3
$\begingroup$

I am dealing with the following concrete situation that could be familiar to Riemannian geometers more experienced than myself.

Suppose that $M$ is a smooth compact manifold of dimension $m$ and $g$ is a smooth Riemann metric on $M$. $\newcommand{\ve}{{\varepsilon}}$ $\newcommand{\pa}{\partial}$ Suppose that $(g^\ve)_{\ve>0}$ is a family of smooth Riemann metrics satisfying the following properties.

A. We know that for any $p\in M$ there exists an open neighborhood $U\ni p$ and local coordinates $x^1,\dotsc, x^m$ on $U$ such that

$$ g^\ve_{ij} \to g_{ij} $$

uniformly on the compacts of $U$, where

$$ g^\ve =\sum_{i,j} g^\ve_{ij}dx^idx^j,\;\;g=\sum_{i,j}g_{ij}dx^idx^j. $$

B. (Edited following Deane Yang's inquiry.) The note by $Gr_2(TM)$ the bundle of Grassmanians of $2$-planes in the tangent bundle. The sectional curvature $K^\ve$ can then be viewed as a function $K^\ve: Gr_2(TM)\to\mathbb{R}$. We know that there exists a smooth function $K^0: Gr_2(TM)\to \mathbb{R}$ such that $K^\ve\to K^0$ uniformly.

Question. Can we conclude that the function $K^0$ in B is the sectional curvature of $g$?

$\endgroup$
7
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I just want to confirm that the sectional curvature converges only for co-ordinate 2-planes and not for other 2-planes? Others can answer your question better than me, but my experience has been that controlling the sectional curvature only along co-ordinate 2-planes (for a fixed set of co-ordinates) is not enough. $\endgroup$
    – Deane Yang
    May 15, 2012 at 20:46
  • $\begingroup$ It's a bit better than the uniform convergence mentioned in my question. let me edit the question. $\endgroup$ May 15, 2012 at 22:14
  • $\begingroup$ Have you looked at the paper by Stefan Peters, "Convergence of riemannian manifolds", Compositio Math 62 (1987) 3-16? You can't conclude that the limiting sectional curvature is continuous but it is bounded almost everywhere. $\endgroup$
    – Deane Yang
    May 15, 2012 at 22:41
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I have looked at the paper you mentioned. That paper uses only the assumption that $K^\varepsilon$ is uniformly bounded. In my case $K^\varepsilon$ is convergent to a smooth limit. The question is weather this limit is indeed the curvature of the limiting metric $g$ which we know is smooth. $\endgroup$ May 16, 2012 at 0:10
  • $\begingroup$ You're absolutely right, and Anton Petrunin has a much better answer to your question. $\endgroup$
    – Deane Yang
    May 16, 2012 at 8:05

1 Answer 1

6
$\begingroup$

Yes, it is true. Here is a sketch of proof, but I am sure that there is a simper way to see it.

Note that by Gauss–Bonnet, this is true in dimension 2.

Assume we know it in dimension $n-1$.

There is a construction of smooth convex hypersurfaces $H^\varepsilon$ in $(M,g^\varepsilon)$ which converge nicely to a smooth hypersurfaces $H$ in $(M,g^\varepsilon)$. "Nicely" means that one can apply the induction hypothesis for $H^\varepsilon\to H$. Taking many hypersurfaces like that plus linear algebra finishes the proof.

The construction. To construct $H^\varepsilon$ near $p\in M$, choose n points $a_1,a_2,\dots a_n$ such that in all the metrics the angles $\angle a_ipa_j\approx\pi/2$ for all $i\ne j$. Then define $$H^\varepsilon=\{\\, x\in M\mid \sum\phi(|a_i-x|_{g^\varepsilon}-|a_i-p|_{g^\varepsilon})= 0 \\,\}$$ where $\phi(0)=0$, $\phi'(0)=1$ and $\phi''\ll -2$.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ @ Anton Thank you for your answer. I need to process the strategy that you outlined above. I have to admit that I do not see why $H^\varepsilon$ is smooth and what is the role of the angle condition that you mentioned. $\endgroup$ May 16, 2012 at 9:35
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Liviu, sorry, it is very cryptic. Look at 4.3 in our "Extremal subsets in ..." and then look at Lemma B.5 in journals.tubitak.gov.tr/math/issues/mat-03-27-1/… . Hope it helps. $\endgroup$ May 16, 2012 at 10:26
  • $\begingroup$ @ Anton: Thanks for the ref. I'll check it out. $\endgroup$ May 16, 2012 at 12:45
  • $\begingroup$ @Anton: Perhaps it is obvious, but why does it follow from Gauss-Bonnet in dimension 2? $\endgroup$
    – Dan Lee
    May 16, 2012 at 18:31
  • $\begingroup$ @Dan. Fix 3 very close points, let $\triangle^\varepsilon$ be geodesic triangles for $g^\varepsilon$ with the vertices at these points. Note that the angles and area of $\triangle^\varepsilon$ converge to the angles and area of $\triangle^0$. Apply Gauss–Bonnet. $\endgroup$ May 17, 2012 at 2:17

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.