arxiv: v1 [math.cv] 8 Jan 2014

Transcription

1 THE DIEDERICH-FORNÆSS EXPONENT AND NON-EXISTENCE OF STEIN DOMAINS WITH LEVI-FLAT BOUNDARIES SIQI FU AND MEI-CHI SHAW arxiv:40834v [mathcv] 8 Jan 204 Abstract We study the Diederich-Fornæss exponent and relate it to non-existence of Stein domains with Levi-flat boundaries in complex manifolds In particular, we prove that if the Diederich-Fornæss exponent of a smooth bounded Stein domain in an n-dimensional complex manifold is > k/n, then it has a boundary point at which the Levi-form has rank k Mathematics Subject Classification (200): 32T35, 32V40 Introduction A domain in a complex manifold is Stein if and only if there exists a smooth strictly plurisubharmonic exhaustion function A Stein domain is called hyperconvex if there exists a smooth bounded strictly plurisubharmonic function Diederich and Fornæss [] showed that for any bounded pseudoconvex domain in C n with C 2 boundary, there exist a positive constant η and a defining function ρ such that ˆρ = ( ρ) η is plurisubharmonic on Ω (see also [29]) The existence of bounded plurisubharmonic function was later generalized to bounded pseudoconvex domains with C boundary by Kerzman and Rosay [20] and with Lipschitz boundary by D ly [0] (see also more recent results by Harrington [5]) The constant η is called a Diederich-Fornæss exponent The supremum of all Diederich-Fornæss exponents is called the Diederich-Fornæss index of Ω The Diederich-Fornæss index has implications in regularity theory of the -Neumann Laplacian (see, for example, [2, 3, 5, 6]), as well as in estimates of the pluri-complex Green function [4] and comparison of the Bergman and Szegö kernels [8] The Diederich-Fornæss indices can be arbitrarily small on the worm domains ([, 2]) Sibony proved that for a smooth bounded pseudoconvex domain in C n satisfying Property (P), the Diederich-Fornæss index is one (see [3]) If the pseudoconvex domain Ω has a defining function which is bounded plurisubharmonic on Ω, then the Diederich-Fornæss index is one Fornæss and Herbig [3] showed that a smooth bounded domain in C n with a defining function that is plurisubharmonic on the boundary also has Diederich-Fornæss index one In this case, Boas and Straube showed that the -Neumann Laplacian is global hypoelliptic on L 2 -Sobolev spaces (see []) It was shown by Nemirovskii [22, Corollary] that any smooth bounded Stein domain with a defining function that is plurisubharmonic on the domain cannot have Levi-flat boundary In this paper, we study the Diederich-Fornæss exponent and relate it to non-existence of Stein domains with Levi-flat boundaries in complex manifolds Our main result can be stated as follows: Theorem Let Ω be a bounded Stein domain with C 2 boundary in a complex manifold M of dimension n If the Diederich-Fornæss index of Ω is greater than k/n, k n, then Ω has a boundary point at which the Levi form has rank greater than k The authors were supported in part by NSF grants

