Abstract
In this paper we prove a generalisation of Schlenk’s theorem about the existence of contractible periodic Reeb orbits on stable, displaceable hypersurfaces in symplectically aspherical, geometrically bounded, symplectic manifolds, to a forcing result for contractible twisted periodic Reeb orbits. We make use of holomorphic curve techniques for a suitable generalisation of the Rabinowitz action functional in the stable case in order to prove the forcing result. As in Schlenk’s theorem, we derive a lower bound for the displacement energy of the displaceable hypersurface in terms of the action value of such periodic orbits. The main application is a forcing result for noncontractible periodic Reeb orbits on quotients of certain symmetric star-shaped hypersurfaces. In this case, the lower bound for the displacement energy is explicitly given by the difference of the two periods. This theorem can be applied to many physical systems including the Hénon–Heiles Hamiltonian and Stark–Zeeman systems. Further applications include a new proof of the well-known fact that the displacement energy is a relative symplectic capacity on \({\mathbb {R}}^{2n}\) and that the Hofer metric is indeed a metric.
We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.
Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
In [1], a generalisation of Rabinowitz–Floer homology was constructed. Rabinowitz–Floer homology is the Morse–Bott homology in the sense of Floer associated with the Rabinowitz action functional introduced by Kai Cieliebak and Urs Frauenfelder in [2]. The main application of this generalisation was to prove an existence result for noncontractible periodic Reeb orbits on quotients of certain symmetric star-shaped hypersurfaces in \({\mathbb {C}}^n\), \(n \ge 2\). More precisely, let \(\Sigma \subseteq {\mathbb {C}}^n\) be a compact and connected star-shaped hypersurface invariant under the rotation
for some even \(m \ge 2\) and \(k_1,\dots ,k_n \in {\mathbb {Z}}\) coprime to m. Then \(\Sigma /{\mathbb {Z}}_m\) admits a noncontractible periodic Reeb orbit generating the fundamental group \(\pi _1({\mathbb {S}}^{2n - 1}/{\mathbb {Z}}_m) \cong {\mathbb {Z}}_m\). For a proof see [1, Theorem 1.2] and [3, Theorem 1.1] for the more general result, removing the restriction of m being even. The existence of noncontractible periodic Reeb orbits on lens spaces is extremely relevant and attracts much attention in celestial mechanics as mentioned in [4, Introduction] or [5]. We quickly recall the setup for the proof of this result. Let \((W,\lambda )\) be a connected Liouville domain with connected boundary \(\partial W\) and consider a Liouville automorphism \(\varphi \in {{\,\textrm{Aut}\,}}(W,\lambda )\), that is, \(\varphi \in {{\,\textrm{Diff}\,}}(W)\) is of finite order and there exists a unique function \(f_\varphi \in C^\infty ({{\,\textrm{Int}\,}}W)\) such that \(\varphi ^*\lambda - \lambda = df_\varphi \). The main step was to construct a homology theory for the twisted Rabinowitz action functional
on the completion \((M,\lambda )\) of \((W,\lambda )\), where
denotes the twisted loop space of M and \(\varphi \). Twisted loops play a significant role in physical systems with symmetries, see for example [6, Section 6.2] or [7, Definition 4.1]. Consider the chain complex \({{\,\textrm{RFC}\,}}^\varphi (\partial W,M)\) generated by the critical points of a suitable Morse function on the critical manifold \({{\,\textrm{Crit}\,}}({\mathscr {A}}^H_\varphi )\), where
with \(R \in {\mathfrak {X}}(\partial W)\) denoting the Reeb vector field. We then define twisted Rabinowitz-Floer homology as the Morse-Bott homology with coefficients in \({\mathbb {Z}}_2\) by
where the boundary map \(\partial \) counts twisted negative gradient flow lines modulo two with respect to a suitable \(d\lambda \)-compatible \(\varphi \)-invariant almost complex structure on M. This homology theory has the following crucial properties:
-
1.
The semi-infinite dimensional Morse–Bott homology \({{\,\textrm{RFH}\,}}^\varphi (\partial W, M)\) is well-defined. Moreover, twisted Rabinowitz–Floer homology is invariant under twisted homotopies of Liouville domains.
-
2.
Twisted Rabinowitz–Floer homology is indeed a generalisation of the standard Rabinowitz–Floer homology \({{\,\textrm{RFH}\,}}(\partial W,M)\) defined in [2], as
$$\begin{aligned} {{\,\textrm{RFH}\,}}^{{{\,\textrm{id}\,}}_W}(\partial W, M) \cong {{\,\textrm{RFH}\,}}(\partial W,M). \end{aligned}$$ -
3.
If \(\partial W\) is simply connected and does not admit any nonconstant twisted periodic Reeb orbits, then
$$\begin{aligned} {{\,\textrm{RFH}\,}}^\varphi _*(\partial W,M) \cong {\text {H}}_*({{\,\textrm{Fix}\,}}(\varphi \vert _{\partial W});{\mathbb {Z}}_2). \end{aligned}$$Note that \({{\,\textrm{Fix}\,}}(\varphi )\) is a symplectic submanifold of M by [8, Lemma 5.5.7].
-
4.
If \(\partial W\) is displaceable by a compactly supported Hamiltonian symplectomorphism in the completion \((M,\lambda )\), then
$$\begin{aligned} {{\,\textrm{RFH}\,}}^\varphi (\partial W,M) \cong 0. \end{aligned}$$
For a proof see [1, Theorem 1.1]. Note that there are two possible ways for proving property 4: either one shows that the norm of the gradient of a perturbed version of the twisted Rabinowitz action functional is uniformly bounded from below as in [2, Lemma 3.9], or one generalises leaf-wise intersection points following [9]. A direct consequence of properties 3 and 4 is the following observation as in [2, Corollary 1.5]. Suppose that \(\partial W\) is Hamiltonianly displaceable in the completion \((M,\lambda )\) and simply connected. If \({{\,\textrm{Fix}\,}}(\varphi \vert _{\partial W}) \ne \varnothing \), then \(\partial W\) does admit a twisted periodic Reeb orbit. Indeed, if there does not exist any twisted periodic Reeb orbit on the boundary \(\partial W\), we compute using property 3
contradicting property 4. However, if \({{\,\textrm{Fix}\,}}(\varphi \vert _{\partial W}) = \varnothing \), then one cannot directly conclude the existence of a twisted periodic Reeb orbit on \(\partial W\). This is for example the case for the rotation \(\varphi :{\mathbb {C}}^n \rightarrow {\mathbb {C}}^n\) from the beginning. So the best one can hope for is some kind of forcing result to hold. More precisely, if we know that there exists a sufficiently well-behaved twisted periodic Reeb orbit, then this forces the existence of another one. The above observation is already a forcing result, as \({{\,\textrm{Fix}\,}}(\varphi \vert _{\partial W})\) is precisely the set of all constant twisted periodic Reeb orbits on \(\partial W\).
