Maximal bottom of spectrum or volume entropy rigidity in Alexandrov geometry
Jiang Yin

TL;DR
This paper extends rigidity results related to the bottom of the spectrum and volume entropy from Riemannian manifolds to Alexandrov spaces, showing similar splitting theorems under curvature and entropy conditions.
Contribution
It proves analogue theorems for Alexandrov spaces, generalizing known results from Riemannian geometry to a broader class of metric spaces.
Findings
Rigidity theorems for Alexandrov spaces with curvature bounds.
Splitting results under spectral and entropy conditions.
Extension of hyperbolic space characterization to Alexandrov spaces.
Abstract
In \cite{LiWang2001complete1,LiWang2001complete2}, Li-Wang proved a splitting theorem for an n-dimensional Riemannian manifold with and the bottom of spectrum . For an n-dimensional compact manifold with with the volume entropy , Ledrappier-Wang \cite{LeW2010volent} proved that the universal cover is isometric to the hyperbolic space . We will prove analogue theorems for Alexandrov spaces.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsGeometric Analysis and Curvature Flows · Point processes and geometric inequalities · Analytic and geometric function theory
maximal bottom of spectrum or volume entropy rigidity in Alexandrov geometry
Yin Jiang
Mathematics Department, Capital Normal University, Beijing P.R.C.
Abstract.
In [22, 23], Li-Wang proved a splitting theorem for an n-dimensional Riemannian manifold with and the bottom of spectrum . For an n-dimensional compact manifold with with the volume entropy , Ledrappier-Wang [20] proved that the universal cover is isometric to the hyperbolic space . We will prove analogue theorems for Alexandrov spaces.
1. Introduction
Let be an n-dimensional Alexandrov space with curvature , . Denote its n-dimensional Hausdorff measure. The goal of this paper is to establish two rigidity theorems on Alexandrov spaces.
Given a Lipschitz function , the pointwise Lipschitz constant of at is defined by
[TABLE]
Denote by the set of Lipschitz functions with compact support in . Suppose is non-compact, the bottom of the -spectrum of the Laplacian on can be characterized by
[TABLE]
It’s well known that (see e.g. Theorem 5 of [38]) that
[TABLE]
By the Bishop volume comparison, we have
[TABLE]
When is a smooth Riemannian manifold, Li-Wang [22, 23] proved the following theorems
Theorem 1.1** (Theorem 0.5 and 0.6, [23]).**
Let be a complete n-dimensional manifold. Suppose that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
If , then either:
(1) has only one end; or
(2) with the warped product metric
[TABLE]
where is a compact manifold with non-negative Ricci curvature.
If , besides (1) and (2), we have another case:
(3) with the warped product metric
[TABLE]
where is a compact manifold with its Gaussian curvature bounded below by .
For , there is no splitting theorem for two infinite volume ends, see section 3 of [23]. However, we still have the following:
Theorem 1.2** (Theorem 0.7, [23]).**
Let be a complete 2-dimensional manifold. Suppose that and , then either:
(1) has no finite volume end; or
(2) with the warped product metric
[TABLE]
Let be a compact Riemannian manifold, denote by its universal cover. If and , from the above theorems, we know that has at most one end. Wang [39] proved that must be isometric to the hyperbolic space . Later, the condition was weakened by Ledrappier-Wang [20]. The volume entropy of a compact manifold is defined by
[TABLE]
(for the existence of the limit, see [26]). By Bishop volume comparison, for any compact -dimensional manifold with , .
Theorem 1.3** ([20]).**
Let be a compact, -dimensional Riemannian manifold with . If , then is isometric to the hyperbolic space .
Remark 1.4*.*
This is a generalization of Wang’s theorem. Since if , by (1.1), we have . Recently, Chen-Rong-Xu [10] have proved a quantitative version for Theorem 1.3.
If is a compact n-dimensional Alexandrov space with curvature , by Bishop volume comparison, the volume entropy . In view of the theorems above, do we have any rigidity for non-compact Alexandrov spaces with curvature satisfying ? Or compact Alexandrov spaces with curvature satisfying ? In this paper, we will prove analogue theorems for Alexandrov spaces.
Theorem 1.5**.**
Suppose . Let be a non-compact, n dimensional Alexandrov space with curvature , . If , then either
(1) has only one end; or
(2) splits as , where is a compact Alexandrov space with non-negative curvature.
For , we have the following theorem
Theorem 1.6**.**
Suppose . Let be a non-compact, n-dimensional Alexandrov space with curvature , . If , then either
(1) has no finite volume end; or
(2) splits as , where is a compact Alexandrov space with non-negative curvature.
Note that when , our theorem is weaker than Theorem 1.1. Since if has at least two infinite volume ends , we don’t know whether is a warped product like case (3) in Theorem 1.1, see Remark 4.14.
