arxiv:math/ v1 [math.dg] 5 Dec 2005

Transcription

1 arxiv:math/ v1 [math.dg] 5 Dec 2005 ALGEBRAIC PROPERTIES OF DUPIN HYPERSURFACES THOMAS E. CECIL, QUO-SHIN CHI, AND GARY R. JENSEN Abstract. We prove that any connected proper Dupin hypersurface in R n is analytic algebraic and is an open subset of a connected component of an irreducible algebraic set. We prove the same result for any connected Dupin hypersurface in R n that satisfies a finiteness condition. Hence any taut submanifold of R n, whose unit normal bundle satisfies the finiteness condition, is analytic algebraic and is a connected component of an irreducible algebraic set. 1. Introduction In the 1980 paper [8], H.-F. Münzner proved that a connected isoparametric hypersurface M in a sphere S n R n+1 is algebraic in the sense that M is contained in a level set of the restriction to S n of a homogeneous polynomial on R n+1. If M is compact, then M is equal to this level set. In this paper, we generalize this result and show that a connected proper Dupin hypersurface M in R n is analytic algebraic and is an open subset of a connected component of an irreducible algebraic set in R n. If M is complete, then it equals this connected component. We obtain a similar result for proper Dupin hypersurfaces in S n via stereographic projection. Let M be an immersed hypersurface in Euclidean space R n or the unit sphere S n R n+1. A curvature surface of M is a smooth connected submanifold S such that for each point x S, the tangent space T x S is equal to a principal space of the shape operator A of M at x. The hypersurface M is said to be Dupin if it satisfies the condition (a) along each curvature surface, the corresponding principal curvature is constant. The hypersurface M is called proper Dupin if, in addition to condition (a), it also satisfies the condition Date: March 6, Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 53C40. Key words and phrases. Dupin hypersurface, semi-algebraic set. The first author was partially supported by NSF Grant No. DMS

2 2 CECIL, CHI, AND JENSEN (b) the number g of distinct principal curvatures is constant on M. Since both of these conditions are invariant under conformal transformations, stereographic projection allows us to consider our hypersurfaces in R n or S n, whichever is more convenient. The main result in this paper, contained in Theorem 31 and Corollary 32, is a proof that any connected proper Dupin hypersurface M in R n is analytic algebraic and thus an open subset of a connected component of an irreducible algebraic set of R n. If M is complete, then it equals the connected component. This result is extended to Dupin hypersurfaces that satisfy what we call the finiteness property (see Definition 34), a condition satisfied by all known examples. Our results give a partial solution to a question posed by N. Kuiper in [6], now called Kuiper s Conjecture, Are there taut submanifolds which are not real algebraic? Recall that an immersed submanifold M m of R n (or of S n ) is taut if there is a field F such that for each point p R n, the distance function L p : M m R, L p (x) = d(f(x), p) 2 has the following properties (see [3]) (a) For each r 0, the set M r (L p ) = L 1 p [0, r] is compact. (b) If L p is a Morse function, then for each r 0 and each integer k, the number of critical points of L p with index k that lie in M r (L p ) is equal to dimh k (M r (L p ),F). Every taut submanifold in R n is Dupin (Miyaoka [7] for hypersurfaces and Pinkall [12] in general). The tube M ǫ of radius ǫ around an embedded compact submanifold M m of R n is Z 2 -taut if and only if M is Z 2 -taut (([12]). If f : M m S n is a submanifold with unit normal bundle UN(M) and if US n denotes the unit tangent bundle of S n, then its Legendre lift is the map UN(M) US n that sends the unit normal vector ξ of M at x to the unit tangent vector ξ of S n at f(x). Denote the Legendre lift by (f, ξ). In [11], Pinkall defined the notion of Dupin Legendre lift and showed that a tube around a submanifold f : M m S n is Dupin if and only if its Legendre lift is Dupin. In Theorem 37 we prove: If M m S n is a taut submanifold whose Legendre lift, which is Dupin, satisfies the finiteness condition, then M S n is analytic algebraic and, being a proper embedding and thus complete, is a connected component of an irreducible algebraic variety. The proof of this theorem shows that the conclusion holds for any analytic taut submanifold.

3 ALGEBRAIC PROPERTIES OF DUPIN HYPERSURFACES 3 The paper is organized as follows. The first section outlines the facts needed about algebraic and semi-algebraic subsets of R n and explains that Nash functions are the same as analytic algebraic functions. Our principal algebraic tool is contained in Lemma 17, which states that if a connected analytic submanifold M m R n contains a connected open subset that is a semi-algebraic subset of R n, then M is an open subset of a connected component of an irreducible algebraic set. The second section outlines how to calculate the center and radius of a spherical curvature surface, in terms of the mean curvature normal. The third section outlines the facts needed about jet spaces and shows that the curvature surface through a point for a principal curvature of constant multiplicity of a hypersurface is determined by the 3-jet at the point of the embedding. The fourth section presents a proof of our main results. The final section presents the finiteness condition and extends the main results to any connected Dupin hypersurface possessing this finiteness condition. We wish to thank Ulrich Pinkall for permission to use a sketch [10] of a proof of Kuiper s Conjecture he sent in 1984 to Tom Cecil. This sketch led us to the parametrization (5.10). We then used ideas from real algebraic geometry to obtain the algebraic conclusion that the submanifold is contained in the connected component of an irreducible algebraic subset. 2. Algebraic Preliminaries In this section we briefly review the material we need in real algebraic geometry, referring for details to the book by Bochnak, et al. [1]. Let R[X 1,...,X n ] denote the ring of all real polynomials in n variables. If B is any subset of this ring, we denote the set of zeros of B by Z(B) = {x R n : f B f(x) = 0} Definition 1. An algebraic subset of R n is the set of zeros of some B R[X 1,..., X n ]. Given any subset S of R n, the set of all polynomials vanishing on S, denoted I(S) = {f R[X 1,...,X n ] : x S f(x) = 0} is an ideal of R[X 1,...,X n ]. Ideals of the ring of real polynomials are finitely generated, which implies that for any algebraic set V of R n, there exists a polynomial f R[X 1,...,X n ] such that V = Z(f). In

