arxiv:math/ v1 [math.dg] 28 Mar 2006

Transcription

1 Riemann minimal surfaces in higher dimensions arxiv:math/060366v1 [math.dg] 8 Mar 006 S. Kaabachi and F. Pacard February, 008 Abstract. We prove the existence of a one parameter family of minimal embedded hypersurfaces in R n+1, for n 3, which generalize the well known dimensional Riemann minimal surfaces. The hypersurfaces we obtain are complete, embedded, simply periodic hypersurfaces which have infinitely many parallel hyperplanar ends. By opposition with the -dimensional case, they are not foliated by spheres. Résumé. Nous prouvons l existence d une famille à un paramètre d hypersurfaces de R n+1, pour n 3, qui sont minimales et qui généralisent les surfaces minimales de Riemann. Les hypersurfaces que nous obtenons sont des hypersurfaces complètes, simplement périodiques et qui ont une infinité de bouts hyperplans parallèles. Contrairement au cas des surfaces, i.e. n =, ces hypersurfaces ne sont pas fibrées par des hypersphères. 1 Introduction and statement of results In 3-dimensional Euclidean space, the minimal surfaces known as Riemann minimal surfaces belong to a one parameter family of minimal surfaces which are embedded, have planar ends and are simply periodic i.e. are invariant under a discrete one parameter group of translations). Moreover, in the quotient space, they have the topology of a -torus and have finite total curvature. These minimal surfaces have been discovered by Riemann in the 19th century and each element of this family is foliated by circles or straight lines. In fact, up to some rigid motion and dilation, a fundamental piece of any of these surfaces can be parameterized by Xt, θ) := at) + Rt) cosθ, Rt) sinθ, t) for t, θ) R S 1 in which case the functions a and R are solutions of the following system of first order nonlinear ordinary differential equations and t R) + 1 = µ R + R 4 t a = R. where µ R is a parameter. The surface Σ µ is invariant under some translation d µ R 3, and, in the quotient space R 3 /Zd µ ), is topologically equivalent to a torus S 1 S 1. In addition, in the quotient space, this surface has finite total curvature. In this paper, we prove that this one parameter family of minimal surfaces can be generalized to any dimension n 3. More precisely, we show that there exists a one parameter family of minimal hypersurfaces in R n+1, which are embedded, have infinitely many hyperplanar ends and are invariant under some one parameter discrete group of translations. The canonical basis of R n+1 will be denoted by e j, for j = 1,...,n + 1, and coordinates of x R n will be denoted by x 1,...,x n ). In order to state our result precisely, we introduce the subgroup G On + 1) which is generated by elements of the form R := R

2 where R On 1). Our main result reads : Theorem 1.1 There exists a one parameter family of embedded minimal hypersurfaces Σ ε ) ε 0,ε0) which have horizontal hyperplanar ends and are simply periodic. These hypersurfaces are invariant under the discrete group of translations Zd ε, where d ε = e 1 + h ε e n+1 with h ε > 0, and they are also invariant under the action of G. In the quotient space R n+1 /Zd ε ) the hypersurface Σ ε is topologically equivalent to S n 1 S 1 and has finite total curvature. When n 3 and by opposition to the case of surfaces, it follows from the result of W. C. Jagy [1] that our hypersurfaces are not foliated anymore by n 1)-dimensional spheres and hence it seems unlikely that these hypersurfaces could be recovered by solving some system of nonlinear ordinary differential equations. In fact, near any of its ends, the hypersurface Σ ε we construct is close to the vertical graph of the function x R n ε n x x n x + x n ) where x = 1, 0,...,,0) R n and one can check that the level sets of this function are not spheres. As already mentioned, near their ends, the minimal hypersurfaces we construct are not exactly vertical graphs of these functions but vertical graphs of some small perturbation these functions and it turns out that, in dimension n 3, the perturbations are small enough so that the level sets are not spheres. This is in striking contrast with the -dimensional case where, the corresponding -dimensional construction leading to the construction of Riemann minimal surfaces) yields a minimal surface which, close to its ends, is close to the vertical graph of the function x R ε log x + x log x x ) and this time one can check that the level sets of this function are already circles. Let us emphasize that the hypersurfaces we construct do not describe the full family of such hypersurfaces. Indeed, we only describe the elements of this family when the translation period d ε is close to e 1. In order to construct these hypersurfaces, the main observation is that the moduli space of Riemann s minimal surfaces is one dimensional once the action of rigid motions and dilation has been taken into account) and noncompact. In particular, one can investigate the behavior of these surfaces close to one of the two ends of the moduli space. It turns out that surfaces belonging to one end of the moduli space, when they are properly rescaled, can be understood as infinitely many parallel planes which are connected together by small catenoidal necks. Hence, even though this would not be worth the effort, these surfaces could be recovered using the connected sum result by M. Traizet [11]. This is this connected sum result which allows us to describe part of the moduli space of the n-dimensional analogues of Riemann s minimal surfaces. This work compliments previous work which have been done to generalize, in higher dimensions, some classical families of minimal surfaces. For example, in [1], the minimal k-noids, which are complete minimal surfaces with catenoidal ends have been generalized to any dimension. This is also the case for Scherk s second surfaces which have been generalized to any dimension in [8]. In section we give the definition of the n-catenoid, which generalizes the usual catenoid to any dimension. We then proceed with a perturbation of the truncated n-catenoid to produce an infinite dimensional family of minimal hypersurfaces which are parameterized by their boundary data. Section 3 is devoted to the perturbation of the hyperplane with two balls removed. Again we find an infinite dimensional family of minimal hypersurfaces which are parameterized by their boundary data on the boundaries of the two excised balls. In Section 4, we explain how these infinite dimensional families can be connected together to produce the n-dimensional analogues of Riemann s minimal surfaces.