We will also prove a version of Theorem 1.3 for Alexandrov spaces.
Theorem 1.7**.**
Let be a compact, -dimensional Alexandrov space with curvature . If the volume entropy , then is a hyperbolic manifold.
As an immediate corollary of Theorem 1.7, we have
Corollary 1.8**.**
Let be a compact, -dimensional Alexandrov space with curvature . If , then is a hyperbolic manifold.
Before describing our approach, let us recall the proof of Theorem 1.1. Suppose has at least two ends. If has at least two infinite volume ends and , then we can construct a non-constant, bounded harmonic function on . If in addition and , by Bochner formula and decay estimates for harmonic functions, Li-Wang [22] proved that must splits as case (3) in Theorem 1.1, then .
If , then , has at least one finite volume end . Ji-Li-Wang [17] proved that the Busemann function with respect to the ray to the infinity of satisfies . Then is smooth and , has no critical point. It follows that is homeomorphic to for some manifold . By Bochner formula, they get the explicit form of the Hessian of and proved that . The proof of Theorem 1.2 is just the same.
For Theorem 1.3, Liu [25] constructed a Busemann function on such that and . By the argument as above . Since the sectional curvature of is bounded, by a theorem of [39], is isometric to .
Our proof of Theorem 1.5, 1.6 and 1.7 are basically along the Line of the argument above. However, for Alexandrov spaces, due to the lack of smoothness of the boundaries of ends, harmonic functions are not necessarily continuous up to the boundary. We should rely on the theory of Dirichlet problem on metric spaces with a doubling measure and satisfying Poincaré inequality for . Following the approach by harmonic functions developed by Li-Wang, we can prove that if , then doesn’t have two infinite volume ends.
For , since , then has at least one end with finite volume. Following Ji-Li-Wang’s proof, we can get a semiconcave function such that for a.e. and (see section 2 for the definition of the Laplacian ). Under the condition of Theorem 1.7, following Liu’s proof, we can also get such a function on .
Similar to the non-negative curvature case, Alexander-Bishop [1] proved that the existence of an affine function is equivalent to the splitting of an Alexandrov space. For our purpose, we just mention a particular case of this theorem.
Definition 1.9*.*
We say is a -affine function, if for any unit speed geodesic ,
[TABLE]
Theorem 1.10** ([1]).**
Let be an n-dimensional Alexandrov space with curvature , . If carries a non-constant -affine function . Then is a constant and is a warped product. If in addition , then , where is an Alexandrov space with non-negative curvature.
If is a manifold, is just the affine function. For Alexandrov spaces, due to the lack of regularity for functions with constant Laplacian, it’s not easy to see that has no critical points. For theorem 1.5, let , one may consider two asymptotic rays from with respect to a line on . However, in general these two rays on the warped product don’t form a line. By studying the gradient flow, we will prove the following general splitting theorem.
Theorem 1.11**.**
Let be a non-compact, n-dimensional Alexandrov space with curvature , . If there exists a semiconcave function satisfying:
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Then is -affine and splits as , where is an dimensional Alexandrov space with non-negative curvature.
For Theorem 1.7, by an argument of Chen-Rong-Xu [10], the warped product (i.e. ) must be . We will also discuss the obstacles to generalize our argument to spaces, see Remark 4.15.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In section 2, we recall some necessary materials for Alexandrov spaces, including gradient flow, theory of Dirichlet problem. We will also prove a refined version of localized Bochner inequality. In section 3, we will prove Theorem 1.11. In section 4, we will prove theorem 1.5 and 1.6. In section 5, we will prove Theorem 1.7.
Acknowledgements. We are grateful to Xiantao Huang, RenJin Jiang, Shicheng Xu and Huichun Zhang for helpful discussions. We also thank Xiaochun Rong for helpful suggestions.
2. Preliminaries
2.1. Preliminaries on Alexandrov spaces
In this section, we review the definition of Alexandrov spaces with curvature bounded below and some properties. These definitions and results are mainly taken from [7], [28] and [6].
Let be a metric space. A rectifiable curve connecting two points is called a geodesic if its length is equal to and it has unit speed. A metric space is called a geodesic space if any two points can be connected by a geodesic. Denote by the simply connected 2-dimensional space form of constant curvature . Given three points in a geodesic space , we can take a comparison triangle in , such that
[TABLE]
If , we add the assumption . The angle is called comparison angle.
Definition 2.1*.*
A geodesic space is called an Alexandrov space with curvature if it’s locally compact and for any point , there exists a neighborhood such that, for any four different points in , we have
[TABLE]
The Hausdorff dimension of an Alexandrov space is always an integer. Let be an n-dimensional Alexandrov space with curvature . Denote by the n-dimensional Hausdorff measure. Given any two geodesics and with , the angle
[TABLE]
is well defined.
We say is equivalent to if , denote by the set of equivalent classes of geodesic with . The space of directions is the completion of metric space .