4 4 CECIL, CHI, AND JENSEN fact, if f 1,...,f m generate I(V ), take f = f f2 m Definition 2. A semi-algebraic subset of R n is one which is a finite union of sets of the form j {x R n : F j (x) 0}, where * is either < or =, F j R[X 1,...,X n ], and the intersection is finite. (F j < 0 is just F j > 0. So there is no need to introduce > in the definition.) All algebraic sets are certainly semi-algebraic, and R n itself is given by the null relation. Another simple example popular in Calculus is {(x, y) : y 1 + x 2 0} {(x, y) : x 2 y 0}, the area enclosed by the two parabolas. It follows from the definition that the complement of a semi-algebraic set is semi-algebraic, and hence a semi-algebraic set take away another semi-algebraic set leaves a semi-algebraic set. The following result is proved in [1, Theorem 2.21, p. 26]. Proposition 3. The projection π : R n R k sending x R n to its first k coordinates maps a semi-algebraic set to a semi-algebraic set. In particular, even though a linear projection does not map an algebraic set to an algebraic set, in general, it does map it to a semialgebraic set. Corollary 4. The (topological) closure and interior of a semi-algebraic set are semi-algebraic. A proof is given in [1, Proposition 2.2.2, p. 27]. Definition 5. A map f : S R n R k is semi-algebraic if its graph in R n R k is a semi-algebraic set. Corollary 6. The image of a semi-algebraic map f : S R n R k is semi-algebraic, via the composition graph(f) R n R k R k, where the last map is the projection onto the second summand. Definition 7. A Nash function is a C semi-algebraic map from an open semi-algebraic subset of R n to R.

5 ALGEBRAIC PROPERTIES OF DUPIN HYPERSURFACES 5 Definition 8. A real analytic function f defined on an open semialgebraic subset U of R n is analytic algebraic if it is a solution of a polynomial equation on U (2.1) a 0 (x)f s (x) + a 1 (x)f s 1 (x) + + a s (x) = 0 where a 0 (x) 0, a 1 (x),, a s (x) are polynomials over R n. A significant result in the subject is that these two concepts are equivalent (see [1, Proposition 8.1.8, p. 165]). Proposition 9. A function is Nash if and only if it is analytic algebraic. Example 10. For any number ǫ satisfying 0 < ǫ < 1, the open ball (2.2) B n (ǫ) = {s = (s 1,..., s n ) R n : s < ǫ} is an open semi-algebraic subset of R n. The function (2.3) s 0 = 1 s 2 on B n (ǫ) is analytic algebraic, since (s 0 (x)) 2 + a 0 (x) = 0 on B n (ǫ), where a 0 (x) is the polynomial s 2 1 on R n. Partial derivatives of all orders of s 0 are analytic algebraic. In fact, an elementary calculation and induction argument shows that if D i denotes the partial derivative with respect to s i, then D i1...i k s 0 = a k(s) (s 0 ) m where a k (s) is a polynomial on R n and m is a positive integer. Therefore, (s 0 ) 2m (D i1...i k s 0 ) 2 a k (s) 2 = 0 is an equation of the form (2.1), since (s 0 ) 2 is a polynomial on R n. A slight generalization of the single-variable case in [1, Proposition 2.9.1, p. 54], shows that the partial derivatives of any Nash function are again Nash functions. Proposition 11. Let f be a Nash function defined on a connected open semi-algebraic open set U in R n. Then a partial derivative of f of any order with respect to x := (x 1,, x n ) R n is again a Nash function on U. Definition 12. Let S be a semi-algebraic subset of R n. The dimension of S, denoted dim (S), is the dimension of the ring R = R[x 1,, x n ]/I(S), which is the maximal length of chains of prime ideals of R. In [1, Proposition , p. 54] it is proved that

6 6 CECIL, CHI, AND JENSEN Proposition 13. If S is a semi-algebraic subset of R n that is a C submanifold of R n of dimension d, then dim (S) = d. We denote the topological closure of S by S top. Denote the Zariski closure of S by S zar. It is the smallest algebraic set containing S, so S zar = Z(I(S)) The following plays a central role in our arguments to follow (see [1, Proposition 2.8.2, p. 50]). Proposition 14. If S is a semi-algebraic subset of R n, then dim (S) = dim (S top ) = dim (S zar ) Definition 15. An algebraic set V in R n is irreducible if, whenever V = F 1 F 2, where F 1 and F 2 are algebraic sets, then V = F 1 or V = F 2. The following facts are in [1, Theorem 2.8.3, p. 50]: Every algebraic set V is the union, in a unique way, of a finite number of irreducible algebraic sets V 1,...,V p, such that V i is not a subset of j i V j for i = 1,...,p. The V i are the irreducible components of V and dim (V ) = max (dim (V 1 ),...,dim (V p )) An algebraic set V R n is irreducible if and only if the ideal I(V ) is prime. Remark 16. Let X be an irreducible real algebraic set in R n. By [5], X can be successively blown up to reach its desingularization X. Let π : X X be the projection. Then the proper transform of X in X, that is, the Zariski closure of the preimage of X with its singular set removed, is a smooth algebraic set with disjoint smooth connected (algebraic) components X1,, X s, whose projections in X are called the connected components of X. We will show these connected components are semi-algebraic as follows. X1,, Xs are exactly the irreducible components of the proper transform of X under π. The morphism π is algebraic. Hence it maps the algebraic sets Xi to the connected components of X, which are therefore semi-algebraic. Note that the proper transform itself is not affine, but we can always cover it by a finite number of affine charts and then proceed with our arguments in each chart and take a finite union. That the connected components of X are closed follows from the fact that π is a proper map.

