Liouville theorems for harmonic map heat flow along ancient super Ricci flow via reduced geometry

Keita Kunikawa and Yohei Sakurai

arXiv: 2104.05191v2 · PDF · 3 August 2021
Categories: math.DG
Licence: CC BY 4.0 The site shows the text.

Abstract

We study harmonic map heat flow along ancient super Ricci flow, and derive several Liouville theorems with controlled growth from Perelman’s reduced geometric viewpoint. For non-positively curved target spaces, our growth condition is sharp. For positively curved target spaces, our Liouville theorem is new even in the static case (i.e., for harmonic maps); moreover, we point out that the growth condition can be improved, and almost sharp in the static case. This fills the gap between the Liouville theorem of Choi and the example constructed by Schoen-Uhlenbeck.

Items 33

Theorem

Theorem 1.1

Y4P3

Let (M,g) be a complete Riemannian manifold of non-negative Ricci curvature. Then we have the following:

Let u:M\times (-\infty,0]\to (0,\infty) be a positive ancient solution to the heat equation. If
u(x,t)=\exp\left[o\left(d(x)+\sqrt{\vert t\vert}\right)\right]
near infinity, then u must be constant. Here d(x) denotes the Riemannian distance from a fixed point;
let u:M\times (-\infty,0]\to \mathbb{R} be an ancient solution to the heat equation. If
u(x,t)=o\left(d(x)+\sqrt{\vert t\vert}\right)
near infinity, then u is constant.

Theorem

Theorem 1.2

H395

Let (M,g(\tau))_{\tau \in [0,\infty)} be an admissible, complete backward super Ricci flow. We assume

\mathcal{D}(V)\geq 0,\quad \mathcal{H}(V) \geq -\frac{H}{\tau},\quad H\geq 0

for all vector fields V. Then we have the following:

Let u:M\times [0,\infty)\to (0,\infty) be a positive solution to backward heat equation. If
u(x,\tau)=\exp\left[o\left(\mathfrak{d}(x,\tau)+\sqrt{\tau}\right)\right]
near infinity, then u is constant. Here \mathfrak{d}(x,\tau) is defined by
\mathfrak{d}(x,\tau):=\sqrt{4\tau\,\ell(x,\tau)};
let u:M\times [0,\infty)\to \mathbb{R} be a solution to backward heat equation. If
u(x,\tau)=o\left(\mathfrak{d}(x,\tau)+\sqrt{\tau}\right)
near infinity, then u is constant.

Theorem

Theorem 2.1

O2CR

Let (M,g(\tau))_{\tau \in [0,\infty)} be an admissible, complete backward super Ricci flow. We assume

\mathcal{D}(V)\geq 0,\quad \mathcal{H}(V) \geq -\frac{H}{\tau},\quad H\geq 0

for all vector fields V. Let (N,\mathfrak{g}) be a complete, simply connected Riemannian manifold with \sec \leq 0. Let u:M\times [0,\infty)\to N be a solution to backward harmonic map heat flow. If

\rho(u(x,\tau))=o\left(\mathfrak{d}(x,\tau)+\sqrt{\tau}\right)

near infinity, then u is constant. Here \rho:N\to \mathbb{R} is the Riemannian distance function from a fixed point y_0 \in N.

Proof (Proof of Theorem 2.1) of Theorem 2.1

Let (M,g(\tau))_{\tau \in [0,\infty)} be backward super Ricci flow satisfying (\ref{eq:main assumption}) for all vector fields V. Let (N,\mathfrak{g}) be simply connected, and \sec \leq 0. Let u:M\times [0,\infty)\to N be a solution to backward harmonic map heat flow. For R>0 we put

A_{R}:=\sup_{Q_{R,R^2}}2\rho \circ u.

In view of the growth condition, A_{R}=o(R) as R\to \infty. For a fixed (x,\tau)\in M \times (0,\infty), we possess (x,\tau)\in Q_{R/2,R^2/4} for every sufficiently large R>0, and fix such one. From Theorem 4.1 with K=0, we derive

\frac{\Vert du \Vert}{A^2_R}\leq \frac{\Vert d u \Vert}{A^2_R-\rho^2\circ u} \leq \frac{2C_m}{A_R R}

at (x,\tau). Letting R\to \infty, we complete the proof of Theorem 2.1.

Uses Theorem 4.1

Theorem

Theorem 2.2

VCBE

Let (M,g(\tau))_{\tau \in [0,\infty)} be an admissible, complete backward super Ricci flow. We assume

\mathcal{D}(V)\geq 0,\quad \mathcal{H}(V) \geq -\frac{H}{\tau},\quad H\geq 0

for all vector fields V. Let (N,\mathfrak{g}) be a complete Riemannian manifold with \sec \leq \kappa for \kappa>0. Assume that an open geodesic ball B_{\pi/2\sqrt{\kappa}}(y_0) of radius \pi/2\sqrt{\kappa} centered at y_0 in N does not meet the cut locus \mathrm{Cut}\,(y_0) of y_0. Let u:M\times [0,\infty)\to N be a solution to backward harmonic map heat flow. If the image of u is contained in B_{\pi/2\sqrt{\kappa}}(y_0), and if u satisfies

\frac{1}{\cos \sqrt{\kappa}\rho(u(x,\tau))}=o\left(\mathfrak{d}(x,\tau)^{1/2}+\tau^{1/4}\right)

near infinity, then u is constant.

Proof (Proof of Theorem 2.2) of Theorem 2.2

Let (M,g(\tau))_{\tau \in [0,\infty)} be backward super Ricci flow satisfying (2.2) for all vector fields V. Let (N,\mathfrak{g}) be \sec \leq \kappa for \kappa>0. Assume that B_{\pi/2\sqrt{\kappa}}(y_0) does not meet \mathrm{Cut}\,(y_0). Let u:M\times [0,\infty)\to N be a solution to backward harmonic map heat flow. Suppose that the image of u is contained in B_{\pi/2\sqrt{\kappa}}(y_0). For R>0 we put

\mathcal{A}_{R}:=\sup_{Q_{R,R^2}}\left(\frac{1}{\cos\sqrt{\kappa}\rho \circ u}\right)^2.

The growth condition says that \mathcal{A}_{R}=o(R) as R\to \infty. We fix (x,\tau)\in M \times (0,\infty), and a sufficiently large R>0. Thanks to Theorem 5.1 with K=0,

\frac{\Vert du \Vert}{A}\leq \frac{\Vert d u \Vert}{A-\varphi \circ u} \leq \frac{2C_m\mathcal{A}_R}{ R}

at (x,\tau), where \varphi and A are defined as (5.1). Notice that A\leq 1. Thus, by letting R\to \infty, we complete the proof of Theorem 2.2.

Uses Theorem 5.1

Theorem

Theorem 2.3

ROIR

Let (M,g) be a complete Riemannian manifold of non-negative Ricci curvature, and let (N,\mathfrak{g}) be a complete Riemannian manifold with \sec\leq \kappa for \kappa>0. Let u:M \to N be a harmonic map (i.e., \Delta u=0). We assume that B_{L}(y_0) is a regular (i.e., L\in (0, \pi/2\sqrt{\kappa}) and B_{L}(y_0)\cap \mathrm{Cut}\,(y_0)=\emptyset), open geodesic ball. If the image of u is contained in B_{L}(y_0), then u is constant.

Corollary

Corollary 2.4

Z3Y8

Let (M,g) be a complete Riemannian manifold of non-negative Ricci curvature, and let (N,\mathfrak{g}) be a complete Riemannian manifold with \sec\leq \kappa for \kappa>0. Assume that B_{\pi/2\sqrt{\kappa}}(y_0) does not meet \mathrm{Cut}\, (y_0). Let u:M \to N be a harmonic map. If the image of u is contained in B_{\pi/2\sqrt{\kappa}}(y_0), and if u satisfies a growth condition

\frac{1}{\cos\sqrt{\kappa}\rho(u(x))} = o(d(x)^{1/2})

near infinity, then u is constant.