The tangent cone at , , is the Euclidean cone over , it’s an Alexandrov space with curvature . For any two vectors . The ”scalar product” (see section 1 of [34]) is defined by
[TABLE]
The distance is defined by the law of cosines
[TABLE]
For each point , we denote by the set of directions at corresponding to all geodesics connecting to . The symbol denotes the direction at corresponding to some geodesic . Given a direction , it’s possible that there exists no geodesic starting at with . However, it’s shown in [30] that for and any direction , there exists a quasi-geodesic with and .
The exponential map is defined by Petrunin [32] as follows. and for any , is a point on some quasi-geodesic of length starting from along direction . If the quasi-geodesic is not unique, we fix some one of them as the definition of .
A point in an n-dimensional Alexandrov space is said to be regular if its tangent cone is isometric to with standard metric. Denote by the set of regular points.
Definition 2.2*.*
We say that a function is differentiable at , if there exists a vector in , denoted by , such that for any geodesic with ,
[TABLE]
The Rademacher theorem, in the framework of metric measure space with a doubling measure and a Poincaré inequality for upper gradient, was proved by Cheeger [8]. In [3], Bertrand proved it in Alexandrov spaces via a simple argument. It says that a locally Lipschitz function is differentiable almost everywhere with respect to in .
2.2. Semiconcave functions and gradient curves
Next, we introduce -concave functions and semi-concave functions. These definitions and results are mainly taken from section 1 and 2 of [34].
Definition 2.3*.*
Let be an n-dimensional Alexandrov space without boundary and be an open subset. A locally Lipschitz function is called -concave if for any geodesic in , the function is concave.
A function is called semiconcave if for any point , there is a neighborhood and such that the restriction is -concave. Given a semiconcave function , its differential is well defined for each point . Let be a continuous function. A function is called -concave if for any point and , there is a neighborhood such that is -concave.
Note that any semiconcave function is locally Lipschitz. The gradient vector at any point , is well defined. If for all , then ; Otherwise,
[TABLE]
where is the (necessarily unique) unit vector for which attains its maximum.
Denote by the set of locally Lipschitz continuous functions on . Let , the pointwise Lipschitz constant of at are defined by
[TABLE]
For the gradient, we have the following proposition:
Lemma 2.4** (Proposition 2.4, [41]).**
Let be a semiconcave function. If is differentiable at , then we have
[TABLE]
Next we introduce the gradient curves of semiconcave functions.
Definition 2.5*.*
Let be a semiconcave function, a curve is called -gradient curve if for any ,
[TABLE]
The next proposition states the existence and uniqueness of gradient curves.
Proposition 2.6** (Propostion 2.1.2, [34]).**
Given a semiconcave function and a point , there is a unique gradient curve such that .
A limit of gradient curves is a gradient curve for the limit function, i.e.
Proposition 2.7** (Proposition 2.1.5, [34]).**
Let , let be the sequence of f-gradient curves with and let be the -gradient curve with . Then as .
Next we introduce the gradient flow.
Definition 2.8*.*
Let be a semiconcave function. We define the -gradient flow to be the one parameter family of maps
[TABLE]
where and is the -gradient curve which starts at .
2.3. Sobolev spaces and measure valued Laplacian
Let be a domain in , the Sobolev spaces is well defined (see, for example [19]). For a locally Lipschitz function , its -norm is defined by
[TABLE]
Sobolev spaces is defined by the closure of the set
[TABLE]
under the -norm. Denote by the set of Lipschitz functions with compact support in . is defined by the closure of under the -norm. This coincides with the definitions in [8]. We say if for any bounded, open subset . According to [19] (see also Theorem 4.47 of [8]), the ”derivative” is well-defined for all . is reflexive according to Theorem 4.48 of [8].
Given a function , a functional is defined on by
[TABLE]
By a standard argument, we can prove the following Lemma:
Lemma 2.9**.**
Let and . If for any bounded, open subset , there exists a constant such that and converge to strongly in , then and for any ,
[TABLE]
Let , if for any non-negative ,
[TABLE]
then we say . In this case, according to [14], is a signed Radon measure. Denote its Lebesgue decompostion by
[TABLE]
where is the density of the absolutely continuous part and is the singular part. We have that
[TABLE]
For a semiconcave function , it was proved by Perelman [29] that for a.e. , there exists a quadratic form on such that for any geodesic with , we have
[TABLE]
Denote the set of such points by , it has full measure. When a function is -concave, Petrunin [31] proved that is a signed Radon measure. Furthermore, and
[TABLE]
for almost all points .
We say if . We say if and . If and is a signed Radon measure, then
[TABLE]
for any .
It’s easy to prove the following lemma:
Lemma 2.10**.**
If and are signed Radon measures, we have
[TABLE]
If, in addition, , then we have
[TABLE]
for any .