2 Results
2.1 Preliminaries on twisted stable hypersurfaces
Definition 1
(Stable Hypersurface, [10, p. 1774]) Let \((M,\omega )\) be a connected symplectic manifold. A stable hypersurface in \((M,\omega )\) is a compact and connected hypersurface \(\Sigma \subseteq M\) such that the following conditions hold:
-
1.
\(\Sigma \) is separating, that is, \(M \setminus \Sigma \) consists of two connected components \(M^\pm \), where \(M^-\) is bounded and \(M^+\) is unbounded.
-
2.
There exists a vector field X in a neighbourhood of \(\Sigma \) such that X is outward-pointing to \(\Sigma \cup M^-\) and \(\ker \omega \vert _\Sigma \subseteq \ker L_X\omega \vert _\Sigma \).
We write \((\Sigma ,\omega \vert _\Sigma ,\lambda )\) for a stable hypersurface, where the stabilising form \(\lambda \in \Omega ^1(\Sigma )\) is defined by \(\lambda := i_X\omega \vert _\Sigma \).
Definition 2
(Twisted Stable Hypersurface) Let \((\Sigma ,\omega \vert _\Sigma , \lambda )\) be a stable hypersurface in a connected symplectic manifold \((M,\omega )\) and \(\varphi \in {{\,\textrm{Symp}\,}}(M,\omega )\). We say that \(\Sigma \) is twisted by \(\varphi \), if \(\varphi (\Sigma ) = \Sigma \), \(\varphi \) is of finite order and \(\varphi ^*X = X\).
Example 1
(Star-Shaped Hypersurfaces) Consider the Liouville automorphism
for \(m \ge 2\) an integer and \(k_1,\dots ,k_n \in {\mathbb {Z}}\) coprime to m. Let \(f \in C^\infty ({\mathbb {S}}^{2n - 1})\) be a positive function such that \(f \circ \varphi = f\). Then the star-shaped hypersurface
is a contact manifold with \(\varphi \)-invariant contact form \(\lambda \vert _{\Sigma _f}\), where
with complex coordinates \(z_j = x_j + iy_j\). Indeed, by [11, Lemma 12.2.2], we have that
for the defining Hamiltonian function
Hence \((\Sigma _f,\lambda \vert _{\Sigma _f})\) is a contact manifold as the Liouville vector field
satisfies \(i_X d\lambda = \lambda \) and is outward-pointing as
Finally, we conclude that
is the Reeb vector field. The quotient \(\Sigma _f/{\mathbb {Z}}_m\) is called a lens space.
Example 2
(Magnetic Torus, [10, Section 6.1]) Let \({\mathbb {T}}^n\) be the standard flat torus for \(n \ge 2\) and let \(J :{\mathbb {R}}^n \rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}^n\) be an antisymmetric nonzero linear map. Define \(\rho \in \Omega ^2({\mathbb {T}}^n)\) by setting \(\rho (\cdot ,\cdot ):= \langle \cdot , J \cdot \rangle \) and denote by \(\omega _\rho = dp \wedge dq + \pi ^*\rho \) the magnetic symplectic form on \(T^*{\mathbb {T}}^n \cong {\mathbb {T}}^n \times {\mathbb {R}}^n\). For an energy value \(k \in {\mathbb {R}}\) set \(\Sigma _k:= H^{-1}(k)\) for the mechanical Hamiltonian function
Define \(A:= (J\vert _{{{\,\textrm{im}\,}}J})^{-1}\) and \(\alpha \in \Omega ^1({{\,\textrm{im}\,}}J)\) by
By [10, Proposition 6.3], the energy hypersurface \(\Sigma _k\) is stable and displaceable for every \(k > 0\). The stabilising form \(\lambda \) on \(\Sigma _k\) is given by
where
denote the projections with respect to the orthogonal splitting
and
Let \(\varphi \in {{\,\textrm{Diff}\,}}({\mathbb {T}}^n)\) be an isometry of finite order satisfying
and consider the cotangent lift
Then clearly \(\varphi (\Sigma _k) = \Sigma _k\) as \(\varphi \) is an isometry and \(D\varphi ^\dagger \) is of finite order as \(\varphi \) is. Moreover, we have that \(D\varphi ^\dagger \in {{\,\textrm{Symp}\,}}(T^*{\mathbb {T}}^n,\omega _\rho )\), because \(D\varphi ^\dagger \in {{\,\textrm{Symp}\,}}(T^*{\mathbb {T}}^n,dp \wedge dq)\) and \(D\varphi ^\dagger \) preserves \(\rho \) by assumption (2). Lastly, we see that \(\varphi ^*\lambda = \lambda \) by considering formula (1) together with assumption (2), and thus also \(\varphi ^*X = X\) by the equivalent characterisations of stability [12, Proposition 4.2].
Definition 3
(Hofer Norm, [8, p. 466]) Let \((M,\omega )\) be a symplectic manifold. Define the Hofer norm of \(F \in C^\infty _c(M \times [0,1])\) by
where
Definition 4
(Displacement Energy, [8, p. 469]) Let \((M,\omega )\) be a symplectic manifold. For a compact subset \(A \subseteq M\) define the displacement energy of A by
where \(\varphi _F:= \phi ^{X_F}_1\) denotes the time-1-map of the smooth flow of the time-dependent Hamiltonian vector field \(X_{F_t}\).
Example 3
([13, p. 189]) Let M be a compact manifold without boundary. Then we have that \(e(M) = +\infty \) in \((T^*M,dp \wedge dq)\) for the zero-section M in \(T^* M\). However, if \(\rho \ne 0\) for a magnetic cotangent bundle \((T^*M, \omega _\rho )\) and \(\chi (M) = 0\) for the Euler-characteristic \(\chi \) of M, then \(e(M) < +\infty \) is finite. For more examples of nondisplaceable hypersurfaces in cotangent bundles see [14, Theorem 1.13].