7 ALGEBRAIC PROPERTIES OF DUPIN HYPERSURFACES 7 A real irreducible algebraic set may have several connected components of varying dimensions. A good example is a degenerate torus given by y 2 = x 2 (x 1). The solution set is irreducible since the polynomial is. This irreducible algebraic set consists of two connected components. One is the curve that opens toward positive infinity, with vertex at (1, 0). The other is {(0, 0)}. The name connected component is standard in real algebraic geometry, but we should realize that these are not always the connected components in the topological sense. For example, the irreducible algebraic set known as the Cartan umbrella z(x 2 + y 2 ) x 3 = 0 is topologically connected, but has two connected components: the surface z = x 3 /(x 2 + y 2 ) (including the origin) and the z-axis. If an irreducible algebraic set X in R n contains a connected analytic hypersurface M in R n, then M must be an open subset of one of the connected components of X. If M is closed, then it must be the whole connected component. We can now prove our principal algebraic tool. Lemma 17. Let M m R n be a connected analytic submanifold and let U M be a connected open subset of M. If U is a semi-algebraic subset of R n, then M is an open subset of a connected component of the irreducible algebraic set U zar. Proof. The Zariski closure U zar of U is irreducible, because I(U zar ) = I(U) is a prime ideal. In fact, suppose f and g are polynomials such that fg I(U). If f / I(U), then there exists a point p U such that f(p) 0. By continuity, there exists an open subset O of U, containing p, on which f is never zero. But fg is identically zero on O, so g must be identically zero on O. Since O is an open subset of U, and since g is an analytic function on U, it follows that g is identically zero on the connected set U, that is, g I(U). By the same sort of argument, if f I(U), then f is an analytic function on M, identically zero on the open subset U, so must be identically zero on M. Hence M Z(I(U)) = U zar. Definition 18. A semi-algebraic subset N of R m is a Nash submanifold of R m of dimension n if for every point p of N, there exists a Nash diffeomorphism ψ from an open semi-algebraic neighborhood U of the origin in R m into an open semi-algebraic neighborhood V of p in R m

8 8 CECIL, CHI, AND JENSEN such that ψ(0) = p and ψ((r n {0}) U) = N V. Here, by a Nash diffeomorphism we mean the coordinate functions of it and its inverse are Nash functions. Definition 19. Let N be a Nash submanifold of R m. A mapping f : M R is a Nash mapping if it is semi-algebraic, and for every ψ in the preceding definition, f ψ R n U is a Nash function. Semi-algebraic subsets of R n are, in a sense, piecewise algebraically analytic. This is made precise in the following result (see [1, Proposition 2.9.0, p. 57]). Proposition 20. Let S be a semi-algebraic subset of R n. Then S is the disjoint union of a finite number of Nash submanifolds M i of R n, each Nash diffeomorphic to an open cube (0, 1) dimm i. The following lemma is a kind of converse to Lemma 17, in that it implies that if a C submanifold U d of R n is contained in an irreducible algebraic subset of dimension d in R n, then U is a real analytic submanifold. Lemma 21. Let X be a closed semi-algebraic subset of R n of dimension d. If there is an open set U of X such that U is a C submanifold of dimension d in R n, then around each point p of U there is an open neighborhood B U that is a semi-algebraic subset of R n. Proof. By Proposition 20, X is the finite disjoint union of Nash submanifolds, each Nash diffeomorphic to an open cube of some dimension. Let N 1,...,N k be those Nash submanifolds of dimension d that intersect U. There are such Nash submanifolds, for otherwise, U would be contained in a finite union of Nash submanifolds of smaller dimensions. Let Y be the topological closure of the union of N 1,, N k. Then Y is semi-algebraic and Y X. U is contained in Y, for otherwise, there would be a point z U that is not in Y, so that z stays some distance away from Y. Therefore, there would be a small open ball D around z in U disjoint from Y, which would imply that D is contained in Nash manifolds of smaller dimensions, because Y contains all the Nash submanifolds of dimension d not disjoint from U. This is absurd. The part Y where Y is not in U is closed. Since p U, there is a nonzero shortest distance δ from p to Y. Choose a Euclidean ball B of radius δ < δ centered at p such that B U is a submanifold of R n diffeomorphic to a cube of dimension d, which is possible since U is a submanifold of R n. We claim that B U = B Y. It is clear that B U B Y since U Y. Suppose w B Y. Then w must be in U, because otherwise

