Maximally-warped metrics with harmonic curvature
Andrzej Derdzinski
Department of Mathematics
The Ohio State University
231 W. 18th Avenue
Columbus, OH 43210, USA
[email protected]
and
Paolo Piccione
Departamento de Matemática
Instituto de Matemática e Estatística
Universidade de São Paulo
Rua do Matão 1010, CEP 05508-900
São Paulo, SP, Brazil
[email protected]
(Date: December 13, 2018)
Abstract.
We describe the local structure of Riemannian manifolds with harmonic
curvature which admit a maximum number, in a well-defined sense, of local
warped-product decompositions, and at the same time their Ricci
tensor has, at some point, only simple eigenvalues. We also prove that, in
every given dimension greater than two, the local-isometry types of
such manifolds form a finite -dimensional moduli space, and a
nonempty open subset of this moduli space is realized by
locally irreducible complete metrics which are neither Ricci-parallel,
nor – for dimensions greater than three – conformally flat.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary 53C25; Secondary 53B20
Both authors’ research was supported in part by a
FAPESP- OSU 2015 Regular Research Award (FAPESP grant:
2015/50265-6)
Introduction
A Riemannian manifold is said to have harmonic curvature
[1, Sect. 16.33] if
[TABLE]
R being the curvature tensor. We consider harmonic-curvature
Riemannian manifolds (M,g) of dimensions n≥3 in which, with
r denoting the Ricci tensor,
[TABLE]
Such warped -product decompositions have one -dimensional fibres
(Corollary 1.3), and are in a one -to -one correspondence with
certain one -dimensional Lie subalgebras of
isom(M′,g′), the Lie algebra of Killing fields on the
Riemannian universal covering (M′,g′) of (M,g) (see
Remark 3.2). The number γ of these subalgebras cannot
exceed n−1, cf. Corollary 4.2, and we refer to g as
maximally warped if
[TABLE]
Our Theorem 5.6 describes the local structure of Riemannian manifolds
(M,g) of dimensions n≥3, satisfying (0.1) – (0.3).
Their local-isometry types turn out to form a
(2n−3)-dimensional moduli space (Remark 5.7), and we prove
(in Theorem 7.3) that some nonempty open
subset of the moduli space consists of local-isometry types of such
manifolds which in addition are
[TABLE]
We do not know if any compact manifold can have the properties (0.1) –
(0.3). However, we observe (see Theorem 1.4) that compact
Riemannian manifolds with harmonic curvature that admit global
nontrivial warped-product decompositions must have fibre dimensions
greater than one and, consequently, cannot be Ricci-generic in
the sense of satisfying the distinct-eigenvalues clause of (0.2).
Harmonicity of the curvature always follows if the metric is Ricci-parallel, or locally reducible with
harmonic-curvature factors, or conformally flat and of
constant scalar curvature while, in dimension three, harmonic curvature
amounts to conformal flatness plus constancy of the scalar curvature
[1, Sect. 16.35 and 16.4].
Compact Riemannian manifolds with (0.1) have been studied extensively.
All their known examples (aside from the three classes italicized above),
listed as 2,3,4 in [1, p. 432], admit – at least locally –
nontrivial warped-product decompositions with a fibre of dimension
greater than one. Consequently (see Corollary 1.3 below), they are not
Ricci-generic. However, for examples 2 and 4 of [1, p. 432]
the warped-product structure, rather than being an Ansatz, is a
consequence of geometric conditions involving multiplicities of
eigenvalues of the Ricci tensor [2] or self-dual Weyl
tensor [3]. The following questions about compact Riemannian
manifolds with harmonic curvature, lying outside of the three italicized
classes, are thus open and natural: can they be Ricci-generic? must
they, locally, have a warped-product decomposition and if not, how to
describe those among them which have one?
Our Theorem 7.3 yields an affirmative answer to a weaker version of
the first question in which completeness replaces compactness. On the other
hand, the second question provides an obvious motivation for studying
condition (0.3).
The authors wish to thank the referees for constructive comments, which have
resulted in a substantial improvement of the presentation.
1. Preliminaries
Manifolds (always assumed connected), mappings and tensor fields are by
definition C∞-differentiable. By a Codazzi
tensor [1, p. 435] on a Riemannian manifold one means a
twice -covariant symmetric tensor field S with a totally
symmetric covariant derivative ∇S. One then has two well-known
facts [1, Sect. 16.4(ii)]:
[TABLE]
s being the scalar curvature. As shown by DeTurck and
Goldschmidt [4],
[TABLE]
We call two (connected) real -analytic Riemannian manifolds locally isometric if they have open submanifolds that are both
isometric to open submanifolds of a third such manifold. One easily sees
that this is an equivalence relation. In view of the extension theorem for
analytic isometries [9, Corollary 6.4 on p. 256], for two
complete real -analytic Riemannian manifolds, being locally isometric
to each other means the same as having isometric Riemannian universal
coverings.
On a manifold with a torsion-free connection ∇, the Ricci
tensor r satisfies the Bochner identity
r(⋅,v)+d[divv]=div∇v, where v is any vector field.
Its coordinate form Rjkivk=vk,jki−vk,kji arises via contraction from the Ricci identity
vl,jki−vl,kji=Rjkqilvq. (We use the sign
convention for R such that
Rjki=Rjqkiq.) Applied to the gradient v of a
function ϕ on a Riemannian manifold, this yields
[TABLE]
The warped product of Riemannian manifolds (M,g) and
(Σ,η) with the warping function
ϕ:M→(0,∞) is the Riemannian manifold
[TABLE]
(The same symbols g,η,ϕ stand here for also the pullbacks of
g,η,ϕ to the product M=M×Σ.) One calls
(M,g) and (Σ,η) the base and fibre of (1.4), and refers to (1.4) as nontrivial if
ϕ is nonconstant. From now on we assume that dimΣ≥1.
