Abstract
We study the space of Sasaki metrics on a compact manifold \(M\) by introducing an odd-dimensional analogue of the \(J\)-flow. That leads to the notion of critical metric in the Sasakian context. In analogy to the Kähler case, on a polarised Sasakian manifold, there exists at most one normalised critical metric. The flow is a tool for texting the existence of such a metric. We show that some results proved by Chen (Commun. Anal. Geom. 12: 837–852, 2004) can be generalised to the Sasakian case. In particular, the Sasaki \(J\) -flow is a gradient flow which has always a long-time solution minimising the distance on the space of Sasakian potentials of a polarised Sasakian manifold. The flow minimises an energy functional whose definition depends on the choice of a background transverse Kähler form \(\chi \). When \(\chi \) has nonnegative transverse holomorphic bisectional curvature, the flow converges to a critical Sasakian structure.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
Sasakian manifolds are the odd-dimensional counterpart of Kähler manifolds and are defined as odd-dimensional Riemannian manifolds \((M,g)\) whose Riemannian cone \((M\times {\mathbb {R}}^+,t^2g+\hbox {d}t^2)\) admits a Kähler structure. These manifolds are important for both geometric and physical reasons. In geometry, they can be used to produce new examples of complete Kähler manifolds, manifolds with special holonomy and Einstein metrics. Moreover, Sasakian manifolds play a role in the study of orbifolds since many Kähler orbifolds can be desingolarised by using Sasakian spaces. In theoretical physics, these manifolds play a central role in the AdS/CFT correspondence (see e.g. [12, 16, 17, 30–33]). We refer to [3, 39] for general theory and recent advancement in the study of these manifolds.
Given a Sasakian manifold, the choice of a Kähler structure on the Riemannian cone determines a unitary Killing vector field \(\xi \) of the metric \(g\) and an endomorphism \(\Phi \) of the tangent bundle to \(M\) such that
\(\eta \) being the \(1\)-form dual to \(\xi \) via \(g\). It turns out that \(\eta \) is a contact form and that \(\Phi \) induces a CR-structure \((\mathcal D,J)\) on \(M\). Moreover, \(\Phi (X)=\mathrm{D}_X\xi \) for every vector field \(X\) on \(M\), where \(\mathrm{D}\) is the Levi-Civita connection of \(g\). The quadruple \((\xi ,\Phi ,\eta ,g)\) is usually called a Sasakian structure and the pair \((\xi ,J)\) can be seen as a polarisation of \(M\).
The research of this paper is mainly motivated by [4, 21–23] where the study of Riemannian and symplectic aspects of the space of Sasakian potentials \(\mathcal {H}\) on a polarised Sasakian manifold is approached. Our approach consists in using an analogue of the \(J\)-flow in the context of Sasakian Geometry obtaining some results similar to the ones proved in the Kähler case by Chen in [7]. The \(J\)-flow is a gradient geometric flow of Kähler structures introduced and firstly studied by Donaldson in [13] from the point of view of moment maps and by Chen in [7] in relation to the Mabuchi energy. It is defined as the gradient flow of a functional \(J_{\chi }\) defined on the space of normalised Kähler potentials whose definition depends on a fixed background Kähler structure \(\chi \). Chen proved in [7] that the flow has always a unique long-time solution which, in the special case when \(\chi \) has nonnegative biholomorphic curvature, converges to a critical Kähler metric. Further results about the flow are obtained in [25, 38, 42, 43].
As far as we know, the interest for geometric flows in foliated manifolds comes from [27] where a foliated version of the Ricci flow is introduced. Subsequently, Smoczyk, Wang and Zhang proved in [36] that the transverse Ricci flow preserves the Sasakian condition and study its long-time behaviour generalising the work of Cao in [5] to the Sasakian case. Some deep geometric and analytic aspects of the Sasaki–Ricci flow were further investigated in [8–11].
In analogy to the Kähler case, the Sasaki \(J\) -flow introduced in this paper (see Sect. 4 for the precise definition) is the gradient flow of a functional \(J_{\chi }:\mathcal {H}\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) whose definition depends on the choice of a transverse Kähler structure \(\chi \). Sasakian metrics arising from critical points of the restriction of \(J_{\chi }\) to the space of normalised Sasakian potentials \(\mathcal {H}_0\), are natural candidates to be canonical Sasakian metrics.
The main result of the paper is the following
Theorem 1.1
Let \((M,\xi ,\Phi ,\eta ,g)\) be a \((2n+1)\)-dimensional Sasakian manifold, and let \(\chi \) be a transverse Kähler form on \(M\). Then, the functional \(J_{\chi }:{\mathcal {H}}_0\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) has at most one critical point and the Sasaki \(J\)-flow has a long-time solution \(f\) for every initial datum \(f_0\). Furthermore, the length of any smooth curve in \(\mathcal {H}_0\) and the distance between any two points decrease under the flow and when the transverse holomorphic bisectional curvature of \(\chi \) is nonnegative, \(f\) converges to a critical point of \(J_{\chi }\) in \({\mathcal {H}}_0\).
The last sentence in the statement of Theorem 1.1 implies that if the transverse Kähler structure \(\chi \) has nonnegative transverse holomorphic bisectional curvature, then \(J_{\chi }\) has a critical point in \({\mathcal {H}}_0\). We remark that Sasakian manifolds having nonnegative transverse holomorphic bisectional curvature are classified in [24], but in the definition of the Sasaki \(J\)-flow, \(\chi \) is just a transverse Kähler structure not necessarily induced by a Sasaki metric.
From the local point of view, a solution to the Sasaki \(J\) -flow can be seen as a collection of solutions to the Kähler \(J\)-flow on open sets in \({\mathbb {C}}^n\). This fact allows us to use all the local estimates about the Kähler \(J\)-flow provided in [7]. What is necessary modifying from the Kähler case is the proof of the existence of a short-time solution to the flow (since the flow is parabolic only along transverse directions) and the global estimates. The short-time existence is obtained in Sect. 4 by using a trick introduced in [36], while the global estimates are obtained by using a transverse version of the maximal principle for transversally elliptic operators (see Sect. 5).
2 Preliminaries
In this section, we recall some basic facts about Sasakian Geometry declaring the notation which will be adopted in the rest of the paper.
