This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

Kählerity of Einstein four-manifolds

Xiaolong Li Department of Mathematics, Statistics and Physics, Wichita State University, Wichita, KS, 67260 xiaolong.li@wichita.edu  and  Yongjia Zhang School of Mathematical Sciences, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China, 200240 zhangyongjia918@163.com
Abstract.

We prove that a closed oriented Einstein four-manifold is either anti-self-dual or (after passing to a double Riemannian cover if necessary) Kähler-Einstein, provided that λ2S12\lambda_{2}\geq-\frac{S}{12}, where λ2\lambda_{2} is the middle eigenvalue of the self-dual Weyl tensor W+W^{+} and SS is the scalar curvature. An analogous result holds for closed oriented four-manifolds with δW+=0\delta W^{+}=0.

Key words and phrases:
Einstein four-manifolds, Kähler-Einstein, self-dual Weyl tensor, curvature restriction
2020 Mathematics Subject Classification:
53C21, 53C25, 53C55
The first author’s research is partially supported by a start-up grant at Wichita State University

1. Introduction

We are concerned with the following question in this paper.

Question 1.1.

Under what curvature conditions is a closed Einstein four-manifold Kähler?

There have been several answers to this question. Derdzinski proved a fundamental result [Der83] that if the self-dual Weyl tensor W+W^{+} of a closed oriented Einstein four-manifold is parallel and has at most two distinct eigenvalues at every point, then, after passing to a double Riemannian cover if necessary, the metric is Kähler. A result of Micallef and Wang [MW93, Theorem 4.2] asserts that a closed oriented four-manifold with harmonic self-dual Weyl tensor (δW+=0\delta W^{+}=0) and half nonnegative isotropic curvature either is anti-self-dual or has a Kähler universal cover with constant positive scalar curvature (see also [GL99], [RS16], [FKP14], and [Wu17] for alternative proofs).

The purpose of this paper is to provide another curvature condition that characterizes closed Kähler-Einstein four-manifolds. To state our results, let us recall that the bundle Λ2\Lambda^{2} of two-forms over an oriented (that is, orientable with an appointed orientation) Riemannian four-manifold (M4,g)(M^{4},g) admits an orthogonal decomposition

Λ2=Λ+Λ,\Lambda^{2}=\Lambda^{+}\oplus\Lambda^{-},

with Λ+\Lambda^{+} and Λ\Lambda^{-} being the +1+1 and 1-1 eigenspaces of the Hodge star operator, respectively. Sections of Λ+\Lambda^{+} are called self-dual two-forms, while sections of Λ\Lambda^{-} are called anti-self-dual two-forms. The Riemann curvature tensor may be identified with a self-adjoint linear map

Rm:Λ2Λ2\operatorname{Rm}:\Lambda^{2}\to\Lambda^{2}

called the curvature operator, via

Rm(eiej)=12Rijklekel.\operatorname{Rm}(e_{i}\wedge e_{j})=\frac{1}{2}R_{ijkl}e_{k}\wedge e_{l}.

Corresponding to the decomposition Λ2=Λ+Λ\Lambda^{2}=\Lambda^{+}\oplus\Lambda^{-}, the Riemann curvature operator Rm\operatorname{Rm} can be decomposed into the following irreducible pieces:

Rm=[W++S12IRicRicW+S12I],\displaystyle\operatorname{Rm}=\left[\begin{array}[]{c|c}&\\ W^{+}+\frac{S}{12}I&\overset{\circ}{\operatorname{Ric}}\\ &\\ \hline\cr&\\ \overset{\circ}{\operatorname{Ric}}&W^{-}+\frac{S}{12}I\\ &\end{array}\right],

where SS is the scalar curvature, II is the identity map, Ric=RicS4g\overset{\circ}{\operatorname{Ric}}=\operatorname{Ric}-\tfrac{S}{4}g is the traceless Ricci tensor, and W±:Λ±Λ±W^{\pm}:\Lambda^{\pm}\to\Lambda^{\pm} are called the self-dual and anti-self-dual parts of the Weyl curvature operator W:Λ2Λ2W:\Lambda^{2}\to\Lambda^{2}. It is also convenient to denote by Rm+\operatorname{Rm}^{+} and Rm\operatorname{Rm}^{-} the restriction of the Riemann curvature operator on Λ+\Lambda^{+} and Λ\Lambda^{-}, respectively. In other words, Rm±=W±+S12I\operatorname{Rm}^{\pm}=W^{\pm}+\frac{S}{12}I. A four-manifold (M4,g)(M^{4},g) is said to be anti-self-dual if W+0W^{+}\equiv 0 and self-dual if W0W^{-}\equiv 0.

It is well-known that on any Kähler surface (M4,J,g)(M^{4},J,g) with the natural orientation (in the sense that the Kähler form is self-dual), the self-dual Weyl operator W+:Λ+Λ+W^{+}:\Lambda^{+}\to\Lambda^{+} is given by

W+=[S6S12S12].\displaystyle W^{+}=\left[\begin{array}[]{ccc}\tfrac{S}{6}&&\\ &-\tfrac{S}{12}&\\ &&-\tfrac{S}{12}\end{array}\right].