Remark 1.1*.*
As
g+ϕ2η=ϕ2[ϕ−2g+η], a warped product
is nothing else than a Riemannian manifold conformal to a Riemannian
product via multiplication by a positive function which is constant along one
of the factor manifolds.
A proof of the following well-known lemma [7] is given in the
Appendix.
Lemma 1.2**.**
A warped product (1.4) with a
nonconstant warping function ϕ has harmonic curvature if and only
if the Levi-Civita connection ∇ of (M,g), its
Ricci tensor r and the g-gradient
∇ϕ of ϕ satisfy three conditions :
- (a)
(Σ,η)* is an Einstein manifold, with some Einstein
constant κ.*
2. (b)
r−pϕ−1∇dϕ* is a
Codazzi tensor on (M,g), where p=dimΣ≥1.*
3. (c)
ϕ3div[ϕ−1∇dϕ]=[(p−1)Λ−κ]dϕ+(1−p)ϕdΛ/2, with
Λ=g(∇ϕ,∇ϕ)
and the g-divergence div. Then,
at each point of M, for the Ricci tensor r of g,
- (d)
the space tangent to the fibre factor is contained in an
eigenspace of r.
One may rewrite (c) as a requirement involving the
g-Laplacian Δϕ, namely,
- (e)
ϕ2[r(∇ϕ,⋅)+dΔϕ]=[(p−1)Λ−κ]dϕ+(1−p/2)ϕdΛ.
Finally, when p=1, and so κ=0, (c) reads
div[ϕ−1∇dϕ]=0.
From (d) and, respectively, (c), we obtain two easy consequences:
Corollary 1.3**.**
In a warped-product Riemannian manifold
with a nonconstant warping function, harmonic curvature, and a fibre of
dimension greater than one, the Ricci tensor has, at every point, at least
one multiple eigenvalue. The assumptions (0.1) –
(0.2) thus imply one-dimensionality of the fibre for any
warped-product decomposition in (0.2).
Theorem 1.4**.**
If a warped-product Riemannian manifold (M,g) has a compact
base (M,g), a nonconstant warping function, and harmonic
curvature, then the Einstein constant κ of its fibre must be
positive. Thus, the dimension of the fibre is greater than one and, in view of
Corollary 1.3, (M,g) cannot satisfy the
distinct-eigenvalues clause of (0.2).
In fact, given a positive function ϕ on a Riemannian manifold
(M,g) and constants κ,p∈IR, let us set
v=∇ϕ and w=ϕ2u−[(p−1)Λ−κ]v+(p−2)ϕ∇viv, where
u=div∇v and
Λ=g(v,v). Then the function
ϕp−4g(v,w) differs by a g-divergence from
−[(p−1)Λ−κ]ϕp−4Λ−ϕp−2g(∇v,∇v), while (c) reads w=0, as
2∇viv=∇Λ. (An easy exercise.)
Remark 1.5*.*
The base and fibre factor distributions of any
warped product are Ricci-orthogonal to each other. (See the equality
Riai=0 in formula (A.3) of the Appendix.) Thus, if the
base, or fibre, is one -dimensional, nonzero vectors tangent to it
constitute eigenvectors of the Ricci tensor.
2. Vector fields
Lemma 2.1**.**
Let a maximal integral curve
(a−i,a+i)∋t↦x(t) of a vector field v on a
manifold M, with −∞≤a−i<a+i≤∞, some
t′∈(a−i,a+i), and some compact set C⊆M,
have the property that x(t)∈C for all
t∈[t′,a+i) or, respectively, for all t∈(a−i,t′].
Then a+i=∞ or, respectively, a−i=−∞.
Consequently, a maximal integral curve of a vector field on a manifold, lying
within a compact set, must be complete, that is, defined on IR.
Proof.
For a compactly supported function χ equal to 1 on
an open set U containing C, the curve restricted to
[t′,a+i), or to (a−i,t′], clearly remains half-maximal
(not extendible beyond a+i, or a−i) when treated as an integral
curve of χv. On the other hand, χv is complete due to
compactness of its support.
∎
By a section of a locally trivial fibre bundle we mean, as usual, a
submanifold Σ of the total space Q mapped
diffeomorphically onto the base M by the bundle projection
p. We also identify the section with the inverse
ψ:M→Σ of the latter diffeomorphism, which makes it a
mapping ψ:M→Q having
p∘ψ=IdMi. In the case of a vector bundle
Q, a section ψ, and a zero z∈M of ψ, the
corresponding submanifold Σ of Q intersects the zero
section M at z (that is, at the zero vector of the fibre
Qzi), giving rise to the differential
∂ψzi, defined to be the linear operator
TziM→Qzi obtained as the composite of the
ordinary differential of ψ:M→Q at z (the inverse of
dpzi:TziΣ→TziM), followed by the direct-sum projection
TziQ=TziM⊕Qzi→Qzi.
Relative to any local coordinates at z and a local trivialization of
Q, the components of A=∂ψzi form the matrix
[Ajλ]=[∂jiψλ], with the partial derivatives
of the components of ψ evaluated at z.