9 ALGEBRAIC PROPERTIES OF DUPIN HYPERSURFACES 9 w Y, so that the distance from p to w would be > δ and so w would not be in B, a contradiction. Hence, w B U, proving the claim. Now that B U = B Y, we see that B U on the one hand is diffeomorphic to an open cube of dimension d contained in U, and on the other hand it is semi-algebraic since so are B and Y. 3. Mean curvature normal Definition 22. Following Cecil-Ryan [4, p. 140], we say that a submanifold x : V m R n, for any m < n, is umbilic if there exists a linear map ω (x) : Tx V R, for every x V, such that for every Z Tx V, the shape operator (3.1) B Z : T x V T x V is B Z = ω(z)i Let x, e i, e α be a first order frame field on an open set U V along x, which means that the vector fields e i, for i = 1,...,m, are tangent to x(v ) and the e α, for α = m + 1,..., n, are normal to x(v ) at each point of U. Then (3.2) dx = θ i e i, de i = ω j i e j + ωi α e α, de α = ωαe j j + ωαe β β i j α j β where the 1-forms ω a b = ωb a, for a, b = 1,..., n, and (3.3) ω α i = i,j h α ijθ j for functions h α ij = hα ji. Then (3.4) B eα = i ω α i e i = i,j h α ijθ j e i A normal vector is given by Z = α zα e α, so B Z = α z α B eα = i,j,α z α h α ij θj e i Definition 23. The mean curvature normal vector field of x is the normal vector field on V H = ( ) ( 1 m trace B e α )e α = 1 h α ii e α m α which is independent of the choice of orthonormal frame e α in the normal bundle. α i

10 10 CECIL, CHI, AND JENSEN We see that x is umbilic if and only if B eα = h α I, for some function h α, for all α; that is, ω α i = h α θ i for all i, α. When x is umbilic, then the mean curvature normal is H = α h α e α Let x : M n 1 R n be a connected immersed hypersurface. Let ξ be a field of unit normals to x(m) defined on an open subset U of M, and let A denote the shape operator corresponding to ξ. If the principal curvatures are ordered κ 1 (p) κ n 1 (p) for each p U, then the κ i are continuous functions on U (see Ryan [13, Lemma 2.1, p.271]). If a continuous principal curvature function κ has constant multiplicity m on U, then κ is smooth on U, as is its m-dimensional principal distribution T κ of eigenvectors of A corresponding to the eigenvalue κ (see Nomizu [9] or Singley [14]). Furthermore, T κ is integrable and we will refer to T κ as the principal foliation corresponding to the principal curvature κ. Proposition 24. Suppose x : M n 1 R n is a connected immersed hypersurface with a principal curvature function κ of constant multiplicity m. If m = 1, suppose further that κ is constant on any leaf V 1 of the principal foliation T κ of M. For any leaf V m of T κ, i). If κ = 0 and dκ = 0 at each point of V, then x(v ) is an open subset of an m-plane in R n ii). if κ or dκ is nonzero at some point of V, then x(v ) is an open subset of an m-sphere in R n of radius 1/ H and center at (3.5) H(p 0 )/ H 2 where p 0 is any point in V and H is the mean curvature normal of x(v m ) R n. Proof. See [4, Theorem 4.5, pp and Theorem 4.8, pp ]. We shall need an explicit formula for the mean curvature vector H of V in Proposition 24. Let x, e i, e α, e n be a first order frame field along x, for which e n is a unit normal vector field, each vector field e i T κ, where i = 1,...,m, and each vector field e α T κ T x M, where α = m + 1,..., n 1. Then dx = i θi e i + α θα e α and de n = n 1 a=1 ωa ne a and the shape operator B en : T x M T x M satisfies

11 ALGEBRAIC PROPERTIES OF DUPIN HYPERSURFACES 11 B en e i = κe i, for all i, and B en e α span {e β }, for all α, since B en is self-adjoint. But (3.6) B en = n 1 a=1 ω n a e a = i where ω n a = n 1 b=1 h abθ b. Therefore, (3.7) ω n i = κθ i, ω n α = β ω n i e i + α h αβ θ β ω n α e α for all i, β; that is, h iα = h αi = 0, for all i, α. In addition, the (n m 1) (n m 1) symmetric matrix of functions (3.8) c = (c αβ ) = (h αβ κδ αβ ) is non-singular at every point of V, so has inverse (3.9) c 1 = (c αβ ) Set (3.10) dκ = κ i θ i + κ α θ α i α Under the hypothesis of Proposition 24, the κ i = 0. The κ α are the derivatives of κ normal to the leaves of T κ. At any point of a leaf V m of T κ, the mean curvature normal of V at the point is (3.11) H = κe n α,β c αβ κ β e α 4. Jets Definition 25. Smooth maps f, g : M m N n have the same k-jet at p M means f(p) = g(p) = q, and for any smooth curve γ : R M such that γ(0) = p and any smooth function F : N R such that F(q) = 0, the derivatives (4.1) (F f γ) (j) (0) = (F g γ) (j) (0) for all j k. This defines an equivalence relation on the set of smooth maps C (M, N). If f C (M, N), denote its k-jet at p M by j k p (f). Proposition 26. If f, g C (M, N), then j k p(f) = j k p(g) if and only if for any local coordinate charts U, x = (x 1,...,x m ) about p in M and V, y = (y 1,...,y n ) about f(p) = q in N, all partial derivatives at p (4.2) D i1...i j f α (p) = D i1...i j g α (p), for all j k, α = 1,...,n where f α = y α f and g α = y α g.

