Skip to main content
deleted 792 characters in body
Source Link
Otis Chodosh
  • 7.2k
  • 3
  • 25
  • 56

I'm slightly confused by your notation. I think that you have switched the unit normal and conormal. In particular inI misunderstood the physicist GR notation, in Question 1. The bold statement is incorrect. Consider the coefficients of a vector field should havefunction raised indices, which you can remember by $$ V = V^i \frac{\partial}{\partial x^i} $$ so you're summing over one "raised"$\tau(x) = 2x$ on $i$$\mathbb{R}$ and one "lowered"the function $i$$k(x) : = x$ on $\mathbb{R}$. Then $S_t = \{t/2\}$. So, I think that you're mixing up vector fields and 1-forms.

But $\xi^a$ is the unit normal vector field toat time $\{\tau = c\}$ as far as I can tell, so what you've written in "Question 1" is correct.

As for why Question 1 holds$t$, perhaps you should review the definition of the Lie derivative. The correct "definition"value of the Lie derivative is the one given here, namely if$k(x)$ on $T$$S_t$ is a tensor and $\xi$ a vector field generating$t/2$. So, the pathrate of diffeomorphisms $\varphi_t$ then $$ \mathcal{L}_\xi T = \frac{d}{dt}\Big|_{t=0} \varphi_t^* T. $$ So, in your case $\xi$change is a vector field on $\Sigma$ and along flowlines of$1/2$. On the other hand $\xi$, $\tau$ is increasing at a constant unit rate would be (do you see why?). Now$\frac{\partial}{\partial x}$, you should think through why this answers Question 1so $\mathscr{L}_\xi k = 1$.


As for question 2, I am not going to do the computation for you, but let me explain in modern notation how to understand. I will write $S_c:=\{\tau=t\}$ and $H$ for the mean curvature of $S_t$. Consider the quantity $$ \int_{S_t} H^2 d\mu_t $$ We let $u = |\nabla \tau|^{-1}$ as above. This is often called the lapse function. Now, how do we compute the rate of change of this integral? $$ \frac{d}{dt}\int_{S_t} H^2 d\mu_t = \int_{S_t} \frac{d}{dt} H^2 d\mu_t + \int_{S_t} H^2 \frac{d}{dt} d\mu_t $$ (here, I am thinking of integrating over a fixed, abstract sphere, where the function $H$ and measure $\mu_t$ are time dependent).

What is the first term? To differentiate $H$, we must use the second variation formula, giving $$ \frac{d}{dt} H = -\Delta_{S_t} u -(Ric(\xi,\xi)+\Vert h \Vert^2)u. $$ Here, $h$ is the second fundamental form. To differentiate the second term, one should use the first variation formula, giving $$ \frac{d}{dt} d\mu_t = uH d\mu_t. $$ Thus, putting these together yields $$ \frac{d}{dt}\int_{S_t} H^2 d\mu_t = \int_{S_t} \left(-2H \Delta u - 2H(Ric(\xi,\xi) + \Vert h\Vert^2)u + uH^3 \right) d\mu_t $$ Now, using the Gauss equations, we have that $$ 2(Ric(\xi,\xi) + \Vert h\Vert^2) = R-\mathcal{R}+\Vert h \Vert^2 + H^2 $$ Inserting this into the above equation yields $$ \frac{d}{dt}\int_{S_t} H^2 d\mu_t = \int_{S_t} \left(-2H \Delta u - uHR +uH\mathcal{R} -uH\Vert h\Vert^2 \right) d\mu_t $$ This is exactly your equation.


I'll mention that an apt choice is $u=\frac{1}{H}$. This yields the so-called inverse mean curvature flow. It would be very instructive for you to plug this in and try to find a nice differential inequality for what you call $C(\tau)$ assuming that $R\geq0$.

Of course, Geroch is unconcerned with the existence of such a function $\tau$. This turns out to be a very serious problem, and was only recently solved in the beautiful work of Huisken--Ilmanen in their proof of the Penrose inequality: http://projecteuclid.org/DPubS?service=UI&version=1.0&verb=Display&handle=euclid.jdg/1090349447. In particular, the computation I have just done is contained in this article for the special case of inverse mean curvature flow (as this is the only case that is really important)

I'm slightly confused by your notation. I think that you have switched the unit normal and conormal. In particular in the physicist GR notation, the coefficients of a vector field should have raised indices, which you can remember by $$ V = V^i \frac{\partial}{\partial x^i} $$ so you're summing over one "raised" $i$ and one "lowered" $i$. So, I think that you're mixing up vector fields and 1-forms.

But $\xi^a$ is the unit normal vector field to $\{\tau = c\}$ as far as I can tell, so what you've written in "Question 1" is correct.

