A lift of the Seiberg-Witten equations to Kaluza-Klein 5-manifolds
M. J. D. Hamilton

TL;DR
This paper demonstrates how Seiberg-Witten equations on 4-manifolds can be lifted to 5-dimensional Kaluza-Klein manifolds, revealing equivalences and applications to Sasaki 5-manifolds over Kähler-Einstein surfaces.
Contribution
It introduces a method to lift Seiberg-Witten equations to Kaluza-Klein 5-manifolds, establishing an equivalence with Dirac equations with non-linearities and applying this to Sasaki 5-manifolds.
Findings
Equivalence between solutions of Seiberg-Witten equations on 4-manifolds and Dirac equations on 5-manifolds.
Extension of Seiberg-Witten theory to Kaluza-Klein circle bundles.
Application to Sasaki 5-manifolds over Kähler-Einstein surfaces.
Abstract
We consider Riemannian 4-manifolds with a Spin^c-structure and a suitable circle bundle over such that the Spin^c-structure on lifts to a spin structure on . With respect to these structures a spinor on lifts to an untwisted spinor on and a U(1)-gauge field for the Spin^c-structure can be absorbed into a Kaluza-Klein metric on . We show that irreducible solutions to the Seiberg-Witten equations on for the given Spin^c-structure are equivalent to irreducible solutions of a Dirac equation with cubic non-linearity on the Kaluza-Klein circle bundle . As an application we consider solutions to the equations in the case of Sasaki 5-manifolds which are circle bundles over Kaehler-Einstein surfaces.
| spin or non-spin | odd | ||||||
| spin | even |
| spin or non-spin | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| spin |
| spin or non-spin | odd | , | , | , | , | |||
| spin | even | , | , | , | , |
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.
A lift of the Seiberg–Witten equations to Kaluza–Klein -manifolds
M. J. D. Hamilton
Fachbereich Mathematik
Universität Stuttgart
Pfaffenwaldring 57
70569 Stuttgart
Germany
Abstract.
We consider Riemannian -manifolds with a -structure and a suitable circle bundle over such that the -structure on lifts to a spin structure on . With respect to these structures a spinor on lifts to an untwisted spinor on and a -gauge field for the -structure can be absorbed into a Kaluza–Klein metric on . We show that irreducible solutions to the Seiberg–Witten equations on for the given -structure are equivalent to irreducible solutions of a Dirac equation with cubic non-linearity on the Kaluza–Klein circle bundle . As an application we consider solutions to the equations in the case of Sasaki -manifolds which are circle bundles over Kähler–Einstein surfaces.
1. Introduction
Suppose that is a -manifold with a Lorentz metric and an electromagnetic gauge field, i.e. a -form . The original Kaluza–Klein ansatz [27], [29] is to consider the -manifold and combine and to a Lorentz metric on which is invariant under the circle action. The -dimensional vacuum Einstein field equations for (i.e. vanishing of the Ricci tensor) then imply the -dimensional Einstein field equations for with electromagnetic source and the Maxwell equation for .
Let be a smooth, closed, oriented, Riemannian -manifold. We choose a -structure on with associated spinor bundle and characteristic line bundle . Locally the spinor bundle is a tensor product of a standard spinor bundle and a square root , i.e. a twisted spinor bundle. Since does not necessarily admit a spin structure, the standard spinor bundle and the square root may not exist globally on . However, -structures always exist on closed, oriented -manifolds.
The Seiberg–Witten equations [38], [39], [40] are partial differential equations for a pair , consisting of a Hermitian connection on and a positive Weyl spinor . These equations can be used to define the Seiberg–Witten invariants of which have numerous applications to the differential geometry, symplectic geometry and topology of -manifolds.
Let be the principal circle bundle with Euler class . For this choice of Euler class the -structure on lifts to a spin structure on . For the associated spinor bundles, every spinor has a canonical lift to an untwisted spinor .
We can think of the connection as a -connection on the principal bundle and define the Kaluza–Klein metric
[TABLE]
on , which is a Riemannian metric, because is assumed to be imaginary-valued.
Theorem 1.1**.**
We consider the Seiberg–Witten equations on :
[TABLE]
Let be a positive Weyl spinor on and the lift to . If is a solution to the Seiberg–Witten equations (1.1), then is a solution to the equation
[TABLE]
Here is the Dirac operator on for the Kaluza–Klein metric . If does not vanish identically on , then the converse holds as well, i.e. if is a solution to equation (1.2), then is a solution to the Seiberg–Witten equations (1.1).
Theorem 1.1 is a special case of the more general Theorem 7.5. In particular, the spin structure on in Theorem 1.1 is of odd type, cf. Section 4. If is a spin manifold (i.e. admits a spin structure), we can choose the spin structure on to be even. We also consider the generalization to Kaluza–Klein circle bundles with fibres of length , where can vary over the base manifold , see Section 9. The overall sign on the right hand side of equation (1.2) depends on the relation between Clifford multiplication in dimensions and , cf. Remark 7.9.
Remark 1.2*.*
Pairs and spinors are called irreducible if and are not identically zero on and , respectively. The theorem implies that is an irreducible solution to the Seiberg–Witten equations (1.1) on if and only if is an irreducible solution to equation (1.2) on the Kaluza–Klein circle bundle . Reducible solutions to the Seiberg–Witten equations are given by connections so that . The trivial spinor is a solution to equation (1.2) without a condition on .
