Ricci curvature bounds and rigidity for non-smooth Riemannian and semi-Riemannian metrics

All of these claims follow from the definition of \star_M and standard properties of convolution on \mathbb R^n.

Since these claims are local, we may without loss of generality suppose that all vector fields are compactly supported and M=\mathbb R^n. Recall that in smooth local coordinates

Observing that \Gamma_{\alpha\gamma}^\beta \in L^\infty_{\mathrm{loc}}(\mathbb R^n) and that L^{\infty^-}(\mathbb R^n) is closed with respect to the pointwise product, we conclude that (\nabla_V W)^\beta \in L^{\infty^-}(\mathbb R^n).
Similarly, applying Remark 2.6 to

we see that W^\alpha\partial_\alpha V^\beta \in W^{-1,1+\frac{1}{n}}(\mathbb R^n), while W^\alpha\Gamma_{\alpha\gamma}^\beta V^\gamma \in L^{\infty^-}(\mathbb R^n). We conclude by recalling that

For the second statement observe that g( X,Y ) = X^\alpha Y^\beta g_{\alpha\beta}. Here Y^\beta\in W^{1,\infty^-}(\mathbb R^n) and g_{\alpha\beta}\in W^{1,\infty}_{\mathrm{loc}}(\mathbb R^n), thus Y^\beta g_{\alpha\beta}\in W^{1,\infty^-}(\mathbb R^n). Thus another appeal to Remark 2.6 concludes the proof.

Let us argue locally by fixing an ONF \{e_i\}_i, which consists of C^{0,1}_\text{\normalfont loc}-vector fields. Lemma 3.1 ensures that all objects in this proof are well-defined.
We first compute \text{\normalfont d}\delta X^\flat explicitly, evaluated on an arbitrary W^{1,\infty^-}_\text{\normalfont loc}-vector field Y. Observe that since g\in W^{1,\infty}_\text{\normalfont loc}(T^0_2 M) and X\in W^{1,\infty^-}_\text{\normalfont loc}(TM), then X^\flat \in W^{1,\infty^-}_\text{\normalfont loc} (T^*M).

Now we claim that

Indeed up to L^1_\text{\normalfont loc}-linearity observe that for \nabla X^\flat = \alpha \otimes \beta

Let us denote by S^T the transposed tensor of the (0,2)-tensor S, i.e. S^T(V,W):= S(W,V). We can then compute

Adding together the two previous results, with Y=X, we get

which can be rewritten as

Indeed it holds that \nabla V^\flat = (\nabla V)^\flat for V\in L^{\infty^-}_\text{\normalfont loc}(TM), which is to be understood as a distributional identity. This can be verified in coordinates:

Apart from g_{\beta i} \partial_\alpha V^i, which is admissible by Remark 2.6, all the above are pointwise multiplications of functions.
Now observe that

Let us denote d_t:=d(\,\cdot\, ,c(t)) and d_{i,t}:=d_{i}(\,\cdot\, ,c(t)). Given \varphi\in C^\infty_c(M), let K \Subset M be a compact set with \operatorname{supp}(\varphi) \subseteq K. Then d_{i,t} \to d_t uniformly on K as i\to \infty. Moreover, due to g_i \to g in C^1_{loc} and \mathrm{Ric} \geq 0, there exists a sequence \delta_i\searrow 0 such that \mathrm{Ric}_i \geq - (n-1) \delta_i g_i on TM|_K (cf. Proposition 2.5). Thus

because integration happens on the compact set K and standard Laplacian comparison (see e.g. [petersen2006riemannian, Lem. 7.1.9]) works there due to the estimate on K for \mathrm{Ric}_i. Also

Noting that \lim_{i\to\infty}\sqrt{\delta_i}\coth(\sqrt{\delta_i} d_{i,t}) = \frac{1}{d_{t}} uniformly on K, we conclude that

Note that for any t \in \mathbb R, \int_M t \Delta \varphi \, \text{\normalfont d}\mathrm{Vol} = \int_M (\Delta t) \varphi \, \text{\normalfont d}\mathrm{Vol} = 0, so

The LHS converges to \int_M b \Delta \varphi \, \text{\normalfont d}\mathrm{Vol} and the RHS to 0 for t \to \infty, so we get that b^+ is subharmonic. An analogous proof establishes the same property for b^-.