We need the following Green’s formula:
Lemma 2.11**.**
For any , for a.e. , we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let . For , denote . Denote , by coarea formula, . By Bishop-Gromov volume comparison theorem, is locally Lipschitz. Then is differentiable for a.e. and
[TABLE]
Suppose is differentiable at . Consider the cut-off functions
[TABLE]
∎
Then we have
[TABLE]
Let , we obtain
[TABLE]
We claim that
[TABLE]
Let , where are Radon measures. Then
[TABLE]
Let , we get (2.12). By combining (2.11) with (2.12), we finish the proof.
Dirichlet problem
Definition 2.12*.*
The capacity of a set is the number
[TABLE]
where the infimum is taken over all such that on .
It’s easy to see that is countably subaddictive and . We say that a property regarding points in holds quasieverywhere (q.e.) if the set of points for which it fails has capacity zero.
Let be a bounded domain, given a function and , consider the following Dirichlet problem
[TABLE]
If , it’s known that the solution exists and is unique. (See, for example, Theorem 7.12, Theorem 7.14 of [8] and note that if , the Dirichlet Poincaré inequality holds, see, e.g. Corollary 5.54 of [4]).
If , then is called a harmonic function. If , denote the solution of 2.14 by . A Lipschitz function on can be extended to a function such that on (see, e.g. (8.2) or (8.3) of [8]). By remark 7.11 and Theorem 7.14 of [8], we know that does not depend on the choice of extension, we define . It was proved in [33] that is locally Lipschitz in . However, it’s in general not possible to have continuity up to the boundary. Nevertheless, we have the following theorem, see e.g. Theorem 10.6 of [4].
Lemma 2.13**.**
Let be a bounded domain in with . Let be a Lipschitz function. Then for q.e. , we have
[TABLE]
We also have the following comparison principle, see e.g. Lemma 10.2 of [4].
Lemma 2.14**.**
Let be a bounded domain in with . Let be two Lipschitz functions. If q.e. on , then in .
For a positive harmonic function, we have the gradient estimate, which was proved by Zhang-Zhu in [41], modified by Hua-Xia in [15]. Recently, Zhang-Zhu [42] have proved a sharp local Cheng-Yau gradient estimate on more general metric measure spaces.
Lemma 2.15**.**
Let be an n-dimensional Alexandrov space with curvature for some . Then there exists a constant such that every positive harmonic function on satisfies
[TABLE]
2.4. Bochner formula
The Bochner formula for Alexandrov spaces was established in [41]. We need the following refined version.
Theorem 2.16**.**
Let be an n-dimensional Alexandrov space with curvature for some , . Suppose and with , then , and for -a.e. ,
[TABLE]
If , for -a.e. ,
[TABLE]
To prove this theorem, we need a global Bochner formula. By [35] and [40], we know an n-dimensional Alexandrov space with curvature () whose boundary is empty satisfies condition. By the same trick in the proof of Theorem 3.14 of [37], we can prove the following lemma:
Lemma 2.17**.**
Let be an n-dimensional Alexandrov space with curvature for some , . If with for some , then , and for -a.e. , we have
[TABLE]
Remark 2.18*.*
is by Lemma 3.2 of [37]. Note that if , then and , Since
[TABLE]
(2.19) reduces to the third inequality of Theorem 3.14 of [37].
Our proof is basically along the line of the proof of Theorem 1.1 in [16]. We adopt their notations, denote
[TABLE]
We need the following result on the existence of good cut-off functions. See also [2, 27].
Lemma 2.19** (Propostion 2.9, [16]).**
For any compact subset , there is a such that in a neighborhood of .
Lemma 2.20** (Corollary 2.11, [16]).**
If with for some , then for any , for some .
Proof of Theorem 2.16.
Let and with . For any Ball , choose such that in a neighborhood of . Since , by [18], . Then
[TABLE]
By Lemma 2.20,
[TABLE]
By Theorem 2.17, we know and
[TABLE]
Since for any , we have
[TABLE]
for . For any with support in , we have
[TABLE]
Then
[TABLE]
By combining (2.23), (2.24) with (2.26), we get (2.17). By (2.20),we have
[TABLE]
By combining this with (2.17), we get (2.18). ∎
3. The General splitting theorem
In this section, we prove Theorem 1.11. We need a lemma in [30]. We adopt some notations of this paper. Let be a continuous function on , . We write if
[TABLE]
for some . means that for some . If is another continuous function on , then means that for all . The following lemma is from 1.3 of [30].
Lemma 3.1** (1.3, [30]).**
If for all , and for almost all and all . Then is concave, where is the solution of .
We need the following Lemma:
Lemma 3.2**.**
Let be a semiconcave function with for some constant . Let be the -gradient flow. For any Borel subset , define
[TABLE]
If , then for any ,
[TABLE]
This Lemma is essentially implied in the proof of 1.3. Claim of [35]. For completeness, we present a proof here.
