arxiv: v1 [math.dg] 15 Jan 2019

Transcription

1 LOCAL SYMMETRY-RANK BOUND FOR POSITIVE INTERMEDIATE RICCI CURVATURES arxiv: v1 [math.dg] 15 Jan 019 LAWRENCE MOUILLÉ Abstract. We generalize the Grove-Searle symmetry-rank bound to the setting of positive intermediate Ricci curvature using a local argument, only requiring the existence of commuting Killing fields around a point and positive intermediate Ricci curvature on the span of those fields. We also prove that this symmetry-rank bound is locally optimal in a strong sense: Every Riemannian metric is arbitrarily close in the C 1 -topology to one that achieves the upper bound at a point. Symmetry-rank and positive sectional curvature. The symmetry-rank of a Riemannian manifold (M, g), denoted symrank(m, g), is the rank of its isometry group, i.e. symrank(m,g) is the maximal dimension of a torus that can act isometrically and effectively on (M,g). In [7], K. Grove and C. Searle prove the maximal symmetry-rank theorem: Any closed, connected Riemannian n-manifold M with positive sectional curvature has n+1 symrank(m, g), and in the case of equality, M is diffeomorphic to a sphere, a real or complex projective space, or a lens space. The Grove-Searle symmetry-rank bound is proven using global arguments, relying on globally defined torus actions and a theorem of M. Berger stating that any Killing field on an even dimensional positively curved manifold has a zero. B. Wilking realized that the same bound can be obtained for quasi-positive curvature using the Gauss equation [0]. C. Searle and F. Wilhelm noticed that Wilking s argument only requires locally defined commuting Killing fields and positive sectional curvature for planes spanned by the Killing fields, as opposed to the globally defined torus action and quasi-positive curvature condition [17]. In this paper, we show that a generalized bound can be obtained for positive intermediate Ricci curvature using a similar argument. Positive intermediate Ricci curvature. Let (M, g) be an n-dimensional Riemannian manifold, and let k {1,...,n 1}. Given a (k+1)-dimensional subspace 010 Mathematics Subject Classification: Primary: 53C0; Secondary: 53B0, 58D19 Date: January 17,

2 LAWRENCE MOUILLÉ V T p M, let R V denote the type-(1,3)curvature tensorrrestricted to V and composed with orthogonal projection to V. Then given a unit vector u V, define the k-ricci curvature for the pair (u,v) by Ric k (u,v) = trace ( x R V (x,u)u ) = k g(r(e i,u)u,e i ), where {e 1,...,e k } is any orthonormal basis for the orthogonal complement of span{u} in V. Notice that the 1-Ricci curvature Ric 1 (u,v) is the sectional curvature of the -plane V, and the (n 1)-Ricci curvature Ric n 1 (u,t p M) is the Ricci curvature Ric(u, u). We say (M,g) has positive k th -intermediate Ricci curvature if Ric k (u,v) > 0 for all pairs (u,v) in the tangent bundle TM. We abbreviate this by writing Ric k > 0. Thus Ric 1 > 0 is equivalent to sec > 0, and Ric n 1 > 0 is equivalent to Ric > 0. Furthermore,itiseasytocheckthatifRic k > 0forsomek n, thenric k+1 > 0. For known results concerning lower bounds on intermediate Ricci curvature, see [9], [11], [10], [18], [19], or [1]. i=1 Local symmetry-rank. Our first result is a local symmetry-rank bound in the presence of positive intermediate Ricci curvature: Theorem A. Suppose that M is an n-manifold and N M is a submanifold such that T p N is spanned by commuting Killing fields for some p N. If Ric k (u,v) > 0 for all (k +1)-dimensional subspaces V T p N, then n+k dim(n). Note that the submanifold N is not assumed to be complete. If a manifold M has a submanifold N through a point p such that T p N is spanned by commuting Killing fields, Ric k (u,v) > 0 for all (k +1)-dimensional subspaces V T p N, and dim(n) = n+k at p, then we say M has k-maximal local symmetry-rank at p. Notice that when k = n 1 in Theorem A, then dim(v) = n, and hence either the collection of permissible subspaces V T p N is empty, or V = T p N = T p M. However in the latter case, because T p M is then spanned by commuting Killing fields, we know that sec 0 on T p M, and hence we cannot have Ric n 1 (u,v) > 0. Therefore, the statement of Theorem A when k = n 1 is in fact vacuous, and in general, no manifold admits (n 1)-maximal local symmetry-rank. From the Grove-Searle maximal symmetry-rank theorem, the list of manifolds that admit positive sectional curvature and maximal global symmetry-rank is restrictive, only consisting of quotients of spheres. In stark contrast, we have the following density result for k-maximal local symmetry-rank:

