This paper demonstrates the existence of almost-Kähler metrics within certain anti-self-dual conformal classes on the complex surface $K3 ext{ extperiodcentered}3ar{ ext{ exttwosuperior}} ext{ extbackslash}CP^{2}$, expanding understanding of geometric structures on this manifold.
Contribution
It shows that some anti-self-dual classes constructed by Donaldson-Friedman admit almost-Kähler representatives, a new insight into the geometry of these classes.
Findings
01
Existence of almost-Kähler metrics in specific anti-self-dual classes
02
Application of twistor space methods to identify geometric structures
03
Extension of known anti-self-dual constructions to include almost-Kähler structures
Abstract
Donaldson-Friedman constructed anti-self-dual classes on K3#3CP2 using twistor space. We show that some of these conformal classes have almost-K\"ahler representatives.
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
TopicsGeometry and complex manifolds · Geometric Analysis and Curvature Flows · Advanced Algebra and Geometry
Full text
AK-ASD Twistor
Inyoung Kim
Almost-Kähler anti-self-dual metrics on K3#3CP2
Inyoung Kim
Abstract.
Donaldson-Friedman constructed anti-self-dual classes on K3#3CP2 using twistor space.
We show that some of these conformal classes have almost-Kähler representatives.
1. Introduction
On a smooth, oriented riemannian 4-manifold (M,g), 2-forms decomposes as self-dual and anti-self-dual 2-forms Λ2=Λ+⊕Λ−,
according to the eigenvalue of the Hodge star operator ∗. By definition, a 2-form α is called self-dual if ∗α=α.
Then the curvature operator takes the form according to this decomposition of 2-forms Λ2=Λ+⊕Λ−,
[TABLE]
where r˙ comes from the trace-free Ricci curvature.
If W+=0, then g is called to be an anti-self-dual metric.
Let (M,ω) be a 4-dimensional symplectic manifold.
The space of almost-complex structures which are compatible with the symplectic form,
ω(v,w)=ω(Jv,Jw) is nonempty and contractible [23].
If we define g(v,w):=ω(x,Jy), then g is a metric which is compatible with J, g(v,w)=g(Jv,Jw).
We call such a metric g an almost-Kähler metric.
Note that ω is a self-dual harmonic 2-form of length 2 with respect to g.
On the other hand, by conformal invariant properties, if we have an anti-self-dual metric g and a nondegenerate self-dual harmonic 2-form,
then, there exists a unique almost-Kähler anti-self-dual metric in the conformal class of g [5].
Let (M,g) be an oriented, smooth, compact Riemannian 4-manifold.
Then there is Weitzenböck formula for a self-dual 2-form ω,
[TABLE]
where s is the scalar curvature.
Let (M,g,ω) be an almost-Kähler anti-self-dual 4-manifold.
Then ω is a self-dual harmonic 2-form of length 2, we get
[TABLE]
Thus, s≤0 in case of almost-Kähler anti-self-dual metrics.
Moreover, s≡0 if and only if (g,J,ω) is a Kähler manifold.
If an almost-Kähler anti-self-dual metric is not Kähler, we call it a strictly almost-Kähler anti-self-dual metric.
Let (M,g,J) be a Kähler manifold with ∫Msdμg≥0.
Then either the first Chern class c1R∈H2(M,R)=0 or its Kodaira dimension is −∞ [29].
Using the formula
[TABLE]
if CP2#nCP2 admit scalar-flat Kähler metrics, then n≥10.
In [14], it was shown that there exist strictly almost-Kähler anti-self-dual metrics by deforming scalar-flat Kähler metrics on certain manifolds.
Using the Seiberg-Witten invariant, it was shown that if CP2#nCP2 admits an almost-Kähler anti-self-dual metric, then n≥10 [14].
In this respect, it might be an interesting question whether there exists a manifold which admits almost-Kähler anti-self-dual metrics but not scalar-flat Kähler metrics.
K3#nCP2 for n≥3 are candidates
since they do not admit scalar-flat Kähler metrics [29] but it was shown that there exists anti-self-dual metrics on them [6].
In this paper, we show that some of anti-self-dual conformal classes constructed by Donaldson-Friedman in [6] are almost-Kähler,
using twistor interpretation of self-dual harmonic 2-forms.
Theorem 1**.**
There exist strictly almost-Kähler anti-self-dual metrics on K3#nCP2 for n≥3.
Acknowledgement : The author is most grateful to Prof. Claude LeBrun for suggesting this problem
and precious advices. The author is thankful to Jongsu Kim for helpful discussions. The author would like to thank Eui-Sung Park for helpful comment regarding Lemma 5.
The author is very thankful to Chanyoung Sung and Korea National University of Education for supports and opportunities, by which
this work has been able to be carried out.
This article is supported by NRF-2018R1D1A3B07043346.
2. Twistor spaces
An oriented, riemannian 4-manifold (M,g) with an anti-self-dual metric(ASD) corresponds to the complex 3-manifold, which is called the twistor space [2, 24].
Consider the unit sphere bundle of self-dual 2-form p:S(Λ+)→M.
Using the Levi-Civita connection, we can split the tangent bundle of Z:=S(Λ+) by
[TABLE]
On Vz, which is the tangent space of the fiber, we define JV be the −90∘ rotation and on (p∗TM)z, we put the almost-complex structure determined by z.
The fundamental theorem by Penrose and Atyiah, Hitchin, Singer is that this complex structure is integrable if g is anti-self-dual [2, 24].
We note that the twistor space Z can be also given by P(V+), where V+ is the positive spinor bundle [12].
Moreover, locally there exists the bundle H such that H is the Hopf bundle on each fiber CP1
and H2 exists globally [12].
Then it is shown that the canonical line bundle K of Z is isomorphic to H−4, which we denote by O(−4) [2].
Also, there is a fixed-point free anti-holomorphic involution σ, defined by the quaternionic structure on V+, σ2=Id [2].
σ is the antipodal map on each fiber and σ preserves each twistor line.
We call σ be the real structure on Z.
Then σ induces a complex-anti-linear map on H1(Z,K).