12 12 CECIL, CHI, AND JENSEN Proof. See [2, pp ] If (p, q) M N, let (4.3) J k p,q (M, N) = {jk p (f) : f C (M, N), f(p) = q} and let (4.4) J k (M, N) = (p,q) M N Jp,q k (M, N) for each whole number k. This space has a natural C structure with C projections (4.5) J k (M, N) M, (f) p jk j k p A map f C (M, N) defines a C section (4.6) J k (M, N) N (f) f(p) p j k (f) : M J k (M, N) p j k p (f) Lemma 27. For any f C (M, N), and p M, the jet jp k+l (f) J k+l (M, N) can be identified with jp(j k l (f)) J k (M, J l (M, N)). Proof. Local coordinates in M and N determine local coordinates in J l (M, N) (see [2]), and these give the local expression (4.7) j l (f) = (p, f, D i1...i j f), j l Then jp k(jl (f)) is given by the first k partial derivatives of these component functions at p, which are, ignoring redundancies, the first k + l partial derivatives of f at p. It seems justified to abuse notation to express this lemma as (4.8) jp k+l (f) = jp k (jl (f)) for any f C (M, N), and p M. Remark 28. Let y : V m R n be an immersed submanfold. Any first order frame field (4.9) y, e i, e α along y, where e i are tangent, i = 1,...,m, and e α are normal, α = m+1,...n, is determined by the 1-jet jp 1 (y) at each point p V. Now (4.10) dy = i θ i e i, de a = n ωa b e b, a = 1,..., n b=1

13 ALGEBRAIC PROPERTIES OF DUPIN HYPERSURFACES 13 so the 1-forms θ i are determined by the 1-jet of y at each point and the 1-forms ωa b are determined by the 2-jet of y at each point, since each e a is determined by the 1-jet of y. Then (4.11) ω α i = j h α ij θj where the functions h α ij = h α ji are determined by the 2-jet of y at each point. Hence, the shape operators (3.4) are determined by the 2-jet of y at each point, and thus the shape operator B Z is determined by the 2-jet of y, for any normal vector Z = α zα e α. In terms of our first order frame field (4.9) on U V, the characteristic polynomial of the shape operator B eα of (3.4) is (4.12) F α (p, z) = det(h α (p) zi) for p U, z C, where h α (p) = (h α ij(p)) is the m m symmetric matrix defined in (4.11). Thus, F(p, z) is a polynomial function of h α ij(p) and z, and is determined by the 2-jet of y. The eigenvalues of B eα are necessarily real, so can be arranged as (4.13) κ α 1 (p) κα m (p) for each p U. These are the roots of F α (p, z). They are continuous functions on U (see Ryan [13, Lemma 2.1, p. 271]). A slight variation on Ryan s argument shows that if κ α i has constant multiplicity m i on U, for some i, then it is a rational function of the entries of h α on U. In particular, κ α i is determined by the 2-jet of y at each point, so its derivative dκ α i is determined by the 3-jet of y. Suppose now that x : M n 1 R n is a hypersurface, so that we can drop the superscript α in the above notation. Suppose that κ is a principal curvature of constant multiplicity m on U M. Then the functions c αβ in (3.8) and c αβ of (3.9) depend rationally on the 2-jet of x at each point and the normal derivatives dκ(e α ) = κ α depend rationally on the 3-jet of x at each point. Therefore, the vector H in (3.11) depends rationally on the 3-jet of x at each point. 5. Proper Dupin hypersurfaces are algebraic We are ready to prove that a proper Dupin hypersurface f : M n 1 R n is analytic algebraic in the sense that its differentiable structure has an analytic subatlas with respect to which the immersion into R n is analytic algebraic. It follows that each point of M is contained in an open neighborhood of M that is a semi-algebraic subset of R n. From the analyticity and the semi-algebraic neighborhood we can conclude

14 14 CECIL, CHI, AND JENSEN that if M is connected, then it is an open subset of an irreducible algebraic set in R n of dimension n 1. Suppose f has g principal curvatures, with multiplicities m 1,...,m g. By Proposition 24, for any point p M, the i th curvature surface through p is either an open subset of a sphere of dimension m i in R n or an open subset of a plane of dimension m i. Inversion in a sphere whose center does not lie on the union of all these spheres and planes will transform all curvature surfaces of f(m) to spheres. Thus, we may assume that all curvature surfaces of f are open subsets of spheres. Denote the center of the sphere of dimension m i containing the i th curvature surface through f(p) by (5.1) c i (p) R n and its radius by (5.2) r i (p) = f(p) c i (p) By Proposition 24 and Remark 28, c i (p) is determined by j 3 p(f). If e a (p), for a {i}, form an orthonormal basis of principal vectors for the i th principal curvature, then they are determined by j 2 p(f). Lemma 29. For any point p M, there is an analytic algebraic parametrization of an open subset about f(p) of the i th curvature surface through f(p) given by (5.3) x(s i ) = c i (p) + s 0 i(s i )(f(p) c i (p)) + r i (p) a {i} s a i e a (p) where (5.4) s 0 i (s i) = 1 s i 2 for all s i in the open ball B m i (ǫ i ) R m i. The components of s i are denoted s a i, for each a {i}, so s i 2 = 1 a {i} (s a i ) 2 The vectors c i (p), f(p), and e a (p), for all a {i}, are determined by j 3 p (f). The proof is contained in Example 10, which shows that the map x(s i ) in (5.3) is algebraic analytic. This lemma is essentally showing that a sphere of any radius, dimension, and center in R n is a Nash submanifold (see [1, Definition 2.9.9, p. 57]). Since the map x(s i ) in (5.3) is an embedding, there exists an embedding x i : B m i (ǫ i ) M such that f(x i (s i )) = x(s i ), for all s i B m i (ǫ i ).