Let \((M,\xi ,\Phi ,\eta ,g)\) be a \((2n+1)\)-dimensional Sasaki manifold. Then, the Reeb vector field \(\xi \) specifies a Riemannian foliation on \(M\), which is usually denoted by \(\mathcal F_{\xi }\), and the tangent bundle to \(M\) splits in \(TM=\mathcal D\oplus L_{\xi }\), where \(L_{\xi }\) is the line bundle generated by \(\xi \) and \(\mathcal D\) has as fibre over a point \(x\) the vector space \(\ker \eta _x\). The metric \(g\) splits accordingly in \(g=g^\mathrm{T}+\eta ^2\), where the degenerate tensor \(g^\mathrm{T}\) is called the transverse metric of the Sasakian structure. In the following, we denote by \(\nabla ^\mathrm{T}\) the transverse Levi-Civita connection defined on the bundle \(\mathcal D\) in terms of the Levi-Civita connection \(\mathrm{D}\) of \(g\) as
where the upperscript \(\mathcal D\) denotes the orthogonal projection onto \(\mathcal D\). This connection induces the transverse curvature
and the transverse Ricci curvature \(\mathrm{Ric}^\mathrm{T}\) obtained as the trace of the map \(X\mapsto R^\mathrm{T}(X,\cdot )\cdot \) on \(\mathcal D\) with respect to \(g^\mathrm{T}\). We further recall that a real \(p\)-form \(\alpha \) on \((M,\xi ,\Phi ,\eta ,g)\) is called basic if
where \(\iota _{\xi }\) denotes the contraction along \(\xi \). The set of basic \(p\)-forms is usually denoted by \(\Omega _{B}^p(M)\) and \(\Omega _B^0(M)=C^{\infty }_B(M)\). Since the exterior differential operator takes basic forms into basic forms, its restriction \(\mathrm{d}_B\) to \(\Omega _B(M)=\oplus \Omega _B^p(M)\) defines a cohomological complex. Moreover, \(\Phi \) induces a transverse complex structure \(J\) on \((M,\xi )\) and a splitting of the space of complex basic forms in forms of type \((p,q)\) in the usual way. Furthermore, the complex extension of \(\mathrm{d}_B\) to \(\Omega _B(M,{\mathbb {C}})\) splits as \(\mathrm{d}_B=\partial _B+\bar{\partial }_B\) and \(\bar{\partial }_B^2=0\) (see e.g. [2] for details). A basic \((1,1)\)-form \(\chi \) on \((M,\xi ,\Phi ,\eta ,g)\) is said to be positive if
for every nonzero section \(Z\) of \(\Gamma (\mathcal D^{1,0})\). If further \(\chi \) is closed, we refer to \(\chi \) as to a transverse Kähler form. Note that condition (3) depends only on the transverse complex structure \(J\) and on \(\xi \), since \(\chi \) is basic. Every such a \(\chi \) induces the global metric
on \(M\). The metric \(g_{\chi }\) induces a transverse Levi-Civita connection \(\nabla ^{\chi }\) and a transverse curvature \(R^{\chi }\) as in (1) and (2) (here it is important that \(\chi \) is basic in order to define \(\nabla ^{\chi }\)).
2.1 Adapted coordinates
Let \((M,\xi ,\Phi ,\eta ,g)\) be a Sasakian manifold. We can always find local coordinates \(\{z^1,\dots ,z^{n},z\}\) taking values in \({\mathbb {C}}^n\times {\mathbb {R}}\) such that
A function \(h\) is basic if and only if it does not depend on the variable \(z\), and we usually denote by \(h_{,i_1\dots i_r\bar{j}_1\dots \bar{j}_l}\) the space derivatives of \(h\) along \(\partial _{z^{i_1}},\dots ,\partial _{z^{i_r}}, \partial _{\bar{z}^{ j_1}},\dots ,\partial _{\bar{z}^{ j_l}}\). We denote by \(A_{i_1\dots i_r\bar{j}_1\dots \bar{j}_l}\) (without “,”) the components of the basic tensor \(A\). Furthermore, when a function \(f\) depends also on a time variable \(t\), we use notation \(\dot{f}\) to denote its time derivative. In the case when \(f\) depends on two time variables \((t,s)\), we write \(\partial _t f\) and \(\partial _s f\), to distinguish the two derivatives.
For instance, the metric \(g\) and the transverse symplectic form \(\hbox {d}\eta \) locally write as
where the \(g_{i\bar{j}}\) are all basic functions. In particular, the transverse metric \(g^\mathrm{T}\) writes as \(g^\mathrm{T}=g_{i\bar{j}}\mathrm{d}z^i\mathrm{d}\bar{z}^{ j}\) and a Sasakian structure can be regarded as a collection of Kähler structures each one defined on an open set of \({\mathbb {C}}^n\). Observe that conditions (4) depend only on \((\xi ,J)\), and therefore, they hold for every Sasakian structure compatible with \((\xi ,J)\). This fact is crucial in the Proof of Theorem 1.1.
In this paper, we make sometimes use of special foliated coordinates with respect to a transverse Kähler form \(\chi \). Indeed, once a transverse Kähler form \(\chi \) on the Sasakian manifold \((M,\xi ,\Phi ,\eta ,g)\) is fixed, we can always find foliated coordinates \(\{z^1,\dots ,z^{n},z\}\) around any fixed point \(x\) such that if \(\chi =\chi _{i\bar{j}}\,\hbox {d}z^i\wedge \hbox {d}\bar{z}^j\), then
Moreover, we can further require that the transverse metric \(g^\mathrm{T}\) takes a diagonal expression at \(x\).
2.2 The space of the Sasakian potentials and the definition of \(J\)-flow
Following [4, 21–23], given a Sasakian manifold \((M,\xi ,\Phi ,\eta ,g)\), we consider
where \(\mathrm{d}^ch\) is the \(1\)-form on \(M\) defined by \((\mathrm{d}^ch)(X)=-\frac{1}{2} \hbox {d}h(\Phi (X))\). Every \(h\in {\mathcal {H}}\) induces the Sasakian structure \((\xi ,\Phi _h,\eta _h,g_h)\) where
Notice that
All the Sasakian structures induced by the functions in \({\mathcal {H}}\) have the same Reeb vector field and the same transverse complex structure. It is rather natural to restrict our attention to the space \(\mathcal {H}_0\) of normalised Sasakian potentials. \({\mathcal {H}}_0\) is defined as the zero set of the functional \(I:{\mathcal {H}}\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) defined through its first variation by
where \(f\) is a smooth curve in \({\mathcal {H}}\) (see [21, formula (14)] for an explicit formulation of \(I\)). The pair \((\xi ,J)\) can be seen as a polarisation of the Sasakian manifold (see [4]). Notice that \(\mathcal {H}\) is open in \(C^{\infty }_B(M,{\mathbb {R}})\) and has the natural Riemannian metric
The covariant derivative of (5) along a smooth curve \(f=f(t)\) in \(C^{\infty }_B(M,{\mathbb {R}})\) takes the following expression
where \(\psi \) is an arbitrary smooth curve in \(C^{\infty }_B(M,{\mathbb {R}})\) and \(\langle \cdot ,\cdot \rangle _f\) is the pointwise scalar product induced by \(g_f\) on basic forms (see [21, 23]). Note that \(D_t\) can be alternatively written as
which has the following local expression
Moreover, a curve \(f=f(t)\) in \({\mathcal {H}}\) is a geodesic if and only if it solves
Furthermore, W. He proved in [23] that \({\mathcal {H}}\) is an infinite dimensional symmetric space whose curvature can be written as
where \(\{,\,\}_h\) is the Poisson bracket on \(C^{\infty }_B(M,{\mathbb {R}})\) induced by the contact form \(\eta _h\).