Definition 5
(Symplectic Asphericity, [15, p. 302]) A connected symplectic manifold \((M,\omega )\) is said to be symplectically aspherical, if
Equivalently, \((M,\omega )\) is symplectically aspherical if and only if for the de-Rham-homology class \([\omega ]\vert _{\pi _2(M)} = 0\) holds.
Example 4
(Magnetic Torus) The magnetic torus \((T^*{\mathbb {T}}^n,\omega _\rho )\) from Example 2 is symplectically aspherical as \(\omega _\rho = d\lambda _\theta \) is exact with
for all \(q \in {\mathbb {T}}^n\) by [10, Lemma 6.2], where \(\pi :T^*{\mathbb {T}}^n \rightarrow {\mathbb {T}}^n\) denotes the projection. Alternatively, the magnetic cotangent bundle \((T^*{\mathbb {T}}^n,\omega _\rho )\) is symplectically aspherical as \(\pi _2(T^*{\mathbb {T}}^n) \cong \pi _2({\mathbb {T}}^n) \times \pi _2({\mathbb {R}}^n) = 0\).
Definition 6
(Contractible Twisted Loop Space) Let \((M,\omega )\) be a symplectic manifold and \(\varphi \in {{\,\textrm{Symp}\,}}(M,\omega )\) of finite order. A loop \(v \in C^\infty ({\mathbb {T}},M)\), \({\mathbb {T}}:= {\mathbb {R}}/{\mathbb {Z}}\), is said to be a contractible twisted periodic loop, if there exists \(\gamma \in {\mathscr {L}}_\varphi M\) such that
and a filling \({\bar{v}} \in C^\infty ({\mathbb {D}},M)\) on the unit disc
such that \({\bar{v}}(e^{2\pi i t}) = v(t)\) for all \(t \in {\mathbb {T}}\). We denote the space of all contractible twisted periodic loops of M and \(\varphi \) by \(\Lambda _\varphi M\).
Definition 7
(Twisted Rabinowitz Action Functional) Let \((\Sigma ,\omega \vert _\Sigma ,\lambda )\) be a twisted stable hypersurface in a symplectically aspherical symplectic manifold \((M,\omega )\). For a defining Hamiltonian function H for \(\Sigma \) with \(H \circ \varphi = H\), we define the twisted Rabinowitz action functional
Remark 1
(\({{\,\textrm{Crit}\,}}({\mathscr {A}}^H_\varphi )\)) Let \(X \in {\mathfrak {X}}(\gamma )\) be a twisted variation, that is, X is a vector field along \(\gamma \) and satisfies the condition
Then a routine computation shows that
where \(R \in {\mathfrak {X}}(\Sigma )\) is the stable Reeb vector field. If J is a \(\varphi \)-invariant almost complex structure compatible with \(\omega \), then the gradient \({{\,\textrm{grad}\,}}_J {\mathscr {A}}^H_\varphi \in {\mathfrak {X}}(\Lambda _\varphi M \times {\mathbb {R}})\) with respect to the \(L^2\)-metric
and \((v,\tau ) \in \Lambda _\varphi M \times {\mathbb {R}}\), is given by
Hence \((u,\tau ) \in C^\infty ({\mathbb {R}},\Lambda _\varphi M \times {\mathbb {R}})\) is a twisted negative gradient flow line, if the elliptic partial differential equations or twisted Rabinowitz–Floer equations
hold for all \((s, t) \in {\mathbb {R}} \times {\mathbb {T}}\).
Example 5
(Magnetic Torus) Consider the displaceable twisted stable hypersurface \(\Sigma _k \subseteq (T^*{\mathbb {T}}^n,\omega _\rho ,H)\) as in Example 2. A point \((q,p) \in \Sigma _k\) gives rise to a twisted periodic Reeb orbit if and only if
A computation similar to [10, p. 1843] shows
Definition 8
(Morse–Bott Component, [9, p. 86]) Let \({\mathscr {A}} :{\mathscr {E}} \rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) be a smooth functional. A subset \(C \subseteq {{\,\textrm{Crit}\,}}{\mathscr {A}}\) is called a Morse–Bott component, if
-
1.
C is an action-constant submanifold of \({\mathscr {E}}\).
-
2.
\(T_xC = \ker {{\,\textrm{Hess}\,}}{\mathscr {A}}(x)\) for all \(x \in C\) for the Hessian \({{\,\textrm{Hess}\,}}{\mathscr {A}}\) of \({\mathscr {A}}\).
Example 6
(\({{\,\textrm{Fix}\,}}(\varphi \vert _\Sigma )\)) Let \(\Sigma \) be a twisted stable hypersurface in a symplectically aspherical symplectic manifold. Then \({{\,\textrm{Fix}\,}}(\varphi \vert _\Sigma ) \subseteq {{\,\textrm{Crit}\,}}{\mathscr {A}}^H_\varphi \) is a Morse–Bott component. Indeed, by [1, Proposition 2.23] we have that
for all \(x \in {{\,\textrm{Fix}\,}}(\varphi \vert _\Sigma )\).
Definition 9
([10, p. 1768]) A symplectic manifold \((M,\omega )\) is called geometrically bounded, if there exists an \(\omega \)-compatible almost complex structure J and a complete Riemannian metric such that the following conditions hold.
-
1.
There are constants \(C_0,C_1 > 0\) with
$$\begin{aligned} \omega (Jv,v) \ge C_0\Vert v\Vert ^2 \qquad \text {and} \qquad |\omega (u,v)| \le C_1\Vert u\Vert \Vert v\Vert \end{aligned}$$for all \(u,v \in T_x M\) and \(x \in M\).
-
2.
The sectional curvature of the metric is bounded above, and its injectivity radius is bounded away from zero.
Example 7
([10, p. 1768]) Magnetic cotangent bundles are geometrically bounded.