The pullback of a -structure to a spin structure on the circle bundle defined by the characteristic line bundle of has been discussed in [35]. The proof of Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 7.5 depends on a calculation in [3] of the Dirac operator on lifted spinors , see Proposition 6.5. The implication in the case from equation (1.2) to the Seiberg–Witten equations (1.1) follows from the unique continuation property of Dirac operators, cf. Proposition 7.3.
Both Seiberg–Witten equations on combine to a single equation on because the Dirac operator maps the lift of a positive Weyl spinor on to the lift of a mixed spinor. Similarly the map (with Clifford multiplication in the second entry)
[TABLE]
has mixed image. Equation (1.2) is a lift of the equation . Note that the quadratic non-linearity in the Seiberg–Witten equations becomes the non-linearity .
Remark 1.3*.*
In Seiberg–Witten theory one often considers the space of all solutions to equations (1.1) where the -structure and Riemannian metric are considered as fixed parameters. For the corresponding space of solutions of equation (1.2) on the Riemannian metric varies, because depends on . For a given metric , the Kaluza–Klein construction can be viewed as an embedding of the space of connections on into the space of Riemannian metrics on .
Remark 1.4*.*
The implications of the invariance of the Seiberg–Witten equations under gauge transformations and charge conjugation are discussed in Section 8.
Remark 1.5*.*
Equation (1.2) makes sense for spinors on any oriented Riemannian -manifold (or, more generally, an -manifold of arbitrary dimension ) with a spin structure. The solutions of an equation of type
[TABLE]
with constants on arise as critical points of the functional (see [26])
[TABLE]
for the quartic Lagrangian
[TABLE]
This Lagrangian is related to the four-fermion interaction studied in the -dimensional Gross–Neveu model [22].
As an application we consider in Section 10 the Boothby-Wang construction of circle bundles over closed Kähler–Einstein surfaces with and Einstein constant . There are canonical -structures on with characteristic line bundles and , defined by the complex structure . The (perturbed) Seiberg–Witten equations for both -structures have canonical solutions with . In this situation the circle bundle is a Sasaki -Einstein -manifold (if the -fibres have a suitable constant length, depending on ) and the spinors lift to eigenspinors of the Dirac operator . If the Einstein constant is negative and normalized so that , the spinors are harmonic, i.e. in the kernel of . If and normalized so that , the -manifold is Sasaki–Einstein and the spinors are Killing spinors.
Remark 1.6*.*
Other generalizations of the Seiberg–Witten equations to -manifolds can be found in several references, including [14], [30], [36].
Convention**.**
In the following all manifolds are smooth, non-empty, connected and oriented if not stated otherwise.
2. Kaluza–Klein circle bundles
Let be a closed, oriented, Riemannian -manifold and
[TABLE]
the oriented principal -bundle with Euler class and group action . We denote by the vector field on along the fibres, given by the infinitesimal action of a fixed element in the Lie algebra of , normalized such that the flow of has period .
We define a Riemannian metric on with the following Kaluza–Klein ansatz [11]: Let be a -connection on the principal bundle . This means that is invariant under the circle action,
[TABLE]
and normalized such that
[TABLE]
The curvature -form satisfies
[TABLE]
Definition 2.1**.**
The Riemannian metric
[TABLE]
is called the Kaluza–Klein metric on . We call the principal circle bundle over a Riemannian manifold together with the Kaluza–Klein metric for a connection on a Kaluza–Klein circle bundle.
The metric has the following properties:
- •
The horizontal bundle is orthogonal to the circle fibres.
- •
.
- •
, i.e. the circle fibres have length .
- •
is a Killing vector field for , i.e. .
The Kaluza–Klein metric on is completely characterized by these properties.
Let be the complex line bundle (unique up to isomorphism) with . We can define as the complex line bundle associated to via the standard representation of on . Then has a Hermitian metric and can be thought of as the unit circle bundle in . The connection on induces a connection (covariant derivative) on which is compatible with the Hermitian metric and vice versa.
Lemma 2.2**.**
The kernel of is .
Proof.
Recall from Convention Convention that is assumed non-empty and connected, hence . The claim is then equivalent to exactness of the Gysin sequence
[TABLE]
at . ∎
The lemma implies:
Proposition 2.3**.**
Let be the principal circle bundle with Euler class and a complex line bundle on . Then is a trivial line bundle if and only if .
Let be a -structure on with characteristic line bundle . The heuristic idea to define the lift of to a spin structure on is to choose a Kaluza–Klein circle bundle with Euler class , so that . We can then lift to a -structure on with characteristic line bundle . Since this bundle is trivial, it corresponds to a spin structure on . The details will be worked out in Sections 3–5 below.
3. Spin structures and -structures on manifolds
We collect some background material on spin and -structures (more details can be found, for example, in [12], [17], [33], [34]). Let be an oriented Riemannian manifold of dimension .
3.1. Existence and classification
We consider the double covering
[TABLE]
which is the universal covering if . With respect to the Riemannian metric the set of oriented orthonormal frames in forms a principal bundle over with action
[TABLE]
A spin structure on is a principal bundle
[TABLE]
over together with a smooth bundle map which is equivariant with respect to the homomorphism , i.e. the following diagram commutes:
[TABLE]
It follows that the spin structure is a double covering which restricts on each fibre of the principal bundles to a double covering equivalent to .
We denote by
[TABLE]
the unitary complex (Dirac) spinor representation and by
[TABLE]
the associated Hermitian (Dirac) spinor bundle of .