As in the Kähler case, it is still an open problem to establish when two points in \({\mathcal {H}}\) can be connected by a geodesic path. Fortunately, Guan and Zhang proved in [22] that this can be always done in a weak sense. More precisely, the role of \({\mathcal {H}}\) is replaced with its completion \(\bar{\mathcal {H}}\) with respect to the \(C_{w}^2\)-norm (see [22] for details) and the geodesic Eq. (6) with
Then, by definition, a \(C^{1,1}\)-geodesic is a curve in \(\bar{{\mathcal {H}}}\) obtained as weak limit of solutions to (7), and from [22], it follows that for every two points in \({\mathcal {H}}\), there exists a \(C^{1,1}\)-geodesic connecting them.
Now, we can introduce the Sasakian version of the \(J\)-flow. The definition depends on the choice of a transverse Kähler form \(\chi \). Note that
for every \(h\in \ \mathcal {H}\), since \(\chi \) and \(\mathrm{d}^c_Bh\) are both basic forms.
Proposition 2.1
Let \(f_0,f_1\in \mathcal {H}\) and \(f:[0,1]\rightarrow \mathcal {H} \) be a smooth path satisfying \(f(0)=f_0, \, f(1)=f_1\). Then
depends only on \(f_0\) and \(f_1\).
Proof
Following the approach of Mabuchi in [28], let \(\psi (s,t):=sf(t)\) and let \(\Psi \) be the \(2\)-form on the square \(Q=[0,1]\times [0,1]\) defined as
We show that \(\Psi \) is closed as \(2\)-form on \(Q\):
Therefore the Gauss-Green Theorem implies that
and the claim follows. \(\square \)
In view of the last proposition, we can write \(A_{\chi }(f_0,f_1)\) instead of \(A_{\chi }(f)\).
Definition 2.2
The Sasaki \(J\) -functional is the map \(J_{\chi }:\mathcal {H}\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) defined as
Alternatively, we can define \(J_{\chi }\) through its first variation by
and then apply Proposition 2.1 to show that the definition is well posed. Note that
and therefore
where for \(h\in \mathcal {H}\)
the components and the derivatives are computed with respect to transverse holomorphic coordinates, and with the upper indices in \(g_h\), we denote the components of the inverse matrix.
If we restrict \(J_{\chi }\) to \(\mathcal {H}_0,\) then \(h\in \mathcal H_0\) is a critical point of \(J_{\chi }:\mathcal {H}_0\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) if and only if
for every \(k\) in the tangent space to \({\mathcal {H}}_0\) at \(h\), i.e., if and only if \(2n \,\eta \wedge \chi \wedge \hbox {d}\eta _h^{n-1}=c\, \eta \wedge \hbox {d}\eta _h^{n}\), where
Given \(h\in \mathcal {H}_0\), we can rewrite the condition of being a critical point of \(J_{\chi }\) as
Therefore, if \(f_0\in {\mathcal {H}}_0\) is fixed, the evolution equation
can be seen as the gradient flow of \(J_{\chi }:\mathcal {H}_0\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\).
Definition 2.3
A Sasakian structure \((\xi ,\Phi _h,\eta _h,g_h)\) is called critical if \(h\) satisfies (10). We will refer to (11) as to the Sasaki \(J\) -flow.
3 Technical results and critical Sasaki metrics
Let \((M,\xi ,\Phi ,\eta ,g)\) be a \((2n+1)\)-dimensional compact Sasakian manifold and let \(f=f(t)\) be a smooth curve in the space of normalised Sasakian potentials \({\mathcal {H}}_0\). Then
where for \(h\in {\mathcal {H}}_0, \, \Delta _h\) denotes the basic Laplacian
A direct computation yields
where, given \(\alpha \) and \(\beta \) in \(\Omega _B^{(p,q)}(M,{\mathbb {C}})\), we set
and
In particular, if \(\alpha =\alpha _i\,\hbox {d}z^i\) and \(\beta =\beta _j\,\hbox {d}z^j\) are transverse forms of type \((1,0)\), by writing \(\chi =i\chi _{a\bar{b}}\hbox {d}z^a\wedge \bar{z}^b\), we have
The following technical lemma will be useful in the sequel.
Lemma 3.1
Let \(u\in C_B^\infty (M,\mathbb {R})\) and \(f\) be a smooth path in \(C^{\infty }_B(M,{\mathbb {R}})\). Then
-
(i)
\((\Delta _f\dot{f},u\sigma )_f=-(\partial _B \dot{f},\sigma \partial _B u)_f-(u\partial _B\dot{f},\partial _B \sigma )_f;\)
-
(ii)
\((\bar{\partial }_B\partial _B \dot{f},u\chi )_f=-i(u\,\partial _B \dot{f},\partial _B\sigma )_f-(\chi , \partial _B u \wedge \bar{\partial }_B \dot{f})_f;\)
-
(iii)
\((\dot{f},\dot{\sigma })_f=\frac{1}{2} (\partial _B (\dot{f})^2,\partial _B\sigma )_f-i(\chi , \partial _B \dot{f} \wedge \bar{\partial }_B \dot{f})_f. \)
where \(\sigma =g_f^{\bar{k}r}\chi _{r\bar{k}}\).
Proof
-
(i)
\((\Delta _f\dot{f},\dot{u}\sigma )_f=-(\partial _B^*\partial _B\dot{f},u \sigma )_f=-(\partial _B \dot{f},\sigma \partial _B u)_f-(u\partial _B\dot{f},\partial _B\sigma )_f.\)
-
(ii)
Since the Laplacian is self-adjoint we have:
$$\begin{aligned} 2^nn!i(\bar{\partial }_B\partial _B \dot{f},u\chi )_f= & {} -\int _M ug_f^{\bar{c} j}g_f^{\bar{b} a}\dot{f}_{,j\bar{b}}\,\chi _{a\bar{c}}\,\eta \wedge (\hbox {d}\eta _f)^n\\= & {} \int _M u_{,\bar{b}}g_f^{\bar{c} j}g_f^{\bar{b} a}\chi _{a\bar{c}}\,\dot{f}_{,j}\,\eta \wedge (\hbox {d}\eta _f)^n+\int _M ug_f^{\bar{c} j}g_f^{\bar{b} a}\chi _{a{\bar{b}},\bar{c}}\,\dot{f}_{,j}\,\eta \wedge (\mathrm{d}\eta _f)^n\\= & {} \int _M u_{,\bar{b}}g_f^{\bar{c} j}g_f^{\bar{b} a}\chi _{a\bar{c}}\,\dot{f}_{,j}\,\eta \wedge (\hbox {d}\eta _f)^n+\int _M ug_f^{\bar{c} j}\sigma _{,\bar{c}}\,\dot{f}_{,j}\,\eta \wedge (\hbox {d}\eta _f)^n\\= & {} 2^nn!(u\partial _B \dot{f},\partial _B\sigma )_f-2^nn!i(\chi , \partial _B u\wedge \bar{\partial }_B \dot{f})_f. \end{aligned}$$ -
(iii)
By using (13) and (ii), we have
$$\begin{aligned} (\dot{f},\dot{\sigma })_f= & {} -i(\partial _B\bar{\partial }_B\dot{f},\dot{f}\chi )_f=(\dot{f}\,\partial _B \dot{f},\partial _B\sigma )_f-i(\chi , \partial _B \dot{f} \wedge \bar{\partial }_B \dot{f})_f\\= & {} \frac{1}{2} (\partial _B (\dot{f})^2,\partial _B\sigma )_f-i(\chi , \partial _B \dot{f} \wedge \bar{\partial }_B \dot{f})_f \end{aligned}$$as required.\(\square \)
The following proposition is about the uniqueness of critical Sasaki metrics in \({\mathcal {H}}_0\) and it is analogue to the Kähler case.