Two important examples are provided by zeros z of ψ=v, a vector
field on M (with Q=TM) and of ψ=df, for a function
f:M→IR (here Q=T∗M). In the former case,
A=∂vzi (in coordinates: Ajk=∂jvk), is the
infinitesimal generator of the one-parameter group of linear
transformations of TziM arising as the differentials,
at the fixed point z, of the local diffeomorphisms forming the local flow
of v. In the latter, ∂dfzi=Hesszif,
the Hessian of f at the critical point z.
Let v be a vector field on a manifold M, having a zero at
z∈M, where one assumes M either to be an open
submanifold of a vector space Y, or to have a submanifold
N with z∈N such that v is tangent to N at each
point of N. In this way v, or the restriction of v to
N, becomes a mapping v:M→Y, or a vector field w
on N. The equality Ajk=∂jvk of the last paragraph,
evaluated in coordinates for M which are linear functionals on
Y or, respectively, in which N is defined by equating some
coordinate functions to 0, clearly implies that
[TABLE]
Lemma 2.2**.**
Given a zero z∈M of a vector field v on a manifold
M, with the differential A=∂vzi, let a function
f:U→IR on a neighborhood U of z have
dfzi=0. Then dσzi=0 and
(u,u)σi=2(Au,u)fi for the directional derivative
σ=dvif:U→IR, all u∈TziM, the
Hessian (,)fi=Hesszif, and
(,)σi=Hessziσ.
Proof.
With commas denoting, this time, partial derivatives relative to
fixed local coordinates on a neighborhood of z, we have
σ=vjf,ji as well as
σ,ki=vjf,jk+vj,kif,ji and σ,kli=vjf,jkli+vj,lif,jki+vj,kif,jli+vj,klif,ji.
At z, both vj and f,ji vanish, while
vj,ki=Akj. This proves our claim.
∎
Lemma 2.3**.**
Let z∈N be a zero of a vector field w on a manifold
N such that, for some ε=±1, some Euclidean inner product
⟨,⟩ in TziN, and
A=ε∂wzi, the bilinear form
⟨A⋅,⋅⟩ on
TziN is negative definite. In this case there exist
arbitrarily small neighborhoods U of z with the following
property:* if a maximal integral curve
(a−i,a+i)∋t↦x(t) of w and
t′∈(a−i,a+i) satisfy the condition x(t′)∈U,
where −∞≤a−i<a+i≤∞, then, denoting by
± the sign of ε, one has a±i=±∞, and
x(t)∈U whenever ε(t−t′)≥0.*
Proof.
We fix a Riemannian metric g on a neighborhood of z
in N having ⟨,⟩=gzi. The required neighborhoods
U of z are g-metric balls centered at z, small enough
so as to have compact closures and be diffeomorphic images, under the
g-exponential mapping at z, of the corresponding Euclidean balls
around 0 in TziN. This gives smoothness of
the function f:U→IR such that 2f equals
dist2(z,⋅), the squared g-distance from z,
and using normal coordinates one obtains
Hesszif=⟨,⟩. If the g-metric ball
U is sufficiently small, Lemma 2.2 for v=εw implies
negativity of σ=εdwif on U∖{z}, as
σ assumes at z the critical value 0 with a
negative-definite Hessian. Our claim now easily follows from
Lemma 2.1.
∎
Remark 2.4*.*
The same neighborhoods U of z
will still satisfy the assertion of Lemma 2.3 if one replaces w
by w/c for a constant c>0 and
(a−i,a+i)∋t↦x(t) by
(ca−i,ca+i)∋t↦x(t/c).
Remark 2.5*.*
For any Killing field v on a Riemannian
manifold (M,g), the pair (v,∇v) constitutes a
parallel section of the vector bundle
TM⊕so(TM) endowed with a suitable linear
connection [5, Remark 17.25 on p. 547]. Therefore,
- (i)
a Killing field on M is uniquely determined by its restriction
to any nonempty open subset of M, while
2. (ii)
assuming (M,g) to be simply connected and
real -analytic, we conclude that any Killing field v on a
nonempty connected open subset of M has a unique extension to a
Killing field on M.
Given a nontrivial Killing vector field v on a Riemannian manifold and
a function θ, the obvious equality
£θvig=θ£vig+2dθ⊙g(v,⋅) clearly implies that
[TABLE]
3. Integrable-complement Killing fields
This section presents a well-known correspondence – see, for instance, the
Appendix in [10] – between warped -product decompositions with a
one -dimensional fibre and certain special Killing fields.
Let v a nontrivial Killing field on a Riemannian manifold
(M,g) such that, on the dense (by Remark 2.5(i)) complement
of its zero set, the distribution v⊥ is integrable. In other words,
locally, at points with v=0, multiplying v by a suitable positive
function one obtains a gradient vector field. Equivalently,
[TABLE]
Namely, (3.1) is necessary: for ξ=g(v,⋅), due to
skew-symmetry of ∇ξ, the integrability condition
ξ∧dξ=0 has the local-coordinate expression
ξi,jiξki+ξj,kiξii+ξk,iiξji=0, which
transvected with vk yields
vkξkiξi,ji=vkξk,jiξii−vkξk,iiξji, or
[TABLE]
Closedness of ξ/β amounts to symmetry of
∇(ξ/β), and so it now follows since (3.2) with
ξi,ji=−ξj,ii implies symmetry of
β2(ξii/β),ji=βξi,ji−β,jiξii in i,j.