2 2 SIQI FU AND MEI-CHI SHAW In particular, we have the following corollary Corollary 2 If the Diederich-Foræss index is greater than /n, then its boundary cannot be Levi flat; and if the Diederich-Foræss exponent is greater than /n, then its boundary must have at least one strongly pseudoconvex boundary point We would like to thank Professor Takeo Ohsawa who kindly informed us that similar results were obtained by Adachi and Brinkschulte independently using different methods [37] For related work on the nonexistence of Levi-flat hypersurfaces in complex manifolds, we refer to the reader to papers [8, 22, 32, 33, 23, 5, 6, 25, 26] in the references 2 The Diederich-Fornæss index Let M be an n-dimensional complex manifold with hermitian metric ω Let Ω be a bounded domain in M A continuous real-valued function r on M is called a defining function of Ω if r < 0 on Ω, r > 0 on M \Ω, and C δ(z) r(z) C 2 δ(z) near bω, where δ(z) is the geodesic distance from z to the boundary bω We will also assume that the defining function r is in the same smoothness class as that of the boundary bω A defining function r is said to be normalized if lim z bω r(z) /δ(z) = Note that the signed distance function ρ(z) = δ(z) on Ω and ρ(z) = δ(z) on M \Ω is a normalized defining function for Ω A constant 0 < η is called a Diederich-Fornæss exponent of a defining function r of Ω if there exists a neighborhood U of bω such that (2) ( () η ) 0 onu Ωinthesenseofdistribution We willcall thesupremumofall suchη s the Diederich- Fornæss index of r and denote it by I(r) The supremum of I(r) over all defining functions of Ω is called the Diederich-Fornæss index of Ω and is denoted by I(Ω) A defining function r is said to satisfy the strong Oka property if there exists a constant K and a neighborhood U of bω such that (22) ( log()) Kω on U Ω in the sense of distribution The supremum of all such K s is called the Oka index of r and is denoted by K(r) By Takeuchi s theorem, the signed distance function of a (proper) pseudoconvex domain in CP n with the Fubini-Study metric satisfies the strong Oka property with Oka index /2 (Hereafter, the Fubini-Study metric is normalized so that its holomorphic sectional curvature is 2 and hence its holomorphic bisectional curvature is ) Let Ω M be a bounded domain with C 2 -boundary Let r be a defining function of Ω Let ω ν = r/ r Let L ν be the dual vector of ω ν For any (,0)-vector X near bω, let X ν = X,L ν ω L ν be the complex normal component of X and X τ = X X ν the complex tangential component Write T,0 (r) = {(z,x) T,0 (M) Xr = 0} For z bω, we further decompose X τ = X s + X l, where X l is in the the null space N z of the Levi-form δ at z and X s X l Let S,0 (M) = {(z,x) T,0 (M), X ω = } Let W be the weakly pseudoconvex points on bω Let S(r) = max{ r(x l,l ν )(z) ; X l ω =,X l N z,z W} If bω is strongly pseudoconvex, we set S(r) = 0 Define { (23) I 0 (r) = max min { K(r) } 2(S(r)) 2 } 8(S(r)) 2,, > 0 2 K(r)

3 Theorem 2 Let Ω be a bounded domain with C 2 -boundary and let r be a normalized defining function that satisfies the strong Oka property Then I(r) I 0 (r) Proof A simple computation yields that (24) ( log()) = r and (25) ( () η ) = η() η( r + r r r 2 +( η) r r r 2 ) = η() η( ( log()) η It follows from (25) that (2) is equivalent to r r (26) ( log()) η r 2 Let c 0 be a constant such that 0 < c 0 < K(r) Then (27) ( log()) c 0 ω for z Ω near the boundary It follows from (24) that r r r 2 ) r(x τ,x τ ) (28) c 0 X τ 2 ω