Proposition 3.2
\(J_{\chi }:\mathcal {H}_0\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) has at most one critical point.
Proof
Let \(f\) be a curve in the space \(\bar{{\mathcal {H}}}\) obtained as completion of \({\mathcal {H}}\) with respect to the \(C^2_w\)-norm. Then, taking into account the definition of \(J_{\chi }\), Lemma 3.1 and Eqs. (12), (13), we have
Therefore, if \(f\) solves the modified geodesic equation (7), then
Let us assume now to have two critical points \(f_0\) and \(f_1\) of \(J_{\chi }\) in \({\mathcal {H}}_0\) and denote by \(\bar{{\mathcal {H}}}_0\) the completion of \({\mathcal {H}}_0\) with respect to the \(C^2_w\)-norm. Then, in view of [22], there exists a \(C^{1,1}\)-gedesic \(f\) in \(\bar{{\mathcal {H}}}_0\) such that \(f(0)=f_0\) and \(f(1)=f_1\). Let \(h(t)=J_{\chi }(f(t))\). Then, since \(f_0\) and \(f_1\) are critical points of \(J_{\chi }\), we have \(\dot{h}(0)=\dot{h}(1)=0\). Since \(\ddot{h}\ge 0\), it as to be \(\ddot{h}\equiv 0\) which implies \(\partial _B \dot{f}=0\) and \(\dot{f}(t)\) is constant for every \(t\in [0,1]\). Finally, since \(f\) is a curve in \(\bar{{\mathcal {H}}}_0\), then \(I(f)=0\) and therefore \(\dot{f}=0\), which implies \(f_0=f_1\), as required. \(\square \)
On a compact \(3\)-dimensional Sasaki manifold, the existence of a critical metric is always guaranteed. Indeed, if \((M,\xi ,\Phi ,\eta ,g)\) is a compact \(3\)-dimensional Sasaki manifold with a fixed background transverse Kähler form \(\chi \), then we can write:
where the scalar product and the basic Laplacian are computed with respect to the metric induced by \(\eta \). Hence, \(\eta _h=\eta +\mathrm{d}^ch\) induces a critical metric if and only if \(h\) solves:
which has always a solution since:
In higher dimensions, there is a cohomological obstruction to the existence of a critical metric similar to the one in the Kähler case.
Recall that if \((M,\omega )\) is a Kähler \(2n\)-dimensional manifold (with \(n>1\)) with a fixed background Kähler metric \(\chi \), then the existence of a \(J_{\chi }\)-critical normalised Kähler potential on \((M,\omega )\) implies that \([c\omega -\chi ]\) is a Kähler class in \(H^2(M,{\mathbb {R}})\) (see [14]). In [6], Chen proved that such a condition is sufficient for the existence of a critical metric on complex surfaces, while in the recent paper [25], Lejmi and Székelhyidi provide an example where the condition is satisfied, but the \(J\)-flow does not converge. In [38], Song and Weinkove find a necessary and sufficient condition for the convergence of the flow in terms of a (\(n-1, n-1\))-form. Some further results about the convergence have been obtained in [42, 43]. The Sasakian context is quite similar. Indeed, given a Sasakian manifold \((M,\xi ,\Phi ,\eta ,g)\) with a fixed background transverse Kähler form \(\chi \), then if \(h\in {\mathcal {H}}_0\) is a critical normalised Sasakian potential, then \(\frac{c}{2}\hbox {d}\eta _h-\chi \) is a transverse Kähler form. Hence, it is rather natural to conjecture that the existence of a Sasakian potential \(h\) satisfying \(\frac{c}{2}\hbox {d}\eta _h-\chi >0\), implies the existence of a critical Sasaki metric, and we expect that the results in [38, 42, 43] could be generalised to the Sasakian case.
The following proposition is about the existence of a critical Sasaki metric in dimension \(5\):
Proposition 3.3
Let \((M,\xi ,\Phi ,\eta ,g)\) be a compact \(5\)-dimensional Sasaki manifold. Assume that there exists a map \(h\in \mathcal {H}_0\) such that \(\frac{c}{2}\,(\mathrm{d}\eta + \mathrm{dd}^ch)-\chi \) is a transverse Kähler form. Then, there exists a critical Sasaki metric on \(M\).
Proof
Up to rescaling \(\eta \), we may assume \(c=1\). A function \(h\in \mathcal {H}_0\) is critical if and only if
Let \(\Omega =\frac{1}{2} \hbox {d}\eta -\chi \). Then, our hypothesis implies that \(\Omega \) is a transverse Kähler form and moreover by substituting we get
Finally, the Calabi-Yau theorem in Kähler foliations [15] implies the statement. \(\square \)
4 Well posedness of the Sasaki \(J\)-flow
Theorem 4.1
The Sasaki \(J\)-flow is well posed, i.e., for every initial datum \(f_0\), system (11) has a unique maximal solution \(f\) defined in \([0,\epsilon _{\max })\), for some positive \(\epsilon _{\max }\).
Proof
Since \(\mathcal {H}\) is not open in \(C^{\infty }(M,{\mathbb {R}})\), to apply the standard parabolic theory, we have to use a trick adopted by Smoczyk, Wang and Zhang for showing the short-time existence of the Sasaki–Ricci flow in [36]. Since the functional \(F:\mathcal {H}\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) defined as
is elliptic, the standard parabolic theory implies that the geometric flow
has a unique maximal solution \(f\in C^{\infty }(M\times [0,\epsilon _\mathrm{max}),{\mathbb {R}})\), for some \(\epsilon _\mathrm{max}>0\). Of course if \(f(\cdot ,t)\) is a solution to (14) which is basic for every \(t\) and \(I(f)=0\), then \(f\) solves (11). We first show that if \(f_0\) is basic, then the solution \(f\) to (14) holds basic for every \(t\in [0,\epsilon _\mathrm{max})\). We have
Moreover, since the components of \(\chi \) are basic, we have
i.e.
