Biconservative submanifolds in $\mathbb{S}^{n}\times \mathbb{R}$ and $\mathbb{H}^{n}\times \mathbb{R}$
Fernando Manfio, Nurettin Cenk Turgay, Abhitosh Upadhyay

TL;DR
This paper classifies 3-dimensional biconservative submanifolds with parallel mean curvature in certain product spaces and explores related biharmonic submanifolds, advancing understanding of their geometric properties.
Contribution
It provides a complete classification of specific biconservative submanifolds in product spaces and establishes conditions for their conservativity.
Findings
Complete classification of 3D biconservative submanifolds in $ ext{S}^4\times \mathbb{R}$ and $ ext{H}^4\times \mathbb{R}$
Necessary and sufficient conditions for conservativity of these submanifolds
Results on biharmonic submanifolds in the same ambient spaces
Abstract
In this paper, we study biconservative submanifolds in and with parallel mean curvature vector field and co-dimension 2. We obtain some necessary and sufficient conditions for such submanifolds to be conservative. In particular, we obtain a complete classification of 3-dimensional biconservative submanifolds in and with nonzero parallel mean curvature vector field. We also get some results for biharmonic submanifolds in and .
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 · Geometry and complex manifolds · Advanced Differential Geometry Research
Biconservative submanifolds in and
F. Manfio, N. C. Turgay and A. Upadhyay
Abstract
In this paper we study biconservative submanifolds in and with parallel mean curvature vector field and co-dimension . We obtain some necessary and sufficient conditions for such submanifolds to be conservative. In particular, we obtain a complete classification of -dimensional biconservative submanifolds in and with nonzero parallel mean curvature vector field. We also get some results for biharmonic submanifolds in and .
MSC 2010: Primary: 53A10; Secondary: 53C40, 53C42
Key words: Biconservative submanifolds, biharmonic submanifolds, product spaces and .
1 Introduction
Roughly speaking, biconservative submanifolds arise as the vanishing of the stress-energy tensor associated to the variational problem of biharmonic submanifolds. More precisely, an isometric immersion between two Riemannian manifolds is biconservative if the tangent component of its bitension field is identically zero (see Section 2).
Simplest examples of biconservative hypersurfaces in space forms are those that have constant mean curvature. In this case, the condition of biconservative becomes , where is the shape operator and is the mean curvature function of the hypersurface. The case of surfaces in was considered by Hasanis-Vlachos [11], and surfaces in and was studied by Caddeo-Montaldo-Oniciuc-Piu [2]. In the Euclidean space , these surfaces are rotational. Recent results in the study of biconservative submanifolds were obtained, for example, in [8, 9, 10, 19, 20, 22, 23].
Apart from space forms, however, there are few Riemannian manifolds for which biconservative submanifolds are classified. Recently, this was considered for surfaces with parallel mean curvature vector field in and in [7], where they found explicit parametrizations for such submanifolds.
In this paper, we give a complete classification of biconservative submanifolds in with nonzero parallel mean curvature vector field and co-dimension . This extends the one obtained in [7]. To state our result, let denote either the unit sphere or the hyperbolic space , according as or , respectively. Given an isometric immersion , let be a unit vector field tangent to the second factor. Then, a tangent vector field on and a normal vector field along are defined by
[TABLE]
Consider now an oriented minimal surface such that the vector field defined by (1.1) is nowhere vanishing, where and . Let be a real number such that . Let now
[TABLE]
be given by
[TABLE]
Theorem 1.1**.**
The map defines, at regular points, an isometric immersion with , where is the mean curvature vector field of . Moreover, is a biconservative isometric immersion with parallel mean curvature vector field if and only if is a vertical cylinder. Conversely, any biconservative isometric immersion with nonzero parallel mean curvature vector field, such that the vector field defined by (1.1) is nowhere vanishing, is locally given in this way.
In particular, we prove (see Corollary 5.2) that the submanifolds of Theorem 1.1 belong to a special class, which consists of isometric immersions with the property that the vector field is an eigenvector of all shape operators of .