3 3 The n-catenoid and minimal hypersurfaces close to it From now on, we assume that n 3 is fixed. We recall some well known facts concerning the definition and properties of the n-catenoid C, a minimal hypersurface of revolution which generalize in R n+1, the standard catenoid in 3-dimensional Euclidean space. We also give an rather explicit expansion formula for the mean curvature of any hypersurface which is close enough to C. The n-catenoid C is a hypersurface of revolution about the x n+1 -axis. It will be convenient to consider a parametrization X : R S n 1 R n+1 of C for which the induced metric is conformal to the product metric on R S n 1. This parametrization is given by Xt, z) := ϕt)z, ψt) ),.1) where t R, z S n 1 and where the functions ϕ and ψ are explicitly given by ϕt) := coshn 1)t)) 1 n 1 and ψt) := It is easy to check that the induced metric on C is given by g := ϕ dt + g S n 1) t 0 ϕ n ds. and, if the orientation of C is chosen so that the unit normal vector field is given by then, the second fundamental form of C is given by n := ϕ 1 n z, t lnϕ ),.) b := ϕ n 1 n)dt + g S n 1). From these expressions, it is easy to check that the hypersurface parameterized by X is indeed minimal..1 The Jacobi operator about the n-catenoid We now consider the hypersurfaces which can be parameterized as normal graphs over C, namely they can be parameterized by X w := X + w n.3) for some small sufficiently smooth) function w. Let us denote by Hw) the mean curvature of the hypersurface parameterized by X w. The Jacobi operator, which is nothing but the linearized mean curvature operator, appears in the second variation of the n-volume functional. It is given by the general formula J := g + A, where g denotes the Laplace-Beltrami operator and A is the shape operator of the hypersurface. In the case of the n-catenoid and in the above defined parametrization, the Jacobi operator about C is given by J = ϕ n t ϕ n t ) + ϕ S n 1 + n n 1)ϕ n It turns out that it is easier and equivalent) to study the mapping properties of the conjugate operator L which is defined by L := ϕ +n J ϕ n. We have explicitly L := t + S n 1 ) n n3n ) + ϕ n. 4 The next Lemma is borrowed from [1]. It explains the structure of the expansion of the mean curvature operator w Hw) in terms of the function w and its derivatives.

4 4 Lemma.1 [1] The equation Hw) = 0 is equivalent to L w = ϕ n Q ϕ n w ) + ϕ n Q3 ϕ n w ),.4) where the operators Q and Q 3 enjoy the following property : There exists a constant c > 0 such that for all t R and for all w 1, w C [t 1, t + 1] S n 1 ), we have Q w ) Q w 1 ) C c w C + w 1 C ) w w 1 C,.5) and, provided w 1 C + w C 1, we also have Q 3 w ) Q 3 w 1 ) C c w C + w 1 C ) w w 1 C..6) Here all norms are understood on the domain of definition of the functions. Proof : We recall the main lines of the proof of this critical Lemma for the sake of completeness. We set ñ := ϕn and w := w ϕ, so that the hypersurface parameterized by X w is also be parameterized by X w := X + w ñ. Now, the first fundamental form g w of the hypersurface parameterized by X w is explicitly given by g w = ϕ dt + dz i dz j ) + ϕ 3 n w n 1)dt + dz i dz j ) + ϕ t ϕ w t w dt + z i w dt dz i ) + ϕ 4 n w nn )dt + dz i dz j ) + ϕ w + t w) )dt + t w z i w dt dz i + z i w z j w dz i dz j ), where g S n 1 = dz i dz j in local coordinates. Making use of the expansion deti + B) = 1 + TrB + 1 Tr B) TrB ) ) + O B 3 )), and changing back w into w/ϕ, we obtain the expansion detgw = ϕ n + 1 ϕn w nn 1) ϕ n w + ϕ Q 3 ϕ 1 w ) + ϕ n Q4 ϕ 1 w ) where Q 3 is homogeneous of degree 3 and where Q 4 collects all the higher order terms. The key point is that the Taylor s coefficients of Q i are bounded functions of t and z and so are the derivatives of any order of these functions. The result then follows from the variational characterization of minimal hypersurfaces as critical points of the functional Ew) = detgw ds dz It is easy to check that critical points of E are solution of the nonlinear elliptic equation t ϕ n t w) + ϕ n S n 1 w + nn 1)ϕ n w = Q ϕ 1 w ) + φ n 1 Q 3 ϕ 1 w ), where Q is homogeneous of degree and where Q 3 collects all the higher order terms. Again, the Taylor s coefficients of Q i are bounded functions of t and z and so are the derivatives of any order of these functions. To complete the proof, it is enough to perform the conjugacy which was used to define L starting from J. Let us briefly comment of this result. The first estimate reflects the fact that the operator Q is a nonlinear second order differential operator which is homogenous of degree in w and its derivatives, and has coefficients which are bounded functions of t. The second estimate reflects the fact that the nonlinear operator Q 3 is a nonlinear second order differential operator whose

5 5 Taylor expansion at w = 0 does not involve any constant, linear nor quadratic term and has coefficients which are bounded functions of t. Observe that the n-catenoid is invariant under the action of the group G and if one looks for hypersurfaces which are invariant under the action of G then this amounts to consider normal variations of the n-catenoid for some functions w which enjoy the following invariance property for all R On) of the form w t, z) = wt, z) and wt, z) = wt, R z).7) R := ) R where R On 1). Clearly the Jacobi operator and its conjugate preserve this invariance i.e. if a function w satisfies.7) then so does the function L w. Since the mean curvature is invariant under the action of isometries, the nonlinear operator which appears on the right hand side of.4) also enjoys a similar invariance property.. Linear analysis about the n-catenoid We study the mapping properties of the conjugate Jacobi operator L. Given n, we denote by λ j = j n + j), j N, the eigenvalues of the Laplace-Beltrami operator on S n 1 and we denote by E j the corresponding eigenspace. That is for all φ E j. S n 1φ = λ j φ, The indicial roots of L describe the asymptotic behavior, at infinity, of the solutions of the homogeneous problem L w = 0 in R S n 1. If w C R S n 1) is solution of the homogeneous problem Lw = 0 in R S n 1, we may consider the eigenfunction decomposition of w as wt, z) = j N w j t, z) where, for each t R the function w j t, ) E j. Then the E j -valued function w j is a solution of L j v = 0 on R where the operator L j is defined by ) L j := t n n3n ) + j + ϕ n 4 Since ϕ n tends exponentially to 0 at ±, it is easy to check that there are exactly two independent solutions of the homogenous problem L j v = 0, which we denote by v + j and v j and which satisfy where lim t + e γjt v j + t) = 1 and lim e γjt w t + j t) = 1 j := n + j, for all j N. The real numbers ± j are usually referred to as the indicial roots of L at both + and. We define the operator ) 0 := t + S n 1 n