As for why Question 1 holds, perhaps you should review the definition of the Lie derivative. The correct "definition" of the Lie derivative is the one given here, namely if $T$ is a tensor and $\xi$ a vector field generating the path of diffeomorphisms $\varphi_t$ then $$ \mathcal{L}_\xi T = \frac{d}{dt}\Big|_{t=0} \varphi_t^* T. $$ So, in your case $\xi$ is a vector field on $\Sigma$ and along flowlines of $\xi$, $\tau$ is increasing at a constant unit rate (do you see why?). Now, you should think through why this answers Question 1.


As for question 2, I am not going to do the computation for you, but let me explain in modern notation how to understand. I will write $S_c:=\{\tau=t\}$ and $H$ for the mean curvature of $S_t$. Consider the quantity $$ \int_{S_t} H^2 d\mu_t $$ We let $u = |\nabla \tau|^{-1}$ as above. This is often called the lapse function. Now, how do we compute the rate of change of this integral? $$ \frac{d}{dt}\int_{S_t} H^2 d\mu_t = \int_{S_t} \frac{d}{dt} H^2 d\mu_t + \int_{S_t} H^2 \frac{d}{dt} d\mu_t $$ (here, I am thinking of integrating over a fixed, abstract sphere, where the function $H$ and measure $\mu_t$ are time dependent).

What is the first term? To differentiate $H$, we must use the second variation formula, giving $$ \frac{d}{dt} H = -\Delta_{S_t} u -(Ric(\xi,\xi)+\Vert h \Vert^2)u. $$ Here, $h$ is the second fundamental form. To differentiate the second term, one should use the first variation formula, giving $$ \frac{d}{dt} d\mu_t = uH d\mu_t. $$ Thus, putting these together yields $$ \frac{d}{dt}\int_{S_t} H^2 d\mu_t = \int_{S_t} \left(-2H \Delta u - 2H(Ric(\xi,\xi) + \Vert h\Vert^2)u + uH^3 \right) d\mu_t $$ Now, using the Gauss equations, we have that $$ 2(Ric(\xi,\xi) + \Vert h\Vert^2) = R-\mathcal{R}+\Vert h \Vert^2 + H^2 $$ Inserting this into the above equation yields $$ \frac{d}{dt}\int_{S_t} H^2 d\mu_t = \int_{S_t} \left(-2H \Delta u - uHR +uH\mathcal{R} -uH\Vert h\Vert^2 \right) d\mu_t $$ This is exactly your equation.


I'll mention that an apt choice is $u=\frac{1}{H}$. This yields the so-called inverse mean curvature flow. It would be very instructive for you to plug this in and try to find a nice differential inequality for what you call $C(\tau)$ assuming that $R\geq0$.

Of course, Geroch is unconcerned with the existence of such a function $\tau$. This turns out to be a very serious problem, and was only recently solved in the beautiful work of Huisken--Ilmanen in their proof of the Penrose inequality: http://projecteuclid.org/DPubS?service=UI&version=1.0&verb=Display&handle=euclid.jdg/1090349447. In particular, the computation I have just done is contained in this article for the special case of inverse mean curvature flow (as this is the only case that is really important)

I think that I misunderstood the notation in Question 1. The bold statement is incorrect. Consider the function $\tau(x) = 2x$ on $\mathbb{R}$ and the function $k(x) : = x$ on $\mathbb{R}$. Then $S_t = \{t/2\}$. So, at time $t$, the value of $k(x)$ on $S_t$ is $t/2$. So, the rate of change is $1/2$. On the other hand $\xi$ would be $\frac{\partial}{\partial x}$, so $\mathscr{L}_\xi k = 1$.


As for question 2, I am not going to do the computation for you, but let me explain in modern notation how to understand. I will write $S_c:=\{\tau=t\}$ and $H$ for the mean curvature of $S_t$. Consider the quantity $$ \int_{S_t} H^2 d\mu_t $$ We let $u = |\nabla \tau|^{-1}$ as above. This is often called the lapse function. Now, how do we compute the rate of change of this integral? $$ \frac{d}{dt}\int_{S_t} H^2 d\mu_t = \int_{S_t} \frac{d}{dt} H^2 d\mu_t + \int_{S_t} H^2 \frac{d}{dt} d\mu_t $$ (here, I am thinking of integrating over a fixed, abstract sphere, where the function $H$ and measure $\mu_t$ are time dependent).

What is the first term? To differentiate $H$, we must use the second variation formula, giving $$ \frac{d}{dt} H = -\Delta_{S_t} u -(Ric(\xi,\xi)+\Vert h \Vert^2)u. $$ Here, $h$ is the second fundamental form. To differentiate the second term, one should use the first variation formula, giving $$ \frac{d}{dt} d\mu_t = uH d\mu_t. $$ Thus, putting these together yields $$ \frac{d}{dt}\int_{S_t} H^2 d\mu_t = \int_{S_t} \left(-2H \Delta u - 2H(Ric(\xi,\xi) + \Vert h\Vert^2)u + uH^3 \right) d\mu_t $$ Now, using the Gauss equations, we have that $$ 2(Ric(\xi,\xi) + \Vert h\Vert^2) = R-\mathcal{R}+\Vert h \Vert^2 + H^2 $$ Inserting this into the above equation yields $$ \frac{d}{dt}\int_{S_t} H^2 d\mu_t = \int_{S_t} \left(-2H \Delta u - uHR +uH\mathcal{R} -uH\Vert h\Vert^2 \right) d\mu_t $$ This is exactly your equation.