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we recall some properties of biharmonic maps and we give a more precise statement of biconservative submanifolds. The basics of submanifols theory in product space is discussed in Section 3. In particular, we recall with details the class . In Section 4 we show some general results about -dimensional biconservative submanifolds in . In particular, we obtain a necessary and sufficient condition for a biconservative submanifold with parallel mean curvature vector to be biharmonic. Finally, Section 5 contains the arguments necessary to prove the above main Theorem.
2 Preliminaries
Given a smooth map between two Riemannian manifolds, the energy density of is the smooth function defined by
[TABLE]
where denotes de Hilbert-Schmidt norm of . The total energy of , denoted by , is given by integrating the energy density over ,
[TABLE]
The map is called harmonic if it is a critical point of the energy functional . Equivalently, is harmonic if it satisfies the Euler-Lagrange equation , where
[TABLE]
is known as the tension field of map . When is an isometric immersion with mean curvature vector field , we have . Therefore the immersion is a harmonic map if and only if is a minimal submanifold of .
A natural generalization of harmonic maps are the biharmonic maps, which are critical points of the bienergy functional
[TABLE]
This generalization, initially suggested by Eells-Sampson [6], was studied by Jiang [13], where he derived the corresponding Euler-Lagrange equation
[TABLE]
where is the Jacobi operator of .
When is an isometric immersion, we get
[TABLE]
Thus a minimal isometric immersion in the Euclidean space is trivially biharmonic. Concerning biharmonic submanifolds in the Euclidean space, one of the main problem is the following known Chen’s conjecture [4]: Any biharmonic submanifold in the Euclidean space is minimal.
The stress-energy tensor, described by Hilbert [12], is a symmetric -covariant tensor associated to a variational problem that is conservative at the critical points. Such tensor was employed by Baird-Eells [1] in the study of harmonic maps. In this context, it is given by
[TABLE]
and it satisfies
[TABLE]
Therefore, when is harmonic.
In the context of biharmonic maps, Jiang [14] obtained the stress-energy tensor given by
[TABLE]
which satisfies
[TABLE]
In the case of to be an isometric immersion, it follows that , since is normal to . However, we have
[TABLE]
and thus does not always vanish.
Definition 1**.**
An isometric immersion is called biconservative if its stress-energy tensor is conservative, i.e., .**
The following splitting result of the bitension field, with respect to its normal and tangent components, is well known (see, for example [7, 19, 20]).
Proposition 2.1**.**
Let be an isometric immersion between two Riemannian manifolds. Then is biharmonic if and only if the tangent and normal components of vanish, i.e.,
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where denotes the curvature tensor of .
3 Basic facts about submanifolds in
In order to study submanifolds , our approach is to regard as an isometric immersion into , where denote either Euclidean space or Lorentzian space -dimensional, according as or , respectively. Then we consider the canonical inclusion
[TABLE]
and study the composition . Notice that the vector field is the gradient of the height function .
Using that is a parallel vector field in we obtain, by differentiating (1.1), that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
for all , where denotes the second fundamental form of and stands for the shape operator of with respect to , given by
[TABLE]
The Gauss, Codazzi and Ricci equations for are, respectively
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
for all and (cf. [16] for more details).
In the case of hypersurfaces , the vector field given in (1.1) can be written as
[TABLE]
where is a unit normal vector field along and is a smooth function on . Thus the equations (3.1) and (3.2) become
[TABLE]
for all , where stands for the shape operator of with respect to .
3.1 The class
We will denote by the class of isometric immersions with the property that is an eigenvector of all shape operators of . This class was introduced in [21], where a complete description was given for hypersurfaces, and extended to submanifolds of in [18]. Trivial examples are the slices , corresponding to the case in which vanishes identically, and the vertical cylinders , where is a submanifold of , which correspond to the case in which the normal vector field vanishes identically.
Following the notation of [18], let us recall a way of construct more examples of submanifolds in this class. Let be an isometric immersion and suppose that there exists an orthonormal set of parallel normal vector fields along . Thus the vector subbundle with rank of , spanned by , is parallel and flat. Let us denote by and the canonical inclusions, and let . Set
[TABLE]
Then the vector subbundle of , where , spanned by , is parallel and flat, and we can define a vector bundle isometry
[TABLE]
by
[TABLE]
for all and for all . Using this isometry, we define a map by
[TABLE]
where is a regular curve with and .