We call an element of H1(Z,K) is real if it is invariant under σ.
Conversely, let Z be a complex 3-manifold which has a fixed-point free anti-holomorphic involution σ such that σ2=Id.
Suppose further Z is fibered by σ-invariant holomorphic curves CP1,
which are called the real twistor lines and normal bundle of each real twistor line is isomorphic to O(1)⊕O(1).
Then there is a corresponding 4-manifold with the anti-self-dual metric [2, 24].
Let (Mi,gi) be anti-self-dual 4-manifolds and let Zi be twistor spaces corresponding to Mi.
Take a twistor line li⊂Zi and by blowing up this line,
we get an exceptional divisor Qi=CP1×CP1 on Zi and
we denote blown up manifolds by Zi~.
We identify Z~1 and Z~2 along Qi by interchanging factors Q1 and Q2
and we denote the identified singular manifold with normal crossing divisor Q by Z0.
A real structure σi on Zi extends to Z~i such that σ~i∣Zi=σi and therefore induces the real structure σ0 on Z0.
It was shown in [6] that if H2(Zi,ΘZi)=0,
then there exists a complex deformation of Z0
and this deformation produces anti-self-dual metrics on M1#M2.
From this, it was shown that nCP2 admit anti-self-dual metrics [6].
In this paper, we are in particular interested in the existence of almost-Kähler anti-self-dual metrics on K3#3CP2, more generally K3#nCP2, n≥3.
Ricci-flat Kähler metrics are anti-self-dual. K3 surface is known to admit such metrics [30] and
we consider the corresponding twistor space Z. Note that H2(Z,ΘZ)=0 [6].
However, by overcoming the obstruction, it was shown that NK3#nCP2
admit anti-self-dual metrics for N>0 and n≥2N+1 [6].
Theorem 2**.**
(Donaldson-Friedman) There exist anti-self-dual metrics on NK3#nCP2
for N>0 and n≥2N+1 [6].
This method was developed further by LeBrun and Singer [21] when a 4-manifold M admits an isometric Z2-action with k-isolated fixed points.
Moreover, by considering cohomological interpretation of positive scalar curvature condition [1], it was shown in [19] that
X~#nCP2 admit an anti-self-dual metric of positive scalar curvature if M does and H2(Z,ΘZ)=0,
where Z is the twistor space of M.
Here X=M/Z2 and X~ be the oriented manifold by replacing singularity of M/Z2
by 2-sphere of self-intersection −2.
Also, Kalafat showed that if (Mi,gi) are anti-self-dual 4-manifolds of positive scalar curvature such that
their twistor spaces Zi satisfy H2(Zi,ΘZi)=0, then M1#M2 admits an anti-self-dual metric of positive scalar curvature [13].
In this paper, we use this method of LeBrun in the construction of almost-Kähler ASD metrics on K3#nCP2 for n≥3.
Let M be an anti-self-dual space and let Z be its twistor space.
It was shown there are correspondences between certain cohomology groups on a twistor space Z
and solutions of differential equations on a 4-manifold M [7], [11].
One of these correspondences we need in this paper is the following.
Consider Spin(4)=SU(2)×SU(2).
Let V± be the basic Spin representations of two factors.
We denote S+m for SmV+, where Sm denote the symmetric power
and S−m for SmV−.
By following [11],
we note the following operator,
[TABLE]
with weight 21(m+2).
Theorem 3** (7,11).**
Let M be an anti-self-dual space and Z be its twistor space.
Then
[TABLE]
defines an isomorphism onto the space of solutions to Dmϕ=0, for m≥0.
In particular, when m=2, a real element of H1(Z,O(−4)) corresponds to a real self-dual closed 2-form.
Let (X,OX),(Y,OY) be complex spaces.
A map between complex spaces X,Y is given by (f,f#), where f:X→Y and f#:OY→f∗OX.
Here f∗OX is the direct image sheaf.
Then a map (f,f#):(X,OX)→(Y,OY) is called flat over y if OX,x is a flat module over OY,f(x)
via the map f#:OY,f(x)→OX,x.
A sheaf of OX-module F on X is said to be flat if Fx is flat module over OY,f(x).
If G be a sheaf of OY-module, then f−1G is a f−1OY-module. Moreover,
via the map f−1OY→OX, f∗G is defined to be f−1G⊗f−1OYOX.
Then f∗G is an OX-module.
Let X⊂Y and i:X→Y be the inclusion map. For a sheaf of OY-module G,
we consider the following map
[TABLE]
We denote α∣X:=rX(α), where α∈Hi(Y,G).
Let α∈H1(Z,K).
Then, α∣CP1∈H1(CP1,OCP1(−4)).
By Serre duality,
[TABLE]
Then ϕ∈H0(CP1,OCP1(2)) correspond to S+2.
Since CP1=P((S+∗)x∖0), a section ϕ gives rise to a homogenous polynomial of degree 2 on (S+∗)x∖0,
which gives an element of (S+2)x [11].
When m=2, we have S+2=Γ(Λc+) and D2 on Γ(Λ+) is the exterior derivative d [11].
Thus, an element of H1(Z,OZ(K)) corresponds to a self-dual closed 2-form.
Since Δ=dd∗+d∗d and d∗=∗d∗ for a 2-form on a 4-manifold, a self-dual closed 2-form is in particular harmonic.
A real element of H1(Z,OZ(K)) corresponds to a self-dual closed real 2-form on a 4-manifold.
Remark 1**.**
Let Zt be the twistor space of (K3#3CP2,gt), where gt is the family of anti-self-dual metrics
constructed by Donaldson-Friedman.
If we have a real cohomology class α∈H1(Zt,OZt(Kt)) such that α∣l=0 for any twistor line l∈Zt,
we get a nondegenerate real self-dual closed 2-form. In particular, this gives an almost-Kähler anti-self-dual metric on K3#3CP2.
3. Extension of a Cohomology class
Let (X,OX),(Y,OY) be complex spaces
with maps (f,f#), where f:X→Y and f#:OY→f∗OX.
Let F be a sheaf of OX-module on X.