3 SYMMETRY-RANK AND INTERMEDIATE RICCI CURVATURES 3 Theorem B. Any n-dimensional Riemannian manifold is arbitrarily close in the C 1 -topology to one that has k-maximal local symmetry rank at a point for n 3 and k {1,...,n }. Theorem B shows that Theorem A is optimal in a strong sense. We prove Theorem B in Section 3 by sewing a model metric into a small ball around a point and showing that the resulting metric can be made arbitrarily close in the C 1 -distance to the original. These model metrics are constructed in Section and are incomplete metrics on R n, for n 3, that have k-maximal local symmetry-rank at the origin for any k {1,...,n }. Global symmetry-rank. When a torus acts isometrically and effectively on a Riemannian manifold, the principal isotropy is trivial, so the tangent spaces to any principal orbit are spanned by commuting Killing fields. Thus, an immediate consequence of Theorem A is the following generalized symmetry-rank bound: Corollary C. If M is a connected Riemannian n-manifold with Ric k > 0, then n+k symrank(m, g). Note that the k = 1 case, i.e. sec > 0, gives exactly the bound from the Grove- Searle maximal symmetry-rank theorem. Also, the k = n 1 case in Corollary C, symrank(m,g) n 1 = n 1, follows from the previous observation that if T p M is spanned by commuting Killing fields, then sec 0 on T p M. Ramifications in non-negative curvature. In [6], F. Galaz-García and C. Searle state the maximal symmetry-rank conjecture for non-negatively curved manifolds, which has since been sharpened [4]: Let (M, g) be a closed, simply connected, n-dimensional Riemannian manifold with non-negative sectional curvature. Then (1) symrank(m, g) n, and 3 () in the case of equality, M is equivariantly diffeomorphic to a product of spheres or a quotient thereof by a free linear action of a torus of rank less than or equal to n mod 3. Part (1) was also independently proposed by B. Wilking, and it has been proven for manifolds with dimension n 9 in [6] and 10 n 1 in [4]. With the assumption of non-negative curvature replaced with rationally ellipticity, Part (1) is obtained for all dimensions in [5]. This is relevant because the Bott conjecture claims that any non-negatively curved manifold is rationally elliptic.

4 4 LAWRENCE MOUILLÉ Notice that a non-negatively curved manifold can have positive k th -intermediate Ricci curvature for k without being positively curved. If Ric k > 0 for k n 3, then fromcorollaryc, symrank(m,g) n 3. Inparticular, wehavethefollowing: Corollary D. Part (1) of the maximal symmetry-rank conjecture holds with the additional assumption that Ric n 3 > 0. k-maximal global symmetry-rank. Corollary C leads naturally to the following: Question. Can we classify n-manifolds M that admit Ric k > 0 and have symrank(m,g) = n+k? In order to make progress towards addressing this and other questions concerning positive intermediate Ricci curvature, it would be beneficial to find non-trivial examples of manifolds with Ric k > 0. By this, we suggest finding and cataloging examples where Ric k > 0 while Ric k 1 0 for k. In the k = n or k = n 1 cases, the maximal symmetry-rank bound from Corollary C gives symrank(m,g) n+k = n 1. In dimensions n = and 3, this upper bound is realized by the T 1 -action on S and the T -action on S 3. However, it is known that for dimension n 4, no manifolds admit both Ric > 0 and an isometric cohomogeneity-one torus action; see Section 4 of [8]. Therefore: Remark. If M is a n-manifold with Ric k > 0 for k = n or n 1, then n+k symrank(m,g) n <. D. Corro and F. Galaz-García show in [] that for each n 6, there exist infinitely many diffeomorphism types of closed, smooth, simply-connected n-manifolds with a smooth, effective action of a torus T n and a metric of positive Ricci curvature invariant under a T n 4 -subgroup of T n. This shows that symrank(m,g) = n 4 can be achieved in these dimensions for Ricci-positive manifolds. It remains to be shown if this can be improved to give examples of positive Ricci curvature invariant under a T n -action. Structure of paper. In Section 1, we prove Theorem A. In Section, we construct metrics on R n that have k-maximal local symmetry-rank at the origin for n 3 and 1 k n. In Section 3, we provetheorem B by establishing a result about sewing metrics in the C 1 -topology and applying it to the metrics constructed in Section. Acknowledgments. This paper is part of my doctoral thesis at the University of California, Riverside. I would like to thank my thesis advisor, Fred Wilhelm, for his insights and valuable feedback during the preparation of this paper. I would also like to thank Priyanka Rajan and Karsten Grove for helpful discussions concerning this project.