The main result concerning the map given in (3.7) is that, at regular points, is an isometric immersion in class . Conversely, given any isometric immersion in class , with , is locally given in this way (cf. [18, Theorem 2]). The map is a partial tube over with type fiber in the sense of [3]. Geometrically, the submanifold is obtained by the parallel transport of in a product submanifold of a fixed normal space of with respect to its normal connection.
We point out that, in the case of hypersurfaces, is in class if and only if the vector field in (1.1) is nowhere vanishing and has flat normal bundle (cf. [21, Proposition 4]). Some important classes of hypersurfaces of that are included in class are hypersurfaces with constant sectional curvature [17], rotational hypersurfaces [5] and constant angle hypersurfaces [21]. For submanifolds of higher codimension, we have that is in class and it has flat normal bundle if and only if the vector field in (1.1) is nowhere vanishing and has flat normal bundle [18, Corollary 3].
4 Biconservative submanifolds in
Let be an isometric immersion with nonzero parallel mean curvature vector field . It follows from (2.1) and from the expression of the curvature tensor of that is biconservative if and only if
[TABLE]
where and denote the vector fields given in (1.1). Without loss of generality, we may assume that and are nowhere vanishing. Therefore, it follows from (4.1) that is orthogonal to and, thus
[TABLE]
for all . As and , it follows from (4.2) that
[TABLE]
for all , which implies that
[TABLE]
On the other hand, since is parallel it follows from the Ricci equation that for every . In particular, we have . Equivalently, the eigenspaces associated to are invariant by . In particular, if we denote by
[TABLE]
we conclude that
[TABLE]
Remark 4.1**.**
In the case of biconservative hypersurfaces with nonzero parallel mean curvature vector, the equation (4.1) can be written as
[TABLE]
where is the function given in (3.6) and is the smooth function such that . Thus, as , a biconservative hypersurface with nonzero parallel mean curvature vector is either a slice or an open subset of a Riemannian product , where is a hypersurface of with nonzero parallel mean curvature vector field.**
Thus, by virtue of Remark 4.1, we will consider biconservative submanifolds with codimension greater than one.
4.1 Biconservative submanifolds of co-dimension
Let us consider now the case of co-dimension , that is, a biconservative isometric immersion with nonzero parallel mean curvature vector field . Let us consider the unit normal vector fields
[TABLE]
It follows from (4.1) that is an orthonormal normal frame of . Moreover, as and has co-dimension , we also have .
Suppose first that the eigenspace given in (4.4) is one-dimensional, that is, . This implies that for some smooth function . Thus, it follows from (3.2) that
[TABLE]
In particular, we have for every and, from [18, Proposition 10], we conclude that is in class .
Remark 4.2**.**
If is -dimensional one has identically zero. This implies that the mean curvature vector field of is a multiple of , and this contradicts the fact that and are orthogonal, unless that is identically zero.
From now on, let us assume that , with .
Lemma 4.3**.**
Let be a biconservative isometric immersion with nonzero parallel mean curvature vector field. Then there exists a local orthonormal frame in , with , such that:
- (i)
The shape operators of with respect to and , given in (4.6), have matrix representations given by
[TABLE]
where and are diagonalized matrices and is a symmetric matrix such that , and
[TABLE]
- (ii)
, for all .
Proof.
Writing , consider the local orthonormal frame in , where are eigenvectors of such that
[TABLE]
Thus we have the first equation of (4.7). Moreover, since is proportional to and has constant length, we have and . On the other hand, by a simple computation, one can see that the Ricci equation takes the form
[TABLE]
For and , the equation (4.9) gives
[TABLE]
Therefore, the matrix representation of takes the form given in the second equation of (4.7). Moreover, for , (4.9) becomes
[TABLE]
Now, if the distribution
[TABLE]
has dimension , then we have and, by replacing indices if necessary, we may assume that . Therefore, by redefining properly, we may diagonalize . Since is proportional to identity matrix it, no matter, remains diagonalized. Summing up, we see that, by redefining properly, one can diagonalize the matrix . Then, we can write
[TABLE]
for some smooth functions , with . In order to obtain (4.8), we need to show that
[TABLE]
By a direct computation, it follows from the Codazzi equation that
[TABLE]
for . On the other hand, from (1.1) we have
[TABLE]
for a smooth function . Since is parallel, equation (4.13) yields
[TABLE]
Combining (4.12) and (4.14), we get
[TABLE]
By summing this equation on and taking into account
[TABLE]
we get (4.11), which proves the assertion in (i). Finally, for and , we obtain from Codazzi equation that
[TABLE]
Then, using (4.10), we obtain
[TABLE]
for all and , and this proves (ii). ∎
Corollary 4.4**.**
Let be a biconservative isometric immersion with nonzero parallel mean curvature vector field. Then is an involutive distribution.