Observe that for all x \in M, s \in \mathbb R,

Since b^\pm \in C^{0,1}(M)\subseteq W^{1,2}_\text{\normalfont loc}(M), \Delta b^\pm \geq 0 holds in the weak sense as well. Thus by the strong maximum principle for elliptic PDE (see [giltrud2001elliptic, Thm. 8.19]) we can conclude that b^+ +b^-=0. Since b^+=-b^-, it is both subharmonic and superharmonic, thus harmonic.

Let us restrict ourselves to a relatively compact open chart domain \Omega. As a consequence of Proposition 3.6, it holds that b\in W^{1,2}(\Omega) is a weak solution of

Due to elliptic regularity (see e.g. [giaqmar2012elliptic, Thm. 4.9]), it holds that b\in W^{2,2}_{\mathrm{loc}}(\Omega). Now observe that on \Omega, b it is a strong solution of

Recall that b is Lipschitz, thus its first order derivatives \partial_\beta b are in L^p_{\mathrm{loc}}(\Omega). Due to L^p-estimates for solutions of elliptic PDE [giaqmar2012elliptic, Thm. 7.3], we get b\in W^{2,p}_\text{loc}(\Omega) for all p\in [1,\infty). The second statement follows directly from the embeddings of Sobolev spaces in Hölder spaces.

The equivalence of the first two conditions is ensured by the Hopf-Rinow-Cohn-Vossen Theorem [bubuiv2001metric, Thm. 2.5.28] (in particular this equivalence holds even for continuous metrics, cf. [Burtscher_length]). Due to the same theorem, we also have that the first two conditions are equivalent to

which follows from (iii).
Finally let us prove that (i),(ii) \Rightarrow (iii). As for the smooth case, for any geodesic \gamma it holds that

Indeed, following a classical proof such as [petersen2006riemannian, Thm. 5.1.2] we notice that \gamma\in C^2((a,b),M) and g\in C^1(T^0_2 M) are sufficient conditions for the above formula. It follows that integral curves of the corresponding geodesic spray on TM remain in compact sets on finite time intervals, implying completeness of the spray and thereby geodesic completeness by projecting to M (cf. [Lang, Ch. 4, Th. 2.3]).

Since b is 1-Lipschitz, it is enough to prove that \abs{\nabla b(x)}\geq 1 for any fixed x\in M. As above, consider the approximate Busemann function b_t(x)=t-d(x,c(t)). Given t\in\mathbb R (with x\neq c(t)), call v_t:=\sigma_t'(0)\in T_x M, where \sigma_t is a length minimizing unit speed curve from x to c(t). Due to Theorem 3.10, each \sigma_t can be extended to all of \mathbb R as a solution of the geodesic equation. Setting d:=d(x,c(t)) we have \sigma_t: [0,d]\to M and b_t(\sigma_t(s)) = t+s-d. Hence (b_t\circ \sigma_t)'(s) = 1 for all s\in [0,d].

Due to compactness of the unit sphere in T_xM, we can extract a sequence t_j\to \infty and a unit vector v\in T_xM such that v_{t_j} \to v. At the same time, due to the Riemannian analogue of [KOSS22C1HawkingPenrose, Cor. 2.6] applied to the family \{ \sigma_{t_j}\}_j, there exists \delta>0 and a geodesic \sigma:[-\delta,\delta]\to M such that \sigma(0)=x, \sigma'(0)=v and, up to passing to a subsequence of \{t_j\}_j, \sigma_{t_j} \to \sigma in C^2([-\delta, \delta]). We then obtain that b_{t_j}\circ \sigma_{t_j} \to b \circ \sigma uniformly on [0, \delta]. At the same time (b_{t_j}\circ\sigma_{t_j})'\vert_{[0,\delta]}=1 identically. Consequently, b\circ \sigma \vert_{[0,\delta]} is differentiable with (b\circ \sigma)' \vert_{[0,\delta]}\equiv 1. Finally, we deduce

Since \text{\normalfont d} b \in W^{1,\infty^-}_\text{\normalfont loc}(T^*M), then also \nabla b \in W^{1,\infty^-}_\text{\normalfont loc}(TM). We can thus apply the Bochner-Weitzenböck identity (Theorem 3.2). Noting that

this gives

Since \mathrm{Ric}(\nabla b,\nabla b)\geq 0 (even though \nabla b is not smooth and compactly supported, this is easily seen to hold by approximation), we conclude that \operatorname{Hess} b =0.

In local coordinates we have that

Thus for every \alpha, \beta

so the claim follows from [Horvath, Ch. 4, Prop. 10].

