![MathJax Logo](/templates/jsp/_style2/_tandf/pb2/images/math-jax.gif)
Abstract
In this paper, we discuss the general existence theory of Dirac-harmonic maps from closed surfaces via the heat flow for α-Dirac-harmonic maps and blow-up analysis. More precisely, given any initial map along which the Dirac operator has nontrivial minimal kernel, we first prove the short time existence of the heat flow for α-Dirac-harmonic maps. The obstacle to the global existence is the singular time when the kernel of the Dirac operator no longer stays minimal along the flow. In this case, the kernel may not be continuous even if the map is smooth with respect to time. To overcome this issue, we use the analyticity of the target manifold to obtain the density of the maps along which the Dirac operator has minimal kernel in the homotopy class of the given initial map. Then, when we arrive at the singular time, this density allows us to pick another map which has lower energy to restart the flow. Thus, we get a flow which may not be continuous at a set of isolated points. Furthermore, with the help of small energy regularity and blow-up analysis, we finally get the existence of nontrivial α-Dirac-harmonic maps () from closed surfaces. Moreover, if the target manifold does not admit any nontrivial harmonic sphere, then the map part stays in the same homotopy class as the given initial map.
1. Introduction
Motivated by the supersymmetric nonlinear sigma model from quantum field theory, see [Citation1], Dirac-harmonic maps from spin Riemann surfaces into Riemannian manifolds were introduced in [Citation2]. They are generalizations of the classical harmonic maps and harmonic spinors. From the variational point of view, they are critical points of a conformal invariant action functional whose Euler-Lagrange equations are a coupled elliptic system consisting of a second order equation and a Dirac equation.
It turns out that the existence of Dirac-harmonic maps from closed surfaces is a very difficult problem. Different from the Dirichlet problem, even if there is no bubble, the nontriviality of the limit is also an issue. Here, a solution is considered trivial if the spinor part ψ vanishes identically. So far, there are only a few results about Dirac-harmonic maps from closed surfaces, see [Citation3–5] for uncoupled Dirac-harmonic maps (here uncoupled means that the map part is harmonic; by an observation of Bernd Ammann and Johannes Wittmann, this is the typical case) based on index theory and the Riemann-Roch theorem, respectively. In an important contribution [Citation6], Wittmann investigated the heat flow introduced in [Citation7] and showed the short-time existence of this flow; for reasons that will become apparent below this is not as easy as for other parabolic systems. The problem has also been approached by linking and Morse-Floer theory. See [Citation8, Citation9] for one dimension and [Citation10] for the two dimensional case.
In critical point theory, the Palais-Smale condition is a very strong and useful tool. It fails, however, for many of the basic problems in geometric analysis, and in particular for the energy functional of harmonic maps from spheres [Citation11]. Therefore, it is not expected to be true for Dirac-harmonic maps. To overcome this problem for harmonic maps, Sacks-Uhlenbeck [Citation12] introduced the notion of α-harmonic maps where the integrand in the energy functional is raised to a power These α-harmonic maps then satisfy the Palais-Smale condition. However, when we analogously introduce α-Dirac-harmonic maps, the Palais-Smale condition fails due to the following existence result for uncoupled α-Dirac-harmonic maps, which directly follows from the proof of Theorem 4.1.
Theorem 1.1.
For a closed spin surface M and a closed manifold N, consider a homotopy class of maps
for which
is non-trivial. Assume that
is an α-harmonic map. Then there is a real vector space V of real dimension 4 such that all
, are α-Dirac-harmonic maps.
To overcome this issue, in [Citation8, Citation9], the authors add an extra nonlinear term to the action functional of Dirac-geodesics. As for the two dimensional case [Citation10], we even cannot directly prove the Palais-Smale condition for the action functional of perturbed Dirac-harmonic maps into non-flat target manifolds. Instead, we are only able to prove it for perturbed α-Dirac-harmonic maps, and then approximate the α-Dirac-harmonic map by a sequence of perturbed α-Dirac-harmonic maps. However, in this approach, it is not easy to control the energies of the perturbed α-Dirac-harmonic maps, which are constructed by a Min-Max method over increasingly large domains in the configuration space.
Due to these two problems, in this paper, we would like to use the heat flow method to get the existence of Dirac-harmonic maps from closed surfaces to general manifolds where the harmonic map type equation is parabolized and the first order Dirac equation is carried along as an elliptic side constraint [Citation7]. As already mentioned, the short-time existence of the heat flow for Dirac-harmonic map was proved by Wittmann [Citation6]. He constructed the solution to the constraint Dirac equation by the projector of the Dirac operator along maps. By assuming that the Dirac operator along the initial map has nontrivial minimal kernel, he showed that the kernel would stay minimal for small time in the homotopy class of the initial map. This minimality implies a uniform bound for the resolvents and the Lipschitz continuity of the normalized Dirac kernel along the flow. This Lipschitz continuity makes the Banach fixed point theorem available. If one follows this approach, the first issue is how to deal with the kernel jumping problem. Observe that if the Dirac operators converge at the jumping time, the symmetry of the spectrum of Dirac operator guarantees that the limiting Dirac operator has odd dimensional kernel. Therefore, it is natural to try to extend Wittmann’s short time existence to the odd dimensional case. However, the eigenvalues in this case may split at time t = 0. Then the projector may not be continuous even if the Dirac operator is smooth with respect to time along the flow (see [Citation13]), which means that the Lipschitz continuity of the kernel is not available in general. To overcome this issue, we need the density mentioned in the abstract, which gives us a piecewise smooth flow.