The spinor representation is the restriction of an irreducible representation of the complex Clifford algebra on . The embedding and the vector space isomorphism yield bilinear, fibrewise Clifford multiplications
[TABLE]
which are compatible with the Hermitian bundle metric on and extend via to the dual bundles and and to the complexifications of these bundles. Clifford multiplication with tangent vectors satisfies
[TABLE]
The Levi–Civita connection of the Riemannian metric defines a Clifford connection on . Together with Clifford multiplication by tangent vectors we get the Dirac operator
[TABLE]
a first order linear differential operator.
If is even, there is a unique irreducible representation of on and the spinor representation of decomposes into the direct sum of two irreducible Weyl representations on subspaces , of half dimension. There is a corresponding decomposition of the spinor bundle
[TABLE]
into Weyl spinor bundles. Clifford multiplication with a tangent vector and the Dirac operator map
[TABLE]
If is odd, there are two inequivalent irreducible representation of on and the restrictions to are equivalent and irreducible.
In dimension and , the cases we are most interested in, both and can be identified as a complex vector space with . The Weyl spinor spaces are given as the -eigenspaces of
[TABLE]
for an oriented orthonormal basis of . Clifford multiplications and on are related as follows: Identify and let be an orthonormal basis of adapted to this embedding. Then
[TABLE]
for and all . This corresponds to the irreducible representation of where acts as (in the other representation this element acts as , see [33, Ch. I, Proposition 5.9]).
Similarly, the Lie group is defined by
[TABLE]
where the non-trivial element of acts as . There are Lie group homomorphisms
[TABLE]
These homomorphisms together yield a double covering
[TABLE]
A -structure on is a principal bundle
[TABLE]
over together with a smooth bundle map , so that the following diagram commutes:
[TABLE]
For a -structure the homomorphism defines an associated principal -bundle
[TABLE]
and with the standard representation of on a complex line bundle
[TABLE]
with a Hermitian metric, called the characteristic line bundle of the -structure (in the case of , the complex line bundle is sometimes called the determinant line bundle because it is isomorphic to the top exterior power of both Weyl spinor bundles).
In the following we denote the projection of these principal bundles to by , , etc. It is sometimes useful to consider the -principal bundle given by the fibre product
[TABLE]
A -structure with associated bundle yields a double covering
[TABLE]
which restricts on each fibre to a double covering equivalent to (see e.g. [33, Appendix D]).
The spinor representation of together with the standard representation of define the unitary (Dirac) spinor representation of on the complex vector space . A -structure defines an associated Hermitian (Dirac) spinor bundle
[TABLE]
with a Clifford multiplication. The Levi–Civita connection of the Riemannian metric together with the choice of a Hermitian connection on define a Clifford connection on . We get a Dirac operator
[TABLE]
In even dimension there is a splitting into Weyl spinor bundles so that the properties corresponding to (3.2) hold.
Definition 3.1**.**
Let and denote the set of all isomorphism classes of spin structures and -structures on . We denote the isomorphism class of a spin structure or a -structure by the same symbol.
The structure of the sets and is well-known.
Proposition 3.2**.**
The set is non-empty if and only if the second Stiefel-Whitney class of vanishes, . In this case is a torsor (a set with a free and transitive action) over .
Proposition 3.3**.**
The set is non-empty if and only if there exists an element with . In this case is a torsor over and
[TABLE]
for every -structure . Denoting the action of an element on a -structure by , the action on the associated Chern class is given by . Moreover, for any oriented -manifold the set is non-empty.
Remark 3.4*.*
We can write the class as for a complex line bundle over and then denote the action by and .
Definition 3.5**.**
If the sets or are non-empty, we say that is a spin or -manifold, respectively.
Hence our notion of spin and -manifold signifies only the existence of such a structure and not that a specific one has been chosen.
3.2. Relation between spin and -structures
Our goal in this section is to understand the correspondence between spin structures and -structures with vanishing first Chern class.
Definition 3.6**.**
We define the set
[TABLE]
Consider the Bockstein sequence
[TABLE]
associated to the short exact sequence
[TABLE]
We have
[TABLE]
where denotes the elements of order . The following lemma follows immediately from Proposition 3.3.
Lemma 3.7**.**
If the set is non-empty, then it is a torsor over the group .
The following theorem shows that spin structures induce -structures. The first part of this theorem was proved in [20, p. 49-50]. The second part on isomorphisms is a direct consequence.
Theorem 3.8**.**
Let be a spin manifold. Then there exists a surjective map
[TABLE]
which is equivariant with respect to the Bockstein epimorphism . It descends to an isomorphism of torsors
[TABLE]
with respect to the induced group isomorphism .
In particular, decomposes into subsets, each of which contains isomorphism classes of spin structures that map to the same isomorphism class of -structures.
Definition 3.9**.**
We denote by the -structure induced by the spin structure .
Definition 3.10**.**
Let be a spin structure and a -structure on with characteristic line bundle . By Proposition 3.3 and Remark 3.4 there exists a unique complex line bundle on , up to isomorphism, so that . This line bundle satisfies and is called the square root of determined by .
A right inverse to the map can be constructed as follows.
Proposition 3.11**.**
A -structure on with together with a trivialization of determines a unique isomorphism class of spin structures on so that .
Proof.
We first give an explicit construction of the map , cf. [33, Example D.5]. Given a spin structure we define the -principal bundle
[TABLE]
where the non-trivial element of acts as . We then get a -structure
[TABLE]
Conversely, consider a -structure with trivialized bundle
[TABLE]
There exists a bundle isomorphism
[TABLE]
The -structure defines a double covering
[TABLE]
which is equivariant with respect to the homomorphism . The double covering restricted to the preimage of together with the action of defines a spin structure on . By construction . The bundle isomorphism
[TABLE]
shows that the spin structure satisfies . ∎
Remark 3.12*.*
The construction of the spin structure from the -structure is from [35, Lemma 3.1]. In this reference, however, the dependence on the trivialization of is not stated explicitly.