Since \operatorname{Hess} b=0, also \nabla \nabla b=0 and thus the integral curves of \nabla b are geodesics. By Theorem 3.10, all integral curves of \nabla b are defined on all of \mathbb R. Since b \in C^2(M) and \abs{\nabla b}=1, all level sets b^{-1}(t) are embedded C^2-hypersurfaces.
Recall that for (t,p)\in \mathbb R\times M', the flow \text{\normalfont Fl}_t^{\nabla b} (p) of the vector field \nabla b denotes the point \gamma(t)\in M, where \gamma is the solution of

It is a well-known consequence of the flow box theorem ([Abraham_Marsden_Ratiu, Prop. 4.1.13]) that (t,p)\mapsto \Phi(t,p):= \text{\normalfont Fl}^{\nabla b}_t(p) is a C^1-map \Phi:\mathbb R \times M' \to M, while t \mapsto \text{\normalfont Fl}^{\nabla b}_t(p) is C^2 for every fixed p \in M.
Note that for t \in \mathbb R and p \in M'

and consequently

This immediately implies that \Phi is a C^1-diffeomorphism. Let us first check that \Phi is a C^1-isometry. Observe that

Fix p\in M'. Since \nabla b(\Phi(t,p)) \perp T_{\Phi(t,p)} (\{b=t\}) for each t, for any (a,v)\in \mathbb R \times T_{p} M we have

Thus we may conclude the proof by showing that \abs{T_{(t,p)}\Phi(0,v)}^2 is independent of t for any given v\in T_{p}M' (because for t=0 it holds that T_{(0,p)} \Phi (0,v) = v). On \mathbb R\times M' let us index with latin letters the coordinates on \{0\}\times M to distinguish them from the flow parameter t. Greek letters will be reserved to coordinates on M. Locally, by definition, we have

and by symmetry of the second distributional derivatives

Given that these mixed second derivatives are distributions represented by continuous functions, by [Friedlander, Th. 2.1.2] the derivatives exist also in the classical sense. Now the following computation is admissible due to the fact that the products are merely multiplications between functions.

We conclude that \Phi is a C^1-isometry. At this point, the regularity of the embedding of M' in M is no longer relevant. We endow M' with a C^2-compatible C^\infty-structure (cf. [Hirsch, Thm. 2.9]). Then \Phi can be understood as a C^1-isometry of C^1-metrics on smooth manifolds. Thus, a result of Taylor [taylor2006existence, Thm. 2.1] asserting the C^2-regularity of distance-preserving maps between C^1-Riemannian metrics concludes the proof.

This is immediate, since the distributional Ricci tensor of a product Riemannian manifold splits.

Following the proof of Theorem 3.5, recall that \operatorname{Hess} b =0 and b\in C^2(M). Thus we proceed by a bootstrapping argument:

Recall that the splitting map is \Phi(t,p)= \text{\normalfont Fl}_t^{\nabla b}(p), which is just the point u(t) where u:\mathbb R\to M is the solution to

Due to the flowbox theorem [Abraham_Marsden_Ratiu, Thm. 4.1.13], the map \Phi is of the same regularity as \nabla b, which is of the same regularity as g, i.e., C^k. Once again, invoking [taylor2006existence, Thm. 2.1] in the same way as in the proof of Proposition 3.14 yields C^{k+1}-regularity of the isometry, concluding the proof.

Let f\in C^{1,1}_c(M) \cap W^{3,2}_\text{\normalfont loc}(M). Clearly f is bounded and Lipschitz continuous. Also using the Sobolev chain rule and Leibniz rule for derivations, we have

Given that C^\infty_c(M)\subseteq C^{1,1}_c(M) \cap W^{3,2}_\text{\normalfont loc}(M), we have proven the first inclusion.
Now consider any \omega\in C^\infty_c(M). Then without loss of generality we can assume \operatorname{supp} \omega is contained in a chart and \omega = \omega_\alpha \text{\normalfont d} x^\alpha, with \omega_\alpha \in C^\infty_c(M)\subseteq \mathrm{Test} (M) and, up to multiplication with an appropriate cutoff function, x^\alpha\in C^\infty_c (M) \subseteq \mathrm{Test} (M).
Finally consider any X\in C^\infty_c(TM). The argument is the same as the previous point, decomposing X into X= X^\alpha g_{\alpha\beta} \nabla x^\beta. Then X^\alpha g_{\alpha\beta} \in C^{1,1}_c(M) \cap W^{3,2}_\text{\normalfont loc}(M)\subseteq \mathrm{Test}(M) and, again up to multiplication with a cutoff function, x^\alpha\in C^\infty_c (M) \subseteq \mathrm{Test} (M).