6 6 Observe that the indicial roots of 0 are equal to the indicial roots of the operator L. The solutions of the homogeneous problem J w = 0 are usually called Jacobi fields. Some Jacobi fields which correspond to explicit 1-parameter family of minimal hypersurfaces to which C belongs, are explicitly known. These Jacobi fields are obtained by projecting over the normal vector field the Killing vector fields associated to rigid motions and dilation. With slight abuse of terminology we shall also refer to solutions of L w = 0 as Jacobi fields. Then one has to multiply the Jacobi fields associated to J by ϕ n to obtain the expression of the corresponding Jacobi fields for L, in doing so one takes into account the fact that L is conjugate to L. Using this receipt we obtain the following Jacobi fields for the operator L) : i) The function Φ 0, := ϕ n 4 t ϕ, which is associated to the translation of C along its axis. ii) The function Φ 0,+ := ϕ n 4 ϕ t ψ ψ t ϕ ), which is associated to the dilation of C, iii) The function Φ 1, e := ϕ n z e) for e R n {0}, which is associated to the translation of C along the direction e orthogonal to its axis. iv) The function Φ 1,+ e := ϕ n 4 ψ t ψ + ϕ t ϕ)z e) for e R n {0}, which is associated to the rotation of the axis of C in a direction e orthogonal to its axis. These constitute n + 1) linearly independent Jacobi fields. The operator L does not satisfy the maximum principle. Indeed, one checks that the Jacobi fields Φ 1, e decay exponentially at ±. Nevertheless, if the operator L is restricted to suitable subspace of functions, some version of the maximum principle is still available. This is the content of the following result whose proof can be found in [1] see also [3]). Proposition.1 [1] Assume that < n. Let w be a solution of L w = 0 in R S n 1, which is bounded by a constant times cosht). Then w 0. Proof : A simple proof of this result can be obtained as follows. Proceed with the eigenfunction decomposition of w, the solution of L w = 0, so that w = j w j. Then w j is a solution of L j w j = 0 which is bounded by a constant times cosht). When j = 0 or j = 1 then all solutions are explicitly known and are described above. It is easy to check that no solution is bounded by a constant times cosht) unless it is identically equal to 0 since we have chosen < n. Now, when j we write w j t, z) = v j t)φ j z) where φ j E j. As already observe the function v j being bounded by a constant times cosht) for < n has to decay at infinity like. cosht) j Then, we have ) t v n j + j vj + n3n ) ϕ n v 4 j = 0 and also since Φ 1, e are Jacobi fields) ) t ϕ n n + 1 ϕ n n3n ) + ϕ n ϕ n 4 = 0 For all s R, we set v s := ϕ n s v j. Using the above equations, we have ) ) t v n s + j vs + n3n ) ϕ n n v 4 s = j 1) + j ϕ n.8) For all s R, v s is positive near ± because the function v j tends to 0 at ± much faster than the function ϕ n ). We choose s to be the sup of the reals for which v s 0. Then v s vanishes in R and at this point, which is a minimum point for v s,.8) yields t v s < 0. A contradiction. This completes the proof of the result.

7 7 Given k N, α 0, 1) and R, the space C k,α R S n 1 ) is defined to be the space of functions w C k,α R S n 1 ) for which the following norm is finite. w C k,α R S n 1 ) := cosht) w C k,α R S n 1 ), We show in the next result that, provided the weight parameter is suitably chosen and α 0, 1) is fixed, one can define a right inverse for L. Proposition. Assume that n, n+ ) and α 0, 1) are fixed. Then, there exists a continuous operator G : C R S n 1 ) C R S n 1 ) a right inverse for the operator L such that, if the function f satisfies.7) then so does Gf). Proof: The existence of G follows from standard results and we refer to [7] and [4] for a proof see also [9]). According to Proposition.1 and the description of the geometric Jacobi fields, we see that the operator L : C R S n 1 ) C R S n 1 ) is injective for all < n. Hence according to [7] and [4], the operator L is surjective for all > n which is not an indicial root. This proves the existence of a right inverse. Observe that, for > n there is no uniqueness of the right inverse and in order to define a right inverse which preserves.7) it is enough to average over the orbit of the group and define Gf)t, z) = 1 Gf)t, z 1, R z)) + Gf) t, R z))) z 1, dσ R On 1) where z = z 1, z) S n 1 and where G is any right inverse for L. Here dσ R is the standard Haar measure on On 1) normalized so that the volume of On 1) is equal to 1). The last result we will need is concerned with the Poisson operator associated to the operator 0 = t + S n 1 n ) which acts on functions defined on the cylinder R S n 1. A similar result has already been proven in [1] but we give here a new very short self contained proof. Lemma. There exists a constant c = cn) > 0 such that for all h C S n 1 ), which is L S n 1 )-orthogonal to E 0 and E 1, there exists a unique w h C [0, + ) S n 1 ) solution of { 0 w h = 0 in [0, + ) S n 1 w h = h on {0} S n 1 which tends to 0 as t tends to +. Furthermore, for some constant c = cn) > 0. e n+ t w h C [0,+ ) S n 1 ) c h C S n 1 ). Proof: We perform the eigenfunction decomposition of h h = j h j where h j E j. Then we have the explicit expression of w h given by w h t, z) = j e jt h j z),