4. Spin and -structures on Kaluza–Klein circle bundles
Lemma 4.1**.**
Let be an oriented manifold and the principal circle bundle with Euler class . Then is spin if and only if one of the following conditions holds:
- (1)
* is spin* 2. (2)
**
Proof.
We follow the proof in [23]. The manifold is spin if and only if . Applying the Whitney sum formula to the decomposition , where is the trivial vertical line bundle, shows that . Similar to the proof of Lemma 2.2 exactness of the long exact -Gysin sequence
[TABLE]
together with by Convention Convention imply that the kernel of on is equal to . ∎
Spin structures on the total space of a principal circle bundle can be either even or odd with respect to the circle action [5, 10, 1, 37]. Let be an oriented Riemannian -manifold and the Kaluza–Klein circle bundle with Riemannian metric and free, isometric -action denoted by
[TABLE]
The induced free action of on , given by the differential, commutes with the -action and defines a smooth family of diffeomorphisms
[TABLE]
Suppose that is spin and a spin structure on . The family then lifts to a smooth family of diffeomorphisms
[TABLE]
because the manifold is a double covering of . We have and specify the lift uniquely by . Since and the bundles are connected manifolds by Convention Convention, there are two possibilities:
- •
: the -action on then lifts to a free -action . The -action commutes with the -action and the projection is -equivariant. In this case the spin structure is called even (or projectable).
- •
is multiplication with in each fibre: the -action on then does not lift to an -action on . In this case the spin structure is called odd (or non-projectable).
Remark 4.2*.*
In the case of an even spin structure on we get a free action of on . In the case of an odd spin structure on the (non-free) action
[TABLE]
does lift to an action on , which induces a free action of on .
The fibres of the principal bundle are principal -bundles over . These fibres are diffeomorphic to in the even case (with sections of the -bundles over defined by the lift ) and to in the odd case.
Definition 4.3**.**
For a Kaluza–Klein circle bundle we denote the sets of isomorphism classes of even and odd spin structures on by and .
Definition 4.4**.**
For a class define
[TABLE]
Theorem 4.5**.**
Let be the Kaluza–Klein circle bundle with Euler class and Riemannian metric . Assume that is spin. Then there exists a map
[TABLE]
with the following properties:
- (1)
The restriction of to is a bijection . 2. (2)
The restriction of to is a surjection .
Proof.
For a proof in the case of even spin structures on see [3, p. 236–237] and [10, Proposition 2.2]. For the construction of see [3, p. 242] and [10, Proposition 2.3]. For both cases, see also [37, p. 24, 27–29], which refers to [3] and [35].
In [35, Proposition 3.1] it is shown that every element of lifts to an element of . However, it is not immediately clear that this right inverse to can be assumed to have image in the odd spin structures. We therefore prove this fact (compare with Proposition 3.11). Let be a -structure on with . We first construct a spin structure on the -principal bundle over : The double covering
[TABLE]
is equivariant with respect to the homomorphism . We restrict the -action on to a free action of . The double covering is then equivariant with respect to
[TABLE]
We consider the pullback bundles
[TABLE]
There is an induced, equivariant double covering
[TABLE]
The assumption on the first Chern class of implies that , hence is tautologically trivial and there is an isomorphism
[TABLE]
The restriction of to the preimage of is equivariant with respect to the homomorphism (4.1), i.e. a spin structure on . We then get a spin structure on by extending the fibres via
[TABLE]
with respect to compatible embeddings
[TABLE]
It remains to show that is odd. The preimage of under the composition is
[TABLE]
where . Hence we can identify this preimage with
[TABLE]
It follows that the preimage of under is diffeomorphic to
[TABLE]
This implies the claim by Remark 4.2. ∎
The following corollary will be used in Definition 5.1 to fix the choice of Kaluza–Klein circle bundles and construct the lift of spinors.
Corollary 4.6**.**
Let be an oriented Riemannian manifold.
- (1)
If is , let be a -structure on with characteristic line bundle and the Kaluza–Klein circle bundle with Euler class and Riemannian metric . Then there exists an odd spin structure on such that . 2. (2)
If is spin, let be a spin structure on and the Kaluza–Klein circle bundle with arbitrary Euler class and Riemannian metric . Then there exists an even spin structure on such that .
Proof.
In both situations the manifold is spin by Lemma 4.1, because in the first case and in the second case. The claims are thus direct consequences of the surjectivity of the map in Theorem 4.5. ∎
5. Spinors on Kaluza–Klein circle bundles over -manifolds
Let be a closed, oriented, Riemannian -manifold. Our goal is to lift spinors for a given -structure on to spinors for a spin structure on a suitable Kaluza–Klein circle bundle . It turns out that we can lift sections for a -family of -spinor bundles on to the same spinor bundle on . Let be the Kaluza–Klein circle bundle with Euler class and Riemannian metric and the complex line bundle with , unique up to isomorphism. According to [3], [1], [2] there are two cases:
- (1)
Let be an odd spin structure on and with characteristic line bundle . Let and denote the corresponding spinor bundles. Then sections of the spinor bundles can be lifted to sections of for all . 2. (2)
Let be an even spin structure on and . Consider the associated -structure and denote the corresponding spinor bundles by and . Then sections of the spinor bundles can be lifted to sections of for all .