From [gigpas2020notes, Prop. 6.3.7] we know that in the case of X_1,X_2\in \mathrm{TestV}(M) the vector field [X_1,X_2] is exactly the one associated with the derivation H^{2,2}(M)\cap C^{0,1}(M)\ni f \mapsto X_1(X_2(f)) - X_2(X_1(f)). Since C^\infty_c(M)\subseteq D(\Delta)\subseteq H^{2,2}(M), [X_1,X_2] coincides with the usual Lie bracket of vector fields.

Without loss of generality we may assume that the support of \omega is contained in a single chart and that \omega = f \text{\normalfont d} x for some f\in C^{0,1}_c(M),\, x\in C^\infty_c(M). Then

Observe that in coordinates

Similarly {\operatorname{div} (\text{\normalfont d} x(X_2) X_1)} = \text{\normalfont d} x (X_2) \operatorname{div} X_1 + X_1(X_2(x)). Both are well defined L^1_\text{\normalfont loc}(M) functions. Thus we conclude

Recall that by definition

already holds for all f\in C^\infty_c(M). By density the above formula can be extended to all f\in W^{1,2}(M), thus including f\in \mathrm{Test}(M).

The first statement has been proven in [gigli2018nonsmooth, Section 3.2]. The second statement follows by definition upon applying the heat flow to x ([gigpas2020notes, Ch. 5]).

Take V\in C^\infty_c(TM), and without loss of generality suppose that \operatorname{supp} V is fully contained in a chart domain. In this case we can treat smooth coordinate functions x^\alpha as C^\infty_c(M) functions, since we can just multiply x^\alpha by \chi\in C^\infty_c(M) such that \chi=1 on \operatorname{supp} V and \operatorname{supp} \chi is fully contained in said chart. Let \omega= V^\flat\in C^{0,1}_c(T^*M); up to linearity we can write \omega = f\text{\normalfont d} x where f\in C^{0,1}_c(M) and x\in C^\infty_c(M). Now consider \{f_n\}_n, \{x_n\}_n sequences of \mathrm{Test}(M) functions as stated in the previous lemma. Let us call \omega_n:= f_n \text{\normalfont d} x_n. By definition, \omega_n is a test 1-form. We want to prove that \omega_n \to \omega in W_H^{1,2}(T^*M). Using the calculus properties of \text{\normalfont d},\delta on test forms (see [gigpas2020notes, Prop. 6.4.3], [gigpas2020notes, Prop. 6.4.17] together with [gigpas2020notes, Prop. 4.2.7], and [gigli2018nonsmooth, Eq. 3.5.13] for the correspondence \delta \omega_n = -\operatorname{div} \omega_n^\sharp), we obtain

The properties of f_n, x_n together with the fact that f,\text{\normalfont d} x, \Delta x are essentially bounded, ensure that the three right hand sides converge to 0 in L^2 as n\to \infty.

Take an arbitrary X\in C^\infty_c(TM)\subseteq H^{1,2}_H(TM). Due to their compact support and their W^{-1,\infty^-}_\text{\normalfont loc} regularity, Remark 2.6 ensures that we are allowed to evaluate all the following distributions on the non-compactly supported canonical volume density \mathrm{Vol}\in C^{0,1}_{\mathrm{loc}}(\mathrm{Vol}\, M) =W^{1,\infty}_\text{\normalfont loc}(\mathrm{Vol}\, M)\subseteq W^{1,\infty^-}_\text{\normalfont loc}(\mathrm{Vol}\, M). First of all

Then by [gigpas2020notes, Thm. 6.5.1] and Theorem 3.2 the following holds:

We also know from [gigpas2020notes, Thm. 6.5.1] that, for all Y\in H^{1,2}_H(TM),

Given a non negative \varphi \in C^\infty_c(M), we can always represent it as a finite sum of squares of C^{1,1}_c(M)\subseteq W^{1,\infty^-}_\text{\normalfont loc}(M) functions, \varphi = \sum_{i=1}^m \psi_i^2. A proof of this fact can be found in [guan97mongeampere, Lem. 4]. Then the following multiplication is justified by Remark 2.6:

Due to [bregig2024calculus, Lem. 3.3], we also know that \psi_i X \in H^{1,2}_H(TM). We can thus conclude

Let n=\dim M. Consider as before g_i= g_{\varepsilon_i} as in Remark 2.4 for some \varepsilon_i\searrow 0. It follows from Theorem 3.10, together with (?) that (M,g_i) is a complete Riemannian manifold for every i. Observe that for all i\in \mathbb N one can define the continuous function \kappa_i:M\to \mathbb R assigning to every p\in M the lowest eigenvalue of \mathrm{Ric}_i (p) with respect to g_i(p). Clearly, it holds that \mathrm{Ric}_i \geq \kappa_i g_i.