Proof.
It is clear when . If , consider a local orthonormal frame in constructed in Lemma 4.3. From condition (ii), we have , for all , which completes the proof. ∎
In the next result we obtain a necessary and sufficient condition for a biconservative submanifold with parallel mean curvature vector to be biharmonic.
Proposition 4.5**.**
Let be a biconservative isometric immersion with nonzero parallel mean curvature vector field. Then, is biharmonic if and only if the equation
[TABLE]
is satisfied, where is the unit normal vector field given in (4.6).
Proof.
By Proposition 2.1, is biharmonic if and only if the equation (2.2) is satisfied. Consider the local orthonormal frame given in Lemma 4.3. Since, the mean curvature vector field is parallel and , the equation (2.2) turns into (4.15) by virtue of (4.8). ∎
5 Biconservative submanifolds in
In this section we prove Theorem 1.1 in two steps. In the fist one, we prove that there is an explicit way to construct -dimensional biconservative submanifolds in with parallel mean curvature vector field. In the second step, we prove that any -dimensional biconservative submanifolds in , with nonzero parallel mean curvature vector field, is locally given as in the previous construction.
5.1 Examples of biconservative submanifolds
Here we prove the first part of Theorem 1.1.
Theorem 5.1**.**
Let be an oriented minimal surface such that the vector field defined by (1.1) is nowhere vanishing, where and . Let be a real number such that . Let now
[TABLE]
be given by
[TABLE]
Then the map defines, at regular points, an isometric immersion with . Moreover, is a biconservative isometric immersion with parallel mean curvature vector field if and only if is a vertical cylinder.
Proof.
Let be a local orthonormal tangent frame of , with . By putting and , where denotes the canonical projection, , we get that is a local orthonormal tangent frame of . If denotes the unit normal vector field of in , then
[TABLE]
provides a local orthonormal normal frame of in , where denotes the canonical projection. Note that we have
[TABLE]
In terms of the tangent frame of , the shape operator is given by
[TABLE]
for some smooth functions and . By a direct computation, one can see that the matrix representation of , with respect to , take the form
[TABLE]
It follows from (5.2) that , where , which implies . Moreover, we have , since . Thus, as is nowhere vanishing, and therefore also , it is straightforward to verify that is parallel if and only if . It means that is orthogonal to , which implies that . Thus, is a vertical cylinder over a geodesic curve in . ∎
Corollary 5.2**.**
If is a biconservative submanifold with nonzero parallel mean curvature vector field, locally given as in (5.1), then is an immersion in class .
Proof.
As is locally given as in (5.1) it follows, in particular, that is in class . Thus, the vector field associated to , given in (1.1), is a principal direction of . This implies that
[TABLE]
for all , where is tangent to and orthogonal to . With the notations as in Theorem 5.1, and by considering
[TABLE]
we have
[TABLE]
This shows that is an eigenvector of , since . ∎
5.2 Classification results in
Finally, in this subsection, we prove the converse of Theorem 1.1. Here we will consider biconservative isometric immersion , with nonzero parallel mean curvature vector field such that . Let us consider the local orthonormal frame given in Lemma 4.3. Denoting by and as in (4.6), we have
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
for some smooth functions , and , with . Note that, from (4.8), we have and thus, (5.4) becomes (5.2).
On the other hand, we can write the vector field as
[TABLE]
for a smooth function Applying to (5.5), we obtain
[TABLE]
Moreover, from the Codazzi equation, we obtain , that implies
[TABLE]
By putting , for , we have the following:
Lemma 5.3**.**
In terms of the local orthonormal frame in , the Levi-Civita connection of is given by
[TABLE]
Proof.
A straightforward computation. ∎
Lemma 5.4**.**
There exists a local coordinate system in such that , and decomposes as
[TABLE]
for some smooth functions and . Moreover, are the integral curves of for any and are the integral submanifolds of for any .