Let us define higher direct image sheaf Rif∗(F). This is the sheaf associated to the following presheaf on Y,
[TABLE]
Theorem 4** (3, 4).**
Let X,Y be reduced complex spaces.
Suppose f:X→Y be a proper morphism and F be a coherent sheaf on X, which is flat over y for all y∈Y.
Let Iy be the ideal sheaf of y.
Then we have
(1) For all q≥0, hq(Xy,Fy) is an upper semi-continuous function of y.
(2) Rqf∗(F) is locally free if hq(Xy,Fy) is constant.
(3) If hq(Xy,Fy) is constant, then the map (Rqf∗F)y/Iy(Rqf∗F)y→Hq(Xy,Fy)
is bijective.
In Theorem 4, on f−1(y), we consider the inclusion map
iy:f−1(y)→X and we define Fy:=iy∗F.
In this paper, we are in particular interested in the case K3#3CP2.
Let Z be the twistor space of K3 with a Ricci-flat Kähler metric and let CP2 be CP2
with the non-standard orientation and gFS be the Fubini-Study metric.
Let Fi be the twistor space of (CP2,gFS).
Then take a twistor line li, i=1,2,3 on Z and by blowing up li,
we get Z~ with an exceptional divisor Qi′ for i=1,2,3, which is CP1×CP1.
The normal bundle of Qi′ in Z~ is O(1,−1).
In this paper, O(a) means some power of tautological line bundle on CPn
or the sheaf of sections of it according to the context.
Let π1 be the projection of CP1×CP1 to the first factor
and π2 the second factor.
By O(a,b), we mean π1∗O(a)⊗π2O(b).
Similarly, by blowing up a twistor line, we get (F~i,Qi′′) such that the normal bundle of Qi′′ in F~i is O(1,−1).
We identify Z~ with F~i by identifying Qi′⊂Z~ and Qi′′⊂F~i by switching each factor in the Qi′ and Qi′′
and denote the identification of Qi′ and Qi′′ by Qi.
Let F~=F~1∪F~2∪F~3 and Q=Q1∪Q2∪Q3.
Then we get a singular space Z0=Z~∪QF~ with normal crossing divisor Q.
In this paper, we consider the following type of deformation, as suggested by LeBrun in [19].
A 1-parameter family of standard deformation of a singular complex space Z0
is a flat, proper, holomorphic map ϖ:Z→U with an anti-holomorphic involution σ:Z→Z such that
σ∣Z0=σ0 and U⊂C is an open neighborhood of [math].
Z is a complex 4-manifold and when u∈U is non-zero real, ZU=ϖ−1(u) is a twistor space.
For a precise definition, we refer to [19].
By the construction of anti-self-dual metrics in [6], there exists a standard deformation of Z0.
We denote this standard deformation by
[TABLE]
with fiber Zt which is a smoothing of a singular twistor space Z0 and
U∈C is a neighborhood of the origin.
Let KZ be the canonical bundle of Z and
let IF~ be the ideal sheaf of F~∈Z.
Then we consider the invertible sheaf OZ(KZ)⊗2IF~.
We use K instead of KZ.
We apply Leray spectral sequence to this map ϖ.
Since OZ(K)⊗2IF~ is an invertible sheaf, it is coherent and
Z can be covered by open sets such that OZ(K)⊗2IF~∣U is a
free OZ∣U-module.
Since ϖ:Z→U is a flat, proper morphism, OZ(K)⊗2IF~ is flat over all t∈U.
Thus, by the theorem 4, we have
h1(Zt,(OZ(K)⊗2IF~)t) is an upper semi-continuous function of t∈U
and if h1(Zt,(OZ(K)⊗2IF~)t) is constant,
then R1ϖ∗(OZ(K)⊗2IF~) is locally free.
In Leray spectral sequence, we have
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
By Cartan’s Theorem B, Hi(U,Rqϖ∗(OZ(K)⊗2IF~)=0 for i>0.
Thus, we get d2=0 for all q. Therefore, Leray spectral sequence degenerates at E2-level.
Then, we have
[TABLE]
where Grp is the p-th filtration of Hp+q(Z,OZ(K)⊗2IF~).
In particular, for p=0,q=1, we get
[TABLE]
Thus, we get
[TABLE]
By Theorem 4, if h1(Zt,(OZ(K)⊗2IF~)t) is constant, then
the following restriction map
[TABLE]
is surjective.
Let ω be a self-dual harmonic 2-form on a smooth, oriented, compact Riemannian manifold.
Then
[TABLE]
Thus, dω=0.
Therefore, H1(Zt,OZt(Kt)) corresponds to the space of self-dual harmonic 2-forms on K3#3CP2,
which has dimension 3.
Theorem 5**.**
Let ϖ:Z→U, U⊂C, be a 1-parameter family of standard deformation of Z0 such that each fiber Zt
correspond to the twistor space of (K3#3CP2,gt) constructed in [6].
Then for t=0, h1(Zt,OZt(Kt))=3.
If h1(Z0,(OZ(K)⊗2IF~∣0)=3,
then a given real element H1(Z0,(OZ(K)⊗2IF~)∣0)
can be extended nearby fiber so that we get a real element in H1(Zt,OZt(Kt)) for t=0.
4. First Cohomology of the singular fiber and a nondegenerate element
In this section, we show that h1(Z0,(OZ(K)⊗2IF~)0)=3
and there is a nondegenerate element in H1(Z0,(OZ(K)⊗2IF~)0).
Then using Theorem 5, we prove Theorem 1.
Let F~=F1~∪F2~∪F3~ and
IF~=IF1~+IF2~+IF3~.
Lemma 1**.**
1. [−F~]∣F~i=[Qi].
2. [−F~]∣Z~=[−Q].
Proof.
First, we assume that the first factor of Qi=CP1×CP1 is the twistor line and the second factor is the blown up line
so that the normal bundle of Qi in Z~ is O(1,−1) and in F~i is O(−1,1).
Note that by adjunction formula, KZt=KZ⊗[Zt]∣Zt. But the normal bundle of Zt for t=0 in Z is trivial.
Thus, KZt=KZ∣Zt for t=0. We also note that normal bundle of F~i restricted to F~i−Qi is trivial.