If v is a Killing field, g(v,x˙) is constant along any
geodesic t↦x=x(t), as
d[g(v,x˙)]/dt=g(∇x˙iv,x˙)=0. Then, with
the orthogonal complement v⊥ only defined away from the zero set of
v, one easily sees that
[TABLE]
Remark 3.1*.*
Local Killing fields v satisfying
(3.1), outside of their zero sets, if treated as defined only up to
multiplication by nonzero constants, stand in a natural one -to -one
correspondence with local warped -product decompositions of g that have a
one -dimensional fibre. Here v is tangent to the fibre direction.
Namely, such a local decomposition is uniquely determined by the base and
fibre factor distributions. Just one of them suffices, the other being its
(necessarily integrable) orthogonal complement. That v locally spans the
fibre factor distribution of a warped product follows from Remark 1.1
and the local version of de Rham’s decomposition theorem: in view of
(3.2), rewritten as 2βvi,ji=viβ,ji−β,iξji, where
β=vkξki=g(v,v), and [1, Theorem 1.159], v is
g^-parallel for the conformally related metric
g^=g/β, with dviβ=2g(∇viv,v)=0 due
to skew-adjointness of ∇v. Conversely, for a warped product
with a one -dimensional fibre, the required Killing field v
comes from a local flow of local isometries of the fibre (cf. formula
(A.2) in the Appendix), (2.2) implying uniqueness of v up to
a constant factor.
Remark 3.2*.*
From Remarks 2.5 and 3.1 it follows
that, in the case of a real -analytic Riemannian
manifold (M,g), denoting by isom(M′,g′) the Lie
algebra of Killing fields on the Riemannian universal covering
(M′,g′) of (M,g), one has a natural bijective
correspondence between the one -dimensional Lie subalgebras of
isom(M′,g′) spanned by Killing fields v
satisfying (3.1), and the local warped -product decompositions, with
one -dimensional fibres, of g restricted to the dense open set
where v=0. As before, v is tangent to the fibre direction.
Lemma 3.3**.**
Let an open ball B around 0 in
a Euclidean n-space, n≥2, admit a connection ∇ such
that all line segments through 0 in B are
∇-totally geodesic and tangent at all points
x∈B∖{0} to some codimension-one foliation
F on B∖{0} having
∇-totally geodesic leaves. Then n=2.
Proof.
Fix a leaf L of F and
x∈L such that the ∇-exponential mapping
expxi sends a Euclidean open ball B′ centered at 0 in
TxiB, diffeomorphically, onto a neighborhood
expxi(B′) of 0 in B. Thus,
expxi(B′∩TxiL)∖J⊆L, for
J=B∩{qx:q∈(−∞,0]}, and so J⊆L. (The
leaves of F are locally closed, being, locally, the level
sets of a submersion.) Hence L∪{0} is a smooth
∇-totally geodesic submanifold of B, with some
tangent space V at 0, meaning in turn that
L∪{0}=B∩V. Consequently, n=2, for otherwise
any two such codimension-one subspaces V of our Euclidean
n-space would have a nontrivial intersection.
∎
When F is real -analytic, we can also obtain the
above assertion by applying, to a sphere Σ around 0 in
B, Haefliger’s theorem [6] which states that a transversally
orientable real -analytic codimension-one foliation may exist on
a compact manifold Σ only if the fundamental group of
Σ has an element of infinite order.
Remark 3.4*.*
Kobayashi [8] showed that the zero set
of any Killing vector field on a Riemannian manifold (M,g) is
either empty, or its connected components are mutually isolated totally
geodesic submanifolds of even codimensions.
For a nontrivial Killing field v with (3.1), the above
codimensions must all equal 2. This is immediate if one fixes a
zero z of v and applies Lemma 3.3 to a small ball B
in the normal space at z of the connected component through z
such that expzi maps B diffeomorphically onto a
submanifold N of M, with ∇ and
F denoting the expzi-pullback of the
Levi-Civita connection of the submanifold metric h on
N and, respectively, of the foliation on N∖{z}
the leaves of which are intersections of N and the leaves of
v⊥, the latter defined wherever v=0. (The local flow of
v preserves N and h, and so v is tangent to N.)
The restriction of v to N now constitutes an h-Killing
field w having just one zero, at z, and satisfying (3.1) (for
h,w rather than g,v), so that (3.3) allows us to use
Lemma 3.3.
4. Multiply-warped metrics with divR=0
Lemma 4.1**.**
Suppose that the Ricci tensor of a real-analytic Riemannian
n-manifold (M,g) has n distinct eigenvalues at some point and, with the notation of Remark 3.2,
a2i,…,ami are distinct
one -dimensional Lie subalgebras of
isom(M′,g′) spanned by Killing fields
v2i,…,vmi such that each v=vji satisfies
(3.1). Then m≤n, and g(vji,vki)=0 as
well as [vji,vki]=0 if j=k. Finally,
g(∇uivji,vki)=0 whenever
j,k,l∈{2,…,m} and u=vli.
Proof.
Remarks 3.2 and 1.5 imply that all vji,
wherever nonzero, are mutually nonproportional eigenvectors of the Ricci
tensor, which makes them pointwise orthogonal to one another, as well as
invariant, up to constant factors – by (2.2) – under each other’s
local flows. Thus, m≤n+1 and, as
[v,w]=£viw for v=vji and u=vki,
one gets [vji,vki]=cvki with some constant c depending on
j and k. Switching j and k, we see that c=0. Now let
u=vli, v=vji and u=vki, where j,k,l∈{2,…,m}.