Proof.
For any , is locally Lipschitz. Since is also an Alexandrov space, by Rademacher’s theorem, is differentiable at -a.e. . By Fubini theorem,
[TABLE]
is of full -measure. For ,
[TABLE]
for a.e. . Since
[TABLE]
and , . By (3.3) and the dominated convergence theorem, for ,
[TABLE]
Denote , then for a.e. . Since is locally Lipschitz, we have
[TABLE]
That is,
[TABLE]
For any ball , denote . Consider the cut-off functions:
[TABLE]
By (3.6), we have
[TABLE]
Since for a.e. , we have
[TABLE]
By combining (3.7) with (3.8), we have
[TABLE]
On the other hand, for , we can choose cut-off functions with respect to :
[TABLE]
Then we have
[TABLE]
By combining (3.9) with (3.10), we have
[TABLE]
Let be a Borel subset with finite volume. Denote the volume of unit ball . For any , there exists a finite union of balls such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
By combining (3.11) with (3.13), we have
[TABLE]
By the arbitrariness of , we have
[TABLE]
Since the Bishop-Gromov volume comparison theorem holds on Alexandrov spaces, the Vitali covering theorem follows, see for example, Theorem 1.6 of [13]. For any open subset , there exist countably many disjoint balls such that . By (3.11), we have
[TABLE]
By combining (3.15) with (3.16), we have
[TABLE]
Let be a Borel subset with finite volume. Then for any , there exists an open subset such that
[TABLE]
By (3.15), we have
[TABLE]
By combining (3.17) with (3.19), we have
[TABLE]
By the arbitrariness of , we have
[TABLE]
By combining (3.15) with (3.21), we have
[TABLE]
thus we complete the proof. ∎
A curve is called a ray if for any .
Proof of Theorem 1.11.
Since for a.e. , . We will prove that is -affine, then by Theorem 1.10, splits as .
We divide our proof into four steps.
Step 1, prove that the -gradient curve issuing from any point is a ray.
Fix , . Let be the -gradient flow, consider the gradient curves of issuing from . Then
[TABLE]
Denote
[TABLE]
then . Since , by Lemma 3.2, we have
[TABLE]
By the definition of ,
[TABLE]
By combining (3.22), (3.23) with (3.24), we have
[TABLE]
It follows that for a.e. ,
[TABLE]
Since a.e., is 1-Lipschitz. By (3.26), for -a.e. . It follows that, for ,
[TABLE]
Since is 1-Lipschitz,
[TABLE]
By combining (3.27) with (3.28), we get that for a.e. , is a ray, denote this set by . For any , choose , then converge to the gradient curve . By Proposition 2.7, is a ray.
Step 2, prove that is semiconvex and the gradient curves of and form a line.
For any geodesic and any , let . For ,
[TABLE]
Since , this means that supports at . Then is semiconvex and
[TABLE]
Since is semiconcave, for , consider the -gradient curve issuing from . Repeating the argument as above, we can prove that is a ray. Denote the curve formed by and , let . Since the -gradient curve issuing from for is a ray and geodesic doesn’t branch, we know that is a geodesic.
Step 3, prove that is differentiable and estimate .
Let , . Then
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
This means that supports at . It follows that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
In (3.31), let , we obtain
[TABLE]
By combining (3.30) with (3.32), we know that
[TABLE]
Repeat the argument as above, we know that if ,
[TABLE]
By combining (3.34) with (3.35), we know that is differentiable.
Since is both semiconcave and semiconvex, so is . by combining (3.35) with (3.33), we have
[TABLE]
Since is semiconcave, by Lemma 3.1, we know that
[TABLE]
Step 4, prove that is -affine. Compare the proof of Lemma 4.2 of [40].
Define the lower Hessian of , by
[TABLE]
Since is both semiconcave and semiconvex, it’s well defined.
Recall that is the set of points such that there exists Perelman’s Hessian of at .
Since has full measure and , by (2.3) and (2.4), for a.e. ,
[TABLE]
By (3.33), we have
[TABLE]
By combining (3.38) with (3.39), for a.e. ,
[TABLE]
Consider the function ,
[TABLE]
By (3.40),
[TABLE]
For any geodesic , by (3.41) and Segment inequality (see [9]), there exist geodesics converging to uniformly such that . Then for a.e. ,
[TABLE]
By combining (3.35) with (3.42), for a.e. , if we denote , then we have
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and . That is,
[TABLE]
By combining (3.35) with (3.43), we have
[TABLE]
Since is semiconvex, by Lemma 3.1, we obtain that is -convex. Since converge to uniformly, we know that
[TABLE]
By combining (3.37) with (3.44), we know that is -affine. Since , by Theorem 1.10, splits as , where is an dimensional Alexandrov space with non-negative curvature. ∎
4. Splitting theorem with respect to bottom of spectrum
In this section, we will always assume that is a non-compact, n dimensional Alexandrov space with curvature , . For an open subset , denote the set of Lipschitz functions with compact support in . The bottom of the spectrum of the Laplacian on can be characterized by
[TABLE]
Now fix a ball , from now on, we say is an end of , we mean is an unbounded connected component of . Let be an end of . The bottom of the spectrum of the Laplacian on satisfying Dirichlet boundary condition on can be characterized by
[TABLE]
It’s easy to see that .