2.2 A forcing theorem for twisted periodic Reeb orbits
Let \((W,\lambda )\) be a connected Liouville domain with connected boundary \(\Sigma := \partial W\). Let \((M,\lambda )\) be the completion of \((W,\lambda )\) and \(\varphi \in {{\,\textrm{Aut}\,}}(W,\lambda )\) a Liouville automorphism, that is, \(\varphi \in {{\,\textrm{Diff}\,}}(W)\) is a diffeomorphism of finite order such that \(\varphi ^*\lambda = \lambda \). In this setup, the kernel of the twisted Rabinowitz action functional \({\mathscr {A}}^H_\varphi \) admits the canonical description
by [1, Proposition 2.23], where \(\xi := \ker \lambda \vert _\Sigma \) denotes the contact distribution.
Definition 10
(Transversal Nondegeneracy, [11, Definition 7.3.1]) Let \((M,\lambda )\) be the completion of a connected Liouville domain \((W,\lambda )\). A contractible twisted periodic Reeb orbit \((v,\tau ) \in {{\,\textrm{Crit}\,}}({\mathscr {A}}_\varphi ^H)\) is said to be nondegenerate, if
Theorem 1
Let \(\Sigma \subseteq {\mathbb {C}}^n\), \(n \ge 2\), be a compact and connected star-shaped hypersurface invariant under the rotation
for some \(m \ge 2\) and \(k_1,\dots ,k_n \in {\mathbb {Z}}\) coprime to m. Assume that there exists a nondegenerate twisted Reeb orbit \((\gamma _0,\tau _0)\) on \(\Sigma \). Then there exists a twisted Reeb orbit \((\gamma ,\tau )\) on \(\Sigma \) with
Example 8
(Ellipsoid, [16, Section 2.2]) For real numbers \(0 < a_1 \le \ldots \le a_n\) we consider the convex hypersurface
By [11, Lemma 12.2.2], the corresponding Reeb vector field is given by the Hamiltonian vector field \(X_H\), where
with \(E(a_1,\dots ,a_n) = H^{-1}(1)\). In coordinates \(z_j = x_j + iy_j\) we then compute
Hence the Reeb flow \(\phi _t :E(a_1,\dots ,a_n) \rightarrow E(a_1,\dots ,a_n)\) is given by
The periodic orbits \(t \mapsto \phi _t(z_1,\dots ,z_n)\) depend on the choice of \(a_1,\dots ,a_n\). If \(a_1,\dots ,a_n\) are linearly independent over \({\mathbb {Z}}\), all periodic orbits are nondegenerate as \(z_j = 0\) except for one coordinate \(z_1, \dots , z_n\). These periodic orbits are invariant under \(\varphi \) and the twisted periodic Reeb orbits on \(E(a_1,\dots ,a_n)\) are given by
for \(j = 1,\dots ,n\). Consider the twisted Reeb orbit \((\gamma _0,\tau _0)\) defined by
for \(\pi |z|^2 = a_1\) and \(k \in {\mathbb {Z}}\). Then for \(\gamma (t):= e^{-2\pi i t}\gamma _0(t)\) we compute
by [8, Example 12.1.7].
Remark 2
As Example 8 shows, one cannot conclude the existence of two geometrically distinct simple symmetric periodic Reeb orbits as in [3, Theorem 1.2] from Theorem 1. Indeed, even under the additional assumption that \(\Sigma \) is dynamically convex, the estimate (3) is not only satisfied for geometrically distinct closed orbits as the ellipsoid \(\Sigma = E(a_1,\dots ,a_n)\) is dynamically convex by the Hofer–Wysocki–Zehnder Theorem [11, Theorem 12.2.1]. The strength of estimate (3) is to provide an upper bound for twisted systoles. This is part of upcoming work of the author.
Example 9
(The Hénon–Heiles Hamiltonian, [17, Section 2]) Consider the mechanical Hamiltonian function
This Hamiltonian function is known as the Hénon–Heiles Hamiltonian. On \({\mathbb {R}}^4 \cong {\mathbb {C}}^2\) consider the coordinates
Define
We have that \(\varphi ^*\lambda = \lambda \) for
For every \(0< k < \frac{1}{6}\), the regular energy surface \(H^{-1}(k)\) contains a strictly convex sphere-like component \(\Sigma _k \cong {\mathbb {S}}^3\). The resulting quotient \(\Sigma _k/{\mathbb {Z}}_3\) is diffeomorphic to the lens space L(3, 1), but not contactomorphic to it with the standard contact distribution. Here we write \(L(m,k_2)\) for the lens space \({\mathbb {S}}^3/{\mathbb {Z}}_m\) from Example 1 with \(k_1 = 1\). Instead, the quotient \(\Sigma _k/{\mathbb {Z}}_3\) is contactomorphic to L(3, 2) with its standard contact distribution. This is mainly due to the use of different coordinates. By a shooting argument [18], one can show that there exist at least two \({\mathbb {Z}}_3\)-symmetric periodic orbits on \(\Sigma _k\). In fact, by [17, Corollary 2.5], there exist infinitely many periodic orbits on \(\Sigma _k\).
Example 10
(Hill’s Lunar Problem, [11, Section 5.8]) The mechanical Hamiltonian function \(H :T^*({\mathbb {R}}^2 {\setminus } \{0\}) \rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) defined by
is called Hill’s lunar Hamiltonian. After Levi–Civita regularisation the regularised Hill’s lunar Hamiltonian \(K :T^* {\mathbb {R}}^2 \rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) is given by
For \(k > 0\) sufficiently small, the energy hypersurface \(K^{-1}(k)\) admits at least two periodic orbits by [19, Theorem 1] and contains a strictly convex sphere-like component \(\Sigma _k \cong {\mathbb {S}}^3\). On \(T^*{\mathbb {R}}^2 \cong {\mathbb {C}}^2\) consider the coordinates
and the rotation
Then K is invariant under the rotation \(\varphi \) and thus \(\Sigma /{\mathbb {Z}}_4\) is diffeomorphic to the lens space L(4, 1), but again due to the choice of nonstandard coordinates not contactomorphic to it. It is a delicate question in Contact Topology to decide the correct value of \(k_2 \ne 1\), such that the obtained lens space L(4, 1) in Hill’s lunar problem is contactomorphic to \(L(4,k_2)\). The tight contact structures on the lens spaces \(L(m,k_2)\) are classified up to isotopy by [20, Theorem 2.1], so in principle it should be possible to obtain the correct value of \(k_2\).