5 SYMMETRY-RANK AND INTERMEDIATE RICCI CURVATURES 5 1. Symmetry-rank bound The reader will notice that this proof is informed by B. Wilking s argument for the symmetry-rank bound under the assumption of quasi-positive curvature in [0]. Let II denote the second fundamental form for N M, i.e. for u,v T p N, II(u,v) = ( u V) T p N, where V is any extension of v to a vector field. Given a unit vector u T p N, let O u denote the orthogonal complement of span{u} in T p N. Considering the linear map II(u, ) : O u T p N, we have dim(kerii(u, )) = dim(o u ) dim(imii(u, )) (dim(n) 1) (n dim(n)). Now suppose that dim(n) > n+k. Then for any unit vector u T pn, we have dim(kerii(u, )) > k 1, and hence there exist k orthonormal vectors e 1,...,e k O u such that II(u,e i ) = 0 for all i. Fixaunitvectoru T p N suchthat II(u,u) 0isminimal,andchoosee 1,...,e k O u such that II(u,e i ) = 0. Define functions f i : R R by f i (θ) = II(cos(θ)u+sin(θ)e i,cos(θ)u+sin(θ)e i ) = cos 4 (θ) II(u,u) +cos (θ)sin (θ) II(u,u),II(e i,e i ) +sin 4 (θ) II(e i,e i ). Then because f i (0) = II(u,u) is minimal, f i (0) = 4 ( II(u,u),II(e i,e i ) II(u,u) ) 0, and so we must have II(u,u),II(e i,e i ) 0. Now let V = span{u,e 1,...,e k } T p N. Then because II(u,e i ) = 0 and II(u,u),II(e i,e i ) 0 for all i, we have from the Gauss equation that k Ric k (u,v) = sec M (u,e i ) = i=1 k [ secn (u,e i )+ II(u,e i ) II(u,u),II(e i,e i ) ] i=1 k sec N (u,e i ) i=1 But because T p N is spanned by commuting Killing fields, sec N 0 on T p N. Therefore, if dim(n) > n+k, then there exists a pair (u,v) such that Ric k(u,v) 0, thus proving Theorem A by contraposition.. Construction of k-maximal local symmetry-rank In this section, we prove the following: Proposition.1. There exist metrics g model on R n that have k-maximal local symmetry-rank for all n 3 and 1 k n.