Proof.
By Corollary 4.4, the tangent bundle decomposes orthogonally as
[TABLE]
Therefore, there exists a local coordinate system in such that
[TABLE]
(see [15, p. 182]). Thus for some smooth function on . On the other hand, since , for , we have . However, by considering (5.10), one can see that
[TABLE]
for . By considering (5.12) and (5.10), and taking into account the fact that , whenever are orthogonal tangent vector fields on , we obtain
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
for all . From (5.13), we obtain (5.11) for some smooth functions and . Moreover, equation (5.14) implies that . Therefore, by re-defining the parameter properly, we may assume that , which concludes the proof. ∎
Proposition 5.5**.**
Let be a biconservative isometric immersion with nonzero parallel mean curvature vector field . Suppose that and let . Then the following assertions hold:
- (i)
An integral submanifold of through lies on a -plane of containing the factor . Moreover, is congruent to a minimal surface . 2. (ii)
An integral curve of through is an open subset of a circle of radius contained on a -plane of , where .
Proof.
Let be an integral submanifold of through . Define vector fields along by
[TABLE]
for and , where is the restriction of the unit normal vector field of the immersion to . Note that span , while the vector fields span the normal bundle in . By taking into account the fact that , whenever are orthogonal tangent vector fields on , and considering (5.2), (5.3) and Lemma 5.3, we get
[TABLE]
for all , where is the Levi-Civita connection of . This yields that lies on a -plane on which lies. Moreover, the unit normal vector field of in is , and the shape operator of along becomes
[TABLE]
which shows that is congruent to a minimal surface in . This proves the assertion (i). In order to prove (ii), let us consider an integral curve of through and define
[TABLE]
as a vector field along . Then we have
[TABLE]
Thus is an open subset of a circle lying on the -plane spanned by and . This proves (ii) and concludes the proof. ∎
By summing up Lemma 5.4 and Proposition 5.5, we get the converse of Theorem 1.1, which can be stated as follow.
Theorem 5.6**.**
Let be a biconservative isometric immersion with nonzero parallel mean curvature vector field .Then is either an open subset of a slice for some , an open subset of a Riemannian product , where is a hypersurface of , or it is locally congruent to the immersion described in Theorem 5.1. In particular, belongs to class .
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] P. Baird, J. Eells, A conservation law for harmonic maps , Lecture Notes in Math. 894, Springer, Berlin-New York, 1981.
- 2[2] R. Caddeo, S. Montaldo, C. Oniciuc, P. Piu, Surfaces in three-dimensional space forms with divergence-free stress-bienergy tensor . Ann. Mat. Pur. Appl. 193 (2014), no. 2, 529–550.
- 3[3] S. Carter, A. West, Partial tubes about immersed manifolds . Geom. Dedicata 54 (1995), 145–169.
- 4[4] B. Y. Chen, Some open problems and conjectures on submanifolds of finite type , Soochow J. Math. 17 (1991), no. 2, 169–188.
- 5[5] F. Dillen, J. Fastenakels, J. Van der Veken, Rotation hypersurfaces in 𝕊 n × ℝ superscript 𝕊 𝑛 ℝ \mathbb{S}^{n}\times\mathbb{R} and ℍ n × ℝ superscript ℍ 𝑛 ℝ \mathbb{H}^{n}\times\mathbb{R} , Note di Matematica 29 (2008), 41–54.
- 6[6] J. Eells, J. H. Sampson, Harmonic Mappings of Riemannian Manifolds , Amer. J. Math. 86 (1964), no. 1, 109–160.
- 7[7] D. Fectu, C. Oniciuc, A. L. Pinheiro, CMC biconservative surfaces in 𝕊 n × ℝ superscript 𝕊 𝑛 ℝ \mathbb{S}^{n}\times\mathbb{R} and ℍ n × ℝ superscript ℍ 𝑛 ℝ \mathbb{H}^{n}\times\mathbb{R} , J. Math. Anal. Appl. 425 (2015), 588–609.
- 8[8] Y. Fu, On bi-conservative surfaces in Minkowski 3 3 3 -space , J. Geom. Phys. 66 (2013), 71–79.