Let C be any constant such that C > S(r) Then there exists a neighborhood U of N,0 (W) = {(z,x) z W,X N z, X ω = } in S,0 (M) such that (29) r(x,l ν ) C, (z,x) U For (z,x τ ) S,0 (Ω)\U with z near bω, (20) r(x τ,x τ ) C 2 X τ 2 ω for some constant C 2 > 0 We write X = X τ +X ν with X l N z as before Then (2) ( log())(x,x) = r(x τ,x τ ) + 2Re r(x τ,x ν ) + r(x ν,x ν ) + Xr 2 r 2 Note that Xr = X ν ω r ω Let K 0 = sup{ r ω ; z Ω} Then (22) r(x ν,x ν ) K 0 Xr 2 / r 2 ω Similarly, (23) Re r(x τ,x ν ) K 0 X τ ω Xr / r ω We first deal with the strictly pseudoconvex directions For (z,x) T,0 (Ω) with (z,x τ / X τ ) S,0 (Ω) \ U with z near bω, it follows from (23) and (20) that for any positive constant M, ( 2Re r(x τ,x ν ) K 0 M X τ 2 ω + M ) r (24) 2 Xr 2 ω K 0 r(x τ,x τ )+ K 0M MC 2 r 2 Xr 2 ω 3

4 4 SIQI FU AND MEI-CHI SHAW Therefore, (25) ( log())(x, X) ( K 2 MC 2 + ) r(xτ,x τ ) ( K 0(M +) r r 2 ω ) Xr 2 r 2 By choosing M sufficiently large and then letting z be sufficiently close to bω, we know that (26) holds for any η < Wenowdealwithweaklypseudoconvexdirections For(z,X) T,0 (Ω)with(z,X τ / X τ ω ) U, we have (26) 2 r(x τ,x ν ) 2C X τ ω Xr / r ω C ( r ε X τ 2 ω + ε Xr 2 r r 2 ), ω where ε is a positive constant to be chosen Since r is a normalized defining function, r ω = / 2 on bω Combining (26) with (28), we have ( log())(x,x) (c 0 C /ε) X τ 2 + (C ε+k r ) r 2 ω r 2 Xr 2 (c 0 C /ε) X τ 2 + 2C ε K r (27) r 2 Xr 2 for some positive constant K We consider two cases: 4C 2 c 0 and 4C 2 > c 0 When 4C 2 c 0, we take ε = C /c 0 Then (28) ( log())(x,x) ( 2C 2 /c 0 K r ) Xr 2 /r 2 When 4C 2 > c 0, we take ε = 4C < C /c 0 Then combining (27) with (27), we have ( ) C ( log())(x,x) c 0 ε ( log())(x,x)+ 2C ε K r r 2 Xr 2 Therefore, Hence ( c0 ε( 2C ε) ( log())(x, X) C (29) ( log())(x,x) ( c 0 8C 2 Note that when 4C 2 c 0, we have (220) C2 c 0 2 and c 0 4C 2 Furthermore, when 4C 2 > c 0, (22) 2 > c 0 8C 2 > C2 c 0 ) K c 0 ε r Xr 2 C r 2 K c 0 ε r 2C 2 ) X ν 2 r 2 2 Combing (28)-(22), we know that (26) holds for any η < I 0 (r) We thus conclude the proof of Proposition 2 By Takeuchi s theorem ([36], see also [7, 4]), (22) holds for the signed distance function with K = /2 on any proper pseudoconvex domain on complex projective space CP n Combing this with Proposition 2, we have:

5 Corollary 22 Let Ω be a proper pseudoconvex domain in CP n with C 2 boundary Then its Diederich-Fornaess index { I(Ω) I 0 (ρ) = max min { } } 96(S(ρ)) 2,, 24(S(ρ)) 2 > 0, 2 where ρ is the signed distance function to bω with respect to the Fubini-Study metric Proposition 23 Let Ω M be a bounded domain with C 2 boundary and let r be a normalized defining function Suppose (22) holds and there exist a neighborhood V of the set W of weakly pseudoconvex boundary points and a positive constant K > such that (222) K X τ 2 r(x τ,x τ ) r for all z V and X T,0 z (M) Then (223) I(Ω) max Proof From (22), we know that { min { 8(K ), 2 KK X τ 2, Θ = ( log()) Kω }, 3 2K } is positive semi-definite Applying the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality to Θ(X τ,x ν ), we then have Θ(X τ,x ν ) Θ(X τ,x τ ) /2 Θ(X ν,x ν ) /2 (We refer the reader to [34] for a similar technique that has been used by Straube to construct