We consider the following.
[TABLE]
Here VQ1,F1~ is the normal bundle of Q1 in F1~, which is O(−1,1)
and VQ1 is the normal bundle of Q1 in Z, which is O(1,−1)⊕O(−1,1)
and VF1~∣Q1 is the normal bundle of F1~ in Z restricted to Q1.
From this, we get that VF1~∣Q1 is O(1,−1).
Note that Q1 can be seen as a divisor of F~1.
Then, [−Q1]∣Q1=O(1,−1) and [−Q1]∣F1~−Q is trivial,
where [⋅] denotes the line bundle corresponding to a divisor.
Thus, [−Q1] is the same with the normal bundle of F~1⊂Z.
Similarly, we can show [−F~]∣Z~=[−Q].
We can check the result does not depend on the choice of the factor of Qi=CP1×CP1.
∎
The same proof with Lemma 1 implies that
[TABLE]
Thus, we have
[TABLE]
Lemma 2**.**
1. (OZ(KZ)⊗2IF~)t=(OZ(KZ)⊗2IF~)∣Zt⊗OZt=OZt(Kt) for t=0.
Let π:S~→S be the blowing up along a submanifold W with codimension k+1 and let I be the ideal sheaf of W~.
Then we have OS~(π∗KS)=OS~(KS~)⊗IW~k.
Remark 2**.**
From Lemma 3, we get
[TABLE]
Lemma 4**.**
OZ~(KZ~⊗[−Q])* is non-trivial along the twistor line direction and trivial along the blown up direction
of Qi=CP1×CP1.
On the other hand, OF~i(KFi~⊗[3Qi]) is non-trivial along the blown up direction
and trivial along the twistor line direction.*
Proof.
Suppose we have chosen the factor of Qi so that the normal bundle of Qi in Z~ is O(1,−1)
and in F~i is O(−1,1). Then the first factor of Qi is the twistor line direction in Z~
and the blown up direction in F~i.
Using this, we get
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Similarly, we have
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
∎
Below, we state Künneth formula in oder to calculate the cohomology Hi(CP1×CP1,O(a,b)).
Theorem 6** (26).**
Let F,G be cohernet sheaves on X and Y respectively, which are projective varieties over a filed k.
Let π1 is the projection map from X×Y to X and Similarly, π2 to Y.
Then the following holds.
[TABLE]
Our goal is to show that H1(Z0,(OZ(KZ)⊗2IF~)0)
is 3-dimensional and there is a nondegenerate element in
H1(Z0,(OZ(KZ)⊗2IF~)0).
The reason to choose OZ(K)⊗2IF~ instead of
OZ(K)⊗IF~ is that we would like to get an element
α∈H1(Z0,(OZ(KZ)⊗2IF~)0), such that α∣Q is nonzero.
Let i:Qi→Z~ and i:Qi→Fi~ be inclusion maps. Then we note that
[TABLE]
If we use K⊗IF~, we get
[TABLE]
Lemma 5**.**
Let Z be the twistor space of K3-surface with a Ricci-flat Kähler metric and Z~ be the blown up of Z along three twistor lines.
Let F be the twistor space of CP2 with Fubini-Study metric and F~ be the blown up of F along a twistor line.
Then we have
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Proof.
Below we show that
h1(Z~,OZ~(π1∗KZ))=h1(Z,OZ(KZ)) and
h1(F~,OF~(π2∗KF))=h1(F,OF(KF)).
H1(Z,OZ(KZ)) corresponds to the space of self-dual harmonic 2-forms on K3-surface.
Since b+=3 on this surface, we get h1(Z,OZ(KZ))=3.
Similarly, since there is no self-dual harmonic 2-form on CP2, we have h1(F,OF(KF))=0.
∎
Lemma 6**.**
Let f:X→Y be a continuous map of topological spaces and let G be a sheaf of abelian groups on X.
If Rif∗G=0 for i>0, then for all i≥0, there is a following isomorphism.
[TABLE]
Proof.
This follows from the Leray spectral sequence argument.
We refer to ([13], Proposition 3.0.6) for details of the proof.
∎
Therefore, in order to prove Lemma 5, we need to prove Riπ∗OZ~(π∗K)=0 for i>0
and π∗OZ~(π∗K)=K. For this, we use following Propositions ([28] V2. p.124, [13] Proposition 3.0.8)
Proposition 1**.**
Let X and Y be complex manifolds and suppose f:X→Y be a holomorphic proper and submersive map and G be a coherent analytic sheaf on X.
If Hi(f−1(y),G∣f−1(y))=0 for all y∈Y, then Rif∗(G)=0.
Proposition 2**.**
Let π:(Z~,Q)→(Z,l) be blowing up of a twistor line l and K be the canonical bundle on Z.
Then, we have Riπ∗OZ~(π∗K)=0.
Proof.
This follows from π−1(y) is a point or P1 and H1(P1,O)=0.
∎
Then we get
[TABLE]
Using the Projection formula and Zariski’s Main Theorem [10], we get π∗OZ~(π∗K)=OZ(K)
([13], Lemma 3.0.9, 3.0.10).
Lemma 7**.**
(Projection formula)
Let f:(X,OX)→(Y,OY) be a morphism of ringed spaces.
If G is OX-module and E is locally free OY-module of finite rank, then
[TABLE]
For G=OX, we get
[TABLE]
Lemma 8**.**
(Zariski’s Main Theorem, weak version)
Let X and Y be noetherian integral schemes and let f:X→Y be a birational projective morphism.
If Y is normal, then f∗OX=OY.
First, we consider H1(Z~,OZ~(π∗KZ)).
Lemma 9**.**
Let (M,g) be an oriented, smooth, compact 4-dimensional Riemannian manifold
and g has the property s=W+=0, where s is the scalar curvature of g.
Then any self-dual harmonic 2-form on M is parallel.
Proof.
From the following the Weitzenböck formula for self-dual 2-forms, we have
[TABLE]
Thus, if s=W+=0 and M is compact, we get ∇ω=0 for a self-dual harmonic 2-form.
∎
By Yau’s theorem, a K3 surface admits a Ricci-flat Kähler metric [30].