We have g(∇uiv,w)=0 if u=w (due to the
Killing property of v) and, therefore, also when v=w (since
u,v commute). Also, g(∇uiv,w)=0 in the remaining
case, with u,v different from w (and hence orthogonal to w):
as a consequence of (3.3), outside of the zero set of w the
distribution w⊥ has totally geodesic leaves. This proves the final
claim of the lemma, implying in turn that, if one had m=n+1, all
vj would be parallel, leading to flatness of g, and contradicting
the Ricci-eigenvalues assumption.
∎
Due to DeTurck and Goldschmidt’s real -analyticity theorem
(1.2), we may combine Lemma 4.1 with Remark 3.2 and
Corollary 1.3, obtaining
Corollary 4.2**.**
Under the assumptions (0.1) –
(0.2), the integer γ defined in the Introduction does
not exceed n−1.
5. The local structure
Given an open interval I⊆IR, we introduce a Riemannian metric
g on the open set
I×IRn−1⊆IRn, n≥2, by
declaring its component functions in the Cartesian coordinates
x1,x2,…,xn to be
[TABLE]
where I∋t↦(g22i(t),…,gnni(t))∈(0,∞)n−1 is any
prescribed smooth curve. We also define the functions
y2i,…,yni and
y=diag(y2i,…,yni) of the variable
t∈I, valued in IR and, respectively, in the real vector
space IE≅IRn−1 of all diagonal
(n−1)×(n−1) matrices, by
[TABLE]
Remark 5.1*.*
If I=IR while
∓yj(t)≥δ whenever ±t is sufficiently large and
positive, for both signs ±, some constant δ>0, and all
j≥2, then the above metric g is complete. In fact, (5.2)
gives loggjji(t)→∞ as ∣t∣→∞, so
that gjji(t)≥a with some constant a∈(0,1] and all
t∈IR, which in turn gives g≥ag′ (positive
semidefiniteness of g−ag′) for the standard Euclidean
metric g′. Completeness of g′ now implies that of g, as
g-bounded sets have compact closures due to the resulting inequality
dist≥adist′ between distance functions.
Let us consider the second-order autonomous ordinary differential equation
[TABLE]
imposed on a C2 curve I∋t↦y∈IE, in which
yy˙ and y2=yy represent
diagonal-matrix products, while try also
denotes try times the identity.
Lemma 5.2**.**
For a metric g on
I×IRn−1 defined by (5.1) and the
corresponding curve
I∋t↦y=diag(y2i,…,yni) with
(5.2), at every point
(t,x)∈I×IRn−1, each of
the coordinate vectors ∂ki, k=1,…,n, is an
eigenvector of the Ricci tensor of g with an eigenvalue μki depending on t.
- (a)
Specifically,
μ1i=try˙−try2 and
μji=y˙ji−yjitry if
j≥2.
2. (b)
The scalar curvature s of g equals
2try˙−try2−(try)2.
3. (c)
∂2i,…,∂ni* are g-Killing fields
with integrable orthogonal complements.*
4. (d)
Given any fixed x∈IRn−1, the curve
I∋t↦(t,x) is a g-geodesic.
5. (e)
g* has harmonic curvature if and only if (5.3) holds.*
Proof.
We assume j,k,l to range over {2,…,n} and be
mutually distinct. Repeated indices are not summed over. First, (c) is
obvious as g11i,g1ji,gjji,gjki only depend
on t=x1. Also,
Γ111=Γ11j=0, proving (d),
while Γ1j1=Γ1jk=Γjjj=Γjjk=Γjkj=Γjkl=0 and
gjjΓjj1=−Γ1jj=yji. Hence R11i=μ1i and gjjRjji=μji for μ1i,μji as in (a). This yields (a), and hence (b).
(Each ∂ki spans the fibre direction of a warped -product decomposition,
and we may use Remark 1.5.) Next,
R11,ji=R1j,1i=R1j,ki=Rjk,1i=Rjk,ji=Rjj,ki=Rjk,li=0. Finally,
gjjRj1,ji=yji(μji−μ1i) and
gjjRjj,1i=μ˙ji, so that (1.1.i)
implies (e),
∎
We refer to a solution I∋t↦y∈IE of (5.3) as maximal if it cannot be extended to a larger open interval, and call it
Ricci-generic whenever the n values
μki=μki(t) of Lemma 5.2(a) are all distinct at some
t∈I (or, equivalently, no two among the functions
μ1i,…,μni coincide everywhere in I).
Example 5.3**.**
Two non-Ricci-generic maximal solutions of
(5.3) are defined by y=−2tanhnt and
y=2tannt (times the identity 1), with
I=IR or I=(−π/(2n),π/(2n)). In fact,
2y˙=n(y2∓4) and so y¨=nyy˙,
while for multiples y of 1 the right-hand side of
(5.3) vanishes and try+y=ny.
Example 5.4**.**
Any solution
y=diag(y2i,…,yni) of (5.3), where
n≥2, can be trivially extended to the solution
diag(y2i,…,yni,0,…,0) with a number
m>0 of additional zero components. The new metric defined using
(5.1) – (5.2) is isometric to the Riemannian product of the
original g and a flat metric on IRm.
The set of maximal solutions of (5.3) is obviously preserved by the
group K acting on it via replacement of y with
t↦±y(b±t), where b∈IR and ± is either sign,
combined with permutations of the components y2i,…,yni. We will
use the term K-equivalence when two maximal
solutions lie in the same K- orbit.