Fix any x_0\in M. In order to apply Theorem 4.13 we need to verify that, for some p>\frac{n}{2},

To see this, note first that, by (?), for any fixed R>0 and all i\in \mathbb N we have B_R^i(x_0) \subseteq \overline{B_{2R}(x_0))} \Subset M, and since g_i\to g locally uniformly, for large i we additionally have \mathrm{Vol}_i (B_1^i(x_0) ) \ge \mathrm{Vol}_i(B_{1/2}(x_0)) \ge \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{Vol}(B_{1/2}(x_0)). Thus to establish (?), it remains to show that (\kappa_i - K)^- \to 0 in L^p_{\mathrm{loc}}(M). Fix some L\Subset M, and without loss of generality suppose that L is small enough to admit a smooth local frame X_1,\dots,X_n in a neighborhood V of L. Also, fix \bar x\in L. Then according to the Rayleigh quotient formula, for any i there exists some g_i-unit vector \bar X^{(i)}\in T_{\bar x}M with (\kappa_i(\bar x)-K) = \mathrm{Ric}_{g_i}(\bar X^{(i)},\bar X^{(i)})-K. Let \bar X^{(i)}=\sum_{k=1}^n \alpha_k^{(i)} X_k(\bar x) (\alpha_1^{(i)},\dots,\alpha_n^{(i)}\in \mathbb R) and set

on V. Since \bar X^{(i)} is a g_i-unit vector it follows from (?) and the local equivalence of \|\,\|_g with the Euclidean norm w.r.t. the frame X_k that there exists some C_L>0 such that

independently of the choice of \bar x\in L and \bar X^{(i)} as above. On L we have

Since \mathrm{Ric}(X,X)\geq K g(X,X) in distributions and \rho\ge 0, C(X^{(i)},X^{(i)}) \ge 0. Therefore,

pointwise on L. Set \hat A_i := \max\{|A_i(X_k,X_l)| \colon k,l = 1,\dots,n \}, and analogously define \hat B_i and \hat D_i. Inserting (?) into (?) and taking into account (?), it follows that there exists a constant \tilde C_L such that

pointwise on L. Since all of the above arguments apply irrespective of the choice of \bar x and \bar X^{(i)} we conclude that [\kappa_i-K]^-\le \tilde C_L(\hat A_i + \hat B_i + \hat D_i), pointwise on L. Proposition 2.5 shows that both \hat A_i and \hat B_i converge to 0 in L^p(L). Moreover, \hat D_i\to 0 uniformly on L. Altogether, this establishes (?).

From this, by applying Theorem 4.13, we obtain that \{[M, d_i, \mathfrak{m}_i, x_0]\}_{i\in\mathbb N} admits a subsequence that converges in the pmG-sense to the isomorphism class of a \mathsf{CD}(K, \dim M) space. At the same time, due to the convergence g_i\to g in C^0_\text{\normalfont loc}, we can easily see that (M, d_i , \mathfrak{m}_i, x_0) \to (M,d,\mathfrak{m},x_0), where \mathfrak{m}_{(i)}:= \mathrm{Vol}_{(i)}(B_1(x_0))^{-1} \mathrm{Vol}, in the pmGH-sense. By Theorem 4.11, also their isomorphism classes converge in the pmG-sense. Due to uniqueness of the limits, and the fact that the \mathsf{CD}(K,N) condition is invariant under isomorphisms of metric measure spaces, we have that (M,d,\mathfrak{m},x_0) is a \mathsf{CD}(K,N)-space. Also the Riemannian structure of (M,g) naturally ensures the infinitesimal Hilbertianity of (X,d,\mathfrak{m}) (cf. also the discussion on Sobolev spaces from the previous section), making it an \mathsf{RCD}(K,N)-space. Since \mathrm{Vol} is simply a rescaling of \mathfrak{m} and the \mathsf{RCD}(K,N)-condition is invariant under this operation, the claim follows.