In particular, if λ1λ2λ3\lambda_{1}\leq\lambda_{2}\leq\lambda_{3} are the eigenvalues of W+W^{+}, then we have

λ2=S12\lambda_{2}=-\frac{S}{12}

on any Kähler surface, regardless of the sign of SS. Equivalently, the middle eigenvalue of Rm+\operatorname{Rm}^{+} vanishes on any Kähler surfaces.

Our main result states that if a closed oriented Einstein four-manifold satisfies the condition

λ2S12,\lambda_{2}\geq-\frac{S}{12},

then it is either anti-self-dual or Kähler-Einstein (after passing to a double cover if necessary). More precisely, we prove

Theorem 1.1.

Let (M4,g)(M^{4},g) be a closed oriented Einstein four-manifold. Denote by λ1λ2λ3\lambda_{1}\leq\lambda_{2}\leq\lambda_{3} the eigenvalues of W+W^{+} and by SS the scalar curvature. If λ2S12\lambda_{2}\geq-\frac{S}{12} everywhere, then one of the following assertions holds:

  1. (1)

    S0S\neq 0 and (M,g)(M,g) is Kähler-Einstein, or has a double Riemannian cover π:(M,g)(M,g)\pi:(M^{*},g^{*})\to(M,g), where g=πgg^{*}=\pi^{*}g, such that (M,g)(M^{*},g^{*}) is Kähler-Einstein.

  2. (2)

    (M,g)(M,g) is anti-self-dual with nonnegative scalar curvature. Moreover,

    • if S>0S>0, then MM is isometric to a quotient of 𝕊4\mathbb{S}^{4} with the round metric or 2\mathbb{CP}^{2} with the Fubini-Study metric.

    • if S=0S=0, then either MM is flat or its universal cover is a K3 surface with the Calabi-Yau metric.

In the nonnegative scalar curvature case, Theorem 1.1 provides a generalization of the result of Micallef and Wang [MW93], as the condition λ2S12\lambda_{2}\geq-\frac{S}{12} is weaker than half nonnegative isotropic curvature. Recall that an oriented four-manifold is said to have half nonnegative (resp. positive) isotropic curvature if Rm+\operatorname{Rm}^{+} is two-nonnegative (resp. two-positive), i.e., the sum of the smallest two eigenvalues of Rm+\operatorname{Rm}^{+} is nonnegative (resp. positive). In view of Rm+=W++S12I\operatorname{Rm}^{+}=W^{+}+\frac{S}{12}I, we see that half nonnegative isotropic curvature is equivalent to

S0 and λ1+λ2S6,S\geq 0\quad\text{ and }\quad\lambda_{1}+\lambda_{2}\geq-\tfrac{S}{6},

so it is stronger than the condition λ2S12\lambda_{2}\geq-\frac{S}{12}.

In the negative scalar curvature case, Theorem 1.1, to the best of our knowledge, seems to be the only answer to Question 1.1 other than that of Derdzinski [Der83].

As a corollary of Theorem 1.1, we have a sufficient and necessary condition for a closed Einstein four-manifold to be Kähler.

Corollary 1.2.

Let (M4,g)(M^{4},g) be a closed and oriented (positive or negative) Einstein four-manifold which satisfies H1(M;2)=0H^{1}(M;\mathbb{Z}_{2})=0 and is not isometric to 𝕊4\mathbb{S}^{4} with the round metric. Then (M4,g)(M^{4},g) is Kähler if and only if λ2(W+)S12\lambda_{2}(W^{+})\geq-\frac{S}{12} everywhere.

In addition, Theorem 1.1 also implies some interesting classification results. In the positive scalar curvature case, we have

Corollary 1.3.

Let (M4,g)(M^{4},g) be a closed simply-connected Einstein four-manifold with positive scalar curvature. If λ2(W+)>S12\lambda_{2}(W^{+})>-\frac{S}{12} on MM, then W+0W^{+}\equiv 0 and MM is isometric to 𝕊4\mathbb{S}^{4} with the round metric or 2\mathbb{CP}^{2} with the Fubini-Study metric.

Remark 1.4.

Corollary 1.3 was proved by Polombo [Pol92] assuming the stronger condition of half positive isotropic curvature, which is equivalent to

S>0 and λ1+λ2>S6.S>0\quad\text{ and }\quad\lambda_{1}+\lambda_{2}>-\tfrac{S}{6}.

Alternative proofs of Polombo’s result can be found in [MW93], [FKP14], [RS16], and [Wu17].

Remark 1.5.

The assumption λ2>S12\lambda_{2}>-\frac{S}{12} in Corollary 1.3 cannot be relaxed in view of the Einstein manifold 𝕊2×𝕊2\mathbb{S}^{2}\times\mathbb{S}^{2}, which has λ2=S12\lambda_{2}=-\frac{S}{12} everywhere.

In the Ricci-flat case, we have

Corollary 1.6.

Let (M4,g)(M^{4},g) be a closed oriented Ricci-flat four-manifold. If λ2(W+)0\lambda_{2}(W^{+})\geq 0 on MM, then W+0W^{+}\equiv 0, and either MM is flat or its universal cover is a K3 surface with the Calabi-Yau metric.

Remark 1.7.