As for the convergence, it is sufficient to control the energy of the spinor field because the energy of the map decreases along the flow. To do so, one can impose a restriction on the energy of the initial map as in [Citation14] and get the existence of Dirac-harmonic maps when the initial map has small energy. Alternatively, we use another type flow, that is, the heat flow for α-Dirac-harmonic maps (also called α-Dirac-harmonic map flow in the literatures). Our motivation comes from the successful application of this flow to the Dirichlet problem [Citation15]. Different from there, we cannot uniquely solve the constraint equation. Moreover, our equations of the flow are different. We never write the constraint equation in the Euclidean space Instead, we just solve it in the target manifold N. Last, our flow is not unique due to the absent of a boundary. Instead, only a weak uniqueness is available. Consequently, we need prove the fact that the flow takes value in the target manifold N in a different way. Eventually, we shall obtain the following results on the general existence of Dirac-harmonic maps.
Theorem 1.2.
Let M be a closed spin surface and (N, h) a real analytic closed manifold. Suppose there exists a map for some
such that
. Then there exists a nontrivial smooth Dirac-harmonic map
satisfying
and
Furthermore, if (N, h) does not admit any nontrivial harmonic sphere, then the map part is in the same homotopy class as u0 and
is coupled if the energy of the map is strictly bigger than the energy minimizer in the homotopy class
Remark 1.3.
Our result can at least keep the possibility of the existence of coupled solutions while other solutions produced in the literatures are all uncoupled. The analyticity of the target manifold is a sufficient condition which is used to get the density mentioned in the abstract. In fact, it is easy to see from the proof that we only need the density of the following set
at the αi-energy minimizer in the homotopy class
for a sequence
as
In [Citation16], Wittmann discussed the density of those maps along which all the Dirac operators have minimal kernel. In particular, we have the following corollary.
Corollary 1.4.
Let M be a closed spin surface and (N, h) a real analytic closed manifold. We also assume that
M is connected, oriented and of positive genus;
N is connected. If N is even-dimensional, then we assume that it is non-orientable.
Then there exists a nontrivial smooth Dirac-harmonic map.
The rest of paper is organized as follows: In Section 2, we recall some definitions, notations and lemmas about Dirac-harmonic maps and the kernel of Dirac operator. In Section 3, under the minimality assumption on the kernel of the Dirac operator along the initial map, we prove the short time existence, weak uniqueness and regularity of the heat flow for α-Dirac-harmonic maps. In Section 4, we prove the existence of α-Dirac-harmonic maps and Theorem 1.2. In the Appendix, we solve the constraint equation and prove Lipschitz continuity of the solution with respect to the map.
2. Preliminaries
Let (M, g) be a compact surface with a fixed spin structure. On the spinor bundle we denote the Hermitian inner product by
For any
and
the Clifford multiplication satisfies the following skew-adjointness:
(2.1)
(2.1)
Let be the Levi-Civita connection on (M, g). There is a connection (also denoted by
) on
compatible with
Choosing a local orthonormal basis
on M, the usual Dirac operator is defined as
where
Here and in the sequel, we use the Einstein summation convention. One can find more about spin geometry in [Citation17].
Let be a smooth map from M to another compact Riemannian manifold (N, h) of dimension
Let
be the pull-back bundle of TN by
and consider the twisted bundle
On this bundle there is a metric
induced from the metric on
and
Also, we have a connection
on this twisted bundle naturally induced from those on
and
In local coordinates
the section ψ of
is written as
where each ψi is a usual spinor on M. We also have the following local expression of
where
are the Christoffel symbols of the Levi-Civita connection of N. The Dirac operator along the map
is defined as
(2.2)
(2.2)
which is self-adjoint [Citation11]. Sometimes, we use
to distinguish the Dirac operators defined on different maps. In [Citation2], the authors introduced the functional
(2.3)
(2.3)
They computed the Euler-Lagrange equations of L:
(2.4)
(2.4)
(2.5)
(2.5)
where
is the m-th component of the tension field [Citation11] of the map
with respect to the coordinates on N,
denotes the Clifford multiplication of the vector field
with the spinor ψj, and
stands for the component of the Riemann curvature tensor of the target manifold N. Denote
We can write (Equation2.4(2.4)
(2.4) ) and (Equation2.5
(2.5)
(2.5) ) in the following global form:
(2.6)
(2.6)
and call the solutions
Dirac-harmonic maps from M to N.
With the aim to get a general existence scheme for Dirac-harmonic maps, the following heat flow for Dirac-harmonic maps was introduced in [Citation7]:
(2.7)
(2.7)
When M has boundary, the short time existence and uniqueness of (Equation2.8(2.8)
(2.8) )–(Equation2.9
(2.9)
(2.9) ) was also shown in [Citation7]. Furthermore, the existence of a global weak solution to this flow in dimension two under some boundary-initial constraint was obtained in [Citation14]. In [Citation15], to remove the restriction on the initial maps, the authors refined an estimate about the spinor in [Citation7] as follows:
Lemma 2.1.