6 6 LAWRENCE MOUILLÉ Throughout this section, let n 4, k {1,...,n }, and d = n+k. To prove Proposition.1, we will construct metrics on R n d R d such that the coordinate vector fields for the R d factor are Killing fields and Ric k (u,v) > 0 for all (k +1)- dimensional subspaces V T 0 R d. We do not claim that these metrics are complete as this will not be necessaryfor proving Theorem B in Section 3. First, we establish the following computational simplification: Lemma.. Given any Riemannian manifold M and a natural number d dim(m) 1, suppose that {K i } d i=1 is an orthonormal basis of a subspace K T pm, k {1,...,d 1}, and there exist µ,ν [0, ) such that the following hold: (A) R(K i,k j )K l = 0 when the indices i,j,l are mutually distinct. (B) sec(k i,k j ) { ν,µ} for all i j. (C) For each i, there exist at most k 1 indices j i such that sec(k i,k j ) = ν. (D) µ (k 1)ν > 0. Then Ric k (u,v) > 0 for all (k +1)-dimensional subspaces V K. Proof. Let Ric K : K K denote the Ricci (1,1)-tensor restricted to K and composed with projection onto K. Then by definition, Ric K (u),u = Ric d (u,k). From Property A, we get that Ric K is diagonalized by {K i } d i=1 ; see Proposition in [13]. Then by Properties B and C, we have that Ric d (,K) min i=1,...,d {Ric d(k i,k)} (d k)µ (k 1)ν Applying Property D, we get Ric d (,K) > (d k 1)µ. (1) Also define the operator R K : Λ K Λ K by R K ( i X i Y i ), j V j W j = i,j R(X i,y i,w j,v j ). Then from Property A, R K is diagonalized by {K i K j } i,j ; see Proposition 4.1. in [13]. Hence from Property B, on K we have sec µ. () Thus, given a (k +1)-dimensional subspace V K and unit vector u V, choose orthonormal vectors {e i } d 1 i=1 such that {u,e 1,...,e k } is an orthonormal basis for V and {u,e 1,...,e k,e k+1,...,e d 1 } is an orthonormal basis for K. Then from

7 SYMMETRY-RANK AND INTERMEDIATE RICCI CURVATURES 7 Inequalities 1 and, Ric k (u,v) = k sec(u,e i ) i=1 = Ric d (u,k) d 1 i=k+1 sec(u,e i ) > [(d k 1)µ] [(d k 1)µ] = 0. Proof of Proposition.1. Now consider R n d R d with coordinates (x 1,...,x n d, y 1,...,y d ). Given positive smooth functions φ i : R n d R, define the metric g model on R n d R d by g model = dx 1 + +dx n d +φ 1 dy 1 + +φ d dy d. Setting K i = 1 φ i(0) y i, the fields {K i } d i=1 are the desired commuting Killing fields under this metric, and they are orthonormal at the origin. We will choose φ i such that ( R n,g model) and K i together satisfy the hypotheses of Lemma.. Let K = span{k i 0 } d i=1 = T 0R d, and denote the orthogonal complement by K = T 0 R n d. Let II : K K K denote the second fundamental form for the submanifold {(0,...,0)} R d. Then II(K i,k j ) = 0 for i j, and combining this with the fact that K i are commuting Killing fields, we get that Property A of Lemma. is satisfied. We will show that φ i can be chosen such that such that Properties B, C, and D are satisfied at the origin. Now at the origin, II(K i,k i ) = gradφi φ i(0). Thus from the Gauss equation, because the submanifold {(0,...,0)} R d has intrinsic curvature equal to 0, we have that the extrinsic curvatures are sec(k i,k j ) = gradφ i,gradφ j φ i (0)φ j (0) when i j. We now break the construction into two cases: k = n and k n 3. Case k = n. If k = n, then d = n+k = n 1, and so K is 1-dimensional. Choose a unit vector U in K. We will define φ i such that (1) gradφ 1 = = gradφ k = U, () φ 1 (0) = = φ k (0) = a, (3) gradφ d = U, and (4) φ d (0) = b