Remark

Remark 2.5

E6UI

In the literature of Liouville theorems for harmonic maps with positively curved targets, the results in the form of Theorem 2.3 have been examined (see e.g., [HJW, Theorem 1], [Cho, Theorem], [Ke, Theorem 6.1], [STW, Theorem 1.4], [KuSt, Example 3], [LW, Theorem 3.2], [CJQ, Theorem 2], [Q, Theorem 2], [ZZZ, Corollary 1.8]). We emphasize that in Corollary 2.4, such a condition is relaxed to a growth condition (2.4) beyond the traditional form.

Theorem

Theorem 2.6

HT8N

Let (M,g) be a complete Riemannian manifold of non-negative Ricci curvature, and let (N, \mathfrak{g}) be a complete Riemannian manifold with \sec\leq \kappa for \kappa>0. Assume that B_{\pi/2\sqrt{\kappa}}(y_0) does not meet \mathrm{Cut}\, (y_0). Let u:M \to N be a harmonic map. If the image of u is contained in B_{\pi/2\sqrt{\kappa}}(y_0), and if u satisfies a growth condition

\frac{1}{\cos\sqrt{\kappa}\rho(u(x))} = o(d(x))

near infinity, then u is constant.

Proof (Proof of Theorem 2.6) of Theorem 2.6

The Bochner formula for a harmonic map u:M\to N (i.e., harmonic map version of Lemma 4.2) combined with the refined Kato inequality (6.1) and curvature assumptions on M, N tells us that

\Delta\Vert du\Vert^2\geq -2\kappa \Vert du\Vert^4+2\Vert\nabla du\Vert^2 \geq -2\kappa \Vert du\Vert^4+\frac{2m}{m-1}\Vert\nabla \Vert du\Vert\Vert^2.

Let v(x)=1/\cos\sqrt{\kappa}\rho(u(x)). Note that this is well-defined when u(M)\subset B_{\pi/2\sqrt{\kappa}}(y_0). The Hessian comparison theorem under the curvature assumption on N implies

\Delta v=v^2\Delta(\varphi\circ u)+\frac{2\Vert\nabla v\Vert^2}{v}\geq \kappa \Vert du\Vert^2v+\frac{2\Vert\nabla v\Vert^2}{v},

where \varphi=1-\cos\sqrt \kappa\rho. Using (Proof) and (Proof), a direct computation yields

\begin{aligned} \Delta(\Vert du\Vert^p v^q)&\geq \kappa(q-p)\Vert du\Vert^{p+2}v^q\\ &+p\left(p-1+\frac{1}{m-1}\right)\Vert du\Vert^{p-2}v^q\Vert\nabla\Vert du\Vert\Vert^2+q(q+1)\Vert du\Vert^p v^{q-2}\Vert\nabla v\Vert^2\\&+2pq\Vert du\Vert^{p-1}v^{q-1}g(\nabla\Vert du\Vert, \nabla v), \end{aligned}

where p, q are determined later. Using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and the Young inequality (with \varepsilon>0) for the last term, we have

\begin{aligned} \Delta(\Vert du\Vert^p v^q)&\geq \kappa(q-p)\Vert du\Vert^{p+2}v^q \\ &\quad +p\left(p-1+\frac{1}{m-1}-\varepsilon q \right)\Vert du\Vert^{p-2}v^q \Vert \nabla\Vert du\Vert \Vert^2 \\ &\quad +q\left(q+1-\varepsilon^{-1}p\right)\Vert du\Vert^p v^{q-2}\Vert\nabla v\Vert^2. \end{aligned}

For given m\geq 2, let q=p>2m-3 and \varepsilon=q/(q+1). Then we have

\Delta(\Vert du\Vert^q v^q)\geq 0,

i.e., \Vert du\Vert^q v^q is a subharmonic function on M. Therefore, we can use Li-Schoen’s mean value inequality (see e.g., [PLi, Theorem 7.2]) to conclude

\sup_{B_{R/4}(x_0)}\Vert du\Vert^{2q} v^{2q}\leq \frac{C_m}{\operatorname{vol}({B_{R}(x_0))}}\int_{B_{R}(x_0)}\Vert du\Vert^{2q}v^{2q},

where C_m is a positive constant depending only on m.

On the other hand, choosing q=p+1>2m-3 and \varepsilon=(q-1)/(q+1) in (Proof), we have

\Delta(\Vert du\Vert^{q-1}v^q) \geq \kappa \Vert du\Vert^{q+1}v^q.

We multiply this by \Vert du\Vert^{q-1}v^q\eta^{2q}, where \eta is a test function on M with compact support, and then integrating by parts with the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and the Young inequality yields

\begin{aligned} \kappa\int_{M}\Vert du\Vert^{2q}v^{2q}\eta^{2q}\leq \frac{1}{2}\int_{M}\Vert du\Vert^{2q-2}v^{2q}\eta^{2q-2}\Vert\nabla \eta\Vert^2. \end{aligned}

Recall the generalized Young inequality for a, b\geq 0 with arbitrary \varepsilon>0:

ab\leq \varepsilon\left(\frac{q-1}{q}\right)a^{q/(q-1)}+\frac{\varepsilon^{-(q-1)}}{q}b^q.

Putting a=\Vert du \Vert^{2q-2}\eta^{2q-2} and b=\Vert \nabla\eta\Vert^2 in this inequality, we have

\left(\kappa-\frac{\varepsilon(q-1)}{2q}\right)\int_{M}\Vert du\Vert^{2q}v^{2q}\eta^{2q}\leq \frac{\varepsilon^{-(q-1)}}{2q}\int_{M}v^{2q}\Vert \nabla \eta\Vert^{2q}.

We take \varepsilon=\kappa q/(q-1) to get

\int_{M}\Vert du \Vert^{2q}v^{2q}\eta^{2q}\leq \frac{(q-1)^{q-1}}{\kappa^q q^q}\int_{M}v^{2q}\Vert \nabla \eta\Vert^{2q}.

Choosing \eta as the standard cut-off function in this inequality, we obtain

\begin{aligned} \int_{B_{R}(x_0)}\Vert du\Vert^{2q}v^{2q}&\leq \frac{(q-1)^{q-1}}{\kappa^q q^q R^{2q}} \int_{B_{2R}(x_0)}v^{2q} \\ &\leq \frac{(q-1)^{q-1}}{\kappa^q q^q R^{2q}}\operatorname{vol}(B_{2R}(x_0))\sup_{B_{2R}(x_0)}v^{2q}. \end{aligned}

Combining (Proof), (?) and the Bishop-Gromov volume comparison, it follows that

\sup_{B_{R/4}(x_0)}\Vert du\Vert v\leq \left(\frac{C_m(q-1)^{q-1}}{\kappa^q q^q R^{2q}}\right)^{1/2q} \left( \frac{\operatorname{vol}(B_{2R}(x_0))}{\operatorname{vol}(B_{R}(x_0))} \right)^{1/2q}\sup_{B_{2R}(x_0)}v\leq C_{m, \kappa, q}\frac{o(R)}{R},

where C_{m,\kappa,q} is a positive constant depending only on m,\,\kappa and q. We here notice that q depends only on m. Letting R\to \infty, we complete the proof of Theorem 2.6.

Uses Lemma 4.2, Lemma 6.1

Remark

Remark 2.7

R0I4

According to Schoen-Uhlenbeck [SU] (see also [GS]), a harmonic map u:\mathbb{R}^m \to \mathbb{S}^n_+ is necessarily constant for m\leq 6, and for m\geq 7 such a map exists as a radial solution, where \mathbb{S}^n_+ is the open hemisphere. In Subsection ?, we observe that the growth of the radial solution is greater than the linear order. Moreover, it approaches the linear order as m\to \infty. In this sense, our growth condition (2.6) is almost sharp.