Corollary 1.6 was proved by Micallef and Wang [MW93] under the stronger condition of half-nonnegative isotropic curvature. Alternative proofs of their result can be found in [FKP14], [RS16], and [Wu17]. However, it seems that none of these proofs work under our weaker curvature assumption.

With a bit more efforts, the method employed to prove Theorem 1.1 also yields analogous results for closed four-manifolds with harmonic (namely, divergence free) self-dual Weyl tensor, i.e.

(1.1) δW+:=W+=0.\delta W^{+}:=-\nabla\cdot W^{+}=0.

All Einstein metrics satisfy (1.1) as a consequence of the second Bianchi identity. However, (1.1) is actually much weaker than the Einstein condition.

Theorem 1.8.

Let (M4,g)(M^{4},g) be a closed oriented four-manifold with δW+=0\delta W^{+}=0. Denote by λ1λ2λ3\lambda_{1}\leq\lambda_{2}\leq\lambda_{3} the eigenvalues of W+W^{+} and by SS the scalar curvature. If λ2S12\lambda_{2}\geq-\frac{S}{12} everywhere, then one of the following assertions holds:

  1. (1)

    (M4,g)(M^{4},g) has constant nonzero scalar curvature, and (M4,g)(M^{4},g) is Kähler, or has a double Riemannian cover π:(M,g)(M,g)\pi:(M^{*},g^{*})\to(M,g), where g=πgg^{*}=\pi^{*}g, such that (M,g)(M^{*},g^{*}) is Kähler.

  2. (2)

    (M4,g)(M^{4},g) is anti-self-dual with nonnegative scalar curvature.

We would like to point out that both Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 1.8 are also motivated by an important work of Peng Wu [Wu21], in which he found a beautiful characterization of conformally Kähler Einstein metrics of positive scalar curvature on closed oriented four-manifolds via the condition det(W+)>0\det(W^{+})>0. LeBrun [LeB21], based on his earlier work in [LeB15], provided an entirely different proof of the result and relaxed the assumptions to W+0W^{+}\neq 0 and |W+|3det(W+)522121|W^{+}|^{-3}\det(W^{+})\geq-\tfrac{5\sqrt{2}}{21\sqrt{21}}. In comparison with Wu and Lebrun’s result, Theorem 1.1 has the advantage of giving a curvature characterization in the negative scalar curvature case, but has the disadvantage of using a closed curvature condition. Moreover, the condition λ2S12\lambda_{2}\geq-\frac{S}{12} is not conformally invariant, thus it does not allow any conformally Kähler manifolds.

Theorem 1.8 implies the following results, which are known under the stronger assumption of half positive (resp. nonnegative) isotropic curvature (see [Pol92], [MW93], [FKP14], [RS16], and [Wu17]).

Corollary 1.9.

Let (M4,g)(M^{4},g) be a closed oriented four-manifold with δW+=0\delta W^{+}=0 and positive scalar curvature. If λ2>S12\lambda_{2}>-\frac{S}{12} on MM, then W+0W^{+}\equiv 0.

Corollary 1.10.

Let (M4,g)(M^{4},g) be a closed oriented four-manifold with δW+=0\delta W^{+}=0 and nonnonegative scalar curvature. If λ20\lambda_{2}\geq 0 on MM, then W+0W^{+}\equiv 0.

To conclude this introduction, we give a brief discussion of our strategies to prove the above-mentioned results. In order to prove Theorem 1.1, we apply the maximum principle to the following partial differential inequality

(1.2) Δ(λ3λ1)6(λ3λ1)(λ2+S12)\Delta(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1})\geq 6(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1})(\lambda_{2}+\tfrac{S}{12})

to conclude that λ3λ1\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1} must be a constant. Moreover, we must have λ2=S12\lambda_{2}=-\frac{S}{12} everywhere unless MM is anti-self-dual. This together with the Einstein condition implies that all the λi\lambda_{i}’s are constant functions, and their values can be read from the differential inequalities satisfied by them. The desired Kählerity then follows from the work of Derdzinski [Der83].

The key to prove Theorem 1.8 is to show that the scalar curvature must be constant unless MM is anti-self-dual. We achieve this by picking up some extra gradient terms in (1.2), which are used to conclude that the λi\lambda_{i}’s are constants. It is worth mentioning that these helpful extra terms are used in Wu [Wu21] as well.

The proofs of Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 1.8 are given in Section 2 and Section 3, respectively.

2. The Einstein Case

In this section, we prove Theorem 1.1. First of all, we prove two technical propositions which will also be applied in Section 3. Note that Proposition 2.1 assumes only harmonic self-dual Weyl tensor, while Proposition 2.2 assumes, in addition, constant scalar curvature; these assumptions are consequences of the Einstein condition.

Proposition 2.1.

Let (M4,g)(M^{4},g) be a closed oriented four-manifold with δW+=0\delta W^{+}=0. Denote by λ1λ2λ3\lambda_{1}\leq\lambda_{2}\leq\lambda_{3} the eigenvalues of W+W^{+}. If λ2S12\lambda_{2}\geq-\frac{S}{12} everywhere, then either W+0W^{+}\equiv 0 or λ3λ1\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1} is equal to a positive constant and λ2=S12\lambda_{2}=-\frac{S}{12} everywhere.

Proposition 2.2.