Note that for a Kähler metric, the self-dual Weyl tensor W+ is determined by the scalar curvature s.
Namely, W+ takes the following form in a Kähler case.
[TABLE]
Thus, s=0 if and only if W+=0.
Therefore, K3 surface with Ricci-flat Kähler metric has W+=0.
In particular, a self-dual harmonic 2-form on K3 surface with Ricci-flat Kähler metric is parallel.
Lemma 10** (5).**
Let (Y,g) be a smooth, oriented Riemannian n-manifold, n≥2 and let P be a point of Y.
Let ϕ be a differential l-form on Y−p such that dϕ=0 and d∗ϕ=0.
If there is a neighborhood U of p and a positive constant C such that ∣ϕ∣<C on U−p,
then ϕ extends to Y uniquely and smoothly and dϕ=0 and d∗ϕ=0 on Y.
Remark 3**.**
We note that if we assume ϕ is self-dual on Y−{p} in the Lemma 10,
the extended ϕ is also self-dual.
Let ∗ be the Hodge-star operator of (Y,g).
Then
[TABLE]
since ∗ϕ and ϕ are smooth sections of Λ2 and ϕ is self-dual on Y−{p}.
Lemma 11**.**
Let α∈H1(Z~,OZ~(π∗KZ)) be a real element and suppose that α is not identically zero.
Then α∣l=0 for any real twistor line l∈Z~−Q and α∣Qi∈H1(Qi,OQi(−4,0)) is not zero.
Proof.
Since [Q] is trivial on Z~−Q, by restricting cohomology on the subset, we get
α∣Z~−Q∈H1(Z~−Q,OZ~−Q(KZ~−Q))=H1(Z−L,OZ−L(KZ−L)),
where L=l1∪l2∪l3 and it is real.
Thus, by Theorem 4, α∣Z~−Q corresponds to a closed real self-dual 2-form ϕ on K3−{p1,p2,p3}.
We claim ϕ is bounded near pi.
So it is enough to show that α∣l∈H1(CP1,O(−4)) is bounded,
where l is a twistor line on Z near li.
Since π∗KZ is non-trivial along the twistor line direction, α∣li×{z} is bounded for any z∈CP1.
Thus, for a twistor line l near li, α∣l is bounded.
Thus, ϕ is bounded near pi.
Then by the Lemma 10 and Remark 3, ϕ is extended smoothly as a self-dual 2-form and dϕ=0 on K3.
In particular, it is harmonic.
By the Lemma 9, ϕ is parallel on K3. Then ∣∣ϕ∣∣ is constant
and at a point q, there exists an orthonormal basis such that ϕ(q)=e1∧e2+e3∧e4.
Then, it can be easily checked that ϕ is nondegenerate at q.
∎
As a Corollary of Lemma 11, we get the following.
Corollary 1**.**
Let i:Q→Z~ be the inclusion map. Then the restriction map
r1:H1(Z~,OZ~(π∗KZ))→H1(Q,i∗(OZ~(π∗KZ))) is an isomorphism.
Proof.
Note that h1(Z~,OZ~(π∗KZ))=h1(Q,i∗(OZ~(π∗KZ)))=3 and r1 is injective by Lemma 11.
Thus, r1 is an isomorphism.
∎
We need to calculate h1(Z0,(OZ(KZ)⊗2IF~)0).
First, we consider one of (F~i,Qi), which we denote by (F~,Q).
Let us consider the following exact sequence.
[TABLE]
Using the fact H0(Q,OQ(KF~∣Q))=H1(Q,OQ(KF~∣Q))=0, we get
[TABLE]
Similarly, we get H1(F~,OF~(KF~⊗n[Q]))=0 for n=1,2.
From the exact sequence below,
[TABLE]
we get
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
In order to calculate H2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗2[Q])), we describe the twistor space F.
Let V be the vector space which is isomorphic to C3
and V∗ is the dual vector space of V.
Then F is given by [2], [6], [18].
[TABLE]
Thus, the twistor space F is a hypersurface of CP2×CP2
given by a linear system O(1,1).
Lemma 12**.**
Let F be the twistor space of CP2 with Fubini-Study metric and opposite orientation to usual one, which is a flag manifold.
Then we have Hi(F,O(KF))=0 for i=0,1,2. and h3(F,OF(KF))=1.
Proof.
Let P:=CP2×CP2.
By adjunction formula, we have
[TABLE]
and KP=OP(−3,−3). Thus, in particular, we get KF=OF(−2,−2).
We consider the following exact sequence.
[TABLE]
Then from this, we get the following long exact sequence,
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Note that all terms are zero using the cohomology of CP2 and Künneth formula except the last two terms.
Since H4(CP2×CP2,O(−3,−3))=H2(CP2,O(−3))⊗H2(CP2,O(−3)).
Thus, h4(P,OP(−3,−3))=1 and therefore, we get
[TABLE]
∎
Again from the following short exact sequence
[TABLE]
we get
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Using H2(F~,OF~(π∗KF))=H2(F,OF(KF))=0, we get H2(F~,OF~(KF~))=0.
Since h3(F~,OF~(π∗KF))=h3(F,OF(KF))=1, we get h3(F~,OF(KF~))=1.
The following short exact sequence
[TABLE]
gives
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Thus, we get H2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗[Q]))≅H2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗2[Q])).
Also from the following short exact sequence
[TABLE]
we get
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Note that h2(Q,OQ(−2,−2))=1 and h2(F~,OF~(KF~))=0.
Thus, we get h2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗[Q]))=0 or 1.
If H2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗[Q]))=0, then H2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗2[Q]))=0
and therefore in this case, r2:H1(F~,OF~(KF~⊗3[Q]))→H1(Q,OQ(KF~⊗3[Q])∣Q) is an isomorphism.
If h2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗[Q]))=1, then h2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗2[Q]))=1.
From the following short exact sequence
[TABLE]
we get
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Thus, if H2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗[Q]))=0 and H2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗3[Q]))=0,
then h2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗[Q]))=h2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗3[Q]))=1
and in this case, r2 is an isomorphism.