Stein neighborhood bases in connection with regularity theory in the -Neumann problem) Therefore, 2 ( )( r(xτ,x τ ) r(xν,x ν ) r(x τ,x ν ) r K X τ 2 ω + Xr 2 r 2 K X ν 2 ω Thus r(xτ,x ν ) ((K )K) /2 (+C r ) /2 X τ X ν, for some positive constant C The inequality (223) then follows by applying Proposition 2 with S(r) = ((K )K) /2 Let f C 2 (M) Recall that the real Hessian H f is defined by H f (ξ,ζ)(z) = ξ ( f),ζ for ξ,ζ T R (M 2n ), where ξ denotes the covariant derivative For any X T,0 C (M), we write X = 2 (ξ X Jξ X ) where J is the complex structure Let z be a point in Ω near the boundary and π(z) be its closest point on bω Let γ(t) be the geodesic parametrized by arc-length such that γ(0) = π(z) For any (,0) tangent vector X at z near bω, we let X(t) be the vector at γ(t) obtained by parallel translate (of real and imaginary parts) of X along the geodesic from z to γ(t) and let X 0 = X(0) Proposition 24 Let Ω be a proper pseudoconvex domain with C 2 boundary in CP n Let ρ be the signed distance function to bω with respect to the Fubini-Study metric Let Then K 2 = max{ ξx ( ρ) 2 ω + Jξ X ( ρ) 2 ω ; z W,X N z, X ω = } { { I(Ω) max min 8(K 2 ), 2 }, 3 2K 2 } ) 5

6 6 SIQI FU AND MEI-CHI SHAW Proof It follows from the computations in [35] that ( ) lim ρ(x τ (t),x τ (t)) ρ(x 0,X 0 ) = ξx ( ρ) 2 t 0 + ω + JξX ( ρ) 2 ω t (The above identity was proved in [35] for Ω in C n ; compare also [34] The proof for Ω in CP n is similar; see [7] for related arguments) We then conclude the proof by applying Proposition 23 with K = and any K > K 2 From Proposition 2, we also obtain the following slight variation of a result of Ohsawa and Sibony ([27]; see also [5, 6]): Corollary 25 Let Ω be a bounded domain in M with C 2 boundary Suppose r is a normalized defining function that satisfies (22) Then for any c (0, K) and η (0, I 0 (r)), there exists a neighborhood V of bω such that and ( log()) cω +( c r )η r K r 2 ( () η ) η() η( cω +( c r ) )η r K r 2 3 Non-existence of Stein domains with Levi-flat boundaries We prove Theorem in this section We first recall the following well-known simple lemma Let Ω be a bounded domain with C 2 boundary in a complex hermitian manifold M of dimension n Let ρ be a defining function for Ω For t > 0, let Ω t = {z Ω; ρ < t} Let i t : bω t M be the inclusion map Let k n be an integer Lemma 3 If the rank of the Levi form of bω is k at all z bω, then (3) i t(d c ρ (dd c ρ) n ) = O(t n k )ds t where ds t is the surface element of bω t We sketch the proof for the reader s convenience Note that ds t = i t ( dr)/ dr ω and i t (dc ρ (dd c ρ) n ) = ν ((dρ/ dρ ) d c ρ (dd c ρ) n ) where ν is the dual vector of dρ/ dρ ω By choosing local holomorphic coordinates that diagonalize the Levi form, we then obtain (3) We now prove Theorem Let ρ be a defining function of Ω such that ˆρ = ( ρ) η is plurisubharmonic on Ω for some constant η > k/n Let Ω t = {ρ < t}, t > 0 Since Ω is Stein, Ω t has at least a strictly pseudoconvex boundary point for sufficiently small t Let f(t) = (dd cˆρ) n Ω t Then f(t) 0 and f(t) is decreasing By Stokes theorem, f(t) = i t (dcˆρ (dd cˆρ) n ) bω t Since d cˆρ = iη( ρ) η ( ρ ρ) and dd cˆρ ( ) ρ = 2iηρ η ρ +( η) ρ ρ ρ 2, we have d cˆρ (dd cˆρ) n = η n ( ρ) n(η ) d c ρ (dd c ρ) n