Let (M4,g)(M^{4},g) be a closed oriented four-manifold with δW+=0\delta W^{+}=0 and with constant scalar curvature SS. Denote by λ1λ2λ3\lambda_{1}\leq\lambda_{2}\leq\lambda_{3} the eigenvalues of W+W^{+}. If λ2S12\lambda_{2}\geq-\frac{S}{12} everywhere and W+0W^{+}\not\equiv 0, then the following statements hold:

  1. (1)

    λ2=S12\lambda_{2}=-\frac{S}{12};

  2. (2)

    λ1=S12\lambda_{1}=-\frac{S}{12} and λ3=S6\lambda_{3}=\frac{S}{6} if S>0S>0, and λ1=S6\lambda_{1}=\frac{S}{6} and λ3=S12\lambda_{3}=-\frac{S}{12} if S<0S<0;

  3. (3)

    W+=0\nabla W^{+}=0.

Proof of Proposition 2.1.

According to [MW93, page 664], δW+=0\delta W^{+}=0 is equivalent to the Weitzenböck formula

(2.1) ΔW+=S2W+2(W+)24(W+)#,\Delta W^{+}=\tfrac{S}{2}W^{+}-2(W^{+})^{2}-4(W^{+})^{\#},

where the (W+)#(W^{+})^{\#} is the adjoint matrix of W+W^{+}. The reader may consult [Ham86] or [CLN06] for more information. If we choose an orthonormal basis {ωi}i=13\{\omega_{i}\}_{i=1}^{3} of Λ+\Lambda^{+} that diagonalizes W+W^{+} with eigenvalues λ1λ2λ3\lambda_{1}\leq\lambda_{2}\leq\lambda_{3}, then, with respect to this basis, we have

(W+)2=[λ12λ22λ32]\displaystyle(W^{+})^{2}=\left[\begin{array}[]{ccc}\lambda_{1}^{2}&&\\ &\lambda_{2}^{2}&\\ &&\lambda_{3}^{2}\end{array}\right]

and

(W+)#=[λ2λ3λ1λ2λ1λ2].\displaystyle(W^{+})^{\#}=\left[\begin{array}[]{ccc}\lambda_{2}\lambda_{3}&&\\ &\lambda_{1}\lambda_{2}&\\ &&\lambda_{1}\lambda_{2}\end{array}\right].

Therefore, the Weitzenböck formula (2.1) implies the following differential inequalities for the eigenvalues λ1\lambda_{1} and λ3\lambda_{3}

(2.2) Δλ1\displaystyle\Delta\lambda_{1} \displaystyle\leq S2λ12λ124λ2λ3,\displaystyle\tfrac{S}{2}\lambda_{1}-2\lambda_{1}^{2}-4\lambda_{2}\lambda_{3},
(2.3) Δλ3\displaystyle\Delta\lambda_{3} \displaystyle\geq S2λ32λ324λ1λ2.\displaystyle\tfrac{S}{2}\lambda_{3}-2\lambda_{3}^{2}-4\lambda_{1}\lambda_{2}.

Since λ1\lambda_{1} and λ3\lambda_{3} are only locally Lipschitz functions on MM, the inequalities above are all understood in the sense of barrier (see [Cal58]). To prove (2.2) and (2.3), one may construct the barriers as follows. Fix pMp\in M and let ωΛp+\omega\in\Lambda^{+}_{p} be the unit eigenvector of Wp+W^{+}_{p} associated with λ3\lambda_{3}. Now we may extend ω\omega to a neighborhood of pp by parallel transport and compute using the normal coordinates at pp:

Δ(W+(ω,ω))\displaystyle\Delta(W^{+}(\omega,\omega)) =(ΔW+)(ω,ω)\displaystyle=(\Delta W^{+})(\omega,\omega)
=S2W+(ω,ω)2|W+(ω)|24(W+)#(ω,ω)\displaystyle=\tfrac{S}{2}W^{+}(\omega,\omega)-2|W^{+}(\omega)|^{2}-4(W^{+})^{\#}(\omega,\omega)
=S2λ32λ324λ1λ2 at p.\displaystyle=\tfrac{S}{2}\lambda_{3}-2\lambda_{3}^{2}-4\lambda_{1}\lambda_{2}\quad\text{ at }p.

Obviously, W+(ω,ω)W^{+}(\omega,\omega) is a lower barrier of λ3\lambda_{3} at pp, and this proves (2.3); the proof of (2.2) is similar.

Subtracting (2.2) from (2.3) yields

Δ(λ3λ1)\displaystyle\Delta(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1}) \displaystyle\geq S2(λ3λ1)2(λ32λ12)+4λ2(λ3λ1)\displaystyle\tfrac{S}{2}(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1})-2(\lambda_{3}^{2}-\lambda_{1}^{2})+4\lambda_{2}(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1})
=\displaystyle= (λ3λ1)(S22λ12λ3+4λ2)\displaystyle(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1})\left(\tfrac{S}{2}-2\lambda_{1}-2\lambda_{3}+4\lambda_{2}\right)
=\displaystyle= 6(λ3λ1)(λ2+S12),\displaystyle 6(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1})\left(\lambda_{2}+\tfrac{S}{12}\right),

where we have used λ1+λ2+λ3=0\lambda_{1}+\lambda_{2}+\lambda_{3}=0 in the last step. It follows from λ2S12\lambda_{2}\geq-\frac{S}{12} that

Δ(λ3λ1)6(λ3λ1)(λ2+S12)0,\Delta(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1})\geq 6(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1})\left(\lambda_{2}+\tfrac{S}{12}\right)\geq 0,

in the sense of barrier. By the maximum principle, we conclude that λ3λ1c0\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1}\equiv c\geq 0. Note that c=0c=0 implies W+0W^{+}\equiv 0. In case c>0c>0, the desired equality λ2=S12\lambda_{2}=-\frac{S}{12} follows from

0=Δ(λ3λ1)6(λ3λ1)(λ2+S12).0=\Delta(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1})\geq 6(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1})\left(\lambda_{2}+\tfrac{S}{12}\right).