Example 11
(Stark–Zeeman Systems) Planar Stark–Zeeman systems as in [21] and [22] generalise many important physical systems including the diamagnetic Kepler problem and the restricted three body problem [23]. By [21, Corollary 1], for energy values below the first critical value, the Moser regularised energy hypersurfaces are diffeomorphic to the unit cotangent bundles \(S^*{\mathbb {S}}^n\). In particular, for \(n = 2\) we obtain \(S^*{\mathbb {S}}^2 \cong \mathbb{R}\mathbb{P}^3\), a real projective space.
Theorem 1 immediately follows from a more general result.
Theorem 2
(Forcing) Let \(\Sigma \) be a twisted stable displaceable hypersurface in a symplectically aspherical, geometrically bounded, symplectic manifold \((M,\omega )\) for a symplectomorphism \(\varphi \in {{\,\textrm{Symp}\,}}(M,\omega )\) of finite order \({{\,\textrm{ord}\,}}(\varphi )\) and suppose that \(v_0\) is a contractible twisted periodic Reeb orbit on \(\Sigma \) belonging to a Morse–Bott component C. Then there exists a contractible twisted periodic Reeb orbit \(v \notin C\) such that
Remark 3
The case \((\Sigma ,M) = ({\mathbb {S}}^{2n - 1},{\mathbb {C}}^n)\) or \((\Sigma ,M) = (E(a_1,\dots ,a_n),{\mathbb {C}}^n)\) with the ellipsoid from Example 8 and the rotation
shows that the estimate in Theorem 2 is sharp.
Applying Theorem 2 to the Morse–Bott component \({{\,\textrm{Fix}\,}}(\varphi \vert _\Sigma )\) from Example 6 yields the following corollary.
Corollary 1
Let \(\Sigma \) be a twisted stable displaceable hypersurface in a symplectically aspherical, geometrically bounded, symplectic manifold \((M,\omega )\) for \(\varphi \in {{\,\textrm{Symp}\,}}(M,\omega )\) with \({{\,\textrm{Fix}\,}}(\varphi \vert _\Sigma ) \ne \varnothing \). Then there does exist a nonconstant contractible twisted periodic Reeb orbit v such that
In particular, if we take \(\varphi = {{\,\textrm{id}\,}}_M\) in Corollary 1, we recover Schlenk’s theorem as stated in [10, Theorem 4.9] about the existence of contractible closed characteristics on stable, displaceable hypersurfaces with energy less or equal to the displacement energy of the hypersurface. Schlenk proved this result in [24, Theorem 1.1] using quite different methods.
Example 12
(Magnetic Torus) We can apply Theorem 2 and its Corollary 1 to the magnetic torus in Example 2. Indeed, \((T^*{\mathbb {T}}^n,\omega _\rho )\) is geometrically bounded by Example 7 and symplectically aspherical by Example 4. Moreover, \(\Sigma _k\) is stable and displaceable for every energy value \(k > 0\). Thus for every contractible twisted periodic Reeb orbit \(v_0\) belonging to a Morse–Bott component, there does exist a contractible twisted periodic Reeb orbit v with
Further applications of Theorem 2 and its Corollary 1 are the content of the next section. The proof of Theorem 2 is given in Sect. 4. It is also the aim of future research to numerically investigate the Examples 9, 10 and 11, that is, finding upper bounds of the displacement energy and minimal periods.
3 Applications
3.1 The Hofer distance and relative symplectic capacities
Computing the displacement energy is usually very difficult. Sometimes it is possible to give upper bounds on the displacement energy as in [25, Theorem 1] or lower bounds as for any nonempty open subset \(A \subseteq M\) of a symplectic manifold \((M,\omega )\) we have \(e(A) > 0\) as in [26, Theorem 1.1]. Corollary 1 has two immediate consequences. First, the existence of a nonconstant contractible twisted periodic Reeb orbit on any twisted stable displaceable hypersurface. Second, the existence of a lower bound for the displacement energy via the action value of this critical point. If the hypersurface is of contact type, this action value is precisely the period of the parametrised periodic Reeb orbit. We illustrate the usefulness of the second implication and give dynamical proofs of standard results. Recall, that a relative symplectic capacity on \({\mathbb {R}}^{2n}\) is a map c which assigns to each subset \(A \subseteq {\mathbb {R}}^{2n}\) a number \(c(A) \in [0,+\infty ]\) such that the following three properties hold [8, p. 460].
-
1.
(Relative Monotonicity) If there exists a symplectomorphism \(\psi \) of \({\mathbb {R}}^{2n}\) such that \(\psi (A) \subseteq B\), then \(c(A) \le c(B)\).
-
2.
(Conformality) \(c(\lambda A) = \lambda ^2 c(A)\) for all \(\lambda \in {\mathbb {R}}\).
-
3.
(Normalisation) It holds that
$$\begin{aligned} c(B^{2n}(r)) = c(Z^{2n}(r)) = \pi r^2 \qquad \forall r > 0, \end{aligned}$$for the closed ball of radius r
$$\begin{aligned} B^{2n}(r):= \left\{ (x,y) \in {\mathbb {R}}^{2n}: \Vert x\Vert ^2 + \Vert y\Vert ^2 \le r^2\right\} , \end{aligned}$$and the closed cylinder
$$\begin{aligned} Z^{2n}(r):= \left\{ (x,y) \in {\mathbb {R}}^{2n}: x_1^2 + y_1^2 \le r^2\right\} . \end{aligned}$$
Proposition 1
([8, Theorem 12.3.4]) The displacement energy e is a relative symplectic capacity on \({\mathbb {R}}^{2n}\).
Proof
Relative monotonicity and conformality are not hard to show. Moreover, by relative monotonicity and [8, Exercise 12.3.7] we estimate
By Example 8, the periodic Reeb flow on \(\partial B^{2n}(r)\) is given by
Hence the parametrised periodic Reeb orbits are \((t \mapsto \phi _t(z),\tau )\) with \(\tau \in \pi r^2 {\mathbb {Z}}\). But Corollary 1 implies the existence of a nonconstant closed periodic Reeb orbit \((v,\tau )\) on the contact hypersurface \(\partial B^{2n}(r)\) such that
where
This is only possible for \(\tau = \pi r^2\) and the statement follows. \(\square \)
Proposition 2
([26, Theorem 1.1]) For any subset \(A \subseteq {\mathbb {R}}^{2n}\) with nonempty interior it holds that \(e(A) > 0\).