8 8 Using elliptic estimates together the fact that h j is an eigenfunctions of S n 1, we get the rough estimate h j L S n 1 ) c 1 + j) pn h j L S n 1 ) for some exponent p n 0 which only depends on the dimension n. Furthermore, using the fact that the dimension of E j grows polynomially with j [10], we get h j L S n 1 ) c 1 + j) qn h C S n 1 ). for some exponent p n 0 which only depends on the dimension n. Collecting these, we conclude that e n+ t w h t, z) c e j) t 1 + j) pn+qn h C S n 1 ). j It is easy to check that the series converges uniformly when t 1. This provides the bound sup e n+ t w h t, z) c h C S n 1 ). t 1,z S n 1 Finally, applying the maximum principle we get sup e n+ t w h t, z) c h C S n 1 ). t 0,z S n 1 The estimate for the derivatives follows from Schauder s elliptic estimates. Observe that if the function h enjoys the following invariance property for all R On) of the form hz) = hr z).9) R := ) R where R On 1), then so does the function w h, namely for all R On) as above..3 Nonlinear analysis For all ε 0, 1), we define t ε > 0 by and r ε > 0 is defined by w h t, z) = w h t, R z).10) ϕ n 1 t ε ) = ε n 3n. r ε := ε 1 n 1 ϕtε ) = ε 3n It will be convenient to slightly modify the normal vector field n on C close into a transverse vector field n ε which is defined by n ε t, z) := χ ε t)nt, z) + signt)1 χ ε t))e n+1.11) where χ ε is a cutoff function equal to 0 for t > t ε 1 and equal to 1 when t < t ε. Observe that, as ε tends to 0, n ε is a small perturbation of n. This is made quantitatively precise in the estimate k n ε n 1) c k ϕ n which holds for t t ε and z S n 1, for some constant c k > 0 only depending on k N.

9 9 We now look for minimal hypersurfaces which are close to C and which can be parameterized by X ε,w = X + ϕ n w n ε, for some small) function w. We also ask that these minimal hypersurfaces are invariant under the action of G. Using the result of Lemma.1), one can check that the hypersurface parameterized by X ε,w is minimal if and only if the function w satisfies L w = L ε w + ϕ n Q,ε ϕ n w) + ϕ n Q3,ε ϕ n w),.1) This formula is not exactly identical to.4) since the normal vector field n has been modified into the transverse vector field n ε. Observe that L ε 0, Q,ε Q and Q 3,ε Q 3 when t t ε since n = n ε in this range. Moreover, it follows from.11) that the coefficients of the linear second order operator L ε are bounded by a constant times ϕ n in any C k,α topology). Indeed, L := L L ε is the corresponding linearized mean curvature operator when hypersurfaces close to C are parameterized as graphs over C using the vector field n ε. It is easy to check [1] that, since C has constant mean curvature equal to 0) then Lw = L n ε n w) The estimates of the coefficients of L ε follow at once from this identity using.11). Finally, the operators Q,ε and Q 3,ε enjoy properties which are similar to those enjoyed by Q and Q 3, uniformly for ε 0, 1/). Details can be found for example in [1]. Given k N, α 0, 1) and R, the space C k,α [ t ε, t ε ] S n 1 ) is defined to be the space of functions w C k,α R S n 1 ) which is endowed with the norm : w C k,α [ t ε,t ε] S n 1 ) := cosht) w C k,α [ t ε,t ε] S n 1 ). Given h C S n 1 ) which is L S n 1 )-orthogonal to E 0 and E 1, we define w h to be the harmonic extension of h in a half cylinder, for the operator 0, which is given by Lemma.. Then we set w ht, z) := w ht ε t, z) + w ht ε + t, z) for all t, z) [ t ε, t ε ] S n 1. Granted the estimate provided in Lemma., it is easy to check that there exists a constant c = cn) > 0 such that w h C n+ [ t ε,t ε] S n 1 ) It will be convenient to define an extension operator as follows : i) For all t, z) t ε, t ε ) S n 1, we set c ϕ n+ tε ) h C S n 1 ).13) E ε : C [ t ε, t ε ] S n 1 ) C R S n 1 ) ii) For all t, z) t ε 1, t ε ) S n 1 we set iii) For all t, z) t ε, t ε + 1) S n 1 we set E ε f)t, z) = ft, z). E ε f)t, z) = χt ε t)f t ε, z). E ε f)t, z) = χt t ε )ft ε, z).

10 10 iv) And finally, for all t, z) / t ε 1, t ε + 1) S n 1 we set E ε f)t, z) = ft, z). where χ : R [0, 1] is a smooth cutoff function identically equal to 0 for t 1 and identically equal to 1 for t 0. Obviously there exists a constant c = cn, ) > 0 such that We denote by I ε the canonical imbedding E ε c. I ε : C R S n 1 ) C [ t ε, t ε ] S n 1 ) We fix n, n+ ) and we look for a solution w of.1) which is defined in [ t ε, t ε ] S n 1 and which can be decomposed as w = w h + v where v C [ t ε, t ε ] S n 1 ) is small. Thanks to the result of Proposition., we see that it is enough to find v C [ t ε, t ε ] S n 1 ) solution of v = A ε, hv),.14) where we have defined ) A ε, hv) := I ε G E ε L ε w h + v) + ϕ n Q,ε ϕ n w h + v)) + ϕ n Q3,ε ϕ n w h + v)) L w h The existence of a solution v to this fixed point problem will be a consequence of the following Lemma and the application of a fixed point theorem for contraction mapping. Lemma.3 Given κ > 0, there exists ε κ > 0 and c κ = cn,, κ) > 0 such that, for all ε 0, ε κ ), if h C S n 1 ) κ ε r ε ϕ n t ε ). Then and A ε, h0) C [ t ε,t ε] S n 1 ) c κ ε r ε ϕ 1 t ε ). A ε, hv ) A ε, hv 1 ) C [ t ε,t ε] S n 1 ) 1 v v 1 C [ t ε,t ε] S n 1 ) for all v 1, v C [ t ε, t ε ] S n 1 ) satisfying v i C [ t ε,t ε] S n 1 ) c κ ϕ 1 t ε )εr ε. Proof: We use.13) together with the properties of L ε to get and also L ε w h C [ t ε,t ε] S n 1 ) c ϕ n t ε ) h C S n 1 ) c κ ε r ε ϕ 4 3n t ε ). L ε v C [ t ε,t ε] S n 1 ) c ϕ n t ε ) v C [ t ε,t ε] S n 1 ). Next, observe that L 0 = n3n ) 4 ϕ n, hence L w h C [ t ε,t ε] S n 1 ) = L 0 ) w h C [ t ε,t ε] S n 1 ) c ϕ n+ t ε ) h C S n 1 ) c κ ε r ε ϕ 1 t ε ). Using the properties of Q,ε, we can estimate, for all ε small enough say ε 0, ε κ )), ϕ n Q,ε ϕ n w h) C [ t ε,t ε] S n 1 ) c ϕ n t ε ) h C S n 1 ) c κ ε r ε ϕ 1 3n t ε )