Together with Corollary 4.6 this leads to the following construction:
Definition 5.1** (Choice of Kaluza–Klein circle bundles).**
Let be a closed, oriented, Riemannian -manifold and a -structure on with characteristic line bundle and spinor bundle . We consider two choices for the Kaluza–Klein circle bundle with Riemannian metric , depending on whether the spin structure on should be even or odd (see Table 1):
- (1)
Odd spin structure on : For this case the manifold can be spin or non-spin. Let be the Kaluza–Klein circle bundle with Euler class , a Hermitian connection on and an odd spin structure on with spinor bundle such that . 2. (2)
Even spin structure on : For this case the manifold has to be spin. Let be one of the spin structures on and the square root of determined by . Let be the Kaluza–Klein circle bundle with Euler class , a Hermitian connection on and an even spin structure on with spinor bundle such that .
In both cases we call the spin structure on a lift of the -structure (the isomorphism class of the lift is not necessarily uniquely determined by ). Sections of the -spinor bundles , with characteristic line bundles , lift to sections of the spinor bundle (see Remark 5.5 below).
Remark 5.2*.*
Suppose that is spin, one of the spin structures and a -structure with characteristic line bundle . Then
[TABLE]
This is the reason for choosing the circle bundle with Euler class in the second case of Definition 5.1.
Remark 5.3*.*
The numbers (if is odd) and (if is even) can be thought of as the -charges of the spinor bundle if the bundles and , respectively, correspond to charge . This follows because in the first case and in the second case if a spin structure exists on (which is always the case locally) (cf. [40]).
Remark 5.4*.*
In the case of an even spin structure on we exclude the case , corresponding to , for reasons explained in Remark 7.8.
Remark 5.5*.*
A more precise statement concerning the lifts of spinors is the following [3], [1], [2]: For both the case of an odd and even spin structure on , the -action on defines a Lie derivative of the Killing vector field on sections of the spinor bundle , denoted by
[TABLE]
The space of -sections can be decomposed into eigenspaces of :
- (1)
In the case of an odd spin structure there is a decomposition
[TABLE]
where is the eigenspace of with eigenvalue . 2. (2)
In the case of an even spin structure there is a decomposition
[TABLE]
where is the eigenspace of for the eigenvalue .
Note that by our assumption that is even, the bundles and have the same complex rank . For both cases in Definition 5.1 there exists a canonical bundle map
[TABLE]
that covers the projection and is fibrewise an isomorphism. It induces an isomorphism of Hilbert spaces
[TABLE]
so that the following diagram commutes for each spinor :
[TABLE]
The map commutes with Clifford multiplication:
[TABLE]
for all and with horizontal lift with respect to the Kaluza–Klein metric .
Definition 5.6**.**
We call the spinor the lift of the spinor . We denote often by .
Remark 5.7*.*
It follows that is a correspondence between spinors on of -charge and spinors on of eigenvalue under .
Remark 5.8*.*
The decomposition
[TABLE]
into positive and negative Weyl spinor bundles extends to all twisted spinor bundles . Via we get corresponding decompositions
[TABLE]
of spinors in .
Lemma 5.9**.**
Clifford multiplication on the spinor bundles and is related by
[TABLE]
for all , where the vector field is the horizontal lift (with respect to the metric ) of a vector field , is the vertical unit Killing vector field along the -fibres, denotes the volume form and . In particular, Clifford multiplication with exchanges and with preserves .
This follows from equations (3.4) and (5.1) where the orientation of is defined by followed by the orientation of .
Remark 5.10*.*
Analogous equations can be found in [35, eqns. (10), (11)], however, in this reference , corresponding to the representation of where acts as .
Remark 5.11*.*
We choose the invariant scalar products on and such that the bundle maps in Remark 5.5 are isometries on each fibre with respect to the induced bundle metrics. For spinors and , this implies
[TABLE]
6. Dirac operators
Let be a closed, oriented, Riemannian -manifold with -structure and one of the two Kaluza–Klein circle bundles given by Definition 5.1.
6.1. Clifford identities
We collect some identities involving Clifford multiplication. Let denote the self-dual and anti-self-dual -forms on , satisfying
[TABLE]
where is the Hodge star operator.
Lemma 6.1**.**
The following identities for Clifford multiplication hold:
- (1)
For we have . 2. (2)
For we have and
[TABLE]
where denotes the bundle of trace-free endomorphisms of . In particular,
[TABLE]
Proof.
These identities can be found in references on Seiberg–Witten theory, e.g. [34]. The Weyl spinor bundles are defined by in equation (3.3). ∎
This implies together with Lemma 5.9:
Proposition 6.2**.**
Let be a positive Weyl spinor, and with self-dual part . Then
[TABLE]
6.2. Relation between Dirac operators on and
Let be a Hermitian connection on the Hermitian complex line bundle or according to Table 1.
Definition 6.3**.**
We denote by the Hermitian connection on the line bundle induced from .
Together with the Levi–Civita connection of this defines the Dirac operator
[TABLE]
The connection and Riemannian metric define the Kaluza–Klein metric on , that yields the Dirac operator
[TABLE]
The curvature satisfies . According to Remark 5.5 there is an isometry
[TABLE]
Lemma 6.4**.**
The covariant derivatives on the spinor bundles and are related by:
[TABLE]
where with horizontal lift . This implies for the Dirac operator the formula
[TABLE]
For a proof of these formulas see [3, Lemma 4.3, Lemma 4.4 and the proof of Theorem 4.1]. The claim for the Dirac operator follows from the formula
[TABLE]
where is a local orthonormal frame on . The formula for the covariant derivative on in the case of has also been proved in [35, Proposition 3.2].