I'll mention that an apt choice is $u=\frac{1}{H}$. This yields the so-called inverse mean curvature flow. It would be very instructive for you to plug this in and try to find a nice differential inequality for what you call $C(\tau)$ assuming that $R\geq0$.

Of course, Geroch is unconcerned with the existence of such a function $\tau$. This turns out to be a very serious problem, and was only recently solved in the beautiful work of Huisken--Ilmanen in their proof of the Penrose inequality: http://projecteuclid.org/DPubS?service=UI&version=1.0&verb=Display&handle=euclid.jdg/1090349447. In particular, the computation I have just done is contained in this article for the special case of inverse mean curvature flow (as this is the only case that is really important)

Source Link
Otis Chodosh
  • 7.2k
  • 3
  • 25
  • 56

I'm slightly confused by your notation. I think that you have switched the unit normal and conormal. In particular in the physicist GR notation, the coefficients of a vector field should have raised indices, which you can remember by $$ V = V^i \frac{\partial}{\partial x^i} $$ so you're summing over one "raised" $i$ and one "lowered" $i$. So, I think that you're mixing up vector fields and 1-forms.

But $\xi^a$ is the unit normal vector field to $\{\tau = c\}$ as far as I can tell, so what you've written in "Question 1" is correct.

As for why Question 1 holds, perhaps you should review the definition of the Lie derivative. The correct "definition" of the Lie derivative is the one given here, namely if $T$ is a tensor and $\xi$ a vector field generating the path of diffeomorphisms $\varphi_t$ then $$ \mathcal{L}_\xi T = \frac{d}{dt}\Big|_{t=0} \varphi_t^* T. $$ So, in your case $\xi$ is a vector field on $\Sigma$ and along flowlines of $\xi$, $\tau$ is increasing at a constant unit rate (do you see why?). Now, you should think through why this answers Question 1.


As for question 2, I am not going to do the computation for you, but let me explain in modern notation how to understand. I will write $S_c:=\{\tau=t\}$ and $H$ for the mean curvature of $S_t$. Consider the quantity $$ \int_{S_t} H^2 d\mu_t $$ We let $u = |\nabla \tau|^{-1}$ as above. This is often called the lapse function. Now, how do we compute the rate of change of this integral? $$ \frac{d}{dt}\int_{S_t} H^2 d\mu_t = \int_{S_t} \frac{d}{dt} H^2 d\mu_t + \int_{S_t} H^2 \frac{d}{dt} d\mu_t $$ (here, I am thinking of integrating over a fixed, abstract sphere, where the function $H$ and measure $\mu_t$ are time dependent).

What is the first term? To differentiate $H$, we must use the second variation formula, giving $$ \frac{d}{dt} H = -\Delta_{S_t} u -(Ric(\xi,\xi)+\Vert h \Vert^2)u. $$ Here, $h$ is the second fundamental form. To differentiate the second term, one should use the first variation formula, giving $$ \frac{d}{dt} d\mu_t = uH d\mu_t. $$ Thus, putting these together yields $$ \frac{d}{dt}\int_{S_t} H^2 d\mu_t = \int_{S_t} \left(-2H \Delta u - 2H(Ric(\xi,\xi) + \Vert h\Vert^2)u + uH^3 \right) d\mu_t $$ Now, using the Gauss equations, we have that $$ 2(Ric(\xi,\xi) + \Vert h\Vert^2) = R-\mathcal{R}+\Vert h \Vert^2 + H^2 $$ Inserting this into the above equation yields $$ \frac{d}{dt}\int_{S_t} H^2 d\mu_t = \int_{S_t} \left(-2H \Delta u - uHR +uH\mathcal{R} -uH\Vert h\Vert^2 \right) d\mu_t $$ This is exactly your equation.


I'll mention that an apt choice is $u=\frac{1}{H}$. This yields the so-called inverse mean curvature flow. It would be very instructive for you to plug this in and try to find a nice differential inequality for what you call $C(\tau)$ assuming that $R\geq0$.

Of course, Geroch is unconcerned with the existence of such a function $\tau$. This turns out to be a very serious problem, and was only recently solved in the beautiful work of Huisken--Ilmanen in their proof of the Penrose inequality: http://projecteuclid.org/DPubS?service=UI&version=1.0&verb=Display&handle=euclid.jdg/1090349447. In particular, the computation I have just done is contained in this article for the special case of inverse mean curvature flow (as this is the only case that is really important)