Equation (15) is parabolic in \(\xi (f)\), and then, since the solution to a parabolic problem is unique, if \(\xi (f_0)=0, \, \xi (f(t))=0\) for every \(t\in [0,\epsilon _\mathrm{max})\), as required. Finally, we show that if \(f_0\) is normalised, then \(I(f)=0\) for every \(t\in [0,\epsilon _\mathrm{max})\). We have
and since \(c\int _M\,\eta \wedge \hbox {d}\eta _{f}^n=\int _M\sigma _f\,\eta \wedge \hbox {d}\eta _{f}^n\) we have \(\partial _tI(f)=0\). Therefore, since \(I(f_0)=0, \, I(f)=0\) for every \(t\in [0,\epsilon _{\max })\) and the claim follows. \(\square \)
Remark 4.2
Alternatively, the short-time existence of the Sasaki \(J\)-flow can be obtained by invoking the short-time existence of any second-order transversally parabolic equation on compact manifolds foliated by Riemannian foliations. A proof of the latter result can be found in [1].
In analogy to the Kähler case, let \(\mathrm{En} :\mathcal H_0\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) be the energy functional
Proposition 4.3
The following items hold:
-
1.
\(\mathrm{En}\) has the same critical points of \(J_\chi \) and it is strictly decreasing along the Sasaki \(J\)-flow;
-
2.
any critical point of \(\mathrm{En}\) is a local minimiser;
-
3.
the length of any curve in \({\mathcal {H}}_0\) and the distance of any two points in \({\mathcal {H}}_0\) decrease under the \(J\)-flow.
Proof
-
1.
Let \(f\!:[0,1]\rightarrow \mathcal {H}_0\) be a smooth curve. Then, by using (13) and Lemma 3.1, the first variation of En reads:
$$\begin{aligned} \partial _t \mathrm{En}(f)= & {} \frac{1}{2^nn!}\partial _t\int _M\sigma _f^2\,\eta \wedge (\hbox {d}\eta _f)^{n}\\= & {} 2(\sigma _f,\dot{\sigma }_f)_f+(\sigma _f^2,\Delta _f\dot{f})_f\\= & {} 2(\sigma _f\partial _B \dot{f},\partial _B\sigma _f)-2i(\chi ,\partial _B\dot{f}\wedge \bar{\partial }_B \sigma _f)_f-2(\partial _B\sigma _f,\sigma _f\partial _B\dot{f})_f\\= & {} -2i(\chi ,\partial _B\dot{f}\wedge \bar{\partial }_B \sigma _f)_f. \end{aligned}$$Along the Sasaki \(J\)-flow one has \(\dot{f}=c-\sigma _f\), thus:
$$\begin{aligned} \partial _t \mathrm{En}(f)=-2i(\chi ,\partial _B\sigma _f\wedge \bar{\partial }_B \sigma _f)_f\le 0, \end{aligned}$$and \(\mathrm{En}\) is strictly decreasing along the \(J\)-flow. Moreover, if \(h\in {\mathcal {H}}_0\) is a critical point of \(\mathrm{En}\), then \(\partial _B \sigma _h=0\) which implies that \(h\) is critical if and only if \(\sigma _h=c\).
-
2.
Now, we compute the second variation of \(\mathrm{En}\). Let \(f:(-\delta ,\delta ) \times (-\delta ,\delta ) \rightarrow {\mathcal {H}}_0\) be a smooth map in the variables \((t,s)\). Assume that \(f(0,0)=h\) is a critical point of \(\mathrm{En}\) and let \(u=\partial _{t}f_{|(0,0)}, \, v=\partial _s f_{|(0,0)}\). Then, we have
$$\begin{aligned} \partial _s\partial _t \mathrm{En}(\alpha )=\frac{1}{2^{n-1}n!}i\partial _s\left( \int _M\langle \chi ,\partial _B\partial _t\alpha \wedge \bar{\partial }_B \sigma _\alpha \rangle _\alpha \,\eta \wedge (\hbox {d}\eta _\alpha )^n\right) , \end{aligned}$$and
$$\begin{aligned} \partial _s\partial _t \mathrm{En}(\alpha )_{|(0,0)}= & {} \frac{1}{2^{n-1}n!}\int _M\langle \chi ,\partial _Bu\wedge \bar{\partial }_B \partial _s\sigma _{\alpha |(0,0)}\rangle _h\,\eta \wedge (\hbox {d}\eta _h)^n\\= & {} 2(\chi ,\partial _Bu\wedge \bar{\partial }_B \partial _s\sigma _{\alpha |(0,0)})_h, \end{aligned}$$since \(\sigma _h\) is constant. Now
$$\begin{aligned} 2(\chi ,\partial _Bu\wedge \bar{\partial }_B \partial _s\sigma _{\alpha |(0,0)})_h=2 (\chi ,\partial _s\sigma _{\alpha |(0,0)}\, \partial _B\bar{\partial }_Bu)_h, \end{aligned}$$and formula (13) implies
$$\begin{aligned} \partial _s\partial _t \mathrm{En}(f)_{|(0,0)}=\frac{1}{2^{n-1}n!}\int _M\langle i\partial _B\bar{\partial }_B u,\chi \rangle _h\langle i\partial _B\bar{\partial }_B v,\chi \rangle _h\,\eta \wedge (\hbox {d}\eta _h)^n, \end{aligned}$$which implies that \(\partial _s\partial _t \mathrm{En}(f)_{|(0,0)}\) is positive definite as symmetric form.
-
3.