7 Suppose the Levi rank of bω is k at all boundary points, then by Lemma 3, Thus i t (dc ρ (dd c ρ) n ) = O(t n k )ds t f(t) = O(t nη k ) Therefore, lim t 0 + f(t) = 0 and hence f(t) = 0 for small t > 0 This implies that bω t has Levi rank n 2 at each point, which leads to a contradiction This concludes the proof of Theorem Corollary 2 follows easily The following theorem is a variation of Theorem Theorem 32 Let M be a complex manifold of dimension n with a hermitian metric ω Let Ω be a bounded Stein domain in M with C 2 boundary Suppose there exist a defining function ρ, a constant η > 0, and a neighborhood U of bω such that (32) ( ( ρ) η ) c( ρ) η( ω + ρ ρ ) ρ 2 on U Ω for some constant c > 0 If η /n, then Ω cannot have Levi-flat boundary Proof In light of Theorem, it remains to prove the case when η = /n We follow the notations as in the above proof of Theorem Let ε 0 be sufficiently small such that Ω\Ω ε0 U Ω We set f(t) = (dd c ρ) n Ω t \Ω ε0 for 0 < t < ε 0 Suppose bω is Levi-flat, then as in the proof of Theorem, d cˆρ (dd cˆρ) n bω t = η n ( ρ) n(η ) d c ρ (dd c ρ) n bω t = O(t nη )ds t CdS t By Stoke s theorem (33) f(t) = d cˆρ (dd cˆρ) n d cˆρ (dd cˆρ) n C bω t bω ε0 On the other hand, it follows from (32) that (dd c ρ) n Cδ nη( δ δ ) n ω + Cδ nη 2 δ 2 dv, where dv is the volume element Thus f(t) = (dd c ρ) n C ( ρ) nη 2 dv Ω t \Ω ε0 Ω t \Ω ε0 C t ε 0 ( ρ) dρ C( logt+logε 0 ) Therefore, lim t 0 + f(t) =, which leads to a contradiction with (33) This concludes the proof of Proposition 32 7 Acknowledgement: This work was done while the first author visited the University of Notre Dame in April, 202 He thanks the Department of Mathematics for the warm hospitality

8 8 SIQI FU AND MEI-CHI SHAW References [] H P Boas and E J Straube, Sobolev estimates for the -Neumann operator on domains in C n admitting a defining function that is plurisubharmonic on the boundary, Math Z 206 (99), 8 88 [2] B Berndtsson, Weighted estimates for the -equation, Complex Analysis and Complex Geometry (J D McNeal eds), de Gruyter, pp 43 57, 200 [3] B Berndtsson and Ph Charpentier, A Sobolev mapping property of the Bergman knernel, Math Z 235 (2000), 0 [4] Z B locki, The Bergman metric and the pluricomplex Green function, Trans Amer Math Soc 357 (2004), [5] J Cao, M-C Shaw, and L Wang, Estimates for the -Neumann problem and nonexistence of C 2 Levi-flat hypersurfaces in CP n, Math Z 248 (2004), Erratum, [6] J Cao and M-C Shaw, The Cauchy problem and nonexistence of Lipschitz Levi-flat hypersurfaces in CP n with n 3, Math Z 256 (2007), [7], A new proof of the Takeuchi Theorem, Lecture Notes of Seminario Interdisp di Mate 4 (2005), [8] B Chen and S Fu, Comparison of the Bergman and Szeg kernels, Advances in Mathematics 228 (20), [9] J-P D ly, Estimations L 2 pour l opérateur d un fibré vectoriel holomorphe semi-positif audessus d une variété kählérienne complète, Ann Sci École Norm Sup 5 (982), [0], Mesures de Monge-Ampere et mesures plurisousharmoniques, Math Z 94 (987), [] K Diederich and J E Fornæss, Pseudoconvex domains: bounded strictly plurisubharmonic exhaustion functions, Invent Math 39 (977), 29 4 [2], Pseudoconvex domains: an example with nontrivial Nebenhülle, Math