The proof is finished. \square

Proof of Proposition 2.2.

Part (1) follows immediately from Proposition 2.1 since W+0W^{+}\not\equiv 0.

To prove part (2), we first notice that λ3λ1\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1} is equal to a positive constant by Proposition 2.1. Now the constant scalar curvature assumption implies that λ1+λ3\lambda_{1}+\lambda_{3} is a constant function, as

λ1+λ3=λ2=S12.\lambda_{1}+\lambda_{3}=-\lambda_{2}=\tfrac{S}{12}.

It then follows that both λ1\lambda_{1} and λ3\lambda_{3} must be constant functions. Substituting λ2=S12\lambda_{2}=-\frac{S}{12} and λ1+λ2+λ3=0\lambda_{1}+\lambda_{2}+\lambda_{3}=0 into the differential inequalities satisfied by λ1\lambda_{1} and λ3\lambda_{3}, we obtain that

0=Δλ1\displaystyle 0=\Delta\lambda_{1} \displaystyle\leq S2λ12λ124λ2λ3=2(λ1+S12)(λ1S6)\displaystyle\tfrac{S}{2}\lambda_{1}-2\lambda_{1}^{2}-4\lambda_{2}\lambda_{3}=-2(\lambda_{1}+\tfrac{S}{12})(\lambda_{1}-\tfrac{S}{6})
0=Δλ3\displaystyle 0=\Delta\lambda_{3} \displaystyle\geq S2λ32λ324λ1λ2=2(λ3+S12)(λ3S6).\displaystyle\tfrac{S}{2}\lambda_{3}-2\lambda_{3}^{2}-4\lambda_{1}\lambda_{2}=-2(\lambda_{3}+\tfrac{S}{12})(\lambda_{3}-\tfrac{S}{6}).

One easily reads from above inequalities that we must have

λ1=λ3=0,\displaystyle\lambda_{1}=\lambda_{3}=0, if S=0;\displaystyle\text{ if }S=0;
λ1=S12 and λ3=S6,\displaystyle\lambda_{1}=-\tfrac{S}{12}\text{ and }\lambda_{3}=\tfrac{S}{6}, if S>0;\displaystyle\text{ if }S>0;
λ1=S6 and λ3=S12,\displaystyle\lambda_{1}=\tfrac{S}{6}\text{ and }\lambda_{3}=-\tfrac{S}{12}, if S<0.\displaystyle\text{ if }S<0.

Now part (2) is proved.

Part (3) follows immediately from part (2) and the constant scalar curvature assumption.

\square

We now give the proof of Theorem 1.1.

Proof of Theorem 1.1.

If MM is anti-self-dual, then 0=λ2S/120=\lambda_{2}\geq-S/12 implies that SS is a nonnegative constant. By Hitchin’s classification [Hit74] of half conformally flat Einstein four-manifolds with nonnegative scalar curvature (see also [Bes08, Theorem 13.30]), (M4,g)(M^{4},g) is one of the manifolds as described in part (2) of the statement.

If MM is not anti-self-dual, then by Proposition 2.2, we have that W+=0\nabla W^{+}=0 and W+W^{+} has at most two distinct eigenvalues at every point. One can then invoke the result of Derdzinski [Der83, Therorem 2] to conclude that either MM is Kähler or it has a double cover that is Kähler. Below we provide a more direct proof using an elegant argument of Lebrun [LeB21], which is also applicable to the proof of Theorem 1.8. We shall only present the case where MM has negative constant scalar curvature, as it can be easily adapted to the positive scalar curvature case by flipping signs and reversing directions of the related inequalities.

Since λ1=S/6\lambda_{1}=S/6 is an isolated eigenvalue of W+W^{+}, we have that the corresponding eigenspaces of W+W^{+} at each point on MM form a one-dimensional subbundle of Λ+\Lambda^{+}. Denote this bundle by LL. If LL is a trivial bundle (in particular, if H1(M;2)=0H^{1}(M;\mathbb{Z}_{2})=0), then we can find a non-vanishing global section ω\omega of LL with constant norm everywhere. If LL does not have a non-vanishing global section, then we may let MM^{*} be all the elements in LL with constant unit norm, and the restriction of the bundle projection π:MM\pi:M^{*}\to M is a double cover. If we equip MM^{*} with the Remannian metric g=πgg^{*}=\pi^{*}g, then (M,g)(M^{*},g^{*}) also satisfies Proposition 2.1 and W+W^{+} admits a global eigenvector section associated with λ1=S/6\lambda_{1}=S/6. Henceforth, we will assume that LL admits a global section ω\omega with constant norm |ω|2|\omega|\equiv\sqrt{2}.

