pi(b_{-}-w_{1})}{A} where A=Area⁡(𝕋2)A=\Area(\mathbb{T}^{2}). Eventually, one can check that at the right end of the last neck region 𝒩wm4\mathcal{N}_{w_{m}}^{4},

(9.158) km++ℓm=2​π​b−−∑j=1mwjA=−2​π​b+A.k_{m}^{+}+\ell_{m}=\frac{2\pi b_{-}-\sum\limits_{j=1}^{m}w_{j}}{A}=-\frac{2\pi b_{+}}{A}.

Applying the construction in Section 6, we obtain a manifold

(9.159) ℳ=Xb−4​(T1)​⋃Ψ1𝒩w14​(−T1−1,T2)​⋃Ψ2…​⋃Ψm𝒩wm4​(−Tm−1,Tm+1)​⋃Ψm+1Xb+4​(Tm+1+1),\mathcal{M}=X_{b_{-}}^{4}(T_{1})\bigcup_{\Psi_{1}}\mathcal{N}_{w_{1}}^{4}(-T_{1}-1,T_{2})\bigcup_{\Psi_{2}}\ldots\bigcup_{\Psi_{m}}\mathcal{N}_{w_{m}}^{4}(-T_{m}-1,T_{m+1})\bigcup_{\Psi_{m+1}}X_{b_{+}}^{4}(T_{m+1}+1),

where the attaching maps Ψ1,…​Ψm\Psi_{1},\dots\Psi_{m} are chosen analogously to Ψ−\Psi_{-}, and Ψm+1\Psi_{m+1} is chosen analogously to Ψ+\Psi_{+}. Furthermore, there is an approximate hyperkähler triple 𝝎ℳ\bm{\omega}^{\mathcal{M}} on ℳ\mathcal{M} which is hyperkähler away from the damage zones, and satisfies the conclusions of Proposition 6.4. The weight function on ℳ\mathcal{M} is defined in an analogous way to (8.1), and the arguments in the previous sections are easily modified to prove the existence of a hyperkähler metric g^β\hat{g}_{\beta}, close to gβg_{\beta}.

Next, choose the parameters so that βj=β\beta_{j}=\beta. The parameters TjT_{j} are then all proportional to β\beta, and the diameter of the neck region 𝒩wj4​(−Tj−1,Tj+1)\mathcal{N}^{4}_{w_{j}}(-T_{j}-1,T_{j+1}) in the metric g^β\hat{g}_{\beta} is proportional to β3/2\beta^{3/2}. Therefore, for the sequence of unit diameter hyperkähler metrics h^β\hat{h}_{\beta}, these neck regions limit to nontrivial intervals, and thus there are exactly mm distinct singular points of convergence tj∈(0,1),j=1​…​m,t_{j}\in(0,1),j=1\dots m, in the interior of the interval. The analysis of the regular collapsing regions and the bubbling regions is the same as above. ∎

Proof of Theorem 1.5.

This is a consequence of the above construction. To see this, let

(9.160) 𝒩w14​(−T1−1,T2),…,𝒩wm4​(−Tm−1,Tm+1)\mathcal{N}_{w_{1}}^{4}(-T_{1}-1,T_{2}),\ldots,\mathcal{N}_{w_{m}}^{4}(-T_{m}-1,T_{m+1})

be the neck regions in (9.159) such that for each 1≤j≤m1\leq j\leq m, the neck region 𝒩wj4​(−Tj−1,Tj+1)\mathcal{N}_{w_{j}}^{4}(-T_{j}-1,T_{j+1}) has exactly wjw_{j}-monopoles which have the same zz-coordinate. Notice that the degree of the nilmanifold fiber is determined by the ending slope of the Green’s function. Corollary 2.7 implies that the degree of the nilpotent fibers will jump by wjw_{j} when crossing a singular fiber in 𝒩wj4​(−Tj−1,Tj+1)\mathcal{N}_{w_{j}}^{4}(-T_{j}-1,T_{j+1}). It is also easy to see from the construction that there are wjw_{j} Taub-NUT bubbles at each singular point tj∈(0,1),j=1​…​mt_{j}\in(0,1),j=1\dots m. ∎

Remark 9.8.

If we take each collection of wjw_{j} monopole points in 𝒩wj4​(−Tj−1,Tj+1)\mathcal{N}_{w_{j}}^{4}(-T_{j}-1,T_{j+1}) to have distances exactly proportional to β−1\beta^{-1} (in the flat metric on 𝕋2×ℝ\mathbb{T}^{2}\times\mathbb{R}) from each other, then the corresponding bubble limit will be a multi-Taub-NUT ALF-Awj−1A_{w_{j}-1} metric instead of having wjw_{j} Taub-NUT bubbles. It is also possible to obtain nontrivial bubble-trees. For example, if the distances of the monopole points in a collection of monopole points from each other is proportional to β−2\beta^{-2}, then there will be a first bubble which is a ALF orbifold with an orbifold point which is cyclic of order wjw_{j}, and the deepest bubble will then be an ALE-Awj−1A_{w_{j}-1} metric.

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