15 ALGEBRAIC PROPERTIES OF DUPIN HYPERSURFACES 15 Lemma 30. For any s i B m i (ǫ i ) in the parametrization (5.3), j k x i (s i ) (f) depends analytically algebraically on s i and on j k+3 p (f), for any k 0. Proof. For some δ > 0, there exists y : B n 1 m i (δ) Y M, an embedded submanifold through y(0) = p transverse to the i th curvature surface through each of its points. Let c i (y) be the center of the i th curvature surface through f(y). Let e j, j = 1,..., n 1, be a smooth orthonormal frame field of principal vectors on a neighborhood of p. For each y Y, (5.5) f(x i (s i ), y) = c i (y) + s 0 i (s i)(f(y) c i (y)) + r i (y) a {i}s a i e a(y) is a parametrization of a neighborhood of the i th curvature surface through f(y). Thus, for ǫ i and δ sufficiently small, (x i, y) is a parametrization of a neighborhood of p in M. From (5.5) we see that the partial derivatives of f with respect to the s i variables at (s i, y) depend on j(0,y) 3 (f) and analytically algebraically on s i, since all partial derivaties of s 0 i(s i ) are analytic algebraic (see Example 10). Again from (5.5) we see that the partial derivatives of f with respect to the y variables at (s i, y) depend analytically algebraically on s i and on j(0,y) 1 (c i), j(0,y) 1 (f), j1 (0,y) (r i), and j(0,y) 1 (e a), for all a {i}. Since c i (0, y), f(0, y), r i (0, y), and the e a (0, y) are determined by j(0,y) 3 (f), it follows that their 1-jets are determined by (5.6) j 1 (0,y)(j 3 (f)) = j 4 (0,y)(f) Taking higher derivatives of (5.5) in this way, we see that j k (x i (s i ),p) (f) depends analytically algebraically on s i and on (5.7) jp k (j3 (f)) = jp k+3 (f) Theorem 31. For any point p M, there exists an analytic algebraic parametrization of a neighborhood of f(p) in f(m) R n, where analytic algebraic means that the component functions are analytic algebraic. This collection of analytic algebraic parametrizations defines an analytic structure on M with respect to which f is analytic. In addition, it shows that any point p M has an open neighborhood U M such that f(u) is a semi-algebraic subset of R n. Proof. The idea is to iterate parametrizations along curvature surfaces, starting with the first. Choose a point p M. Setting i = 1 in equation (5.3), we get an analytic algebraic parametrization of a neighborhood of f(p) of the first curvature surface through p. For each s 1,

16 16 CECIL, CHI, AND JENSEN parametrize a neighborhood of the second curvature surface through f(s 1 ) by (5.8) f(s 1, s 2 ) = c 2 (s 1 ) + s 0 2(s 2 )(f(s 1 ) c 2 (s 1 )) + r 2 (s 1 ) s b 2e b (s 1 ) b {2} where c 2 (s 1 ), f(s 1 ), and e b (s 1 ), b {2}, are determined by j 3 s 1 (f), which in turn depends analytically algebraically on s 1 and j 3 p (j3 (f)) = j 6 p (f), by Lemma 30. If g > 2, then one more step should make the iteration clear. For each s 1, s 2 B 1 (ǫ 1 ) B 2 (ǫ 2 ), parametrize a neighborhood of the third curvature surface through f(s 1, s 2 ) by (5.9) f(s 1, s 2, s 3 ) = c 3 (s 1, s 2 ) + s 0 3(s 3 )(f(s 1, s 2 ) c 3 (s 1, s 2 )) +r 3 (s 1, s 2 ) c {3} sc 3e c (s 1, s 2 ) Now c 3 (s 1, s 2 ), f(s 1, s 2 ), and e c (s 1, s 2 ) are determined by j 3 (s 1,s 2 ) (f), which in turn depends analytically algebraically on s 2 and j 3 (s 1,0) (j3 (f)) = j 6 (s 1,0) (f), which in turn depends analytically algebraically on s 1 and j 3 p(j 6 (f)) = j 9 p(f). Continuing in this way, we parametrize a neighborhood of the g th curvature surface through f(s 1,...,s g 1 ) by (5.10) f(s 1,..., s g ) = c g (s 1,...,s g 1 ) +s 0 g (s g)(f(s 1,...,s g 1 ) c g (s 1,...,s g 1 )) +r g (s 1,...,s g 1 ) d {g} sd g e d(s 1,...,s g 1 ) which is analytic algebraic in (s 1,...,s g ) B m 1 (ǫ 1 ) B mg (ǫ g ) and depends on the finite set of constants determined by jp 3g (f). By a standard argument (see, for example, Thorbergsson [15]), f(s 1,...,s g ) parametrizes a neighborhood of p M. Finally, since a finite product of open balls is a semi-algebraic subset of R n 1, its image under the analytic algebraic map (5.10) is a semialgebraic subset of R n. Corollary 32. A connected proper Dupin hypersurface M in R n is an open subset of a connected component of the irreducible algebraic set M zar of dimension n 1. Proof. By the theorem, for any point p M, there is an open neighborhood U M of the point that is a semi-algebraic subset of R n. The result now follows from Lemma 17. A slightly more general result holds that we shall apply to Dupin hypersurfaces.