If H2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗[Q]))=0 and H2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗3[Q]))=0,
then h1(F~,OF~(KF~⊗3[Q]))=2 and r2 is injective.
Thus, we can conclude that either h1(F~,OF~(KF~⊗3[Q]))=h1(Q,OQ(KF~⊗3[Q]∣Q))=h1(CP1×CP1,O(−4,0))=3 and r2 is an isomorphism, or
h1(F~,OF~(KF~⊗3[Q]))=2 and r2 is injective.
Remark 4**.**
Note that if H2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗[Q]))=0,
then H2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗2[Q]))=H2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗3[Q]))=0.
In this case, h1(F~,OF~(KF~⊗3[Q]))=3 and r2 is an isomorphism.
Lemma 13**.**
Let F be the twistor space of CP2 with Fubini-Study metric with nonstandard orientation
and let π:(F~,Q)→(F,l) be the blowing up along a twistor line l⊂F.
Let r2:H1(F~,OF~(KF~⊗3[Q]))→H1(Q,OQ(KF~⊗3[Q]∣Q)) be the restriction map.
Then either h1(F~,OF~(KF~⊗3[Q]))=3 and r2 is an isomorphism or
h1(F~,OF~(KF~⊗3[Q]))=2 and r2 is injective.
Lemma 14**.**
h1(Z0,OZ(K⊗2IF~)0)≥3**
Proof.
Consider ϖ:Z→U be the standard complex deformation.
Each fiber Zt for t=0 is the twistor space of (K3#3CP2,gt),
where gt is a family of ASD metrics constructed in [6].
Note that (OZ(K)⊗2IF~)t=KZt for t=0.
By Lemma 5, we have h1(Zt,OZt(KZt))=3. By upper semicontinuity,
we get dim h1(Z0,OZ(K⊗2IF~)0)≥3.
∎
Proposition 3**.**
h1(Z0,OZ(K⊗2IF~)0)=3.
Proof.
Let a:Z1~⨿F~→Z0 be the normalization map. We consider the following exact sequence.
[TABLE]
Note that each restriction of OZ~(KZ~⊗[−Q]) and
OF~(KF~⊗[3Q]) to Q are the same.
Note that H0(Qi,OQi(π∗KZ∣Qi))=H0(Qi,OQi(−4,0))=0.
Therefore, we get the following long exact sequence
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Since h1(Qi,OQi(π∗KZ∣Qi))=h1(Qi,OQi(−4,0))=3,
we have h1(Q,OQ(π∗KZ∣Q))=9.
The map r is given by
[TABLE]
where α∈H1(Z~,OZ~(π∗KZ)) and βi∈H1(Fi~,OF~(KF~i⊗3[Qi])).
Since r2:H1(Fi~,OF~(KF~i⊗3[Qi]))r2H1(Qi,OQi(KF~i⊗3[Qi])∣Qi)
is injective,
we get dim Im r ≥h1(F~,OF~(KF~⊗[3Q])). Thus, we get
dim ker r ≤ dim H1(Z~,OZ~(KZ~⊗[−Q])), which is 3.
Since f is injective and dim H1(Z0,OZ(K⊗2IF~)0)≥3,
we get dim Im f≥3. Thus, we get 3≤ dim Im f=dim ker r≤3. Thus, dim Im f=3 and therefore,
dim H1(Z0,OZ(K⊗2IF~)0)=3.
∎
Corollary 2**.**
The restriction map r2:H1(F~,OF~(KF~⊗[3Q]))→H1(Q,OQ(KF~⊗3[Q]∣Q))
is an isomorphism.
Proof.
Suppose r2 is not an isomorphism. Then
h1(F~,OF~(KF~⊗[−Q]))<9.
In this case, Im r is strictly greater than H1(F~,K⊗2IF~∣F~)
because r1 is an isomorphism by Corollary 1.
Then dim Im f= dim Ker r<3= dim H1(Z~,OZ~(KZ~⊗[−Q])),
which is a contradiction since dim Im f=3 from Proposition 3.
Thus, r2 is an isomorphism.
∎
From the argument before Remark 4 and Corollary 2, we get the following corollary.
Corollary 3**.**
Either H2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗n[Q]))=0 or h2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗n[Q]))=1 for n=1,2,3.
We show that there is a nondegenerate element in H1(Z0,(OZ(K)⊗2IF~)0).
By lemma 11, if α∈H1(Z~,π∗KZ) is not identically zero, there α∣Q=0 and α∣l=0 for every twistor line
l⊂Z~−Q. Below, we prove the similar one for a cohomology class in H1(F~,OF~(KF~⊗3[Q])).
Lemma 15**.**
Let β be a real element of H1(F~,OF~(KF~⊗3[Q]))
and suppose β is not identically zero.
Then β∣l=0 for any real twistor line l∈F~−Q and β∣Q=0.
Proof.
Since [Q] is trivial on F~−Q,
by restricting a real cohomology β∈H1(F~,OF~(KF~⊗3[Q])) to F~−Q,
we get a real element in H1(F~−Q,KF~−Q).
By Theorem 4, this element corresponds to a real self-dual harmonic 2-form on (CP2−{y},gFS),
where gFS is the restriction of Fubini-Study metric. Moreover, gFS on CP2−{y}
with the non-standard orientation is conformal to Burns metric.
By Corollary 2, the restriction map r2:H1(F~,OF~(KF~⊗3[Q]))→H1(Q,OQ(KF~⊗3[Q]∣Q))
is an isomorphism. Note that H1(Q,OQ(KF~⊗3[Q]∣Q))=H1(CP1×CP1,O(0,−4)).
Thus, on Q, there is a rational curve CP1 such that the restriction of KF~⊗3[Q]∣Q on it is O(−4)
and H1(CP1,O(−4))=0. On F~−Q, KF~⊗3[Q)∣Q is KF~−Q,
and for a twistor line l on F~−Q, which is CP1, KF∣l=O(−4) [2].
Namely, the restriction of the sheaf are the same for the rational curve on Q and any twistor line on F~−Q.