11 11 and ϕ n Q,ε ϕ n w h + v )) Q,ε ϕ n w h + v 1 )) ) C [ t ε,t ε] S n 1 ) c ε r ε ϕ 1 t ε ) v v 1 C [ t ε,t ε] S n 1 ) provided v 1, v C [ t ε, t ε ] S n 1 ) satisfy the assumption of the statement. Similarly, using the properties of Q 3,ε, we can estimate, for all ε small enough say ε 0, ε κ ), ϕ n Q3,ε ϕ n w h) C [ t ε,t ε] S n 1 ) c ϕ n t ε ) h 3 C S n 1 ) c κ ε r ε ϕ 1 9n, and ϕ n Q3,ε ϕ n w h + v )) Q 3,ε ϕ n w h + v 1 )) ) C [ t ε,t ε] S n 1 ) c ε r ε ϕn t ε ) v v 1 C [ t ε,t ε] S n 1 ) provided v 1, v C [ t ε, t ε ] S n 1 ) satisfy the assumption of the statement. The result follows at once from these estimates together with the fact that the norms of G, I ε and E ε are bounded independently of ε. Collecting the previous results, we conclude that, given κ > 0, there exists ε κ > 0 such that, for all ε 0, ε κ ) the mapping A ε, h is a contraction from {v C [ t ε, t ε ] S n 1 ) : v C [ t ε,t ε] S n 1 ) c κ ε r ε ϕ 1 t ε ) } into itself and hence has a unique fixed point v ε, h in this set. The hypersurface parameterized by X ε, h = ε 1 n 1 X + ϕ n w h + v ε, h)n ε ), for t, z) [ t ε, t ε ] S n 1 is a minimal hypersurface which will be denoted by C ε, h. This produces an infinite dimensional family of minimal hypersurfaces which are close to the piece of the catenoid C which is the image of [ t ε, t ε ] S n 1 by X. This family is parameterized by the boundary data h. Observe that, if one wants to produce a hypersurface which is invariant under the action of G it is enough to restrict the subset of function h C S n 1 ) which enjoy in addition the following invariance property hz) = hr z).15) for all R On) of the form for some R On 1). R := ) R.4 Local description of the hypersurface C ε, h near its boundaries We first recall the asymptotic expansion of the parametrization of the ends of the n-catenoid. Starting from the parametrization of the n-catenoid which was given in.1), we perform the change of variables x = ϕt)z R n The lower end of the n-catenoid can be parameterized as a vertical graph over R n {0} for some function u which can be expanded as ux) = d n x n + O x 4 3n ),

12 1 for x large enough, where d 0 := lim t + ψt). This expansion follows at once from the definition of ϕ and ψ. We refer to [1] for the details. We now consider the n-catenoid which has been scaled by a factor ε 1 n 1. Its lower end is can be parameterized by x ε 1 n 1 x, d0 + 1 n x n + O x 4 3n )), for x large enough. Changing ε 1 n 1 into x, we see that the lower end of the scaled n-catenoid can also be parameterized by x x, ε 1 n 1 d0 + ε n x n + Oε 3 x 4 3n )),.16) We apply the analysis of the previous section and collect the results. Close to its lower boundary, the minimal hypersurface C ε,h can be described as a vertical graph over an annulus in the horizontal hyperplane x n+1 = 0, this is the purpose of changing the normal vector field n into n ε. To make this precise, recall that we have defined r ε := ε 1 n 1 ϕtε ) = ε 3n and we write the hypersurface C ε,h, close to its lower boundary, as the graph over B0, r ε ) B0, r ε /) for a function u ε,h. We set Given h C S n 1 ), we define h by h = ε 1 n 1 ϕ n tε )h u 0 ε,hx) := ε 1 n 1 d0 + ε n x n + whx/r i ε ) where wh i is the harmonic extension of h in B0, 1) and we set v ε,h := u ε,h u 0 ε,h.17) Following the construction of the previous section, we obtain the : Lemma.4 There exists c = cn, ) > 0 and, for all κ > 0, there exists ε κ > 0 such that, for all h C S n 1 ) which is L S n 1 )-orthogonal to E 0 and E 1 and which satisfies h C S n 1 ) κ ε r ε, we have v ε,h r ε ) C B0,1) B0,1/)) c ε r ε. In addition, n+ v ε,h v ε,h1 )r ε ) C B0,1) B0,1/)) c ϕ tε ) h h 1 C S n 1 ). if h, h 1 C S n 1 ) are L S n 1 )-orthogonal to E 0 and E 1 and which satisfy h i C S n 1 ) κ ε r ε. The key and crucial point is that the constant c > 0 does not depend on κ. The proof of this estimate follows from a simple but tedious computation following the steps of the construction of C ε,h. Observe that, when h = 0, then the difference between u ε,0 and u 0 ε,0 comes from the term Oε 3 x 4 3n ), with x = r ε, which appears in.16) the expansion of the lower end of the n-catenoid.