[Citation15] Let M be a compact spin Riemann surface with boundary , N be a compact Riemann manifold. Let
for some
and
for
, then there exists a positive constant
such that
Motivated by this lemma, they considered the α-Dirac-harmonic flow and got the existence of Dirac-harmonic maps. For a closed manifold M, the situation is much more complicated because the kernel of the Dirac operator is a linear space. If the Dirac operator along the initial map has one dimensional kernel, Wittmann proved the short time existence on M whose dimension is
By [Citation18], we can isometrically embed N into Then (Equation2.6
(2.6)
(2.6) )–(Equation2.7
(2.7)
(2.7) ) is equivalent to following system:
(2.9)
(2.9)
where II is the second fundamental form of N in
and
(2.10)
(2.10)
(2.11)
(2.11)
Here denotes the shape operator, defined by
for
and Re(z) denotes the real part of
Together with the nearest point projection:
(2.12)
(2.12)
where
we can rewrite the evolution Equationequation (Equation2.8
(2.8)
(2.8) )
(2.8)
(2.8) as an equation in
Lemma 2.2.
[Citation6, Citation7] A tuple , where
and
, is a solution of (Equation2.8
(2.8)
(2.8) ) if and only if
on for
Here we denote the A-th component function of
by
write
for the B-th partial derivative of the A-th component function of
and the global sections
are defined by
where
is the standard basis of
Moreover,
and
denote the gradient and the Riemannian metric on M, respectively.
For future reference, we define
(2.14)
(2.14)
(2.15)
(2.15)
Note that for and
we have
(2.16)
(2.16)
(2.17)
(2.17)
for all
where
is an orthonormal basis of TpM.
Next, for every T > 0, we denote by XT the Banach space of bounded maps:
(2.18)
(2.18)
(2.19)
(2.19)
For any map the closed ball with center v and radius R in XT is defined by
(2.20)
(2.20)
We denote by the parallel transport of N along the unique shortest geodesic from
to
We also denote by
the inducing mappings
(2.21)
(2.21)
(2.22)
(2.22)
and
(2.23)
(2.23)
Now, let us define
(2.24)
(2.24)
and
as
(2.25)
(2.25)
In general, we also denote by γ the curve as
(2.26)
(2.26)
for some constant Λ to be determined. Then the orthogonal projection onto
which is the mapping
(2.27)
(2.27)
can be written by the resolvent by
(2.28)
(2.28)
where
is the resolvent of
Finally, the following density lemma is very useful for us to extend the flow beyond the singular time.
Lemma 2.3.
[Citation16] Let M be a closed spin surface and (N, h) a real analytic closed manifold. Suppose there exists a map for some
such that
. Then the kernel of
is minimal for generic
, i.e., for a
-dense and C1-open subset of
3. The heat flow for α-Dirac-harmonic maps
In this section, we will prove the short-time existence of the heat flow for α-Dirac-harmonic maps. Since we are working on a closed surface M, we cannot uniquely solve the Dirac equation in the following system:
(3.1)
(3.1)
The short time existence and its extension are the obstacles. This system (if it converges) leads to a α-Dirac-harmonic map which is a solution of the system
(3.2)
(3.2)
and equivalently a critical point of functional
(3.3)
(3.3)
where τ is the tension field.
3.1. Short time existence
As in Section 2, we now embed N into Let
with
and denote the spinor along the map u by
where ψA are spinors over M. For any smooth map
and any smooth spinor field
we consider the variation
(3.4)
(3.4)
where π is the nearest point projection as in Section 2. Then we have
Lemma 3.1.
The Euler-Lagrange equations for are
and
(3.6)
(3.6)
Proof.
Suppose is a critical point of
then for the variation (Equation3.5
(3.5)
(3.5) ) we have
(3.7)
(3.7)
Then the lemma directly follows from the following computations.
□
Lemma 3.1 implies that (Equation3.1(3.1)
(3.1) )–(Equation3.2
(3.2)
(3.2) ) is equivalent to
(3.8)
(3.8)
Now, let us state the main result of this subsection.
Theorem 3.2.
Let M be a closed surface, and N a closed n-dimensional Riemannian manifold. Let for some
with
and
with
. Then there exists
such that, for any
, the problem (Equation3.1
(3.1)
(3.1) )–(Equation3.2
(3.2)
(3.2) ) has a solution
with
satisfying
(3.10)
(3.10)
and
(3.11)
(3.11)
for some T > 0.
Proof.