Remark 5.5*.*
Nonzero real numbers a act on maximal
solutions t↦y(t) of (5.3) by sending them to
t↦ay(at). (The new metric arising via (5.1) – (5.2)
is isometric to g/a2.) The group K defined above, obviously
isomorphic to the direct product of the isometry group of IR and
the symmetric group Sn−1i, along with the
multiplicative group IR∖{0} acting as described
here, together generate an action of a semidirect product of K
and (0,∞).
Theorem 5.6**.**
For any n≥3, the construction summarized by (5.1) –
(5.2) provides a bijective correspondence between two sets
consisting, respectively, of
- (i)
all K-equivalence classes of maximal
Ricci-generic solutions to (5.3), and
2. (ii)
all local-isometry types of Riemannian
n-manifolds with (0.1) – (0.3).
For the meaning of local-isometry types, see (1.2) and
the paragraph following it.
Proof.
We need to show that the mapping from (i) to (ii) is: (A)
well-defined, (B) injective, and (C) surjective.
Part (A) easily follows from Lemma 5.2 combined with the comment on
g/a2 in Remark 5.5, the latter applied to a=±1. To obtain
(B), note that the local-isometry type of a metric g arising
from (5.1) – (5.3) determines the K-equivalence
class of the maximal Ricci-generic solution t↦y of
(5.3). Namely, the g-Killing fields
∂2i,…,∂ni, valued in eigenvectors of the
Ricci tensor of g (see Lemma 5.2), are – due to the
Ricci-generic condition and (2.2) – unique up to permutations and
multiplication by nonzero constants, which makes y2i,…,yni,
defined by (5.1) with
gjji=g(∂ji,∂ji), also unique up to
permutations. The variable t, being an arc-length parameter of
g-geodesics orthogonal to
∂2i,…,∂ni, cf. Lemma 5.2(d) and
(5.1), is in turn unique up to substitutions by b±t, for
constants b, as required.
Finally, to prove (C), we fix (M,g) of dimension n≥3
satisfying (0.1) – (0.3). Corollary 1.3 and (1.2),
along with Remarks 3.2 and 2.5(ii), allow us to choose
a2i,…,ani and v2i,…,vni as in
Lemma 4.1 for m=n, and a point x∈M at which all
vji are nonzero. (From now on j ranges over
{2,…,n}.) By the Lie -bracket assertion of Lemma 4.1,
the local flow of each vji preserves all vji and,
consequently, also a unit vector field v1i on a neighborhood of x,
orthogonal to all vji. Since v1i and all vji commute
with one another, they constitute the coordinate vector fields of a local
coordinate system x1=t,x2,…,xn on a neighborhood of
x, in which the metric g has the form (5.1) as a consequence
of the last two lines of Lemma 4.1, with m=n. (In particular, the
assertion g(∇uivji,vki)=0, for u=vli and
j,k,l∈{2,…,n}, applied to j=k, shows that
gjji=g(vji,vji) only depend on the variable
t=x1.) Now Lemma 5.2(e) yields (C).
∎
Remark 5.7*.*
The component version of (5.3) states that
y¨ji−(try+yji)y˙ji
equals yji[try2−(try)yji]. A solution t↦y of
(5.3) for n≥3, with any prescribed value at t=0, may
be chosen so as to make the values μ1i(0),…,μni(0) mutually
distinct. (By Lemma 5.2(a), this amounts to using y˙(0) that
realizes (μ2i(0),…,μni(0)) lying outside a finite union of
specific hyperplanes in IE.) Consequently, the local-isometry
types in Theorem 5.6(ii) form a moduli space of dimension
2n−3.
6. The scalar-curvature integral
Not surprisingly, in the light of (1.1.ii) and parts (b), (e) of
Lemma 5.2,
[TABLE]
Lemma 6.1**.**
For any solution I∋t↦y∈IE
of (5.3) defined on IR, and not identically equal to
zero, one must have s<0 in (6.1).
Proof.
Under the assumption that s≥0, (6.1) gives
2try˙≥try2+(try)2 for our solution
IR∋t↦y∈IE, and so try is
nondecreasing and nonconstant. Fixing t′∈IR such that
try(t′)=0, we define a constant c>0 by
(n−1)c2=[try(t′)]2. Depending on
whether try(t′) is positive or negative,
monotonicity of try gives
(try)2≥(n−1)c2 on
[t′,∞) or, respectively, on (−∞,t′]. The Schwarz
inequality (trx)2≤(n−1)trx2 now shows that
try2≥c2 on [t′,∞), or on
(−∞,t′]. The relation
2try˙≥try2+(try)2 (see above) thus yields
2try˙≥c2+(try)2, that is,
α˙≥c2 on [t′,∞) or
(−∞,t′], where
α=2tan−1(try/c). Consequently,
α→±∞ as t→±∞ for some sign ±,
contrary to boundedness of α.
∎
Remark 6.2*.*
A Riemannian manifold (I×IRn−1,g) arising from
(5.1) – (5.3), which makes it real -analytic, may be
locally isometric to a compact (and hence complete) real -analytic
Riemannian manifold, in the sense of the paragraph following (1.2), even
if the solution I∋t↦y∈IE of (5.3) has no extension
to one defined on IR. This is illustrated by the trivial extension
(Example 5.4), with m>0 additional zeros, of the solution
y2i(t)=2tan2t of Example 5.3, for n=2, further
modified using a=1/2 in Remark 5.5, so as to become
t↦(tant,0,…,0). Since the latter realizes (5.2) with
g22i=cos2t, it represents, locally, a product of the standard
sphere S2 with a flat torus Tm.