13 13 When h 0, there are many discrepancies to take into account. The first comes from the fact that, by construction, the function ε 1 n n 1 ϕ w h is not exactly equal to the function h when t = t ε but the difference between these two functions is bounded by a constant depending on κ) times ϕ n t ε )εrε, and hence which is uniformly bounded by a constant independent of κ) times ε rε if ε is taken small enough. Next, one has to take into account the fact that, for t close to t ε, the coordinates t, θ) are not the usual cylindrical coordinates r = ε 1 n 1 e s in R n and hence the normal graph of ε 1 n n 1 ϕ t) w h is not exactly equal to the vertical graph of wh i. This induces in.17) another discrepancy which is bounded by a constant depending on κ) times ϕ n t ε )εrε, and again is uniformly bounded by a constant independent of κ) times ε rε if ε is taken small enough. Finally, there is a term which comes from the perturbation v ε, h solution of the nonlinear problem, and this induces a discrepancy which is bounded by a constant depending on κ) times n+ ϕ t ε )εrε n+, and since < 0, is uniformly bounded by a constant independent of κ) times ε rε if ε is taken small enough. 3 Minimal hypersurfaces which are graphs over a hyperplane 3.1 The mean curvature for graphs Assume that a hypersurface is a vertical graph over the hyperplane x n+1 = 0 for some function w, i.e. this hypersurface is parameterized by x R n x, wx)) R n+1. We recall that this hypersurface is minimal if and only if w is a solution of ) w div = w ) 1 It will be more convenient to write this equation as w = w w, w) 1 + w. 3.1) We will be interested in vertical graphs which are invariant under the action of the group G which has been defined in the introduction. This amount to restrict our attention to functions w which enjoy the following invariance property for all R On) of the form w x) = wx) and wx) = wr x) 3.) R := ) R where R On 1). Again the Laplacian preserve this invariance i.e. if a function w satisfies 3.) then so does the function w and since the mean curvature is invariant under the action of isometries, the nonlinear operator which appears on the right hand side of 3.1) also enjoys a similar invariance property. 3. Linear analysis of the Laplacian in weighted spaces We set x := 1, 0,...,0) R n and we define R n := R n {x, x }

14 14 Given k N, α 0, 1) and µ, ν R, the space Cµ,ν k,αrn ) to be the space of functions w C k,α loc Rn ) for which the following norm is finite w C k,α µ,ν R n ) := sup s 0,1/) s ν ws +x ) C k,α B0,) B0,1)) + sup s 0,1/) s ν ws x ) C k,α B0,) B0,1)) + w C k,α B0,4) Bx,1/) B x,1/))) + sup s,+ ) s µ ws ) C k,α B0,) B0,1)). is finite. Therefore, the weight parameter ν controls the behavior of the function u near the points ±x and the weight parameter µ controls its behavior at infinity. The following result follows from [7] and [4] but is also a simple consequence of the maximum principle. Proposition 3.1 Assume that µ, ν n, 0) are fixed. Then, there exists a constant c = cn, µ, ν) > 0 and, for all r 0, 1/), there exists a continuous operator Γ : C µ,ν Rn ) C µ,νr n ) such that, for all f C µ,ν Rn ), the function w := Γf) is a solution of w = f in R n. In addition, if f satisfies 3.) then so does Γf). Proof: As mentioned the existence of Γ follows from the results in [7] and [4] see also [9]). Clearly the operator : Cµ,νR n ) C µ,ν Rn ) is injective when ν > n and µ < 0. Hence, according to the results in [7] and [4], the operator is surjective when ν < 0 and µ > n are not indicial roots of the Laplacian namely are not of the form j or n j for some j N. This completes the proof of the result. We also provide a simple proof of this result based on the maximum principle. Observe that, for all λ R, we have x λ = λn + λ) x λ and that λn + λ) < 0 precisely when λ n, 0). Now, let us first assume that f 1 is supported in B0, 4) {x, x }. The above observation implies that the function x x x ν + x + x ν can be used as a barrier function to prove both the existence w 1 solution of w 1 = f 1 in R n as well as the pointwise bound w 1 x) c f 1 C µ,ν Rn ) x x ν + x + x ν ) for some constant c = cn, ν) > 0. However, since f 1 is supported in B0, 4) {x, x }, w 1 is harmonic in R n B0, 4) and hence, it follows from the maximum principle that the function x x n can be used as a barrier function to prove that where c = cn, ν) > 0. w 1 x) sup w 1 4 n x n c f 1 C µ,ν B0,4) Rn ) Finally, let us assume that f is supported in R n B0, ). Then, the above observation implies that the function x x x µ + x + x µ

15 15 can be used as a barrier function to prove both the existence w solution of w = f in R n as well as the pointwise bound w x) c f C µ,ν Rn ) x x µ + x + x µ ) for some constant c = cn, µ) > 0. However, since f is supported in R n B0, ), w is harmonic in B0, ) and hence, it follows from the maximum principle that where c = cn, µ) > 0. w x) sup w c f C µ,ν B0,) Rn ) The existence of Γf) follows from these consideration, first decomposing f = f 1 + f where f 1 is a function supported in B0, 4) and f a function supported in R n B0, 4). We obtain a function Γf) = w 1 + w where w 1 and w are defined as above. Collecting the above estimates, we know that wx) c f C µ,ν Rn ) x x ν + x + x ν ) in B0, 4) and wx) c f C µ,ν Rn ) x µ in R n B0, 4), for some constant c = cn, µ, ν) > 0. Once the existence and the pointwise control of w have been obtained, the estimates for the derivatives of w follow from Schauder s estimates. This completes the proof of the result. The following Lemma is the counterpart of Lemma.. Observe that, this time we do not impose any constraint on the boundary data and the proof is again a simple application of the maximum principle. Lemma 3.1 Assume that α 0, 1) is fixed. For all h C S n 1 ), there exists w h C n Rn B0, 1)) satisfying : { wh = 0 in R n B0, 1) Furthermore, for some constant c = cn) > 0. w h = h on B0, 1) w h C n Rn B0,1)) c h C S n 1 ). Proof: The proof of this result follows at once from the observation that x x n can be used as a barrier function to prove both the existence of w h and the pointwise bound w h x) sup h x n. B0,1) We then apply Schauder s estimates to get the relevant estimates for the derivatives of w h. Observe that if the function h enjoys the invariance property.9), namely for all R On) of the form hz) = hr z) R := ) R where R On 1), then so does the function w h, namely for all R On) as above. w h x) = w h R x) 3.3)