Step 1: Solving (Equation3.9
(3.9)
(3.9) )–(Equation3.10
(3.10)
(3.10) ) in
In this step, we want to find a solution and
of (Equation3.9
(3.9)
(3.9) )–(Equation3.10
(3.10)
(3.10) ) with the initial values (Equation3.11
(3.11)
(3.11) ). We first give a solution to (Equation3.10
(3.10)
(3.10) ) in a neighborhood of u0. For any T > 0, we can choose
δ and R as in the Appendix such that
(3.12)
(3.12)
and
(3.13)
(3.13)
for all
and
where
for any
If R is small enough, then by Lemma 5.5, we have
(3.14)
(3.14)
and there exists
such that
(3.15)
(3.15)
for any
and
where
is a constant such that
Furthermore, for
with
Lemma 5.7 implies that
(3.16)
(3.16)
for any
and
where
with respect to the decomposition
and
Now, for any T > 0 and we define
Then, there exists such that
(3.17)
(3.17)
Now, we denote and
For every Lemma 5.8 gives us a solution
to the constraint equation. Since
by Lp regularity [Citation6] and Schauder estimate [Citation7], we have
(3.18)
(3.18)
For any we also have
that is,
where
denotes a multi-linear map with smooth coefficients. For any
by the Sobolev embedding, Lp-regularity in [Citation6] and Lemma 5.8, we have
(3.19)
(3.19)
Therefore,
(3.20)
(3.20)
Now, when is sufficiently small, for the
above, the standard theory of linear parabolic systems (see [Citation19]) implies that there exists a unique solution
to the following Dirichlet problem:
(3.21)
(3.21)
satisfying
(3.22)
(3.22)
Since we have
(3.23)
(3.23)
By taking T > 0 small enough, we get
(3.24)
(3.24)
Then the interpolation inequality in [Citation20] implies that for T > 0 sufficiently small. For such v1, we have
satisfying (Equation3.20
(3.20)
(3.20) ) and (Equation3.22
(3.22)
(3.22) ). Replacing
in (Equation3.23
(3.23)
(3.23) )–(Equation3.24
(3.24)
(3.24) ) by
then we get
Iterating this procedure, we get a solution
of (Equation3.23
(3.23)
(3.23) )–(Equation3.24
(3.24)
(3.24) ) with
replacing by
which satisfies
(3.25)
(3.25)
and
(3.26)
(3.26)
By passing to a subsequence, we know that vk converges to some u in and
converges to some ψ in
Then it is easy to see that
is a solution of (Equation3.9
(3.9)
(3.9) )–(Equation3.10
(3.10)
(3.10) ) with
and
Step 2: u(x, t) takes value in N for any
Suppose and
satisfy (Equation3.9
(3.9)
(3.9) )–(Equation3.10
(3.10)
(3.10) ). In the following, we write
and
for the Euclidean norm and scalar product, respectively. Similarly, we write
and
for the norm and inner product of (M, g), respectively. We define
(3.27)
(3.27)
by
and
(3.28)
(3.28)
by
A direct computation yields
(3.29)
(3.29)
where
and
are defined in (Equation2.17
(2.17)
(2.17) ) and (Equation2.18
(2.18)
(2.18) ), respectively.
Since and
we have
(3.30)
(3.30)
Together with
(3.31)
(3.31)
we get
where
Since
and
for any
we conclude
on
We have shown that
for all
Finally, by using the -regularity (see Lemma 3.7 below), we conclude that
(3.32)
(3.32)
and
(3.33)
(3.33)
□
Since the equations for α-Dirac-harmonic maps are invariant under multiplying the spinor by elements of with unit norm, by uniqueness we always mean uniqueness up to multiplication of the spinor by such elements. This kind of uniqueness for the Dirac-harmonic map flow was proved by the Banach fixed point theorem in [Citation6]. However, we cannot apply the fixed point theorem to the α-Dirac-harmonic map flow. Therefore, it is interesting to consider the uniqueness of the α-Dirac-harmonic map flow from closed surfaces. By considering the evolution inequality of
we can prove the following uniqueness which is weaker than that in [Citation6] because when the quaternions ha are different, we can no longer bound the C0-norm of the difference of the maps.
Theorem 3.3.
For any given T > 0, let and
be two solutions to (Equation3.1
(3.1)
(3.1) )- with the constraint (Equation3.11
(3.11)
(3.11) ) and
. Then there exists a time
, which depends on R and the
norms of u1 and u2, such that
and
for some with unit length, where
is defined by (Equation5.36
(5.36)
(5.36) ). Furthermore, if
on
for some
, then
on
Proof.
By the assumptions, we have
(3.35)
(3.35)
for a = 1, 2. Therefore, for small enough T1,
Since
for a = 1, 2, there exist
such that
(3.36)
(3.36)
for all
where
is defined by (Equation5.36
(5.36)
(5.36) ). Moreover,
is of unit length since
Now, let us consider the uniqueness of the flow. First, by subtracting the equations of u1 and u2 and multiplying by we have
(3.37)
(3.37)
In the sequel, we will estimate the terms on the right-hand side of the inequality (Equation3.40(3.40)
(3.40) ).