Ann 225 (977), [3] J E Fornæss and A-K Herbig, A note on plurisubharmonic defining functions in C n, Math Ann 342 (2008), [4] R E Greene and H Wu, On Kähler manifolds of positive bisectional curvature and a theorem of Hartogs, Abh Math Sem Univ Hamburg 47 (978), 7 85 [5] P S Harrington, The order of plurisubharmonicity on pseudoconvex domains with Lipschitz boundaries, Math Res Lett 4 (2007), [6], Global regularity for the Neumann operator and bounded plurisubharmonic exhaustion functions, Adv Math 228 (20), no 4, [7] G Henkin and A Iordan, Regularity of on pseudoconcave compacts and applications, Loo-Keng Hua: a great mathematician of the twentieth century Asian J Math 4 (2000), no 4, Erratum, Asian J Math 7 (2003), no, [8] A Lins Neto, A note on projective Levi flats and minimal sets of algebraic foliations, Ann Inst Fourier 49(999), [9] M Klimek, Pluripotential theory, Oxford University Press, 99 [20] N Kerzman and J-P Rosay, Fonctions plurisousharmoniques d exhaustion bornées et domaines taut, Math Ann 257 (98), no 2, 7 84 [2] J J Kohn, Quantitative estimates for global regularity, Analysis and geometry in several complex variables (Katata, 997), 97 28, Trends Math, Birkhuser Boston, Boston, MA, 999 [22] S Nemirovskii, Stein domains with Levi-plane boundaries on compact complex surfaces (Russian) Mat Zametki 66 (999), ; translation in Math Notes 66 (999), [23] L Ni and J Wolfson, The Lefschetz theorem for CR submanifolds and the nonexistence of real analytic Levi flat submanifolds, Comm Analysis and Geometry (2003), [24] T Ohsawa, Nonexistence of real analytic Levi flat hypersurfaces in P 2, Nagoya Math J 58 (2000), [25], On the complement of Levi-flats in Khler manifolds of dimension 3, Nagoya Math J 85 (2007), 6-69 [26], A survey on Levi flat hypersurfaces, preprint, 203 [27] T Ohsawa and N Sibony, Bounded PSH functions and pseudoconvexity in Kähler manifolds Nagoya Math J 49 (998), 8 [28] T Ohsawa and K Takegoshi, On the extension of L 2 holomorphic functions, Math Z 95 (987),

9 9 [29] R M Range: A remark on bounded strictly plurisubharmonic exhaustion functions, Proc Amer Math Soc, 8 (98), [30] R Richberg, Stetige streng pseudokonvexe funktionen, Math Ann 75 (968), [3] N Sibony, Une classe de domaines pseudoconvexes, Duke Math J 55 (987), [32] Y-T Siu, Nonexistence of smooth Levi-flat hypersurfaces in complex projective spaces of dimension 3, Ann of Math 5 (2000), [33], regularity for weakly pseudoconvex domains in compact Hermitian symmetric spaces with respect to invariant metrics, Ann of Math 56 (2002), [34] E Straube, Good Stein neighborhood bases and regularity of the -Neumann problem, Illinois J of Math 45 (200), [35] B Weinstock, Some conditions for uniform H-convexity, Illinois J Math 9 (975), [36] A Takeuchi,Domaines pseudoconvexes infinis et la métrique riemannienne dans un espace projectif, J Math Soc Japan 6(964), 59 8 [37] M Adachi and J Brinkschulte, A global estimate for the Diederich-Fornæss index of weakly pseudoconvex domains, Preprint, 204 Department of Mathematical Sciences, Rutgers University-Camden, Camden, NJ address: sfu@camdenrutgersedu Department of Mathematics, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN address: Mei-ChiShaw@ndedu