From this, we get r:H1(F~,OF~(KF~⊗3[Q]))→H1(CP1,O(−4))
is an isomorphism for any twistor line on F~−Q.
∎
Proposition 4**.**
There is a real element γ∈H1(Z0,(OZ(K)⊗2IF~)0) such that
γ∣l=0, for any real twistor line in Z~−Q and F~−Q.
Proof.
From the description of H1(Z0,(OZ(K)⊗2IF~)0) in the following long exact sequence,
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
an element of H1(Z0,(OZ(K)⊗2IF~)0) is given by the kernel of the map
r=(α∣Qi−βi∣Qi), where α∈H1(Z~,OZ~(KZ~⊗[−Q]))
and βi∈H1(Fi~,OF~i(KF~i⊗[3Qi])).
Since Ker r=C3, we take (α,βi)∈ Ker r, which is real and not identically zero.
First, we assume that α is not identically zero.
Then by Lemma 11, αl=0 for any twistor line l in Z~−Q and α∣Qi=0 for any i.
Then we have α∣Qi=βi∣Qi=0.
By Lemma 15, βi∣l=0 for any twistor line in Fi~−Qi.
If we assume βj is not identically zero for some j, then by Lemma 15, βj∣l=0 for any twistor line in F~j−Qj
and βj∣Qj=0. Then α∣Qj=0. By the same argument using Lemma 11 and 15, we get
α∣l=0 for any twistor line l∈Z~−Q and βi∣l=0 for any twistor line l∈F~i−Qi for any i.
∎
We have shown that h1(Z0,(OZ(K)⊗2IF~)0)=3 for all t including the singular fiber.
Thus, by Theorem 5, a given element in H1(Z0,(OZ(K)⊗2IF~)0) can be
extended to nearby fiber. If we take an element given in Proposition 4, then we get a nondegenerate real element of H1(Zt,OZt(Kt)) for t near [math]
since nondegeneracy is an open condition.
Thus, we get a nondegenerate self-dual harmonic 2-form on (K3#3CP2,gt)
and therefore an almost-Kähler anti-self-dual metric in the conformal class of gt.
Let α∈H1(Z~,π∗KZ) and Q=∪1≤i≤nQi for any n≥4.
A self-dual harmonic 2-form corresponding to α∣Z~−Q can be extended to K3 by the argument of Lemma 11.
The same argument is easily extended to cover cases K3#nCP2 for n≥4.
Since K3#3CP2 does not admit a scalar-flat Kähler metric, we get a strictly alnmost-Kähler anti-self-dual metric
on K3#3CP2 for n≥3. This finishes the proof of Theorem 1.
5. **Scalar curvatures of almost-Kähler anti-self-dual metrics **
Recall that the anti-self-duality is a conformal invariant.
By the solution of Yamabe problem [22], each conformal class on a compact manifold of dim ≥3 has a representative whose scalar curvature is constant.
There are three types according to the sign of the scalar curvature.
It is interesting to note the type of almost-Kähler anti-self-dual metrics on K3#nCP2 for n≥3.
From the Weitzenböck formula for a self-dual 2-form,
[TABLE]
if an anti-self-dual compact manifold (M,g) is positive type, then b+(M)=0 (Corollary 1, [27]).
Otherwise, there is a self-dual harmonic 2-form with respect to an an anti-self-dual metric on M with constant positive scalar curvature.
Then we have
[TABLE]
Then we get ∫M3s<ω,ω>≤0, which is a contradiction.
Since K3#nCP2 for n≥3 has self-dual harmonic 2-forms,
an anti-self-dual conformal class on K3#nCP2 for n≥3 cannot be positive type.
Moreover, from the following result in [19, Proposition 3.5], K3#nCP2 for n≥3 cannot admit an anti-self-dual metric with zero scalar curvature.
Proposition 5** (19).**
Suppose M be a smooth, oriented, compact four-dimensional manifold.
If M admits a scalar-flat anti-self-dual metric, then M is homeomorphic to kCP2 for k≥5
or M is diffeomorphic to CP2#nCP2 for n≥10, or diffeomorphic to K3 surface.
Thus, we can conclude that an anti-self-dual conformal class on K3#3CP2 for n≥3 is negative type.
The following result was proven in case b1(M)=0 in [27] and in general in [9].
Theorem 7** (9, 27).**
Suppose (M,c) be a compact, oriented anti-self-dual conformal manifold and its conformal class
contains a metric of constant negative scalar curvature.
Then the corresponding twistor space does not have a nontrivial divisor.
From this, we get the twistor space Z of (K3#nCP2,g) for n≥3 does not admit a nontrivial divisor,
where g is an anti-self-dual metric with negative type.
This is Corollary 2 in [27].
Note that the property of K3-surface we need in this paper in the construction of almost-Kähler anti-self-dual metrics is that
b+=0 and the metric is anti-self-dual and has vanishing scalar curvature.
Then among the list given in Proposition 5, CP2#nCP2 for n≥10 with scalar-flat Kähler metrics have these properties.
Thus, instead of K3 surface, we may use CP2#nCP2 for n≥10.
We note that it was shown that CP2#nCP2 for n≥14 admit scalar-flat Kähler metrics
by twistor method [15, 16].
The optimal case CP2#nCP2 for n=10 was successful using gluing method in [25].
Theorem 8** (20).**
Suppose M be a compact scalar-flat Kähler surface such that c1=0.
Let Z be its twistor space and D be the corresponding divisor.
Suppose M be not a minimal ruled surface of genus γ≥2 such that H0(M,ΘM)=0
and M be not of the form P(L⊕O)→Sγ, where Sγ is a riemann surface of genus γ≥2.
Then H2(Z,ΘZ⊗ID)=0.
Proposition 6** (20, 14).**
Suppose M be a compact scalar-flat Kähler surface such that c1=0.
Let Z be its twistor space with the corresponding divisor D.
If H2(Z,ΘZ⊗ID)=0, then H2(Z,ΘZ)=0.
Let g be a scalar-flat Kähler metric on CP2#nCP2 for n≥10.