Given smooth curve \(u:[0,1]\rightarrow {\mathcal {H}}_0\) in \({\mathcal {H}}_0\) and \(h\in \mathcal H_0\) we denote by
$$\begin{aligned} \mathcal {L}(h,u) =\frac{1}{2^{n}n!}\int _0^1\int _M \dot{u}^2 \ \eta \wedge (\hbox {d}\eta _h)^n\wedge \hbox {d}s=(\dot{u},\dot{u})_{h}, \end{aligned}$$the square of the length of \(u\) with respect to the Sasaki metric induced by \(h\). Let \(f:[0,\epsilon )\times [0,1]\rightarrow \mathcal H_0\) and assume that \(t\mapsto f(t,s)\) is a solution to the \(J\)-flow for every \(s\in [0,1]\). Then, by using Lemma 3.1, we have
$$\begin{aligned} 2^{n}n!\partial _t\mathcal {L}(f,f)= & {} \partial _t\left[ \int _0^1\int _M (\partial _s f)^2\, \eta \wedge (\hbox {d}\eta _f)^n\wedge \hbox {d}s\right] \\= & {} \int _0^1\int _M 2\partial _s\partial _tf\partial _s f+ (\partial _sf)^2\Delta _f(\partial _tf)\, \eta \wedge (\hbox {d}\eta _f)^n\wedge \hbox {d}s\\= & {} \int _0^1\int _M -2\partial _s\sigma _f\partial _s f- (\partial _sf)^2\Delta _f(\sigma _f)\, \eta \wedge (\hbox {d}\eta _f)^n\wedge \hbox {d}s\\= & {} -\int _0^1\left[ 2(\partial _s\sigma _f,\partial _sf)_f+((\partial _sf)^2,\Delta _f \sigma _f)_f \right] \hbox {d}s\\= & {} -\int _0^1\left[ 2(\partial _s\sigma _f,\partial _sf)_f+(\partial _B(\partial _sf)^2,\partial _B \sigma _f)_f \right] \hbox {d}s\\= & {} 2i\int _0^1(\chi ,\partial _B \partial _sf\wedge \bar{\partial }_B \partial _sf)_f\,\hbox {d}s\le 0 \end{aligned}$$and the equality holds if and only if \(\partial _sf(t,s)\) is constant in \(s\).\(\square \)
5 A maximum principle for basic maps and tensors
In this section, we introduce a basic principle for transversally elliptic operators on Sasakian manifolds. The principle will be applied in the next section to compute the \(C^2\)-estimate about the solutions to (11).
Let \((M,\xi ,\Phi ,\eta )\) be a Sasakian manifold. By a smooth family of basic linear partial differential operators \(\{E\}_{t\in [0,\epsilon )}\), we mean a smooth family of operators \(E(\cdot ,t):C_B^{\infty }(M,{\mathbb {R}})\rightarrow C^{\infty }_B(M,{\mathbb {R}})\) which can be locally written as
for every \(h\in C_B^{\infty }(M,{\mathbb {R}})\), where \(\{y^1,\dots ,y^{2n},z\}\) are real coordinates on \(M\) such that \(\xi =\partial _z\). The maps \(a_k\) are assumed to be smooth and basic in the space coordinates (see [15] for a detailed descriptions of these operators on compact manifolds foliated by Riemannian foliations). Observe that \(E\) can be regarded as a functional \(E:C_B^{\infty }(M\times [0,\epsilon ),{\mathbb {R}})\rightarrow C_B^{\infty }(M\times [0,\epsilon ),{\mathbb {R}})\) in a natural way. We further make the strong assumption on \(E\) to satisfy
whenever the complex Hessian \(\hbox {d}d^ch\) of \(h\) is nonpositive at the point \((x,t)\in M\times [0,\epsilon ).\)
Proposition 5.1
(Maximum principle for basic maps). Assume that \(h\in C_B^{\infty }(M\times [0,\epsilon ),\mathbb {R})\) satisfies
Then
Proof
Fix \(\epsilon _0\in (0,\epsilon )\) and let \(h_{\uplambda }:M\times [0,\epsilon _0]\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) be the map \(h_{\uplambda }(x,t)=h(x,t)-{\uplambda }t\). Assume that \(h_{\uplambda }\) achieves its global maximum at \((x_0,t_0)\) and assume by contradiction that \(t_0>0\). Then \(\partial _th_{\uplambda }(x_0,t_0)\ge 0\) and \(\hbox {d}\hbox {d}^ch_{\uplambda }(x_0,t_0)\) is nonpositive. Therefore, condition (16) implies \(E(h_{\uplambda }(x_0,t_0),t_0)\le 0\) and consequently
Since \(\partial _th_{\uplambda }=\partial _th-{\uplambda }\) and \(E(h_{\uplambda }(x,t),t)=E(h(x,t),t)\), we have
which is a contradiction. Therefore, \(h_{\uplambda }\) achieves its global maximum at a point \((x_0,0)\) and
Since the above inequality holds for every \(\epsilon _0\in (0,\epsilon )\) and \({\uplambda }>0\), the claim follows. \(\square \)
A similar result can be stated for tensors:
Proposition 5.2
(Maximum principle for basic tensors). Let \(\kappa \) be a smooth curve of basic \((1,1)\)-forms on \(M\) for \(t\in [0,\epsilon )\). Assume \(\kappa \) nonpositive and such that
where \(N\) is a nonpositive basic form and the components are with respect to foliated coordinates. Then, \(\kappa \) is nonpositive for every \(t\in [0,\epsilon )\).\(\square \)
Proof
The proof is very similar to the case of functions. We show that for every positive \({\uplambda }, \, \kappa _{{\uplambda }}=\kappa -t{\uplambda }\hbox {d}\eta \) is nonpositive. Assume by contradiction that this is not true. Then, there exists a \({\uplambda }\), a first point \((x_0,t_0)\in M\times [0,\epsilon )\) and \(g\)-unitary \((1,0)\)-vector \(Z\in \mathcal {D}_{x_0}^{1,0}\) such that \(\kappa _{{\uplambda }}(Z,\bar{Z})=0\). We extend \(Z\) to a basic and unitary vector field in a small enough neighbourhood \(U\) of \(x\) and consider the map \(f_{{\uplambda }}:U\times [0,t_0]\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) given by \(f_{{\uplambda }}=\kappa _{{\uplambda }}(Z,\bar{Z})\). Then, \(f_{\uplambda }\) has a maximum at \((x_0,t_0)\) and so
at \((x_0,t_0)\). Now since
we have
at \((x_0,t_0)\), which implies
at \((x_0,t_0)\), which is a contradiction.
In the following, we will apply the two propositions when \(E\) is the operator \(\tilde{\Delta }_f\) depending on a smooth curve \(f\) in \(\mathcal {H}\) defined by:
6 Second-order estimates
The following two lemmas provide the a priori estimates we need to prove the main theorem.
Lemma 6.1
Let \(f:M\times [0,\epsilon )\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) be a solution to (11), with \(\epsilon <\infty \). Then
and there exists a uniform constants \(C\), depending only on \(f_0\), such that
where \(\gamma _f=\chi ^{\bar{j} k}(g_f)_{k\bar{j}}\).
Proof
The upper bound of \(\sigma _f\) easily follows from the definition of \(J_{\chi }\) and Proposition 5.1. Indeed, differentiating (11) in \(t\) we have \(\ddot{f}=-\partial _t\sigma _f=g_f^{\bar{a} b}g_f^{\bar{k} j} \chi _{b\bar{k}}\dot{f}_{,j\bar{a}}=-\tilde{\Delta }_f\sigma _f,\) i.e.,
and Proposition 5.1 implies the first inequality. About the upper bound of \(\gamma _f\), we have
Since \(f\) solves (11), we have
and
Let \(R^\mathrm{T}=R^\mathrm{T}(\chi )\) be the transverse curvature of \(\chi \) and \(\mathrm{Ric}^\mathrm{T}(\chi )\) its transverse Ricci tensor (see Sect. 2). The components of \(R^\mathrm{T}\) with respect to foliated coordinates read as \(R_{j\bar{k} a\bar{b}}^\mathrm{T}=-\chi _{j\bar{k}, a\bar{b}}+\chi ^{\bar{p} q}\chi _{j\bar{p}, a}\chi _{q\bar{k}, \bar{b}}\).