We adopt some notations of [22]. If is an end of , denote and . Denote , . Now let , Consider the harmonic functions:
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
By the maximum principle, . By gradient estimate (2.16), on any compact subset of , is equi-continuous for sufficiently large . By Arzela-Ascoli’s theorem, there exists a subsequence converging locally uniformly to a Lipschitz function defined on , . By Lemma 2.9, , is harmonic. Note that may be a constant.
Lemma 4.1**.**
If , then on .
Proof.
By Lemma 2.13, for any , for q.e. ,
[TABLE]
Then for q.e. ,
[TABLE]
Note that
[TABLE]
By Lemma 2.14, on . ∎
Definition 4.2*.*
An end is said non-parabolic if the sequence of harmonic functions subconverge to a non-constant harmonic function . Otherwise, it’s said parabolic.
Lemma 4.3**.**
If is a non-parabolic end, then .
Proof.
Let , then . Consider , then
[TABLE]
Since for any , by (4.1), we have
[TABLE]
It follows that
[TABLE]
Then for any ,
[TABLE]
Since
[TABLE]
By Lemma 2.14, on . It follows that
[TABLE]
By combining (4.4) with (4.9), we have , then . ∎
Remark 4.4*.*
Let be a non-parabolic end. If subconverge to another harmonic function , since for any , we have . Similarly, we can get , then . If , suppose subconverge to a harmonic function defined on . Repeat the above argument, we can get . If is a parabolic end, then .
Lemma 4.5**.**
Suppose has at least two non-parabolic ends, then there exists a non-constant, bounded harmonic function defined on .
The proof of this proposition is similar to the case of Riemannian manifolds, see [24]. We include a proof here.
Proof.
Suppose is sufficiently large so that has at least two disjoint non-parabolic ends and . Choose an increasing sequence such that , let be the solution of
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Clearly, . Then subconverge to a harmonic function satisfying . Next, we prove that is not a constant. For , let be the harmonic functions on such that
[TABLE]
Suppose subconverge to a harmonic function defined on . By lemma 2.13, for q.e. ,
[TABLE]
Note that
[TABLE]
By Lemma 2.14, we have
[TABLE]
It follows that on . Since ,
[TABLE]
By repeating the above argument, we can prove that
[TABLE]
Then
[TABLE]
Since , we know that
[TABLE]
By combining (4.12) with (4.13), we know that is non-constant. ∎
Following the argument in the proof of Theorem 22.1 of [21], we can get the following decay estimate.
Lemma 4.6**.**
Let be an n-dimensional Alexandrov space with curvature for some , . Suppose is an end of with respect to such that . Let be a non-negative function defined on satisfying . If satisfies the growth condition
[TABLE]
as , then it must satisfies the decay estimate
[TABLE]
for some constant depending on and for all .
Suppose is an end of . Let be an increasing sequence, consider the harmonic functions
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Then subconverge to a harmonic function defined on . Note that may be a constant. We can get the the following decay estimate for . See Corollary 22.3 of [21] and Lemma 1.1 of [22].
Lemma 4.7**.**
Suppose is an end of , is the harmonic function constructed above. If , then
[TABLE]
for some constant depending on , and . If is another end with , then
[TABLE]
for some constant depending on , and .
Proof.
Consider the functions
[TABLE]
Let be a Lipschitz function defined on such that
[TABLE]
Let
[TABLE]
then is Lipschitz. Since , . It’s easy to see that satisfies the growth condition (4.14). By Lemma 7.13 of [4], we have
[TABLE]
By Lemma 4.6, we can get
[TABLE]
for some constant depending on , and . Note that on and vanishes on . Then if we replace by , (4.19) still holds. By letting , we get (4.16). Similarly, we can get (4.17). ∎
Following the argument in the proof of Lemma 1.2 of [22], we can get
Lemma 4.8**.**
If is an end of with , the harmonic function in Lemma 4.7 satisfies
[TABLE]
for sufficiently large.
Li-Wang [22] proved sharp volume growth/decay rates for an end with , see Theorem 1.4 of [22]. This has been generalized by Buckley-Koskela [5] to proper pointed metric measure spaces, which include Alexandrov spaces. To state the estimate, denote by the volume of the set . The volume of the end will be denoted by .