17 ALGEBRAIC PROPERTIES OF DUPIN HYPERSURFACES 17 Corollary 33. If a connected analytic hypersurface N R n contains a connected proper Dupin hypersurface M, then N is an open subset of the connected component of an irreducible algebraic set that contains M. Proof. An open subset of M is open in N. 6. Kuiper s Conjecture As observed in the Introduction, Kuiper s Conjecture would be proved if we could prove that any connected Dupin hypersurface in R n is algebraic. A connected Dupin hypersurface N in R n has an open dense subset M each connected component of which is proper Dupin. In fact, M is the set on which the multiplicities are locally constant ([14]). Decompose M into its at most countably many disjoint connected components M 1, M 2, M 3,. By Corollary 33, if the Dupin hypersurface N were an analytic submanifold of R n, then, since it contains the connected proper Dupin hypersurface M 1, it would be contained in an irreducible algebraic set of dimension n 1. Hence, our goal is to prove that N is an analytic hypersurface of R n. Let M c denote the complement of M in N. It is the set of non-proper Dupin points. For any point p M c, and any sequence of points (p i ) in M that converges to p, the number of distinct principal curvatures g satisfies lim(g(p i )) > g(p). Definition 34. A connected Dupin hypersurface N of R n has the local finiteness property if there is a subset S M c, closed in N, such that S does not disconnect N and, for any point p M c not in S, there is an open neighborhood W of p in N such that W M has only a finite number of connected components. We call S the set of bad points in M c. For instance, if M c is a finite union of compact submanifolds, or more generally, is a locally finite CW complex, then N has the local finiteness property. An example with nonempty S is a set M c that consists of the boundaries of an infinite nested sequence T 1, T 2,..., of open neighborhoods, with the closure of T n+1 properly contained in T n, such that the intersection S = n T n is a submanifold of codimension 2 in N. Theorem 35. Let N be a connected Dupin hypersurface in R n. If N has the local finiteness property, then it is an analytic submanfold of R n, and is therefore contained in a connected component of dimension n 1 of an irreducible algebraic set.

18 18 CECIL, CHI, AND JENSEN Proof. Let M N be the open dense subset of N whose connected components are proper Dupin hypersurfaces in R n. Let S M c be the set of bad points in M c. By the local finiteness property, each point p M c not in S has a neighborhood W, open in N, such that W M consists of finitely many connected open sets U 1,, U s. Note that M dense in N implies that W s 1 U i where U i is the topological closure of U i in N. By Corollary 33, each U i is contained in an irreducible algebraic set C i. Then U i is a subset of C i since C i is closed. Hence, W s 1 U i s 1 C i which is a semi-algebraic subset of R n. By Lemma 21, since W is a C manifold, there is a connected open semi-algebraic subset U of s 1 C i contained in W with p U. The intersection B of U with any open ball of R n centered at p is still an open subset of N and a semi-algebraic subset. Thus, we may assume B is so small that it is the graph of h : D R for some open set D R n 1 by performing a linear change of coordinates (x 1,, x n ) in R n if necessary. Since the projection π : (x 1,, x n ) (x 1,, x n 1 ), which is semi-algebraic, sends B to D, we see D is a semi-algebraic subset of R n 1. Thus, the map h is semi-algebraic, because its graph {(x, h(x)) : x D} = B is a semi-algebraic subset of R n 1. Therefore, h is a Nash function and so it must be analytic algebraic as noted in Proposition 9 and the map H : D B, H(x) = (x, h(x)) is an analytic algebraic parametrization of the open neighborhood B N about p. Since p M c was arbitrary, and since every point of M has an analytic algebraic parametrization by Theorem 31, it follows that N \ S is an analytic submanifold of R n. Since N \ S is connected and contains an open subset that is a semi-algebraic subset of R n, it follows that N \ S is contained in an irreducible algebraic set C. Then N is contained in the topological closure of N \ S which in turn must be contained in the closed set C. Now let q be any point in S and consider N itself as an open neighborhood about q. Then N is a C manifold contained in the semi-algebraic set C. Apply the above argument to conclude that some open neighborhood of q in N is the image of an analytic algebraic parametrization.

19 ALGEBRAIC PROPERTIES OF DUPIN HYPERSURFACES 19 Hence, every point of N has an analytic parametrization, and N is an analytic hypersurface of R n. Question 36. Is the local finiteness property true for any connected Dupin hypersurface in R n? If the answer is yes, then we could resolve Kuiper s conjecture for taut submanifolds of R n. As it is, we have the following. Theorem 37. If M m is a taut submanifold of R n, respectively S n, and if its Legendre lift, which is Dupin, satisfies the finiteness condition, then M is an analytic submanifold and a connected component of an irreducible algebraic subset of R n, respectively R n+1. Proof. Consider a taut submanifold f : M m S n, where n m 1. A taut submanifold of S n must be compact. Let (6.1) F : UN(M) US n, F(x, ξ) = (f(x), ξ) denote its Legendre lift into the unit tangent bundle of S n, where UN(M) is the unit normal bundle of M. The unit tangent bundle US n = {(p, η) S n S n : p η = 0}, and we let π : US n S n, π(p, η) = p denote the point sphere map projection. Pinkall [12] proved that if f : M m S n is taut, then it is Dupin, and in [11] he proved that the Legendre lift of a Dupin submanifold is Dupin. In addition, he proved that for any point (x, ξ) UN(M), there exists an open connected neighborhood U UN(M) of (x, ξ) and a Lie sphere transformation A such that π restricted to AF(U) is an immersion into S n. Its image V n 1 is a connected Dupin hypersurface of S n. By hypothesis, the Legendre lift (6.1) satisfies the finiteness condition, and therefore any connected open subset of it, such as F(U), satisfies the finiteness condition, and thus AF(U) satisfies the finiteness condition. Since π maps the dense open subset of AF(U) on which AF(U) is proper Dupin onto the dense open subset of V on which V is proper Dupin, it follows that V satisfies the finiteness condition. Stereographic projection sends it to a connected Dupin hypersurface in R n that satisfies the finiteness condition. By Theorem 35, this connected Dupin hypersurface in R n is analytic algebraic. Since stereographic projection and its inverse are analytic algebraic, we conclude that V is an analytic algebraic hypersurface of S n. We may assume that V is parametrized by the analytic algebraic map h : B R n+1, where B is an open ball in R n 1. An orthonormal frame field h, e 1,...,e n can be constructed along h, where e 1,..., e n 1