Then by Theorem 8 and Proposition 6, the twistor space of (CP2#nCP2,g)
has H2(Z,ΘZ)=0. Thus, Donaldson-Friedman construction can be applied to the pair
(CP2#nCP2,g) for n≥10 and (CP2,gFS).
Moreveor, our construction of nondegenerate self-dual harmonic 2-form also applies in these cases.
The existence of strictly almost-Kähler anti-self-dual metrics on CP2#nCP2 for n≥11
is already shown by deforming scalar-flat Kähler metrics [14].
The method of showing existence of almost-Kähler anti-self-dual metrics on such manifolds in this paper is different from this case.
On the other hand, since CP2#nCP2 admit scalar-flat Kähler metrics unlike K3#nCP2,
we can only state the theorem in the following way.
Theorem 9**.**
There is an almost-Kähler anti-self-dual metric on CP2#nCP2 for n≥11.
6. Appendix: Calculation of the second cohomology of the singular fiber
In this section, we consider H2(Z0,(OZ(K)⊗2IF~)0),
where Z0=Z~∪QF~ is obtained from the twistor space of K3 surface with Ricci-flat Kähler metric
and 3 copies of twistor space of (CP2,gFS).
By Serre Duality
[TABLE]
It was shown that [8], [11], [17] that H1(Zt,O) corresponds to the first cohomology group of the following complex
[TABLE]
where Λi are complex-valued i-forms on M and d+ω is the self-dual part of dω of a 1-form ω.
From this, we get next useful result. We recall the proof briefly following Corollary 3.2 in [8].
Theorem 10** (8, 11, 17).**
For the twistor space Z of a compact, smooth, oriented riemannian 4-manifold with an anti-self-dual metric (M,g),
H1(Z,O)=H1(M,C).
Proof.
By the above argument, it suffices to show that if d+ω=0, then dω=0.
Define α:=dω. Then ∗α=−α by definition of d+ and d+ω=0.
Then we have
[TABLE]
∎
Lemma 16**.**
For a twistor space Z of K3 surface with Ricci-flat Kähler metric, we have H2(Z,OZ(KZ))=0.
For Zt, which is a twistor space of (K3#nCP2,gt),
where gt is a family of anti-self-dual metrics constructed in [6], we have H2(Zt,OZt(KZt))=0.
Proof.
Since K3 surface and K3#nCP2 are simply connected,
we get immediately the conclusion from Theorem 10 and Serre Duality.
∎
In Corollary 3, it is shown that either H2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗n[Q]))=0 or
h2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗n[Q]))=1 for n=1,2,3.
We claim if H2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗n[Q]))=0, then H2(Z0,(OZ(K)⊗2IF~)0)=0
and if h2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗n[Q]))=1,
then h2(Z0,(OZ(K)⊗2IF~)0)=3
Proposition 7**.**
If H2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗[Q]))=0, then H2(Z0,(OZ(K)⊗2IF~)0)=0.
Proof.
We consider again the long exact sequence
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
From Remark 4, if H2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗[Q]))=0,
then H2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗[3Q]))=0.
Moreover, from Lemma 16, we get H2(Z~,OZ~(KZ~⊗[−Q]))=H2(Z~,OZ~(π∗KZ))=H2(Z,OZ(KZ))=0.
From Corollary 2, we get r is surjective. Therefore, we get
H2(Z0,(OZ(K)⊗2IF~)0)=0.
∎
Proposition 8**.**
If h2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗[Q]))=1,
then h2(Z0,(OZ(K)⊗2IF~)0)=3.
Proof.
Again we consider the long exact sequence given in the proof of Proposition 7.
Note that from Corollary 2, we get r is surjective and from Corollary 3, we get h2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗3[Q]))=1.
From this, we get h2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗[3Q]))=3.
Thus, we get h2(Z0,(OZ(K)⊗2IF~)0)=h2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗[3Q]))=3.
∎
Remark 5**.**
From Lemma 16, we have H2(Zt,OZt(Kt))=H1(Zt,O)∗=0.
Then depending on h2(F~,OF~(KF~⊗[Q])),
h2(Z0,(OZ(K)⊗2IF~)0)=0 or 3.
Thus, we cannot conclude about h2(Z0,(OZ(K)⊗2IF~)0).
Bibliography30
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] M. F. Atiyah, Green’s functions for self-dual four-manifolds , in: Mathematical Analysis and Applications, Part A, vol. 7 of Adv. in Math. Suppl. Stud., Academic Press, New York, 1981, pp. 129-158.
2[2] M. Atiyah, N. Hitchin and I. Singer, Self-duality in four dimensional Riemannian geometry , Proc. Roy. Soc. London Ser. A 362 (1978), 425 -461.
3[3] C . B a ˘ n i c a ˘ formulae-sequence 𝐶 𝐵 ˘ 𝑎 𝑛 𝑖 𝑐 ˘ 𝑎 C.B\breve{a}nic\breve{a} and O . S t a ˘ n a ˘ s i l a ˘ formulae-sequence 𝑂 𝑆 𝑡 ˘ 𝑎 𝑛 ˘ 𝑎 𝑠 𝑖 𝑙 ˘ 𝑎 O.St\breve{a}n\breve{a}sil\breve{a} , Algebraic methods in the global theory of complex spaces , John Wiley & Sons, New York (1976).
4[4] W. Barth, K. Hulek, C. Peters, and A. V. de Ven, Compact Complex Surfaces , 2nd ed. 2004, Springer.
5[5] C. Bishop and C. Le Brun, Anti-Self-Dual 4-Manifolds, Quasi-Fuchsian Groups and Almost-Kähler Geometry , ar Xiv: 1708. 03824 [math DG]; to appear in Comm. An. Geom.
6[6] S. Donaldson and R. Friedman, Connected sums of self-dual manifolds and deformations of singular spaces , 1989 Nonlinearity, 2 (1989), pp. 197-239.
7[7] M. G. Eastwood, R. Penrose, and R. O. Wells. Jr., Cohomology and Massless Fields , Commun. Math. Phys. 78. 305-351 (1981).
8[8] M. G. Eastwood and M. A. Singer, The Fröhlicher spectral sequence on a twistor space , J. Differ. Geom. 38 (3), 653-669 (1993).