Since ω\omega, when viewed as an operator on TMTM, satisfies

ωω=id,\omega\cdot\omega=-\operatorname{id},

we have that ω\omega provides an almost complex structure. We need only to show that ω\omega is a closed form.

We first observe that

(2.4) W+(Xω,Xω)0.W^{+}(\nabla_{X}\omega,\nabla_{X}\omega)\geq 0.

for any tangent vector XX. This is because ω\omega has constant norm, which implies that Xω,ω=0\langle\nabla_{X}\omega,\omega\rangle=0 and hence Xω\nabla_{X}\omega is in the eigenspace of λ2=λ3=S/12>0\lambda_{2}=\lambda_{3}=-S/12>0.

Now recall that when δW+=0\delta W^{+}=0, the following Weitzenböck formula holds (c.f. [MW93, (4.1c)] or [LeB21, Equation (9)])

(2.5) ΔW+=S2W+6W+W++2|W+|2I.\displaystyle\Delta W^{+}=\tfrac{S}{2}W^{+}-6W^{+}\circ W^{+}+2|W^{+}|^{2}I.

It is easy to check that (2.5) is equivalent to (2.1). We now take inner product of (2.5) and ωω\omega\otimes\omega, and integrate over MM to get

0\displaystyle 0 =MΔW++S2W+6W+W++2|W+|2I,ωω𝑑g\displaystyle=\int_{M}\left\langle-\Delta W^{+}+\tfrac{S}{2}W^{+}-6W^{+}\circ W^{+}+2|W^{+}|^{2}I,\omega\otimes\omega\right\rangle dg
=M(2W+(ω,Δω)2W+(eω,eω)\displaystyle=\int_{M}\Big{(}-2W^{+}(\omega,\Delta\omega)-2W^{+}(\nabla_{e}\omega,\nabla^{e}\omega)
+S2λ1|ω|26λ12|ω|2+2(λ12+λ22+λ32)|ω|2)dg\displaystyle\qquad+\tfrac{S}{2}\lambda_{1}|\omega|^{2}-6\lambda_{1}^{2}|\omega|^{2}+2(\lambda_{1}^{2}+\lambda_{2}^{2}+\lambda_{3}^{2})|\omega|^{2}\Big{)}dg
2Mλ1ω,Δω𝑑g\displaystyle\leq-2\int_{M}\lambda_{1}\langle\omega,\Delta\omega\rangle dg
=S3M|ω|2𝑑g,\displaystyle=\tfrac{S}{3}\int_{M}|\nabla\omega|^{2}dg,

where we have applied Proposition 2.2(1)(2) and (2.4). Since SS is a negative constant, we have that ω\nabla\omega vanishes everywhere. It follows that ω\omega is a Kähler form.

In case where W+0W^{+}\not\equiv 0 and SS is a positive constant, we can also find a Kähler form in the same way.

\square

It is clear that Corollary 1.2, Corollary 1.3, and Corollary 1.6 can be easily observed from the proof of Theorem 1.1.

3. The Harmonic self-dual Weyl case

If MM is only assumed to have harmonic self-dual Weyl tensor, then the proof given in the previous section breaks down because we cannot conclude that both λ1\lambda_{1} and λ3\lambda_{3} are constant functions without the constant scalar curvature assumption. We shall show, by improving the partial differential inequality satisfied by λ3λ1\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1}, that the scalar curvature must be a constant unless W+0W^{+}\equiv 0, as a consequence of δW+=0\delta W^{+}=0 and λ2S12\lambda_{2}\geq-\frac{S}{12}.

Proposition 3.1.

Let (M4,g)(M^{4},g) be a closed oriented four-manifold with δW+=0\delta W^{+}=0. Denote by λ1λ2λ3\lambda_{1}\leq\lambda_{2}\leq\lambda_{3} the eigenvalues of W+W^{+}. If λ2S12\lambda_{2}\geq-\frac{S}{12} everywhere, then either MM is anti-self-dual with nonnegative scalar curvature, or MM has constant scalar curvature.

Proof.

Let us recall some computations in [Der83]. For any xMx\in M, we can choose an orthogonal basis ω1\omega_{1}, ω2\omega_{2}, ω3\omega_{3} of Λx+\Lambda^{+}_{x}, consisting of eigenvectors of W+W^{+} such that

(3.1) |ω1|2=|ω2|2=|ω3|2=2.|\omega_{1}|^{2}=|\omega_{2}|^{2}=|\omega_{3}|^{2}=2.

Consequently, we have that, at xx

(3.2) W+=12(λ1ω1ω1+λ2ω2ω2+λ3ω3ω3)W^{+}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\lambda_{1}\omega_{1}\otimes\omega_{1}+\lambda_{2}\omega_{2}\otimes\omega_{2}+\lambda_{3}\omega_{3}\otimes\omega_{3}\right)

with λ1λ2λ3\lambda_{1}\leq\lambda_{2}\leq\lambda_{3} being the eigenvalues of W+W^{+}. Let MW+MM_{W^{+}}\subset M be the open dense set where the number of distinct eigenvalues of W+W^{+} is locally constant. In MW+M_{W^{+}}, the pointwise formula (3.2) is valid locally in the sense that the mutually orthogonal sections ω1,ω2,ω3\omega_{1},\omega_{2},\omega_{3} of Λ+\Lambda^{+} satisfying (3.1) and the functions λ1,λ2,λ3\lambda_{1},\lambda_{2},\lambda_{3} may be assumed differentiable in a neighborhood of any pMW+p\in M_{W^{+}}.