Recall that spinors satisfy . This implies (for the second statement we use Proposition 6.2):
Proposition 6.5**.**
The restriction
[TABLE]
is given by
[TABLE]
Using and setting the restriction
[TABLE]
for all is given by
[TABLE]
Remark 6.6*.*
The number can be interpreted as the mass of the lifted spinor , cf. Remark 9.2.
7. Lift of the Seiberg–Witten equations
7.1. The Seiberg–Witten equations
Let be a closed, oriented, Riemannian -manifold with a -structure and characteristic line bundle . We consider in this subsection a spinor and a Hermitian connection on . The Seiberg–Witten equations [40] for are
[TABLE]
We follow the notation in [31]. Here is the imaginary-valued self-dual -form in which under the fibrewise isomorphism
[TABLE]
corresponds to the trace-free endomorphism
[TABLE]
Using an explicit representation of the spinor space as a module over the Clifford algebra it can be shown [34] that maps the real forms isomorphically onto the skew-Hermitian trace-free endomorphisms of . The imaginary-valued forms thus map isomorphically onto the Hermitian trace-free endomorphisms of . Hence is indeed a form in . We also get:
Lemma 7.1**.**
Let , and . Then the following holds:
[TABLE]
Proof.
This follows from the formula
[TABLE]
that holds for all as in the statement of the lemma. ∎
Lemma 7.2**.**
For we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
With respect to a local orthonormal frame for we can write (see [31])
[TABLE]
hence the action of on is given by
[TABLE]
∎
One often considers the more general Seiberg–Witten equations
[TABLE]
where is an arbitrary perturbation.
Proposition 7.3**.**
If satisfy
[TABLE]
then
[TABLE]
Conversely suppose that satisfy equation (7.4) and
[TABLE]
If does not vanish identically on , then satisfy equation (7.3).
Proof.
The first claim is immediate by Lemma 7.2. For the converse, equation (7.4) implies
[TABLE]
Lemma 7.1 implies that equation (7.3) holds in all points where is non-zero. Suppose that is non-zero in some point . Then by continuity it is non-zero also in a small open neighbourhood of . Hence has to vanish on . Since is in the kernel of , the unique continuation property of Dirac operators [4, 9, 7] and the assumption that is connected by Convention Convention imply that vanishes identically on , contradicting the assumption. Therefore equation (7.3) holds in all points of . ∎
Recall that a pair is called irreducible if the spinor does not vanish identically on . Similarly we define for the Kaluza–Klein circle bundle :
Definition 7.4**.**
A spinor is called irreducible if does not vanish identically on .
7.2. Main theorem
We can now state our main theorem.
Theorem 7.5**.**
Let be a closed, oriented, Riemannian -manifold and a -structure on with characteristic line bundle . With the notations from Definition 5.1 let be one of the two principal circle bundles with Euler class and a lift of to a spin structure on . We define a map
[TABLE]
for a positive Weyl spinor , Hermitian connection on and perturbation as follows:
- •
* is the lift of *
- •
* is the Kaluza–Klein metric on determined by and the connection on according to Definition 2.1.*
Let . Then the following holds for :
- (1)
If is a solution of the Seiberg–Witten equations
[TABLE]
for parameters , then is a solution of the equation
[TABLE]
for parameters . 2. (2)
Conversely, if is an irreducible solution of equation (7.6) for parameters , then is an irreducible solution of equations (7.5) for parameters .
Proof.
If satisfy the Seiberg–Witten equations (7.5), then by Proposition 7.3
[TABLE]
Hence by Proposition 6.5 and Remark 5.11
[TABLE]
The converse follows, because the term in the second line of equation (7.7) is an element of , hence together with
[TABLE]
we get
[TABLE]
Under the assumption that somewhere on , Proposition 7.3 implies the Seiberg–Witten equations (7.5). ∎
Remark 7.6*.*
The spinor is always a solution of equation (7.6). The corresponding pair is a solution of equations (7.5) only if .
Remark 7.7*.*
Theorem 1.1 is the special case of Theorem 7.5 for odd spin structure on , and .
Remark 7.8*.*
Equation (7.6) does not make sense if , hence we exclude the case for an even spin structure on .
Remark 7.9*.*
Equation (7.6) depends on the relation between Clifford multiplication on and , cf. equation (3.4) and Lemma 5.9. If the other choice with is made, then all terms on the right hand side of equation (7.6) change sign:
[TABLE]
8. Invariance under gauge transformations and charge conjugation
8.1. Gauge transformations
For a smooth function let
[TABLE]
Consider the gauge transformation given by Table 2.
In the situation of Theorem 7.5, if is a solution to the Seiberg–Witten equations (7.5), then so is for every smooth map .
On the principal circle bundle define
[TABLE]
and the Dirac operator associated to the spin structure and Riemannian metric . We get:
Proposition 8.1**.**
With the notation from Theorem 7.5 let
[TABLE]
and . If is a solution to the equation
[TABLE]
with parameters , then is a solution to the equation
[TABLE]
with parameters for every smooth map .
Proof.
If , the statement is clear. If does not vanish identically on we first apply the reverse implication of Theorem 7.5 to show that is a solution of the Seiberg–Witten equations for parameters . Applying the gauge transformation and again Theorem 7.5 the claim follows. ∎
8.2. Charge conjugation
Charge conjugation is an involution that acts on the spinor bundle by complex conjugation,
[TABLE]
which is a complex anti-linear isomorphism of Clifford modules. It also maps
[TABLE]
The corresponding map on the charge is given by
[TABLE]
where the bundles and , respectively, still have charge , cf. Remark 5.3.