Proof
If \(A \subseteq M\) is not displaceable, we have that \(e(A) = +\infty \) and thus there is nothing to show. Moreover, if A is not compact, we define
So we can assume that A is displaceable by a compactly supported Hamiltonian symplectomorphism \(\varphi _F \in {{\,\textrm{Ham}\,}}_c({\mathbb {R}}^{2n},dy \wedge dx)\). As A is displaceable and has nonempty interior, there exists a closed ball B(r) of radius r such that
Since the displacement energy is a relative symplectic capacity by Proposition 1, we conclude that
\(\square \)
Corollary 2
(Hofer Distance, [8, Theorem 12.3.3]) On \({{\,\textrm{Ham}\,}}_c({\mathbb {R}}^{2n}, dy \wedge dx)\) define the Hofer distance
Then
that is, the Hofer distance is a metric on \({{\,\textrm{Ham}\,}}_c({\mathbb {R}}^{2n}, dy \wedge dx)\).
Proof
Let \(\varphi \in {{\,\textrm{Ham}\,}}_c({\mathbb {R}}^{2n}, dy \wedge dx)\) be not equal to the identity. Thus there exists a set A with nonempty interior such that \(\varphi (A) \cap A = \varnothing \). Lemma 2 implies
and this proves the statement. \(\square \)
Remark 4
In [27, Corollary 1.2], these results are generalised to arbitrary symplectic manifolds.
3.2 Physical systems and the Mañé critical value
Proposition 3
Let \((T^*M,dp \wedge dq, H)\) be a Hamiltonian system for a compact configuration space M and define
where \(\pi _{T^*M} :T^*M \rightarrow M\) denotes the projection. Suppose that \(\Sigma _k:= H^{-1}(k)\) with \(k < e_0(H)\) is a \(\varphi \)-twisted stable regular energy surface admitting a contractible twisted periodic Reeb orbit \((q_0,p_0)\) belonging to a Morse–Bott component C. Then there exists a contractible twisted periodic Reeb orbit \((q,p) \notin C\) such that
Proof
We claim that \(e(\Sigma _k) < +\infty \) for all \(k < e_0(H)\). In particular, every energy hypersurface \(\Sigma _k\) is displaceable in the geometrically bounded and symplectically aspherical symplectic manifold \((T^*M, dp \wedge dq)\) since \(T^*M\) is an exact symplectic manifold with canonical Liouville form pdq. As \(k < e_0(H)\), we can displace \(\Sigma _k\) into the missing fibres. The explicit compactly supported Hamiltonian symplectomorphism achieving that is constructed in [28, Proposition 8.2]. Hence if \(\Sigma _k\) is twisted stable and \(k < e_0(H)\), we conclude the existence of such a contractible periodic Reeb orbit from Theorem 2. \(\square \)
Example 13
(Magnetic Torus) Let M be a compact manifold and \(\theta \in \Omega ^1(M)\). Then the map
is an exact symplectomorphism. Indeed, for every \((q,p) \in T^*M\) and \(v \in T_{(q,p)}T^*M\) we compute
where \(\lambda \in \Omega ^1(T^*M)\) denotes the canonical Liouville form and \(\varphi _{-\theta } \circ \varphi _\theta = {{\,\textrm{id}\,}}_{T^*M}\). A mechanical Hamiltonian function
for some potential function \(V \in C^\infty (M)\) is transformed under \(\varphi _\theta \) to a magnetic Hamiltonian function \(H_\theta = \varphi _\theta ^* H\) given by
In the case of the magnetic torus as in Example 12, we have that
Thus if \(k > 0\), the intersection of \(\Sigma _k = H^{-1}_\theta (k)\) with \(T_q^*{\mathbb {T}}^n\) is a sphere centred at \(\theta _q\) for every \(q \in {\mathbb {T}}^n\). For more details see [29, Example 5.2]. Consequently, we have that \(e_0 = 0\) and Proposition 3 cannot be applied. Note that the Mañé critical value c is infinite in this case because a nonzero \(\rho \) has no bounded primitives in \({\mathbb {R}}^n\).
Remark 5
In the setting of Proposition 3, if H is a Tonelli Hamiltonian function, that is, H is strictly fibrewise convex and superlinear, then any stable energy level of H does admit a periodic Reeb orbit by [30]. See also [12, Theorem (iv)].
Remark 6
The proof of Proposition 3 does not work for higher energy values in general. This is due to a theorem of Will Merry in [31, Theorem 1.1] and [31, Remark 1.7]. Let \(H \in C^\infty (T^*M)\) be a Tonelli Hamiltonian function. Define the Mañé critical value
where the infimum is taken over all 1-forms \(\theta \) on the universal covering manifold \({\widetilde{M}}\) with \(d\theta = {\widetilde{\rho }}\), and \({\widetilde{H}} \in C^\infty (T^*{\widetilde{M}})\) denotes the lift of H. We always have that
If \(k > c\), then the Rabninowitz–Floer homology \({{\,\textrm{RFH}\,}}_*(\Sigma _k,T^*M)\) of [10] is well-defined and does not vanish. In particular, \(\Sigma _k\) is not displaceable. Thus we cannot apply Theorem 2 in that case either.
4 Proof of Theorem 2
The proof of Theorem 2 uses a method called a “homotopy of homotopies argument”. Fix \(\varepsilon > 0\) and choose a Hamiltonian function \(F \in C^\infty _c(M \times [0,1])\) satisfying
This is possible by definition of the displacement energy. Next we need to carefully choose a twisted defining Hamiltonian function H for the stable hypersurface \(\Sigma \). We postpone the construction of this Hamiltonian function and explain the main idea of the proof. Choose a smooth family \((\beta _r)_{r \in [0,+\infty )}\) of cutoff functions \(\beta _r \in C^\infty ({\mathbb {R}},[0,1])\) such that
for all \(r \in [0,+\infty )\). Define a family of twisted Rabinowitz action functionals
by
for all \(r \in [0,+\infty )\). Note that \({\mathscr {A}}_0 = {\mathscr {A}}^H_\varphi \). For a suitable \(\varphi \)-invariant \(\omega \)-compatible almost complex structure we consider the moduli space
where
Note that always \((v_0,\tau _0,0) \in {\mathscr {M}}\) and that such a \(\varphi \)-invariant \(\omega \)-compatible almost complex structure always exists by [8, Lemma 5.5.6]. The gradient \({{\,\textrm{grad}\,}}{\mathscr {A}}_r\) of \({\mathscr {A}}_r\) is taken with respect to the metric
Lemma 1
If
then \({\mathscr {M}}\) is compact.