Lemma

Lemma 3.1

I6LD

Let K\geq 0. We assume

\mathcal{D}(V) \geq -2K\left(H + \Vert V \Vert^2\right),\quad H\geq 0

for all vector fields V. Then at (\overline{x},\overline{\tau}) we have

(\Delta+\partial_\tau)\overline{L} \leq 2m+2K \overline{L}.

Used by Proof

Lemma

Lemma 3.2

9UAB

We assume

\mathcal{H}(V) \geq -\frac{H}{\tau},\quad H\geq 0

for all vector fields V. Then at (\overline{x},\overline{\tau}) we have

\Vert \nabla \mathfrak{d} \Vert^2\leq 3.

Used by Proof

Theorem

Theorem 4.1

13PW

For K\geq 0, let (M,g(\tau))_{\tau \in [0,\infty)} be an m-dimensional, admissible, complete backward (-K)-super Ricci flow, namely,

\operatorname{Ric} \geq h-K g.

We assume

\mathcal{D}(V)\geq -2K\left(H+\Vert V\Vert^2 \right),\quad \mathcal{H}(V) \geq -\frac{H}{\tau},\quad H\geq 0

for all vector fields V. Let (N,\mathfrak{g}) stand for a complete, simply connected Riemannian manifold with \sec \leq 0. For a fixed y_0\in N, let \rho:N\to \mathbb{R} be the Riemannian distance function from y_0. Let u:M\times [0,\infty)\to N be a solution to backward harmonic map heat flow. For R,T>0 and A>0, we suppose 2\rho \circ u\leq A on

Q_{R,T}:=\left\{\,(x,\tau)\in M\times \left(0,T\right] \,\,\, \middle|\,\,\, \mathfrak{d}(x,\tau)\leq R \,\right\}.

Then there exists a positive constant C_{m}>0 depending only on m such that on Q_{R/2,T/4},

\frac{\Vert du \Vert}{A^2-\rho^2 \circ u}\leq \frac{C_m}{A} \left( \frac{1}{R}+\frac{1}{\sqrt{T}}+\sqrt{K} \right).

Used by Proof

Proof (Proof of Theorem 4.1) of Theorem 4.1

For K\geq 0, let (M,g(\tau))_{\tau \in [0,\infty)} be backward (-K)-super Ricci flow satisfying (4.1) for all vector fields V. Let (N,\mathfrak{g}) be simply connected, and \sec \leq 0. Let u:M\times [0,\infty)\to N be a solution to backward harmonic map heat flow. For R,T>0 and A>0, we suppose 2\rho \circ u\leq A on Q_{R,T}. We define functions w and \psi as (4.3) and (4.5), respectively. For \theta>0 we define a compact subset Q_{R,T,\theta} of Q_{R,T} by

Q_{R,T,\theta}:=\{(x,\tau)\in Q_{R,T} \mid \tau\in [\theta,T]\}.

Fix a small \theta\in (0,T/4), and take a maximum point (\overline{x},\overline{\tau}) of \psi w in Q_{R,T,\theta}. By virtue of the Calabi argument, we may assume that the reduced distance is smooth at (\overline{x},\overline{\tau}) (cf. [KuS, Remark 3.3]). Using Proposition 4.5, we see

(\psi w)^2\leq \frac{c_m}{A^4} \left(\frac{1}{R^4}+\frac{1}{T^2}+K^2 \right)+\frac{1}{A^2}\Phi

at (\overline{x},\overline{\tau}) for

c_{m}:=\max \left\{\overline{C}_{m},\widetilde{C}_1,\widetilde{C}_2 \right\},

where \overline{C}_{m},\widetilde{C}_1,\widetilde{C}_2>0 and \Phi are defined as (\ref{eq:dimension epsilon}) and (4.5), respectively. On the other hand, since (\overline{x},\overline{\tau}) is a maximum point,

\Delta(\psi w)\leq 0,\quad \partial_{\tau} (\psi w)\leq 0,\quad \nabla (\psi w)=0

at (\overline{x},\overline{\tau}); in particular, \Phi(\overline{x},\overline{\tau})\leq 0. Therefore,

(\psi w)(x,\tau) \leq (\psi w)(\overline{x},\overline{\tau})\leq \frac{c^{1/2}_{m}}{A^2} \left(\frac{1}{R^4}+\frac{1}{T^2}+K^2 \right)^{1/2}\leq \frac{c^{1/2}_{m}}{A^2} \left(\frac{1}{R^2}+\frac{1}{T}+K\right)

for all (x,\tau)\in Q_{R,T,\theta}. By \psi \equiv 1 on Q_{R/2,T/4,\theta}, and by the definition of w,

\frac{\Vert d u \Vert}{A^2-\rho^2\circ u} \leq \frac{c^{1/4}_{m}}{A} \left(\frac{1}{R}+\frac{1}{\sqrt{T}}+\sqrt{K}\right)

on Q_{R/2,T/4,\theta}. Letting \theta\to 0, we complete the proof of Theorem 4.1.

Uses Lemma 4.3, Proposition 4.5

Lemma

Lemma 4.2

Y7HZ

\begin{aligned} (\Delta+\partial_{\tau}) \Vert du\Vert^2 =2\Vert \nabla du\Vert^2&+2\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(du(\mathcal{R}(e_i)),du(e_i))\\ &-2\sum^{m}_{i,j=1}\mathfrak{g}(R(du(e_i),du(e_j))du(e_j),du(e_i)), \end{aligned}

where \mathcal{R}:=\operatorname{Ric}-h, and \{e_i\}^{m}_{i=1} is an orthonormal frame on M at some fixed time.

Used by Proof, Proof, Proof

Proof of Lemma 4.2

By direct computations and backward harmonic map heat flow equation (?), we have the following (cf. [AH, Lemma 4.5]):

\begin{aligned} \partial_{\tau}\Vert du \Vert^2 &=-\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(du((\partial_{\tau}g)(e_i)),du(e_i))+2\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(\nabla^{u^{-1}TN}_{e_i}(\partial_{\tau}u),du(e_i) )\\ &=-2\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(du(h(e_i)),du(e_i))-2\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(\nabla^{u^{-1}TN}_{e_i}\Delta u,du(e_i) )\\ &=-2\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(du(\operatorname{Ric}(e_i)),du(e_i))-2\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(\nabla^{u^{-1}TN}_{e_i}\Delta u,du(e_i) )\\ &\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \quad \,\,\,\, +2\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(du(\mathcal{R}(e_i)),du(e_i)), \end{aligned}

here u^{-1}TN denotes the induced vector bundle from TN by u, and \nabla^{u^{-1}TN} is the canonical connection over u^{-1}TN. Combining the above equation and the Bochner formula of Eells-Sampson type tells us the following (see e.g., [AMR, Remark 1.15]):

\begin{aligned} \frac{1}{2}\Delta \Vert du\Vert^2 &=\Vert \nabla du\Vert^2+\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(\nabla^{u^{-1}TN}_{e_i}\Delta u,du(e_i) )+\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(du(\operatorname{Ric}(e_i)),du(e_i))\\ &\qquad \qquad \,\,\, \, -\sum^{m}_{i,j=1}\mathfrak{g}(R(du(e_i),du(e_j))du(e_j),du(e_i))\\ &=\Vert \nabla du\Vert^2+\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(du(\mathcal{R}(e_i)),du(e_i))-\frac{1}{2}\partial_{\tau}\Vert du \Vert^2\\ &\qquad \qquad \,\,\, \,-\sum^{m}_{i,j=1}\mathfrak{g}(R(du(e_i),du(e_j))du(e_j),du(e_i)). \end{aligned}

This completes the proof.

Lemma

Lemma 4.3

SFDQ

Let (N,\mathfrak{g}) be simply connected, and \sec \leq 0. For A>0, we assume 2\rho\circ u\leq A. Set

w:=\frac{\Vert du\Vert^2}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^2}.