7. Completeness
Let n≥3. In the usual fashion, (5.3) is equivalent to the
first-order system
[TABLE]
Solutions t↦y of (5.3) thus correspond to integral curves
t↦(y,p) of the vector field v on
IE×IE represented by (7.1), and expressed as
[TABLE]
when identified with a mapping
IE×IE→IE×IE. This v has an obvious
curve IR∋q↦q(1,0) of zeros, where
1∈IE is the identity. Evaluating the differentials of
v:IE×IE→IE×IE at
q(1,0), and of the function
IE×IE∋(y,p)↦s=2trp−try2−(try)2∈IR, cf. (6.1), at any (y,p)∈IE×IE, we obtain
dvq(1,0)i(y^,p^)=(p^,nqp^+q2try^−(n−1)q2y^) and
ds(y,p)i(y^,p^)=2[trp^−tryy^−(try)try^]. When q=0, the
linear endomorphism
dvq(1,0)i of IE×IE is
diagonalizable, with the eigenvalues
0,nq,(n−1)q,q of multiplicities
1,1,n−2,n−2, the eigenspace for each of the four
eigenvalues λ consisting of all (y^,p^) such that
p^=λy^ and either y^ equals a multiple of the identity
(for λ∈{0,nq}), or try^=0 (if
λ∈{(n−1)q,q}).
On the other hand, s has no critical points in
IE×IE, and v is tangent to the level sets of
s. The latter sets are codimension-one
real -analytic submanifolds of IE×IE, and
those among them intersecting the curve
IR∋q↦q(1,0) correspond, by (6.1), to
s=−n(n−1)q2, that is, to all nonpositive values of
s. If we fix q=0, the tangent space at
z=q(1,0) of the hypersurface N given by
s=−n(n−1)q2, equal to the kernel of
dsq(1,0)i, coincides, due to
dimensional reasons, with the span of the eigenspaces of
dvq(1,0)i for the three nonzero eigenvalues
nq,(n−1)q,q. (See the preceding paragraph and the above
formula for ds(y,p)i(y^,p^).) From
(2.1) it now follows that ∂wzi, for the vector field
w on N arising as the restriction of v, is
diagonalizable, with positive (or, negative) eigenvalues.
Thus, as z=q(1,0),
[TABLE]
Remark 7.1*.*
Whenever c∈IR∖{0}, the
assignment (y,p)↦(cy,c2p) is a diffeomorphism
Fci:IE×IE→IE×IE, sending our
vector field v to v/c, and pulling the function s
back to c2s. Using our N given by
s=−n(n−1)q2 we obtain a diffeomorphism
(0,∞)×N∋(c,x)↦F(c,x)=Fci(x) onto
the open set in IE×IE on which s<0, as one
sees defining its inverse by F−1(x′)=(c,x), if
s(x′)<0, with c,x such that
n(n−1)(cq)2=−s(x′) and x=F(1/c,x′).
In the next theorem, we fix an integer n≥3, again denoting by IE
the space of all diagonal (n−1)×(n−1) matrices, and by
1∈IE the identity.
Theorem 7.2**.**
For any (ξ,ζ)∈IR×(0,∞),
every maximal solution t↦y of (5.3) with
(y(0),y˙(0)) sufficiently close to
(ξ1,−ζ1) in IE×IE has the
domain IR, and the metric g on IRn defined by
(5.1) – (5.2) is complete.
Proof.
The solution
IR∋t↦y1,0i(t)=−2tanhnt (times the
identity 1) of Example 5.3 leads, via Remark 5.5,
to further solutions t↦ya,bi(t)=ay1,0i(at+b),
where a,b∈IR and a=0. Suitably chosen and fixed such a,b
clearly realize, at t=0, any prescribed initial data
(ξ1,−ζ1)=(ya,bi(0),y˙a,bi(0))∈IR×(0,∞). Setting
xa,bi(t)=(ya,bi(t),y˙a,bi(t)) and
z±=∓2∣a∣(1,0) we get xa,bi(t)→z± as
t→±∞. In the discussion preceding (7.3), applied to
q=∓2∣a∣, both choices of the sign ± lead to the same N,
given by s=−n(n−1)q2, and the same w, while
z+i,z−i∈N are two different zeros of w. Using (7.3)
we now choose neighborhoods U±i of z±i in
N satisfying the assertion of Lemma 2.3 for x(t) equal to
our xa,bi(t), and t±′∈IR with
xa,bi(t±′)∈U±i. Since
z±=∓2∣a∣(1,0), we may also require that
[TABLE]
By continuity, x(t±′)∈U±i for some neighborhood
U0i of xa,bi(0) in N and all integral
curves t↦x(t)∈N of w with
x(0)∈U0i. The image of
(0,∞)×U0i under the diffeomorphism F
of Remark 7.1 is now a neighborhood of
xa,bi(0)=(ξ1,−ζ1) in IE×IE,
the existence of which constitutes our assertion: according to
Remark 7.1, this F-image equals the union of
Fci(U0i) over c>0, and each
Fci maps N diffeomorphically onto the
s-preimage of the value −n(n−1)(cq)2,
while the push-forward, under
Fci:N→Fci(N), of w obtained by
restricting v to N, is the restriction of v/c to
Fci(N). However, the discussion preceding (7.3), and
(7.3) itself, apply to every q=0, and the use of v/c rather
than v makes no difference (Remark 2.4). Now (7.4)
combined with Remark 5.1 yields completeness of g.