(3.38)
(3.38)
where we used
Similar, by the triangle inequality, we get
(3.39)
(3.39)
and
(3.40)
(3.40)
Based on these estimates, (Equation3.40(3.40)
(3.40) ) becomes
(3.41)
(3.41)
Next, we want to bound those terms in the right-hand side of (Equation3.44(3.44)
(3.44) ) by
and
Since
there is a unique geodesic between
and
for any
Now, for any
we define
(3.42)
(3.42)
where
and
denotes the norm of V(x, t) in the tangent space
Then we can estimate
as follows:
(3.43)
(3.43)
where we used the Lemma 5.1 in the Appendix. Hence, we can rewrite (Equation3.44
(3.44)
(3.44) ) as
(3.44)
(3.44)
where we used Young’s inequality. It remains to bound
by
To that end, we use the Lemma 5.8 and (Equation3.39
(3.39)
(3.39) ) as follows:
(3.45)
(3.45)
where we used h1 = h2 in the second equality.
Last, it is easy to see by considering the following evolution inequality
(3.46)
(3.46)
with
□
3.2. Regularity of the flow
In this subsection, we will give some estimates on the regularity of the flow. Let us start with the following estimate of the energy of the map part.
Lemma 3.4.
Suppose is a solution of (Equation3.1
(3.1)
(3.1) )–(Equation3.2
(3.2)
(3.2) ) with the initial values (Equation3.11
(3.11)
(3.11) ). Then there holds
(3.47)
(3.47)
where
. Moreover,
is absolutely continuous on
and non-increasing.
Proof. N
ote that (Equation3.1(3.1)
(3.1) ) can be written as:
(3.48)
(3.48)
Multiplying the inequality above by and using
(3.49)
(3.49)
we get
(3.50)
(3.50)
which directly gives us the lemma. □
Consequently, we can also control the spinor part along the heat flow of the α-Dirac-harmonic map.
Lemma 3.5.
Suppose is a solution of (Equation3.1
(3.1)
(3.1) )–(Equation3.2
(3.2)
(3.2) ) with the initial values (Equation3.11
(3.11)
(3.11) ). Then for any
, there holds
(3.51)
(3.51)
where
Proof.
The lemma directly follows from Lemma 3.4 and the following lemma:
Lemma 3.6.
Let M be a closed spin Riemann surface, N be a compact Riemann manifold. Let for some
and
for
, then there exists a positive constant
such that
(3.52)
(3.52)
This lemma follows from applying Lemma 2.1 to where η is a cutoff function. □
To get the convergence of the flow, we also need the following -regularity.
Lemma 3.7.
Suppose is a solution of (Equation3.1
(3.1)
(3.1) )–(Equation3.2
(3.2)
(3.2) ) with the initial values (Equation3.11
(3.11)
(3.11) ). Given
, denote
(3.53)
(3.53)
Then there exist three constants and
such that if
(3.54)
(3.54)
then
(3.55)
(3.55)
and for any
(3.56)
(3.56)
Moreover, if
(3.57)
(3.57)
then
(3.58)
(3.58)
Since M is closed, x0 has to be an interior point of M. Therefore, our Lemma is just a special case of the Lemma 3.4 in [Citation15]. So we omit the proof here.
4. Existence of α-Dirac-harmonic maps
In this section, we will prove Theorem 1.2 by the following theorem on the existence of α-Dirac-harmonic maps for
Theorem 4.1.
Let M be a closed spin surface and (N, h) a real analytic closed manifold. Suppose there exists a map for some
such that
. Then for any
, there exists a nontrivial smooth α-Dirac-harmonic map
such that the map part
stays in the same homotopy class as u0 and
Proof
of Theorem 4.1. By Theorem 2.3 in [Citation21], all the following α-Dirac-harmonic maps are smooth. Let us denote the energy minimizer by
where denotes the homotopy class of u0. If u0 is a minimizing α-harmonic map, it follows from Lemma 3.4 that
is an α-Dirac-harmonic map for any
If
then Theorem 3.2 gives us a solution
(4.2)
(4.2)
and
(4.3)
(4.3)
to the problem (Equation3.1
(3.1)
(3.1) )–(Equation3.2
(3.2)
(3.2) ) with the initial values (Equation3.11
(3.11)
(3.11) ).
By Lemma 3.4, we know
(4.4)
(4.4)
Then it is easy to see that, for any there exists a positive constant
such that for all
there holds
(4.5)
(4.5)
Therefore, by Theorem 3.2 and Lemma 3.7, we know that the singular time can be characterized as
(4.6)
(4.6)
and there exists a sequence
such that
(4.7)
(4.7)
and
(4.8)
(4.8)
If then, by Theorem 3.2, we can extend the solution
beyond the time T by using
as new initial values. Thus, we have the global existence of the flow. For the limit behavior as
Lemma 3.4 implies that there exists a sequence
such that
(4.9)
(4.9)
Together with Lemma 3.7, there is a subsequence, still denoted by and an α-Dirac-harmonic map
such that
converges to
in
and
If and
let us assume that
and
is not already an α-Dirac-harmonic map. We extend the flow as follows: By Lemma 2.3, there is a map
such that
(4.10)
(4.10)
and
(4.11)
(4.11)
Thus, picking any with
we can restart the flow from the new initial values
If there is no singular time along the flow started from
then we get an α-Dirac-harmonic map as in the case of
Otherwise, we use again the procedure above to choose
as initial values and restart the flow. This procedure will stop in finitely or infinitely many steps.