Then we have

\begin{aligned} (\Delta+\partial_{\tau}) w-2\frac{g(\nabla w,\nabla (\rho^2\circ u))}{A^2-\rho^2 \circ u}&\geq 4(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)w^2\\ &\quad +\frac{2}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^2}\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(du(\mathcal{R}(e_i)),du(e_i)). \end{aligned}

Used by Proof, Proof, Proof

Proof of Lemma 4.3

By straightforward computations,

\begin{aligned} \nabla w&=\frac{\nabla \Vert du\Vert^2}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^2}+2\frac{\Vert du\Vert^2~\nabla (\rho^2 \circ u)}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^3},\\ \Delta w&=\frac{\Delta \Vert du\Vert^2}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^2}+\frac{4g(\nabla \Vert du\Vert^2,\nabla (\rho^2 \circ u))}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^3}+\frac{2\Vert du\Vert^2~ \Delta (\rho^2 \circ u)}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^3}+\frac{6\Vert \nabla (\rho^2 \circ u) \Vert^2~\Vert du\Vert^2}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^4}\\ &=\frac{2g(\nabla w,\nabla (\rho^2\circ u))}{A^2-\rho^2 \circ u}+\frac{2\Vert du\Vert^2~ \Delta (\rho^2 \circ u)}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^3}+\frac{\Delta \Vert du\Vert^2}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^2}\\ &\quad +\frac{2g(\nabla \Vert du\Vert^2,\nabla (\rho^2 \circ u))}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^3}+\frac{2\Vert \nabla (\rho^2 \circ u) \Vert^2~\Vert du\Vert^2}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^4},\\ \partial_{\tau} w&=\frac{\partial_{\tau} \Vert du\Vert^2}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^2}+\frac{2\Vert du\Vert^2~\partial_{\tau} (\rho^2 \circ u)}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^3}. \end{aligned}

It follows that

\begin{aligned} (\Delta+\partial_{\tau}) w-\frac{2g(\nabla w,\nabla (\rho^2\circ u))}{A^2-\rho^2 \circ u}&=\frac{2\Vert du\Vert^2~ (\Delta+\partial_{\tau}) (\rho^2 \circ u)}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^3}+\frac{(\Delta+\partial_{\tau}) \Vert du\Vert^2}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^2}\\ &\quad +\frac{2g(\nabla \Vert du\Vert^2,\nabla (\rho^2 \circ u))}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^3}+\frac{2\Vert \nabla (\rho^2 \circ u) \Vert^2~\Vert du\Vert^2}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^4}. \end{aligned}

Since (N,\mathfrak{g}) is simply connected and \sec \leq 0, the Greene-Wu Hessian comparison yields the following (see e.g., [AMR, (1.263)], and also [AMR, (1.181)]):

(\Delta+\partial_{\tau}) (\rho^2 \circ u)=\sum^{m}_{i=1}\nabla^2 \rho^2(du(e_i),du(e_i))\geq 2\Vert du\Vert^2,

where we also used the backward harmonic map heat flow equation (?). Furthermore, in view of Lemma 4.2 and \sec \leq 0,

(\Delta+\partial_{\tau}) \Vert du\Vert^2 \geq 2\Vert \nabla du\Vert^2+2\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(du(\mathcal{R}(e_i)),du(e_i)).

Combining the above estimates, we see

\begin{aligned} (\Delta+\partial_{\tau}) w-\frac{2g(\nabla w,\nabla (\rho^2\circ u))}{A^2-\rho^2 \circ u}&\geq 4(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)w^2\\ &\quad+\frac{2}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^2}\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(du(\mathcal{R}(e_i)),du(e_i))+2\mathcal{F}, \end{aligned}

where

\mathcal{F}:=\frac{\Vert \nabla du\Vert^2}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^2}+\frac{\Vert \nabla (\rho^2 \circ u) \Vert^2~\Vert du\Vert^2}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^4}+\frac{g(\nabla \Vert du\Vert^2,\nabla (\rho^2 \circ u))}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^3}.

Now, it suffices to check that \mathcal{F} is non-negative. For the first two terms, the inequality of arithmetic-geometric means, and the Kato inequality imply

\begin{aligned} \frac{\Vert \nabla du\Vert^2}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^2}+\frac{\Vert \nabla (\rho^2 \circ u) \Vert^2~\Vert du\Vert^2}{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^4} &\geq \frac{2\Vert \nabla du\Vert \Vert \nabla (\rho^2 \circ u) \Vert \Vert du\Vert }{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^3}\\ &\geq \frac{\Vert \nabla \Vert du\Vert^2 \Vert~\Vert \nabla (\rho^2 \circ u)\Vert }{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^3}. \end{aligned}

The Cauchy-Schwarz inequality tells us the desired conclusion.

Uses Lemma 4.2

Lemma

Lemma 4.4

K2M7

Let R,T>0,\,\alpha \in (0,1). Then there is a smooth function \psi:[0,\infty)\times [0,\infty)\to [0,1] which is supported on [0,R]\times [0,T], and a constant C_\alpha>0 depending only on \alpha such that the following hold:

\psi\equiv 1 on [0,R/2]\times [0,T/4];
\partial_r \psi \leq 0 on [0,\infty)\times [0,\infty), and \partial_r \psi \equiv 0 on [0,R/2]\times [0,\infty);
we have
\frac{\vert \partial_r \psi \vert}{\psi^\alpha}\leq \frac{C_{\alpha}}{R},\quad \frac{\vert \partial^2_{r}\psi\vert}{\psi^\alpha}\leq \frac{C_{\alpha}}{R^2},\quad \frac{\vert \partial_{\tau} \psi\vert}{\psi^{1/2}}\leq \frac{C}{T},
where C>0 is a universal constant.

Used by Proof

Proposition

Proposition 4.5

NI2G

Let K\geq 0. We assume

\mathcal{R}(V)\geq -K\Vert V \Vert^2,\quad \mathcal{D}(V)\geq -2K\left(H+\Vert V \Vert^2 \right),\quad \mathcal{H}(V) \geq -\frac{H}{\tau},\quad H\geq 0

for all vector fields V. Let (N,\mathfrak{g}) be simply connected, and \sec \leq 0. Let u:M\times [0,\infty)\to N be a solution to backward harmonic map heat flow. For R,T>0 and A>0, we suppose 2\rho \circ u\leq A on Q_{R,T}. We define w as (4.3) on Q_{R,T}. We also take a function \psi:[0,\infty)\times [0,\infty)\to [0,1] in Lemma 4.4 with \alpha=3/4, and set

\psi(x,\tau):=\psi(\mathfrak{d}(x,\tau),\tau).

Then we have

(\psi w)^2\leq \frac{1}{A^4}\left(\frac{\overline{C}_m}{R^4}+\frac{\widetilde{C}_1}{T^2}+\widetilde{C}_2 K^2\right)+\frac{1}{A^2}\Phi.

at every point in Q_{R,T} such that the reduced distance is smooth, where for the universal constants C_{3/4},C>0 given in Lemma 4.4, we put

\begin{aligned} \overline{C}_{m}&:=6C^2_{3/4}\left(m^2+\frac{9}{4}+\frac{369}{32}C^2_{3/4}\right),\quad \widetilde{C}_1:=\frac{3}{2}C^2,\quad \widetilde{C}_2:=6\left(1+\frac{C^2_{3/4}}{4}\right), \\ \Phi&:=(\Delta+\partial_{\tau})(\psi w)-\frac{2g\left( \nabla\psi, \nabla(\psi w) \right)}{\psi}-\frac{2g(\nabla(\psi w),\nabla (\rho^2 \circ u))}{A^2-\rho^2\circ u}. \end{aligned}