16 Nonlinear analysis Recall that we have defined For all r 0, 1), we also define r ε := ε 3n. D r := R n Bx, r) B x, r)). Given k N, α 0, 1) and µ, ν R, we define the space C k,α µ,ν D r ) to be the space of functions w C k,α loc D r) for which the following norm w C k,α µ,ν D r) := sup s r,1/) s ν ws +x ) C k,α B0,) B0,1)) is finite. + sup s r,1/) s ν ws x ) C k,α B0,) B0,1)) + w C k,α B0,4) Bx,1/) B x,1/))) + sup s,+ ) s µ ws ) C k,α B0,) B0,1)). The remaining of the analysis parallels what we have already done to perturb the truncated rescaled n catenoid. Given h C S n 1 ), we use the result of Lemma 3.1 to define the function ŵ h := w h x )/r ε ) w h + x )/r ε ). Using the estimate provided by Lemma 3.1, we conclude that for some constant c = cn) > 0. ŵ h C n, n Drε) c rn ε h C S n 1 ). Remark 3.1 Observe that the decay at infinity of ŵ h can be slightly improved and we have ŵ h C 1 n, n Drε) c rn ε h C S n 1 ). This follows from the fact that the function w h can be decomposed as w hx) = a h x n + w hx) where a h + w h C 1 n Rn B0,1)) c h C S n 1 ). We define, for all ρ R and ε > 0 the function w ε,ρ x) := ρ 1 n ε)x 1 + We look for a solution of 3.1) of the form where v is a small function. ε n x x n x + x n ). w := w ε,ρ + ŵ h + v, It will be convenient to define an extension operator as follows : Ē ε : C µ,ν D r ε ) C µ,ν Rn )

17 17 i) For all x D rε, we set Ē ε f)x) = fx). ii) For all Bx, r ε ) Bx, r ε ) we set iii) For all B x, r ε ) B x, r ε ) we set Ē ε f)x) = χ x x /r ε )fx + r ε x x )/ x x ). Ē ε f)x) = χ x + x /r ε )f x + r ε x + x )/ x + x ). iv) And finally, for all x Bx, r ε ) B x, r ε ) we set Ē ε f)0) = 0. where χ : R [0, 1] is a smooth cutoff function identically equal to 1 for s and identically equal to 0 for s 1. Obviously there exists a constant c = cn, µ, ν) > 0 such that We denote by Īε the canonical imbedding Ē ε c. Ī ε : C R n ) C D rε ) We fix µ, ν n, 0). Using the result of Proposition 3.1, we rephrase this problem as a fixed point problem. It is now enough to find v C k,α µ,ν D rε ) solution of where and where we have set v = B ε,ρ, hv) 3.4) B ε,ρ, hv) := Īε Γ Ēε Ξw ε,ρ + ŵ h + v)). Ξw) := w w, w) 1 + w The existence of a fixed point for B ε,ρ, h relies on the following : Lemma 3. There exists c = cn, µ, ν) > 0 and for all κ > 0 there exists ε κ > 0 such that for all ε 0, ε κ ), for all ρ R and for all h C S n 1 ) satisfying r ε ρ + h C S n 1 ) κ ε r ε, we have Moreover, B ε,ρ, h0) C µ,νd rε ) c ε r ν ε. for all v 1, v C µ,ν D r ε ) satisfying B ε,ρ, hv 1 ) B ε,ρ, hv ) C µ,νd rε ) 1 v 1 v C µ,νd rε ) v i C µ,νd rε ) c ε r ν ε.

18 18 Proof: The first estimate follows from the result of Proposition 3.1 together with the estimate Ξw ε,ρ + ŵ h) C µ,ν Drε) c ε r ν ε which follows from the construction of w ε,ρ + ŵ h. The second estimate follows from Ξw ε,ρ + ŵ h + v ) Ξw ε,ρ + ŵ h + v 1 ) C µ,ν Drε) c rn ε v v 1 C µ,νd rε ) Details are left to the reader. Collecting the previous results, we conclude that, given κ > 0, there exists ε κ > 0 such that, for all ε 0, ε κ ) the mapping K ε,ρ, h is a contraction from {v Cµ,ν D r ε ) : v C µ,νd rε ) c ε } r ε into itself and hence has a unique fixed point w ε,ρ, h in this set. We define ū ε,ρ, h := w ε,ρ + ŵ h + w ε,ρ, h. The hypersurface parameterized by x x, ū ε,ρ, hx)) for x D rε is a minimal hypersurface and will be denoted by Σ ε,ρ, h. The important fact is that the constant c > 0 which appears in Lemma 3. does not depend on κ provided ε is chosen small enough. If one looks for minimal hypersurfaces which are invariant under the action of the group G, it is enough to retrict our attention to the set of functions h C S n 1 ) which are invariant under hz) = hrz) for all R On) of the form where R On 1). R := ) R Local description of the hypersurface Σ ε,ρ, h near its boundaries We would like to analyze ū ε,ρ, h close to x. To this aim, we define y := x x and the function where ū 0 ε,ρ, h y) := ρ n n 1 n ε + w ē h := w h ε n y n + ρ y 1 + w ē h y/r ε) is the harmonic extension defined in Lemma 3.1. We also define Following the construction of ū ε,ρ, h, we obtain : v ε,ρ, h := ū ε,ρ, h ū 0 ε,ρ, h Lemma 3.3 There exists c = cn, µ, ν) > 0 and for all κ > 0 there exists ε κ > 0 such that, for all ε 0, ε κ ), for all ρ R and for all h C S n 1 ) satisfying we have Moreover, for all r ε ρ + h C S n 1 ) κ ε r ε v ε,ρ, hx + r ε ) C b arb0,) B0,1)) c ε r ε. v ε,ρ, h v ε,ρ1, h 1 )x + r ε ) C B0,) B0,1)) c r n ε r ε ρ ρ 1 + h h 1 C S n 1 )) r ε ρ i + h i C S n 1 ) κ ε r ε. Again, the important fact is that the constant c > 0 in the first estimate does not depend on κ.