Lemma 4.9**.**
Let be an end of with .
(1) If is a parabolic end, then must have exponential volume decay given by
[TABLE]
for some constant depending on the end .
(2) If is a non-parabolic end, then must have exponential volume growth given by
[TABLE]
for some constant depending on the end .
Remark 4.10*.*
For a parabolic end with , following the argument in the proof of (1) of Theorem 1.4 in [22], we can prove the estimate (4.20). Buckley-Koskela proved that if an end satisfies , then it either has volume decay as (4.20) or has volume growth as (4.21). So non-parabolic ends must satisfies (4.21).
The following theorem, when restricted to Riemannian manifolds, is a particular case of Theorem 2.1 of [22].
Lemma 4.11**.**
Suppose . Let be a non-compact, n dimensional Alexandrov space with curvature , . If , then has only one end with infinite volume.
Proof.
We argue by contradiction. Suppose has two ends with infinite volume. By Lemma 4.9, we know they are non-parabolic. By Lemma 4.5, there exists a non-constant, bounded harmonic function defined on . Let , by Theorem 2.16, , and
[TABLE]
Denote , by the following Lemma 4.12, and
[TABLE]
By Lemma 4.8 and following the argument from line 11 on page 520 to line 7 on page 521 of [22], we can prove that
[TABLE]
Following the argument from line 8 on page 521 to line 9 on page 522 of [22], we can find non-negative functions such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
It follows that , contradiction! Hence we complete the proof. ∎
Lemma 4.12**.**
Let , then and
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let , by Theorem 2.16, , and
[TABLE]
Following the argument in the proof of Lemma 4.12 of [36], we can prove that for , and furthermore,
[TABLE]
for . By (2.7), we have
[TABLE]
Now let , then
[TABLE]
By (4.24) and (4.26), for a.e. ,
[TABLE]
Let , by (4.25), we have
[TABLE]
Note that , thus we get (4.23).
Remark 4.13*.*
In Lemma 4.12 of [36], it’s assumed that . We find that for , the lemma still holds.
∎
Next, we prove Theorem 1.5. We follow the argument in the proof of Theorem 1.1 of [17].
Proof of Theorem 1.5.
If (1) doesn’t hold, then has at least two ends. For , . By Lemma 4.11, has at most one non-parabolic end, then has at least one parabolic end . Let be a ray with , , where denotes the infinity of the end . Consider the Busemann function (note that it’s different from the common form) ,
[TABLE]
For any , choose a geodesic connecting with , let . Then there exists a subsequence of converging to a ray . Note that it may not be unique. For any , we have
[TABLE]
The last inequality holds since
[TABLE]
It follows that for any ,
[TABLE]
By a similar argument in Step 3 in the proof of Theorem 1.11, we can prove that is semiconcave and for any geodesic (let ),
[TABLE]
By (2.4), for a.e. ,
[TABLE]
Since , we have
[TABLE]
By (4.31) and Lemma 2.4, we have
[TABLE]
Denote
[TABLE]
we have
[TABLE]
We will prove that . For any non-negative function ,
[TABLE]
Since
[TABLE]
We have
[TABLE]
Following the argument from line 20 on page 5 to line 26 one page 6 of [17], there exist such that: For ,
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
For ,
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
We now claim that the volume of , denoted by , is bounded by for sufficiently large . By (4.34), we have
[TABLE]
Following the argument of the proof of Lemma 2.11, we can prove that
[TABLE]
for a.e. , where denotes the dimensional Hausdorff meansure of . Note that is locally Lipschitz, following the same argument from line 1 to line 10 on page 7 of [17], we prove the claim and get
[TABLE]
By combining (4.40), (4.41) and (4.42), we have
[TABLE]
By combining (4.39) with (4.43), we have
[TABLE]
Note that by (4.37), the measure is non-negative and almost everywhere. Then the first term and the second term of the left hand side of (4.44) are non-negative. It follows that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Thus
[TABLE]
We claim that
[TABLE]
Otherwise, there exist and , such that
[TABLE]
Then
[TABLE]
for sufficiently large. This contradicts to (4.46), thus (4.48) holds. By combining this with (4.47), we have
[TABLE]
By combining this with (4.36), we have
[TABLE]
Since is semiconcave and for a.e. , by Theorem 1.11, splits and , where is an n-1 dimensional Alexandrov space with non-negative curvature. Since has at least two ends, by the argument in the proof of Lemma 9.5 of [36], we know that is compact. ∎
Proof of Theorem 1.6.
If has one finite volume end (i.e. parabolic end), the proof is the same as above. ∎
Remark 4.14*.*
For , our result is weaker than Theorem 1.1. If has two infinite volume end, , we don’t know whether splits as case (3) of Theorem 1.1. Since in the proof of Lemma 4.11, we don’t know whether we can get rigidity from .