8 8 LAWRENCE MOUILLÉ for some values of a,b (0, ). Then by construction, Properties B and C of Lemma. are satisfied with Thus, to satisfy Property D, we need µ = U ab = 1 ab, ν = U a = 1 a. 1 ab k 1 a > 0. Therefore, choosing any values for a and b such that a > (k 1)b, the k = n case of Proposition.1 follows from Lemma.. Case k n 3. If k n 3, then K has dimension. In the unit sphere S n d 1 K, choose a vector U. Letting U denote the orthogonal complement of span{u} in K, consider the equatorial sphere S n d = U S n d 1. Now inscribearegular(n d 1)-simplexinS n d, anddefinevectorsv 1 (0),...,V n d (0) S n d to be the vertices of this simplex. Hence V i (0),V j (0) = 1 n d 1 for all distinct i,j {1,...,n d}. Now for θ [0, π ] define V i (θ) = cos(θ)v i (0) sin(θ)u. Notice that V i (θ),v j (θ) = cos θ n d 1 +sin θ is strictly increasing on [0, π ] and takes the value 0 at θ = ξ (0, π ) given by ξ = arctan ( ) 1. n d 1 Hence, V i (θ),v j (θ) is negative for θ [0,ξ). We will now choose φ i such that (1) gradφ 1 = = gradφ k = U, () φ 1 (0) = = φ k (0) = a, (3) gradφ k+i = V i (θ) for i = 1,...,n d, and (4) φ k+1 (0) = = φ d (0) = b for some values of a,b (0, ) and θ (0,ξ). See Figure 1.

9 SYMMETRY-RANK AND INTERMEDIATE RICCI CURVATURES 9 Figure 1. Defining gradφ i Then because θ < ξ, among the curvatures {sec(k i,k j )} d i,j=1, the negative curvatures correspond to distinct values of i,j {1,...,k}, and these curvatures all have the same value ν = U a = 1 a. So for each i, there exist at most k 1 indices j i such that sec(k i,k j ) = ν, and thus Property C of Lemma. is satisfied. To satisfy Property B, we need to choose a,b,θ so that for all l {1,...,k} and for all distinct i,j {1,...,n d}, This common value is given by sec(k l,k k+i ) = sec(k k+i,k k+j ). µ = U,V i(θ) = V i(θ),v j (θ) ab b. (3) Furthermore, to satisfy Property D, we need µ k 1 a > 0. (4) Now choose any value for a > 0. Then, once θ (0,ξ) is chosen, we will define b by b = a V i(θ),v j (θ), U,V i (θ) and thus Equation 3 will be satisfied with µ taking the value µ = U,V i(θ) a V i (θ),v j (θ). Finally, Inequality 4 holds if θ is chosen such that U,V i (θ) > (k 1) V i (θ),v j (θ). Notice that U,V i (θ) approaches a positive constant dependent on n and k as θ approaches ξ, while V i (θ),v j (θ) approaches 0 as θ approaches ξ. Therefore, there exists a value θ such that Inequality 4 holds, and thus applying Lemma., Proposition.1 is proven.

10 10 LAWRENCE MOUILLÉ 3. Sewing and the C 1 -topology 3.1. C l -norm for tensors. Recall that two smooth maps F 1,F : M N are ǫ-close in the weak C l -topology if their values and partial derivatives up to order l are ǫ-close with respect to fixed atlases on M and N; see Chapter of [1]. If the atlases are finite, this leads to a notion of C l -distance. Now, given vector bundles E 1,E, Euclidean metrics on E 1 and E, and a bundle map φ : E 1 E, the C l -norm of φ is defined as follows: If E 1 1 denotes the unit sphere bundle under its Euclidean metric, then φ C l is the C l -distance from φ E 1 1 to the zero bundle map E 1 E. The C l -norm of a tensor ω is the C l -distance from ω to the zero-section. Notice that these definitions depend on the choice of Euclidean metrics. Throughoutthis section, let M be a fixed manifold, and let g be a fixed Riemannian metric on M. All C l -norms will be defined in terms of the fixed metric g on TM. 3.. Sewing theorem. In this section, we will establish the following: Proposition 3.1. Let (M,g) be a Riemannian manifold, let p be a point in M, and let g be a Riemannian metric defined on a neighborhood of p such that g(γ, ) = g (γ, ) for all geodesic rays γ emanating from p. For every ǫ > 0, there exists a Riemannian metric g on M that is ǫ-close to g in the C 1 -distance such that g g on an open ball centered at p. C. Searle, P. Solórzano, and F. Wilhelm have proven that if sec(m,g) K, then g in Proposition 3.1 can be made to satisfy sec(m, g) K for any K < K [16]. Define t to be the value of dist g (p, ), and let t denote grad(dist g (p, )). We begin by proving the following: Lemma 3. (Converse Gauss Lemma). Let (M, g) be a Riemannian manifold, let p M, and let g be as in Proposition 3.1. (1) dist g (p, ) = dist g (p, ), and the integral curves of t are geodesics emanating from p with respect to both metrics g and g. () Along geodesic rays emanating from p, the family of Jacobi fields that vanish at p are the same for both metrics g and g. For a more generalized version of Lemma 3., see [14]. Proof. Becauseg ( t, t ) = g( t, t ) = 1, the integralcurvesof t arealso geodesics underg, andhence 1follows. Nownoticethat alongageodesicrayemanatingfrom p, a Jacobi field J that vanishes at p under g is realized as the variation field of a variation by g-geodesics emanating from p. Because these curves are also geodesics under g, J is also a Jacobi field under g.