19 19 4 The connected sum construction We fix κ large enough and apply the results of the previous sections. Assume that we are given h, h C S n 1 ) satisfying h C S n 1 ) κ ε r ε and h C S n 1 ) κ ε r ε. We decompose h = h 0 + h 1 + h where h 0 E 0, h 1 E 1 and h is L S n 1 )-orthogonal to E 0 and E 1. We further assume that both h and h satisfy.15). In particular, this implies that h 1 Span{x e 1 } and if we decompose h = h 0 + h 1 + h this also implies that h 1 Span{x e 1 }. Granted the above decomposition, we choose from now on ρ := r 1 ε h 1 and consider the hypersurface Σ ε,ρ, h which has been constructed in the previous section. Next, we define t := ε 1 n 1 d0 + ρ n ) n 1 n ε + h 0 and consider e 1 + te n+1 + C ε,h the hypersurface defined in section.4 and which has been translated by e 1 + te n+1. The lower boundary of e 1 + te n+1 + C ε,h and the upper boundary of Σ ε,ρ, h are close on to the other and we will now show that, for all ε small enough, it is possible to find h and h in such a way that the union of Σ ε,ρ, h and e 1 +te n+1 +C ε,h is a C 1 hypersurface. Since this hypersurface has piecewise mean curvature equal to 0 and is C 1, regularity theory then implies that it is a smooth minimal hypersurface with two boundaries and one end asymptotic to x x, ρ x 1 ). To complete the construction of the generalized Riemann s minimal hypersurface, it will remain to first apply a suitable rotation so that the end of the hypersurface Σ ε,ρ, h e 1 + te n+1 + C ε,h ) which is asymptotic to x x, ρ x 1 ) becomes horizontal and next to extend this hypersurface so that it becomes a sinply periodic hypersurface which is invariant under the action of G). In order to produce a C 1 hypersurface, we consider the two summands as vertical graphs over annular regions in the hyperplane x n+1 = 0 and ask that the Cauchy data of these two graphs coincide. This condition can be translated into the following set of equations { uε,h r ε ) + t = ū ε,ρ, hx + r ε ) r u ε,h r ε ) = r ū ε,ρ, hx + r ε ) 4.1) on S n 1. However, given the expansions of u ε,h and ū ε,ρ, h this is equivalent to solve { w i h w ē h = v ε,ρ, hx + r ε ) v ε,h r ε ) r w i h wē h ) = r v ε,ρ, hx + r ε ) v ε,h r ε )) 4.) on S n 1. To proceed with, we recall the following result [5]

20 0 Lemma 4.1 The mapping P : C S n 1 ) C 1,α S n 1 ) h r wh e wi h ) is an isomorphism. Using this result, the solvability of 4.) reduces to a fixed point problem which can be written as h, h) = S ε h, h) It follows from the estimates of Lemma.4 and Lemma 3.3 that S ε h, h) C S n 1 )) c 0 ε rε for some constant c 0 > 0 which does not depend on κ provided ε is small enough. In addition S ε h, h ) S ε h 1, h 1 ) C S n 1 )) 1 h h 1, h h 1 ) C S n 1 )) provided ε is chosen small enough. To conclude, we choose κ = c 0 and use a fixed point Theorem for contraction mappings which will ensure the existence of at least one fixed point for the mapping S ε in { h, h) C S n 1 )) : h, h) C S n 1 )) κ ε r ε} provided ε is chosen small enough, say ε 0, ε 0 ]. This completes our proof of the existence of a fixed point for S ε and hence the existence of the Riemann minimal hypersurface in any dimension. References [1] S. Fakhi and F. Pacard, Existence of complete minimal hypersurfaces with finite total curvature, Manuscripta Math. 103, 000), [] D. Gilbarg and N.S. Trudinger, Elliptic Partial Differential Equations of second order Springer, 001). [3] M. Jleli, Constant mean curvature hypersurfaces, PhD Thesis, University of Paris 1 004). [4] R. Mazzeo, Elliptic theory of edge operators I. Comm. in PDE No 16, ) [5] R. Mazzeo and F. Pacard Constant scalar curvature metrics with isolated singulaties, Duke Math. J. 99, 1999), [6] W. Meeks, J. Perez and A. Ros, Uniqqueness of the Riemann minimal examples Invent. Math. 131, 1998), [7] R. Melrose, The Atiyah-Patodi-Singer index theorem. Research Notes in Mathematics, xiv, 377 p. 1993). [8] F. Pacard, Higher dimensional Scherk s hypersurfaces J. Math. Pures Appl., IX. Ser. 81, No.3, 00) [9] F. Pacard and T. Rivière, Linear and nonlinear aspects of vortices : the Ginzburg Landau model Progress in Nonlinear Differential Equations, 39, Birkäuser 000). [10] M.A. Shubin, Pseudodifferential operators and spectral theory, Springer, 1987). [11] M. Traizet, Adding handles to Riemann minimal examples J. Inst. Math. Jussieu 1, No.1, 00) [1] W. C. Jagy Minimal hypersurfaces foliated by spheres, Michigan Math. J. 38, 1991),