Fix a point \((x_0,t_0)\in M\times [0,\epsilon )\) and special foliated coordinates for \(\chi \) around it (see Subsection 2.1). We may further assume without loss of generality that \((g_f)_{j\bar{k}}={\uplambda }_j\delta _{j k}\) at \((x_0,t_0)\). Then
and
i.e.
Now a direct computation yields
and therefore
Observe that
where \(C_1=\min _{x\in M}\sigma _{f}(x,0)\). Thus for all \(k=1,\dots , n\) we have
Since \(M\) is compact, there exists a constant \(C_2\) such that \(\mathrm{Ric}^\mathrm{T}-C_2\chi \) is nonnegative and therefore at \((x_0,t_0)\) we have
Thus there exists a constant \(C\) such that
Let \(F:=\mathrm{e}^{-Ct}\gamma _f -Ct\). Then
and by Proposition 5.1 we have
which implies
as required. \(\square \)
In order to get a uniform lower bound for \(\hbox {d}\eta _f\), we need to add an hypothesis on the bisectional curvature of \(\chi \) (see Theorem 6.2 below). Observe that the existence of a uniform lower bound without further assumption would imply the existence of a critical metric in \(\mathcal {H}_0\) for each choice of \(\eta \) and \(\chi \), in contrast with the necessary condition \(\frac{c}{2}\hbox {d}\eta _f-\chi >0\).
Theorem 6.2
Assume that the transverse bisectional curvature of \(\chi \) is nonnegative and let \(f:M\times [0,\epsilon )\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) be a solution to (11). Then, there exists a constant \(C\) depending only on the initial datum \(f_0\) such that \(C\chi -\mathrm {d}\eta _f\) is a transverse Kähler form for every \(t\in [0,\epsilon )\).
Proof
Let \(\kappa =\frac{1}{2} \hbox {d}\eta _f-C\chi \) where \(C\) is a constant chosen big enough to have \(\kappa \) nonpositive at \(t=0\). Then, \(\kappa \) is a time-dependent basic \((1,1)\)-form which is nonpositive at \(t=0\). We apply Proposition 5.2 to show that \(\kappa \) is nonpositive for every \(t\in [0,\epsilon )\). Once a system of foliated coordinates \(\{z^k,z\}\) is fixed, we have \(\partial _t \kappa _{a\bar{b}}=\dot{f}_{,a\bar{b}}\) and formula (17) implies
i.e.
We apply Proposition 5.2 using as \(N\) the basic form defined by the right-hand part of formula (19). To this end, we have to show that \(N\) is nonpositive. That can be easily done as follows: fix a point \((x,t)\in M\times [0,\epsilon )\) and an arbitrary unitary vector field \(Z\in \mathcal D_{x}^{1,0}\). Then, we can find foliated coordinates \(\{z^k,z\}\) around \(x\) which are special for \(\chi \) and such that: \(Z=\partial _{z^1|x}\) and \(g_f\) takes a diagonal expression with eigenvalues \({\uplambda }_k\) at \((x,t)\). Then we have
at \((x,t)\) and the claim follows. \(\square \)
7 Proof of the main theorem
The Proof of Theorem 1.1 is based on the second-order estimates provided in Sect. 6 and on the following result in Kähler geometry.
Theorem 7.1
Let \(B\) be an open ball about \(0\) in \({\mathbb {C}}^n\) and let \(\omega , \chi \) be two Kähler forms on \(B\). Let \(f:M\times [0,\epsilon )\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) be solution to the Kähler \(J\)-flow
where \(g_f\) is the metric associated to \(\omega _f=\omega +\hbox {d}d^cf\). Assume that \(\omega _f\) is uniformly bounded in \(B\times [0,\epsilon )\). Then \(f\) is \(C^{\infty }\)-bounded in a small ball about \(0\).
As explained in [7], the theorem can be proved by using the well-known Evans and Krylov’s interior estimate (see [19] for a proof of the estimates in the complex case).
Proof of Theorem 1.1
The proof of the long-time existence consists in showing that every solution \(f\) to (11) has a \(C^{\infty }\)-bound. Let \(f:M\times [0,\epsilon _{\max })\rightarrow \mathbb {R}\) be the solution to (11) with initial condition \(f_0\in {\mathcal {H}}_0\) and assume by contradiction \(\epsilon _{\max }< \infty \). Lemma 6.1 implies that the second derivatives of \(f\) are uniformly bounded in \(M\). Since \(f\) can be regarded as a collection of solutions to the Kähler \(J\)-flow on small open balls in \({\mathbb {C}}^n\), Theorem 7.1 implies that \(f\) is \(C^\infty \)-uniformly bounded in \(M\). Therefore, \(f\) converges in \(C^{\infty }\)-norm to a smooth function \(\tilde{f}\) as \(t\) tends to \(\epsilon _{\max }^{-}\). Since \(\partial _t f\) is basic for every \(t\in [0,\epsilon _{\max }), \, \tilde{f}\) is basic and by the well posedness of the Sasaki \(J\)-flow, the solution \(f\) can be extended after \(\epsilon _{\max }\) contradicting its maximality.