Used by Proof

Proof of Proposition 4.5

In virtue of Lemma 4.3,

\begin{aligned} \Phi&=\psi \left(\Delta+\partial_{\tau} \right)w-\frac{2\psi g(\nabla w,\nabla (\rho^2\circ u))}{A^2-\rho^2 \circ u} +w\left(\Delta+\partial_{\tau}\right)\psi-\frac{2w\Vert \nabla \psi \Vert^2}{\psi}-\frac{2w g(\nabla \psi,\nabla (\rho^2\circ u))}{A^2-\rho^2 \circ u}\\ &\geq 4(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)\psi w^2+\frac{2\psi }{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^2}\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(du(\mathcal{R}(e_i)),du(e_i)) +w\left(\Delta+\partial_{\tau} \right)\psi-\frac{2w\Vert \nabla \psi \Vert^2}{\psi}\\ &\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad\qquad \quad \, -2\frac{w g(\nabla \psi,\nabla (\rho^2\circ u))}{A^2-\rho^2 \circ u}. \end{aligned}

It follows that

4(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)\psi w^2 \leq \Psi_1+\Psi_2+\Psi_3+\Psi_4+\Phi

for

\begin{aligned} \Psi_1&:=-\frac{2\psi }{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^2}\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(du(\mathcal{R}(e_i)),du(e_i)),\quad \Psi_2:=-w \left(\Delta+\partial_{\tau}\right)\psi,\\ \Psi_3&:=\frac{2w\Vert \nabla \psi \Vert^2}{\psi},\quad \Psi_4:=\frac{2w g(\nabla \psi,\nabla (\rho^2\circ u))}{A^2-\rho^2 \circ u}. \end{aligned}

We provide upper bounds of \Psi_1, \Psi_2, \Psi_3,\Psi_4. The following Young inequality plays a crucial role: For all p,q\in (1,\infty) with p^{-1}+q^{-1}=1, a,b\geq 0, and \varepsilon>0,

ab\leq \frac{\varepsilon a^p}{p}+\frac{b^q}{\varepsilon^{q/p} q}.

The inequality

\frac{\Vert \nabla \psi \Vert^2}{\psi^{3/2}}\leq \frac{3 C^2_{3/4}}{R^2}

is also useful, which follows from Lemmas 3.2 and 4.4. We first study an upper bound of \Psi_1. By the assumption for \mathcal{R}(V), the Young inequality (?) with p,q=2, and \psi\leq 1,

\Psi_1=-\frac{2\psi }{(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)^2}\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(du(\mathcal{R}(e_i)),du(e_i)) \leq 2K \psi w\leq \varepsilon \psi^2 w^2+\frac{K^2}{\varepsilon}\leq \varepsilon \psi w^2+\frac{K^2}{\varepsilon}.

We next produce an upper bound of \Psi_2. We see

\begin{aligned} \Psi_2&=-w \left(\Delta+\partial_{\tau}\right)\psi=-w \left( \partial_r \psi(\Delta+\partial_{\tau})\mathfrak{d}+\partial^2_r \psi \Vert \nabla \mathfrak{d} \Vert^2+\partial_{\tau} \psi \right)\\ &=-w \left[ \partial_r \psi \left( \frac{1}{2\mathfrak{d}}(\Delta+\partial_{\tau})\overline{L}-\frac{\Vert \nabla \overline{L} \Vert^2}{4\mathfrak{d}^3} \right)+\partial^2_r \psi \Vert \nabla \mathfrak{d} \Vert^2+\partial_{\tau} \psi \right]\\ &=\frac{w \vert \partial_r \psi \vert}{2\mathfrak{d}}(\Delta+\partial_{\tau})\overline{L}-w \vert \partial_r \psi \vert \frac{\Vert \nabla \overline{L} \Vert^2}{4\mathfrak{d}^3}-w \,\partial^2_r \psi \Vert \nabla \mathfrak{d} \Vert^2-w\,\partial_{\tau} \psi\\ & \leq \frac{w \vert \partial_r \psi \vert}{2\mathfrak{d}}(\Delta+\partial_{\tau})\overline{L}+w \vert \partial^2_r \psi\vert \Vert \nabla \mathfrak{d} \Vert^2+w \,\vert \partial_{\tau} \psi \vert. \end{aligned}

Lemmas 3.1, 3.2 and \overline{L}=\mathfrak{d}^2 yield

\begin{aligned} \Psi_2&\leq m \frac{w \vert \partial_r \psi \vert}{\mathfrak{d}}+K w \vert \partial_r \psi \vert \mathfrak{d}+3w \vert \partial^2_r \psi \vert+w \, \vert \partial_{\tau} \psi \vert \\ &\leq \frac{2m}{R} w \vert \partial_r \psi \vert+KR w \vert \partial_r \psi \vert+3w \vert \partial^2_r \psi \vert+w \,\vert \partial_{\tau} \psi \vert, \end{aligned}

where in the second inequality, we used the fact that \partial_r \psi vanishes on [0,R/2]\times [0,\infty). From the Young inequality (?) with p,q=2, Lemma 4.4, and \psi\leq 1, we derive

\begin{aligned} \Psi_2&\leq \left( \varepsilon \psi w^2+\frac{m^2}{R^2}\frac{ \vert \partial_r \psi \vert^2}{\varepsilon \psi} \right) +\left( \varepsilon \psi w^2+\frac{K^2 R^2}{4}\frac{ \vert \partial_r \psi \vert^2}{\varepsilon \psi} \right)\\ &\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \,\,\,+\left( \varepsilon \psi w^2+\frac{9}{4}\frac{ \vert \partial^2_r \psi \vert^2}{\varepsilon \psi} \right) +\left( \varepsilon \psi w^2+\frac{1}{4}\frac{ \vert \partial_{\tau} \psi\vert^2}{\varepsilon \psi} \right) \\ &\leq 4\varepsilon \psi w^2+\frac{C^2_{3/4}}{\varepsilon}\left(m^2+\frac{9}{4}\right)\frac{ \psi^{1/2}}{R^4}+\frac{C^2}{4\varepsilon}\frac{1}{T^2}+\frac{C^2_{3/4}}{4\varepsilon}K^2\psi^{1/2}\\ &\leq 4\varepsilon \psi w^2+\frac{C^2_{3/4}}{\varepsilon}\left(m^2+\frac{9}{4}\right)\frac{1}{R^4}+\frac{C^2}{4\varepsilon}\frac{1}{T^2}+\frac{C^2_{3/4}}{4\varepsilon}K^2. \end{aligned}

We give an upper bound of \Psi_3. By the Young inequality (?) with p,q=2, and (?),

\Psi_3= \frac{2w\Vert \nabla \psi \Vert^2}{\psi} \leq \varepsilon \psi w^2+\frac{\Vert \nabla \psi \Vert^4}{\varepsilon \psi^3}\leq \varepsilon \psi w^2+\frac{9C^4_{3/4}}{\varepsilon}\frac{1}{R^4}.

We finally examine \Psi_4. The Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, the Young inequality (?) with p=4/3,q=4,\varepsilon=4/3, and (?) lead us to

\begin{aligned} \Psi_4&=2\frac{w g(\nabla \psi,\nabla (\rho^2\circ u))}{A^2-\rho^2 \circ u}\leq \frac{2w\Vert \nabla \psi \Vert \Vert \nabla (\rho^2 \circ u) \Vert}{A^2-\rho^2 \circ u}\leq 2 A w^{3/2} \Vert \nabla \psi \Vert\\ &\leq A^2\psi w^2+\frac{27}{16} \frac{1}{A^2} \frac{\Vert \nabla \psi \Vert^4}{\psi^3}\leq A^2\psi w^2+\frac{243C^4_{3/4}}{16} \,\frac{1}{A^2}\frac{1}{R^4}. \end{aligned}

By summarizing (Proof), (?), (?), (?), (?),

\begin{aligned} 3A^2\psi w^2 &\leq 4(A^2-\rho^2 \circ u)\psi w^2\\ &\leq (6\varepsilon+A^2) \psi w^2+\frac{C^2_{3/4}}{\varepsilon}\left(m^2+\frac{9}{4}+9C^2_{3/4}+ \frac{243 \varepsilon C^2_{3/4}}{16} \,\frac{1}{A^2} \right)\frac{1}{R^4}\\ &\qquad \qquad \qquad \quad \, \,+\frac{C^2}{4\varepsilon}\frac{1}{T^2}+\frac{1}{\varepsilon}\left(1+\frac{C^2_{3/4}}{4}\right)K^2+\Phi. \end{aligned}

Letting \varepsilon \to A^2/6, we have

\psi w^2 \leq \frac{1}{A^4}\left(\frac{\overline{C}_m}{R^4}+\frac{\widetilde{C}_1}{T^2}+\widetilde{C}_2 K^2\right)+\frac{1}{A^2}\Phi.

