arxiv: v1 [math.dg] 1 Nov 2015

Transcription

1 DARBOUX-WEINSTEIN THEOREM FOR LOCALLY CONFORMALLY SYMPLECTIC MANIFOLDS arxiv: v1 [math.dg] 1 Nov 2015 ALEXANDRA OTIMAN AND MIRON STANCIU Abstract. A locally conformally symplectic (LCS) form is an almost symplectic form ω such that a close one-form θ exists with ω = θ ω. We present a version of the well-known result of Darboux an Weinstein in the LCS setting an give an application concerning Lagrangian submanifols. Keywors: Locally conformally symplectic, Darboux-Weinstein theorem, lagrangian submanifol MSC: 53D05, 53D12 Contents 1. Introuction 1 2. Proof of the main theorem 2 3. An application 6 References 7 1. Introuction The aim of this note is to exten in a natural way the classical Darboux- Weinstein theorem, which we now recall (see e.g. [MS]): Theorem 1.1: (Darboux-Weinstein) Let M be a manifol an ω 0, ω 1 close 2-forms on M. Let Q M be a compact submanifol such that ω 0 an ω 1 are nonegenerate an equal on T q M for all q Q. Then there exist N 0, N 1 neighborhoos of Q an ϕ : N 0 N 1 a iffeomorphism such that ϕ ω 1 = ω 0 an ϕ Q = i. Date: November 3,

2 2 ALEXANDRA OTIMAN AND MIRON STANCIU We are intereste in the more general context of locally conformally symplectic (briefly LCS) manifols, a particular case of almost symplectic manifols: Definition 1.2: A manifol M with a non-egenerate two-form ω is calle LCS if there exists a close one-form θ such that ω = θ ω. The notion first appears as such in [Li], it was later stuie by J. Lefebvre [Lef] an especially I. Vaisman [Va]. One can easily see that the name is justifie, as the efinition above is equivalent to the existence of an open cover (U) α an a family of smooth functions f α on each U α such that (e fα ω) = 0 (see [Lee]). Our main result reas: Theorem 1.3: Let M be a manifol, θ 0 an θ 1 close 1-forms an ω 0, ω 1 2-forms on M such that θi ω i = 0. Let Q M be a compact submanifol such that ω 0 an ω 1 are nonegenerate an equal on T q M for all q Q, an θ 0 T Q = θ 1 T Q. Then there exist N 0, N 1 neighborhoos of Q an ϕ : N 0 N 1 a iffeomorphism such that ϕ ω 1 ω 0 an ϕ Q = i. where by we mean conformally equivalent. We shall en with an application concerning the behavior of any LCS form near a Lagragian submanifol, thus extening a theorem ue to Weinstein [We]. 2. Proof of the main theorem We shall heavily rely in our own proof on the intricacies of the original Darboux-Weinstein argument, as presente in [MS, Lemma 3.14, pages 93-95]. One of the instruments of both proofs is the so-calle Moser Trick, which we therefore explain briefly 1 : Theorem 2.1: Let M be a compact manifol an (ω t ) 0 t 1 a smooth family of symplectic forms on M satisfying t ω t = σ t for σ t varying smoothly. Then there is an isotopy ϕ t such that ϕ t ω t = ω 0 with ϕ 0 = i. Proof. Choose the vector fiels Y t uniquely satisfying (2.1) i Yt ω t = σ t 1 The Moser Trick was extene to LCS geometry, [BK], but our proof uses the original symplectic version.

3 DARBOUX-WEINSTEIN THEOREM FOR LCS MANIFOLDS 3 an its integral curves ϕ t (i.e. t ϕ t = Y t ϕ t an ϕ 0 = i), efine overall. What we get is hence ϕ t ω t = ω 0. t ϕ t ω t = ϕ t ( t ω t + L Yt ω t ) = ϕ t (σ t + i Yt ω t ) = 0, Proof of Theorem 1.3. We begin by fixing a Riemannian metric on M, which we shall use to construct a tubular neighborhoo of Q in M, together with a family of iffeomorphisms representing a eformation retract onto Q. Take U ε = {(q, v) Q T M v (T q Q) an v < ε}, where the norm is given by the fixe Riemannian metric. Since Q is compact, for a sufficiently small ε, the exponential is a iffeomorphism from U ε to a neighborhoo of Q which we enote M 0. We may efine ϕ t : M 0 M 0, ϕ t (exp(q, v)) = exp(q, tv), 0 t 1, which are iffeomorphisms onto their image, except for ϕ 0, which collapses the tubular neighborhoo onto Q. With that in min, the vector fiels X t = t ϕ t ϕ 1 t are correctly efine for 0 < t 1 an their integral curves are ϕ t. Let q Q. We may fin V U U q small enough that ω 0 an ω 1 are nonegenerate, θ 0 = f 0 an θ 1 = f 1 on V ; we choose f 0 an f 1 such that f 0 (q) = f 1 (q). By our assumptions, f 0 T Q = θ 0 T Q = θ 1 T Q = f 1 T Q, so f 0 = f 1 on Q V. Consier the symplectic forms conformal to ω 0 an ω 1 on V : η 0 = e f 0 ω 0 η 1 = e f 1 ω 1. We can see from the above that η 0 an η 1 agree on T q M for every q Q V. Let W δ = {(q, v) (Q U) T M v (T q Q) an v < δ}; for δ sufficiently small (an smaller than the ε etermine previously for the entire Q), exp is a iffeomorphism from W δ to its image, which we enote N (note that this is a neighborhoo of Q U, though not a tubular one, N M 0 an ϕ t (N ) N ). We may also assume, picking a smaller δ if necessary, that N V (see the figure below).