If infinitely many steps are required, then there exist infinitely many flow pieces and
such that
(4.12)
(4.12)
where
If the Ti are bounded away from zero, then there is
such that (Equation4.9
(4.9)
(4.9) ) hold for
Therefore, we have an α-Dirac-harmonic map as before. If
then we look at the limit of
If the limit is strictly bigger than
we again choose another map satisfying (Equation4.10
(4.10)
(4.10) ) and (Equation4.11
(4.11)
(4.11) ) as a new starting point. If the limit is exactly
then we choose
such that
for each i. By Lemma 3.7,
converges in
to a minimizing α-harmonic map
If
has minimal kernel, then for any
is an α-Dirac-harmonic map as we showed in the beginning of the proof. If
has non-minimal kernel, we use the decomposition of the twisted spinor bundle through the
-grading
(see [Citation3]). More precisely, for any smooth variation
of u0, we split the bundle
into
which is orthogonal in the complex sense and parallel. Consequently, for any
we have
(4.13)
(4.13)
for
where
and
Therefore,
are smooth variations of
respectively, such that
(4.14)
(4.14)
By taking and
the first variation formula of
implies that
are α-Dirac-harmonic maps (see Corollary 5.2 in [Citation3]). In particular, we can choose
such that
or
If it stops in finitely many steps, there exists a sequence and some
such that
(4.15)
(4.15)
where
either is an α-Dirac-harmonic map or satisfies
And in the latter case,
is a minimizing α-harmonic map. Then we can again get a nontrivial α-Dirac-harmonic map as above. □
By Theorem 4.1, for any sufficiently close to 1, there exists an α-Dirac-harmonic map
with the properties
(4.16)
(4.16)
and
(4.17)
(4.17)
for any
Then it is natural to consider the limit behavior when α decreases to 1. Since the blow-up analysis was already well studied in [Citation15], we can directly prove Theorem 1.2.
Proof
of Theorem 1.2. By Theorem 4.1, we have a sequence of smooth α-Dirac-harmonic maps with (Equation4.16
(4.16)
(4.16) ) and (Equation4.17
(4.17)
(4.17) ), where
as
Then, by Theorem 2.1 in [Citation15], there is a constant
and a Dirac-harmonic map
such that
(4.18)
(4.18)
where
(4.19)
(4.19)
is a finite set.
Now, taking there exists a sequence
and a nontrivial Dirac-harmonic map
such that
(4.20)
(4.20)
as
Choose any
by taking
in (Equation4.17
(4.17)
(4.17) ), we get
(4.21)
(4.21)
and
(4.22)
(4.22)
Thus, ξ = 0 and can be extended to a nontrivial smooth harmonic sphere. Since
the Sobolev embedding implies that
Therefore,
is nontrivial. Furthermore, if (N, h) does not admit any nontrivial harmonic sphere, then
(4.23)
(4.23)
Therefore, is in the same homotopy class as u0. □
5. Appendix
In Section 3, we used some convenient properties of the elements in Those properties were already discussed in [Citation6]. However, the function space used there is
where
because the solution there is the unique fixed point of the following integral representation over
(5.1)
(5.1)
where p is the heat kernel of M, F1 and F2 are defined as in (Equation2.17
(2.17)
(2.17) ) and (Equation2.18
(2.18)
(2.18) ), respectively. Our proof for the short-time existence is different from there, and the space
is more natural and convenient in our situation. Therefore, we cannot directly use the statement in [Citation6]. Although the space is changed, the proofs of those nice properties are parallel. In fact, one can see from the following that to make the elements in
satisfy nice properties (Equation5.11
(5.11)
(5.11) ) and (Equation5.12
(5.12)
(5.12) ), it is sufficient to choose R small, namely, T is independent of R. This is the biggest advantage. In the following, we will give the precise statement of the properties we need in Section 3 and proofs for the most important lemmas.
For every T > 0, we consider the space where
for any
To get the necessary estimate for the solution of the constraint equation, we will use the parallel transport along the unique shortest geodesic between
and
in N. To do this, we need the following lemma which tells us that the distances in N can be locally controlled by the distances in
Lemma 5.1.
[Citation6] Let be a closed embedded submanifold of
with the induced Riemannian metric. Denote by A its Weingarten map. Choose C > 0 such that
, where
Then there exists such that for all
and for all
with
, it holds that
(5.3)
(5.3)
where we denote the Euclidean norm by
in this section.
In the following, we will choose δ and R to ensure the existence of the unique shortest geodesics between the projections of any two elements in By the definition of
we have
(5.4)
(5.4)
for all
Then taking any
we get
(5.5)
(5.5)
for all
Therefore,
In particular,
is N-valued, and
(5.6)
(5.6)
Now, we choose with
and δ such that
(5.7)
(5.7)
where
are as in Lemma 5.1. From (Equation5.6
(5.6)
(5.6) ), we know that for all
it holds that
(5.8)
(5.8)
Then Lemma 5.1 and (Equation5.7(5.7)
(5.7) ) imply that
(5.9)
(5.9)
To summarize, under the choice of constants as follows:
(5.10)
(5.10)
we have shown that
(5.11)
(5.11)
and
(5.12)
(5.12)
for all
and
Using the properties (Equation5.11(5.11)
(5.11) ) and (Equation5.12
(5.12)
(5.12) ), we can parallelly prove two important estimates as in [Citation6]. One is for the Dirac operators along maps.