As a corollary of Lemma 1 we get Theorem 2. Indeed, the moduli space \({\mathscr {M}}\) is the zero level set of a Fredholm section of a bundle over a Banach manifold. As \(v_0\) belongs to a Morse–Bott component, the Fredholm section is regular at the point \(v_0\), that is, the linearisation of the gradient flow equation is surjective there. By compactness, we can therefore perturb the Fredholm section to make it transverse. Hence \({\mathscr {M}}\) is a compact smooth manifold with boundary consisting precisely of the point \(v_0\). See [15, Appendix A] for details. This is absurd, and we conclude that there exists a critical point \((v,\tau ) \in {{\,\textrm{Crit}\,}}({\mathscr {A}}_0) \setminus C\) such that
As \(\varepsilon > 0\) was arbitrary, the statement follows since
We prove Lemma 1 in four steps.
Step 1: If \((u,\tau ,r) \in {\mathscr {M}}\), then \(E(u,\tau ) \le \Vert F\Vert \) for the energy
We estimate
as \({\mathscr {A}}_0(v,\tau ) = {\mathscr {A}}_0(v_0,\tau _0)\) since C is action-constant by definiton of a Morse–Bott component.
Step 2: There exists \(r_0 \in {\mathbb {R}}\) such that \(r \le r_0\) for all \((u,\tau ,r) \in {\mathscr {M}}\). Crucial is the existence of a constant \(\delta > 0\) such that
This is proven along the lines of [2, Lemma 3.9]. With this inequality and Step 1 we estimate
and thus we can set
Step 3: There exists a constant \(C > 0\) such that \(\Vert \tau \Vert _\infty \le C\) for all \((u,\tau ,r) \in {\mathscr {M}}\). This is a delicate estimate based on the explicit construction of the defining Hamiltonian H for \(\Sigma \) as well as an extension of the stabilising form \(\lambda \). The bound on the Lagrange multiplier is derived by comparing the twisted Rabinowitz action functional to a different action functional. This modified version of the twisted Rabinowitz action functional is obtained using a suitable extension of the \(\varphi \)-invariant stabilising form \(\lambda \in \Omega ^1(\Sigma )\) to a compactly supported form \(\beta _\lambda \in \Omega ^1(M)\). The precise constructions can be found in [10, Section 4.2.2]. Given \(\beta _\lambda \), we can define the auxiliary action functional
Moreover, we consider the bilinear form on the tangent bundle \(T\Lambda _\varphi M \times {\mathbb {R}}\)
The main point in the choice of the \(\varphi \)-invariant \(H \in C^\infty (M)\), \(\beta _\lambda \in \Omega ^1(M)\) and the \(\omega \)-compatible \(\varphi \)-invariant almost complex structure J is to make sure, that the properties
-
1.
\(d\widehat{{\mathscr {A}}}_0(v,\tau )(X,\eta ) = {\widehat{m}}\left( {{\,\textrm{grad}\,}}{\mathscr {A}}_0(v,\tau ),(X,\eta )\right) \),
-
2.
\((m - {\widehat{m}})\left( (X,\eta ),(X,\eta )\right) \le 0\),
are true for all \((v,\tau ) \in \Lambda _\varphi M \times {\mathbb {R}}\) and \((X,\eta ) \in T_{(v,\tau )}\Lambda _\varphi M \times {\mathbb {R}}\). These two conditions ensure that the difference \({\mathscr {A}}_0 - \widehat{{\mathscr {A}}}_0\) is a Liapunov function for the negative gradient flow lines of the twisted Rabinowitz action functional \({\mathscr {A}}_0\). The uniform bound on the Lagrange multiplier \(\tau \) now follows from Steps 1 and 2. For details see [10, p. 1808]. The only subtle difference in our case is, that everything needs to be \(\varphi \)-invariant. However, this is no problem as we explain now. The construction of H, \(\beta _\lambda \) and J is based on the existence of a stable tubular neighbourhood of \(\Sigma \), that is, a pair \((\rho _0,\psi )\) with \(\rho _0 > 0\) and \(\psi :(-\rho _0,\rho _0) \times \Sigma \hookrightarrow M\) an embedding such that
By [10, Proposition 2.6 (a)], the space of stable tubular neighbourhoods of \((\Sigma ,\lambda )\) is nonempty. Using the equivariant Darboux–Weinstein Theorem [32, Theorem 22.1], we get the existence of a stable tubular neighbourhood \((\rho _0,\psi )\), satisfying
Compare also [1, Equation (3.2)]. Hence the constructions [10, p. 1791–1793] yield \(\varphi \)-invariant data H, \(\beta _\lambda \) and J due to (6).
Step 4: Proof of Lemma 1. Let \((u_k,\tau _k,r_k)\) be a sequence in the moduli space \({\mathscr {M}}\). By Step 2 and Step 3, the sequences \((r_k)\) and \((\tau _k)\) are uniformly bounded. Thus \((u_k,\tau _k,r_k)\) admits a \(C^\infty _{\textrm{loc}}\)-convergent subsequence by standard arguments [15, Theorem B.4.2]. Indeed, the uniform \(L^\infty \)-bound on the sequence \((u_k)\) follows from the assumption that \((M,\omega )\) is geometrically bounded and the uniform \(L^\infty \)-bound on the derivatives \((Du_k)\) follows from the absence of bubbling as \((M,\omega )\) is symplectically aspherical. In particular, there cannot exist a nonconstant J-holomorphic sphere when the sequence of derivatives is unbounded [15, Section 4.2]. Denote the limit of this subsequence by \((u,\tau ,r)\). This limit clearly satisfies the first equation in (4), thus one only needs to check the asymptotic conditions in (4). Again by compactness, \((u,\tau )\) converges to critical points \((w_\pm ,\tau _\pm )\) of \({\mathscr {A}}_0\) at its asymptotic ends. We claim that
In particular, \({\mathscr {A}}_0(w_\pm ,\tau _\pm ) \in \left[ -\Vert F\Vert + {\mathscr {A}}_0(v_0,\tau _0), \Vert F\Vert + {\mathscr {A}}_0(v_0,\tau _0)\right] \). So if (7) holds, then by assumption (5) we conclude \((w_\pm ,\tau _\pm ) \in C\) and \({\mathscr {M}}\) is indeed compact. It remains to prove (7). It is enough to show
for every \(k \in {\mathbb {N}}\). As in the proof of [9, Lemma 2.8] we estimate
for all \(s_0 \in {\mathbb {R}}\). Similarly, we compute
and thus we estimate
This shows the estimate (7) and so the proof of Lemma 1 and Theorem 2 is complete.