Since Λ+\Lambda^{+} is invariant under parallel transport, in a neighborhood of pMW+p\in M_{W^{+}}, there exist one-forms a,ba,b, and cc defined near pp, such that we have (3.2) and

ω1\displaystyle\nabla\omega_{1} =aω2cω3,\displaystyle=a\otimes\omega_{2}-c\otimes\omega_{3},
ω2\displaystyle\nabla\omega_{2} =bω3aω1,\displaystyle=b\otimes\omega_{3}-a\otimes\omega_{1},
ω3\displaystyle\nabla\omega_{3} =cω1bω2.\displaystyle=c\otimes\omega_{1}-b\otimes\omega_{2}.

It was shown by Derdzinski [Der83] that if δW+=0\delta W^{+}=0, then in a neighborhood of pMW+p\in M_{W^{+}}, we have

λ1\displaystyle\nabla\lambda_{1} =\displaystyle= (λ2λ1)(ιa#ω3)#+(λ3λ1)(ιc#ω2)#,\displaystyle(\lambda_{2}-\lambda_{1})(\iota_{a^{\#}}\omega_{3})^{\#}+(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1})(\iota_{c^{\#}}\omega_{2})^{\#},
λ2\displaystyle\nabla\lambda_{2} =\displaystyle= (λ1λ2)(ιa#ω3)#+(λ3λ2)(ιb#ω1)#,\displaystyle(\lambda_{1}-\lambda_{2})(\iota_{a^{\#}}\omega_{3})^{\#}+(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{2})(\iota_{b^{\#}}\omega_{1})^{\#},
λ3\displaystyle\nabla\lambda_{3} =\displaystyle= (λ1λ3)(ιc#ω2)#+(λ2λ3)(ιb#ω1)#,\displaystyle(\lambda_{1}-\lambda_{3})(\iota_{c^{\#}}\omega_{2})^{\#}+(\lambda_{2}-\lambda_{3})(\iota_{b^{\#}}\omega_{1})^{\#},

and

Δλ1\displaystyle\Delta\lambda_{1} =\displaystyle= 2(λ1λ2)|(ιa#ω3)#|2+2(λ1λ3)|(ιc#ω2)#|2\displaystyle 2(\lambda_{1}-\lambda_{2})|(\iota_{a^{\#}}\omega_{3})^{\#}|^{2}+2(\lambda_{1}-\lambda_{3})|(\iota_{c^{\#}}\omega_{2})^{\#}|^{2}
+S2λ12λ124λ2λ3,\displaystyle+\tfrac{S}{2}\lambda_{1}-2\lambda_{1}^{2}-4\lambda_{2}\lambda_{3},
Δλ2\displaystyle\Delta\lambda_{2} =\displaystyle= 2(λ2λ1)|(ιa#ω3)#|2+2(λ2λ3)|(ιb#ω1)#|2\displaystyle 2(\lambda_{2}-\lambda_{1})|(\iota_{a^{\#}}\omega_{3})^{\#}|^{2}+2(\lambda_{2}-\lambda_{3})|(\iota_{b^{\#}}\omega_{1})^{\#}|^{2}
+S2λ22λ224λ1λ3,\displaystyle+\tfrac{S}{2}\lambda_{2}-2\lambda_{2}^{2}-4\lambda_{1}\lambda_{3},
Δλ3\displaystyle\Delta\lambda_{3} =\displaystyle= 2(λ3λ1)|(ιc#ω2)#|2+2(λ3λ2)|(ιb#ω1)#|2\displaystyle 2(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1})|(\iota_{c^{\#}}\omega_{2})^{\#}|^{2}+2(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{2})|(\iota_{b^{\#}}\omega_{1})^{\#}|^{2}
+S2λ32λ324λ1λ2,\displaystyle+\tfrac{S}{2}\lambda_{3}-2\lambda_{3}^{2}-4\lambda_{1}\lambda_{2},

where ι\iota is the interior product and #\# is the sharp operator.

It follows from the assumption λ2S/12\lambda_{2}\geq-S/12 that in the set MW+M_{W^{+}}, we have

Δ(λ3λ1)\displaystyle\Delta(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1}) =\displaystyle= 6(λ3λ1)(λ2+S12)+4(λ3λ1)|(ιc#ω2)#|2\displaystyle 6(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1})\left(\lambda_{2}+\tfrac{S}{12}\right)+4(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1})|(\iota_{c^{\#}}\omega_{2})^{\#}|^{2}
+2(λ3λ2)|(ιb#ω1)#|2+2(λ2λ1)|(ιa#ω3)#|2\displaystyle+2(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{2})|(\iota_{b^{\#}}\omega_{1})^{\#}|^{2}+2(\lambda_{2}-\lambda_{1})|(\iota_{a^{\#}}\omega_{3})^{\#}|^{2}
\displaystyle\geq 4(λ3λ1)|(ιc#ω2)#|2+2(λ3λ2)|(ιb#ω1)#|2\displaystyle 4(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1})|(\iota_{c^{\#}}\omega_{2})^{\#}|^{2}+2(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{2})|(\iota_{b^{\#}}\omega_{1})^{\#}|^{2}
+2(λ2λ1)|(ιa#ω3)#|2.\displaystyle+2(\lambda_{2}-\lambda_{1})|(\iota_{a^{\#}}\omega_{3})^{\#}|^{2}.