Lemma 5.2.
Choose , δ and R as in (Equation5.10
(5.10)
(5.10) ). If
is small enough, then there exists
such that
(5.13)
(5.13)
for any
and
Proof.
We write and define the C1 map
by
(5.14)
(5.14)
where
denotes the exponential map of the Riemannian manifold N. Note that
and
is the unique shortest geodesic from
to
We denote by
(5.15)
(5.15)
the parallel transport in
with respect to
(pullback of the Levi-Civita connection on N) along the curve
from
to
In particular,
Let
We have
(5.16)
(5.16)
where
is an orthonormal frame of TN, ψi are local C1 sections of
and
is an orthonormal frame of TM.
We define local C1 sections Θi of by
(5.17)
(5.17)
For each we define the functions
by
(5.18)
(5.18)
So far, we only know that the Tij are continuous. In the following, we will perform some formal calculations and justify them afterwards. By a straightforward computation, we have
(5.19)
(5.19)
Therefore we want to control the first time-derivative of the Tij. EquationEquation (Equation5.18(5.18)
(5.18) )
(5.18)
(5.18) implies that these time-derivatives are related to the curvature of
More precisely, for all
we have
(5.20)
(5.20)
Now, let us justify the formal calculations (Equation5.19(5.19)
(5.19) ) and (Equation5.20
(5.20)
(5.20) ). Combining the definition of Θi as parallel transport and a careful examination of the regularity of F we deduce that
exists. Then (Equation5.20
(5.20)
(5.20) ) holds. Together with (Equation5.18
(5.18)
(5.18) ), we know that the Tij are differentiable in t. Therefore (Equation5.19
(5.19)
(5.19) ) also holds. We further get
(5.21)
(5.21)
since
by the definition of Θi and
This implies
(5.22)
(5.22)
where C1 only depends on N.
In the following we estimate and
We have
(5.23)
(5.23)
where
is a geodesic in N. In particular,
is parallel along c and thus
Therefore, we get
(5.24)
(5.24)
where we have used Lemma 5.1 and the Lipschitz continuity of π. Moreover, there exists
such that
for all
We have shown
(5.25)
(5.25)
for all (x, t). Combining this with (Equation5.16
(5.16)
(5.16) ) and (Equation5.19
(5.19)
(5.19) ), we complete the proof. □
The other one is for the parallel transport.
Lemma 5.3.
Choose , δ and R as in (Equation5.10
(5.10)
(5.10) ). If
is small enough, then there exists
such that
(5.26)
(5.26)
for all
and
Consequently, we also have
Lemma 5.4.
Choose , δ and R as in (Equation5.10
(5.10)
(5.10) ). For
, the operator norm of the isomorphism of Banach spaces
(5.27)
(5.27)
is uniformly bounded, i.e. there exists
such that
(5.28)
(5.28)
for all
and
The proofs of these two lemmas only depend on the existence of the unique shortest geodesic between any two maps in which was already shown in (Equation5.12
(5.12)
(5.12) ). Therefore, we omit the detailed proof here. Besides, by Lemma 5.2, one can immediately prove the following Lemma by the Min-Max principle as in [Citation6].
Lemma 5.5.
Assume that , where
and
(5.29)
(5.29)
Choose , δ and R as in Lemma 5.2. If R is small enough, then
(5.30)
(5.30)
and there exists
such that
(5.31)
(5.31)
for any
and
, where
is a constant such that
Once we have the minimality of the kernel in Lemma 5.5, we can prove the following uniform bounds for the resolvents, which are important for the Lipschitz continuity of the solution to the Dirac equation.
Lemma 5.6.
Assume we are in the situation of Lemma 5.5. We consider the resolvent of
. By the Lp estimate (see Lemma 2.1 in [Citation6]), we know the restriction
(5.32)
(5.32)
is well-defined and bounded for any
. If R > 0 is small enough, then there exists
such that
(5.33)
(5.33)
for any
Now, by the projector of the Dirac operator, we can construct a solution to the constraint equation whose nontrivialness follows from the following lemma.
Lemma 5.7.
In the situation of Lemma 5.5, for any fixed and any
with
, we have
(5.34)
(5.34)
where
with respect to the decomposition
In Section 3, to show the short-time existence of the heat for α-Dirac-harmonic maps, we need the following Lipschitz estimate.
Lemma 5.8.
Choose δ as in (Equation5.10(5.10)
(5.10) ),
as in Lemmas 5.2 and 5.3, R as in Lemmas 5.5 and 5.6. For any harmonic spinor
, we define
(5.35)
(5.35)
for any
, where γ is defined in the Section 2 with
. In particular,
. We write
(5.36)
(5.36)
Let be the sections of
such that
(5.37)
(5.37)
for
Then there exists
such that
(5.38)
(5.38)
and
(5.39)
(5.39)
for all
and
Proof.