For the lift of the charge conjugated pair the data for the Kaluza–Klein circle bundle stay the same and
[TABLE]
Charge conjugation maps solutions to the Seiberg–Witten equations with parameters to solutions with parameters . This implies:
Proposition 8.2**.**
With the notation from Theorem 7.5 let
[TABLE]
and . If is a solution to the equation
[TABLE]
with parameters , then is a solution to the equation
[TABLE]
with parameters .
9. Kaluza–Klein circle bundles with fibres of length
The Kaluza–Klein metric can be generalized as follows: Let be a smooth positive function on and . Then
[TABLE]
is again a Riemannian metric on . The only difference to the original metric is that
[TABLE]
i.e. the circle fibres over a point have length . In the physics literature is written as and the scalar field is sometimes called the dilaton.
The vector field has unit length, hence the relation in Lemma 5.9 between Clifford multiplication on the spinor bundles is given by
[TABLE]
The formulas in Proposition 6.2 change accordingly to
[TABLE]
The formula in Proposition 6.5 for the Dirac operator then becomes (see [3] for the case of constant and [1] for the general case)
[TABLE]
with as before. We then get:
Corollary 9.1**.**
Consider the Kaluza–Klein metric given by equation (9.1) with a smooth positive function and . Define a function by , where is the -charge as before. Then is nowhere zero on (since by assumption) and the statements in Theorem 7.5 and equation (7.6) continue to hold with replaced by :
[TABLE]
Remark 9.2*.*
Suppose that and the circle radius is constant. Then equation (9.2)
[TABLE]
is the field equation of a -dimensional Gross–Neveu model [22] (in Euclidean signature) with mass and coupling constant , given by the Lagrangian
[TABLE]
where is the Hermitian bundle metric on . Note that and if . (The spinor on has charge and mass zero and the spinor on has mass and charge zero. If , then the absolute value of the mass of is large, and if , then is small. The interaction described by the term behaves in the opposite way.)
Remark 9.3*.*
In Section 10 we need the following formulas: Suppose that is constant and the Kaluza–Klein metric (9.1). Then the circle fibres of are totally geodesic. For the curvature -form and vectors define (see [8, Chapter 9])
[TABLE]
where is an orthonormal frame in . The Ricci curvature of then satisfies
[TABLE]
If is coclosed and thus harmonic, we have in addition
[TABLE]
10. Kähler–Einstein -manifolds and eigenspinors on Sasaki -manifolds
Spinors of constant length are an interesting case of equation (9.2), e.g. for constant radius and perturbation :
[TABLE]
Hence is an eigenspinor of .
Remark 10.1*.*
In the special case that , the spinor is harmonic, . The points are the non-zero extrema of the potential
[TABLE]
appearing in the Gross–Neveu Lagrangian (9.3) (which are minima for and maxima for ).
Suppose that is an arbitrary spinor and . Then is equivalent to . Positive Weyl spinors of constant length are related to almost complex structures on : Suppose that is a -compatible almost complex structure on , so that
[TABLE]
Then , with self-dual fundamental -form defined by
[TABLE]
is an almost Hermitian structure on . There exists a canonical -structure on with spinor bundles
[TABLE]
We can write , where the canonical and anti-canonical line bundles are
[TABLE]
(we use the same symbol for the canonical bundle as for the unit Killing vector field in Section 2; the meaning should be clear from the context). The characteristic line bundle of is . The spinor has constant length . Conversely, every -structure with a positive spinor of constant length arises in this way for a -orthogonal almost complex structure (see [32], [21]).
Lemma 10.2**.**
Let be a -compatible almost complex structure on . The -structures and have positive Weyl spinor bundles
[TABLE]
with characteristic line bundles and , respectively. The -structure is the charge conjugate of ,
[TABLE]
Clifford multiplication of the fundamental -form on is given by
[TABLE]
For the expression for see e.g. [34, p. 112]. We consider the particular case [40], [15], [34] where is a Kähler surface with integrable complex structure , Kähler form (which is a self-dual, harmonic -form) and compatible Riemannian metric . In this situation explicit solutions to the Seiberg–Witten equations, with spinors of constant length, can be found. The following lemma summarizes some well-known facts about Kähler–Einstein manifolds, see e.g. [8].
Lemma 10.3**.**
Let be a Kähler manifold. The Levi–Civita connection of defines Hermitian connections on and on . If the metric is Einstein with Einstein constant , i.e.
[TABLE]
or equivalently with the Ricci form , then the curvature -forms of these connections are self-dual and given by
[TABLE]
We have
[TABLE]
Proposition 10.4**.**
Let be a closed Kähler–Einstein surface with Einstein constant . We consider the Seiberg–Witten equations
[TABLE]
with perturbation , where .
- (1)
For the -structure , the connection on and the spinor
[TABLE]
are a solution to the perturbed Seiberg–Witten equations (10.2) for all . We have . 2. (2)
For the -structure , the connection on and the spinor
[TABLE]
are a solution to the perturbed Seiberg–Witten equations (10.2) for all . We have .
Proof.
We first consider the case with -structure . For a general Kähler surface, the Dirac operator on associated to the connection on is given by [25]
[TABLE]
For a spinor we have by equation (7.2)
[TABLE]
If is Kähler–Einstein with Einstein constant , then by equation (10.1) and Lemma 10.3
[TABLE]
If is a constant, the first equation in (10.2) is satisfied and the second equation reduces to . This implies the claim in the first case.