Since (\psi w)^2\leq \psi w^2, we arrive at the desired inequality.

Uses Lemma 4.3, Lemma 3.2, Lemma 4.4, Lemma 3.1

Corollary

Corollary 4.6

TMYX

Let (M,g(\tau))_{\tau \in [0,\infty)} be a complete backward Ricci flow with bounded, non-negative curvature operator. Let (N,\mathfrak{g}) be a complete, simply connected Riemannian manifold with \sec \leq 0. Let u:M\times [0,\infty)\to N be a solution to backward harmonic map heat flow. If

\rho(u(x,\tau))=o\left(\mathfrak{d}(x,\tau)+\sqrt{\tau}\right)

near infinity, then u is constant.

Theorem

Theorem 5.1

BGRE

For K\geq 0, let (M,g(\tau))_{\tau \in [0,\infty)} be an m-dimensional, admissible, complete backward (-K)-super Ricci flow. We assume

\mathcal{D}(V)\geq -2K\left(H+\Vert V\Vert^2 \right),\quad \mathcal{H}(V) \geq -\frac{H}{\tau},\quad H\geq 0

for all vector fields V. Let (N,\mathfrak{g}) denote a complete Riemannian manifold with \sec \leq \kappa for \kappa>0. Assume that B_{\pi/2\sqrt{\kappa}}(y_0) does not meet \mathrm{Cut}\,(y_0). Let u:M\times [0,\infty)\to N be a solution to backward harmonic map heat flow. Suppose that the image of u is contained in B_{\pi/2\sqrt{\kappa}}(y_0). For R,T>0, let

\varphi:=1-\cos \sqrt{\kappa}\rho,\quad A:=\frac{1}{2}\left(1+\sup_{Q_{R,T}}\varphi \circ u \right).

Then there is a positive constant C_{m}>0 depending only on m such that on Q_{R/2,T/4},

\frac{\Vert du \Vert}{A-\varphi \circ u}\leq \frac{C_{m}}{\sqrt{\kappa}} \left( \frac{1}{R}+\frac{1}{\sqrt{T}}+\sqrt{K} \right)\sup_{Q_{R,T}}\left(\frac{1}{\cos\sqrt{\kappa}\rho \circ u}\right)^2.

Used by Proof

Proof (Proof of Theorem 5.1) of Theorem 5.1

For K\geq 0, let (M,g(\tau))_{\tau \in [0,\infty)} be backward (-K)-super Ricci flow satisfying (5.1) for all vector fields V. Let (N,\mathfrak{g}) be \sec \leq \kappa for \kappa>0. Assume that B_{\pi/2\sqrt{\kappa}}(y_0) does not meet \mathrm{Cut}\,(y_0). Let u:M\times [0,\infty)\to N be a solution to backward harmonic map heat flow. Suppose that the image of u is contained in B_{\pi/2\sqrt{\kappa}}(y_0). For R,T>0, we define \varphi and A as (5.1). Furthermore, we define w as (5.2). Also, we define \psi as in Proposition 5.3. For \theta>0 we define Q_{R,T,\theta} as (Proof). For a fixed small \theta\in (0,T/4), we take a maximum point (\overline{x},\overline{\tau}) of \psi w in Q_{R,T,\theta}. We may assume that the reduced distance is smooth at (\overline{x},\overline{\tau}).

We set

\delta:=(1-A)(A-\varphi(u(\overline{x},\overline{\tau}))).

Notice that

\frac{1}{1-A}=2\sup_{Q_{R,T}}\frac{1}{\cos\sqrt{\kappa}\rho \circ u},\quad \frac{1}{A-\varphi(u(\overline{x},\overline{\tau}))}\leq \frac{2}{1-\sup_{Q_{R,T} } \varphi \circ u}=2\sup_{Q_{R,T}}\frac{1}{\cos\sqrt{\kappa}\rho \circ u};

in particular,

\frac{1}{\delta}\leq 4\sup_{Q_{R,T}}\left(\frac{1}{\cos\sqrt{\kappa}\rho \circ u}\right)^2.

Letting \varepsilon\to 4\kappa \delta/27 in Proposition 5.3, and \Phi(\overline{x},\overline{\tau})\leq 0 tell us that

\kappa \delta \psi w^2\leq \frac{27C^2_{3/4}}{4\kappa \delta}\left(m^2+\frac{9}{4}+9C^2_{3/4}+ \frac{6561 C^2_{3/4}}{4\delta^2} \right)\frac{1}{R^4}+\frac{27C^2}{16\kappa \delta}\frac{1}{T^2}+\frac{27}{4\kappa \delta}\left(1+\frac{C^2_{3/4}}{4}\right)K^2

at (\overline{x},\overline{\tau}), where \Phi is defined as (5.3). It follows that

\begin{aligned} (\psi w)^2(\overline{x},\overline{\tau}) &\leq \frac{27C^2_{3/4}}{4\kappa^2 \delta^2}\left(m^2+\frac{9}{4}+9C^2_{3/4}+ \frac{6561 C^2_{3/4}}{4\delta^2} \right)\frac{1}{R^4}\\ &\quad +\frac{27C^2}{16\kappa^2 \delta^2}\frac{1}{T^2}+\frac{27}{4\kappa^2 \delta^2}\left(1+\frac{C^2_{3/4}}{4}\right)K^2. \end{aligned}

Since \delta \in (0,1), there is a positive constant \overline{c}_m>0 depending only on m such that

(\psi w)^2(\overline{x},\overline{\tau})\leq \frac{\overline{c}_m}{\kappa^2 \delta^4} \left(\frac{1}{R^4}+\frac{1}{T^2}+K^2 \right).

Thus,

(\psi w)(x,\tau) \leq (\psi w)(\overline{x},\overline{\tau})\leq \frac{\overline{c}^{1/2}_{m}}{\kappa \delta^2} \left(\frac{1}{R^2}+\frac{1}{T}+K\right)

for all (x,\tau)\in Q_{R,T,\theta}. By \psi \equiv 1 on Q_{R/2,T/4,\theta},

\frac{\Vert d u \Vert}{A-\varphi \circ u} \leq \frac{\overline{c}^{1/4}_{m}}{\sqrt{\kappa} \delta} \left(\frac{1}{R}+\frac{1}{\sqrt{T}}+\sqrt{K}\right) \leq \frac{4\overline{c}^{1/4}_{m}}{\sqrt{\kappa}} \left(\frac{1}{R}+\frac{1}{\sqrt{T}}+\sqrt{K}\right)\sup_{Q_{R,T}}\left(\frac{1}{\cos\sqrt{\kappa}\rho \circ u}\right)^2

on Q_{R/2,T/4,\theta}. Letting \theta\to 0, we complete the proof of Theorem 5.1.