∎
Our next result shows that the examples arising from Lemma 5.2(e) are
not generally Ricci-parallel, or locally reducible, or (when n≥4)
conformally flat.
Theorem 7.3**.**
The local-isometry types of Riemannian
n-manifolds satisfying (0.1) – (0.4) form a
set with a nonempty interior in the (2n−3)-dimensional moduli
space of Remark 5.7.
Proof.
According to Theorem 5.6, the local-isometry types of
all n-dimensional (M,g) with (0.1) – (0.3)
arise from (5.1) when one chooses a maximal Ricci-generic solution
I∋t↦y∈IE of (5.3), and then fixes a smooth curve
I∋t↦(g22i(t),…,gnni(t))∈(0,∞)n−1
satisfying (5.2). Restricting our discussion to the case where
0∈I, and then parametrizing such solutions (allowed, this
time, not to be Ricci-generic) by their initial data at t=0, we
identify them with points of a specific Euclidean space, and completeness of
g is guaranteed by Theorem 7.2 once one assumes (as we do from
now on) that the initial data range over a certain nonempty open subset of
the latter space. Now, as in Remark 5.7, if n≥3, we can make the
Ricci eigenvalue functions μ1i(0),…,μni(0) of
Lemma 5.2 mutually distinct (which leads to
Ricci-genericity) just by ensuring that
(μ2i(0),…,μni(0)) does not lie within a specific finite
union of hyperplanes in IE. However, rather than using any prescribed
y(0), cf. Remark 5.7, let us require
y1i(0),…,yni(0) to be all nonzero.
This amounts to imposing on the solution t↦y of (5.3) a
further open condition implying (see the proof of
Lemma 5.2) that Rj1,ji(0)=0, and so g is not
Ricci-parallel. In the proof of Lemma 5.2 we also saw that
Γjj1(0)=0 and, consequently, g cannot
be locally reducible. (If it were, the Ricci eigenvector fields
∂1i,…,∂ni of Lemma 5.2, with distinct
eigenvalue functions μ1i,…,μni, would each be tangent to
one or the other parallel factor distribution, giving
Γjj1=0 with some j=2,…,n.)
For k=j, one easily verifies that
gjjgkkRjkjki=−yjiyki. Therefore, if
W denotes the Weyl tensor,
(n−1)(n−2)gjjgkkWjkjki=2try˙−try2−(try)2+(n−1)[(yji+yki)try−(n−2)yjiyki−y˙ji−y˙ki], where
y˙ji appears with the coefficient 3−n. An enhanced version
of the last open condition thus precludes conformal flatness of our
examples when n≥4.
∎
Appendix: Warped products with harmonic curvature
For the reader’s convenience, we gather here some facts that are well known
[7] and easily verified. The repeated indices are always
summed over. In (1.4) we set m=dimM and p=dimΣ,
assuming that mp≥1 and ϕ:M→(0,∞) is nonconstant.
Thus, dimM=n with n=m+p≥2. We use product coordinates
xλ in M, consisting of local coordinates xi for
M and xa for Σ, declaring
[TABLE]
to be our index ranges. Therefore, giji as well as
θ=logϕ depend only on the variables
xk,ηabi only on xc, that is,
∂aigiji=∂aiθ=∂iiηabi=0. Furthermore,
[TABLE]
For the Christoffel symbols
Γλμν,Γijk,Habc of g,g,η, their Ricci-tensor components
Rλμi,Riji,Pabi, and the
components
∇ii∇jiθ of
the g-Hessian of θ, one has
[TABLE]
while, in terms of the g-Laplacian
Δ,
[TABLE]
The components
Rλμ,νi,∇iiRjki,DciPabi of the covariant derivatives of the
Ricci tensors of g,g,η satisfy, with the usual conventions
θ,ii=∂iiθ and
θ,i=gij∂jiθ, the relations
[TABLE]
Let (a) – (e) refer to parts of Lemma 1.2, which we now proceed
to prove. First,
- (f)
Rab,ii=Rib,ai for all i,a,b as
in (A.1) if and only if one has (a) and (e).
In fact, it suffices to verify (f) on the dense set
(U∪U′)×Σ⊆M, for the
interior U of the zero set of dθ in M and the
subset U′ on which dθ=0. On U, according to
(A.4), Rab,ii=0=Rib,ai since
Δepθ=0. Similarly, on U′,
the equality Rab,ii=Rib,ai amounts, by (A.4), to
the condition Pabi=κηabi, for a function
κ on Σ which must be constant, as it depends only on
the variables xj that are local coordinates in M. Formulae
(A.4) also show that κ is characterized by the relation
−κe−2θdθ=p−1(d[e−pθΔepθ]+e−pθ[Δepθ]dθ)+r(∇θ,⋅)−pg(∇θ,∇θ)dθ−pd[g(∇θ,∇θ)]/2 which, rewritten in terms
of ϕ=eθ, becomes (e).
The equivalence of (e) and (c) is in turn obvious from (1.3). Next, by
(A.4),
- (g)
Rjk,ii=Rik,ji for all i,j,k
with (A.1) if and only if (b) holds,
since ϕ−1∇dϕ=∇dθ+dθ⊗dθ. The main claim of Lemma 1.2 is thus
immediate: harmonicity of the curvature amounts to the Codazzi equation
for the Ricci tensor, cf. (1.1.i), while (A.4) clearly reduces
the latter to the cases (f) – (g).
Finally, (d) follows from (a) and (A.3).