11 SYMMETRY-RANK AND INTERMEDIATE RICCI CURVATURES 11 Letting injrad p denote the injectivity radius of M at p, choose δ (0, 1 injrad p) such that g is defined on the closed ball B(p,δ) M. Lemma 3.3. There s a symmetric (0, )-tensor r defined on B(p, δ) such that g g = t r. Furthermore, given a natural number l, there is a constant C such that r C l < C on B(p,δ). Proof. Let J 1 and J be Jacobi fields along a geodesic γ : [0,t 0 ] M emanating from p that vanish at t = 0. Informed by Proposition.7 in [3] and Chapter 1, 4 of [1], we compute the Taylor expansion of (g g )(J 1,J ) γ(t) centered at t = 0. First, notice that because J i (0) = 0, we have J i (0) = (R g(j,γ )γ )(0) = 0. Second, for any vector field V along γ, we have at t = 0 g( γ (R g (J i,γ )γ ),V) = γ g(r g (J i,γ )γ,v) g(r g (J i,γ )γ,v ) = γ g(r g (V,γ )γ,j i ) = g( γ (R g (V,γ )γ ),J i )+g(r g (V,γ )γ,j i ) = g(r g (J i,γ )γ,v). Using these facts and that J i (0) = 0, we have the following at t = 0: g(j 1,J ) = 0, g(j 1,J ) = g(j 1,J )+g(j 1,J ) = 0, g(j 1,J ) = g(j 1,J )+g(j 1,J )+g(j 1,J ) = g(j 1,J ), g(j 1,J ) = g(j 1,J )+3g(J 1,J )+3g(J 1,J )+g(j 1,J ) = 0, g(j 1,J ) = g(j 1,J )+4g(J 1,J )+6g(J 1,J )+4g(J 1,J )+g(j 1,J ) = 8R g (J 1,γ,γ,J ). Because γ is a geodesic and J i are Jacobi fields for both g and g, we have that the equations above also hold with g substituted for g. Thus, by applying these calculations to the Taylor expansions of g(j 1,J ) γ(t) and g (J 1,J ) γ(t) centered at t = 0, and using the fact that g g on T p M, we have (g g )(J 1,J ) γ(t) = t4 3 (R g R g )(J 1,γ,γ,J ) p +O(t 5 ). By normalizing this equation, we get ( ) (g g J1 ) J 1, J t 4 = J 3 J 1 (t) J (t) (R g R g)(j 1,γ,γ,J ) p +O(t 3 ). γ(t) Because J i (t) = t+o(t ), we have [ lim t 0 (g g ) ( ) ] J1 J 1, J = 0. J γ(t)