Data availibility
Data sharing is not applicable to this article and no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.
References
Bähni, Y.: First steps in twisted Rabinowitz-Floer homology. J. Symp. Geometry 21(1), 111–158 (2023)
Cieliebak, K., Frauenfelder, U.: A Floer homology for exact contact embeddings. Pac. J. Math. 239(2), 251–316 (2009)
Abreu, M., Liu, H., Macarini, L.: Symmetric periodic Reeb orbits on the sphere (2022). arXiv:2211.16470
Liu, H., Zhang, L.: Multiplicity of closed Reeb orbits on dynamically convex \( {\mathbb{R} }{P}^{2n-1} \) for \( n\ge 2 \). Discrete Contin. Dynam. Syst. 42(4), 1801–1816 (2022)
Hryniewicz, U.L., Salomão, P.A.S.: Elliptic bindings for dynamically convex Reeb flows on the real projective three-space. Calc. Var. Partial. Differ. Equ. 55(2), 43 (2016)
Cieliebak, K., Frauenfelder, U., Volkov, E.V.: A variational approach to frozen planet orbits in helium. Ann. de l’Institut Henri Poincaré C, Analyse non linéaire 40(2), 379–455 (2023)
Frauenfelder, U., Moreno, A.: On doubly symmetric periodic orbits. Celest. Mech. Dyn. Astron. 135(2), 20 (2023)
McDuff, D., Salamon, D.: Introduction to Symplectic Topology, 3rd edn. Oxford Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 27. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2017)
Albers, P., Frauenfelder, U.: Leaf-wise intersections and Rabinowitz-Floer homology. J. Topol. Anal. 02(01), 77–98 (2010)
Cieliebak, K., Frauenfelder, U., Paternain, G.P.: Symplectic topology of Mañé’s critical values. Geometry Topol. 14(3), 1765–1870 (2010)
Frauenfelder, U., Koert, O.: The Restricted Three-Body Problem and Holomorphic Curves. Pathways in Mathematics. Birkhäuser, Cham, Switzerland (2018)
Abbondandolo, A.: Lectures on the free period Lagrangian action functional. J. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 13(2), 397–430 (2013)
Butler, L.T., Paternain, G.P.: Magnetic flows on sol-manifolds: Dynamical and symplectic aspects. Commun. Math. Phys. 284(1), 187–202 (2008)
Merry, W.J.: Lagrangian Rabinowitz-Floer homology and twisted cotangent bundles. Geom. Dedicata. 171(1), 345–386 (2014)
McDuff, D., Salamon, D.: J-holomorphic Curves and Symplectic Topology, 2nd edn. Colloquium Publications, vol. 52. American Mathematical Society, Washington, D.C. (2012)
Schlenk, F.: Embedding Problems in Symplectic Geometry. De Gruyter, Berlin, New York (2005)
Schneider, A.: Global surfaces of section for dynamically convex Reeb flows on lens spaces. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 373, 2775–2803 (2020)
Churchill, R.C., Pecelli, G., Rod, D.L.: A survey of the Hénon-Heiles Hamiltonian with applications to related examples. In: Casati, G., Ford, J. (eds.) Stochastic Behavior in Classical and Quantum Hamiltonian Systems, pp. 76–136. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (1979)
Llibre, J., Roberto, L.A.: On the periodic orbits and the integrability of the regularized Hill lunar problem. J. Math. Phys. 52(8), 082701 (2011)
Honda, K.: On the classification of tight contact structures I. Geometry Topol. 4(1), 309–368 (2000)
Cieliebak, K., Frauenfelder, U., Koert, O.: Periodic orbits in the restricted three-body problem and arnold’s \({J}+\)-invariant. Regul. Chaotic Dynam. 22(4), 408–434 (2017)
Cieliebak, K., Frauenfelder, U., Zhao, L.: \({J}^+\) -invariants for planar two-center Stark-Zeeman systems. Ergodic Theory Dynam. Syst. 43(7), 2258–2292 (2023)
Moreno, A.: Contact geometry in the restricted three-body problem: a survey. J. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 24(2), 29 (2022)
Schlenk, F.: Applications of Hofer’s geometry to Hamiltonian dynamics. Comment. Math. Helv. 81(1), 105–121 (2006)
Irie, K.: Displacement energy of unit disk cotangent bundles. Math. Z. 276(3), 829–857 (2014)
Banyaga, A., Hurtubise, D., Spaeth, P.: The symplectic displacement energy. J. Symplect. Geometry 16(1), 69–83 (2018)
Lalonde, F., McDuff, D.: The geometry of symplectic energy. Ann. Math. 141(2), 349–371 (1995)
Contreras, G.: The Palais-Smale condition on contact type energy levels for convex Lagrangian systems. Calc. Var. Partial. Differ. Equ. 27(3), 321–395 (2006)
Abbondandolo, A., Schlenk, F.: Floer homologies, with applications. Jahresber. Deutsch. Math. Verein. 121(3), 155–238 (2019)
Macarini, L., Paternain, G.P.: On the stability of Mañé critical hypersurfaces. Calc. Var. Partial. Differ. Equ. 39(3), 579–591 (2010)
Merry, W.J.: On the Rabinowitz-Floer homology of twisted cotangent bundles. Calc. Var. Partial. Differ. Equ. 42(3), 355–404 (2011)
Guillemin, V., Sternberg, S.: Symplectic Techniques in Physics, 1st edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1984)
Acknowledgements
To Colin, Neil and Jil. In memory of Will J. Merry. A brilliant teacher and a guiding light. Without him I would have never met Urs Frauenfelder, Kai Cieliebak and Felix Schlenk.
Funding
Open access funding provided by Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Communicated by P. H. Rabinowitz.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.