Using the following resolvent identity for two operators D1, D2
(5.40)
(5.40)
we have
(5.41)
(5.41)
where γ is defined in (2.29) with
Therefore, for p large enough, we get
(5.42)
(5.42)
Now, we estimate all the terms in the right-hand side of the inequality above. First, by Lemmas 5.6 and 5.4, we know that all the resolvents above are uniformly bounded. Next, by Lemma 5.2, we have
(5.43)
(5.43)
Finally, by Lemma 5.3, we obtain
(5.44)
(5.44)
Putting these together, we get (Equation5.38(5.38)
(5.38) ).
Next, we want to show the following estimate which is very close to (Equation5.39(5.39)
(5.39) ).
(5.45)
(5.45)
In fact, we have
It remains to estimate the last term in the inequality above. To that end, let be the unique shortest geodesic of N from
to
Let
be given and denote by X(r) the unique parallel vector field along γ with
Then we have
(5.46)
(5.46)
Therefore,
(5.47)
(5.47)
where II is the second fundamental form of N in
and C1 only depends on N. Using (Equation5.9
(5.9)
(5.9) ) and the Lipschitz continuity of π we get
(5.48)
(5.48)
and
(5.49)
(5.49)
This implies
(5.50)
(5.50)
Hence, (Equation5.45(5.45)
(5.45) ) holds.
Now, using (Equation5.38(5.38)
(5.38) ) and (Equation5.45
(5.45)
(5.45) ), we get
Then the inequality (Equation5.39(5.39)
(5.39) ) follows from Lemma 5.7 and (Equation5.45
(5.45)
(5.45) ). This completes the proof. □
References
- Jost, J. (2009). Geometry and Physics. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Science & Business Media.
- Chen, Q., Jost, J., Li, J., Wang, G. (2006). Dirac-harmonic maps. Math. Z. 254(2):409–432. DOI: 10.1007/s00209-006-0961-7.
- Ammann, B., Ginoux, N. (2013). Dirac-harmonic maps from index theory. Calc. Var. 47(3–4):739–762. DOI: 10.1007/s00526-012-0534-z.
- Chen, Q., Jost, J., Sun, L., Zhu, M. (2015). Dirac-harmonic maps between Riemann surfaces. MPI MIS Preprint 76.
- Yang, L. (2009). A structure theorem of Dirac-harmonic maps between spheres. Calc. Var. 35(4):409–420. DOI: 10.1007/s00526-008-0210-5.
- Wittmann, J. (2017). Short time existence of the heat flow for Dirac-harmonic maps on closed manifolds. Calc. Var. 56(6):169. DOI: 10.1007/s00526-017-1270-1.
- Chen, Q., Jost, J., Sun, L., Zhu, M. (2018). Estimates for solutions of Dirac equations and an application to a geometric elliptic-parabolic problem. J. Eur. Math. Soc. 21(3):665–707. DOI: 10.4171/JEMS/847.
- Isobe, T. (2012). On the existence of nonlinear Dirac-geodesics on compact manifolds. Calc. Var. 43(1–2):83–121. DOI: 10.1007/s00526-011-0404-0.
- Isobe, T., Maalaoui, A. (2017). Morse-Floer theory for super-quadratic Dirac-geodesics, arXiv preprint arXiv:1712.08960.
- Jost, J., Zhu, J. (2019). α-Dirac-harmonic maps from closed surfaces, arXiv preprint arXiv:1903.07927.
- Jost, J. (2017). Riemannian Geometry and Geometric Analysis. Berlin: Springer.
- Sacks, J., Uhlenbeck, K. (1981). The existence of minimal immersions of 2-spheres. Ann. Math. 113(1):1–24. DOI: 10.2307/1971131.
- Kato, T. (2013). Perturbation Theory for Linear Operators, Vol. 132. New York: Springer Science & Business Media.
- Jost, J., Liu, L., Zhu, M. (2017). A global weak solution of the Dirac-harmonic map flow. Annales de L’Institut Henri Poincare (C) Non Linear Analysis. 34(7):1851–1882. DOI: 10.1016/j.anihpc.2017.01.002.
- Jost, J., Liu, L., Zhu, M. (2018). Geometric analysis of a mixed elliptic-parabolic conformally invariant boundary value problem. MPI MIS Preprint 41.
- Wittmann, J. (2019). Minimal kernels of Dirac operators along maps. Mathematische Nachrichten. 292(7):1–9.
- Blaine, H., Jr, L., Michelsohn, M.-L. (1989). Spin Geometry, Volume 38 of Princeton Mathematical Series. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
- Nash, J. (1956). The imbedding problem for Riemannian manifolds. Ann. Math. 63(1):20–63. DOI: 10.2307/1969989.
- Schlag, W. (1996). Schauder and Lp estimates for parabolic systems via Campanato spaces. Commun. Partial Differ. Equations. 21(7–8):1141–1175.
- Lieberman, G. M. (1996). Second Order Parabolic Differential Equations. Singapore: World Scientific.
- Chen, Q., Jost, J., Li, J., Wang, G. (2005). Regularity theorems and energy identities for Dirac-harmonic maps. Math. Z. 251(1):61–84. DOI: 10.1007/s00209-005-0788-7.