20 20 CECIL, CHI, AND JENSEN are tangent to V and e n is normal (but tangent to S n ), such that these maps are all analytic algebraic (by Proposition 11 and the algebraic nature of the Gram-Schmidt process). Then AF(U) is the image of the analytic algebraic map B R n+1 given by (h, e n ), and therefore AF(U) is analytic and a semi-algebraic subset of R n+1 by Corollary 6. A Lie sphere transformation is a Nash diffeomorphism of the Nash manifold US n, and thus U must be analytic and a semi-algebraic subset of R n+1. Hence, every point of the Legendre lift of f : M S n has an analytic open neighborhood that is also a semi-algebraic subset of R n+1. This proves that the Legendre lift (6.1) is analytic, and then Lemma 17 and the fact that f(m) is compact, imply that f(m) is a connected component of an irreducible algebraic subset of R n+1. Consider a taut submanifold f : M m R n. Then M is not necessarily compact, but f must be a proper embedding, and tautness implies that f is Dupin, which means that the Legendre lift of f is Dupin. Stereographic projection S from a point p S n to R n is a Nash diffeomorphism. Being a conformal transformation, its inverse sends Dupin submanifolds to Dupin submanifolds, so S 1 f : M m S n is a Dupin submanifold, and therefore, by what has been proved above, it is analytic algebraic. But then f = S S 1 f : M R n is analytic algebraic and any point of its image has an open neighborhood that is a semi-algebraic subset of R n. Furthermore, f being proper implies that it is complete, and so again Lemma 17 implies that f(m) is a connected component of an irreducible algebraic subset of R n. The preceding proof uses the finiteness condition to prove that f : M m S n is analytic. If we assume this condition, then we obtain the same conclusion as follows. Corollary 38. If M m is an analytic taut submanifold of R n, respectively S n, then M is a connected component of an irreducible algebraic subset of R n, respectively R n+1. References [1] Bochnak, J., Coste, M., Roy, M.F.: Real algebraic geometry, Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete (3) [Results in Mathematics and Related Areas (3)], vol. 36. Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1998). Translated from the 1987 French original, Revised by the authors [2] Bryant, R.L., Chern, S.S., Gardner, R.B., Goldschmidt, H.L., Griffiths, P.A.: Exterior differential systems, Mathematical Sciences Research Institute Publications, vol. 18. Springer-Verlag, New York (1991) [3] Carter, S., West, A.: Tight and taut immersions. Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 25, (1972)

21 ALGEBRAIC PROPERTIES OF DUPIN HYPERSURFACES 21 [4] Cecil, T.E., Ryan, P.J.: Tight and taut immersions of manifolds, Research Notes in Mathematics, vol Pitman (Advanced Publishing Program), Boston, MA (1985) [5] Hironaka, H.: Resolution of singularities of an algebraic variety over a field of characteristic zero. I, II. Ann. of Math. (2) 79 (1964), ; ibid. (2) 79, (1964) [6] Kuiper, N.H.: Geometry in total absolute curvature theory. In: Perspectives in mathematics, pp Birkhäuser, Basel (1984) [7] Miyaoka, R.: Taut embeddings and Dupin hypersurfaces. In: Differential geometry of submanifolds (Kyoto, 1984), Lecture Notes in Math., vol. 1090, pp Springer, Berlin (1984) [8] Münzner, H.F.: Isoparametrische Hyperflächen in Sphären. Math. Ann. 251(1), (1980) [9] Nomizu, K.: Characteristic roots and vectors of a differentiable family of symmetric matrices. Linear and Multilinear Algebra 1(2), (1973) [10] Pinkall, U.: Letter to T. Cecil, December 5, 1984 [11] Pinkall, U.: Dupin hypersurfaces. Math. Ann. 270, (1985) [12] Pinkall, U.: Curvature properties of taut submanifolds. Geom. Dedicata 20(1), (1986) [13] Ryan, P.J.: Homogeneity and some curvature conditions for hypersurfaces. Tôhoku Math. J. (2) 21, (1969) [14] Singley, D.H.: Smoothness theorems for the principal curvatures and principal vectors of a hypersurface. Rocky Mountain J. Math. 5, (1975) [15] Thorbergsson, G.: Dupin hypersurfaces. Bull. London Math. Soc. 15(5), (1983) Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, College of the Holy Cross, Worcester, Massachusetts address: cecil@mathcs.holycross.edu Department of Mathematics, Campus Box 1146, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri address: chi@math.wustl.edu Department of Mathematics, Campus Box 1146, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri address: gary@math.wustl.edu