Uses Lemma 5.2, Proof, Proposition 5.3

Lemma

Lemma 5.2

0AB9

Let (N,\mathfrak{g}) be \sec \leq \kappa for \kappa>0. Assume that B_{\pi/2\sqrt{\kappa}}(y_0) does not meet \mathrm{Cut}\,(y_0). Let u:M\times [0,\infty)\to N be a solution to backward harmonic map heat flow. Suppose that the image of u is contained in B_{\pi/2\sqrt{\kappa}}(y_0). For R,T>0, we define \varphi and A as (5.1). Set

w:=\frac{\Vert du\Vert^2}{(A-\varphi \circ u)^2}.

Then we have

\begin{aligned} (\Delta+\partial_{\tau}) w-2\frac{g(\nabla w,\nabla (\varphi \circ u))}{A-\varphi \circ u}&\geq 2\kappa(1-A)(A-\varphi \circ u)w^2\\ &\quad +\frac{2}{(A-\varphi \circ u)^2}\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(du(\mathcal{R}(e_i)),du(e_i)). \end{aligned}

Used by Proof, Proof

Proof of Lemma 5.2

By similar computations to the proof of Lemma 4.3, we see

\begin{aligned} (\Delta+\partial_{\tau}) w &=\frac{2g(\nabla w,\nabla (\varphi\circ u))}{A-\varphi \circ u}+\frac{2\Vert du\Vert^2~ (\Delta+\partial_{\tau}) (\varphi \circ u)}{(A-\varphi \circ u)^3}+\frac{(\Delta+\partial_{\tau}) \Vert du\Vert^2}{(A-\varphi \circ u)^2}\\ &\quad+\frac{2g(\nabla \Vert du\Vert^2,\nabla (\varphi \circ u))}{(A-\varphi \circ u)^3}+\frac{2\Vert \nabla (\varphi \circ u) \Vert^2~\Vert du\Vert^2}{(A-\varphi \circ u)^4}. \end{aligned}

Due to the Hessian comparison,

(\Delta+\partial_{\tau}) (\varphi \circ u)=\sum^{m}_{i=1}\nabla^2 \rho^2(du(e_i),du(e_i))\geq \kappa \cos\sqrt{\kappa}\rho \circ u \Vert du \Vert^2.

Furthermore, Lemma 4.2 and \sec \leq \kappa lead us to

(\Delta+\partial_{\tau}) \Vert du\Vert^2 \geq 2\Vert \nabla du\Vert^2+2\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(du(\mathcal{R}(e_i)),du(e_i))-2\kappa \Vert du \Vert^4.

It holds that

\begin{aligned} (\Delta+\partial_{\tau}) w-\frac{2g(\nabla w,\nabla (\varphi \circ u))}{A-\varphi \circ u}&\geq 2\kappa(A-\varphi \circ u)^2 \left( \frac{\cos \sqrt{\kappa}\rho }{A-\varphi \circ u}-1 \right) w^2\\ &\quad +\frac{2}{(A-\varphi \circ u)^2}\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(du(\mathcal{R}(e_i)),du(e_i))+2\mathcal{F}\\ &= 2\kappa(1-A)(A-\varphi \circ u)w^2\\ &\quad +\frac{2}{(A-\varphi \circ u)^2}\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(du(\mathcal{R}(e_i)),du(e_i))+2\mathcal{F}, \end{aligned}

where

\mathcal{F}:=\frac{\Vert \nabla du\Vert^2}{(A-\varphi \circ u)^2}+\frac{\Vert \nabla (\varphi \circ u) \Vert^2~\Vert du\Vert^2}{(A-\varphi \circ u)^4}+\frac{g(\nabla \Vert du\Vert^2,\nabla (\varphi \circ u))}{(A-\varphi \circ u)^3}.

By similar computations to the proof of Lemma 4.3, \mathcal{F} is non-negative.

Uses Lemma 4.3, Lemma 4.2

Proposition

Proposition 5.3

X0P8

Let K\geq 0. We assume

\mathcal{R}(V)\geq -K\Vert V \Vert^2,\quad \mathcal{D}(V)\geq -2K\left(H+\Vert V \Vert^2 \right),\quad \mathcal{H}(V) \geq -\frac{H}{\tau},\quad H\geq 0

for all vector fields V. Let (N,\mathfrak{g}) be \sec \leq \kappa for \kappa>0. Assume that B_{\pi/2\sqrt{\kappa}}(y_0) does not meet \mathrm{Cut}\,(y_0). Let u:M\times [0,\infty)\to N be a solution to backward harmonic map heat flow. Suppose that the image of u is contained in B_{\pi/2\sqrt{\kappa}}(y_0). For R,T>0, we define \varphi and A as (5.1). Furthermore, we define w as (5.2). We also take a function \psi:[0,\infty)\times [0,\infty)\to [0,1] in Lemma 4.4 with \alpha=3/4, and define \psi as (4.5). Then for any \varepsilon>0, we have

\begin{aligned} 2\kappa(1-A)(A-\varphi \circ u)\psi w^2 &\leq \frac{27\varepsilon}{4} \psi w^2+\frac{C^2_{3/4}}{\varepsilon}\left(m^2+\frac{9}{4}+9C^2_{3/4}+ \frac{36 \kappa^2 C^2_{3/4}}{\varepsilon^2} \right)\frac{1}{R^4}\\ &\qquad \qquad \,\,\,\, +\frac{C^2}{4\varepsilon}\frac{1}{T^2}+\frac{1}{\varepsilon}\left(1+\frac{C^2_{3/4}}{4}\right)K^2+\Phi \end{aligned}

at every point in Q_{R,T} such that the reduced distance is smooth, where the universal constants C_{3/4},C>0 are given in Lemma 4.4, and put

\Phi:=(\Delta+\partial_{\tau})(\psi w)-\frac{2g\left( \nabla\psi, \nabla(\psi w) \right)}{\psi}-\frac{2g(\nabla(\psi w),\nabla (\varphi \circ u))}{A-\varphi \circ u}.

Used by Proof

Proof of Proposition 5.3

Using Lemma 5.2, we see

\begin{aligned} \Phi&=\psi \left(\Delta+\partial_{\tau} \right)w-\frac{2\psi g(\nabla w,\nabla (\varphi\circ u))}{A-\varphi \circ u} +w\left(\Delta+\partial_{\tau}\right)\psi-\frac{2w\Vert \nabla \psi \Vert^2}{\psi}-\frac{2w g(\nabla \psi,\nabla (\varphi \circ u))}{A-\varphi \circ u}\\ &\geq 2\kappa(1-A)(A-\varphi \circ u)\psi w^2+\frac{2\psi }{(A-\varphi \circ u)^2}\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(du(\mathcal{R}(e_i)),du(e_i)) +w\left(\Delta+\partial_{\tau} \right)\psi\\ &\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \,\,~ -\frac{2w\Vert \nabla \psi \Vert^2}{\psi}-2\frac{w g(\nabla \psi,\nabla (\varphi\circ u))}{A-\varphi \circ u}. \end{aligned}

We obtain

2\kappa(1-A)(A-\varphi \circ u)\psi w^2 \leq \Psi_1+\Psi_2+\Psi_3+\Psi_4+\Phi

for

\begin{aligned} \Psi_1&:=-\frac{2\psi }{(A-\varphi \circ u)^2}\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(du(\mathcal{R}(e_i)),du(e_i)),\quad \Psi_2:=-w \left(\Delta+\partial_{\tau}\right)\psi,\\ \Psi_3&:=\frac{2w\Vert \nabla \psi \Vert^2}{\psi},\quad \Psi_4:=\frac{2w g(\nabla \psi,\nabla (\varphi\circ u))}{A-\varphi \circ u}. \end{aligned}

For \Psi_1, the following holds:

\Psi_1=-\frac{2\psi }{(A-\varphi \circ u)^2}\sum^{m}_{i=1}\mathfrak{g}(du(\mathcal{R}(e_i)),du(e_i)) \leq 2K \psi w\leq \varepsilon \psi^2 w^2+\frac{K^2}{\varepsilon}\leq \varepsilon \psi w^2+\frac{K^2}{\varepsilon}

in the same manner as in the proof of Proposition 4.5. For \Psi_2,\Psi_3, we possess the same upper estimates as in the proof of Proposition 4.5. For \Psi_4, the following holds:

\begin{aligned} \Psi_4&=\frac{2w g(\nabla \psi,\nabla (\varphi \circ u))}{A-\varphi \circ u}\leq \frac{2w\Vert \nabla \psi \Vert \Vert \nabla (\varphi \circ u) \Vert}{A-\varphi \circ u}\leq 2 \sqrt{\kappa} w^{3/2} \Vert \nabla \psi \Vert\\ &\leq \frac{3 \varepsilon}{4}\psi w^2+\frac{4\kappa^2}{\varepsilon^3} \frac{\Vert \nabla \psi \Vert^4}{\psi^3}\leq \frac{3 \varepsilon}{4}\psi w^2+\frac{36\kappa^2C^4_{3/4}}{\varepsilon^3} \,\frac{1}{R^4}. \end{aligned}

This proves the desired estimate.