Remark 4.15*.*
Let be a complete, separable metric measure space satisfying the Riemannian curvature-dimension condition . For the Dirichlet problem, Lemma 2.13 and 2.14 holds for metric measure spaces with a doubling measure and satisfying a Poincaré inequality for . spaces are included. So we can define parabolic ends and non-parabolic ends similarly. Suppose , by Theorem 0.1 of [5], the volume of these ends satisfies exponential growth/decay estimates. Decay estimates for harmonic functions also holds since test functions are compositions of distance functions. So we can prove an analogue of Lemma 4.11.
If has a finite volume end , let be the Busemann function with respect to the ray to the infinity of . Following Gigli’s argument in [11, 12], we may prove that . Following the proof of Theorem 1.5, we may prove that and the minimal relaxed gradient for -a.e.. However, we don’t know whether is semiconcave, since has only ”Ricci curvature bounded below”. For any , we don’t know whether the gradient curve of exists. So it seems to me that our argument can’t be generalized to directly. However, analogue theorems may hold on spaces.
5. Splitting theorem with respect to volume entropy
In this section, we always suppose that is a compact, n-dimensional Alexandrov space with curvature . Since Alexandrov space is locally contradictable, the universal cover exists. We are concerned with the volume entropy defined by
[TABLE]
By the same argument in [26], the limit exists and is independent of the center . By the volume comparison theorem, we know that .
Proof of Theorem 1.7.
means that when , . First, we follow the approach of [25] to construct a Busemann function on and show that . Now take a fixed . Pick a point and define . Following the same argument in the proof of Claim 1 of [25], we can prove that: there exists a sequence such that
[TABLE]
Now define
[TABLE]
By Lemma 2.11, without loss of generality, we can assume that
[TABLE]
By the relative volume comparison theorem,
[TABLE]
By combining (5.2), (5.3) with (5.4), we have
[TABLE]
Given a point , for all preimages of in , consider the subset such that . Denote a maximal set of such that
[TABLE]
for . Following the argument of line 7 to line 23 on Page 152 of [25], we can prove that there exists at least one such that
[TABLE]
Since
[TABLE]
By combining (5.6) with (5.7), we have
[TABLE]
Fix , then there is an isometry . Consider the function defined on . Let . is uniformly bounded and 1-Lipschitz, then there exists a subsequence (also denoted by for simplicity) uniformly converging to some . Since is uniformly bounded in , by Lemma 2.11, for any , we have
[TABLE]
Denote , by combing (5.9) with (5.8), we have
[TABLE]
Since are -concave, we know that is 1-concave. We claim that for a.e. . In fact, Denote
[TABLE]
By Rademacher’s theorem, it has full measure. For , let , choose geodesic connecting to , let , then
[TABLE]
Suppose that subconverge to a geodesic , then
[TABLE]
This means that . So we prove the claim.
Suppose subconverge to some function . Repeat the above argument, we can prove that is 1-concave, for a.e. and . By Theorem 1.11, we know that , where is an dimensional Alexandrov space with non-negative curvature. Then following the argument of the proof of Lemma 4.4 of Chen-Rong-Xu’s paper [10], is isometric to . For Reader’s convenience, we list their argument below. Assume is a regular point, thus . Via reparametrization of ,
[TABLE]
Since is compact, for any t, there is such that
[TABLE]
Then
[TABLE]
∎
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] S. Alexander, R. Bishop, A cone splitting theorem for Alexandrov spaces , Pacific J. Math. 218 (2005), 1-16.
- 2[2] L. Ambrosio, A. Mondino, G. Savaré, On the Bakry-Émery Condition, the Gradient Estimates and the Local-to-Global Property of R C D ∗ ( K , N ) 𝑅 𝐶 superscript 𝐷 𝐾 𝑁 RCD^{*}(K,N) Metric Measure Spaces , J. Geom. Anal., 26:24-56, 2016.
- 3[3] J. Bertrand, Existence and uniqueness of optimal maps on Alexandrov spaces , Adv. in Math., 219(3)(2008), 838–851.
- 4[4] A. Björn, J. Björn, Nonlinear potential theory on metric spaces , volume 17 of EMS Tracts in Mathematics. European Mathematical Society (EMS), Zürich, 2011.
- 5[5] S. M. Buckley, P. Koskela, Ends of metric measure spaces and Sobolev inequalities , Math. Z. 252 (2006), no. 2, 275-285
- 6[6] D. Burago, Y. Burago, S. Ivanov, A course in metric geometry , vol.33, AMS(2001).
- 7[7] Y. Burago, M. Gromov, G. Perel’man, AD Alexandrov spaces with curvature bounded below , Russian Math.Surveys 47(1992),1-58.
- 8[8] J. Cheeger, Differentiability of Lipschitz functions on metric measure spaces , Geom. Funct. Anal. 9, (1999), 428–517.