Since λ3λ1\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1} is a nonnegative constant on MM by Proposition 2.1, we conclude that

(λ3λ1)|(ιc#ω2)#|2=(λ3λ2)|(ιb#ω1)#|2=(λ2λ1)|(ιa#ω3)#|2=0,(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{1})|(\iota_{c^{\#}}\omega_{2})^{\#}|^{2}=(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{2})|(\iota_{b^{\#}}\omega_{1})^{\#}|^{2}=(\lambda_{2}-\lambda_{1})|(\iota_{a^{\#}}\omega_{3})^{\#}|^{2}=0,

in a neighborhood of pMW+p\in M_{W^{+}}. This implies that

λ1=λ3=0\nabla\lambda_{1}=\nabla\lambda_{3}=0

in that neighborhood of pMW+p\in M_{W^{+}}. Therefore, λ1\lambda_{1} and λ3\lambda_{3} are locally constant on MW+M_{W^{+}}. Since MW+M_{W^{+}} is open and dense in MM, and since λ1\lambda_{1} and λ3\lambda_{3} are locally Lipschitz functions, we conclude that λ1\lambda_{1} and λ3\lambda_{3} are global constant functions. Moreover λ2=λ1λ3\lambda_{2}=-\lambda_{1}-\lambda_{3} is also a constant.

If MM is not anti-self-dual, then we have λ2=S12\lambda_{2}=-\frac{S}{12} by Proposition 2.1. SS must be a constant since λ2\lambda_{2} is so.

\square

Proof of Theorem 1.8.

If MM is anti-self-dual, then we have S0S\geq 0 in view of 0=λ2S120=\lambda_{2}\geq-\frac{S}{12}. If MM is not anti-self-dual, then MM has constant scalar curvature by Proposition 3.1. In the latter case, Proposition 2.2 is valid and the proof of Kählerity is the same as the proof of Theorem 1.1 given in Section 2. \square

It is clear that Corollary 1.9 and Corollary 1.10 can be observed from the proof of Theorem 1.8.

Acknowledgment

The authors would like to thank Professor Jiaping Wang for some helpful discussions related to this work.

References

  • [Bes08] Arthur L. Besse. Einstein manifolds. Classics in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2008. Reprint of the 1987 edition.
  • [Cal58] E. Calabi. An extension of E. Hopf’s maximum principle with an application to Riemannian geometry. Duke Math. J., 25:45–56, 1958.
  • [CLN06] Bennett Chow, Peng Lu, and Lei Ni. Hamilton’s Ricci flow, volume 77 of Graduate Studies in Mathematics. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI; Science Press Beijing, New York, 2006.
  • [Der83] Andrzej Derdziński. Self-dual Kähler manifolds and Einstein manifolds of dimension four. Compositio Math., 49(3):405–433, 1983.
  • [FKP14] Joel Fine, Kirill Krasnov, and Dmitri Panov. A gauge theoretic approach to Einstein 4-manifolds. New York J. Math., 20:293–323, 2014.
  • [GL99] Matthew J. Gursky and Claude Lebrun. On Einstein manifolds of positive sectional curvature. Ann. Global Anal. Geom., 17(4):315–328, 1999.
  • [Ham86] Richard S. Hamilton. Four-manifolds with positive curvature operator. J. Differential Geom., 24(2):153–179, 1986.
  • [Hit74] Nigel Hitchin. Compact four-dimensional Einstein manifolds. J. Differential Geometry, 9:435–441, 1974.
  • [LeB15] Claude LeBrun. Einstein metrics, harmonic forms, and symplectic four-manifolds. Ann. Global Anal. Geom., 48(1):75–85, 2015.
  • [LeB21] Claude LeBrun. Einstein manifolds, self-dual Weyl curvature, and conformally Kähler geometry. Math. Res. Lett., 28(1):127–144, 2021.
  • [MW93] Mario J. Micallef and McKenzie Y. Wang. Metrics with nonnegative isotropic curvature. Duke Math. J., 72(3):649–672, 1993.
  • [Pol92] A. Polombo. De nouvelles formules de Weitzenböck pour des endomorphismes harmoniques. Applications géométriques. Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup. (4), 25(4):393–428, 1992.
  • [RS16] Thomas Richard and Harish Seshadri. Positive isotropic curvature and self-duality in dimension 4. Manuscripta Math., 149(3-4):443–457, 2016.
  • [Wu17] Peng Wu. A Weitzenböck formula for canonical metrics on four-manifolds. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 369(2):1079–1096, 2017.
  • [Wu21] Peng Wu. Einstein four-manifolds with self-dual Weyl curvature of nonnegative determinant. Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN, (2):1043–1054, 2021.