Uses Lemma 5.2

Corollary

Corollary 5.4

LQ1T

Let (M,g(\tau))_{\tau \in [0,\infty)} be a complete backward Ricci flow with bounded, non-negative curvature operator. Let (N,\mathfrak{g}) be a complete Riemannian manifold with \sec \leq \kappa for \kappa>0. Assume that B_{\pi/2\sqrt{\kappa}}(y_0) does not meet \mathrm{Cut}\,(y_0). Let u:M\times [0,\infty)\to N be a solution to backward harmonic map heat flow. If the image of u is contained in B_{\pi/2\sqrt{\kappa}}(y_0), and if u satisfies a growth condition

\frac{1}{\cos \sqrt{\kappa}\rho(u(x,\tau))}=o\left(\mathfrak{d}(x,\tau)^{1/2}+\tau^{1/4}\right)

near infinity, then u is constant.

Lemma

Lemma 6.1

SRUT

For a harmonic map u: M \to N, we have

\Vert\nabla \Vert du\Vert\Vert^2\leq \frac{m-1}{m}\Vert\nabla du\Vert^2.

Used by Proof, Proof

Proof

BPAL

It is enough to show the inequality at x_0\in M such that \Vert du \Vert(x_0)\neq 0. Let us fix such a point. We compute in normal coordinates (x^i)=(x^1, \dots, x^m) around x_0\in M and (y^\alpha)=(y^1, \dots, y^n) around u(x_0)\in N. Let u(x)=(u^1(x^1, \dots, x^m), \dots, u^n(x^1, \dots, x^m)) be the local expression for u:M\to N in these coordinates. We use the notations

u^\alpha_i=\frac{\partial u^\alpha}{\partial x^i}, \quad \text{and} \quad u^\alpha_{ij}=\frac{\partial^2u^\alpha}{\partial x^i\partial x^j}.

Now we can write

\Vert \nabla du \Vert^2(x_0)=\sum_{\alpha=1}^n \sum_{i,j=1}^m (u_{ij}^\alpha)^2(x_0)

at x_0\in M. For any 1\leq \alpha\leq n, let \lambda^\alpha_1, \dots, \lambda^\alpha_m be real eigenvalues of the symmetric matrix (u^\alpha_{ij}(x_0)) such that |\lambda^\alpha_1|\leq \cdots \leq |\lambda^\alpha_m|. Then we have

\Vert \nabla du \Vert^2(x_0)=\sum_{\alpha=1}^n \sum_{i=1}^m(\lambda^\alpha_i)^2.

On the other hand, since u:M\to N is a harmonic map, we have

\sum_{i=1}^m u_{ii}^\alpha(x_0)=\sum_{i=1}^m \lambda_i^\alpha=0 \quad \text{for all} \quad 1\leq \alpha \leq n.

Using this, elementary computation yields

\sum_{i=1}^{m-1}(\lambda_i^\alpha)^2\geq \frac{1}{m-1}\left(\sum_{i=1}^{m-1}\lambda_i^\alpha \right)^2=\frac{1}{m-1}(\lambda^{\alpha}_m)^2 \quad \text{for all} \quad 1\leq \alpha \leq n.

Adding (\lambda^\alpha_m)^2 to the both sides of this inequality, we have

\Vert \nabla^2u^\alpha \Vert^2(x_0)=\sum_{i=1}^{m}(\lambda_i^\alpha)^2\geq \frac{m}{m-1}(\lambda^\alpha_m)^2 \quad \text{for all} \quad 1\leq \alpha \leq n.

For a general m\times m symmetric matrix A which has real eigenvalues \lambda_1, \dots, \lambda_m with |\lambda_1|\leq \cdots \leq |\lambda_m|, and a vector v\in \mathbb{R}^m, it holds that

\Vert Av\Vert^2\leq |\lambda_m|^2 \Vert v\Vert^2.

In our case, for each 1\leq \alpha \leq n, put v=\nabla u^\alpha(x_0) and A=(u^\alpha_{ij}(x_0)), then we have

\begin{aligned} \Vert \nabla u^\alpha \Vert^2(x_0)\Vert \nabla^2 u^\alpha \Vert^2(x_0) &= \Vert \nabla u^\alpha \Vert^2(x_0) \sum_{i=1}^m(\lambda^\alpha_i)^2\\ &\geq \frac{m}{m-1}\Vert \nabla u^\alpha \Vert^2(x_0)|\lambda^\alpha_m|^2\\ &\geq \frac{m}{m-1}\sum_{i=1}^m\left(\sum_{j=1}^m u_{ij}^\alpha(x_0) u_j^\alpha(x_0)\right)^2. \end{aligned}

Therefore, using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and the Minkowski inequality, we have

\begin{aligned} \Vert du \Vert^2(x_0) \Vert \nabla du \Vert^2(x_0)&=\left(\sum_{\alpha=1}^n \Vert \nabla u^\alpha \Vert^2(x_0)\right)\left(\sum_{\alpha=1}^n\Vert\nabla^2 u^\alpha \Vert^2(x_0)\right)\\ &\geq \left(\sum_{\alpha=1}^n\Vert\nabla u^\alpha\Vert(x_0)\Vert \nabla^2 u^\alpha \Vert(x_0) \right)^2\\ &\geq \frac{m}{m-1}\left[ \sum_{\alpha=1}^n\left\{\sum_{i=1}^m\left(\sum_{j=1}^m u_{ij}^\alpha(x_0) u_j^\alpha(x_0)\right)^2 \right\}^{\frac{1}{2}}\right]^2\\ &\geq \frac{m}{m-1}\sum_{i=1}^m\left(\sum_{\alpha=1}^n\sum_{j=1}^m u_{ij}^\alpha(x_0) u_j^\alpha(x_0)\right)^2. \end{aligned}

Note that

4\Vert du \Vert^2 \Vert \nabla\Vert du\Vert \Vert^2 = \Vert \nabla \Vert du \Vert^2 \Vert^2=4\sum_{i=1}^m\left(\sum_{\alpha=1}^n\sum_{j=1}^m u_{ij}^\alpha u_j^\alpha\right)^2.

Hence we obtain

\Vert du \Vert^2(x_0) \Vert \nabla du \Vert^2(x_0)\geq \frac{m}{m-1}\Vert du \Vert^2(x_0) \Vert \nabla\Vert du\Vert \Vert^2(x_0).

This completes the proof of Lemma 6.1.

Uses Lemma 6.1

Source and licence

The text on this page is from arXiv:2104.05191v2 by Keita Kunikawa and Yohei Sakurai, under the licence CC BY 4.0. The corpus made these changes: it read the items out of the LaTeX source, it expanded the macros of the paper, it put each proof after its statement, and it converted the text to HTML. The formulas are the TeX of the paper, and KaTeX renders them. A formula or a reference can look different from the PDF. The page is published under CC BY 4.0.

The record of each item is in analysis/objects/2104/2104.05191.jsonl.