For the -structure with connection on and spinor it follows analogously that
[TABLE]
where the third equation holds in the Kähler–Einstein case. If is a constant, the first equation in (10.2) is satisfied and the second equation reduces to . This implies the claim in the second case. ∎
Remark 10.5*.*
In particular, if , then the perturbation has to be chosen non-zero.
The following Boothby-Wang construction of Sasaki structures on principal circle bundles over Kähler manifolds, whose Kähler form represents an integral class up to a real multiple, is well-known [24].
Lemma 10.6**.**
Suppose that is a Kähler manifold so that lies in the image of in for some . Let be the principal circle bundle with Euler class and a connection on with curvature -form satisfying . Then satisfies and together with the Kaluza–Klein metric
[TABLE]
defines a Sasaki structure on .
We apply this construction in the case of Kähler–Einstein surfaces, where represents an integral cohomology class.
Proposition 10.7**.**
Suppose that is a closed Kähler–Einstein surface with Einstein constant . Let be one of the two Kaluza–Klein circle bundles with Euler class , connection , constant radius and Kaluza–Klein metric
[TABLE]
chosen as in Table 3.
A Sasaki structure on is defined by and the -form on , satisfying
[TABLE]
Then
[TABLE]
hence the Sasaki structure is Sasaki -Einstein. Furthermore, the -manifold is spin and a lift of the -structure is chosen as in Definition 5.1.
Proof.
See [13], [19] for the definition of Sasaki -Einstein structures. Note that in both cases , depending on whether the sign of is . The formula for the Ricci curvature follows from Remark 9.3, because the Kähler form is harmonic and , hence for both cases
[TABLE]
∎
Remark 10.8*.*
Suppose that the Einstein constant is positive and define for a constant . Then is Kähler–Einstein with . In particular, can be normalized such that . Then is a Sasaki–Einstein metric with .
Theorem 10.9**.**
Let be a closed Kähler–Einstein surface with Einstein constant and one of the two Kaluza–Klein circle bundles with Sasaki -Einstein structure and spin structure given by Proposition 10.7.
Consider the solutions , with , of the Seiberg–Witten equations on with perturbation (for a suitable ) given by Proposition 10.4. Define
[TABLE]
- (1)
For the solution the lifted spinor satisfies
[TABLE] 2. (2)
For the solution the lifted spinor satisfies
[TABLE]
Proof.
This follows from
[TABLE]
with and from Proposition 10.4 and from Table 3. ∎
Remark 10.10*.*
The eigenvalues can also be written as in the first case and in the second case, which relates them to the mass of the spinor .
Remark 10.11*.*
If and is normalized such that , the spinor is harmonic in both cases, .
Remark 10.12*.*
Suppose that . Then the scalar curvature of is positive and the lifted spinors are eigenspinors of the Dirac operator with eigenvalue
[TABLE]
According to a theorem of Friedrich [16] the eigenvalues have to satisfy
[TABLE]
i.e. in our situation
[TABLE]
This inequality holds, because the left-hand side is equal to the square . Equality in (10.3) holds if and only if , i.e. is a Sasaki–Einstein manifold by Remark 10.8. In this case the eigenvalues are and by [16] the spinors are Killing spinors,
[TABLE]
The existence of two linearly independent Killing spinors on complete, simply connected Sasaki–Einstein -manifolds is well-known [18], [6] (by the Bonnet–Myers Theorem the fundamental group of any complete Sasaki–Einstein manifold is finite).
Lower bounds on the eigenvalues of have also been proved in [28, Theorem 6.1] for the case of , i.e. Einstein constant , which for certain values of are improvements of the estimate (10.3). It can be checked that satisfy these bounds as well.
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank the anonymous referee for a number of comments and corrections that helped to improve the quality of the paper. I would also like to thank Bernd Ammann and Uwe Semmelmann for discussions on a preprint version.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Bernd Ammann. The Dirac operator on collapsing S 1 superscript 𝑆 1 S^{1} -bundles. In Séminaire de Théorie Spectrale et Géométrie, Vol. 16, Année 1997–1998 , volume 16 of Sémin. Théor. Spectr. Géom. , pages 33–42. Univ. Grenoble I, Saint-Martin-d’Hères, 1998.
- 2[2] Bernd Ammann. Spin-Strukturen und das Spektrum des Dirac-Operators . Ph D thesis, University of Freiburg, 1998.
- 3[3] Bernd Ammann and Christian Bär. The Dirac operator on nilmanifolds and collapsing circle bundles. Ann. Global Anal. Geom. , 16(3):221–253, 1998.
- 4[4] N. Aronszajn. A unique continuation theorem for solutions of elliptic partial differential equations or inequalities of second order. J. Math. Pures Appl. (9) , 36:235–249, 1957.
- 5[5] Michael Atiyah and Friedrich Hirzebruch. Spin-manifolds and group actions. In Essays on Topology and Related Topics (Mémoires dédiés à Georges de Rham) , pages 18–28. Springer, New York, 1970.
- 6[6] Christian Bär. Real Killing spinors and holonomy. Comm. Math. Phys. , 154(3):509–521, 1993.
- 7[7] Christian Bär. On nodal sets for Dirac and Laplace operators. Comm. Math. Phys. , 188(3):709–721, 1997.
- 8[8] Arthur L. Besse. Einstein manifolds , volume 10 of Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete (3) [Results in Mathematics and Related Areas (3)] . Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1987.