12 1 LAWRENCE MOUILLÉ Now, recall that if a smooth function f : R R satisfies f(0) = 0 = f (0), then there is a smooth function h : R R such that f(t) = t h(t). Combining this with a Gram-Schmidt argument, we get that g g = t r for a smooth symmetric (0,)-tensor r. The inequality r C l < C follows from the fact that r is smooth on the compact set B(p,δ). Proof of Proposition 3.1. Choose δ (0, 1 injrad p) such that g is defined on the closed ball B(p,δ) M. From Lemma 7.3 in [15], there exists a smooth function φ : M [0,1] such that φ 1 where dist(p, ) δ, φ 0 where dist(p, ) δ, φ C 1 δ. On M, define the Riemannian metric g = (1 φ)g + φg. Because g g for dist(p, ) δ, assume t = dist(p, ) < δ. Given unit vector fields U and V, (g g)(u,v) = g(u,v) (1 φ)g(u,v) φg (U,V) = φ(g g )(U,V) = φt r(u,v), where r is the tensor from Lemma 3.3. Furthermore, for a unit vector X, we have X(g g)(u,v) = (Xφ)t r(u,v)+φx(t )r(u,v)+φt Xr(U,V) = (Xφ)t r(u,v)+φ(t)(xt)r(u,v)+φt Xr(U,V). Thus, because φ 1, φ C 1 δ, t < δ, and r C1 < C, we have (g g)(u,v) < 4δ C, X(g g)(u,v) < 1δC +4δ C. Therefore, for any ǫ > 0, δ can be chosen so that g g C 1 < ǫ Density of k-maximal local symmetry-rank. To prove Theorem B, choose any Riemannian n-manifold (M,g) with n 3 and a point p M, and define g on a neighborhood of p to be the pull-back metric g = ( exp 1 p ) ( g model ), where g model is one of the metrics from Proposition.1 in Section. Then by the Gauss Lemma, g(γ, ) = g (γ, ) for all geodesic rays γ emanating from p, and thus Proposition 3.1 can be applied. Therefore, metrics with k-maximal local symmetry-rank are dense in the C 1 -topology.

13 SYMMETRY-RANK AND INTERMEDIATE RICCI CURVATURES 13 References [1] Jeff Cheeger and David G. Ebin, Comparison theorems in riemannian geometry, Vol. 365, AMS Chelsea Publishing, [] Diego Corro and Fernando Galaz-García, Positive Ricci curvature on simply-connected manifolds with cohomogeneity-two torus actions. preprint, arxiv: , revision to appear. [3] Manfredo Do Carmo, Riemannian geometry, Birkhäuser, Boston, Massachusetts, 199. [4] Christine Escher and Catherine Searle, Torus actions, maximality, and non-negative curvature, 015. preprint, arxiv: [5] Fernando Galaz-Garcia, Martin Kerin, and Marco Radeschi, Torus actions on rationally elliptic manifolds, 015. preprint, arxiv: [6] Fernando Galaz-García and Catherine Searle, Low-dimensional manifolds with non-negative curvature and maximal symmetry rank, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 139 (010), no. 7, [7] Karsten Grove and Catherine Searle, Positively curved manifolds with maximal symmetryrank, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 91 (1994), [8] Karsten Grove and Wolfgang Ziller, Cohomogeneity one manifolds with positive Ricci curvature, Invent. Math. 149 (00), no. 3, [9] Luis Guijarro and Frederick Wilhelm, Restrictions on submanifolds via focal radius bounds. preprint, arxiv: [10], Focal radius, rigidity, and lower curvature bounds, Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. 116 (018), no. 6, [11], A softer connectivity principle, 018. preprint, arxiv: [1] Morris W. Hirsch, Differential topology, Springer New York, [13] PeterPetersen, Riemannian geometry,3 rd,graduate Texts inmathematics, vol.171, Springer International Publishing, 016. [14] Peter Petersen and Frederick Wilhelm, Some principles for deforming nonnegative curvature, 010. preprint, arxiv: , revision in preparation. [15] Curtis Pro and Frederick Wilhelm, Diffeomorphism stability and codimension three. preprint, arxiv: [16] Catherine Searle, Pedro Solórzano, and Frederick Wilhelm, Smoothing quotients with lower curvature bounds. in preparation. [17] Catherine Searle and Frederick Wilhelm. work in progress. [18] Zhongmin Shen, On complete manifolds of nonnegative kth-ricci curvature, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 338 (1993), no. 1, [19] Frederick Wilhelm, On intermediate Ricci curvature and fundamental groups, Illinois J. Math. 41 (1997), no. 3, [0] Burkhard Wilking, Torus actions on manifolds with quasi-positive curvature, 008. unpublished manuscript, written by M. Kerin. [1] H. Wu, Manifolds of partially positive curvature, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 36 (1987), no. 3,