The proof of the long-time existence in the case when \(\chi \) has nonnegative transverse holomorphic bisectional curvature, is obtained exactly as in the Kähler case. Let \(f:M\times [0,\infty )\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) be a solution to the Sasaki \(J\)-flow. Since \(\chi \) has nonnegative holomorphic bisectional curvature, Theorem 6.2 implies that \(f\) has a uniform \(C^{\infty }\)-bound and Ascoli-Arzelà Theorem implies that given a sequence \(t_j\in [0,\infty ), \, t_j\rightarrow \infty , \, f_{t_j}\) has a subsequence converging in \(C^\infty \)-norm to function \(f_{\infty }\) as \(t_j\rightarrow \infty \). Therefore, \(f\) converges to a critical map \(f_{\infty }\in \mathcal {H}_0\). \(\square \)
References
Bedulli, L., He, W., Vezzoni, L.: Second order geometric flows on foliated manifolds, in preparation
Boyer, C.P., Galicki, K.: On Sasakian–Einstein geometry. Int. J. Math. 11, 873–909 (2000)
Boyer, C.P., Galicki, K.: Sasaki geometry, Oxford mathematical monographs, p. 613. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2008)
Boyer, C.P., Galicki, K., Simanca, S.R.: Canonical Sasakian metrics. Commun. Math. Phys. 279(3), 705–733 (2008)
Cao, H.-D.: Deformation of Kähler metrics to Kähler-Einstein metrics on compact K\(\ddot{{\rm h}}\)ler manifolds. Invent. Math. 81(2), 359–372 (1985)
Chen, X.X.: On the lower bound of the Mabuchi energy and its application. Int. Math. Res. Notices 12, 607–623 (2000)
Chen, X.X.: A new parabolic flow in Kähler manifolds. Commun. Anal. Geom. 12(4), 837–852 (2004)
Collins, T.C.: The transverse entropy functional and the Sasaki–Ricci flow. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 365(3), 1277–1303 (2013)
Collins, T.C.: Uniform Sobolev inequality along the Sasaki–Ricci Flow. J. Geom. Anal. 24(3), 1323–1336 (2014)
Collins, T.C.: Stability and convergence of the Sasaki–Ricci flow. J. Reine Angew. Math. (to appear)
Collins, T., Jacob, A.: On the convergence of the Sasaki–Ricci flow. Contemp. Math. arXiv:1110.3765v1 (to appear)
Cvetic, M., Lü, H., Page, Don N., Pope, C.N.: New Einstein–Sasaki spaces in five and higher dimensions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 4 (2005)
Donaldson, S.K.: Symmetric spaces, Kähler geometry and Hamiltonian dynamics, in Northern California Symplectic Geometry Seminar. Am. Math. Soc. Transl. Ser. 2 196, 13–33 (1999)
Donaldson, S.K.: Moment maps and diffeomorphisms. Asian J. Math. 3(1), 1–15 (1999)
El Kacimi-Alaoui, A.: Opérateurs transversalement elliptiques sur un feuilletage riemannien et applications. (French) [Transversely elliptic operators on a Riemannian foliation, and applications]. Compos. Math. 73(1), 57–106 (1990)
Gauntlett, J.P., Martelli, D., Sparks, J., Waldram, W.: Sasaki–Einstein metrics on \(S^{2} \times S^{3}\). Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 8, 711–734 (2004)
Gauntlett, J.P., Martelli, D., Sparks, J., Waldram, W.: A new infinite class of Sasaki–Einstein manifolds. Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 8, 987–1000 (2004)
Gilbarg, D., Trudinger, N.S.: Elliptic Partial Differential Equations of Second Order. Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1983)
Gill, M.: Convergence of the parabolic complex Monge–Ampere equation on compact Hermitian manifolds. Commun. Anal. Geom. 19(2), 277–304 (2011)
Godliński, M., Kopczyński, W., Nurowski, P.: Locally Sasakian manifolds. Class. Quantum Gravity 17, 105–115 (2000)
Guan, P., Zhang, X.: A geodesic equation in the space of Sasakian metrics, Geometry and analysis 1. Adv. Lect. Math. 17, 303–318 (2011)
Guan, P., Zhang, X.: Regularity of the geodesic equation in the space of Sasakian metrics. Adv. Math. 230(1), 321–371 (2012)
He, W.: On the transverse scalar curvature of a compact Sasaki manifold. Complex Manifolds. arXiv:1105.4000 (to appear)
He, W., Sun, S.: The generalized Frankel conjecture in Sasaki geometry. Int Math Res Notices. arXiv:1209.4026 (to appear)
Lejmi, M., Székelyhidi, G.: The J-flow and stability. Adv. Math. 274, 404–431 (2015)
Lieberman, G.: Second Order Parabolic Differential Equations. World Scientific, Singapore New Jersey London Hong Kong (1996)
Lovrić, M., Min-Oo, M., Ruh, E.A.: Deforming transverse Riemannian metrics of foliations. Asian J. Math. 4(2), 303–314 (2000)
Mabuchi, T.: K-energy maps integrating Futaki invariants. Tôhoku Math. J. 38, 575–593 (1986)
Mabuchi, T.: Some symplectic geometry on compact Kähler manifolds. I. Osaka J. Math. 24(2), 227–252 (1987)
Martelli, D., Sparks, J.: Toric Sasaki–Einstein metrics on \(S^{2} \times S^{3}\). Phys. Lett. B 621, 208–212 (2005)
Martelli, D., Sparks, J.: Toric geometry, Sasaki–Einstein manifolds and a new infinite class of AdS/CFT duals. Comm. Math. Phys. 262, 51–89 (2006)
Martelli, D., Sparks, J., Yau, S.T.: The geometric dual of \(a\)-maximisation for toric Sasaki–Einstein manifolds. Commun. Math. Phys. 268(1), 39–65 (2006)
Martelli, D., Sparks, J., Yau, S.T.: Sasaki–Einstein manifolds and volume minimisation. Commun. Math. Phys. 280(3), 611–673 (2008)
Sasaki, S.: On differentiable manifolds with certain structures which are closely related to almost contact structure. Tôhoku Math J. 2, 459–476 (1960)
Siu, Y.T.: Lectures on Hermitian–Einstein metrics for stable bundles and Kähler–Einstein metrics. DMV Seminar, vol. 8, 171 pp. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel (1987)
Smoczyk, K., Wang, G., Zhang, Y.: The Sasaki–Ricci flow. Int. J. Math. 21(7), 951–969 (2010)
Song, J., Weinkove, B.: Lecture Notes in Mathematics. In: Boucksom, S., Eyssidieux, P., Guedj, V. (eds.) Introduction to the Kähler-Ricci flow. Springer, Berlin (2013)
Song, J., Weinkove, B.: On the convergence and singularities of the \(J\)-flow with applications to the Mabuchi energy. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 61(2): 210–229 (2008)
Sparks, J.: Sasakian–Einstein manifolds. Surveys Diff. Geom. 16, 265–324 (2011)
Streets, J., Tian, G.: A parabolic flow of pluriclosed metrics. Int. Math. Res. Notices (IMRN) 16, 3101–3133 (2010)
Tosatti, V., Weinkove, B.: Estimates for the complex Monge–Ampère equation on Hermitian and balanced manifolds. Asian J. Math. 14(1), 19–40 (2010)
Weinkove, B.: Convergence of the J-flow on Kähler surfaces. Commun. Anal. Geom. 12(4), 949–965 (2004)
Weinkove, B.: On the J-flow in higher dimensions and the lower boundedness of the Mabuchi energy. J. Diff. Geom. 73(2), 351–358 (2006)
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Valentino Tosatti for useful comments and remarks.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This work was supported by the project FIRB “Geometria differenziale e teoria geometrica delle funzioni”, the project PRIN “Varietà reali e complesse: geometria, topologia e analisi armonica” and by G.N.S.A.G.A. of I.N.d.A.M.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Vezzoni, L., Zedda, M. On the J-flow in Sasakian manifolds. Annali di Matematica 195, 757–774 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10231-015-0488-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10231-015-0488-9