4 4 ALEXANDRA OTIMAN AND MIRON STANCIU Denoting by τ := η 1 η 0, we have ϕ 0 τ = 0 an obviously ϕ 1 τ = τ. Therefore 1 1 τ = 0 t ϕ t (τ)t = ϕ t (i Xt τ)t; 0 let ρ t := ϕ t (i Xt τ). Explicitly, (ρ t ) p (v) = τ ϕt(p)(x t (ϕ t (p)), ϕ t (v)) = τ ϕt(p)( t ϕ t(p), ϕ t (v)), which is correctly efine in t = 0. ϕ t (q) = q, we have (ρ t ) q = 0. Taking σ = 1 0 Observe that for p = q Q, since ρ t t, we have obtaine a one-form σ on N, null on Q U, such that η 1 η 0 = σ. We now turn to the Moser Trick (Theorem 2.1) for the segment of forms η t = η 0 + t(η 1 η 0 ), noticing that t η t = σ. We may shrink the neighborhoo an assume that ω t are non-egenerate an that the integral curves obtaine are efine on [0, 1]. We thus get ϕ : U q U q (neighborhoos of Q U) with ϕ η 1 = η 0 an ϕ Q U = i. We conclue that ω 0 = e f 0 η 0 = e f 0 ϕ η 1 = e f 0 f 1 ϕ ϕ ω 1 on the neighborhoo U q of Q U. We have obtaine the result we wante locally on Q, by applying (essentially) the Darboux-Weinstein technique on patches of Q. Of course, we want the local iffeomorphisms that we have constructe, as well as the conformal factors, to agree on the intersections. This oes not usually happen; however, in our case, having the benefit of having use a global instrument (namely, the metric on M), we will only nee a brief overview of the facts to reach this conclusion. We can construct a cover U α of Q in M such that: (1) θ 0 = f α 0 an θ 1 = f α 1 on U α; (2) f α 0 = f α 1 on Q U α; (3) We have the symplectic forms η α 0 = e f α 0 ω0 an η α 1 = e f α 1 ω1 on U α ;

5 DARBOUX-WEINSTEIN THEOREM FOR LCS MANIFOLDS 5 (4) There is a 1-form σ α on U α with σ α = η1 α ηα 0. More precisely, σ α = 1 0 ϕ t i Xt (η α 1 η α 0 )t; (5) The vector fiel Yt α on U α is uniquely etermine by the Moser Formula (2.1): (2.2) i Y α t η α t = σ α ; where η α t = η α 0 + t(ηα 1 ηα 0 ). (6) Lastly, we have a iffeomorphism ϕ α : U α U α such that ω 0 = e f α 0 f α 1 ϕα (ϕ α ) ω 1 on U α ϕ α Uα Q = i, ϕ α being the integral curve (at time t = 1) of Y α t. Note that ϕ t an X t, being a byprouct of the chosen metric, are inepenent of α, varying only in omain in the above expressions. On U α U β, we have the following: firstly, since f α 0 = θ 0 = f β 0, The same is true of the f 1 -s: f α 0 = c αβ + f β 0. f α 1 = c αβ + f β 1. However, since f0 α = f 1 α on Q U α an f β 0 = f β 1 on Q U β, we conclue that c αβ = c αβ. We then immeiately get so η α 0 = e c αβ η β 0 η α 1 = e c αβ η β 1, η α t = e c αβ η β t an σ α = e c αβ σ β. We now see clearly from (2.2) that, on U α U β, the vector fiels Yt α an Y β t satisfy the same formula, an must be equal. Then ϕ α = ϕ β on U α U β, an we can glue them to a global iffeomorphism ϕ : N 0 := α U α N 1 := α U α with ϕ Q = i an ω 0 = e f α 0 f α 1 ϕ ϕ ω 1 on U α, α. However, it is clear now that the conformal factors are also equal on the intersections: f α 0 f α 1 ϕ = c αβ + f β 0 (c αβ + f β 1 ) ϕ = f β 0 f β 1 ϕ, an we have reache our conclusion.

6 6 ALEXANDRA OTIMAN AND MIRON STANCIU Remark 2.2: The conition of equality on T q M of the two LCS forms might seem a bit restrictive. Nevertheless, there are a few cases where it may be lessene to equality on T Q, for instance if Q is a point (where the conclusion is an easy consequence of the classical Darboux theorem) or if Q is Lagragian for both ω 0 an ω 1. In the latter case, the proof in [CS, Theorem 8.4, pages 48-49] can be reaily aapte to the LCS case, thus reucing the problem to Theorem An application In the symplectic case, the last remark has as consequence the following theorem, escribing any symplectic form aroun a Lagrangian submanifol in terms of the stanar symplectic form on its cotangent bunle. We state the precise result below, ue to Weinstein [We, Theorem 6.1, pages ]: Theorem 3.1: Let (M, ω) be a symplectic manifol an Q M a compact Lagrangian submanifol. Then there exists a neighborhoo M of Q, a neighborhoo N of the zero section in T Q an a iffeomorphism ϕ : M N such that ϕ ω 0 = ω, where ω 0 is the stanar symplectic form on T Q. There is an analogue of this result in the LCS case, which uses the LCS structures of the cotangent bunle introuce by S. Haller an T. Rybicki in [HaR]: take θ a close one-form on Q an η the Liouville form on T Q. Then it can be proven that ω θ = η π θ η is LCS with the Lee form π θ. It can also be easily seen that the zero section is then Lagrangian. Note that ω is globally conformally symplectic if an only if θ is exact. We can now state our extension of the previous theorem to LCS manifols: Theorem 3.2: Let (M, ω) be an LCS manifol with Lee form θ an Q M a compact Lagrangian submanifol. Then there exists a neighborhoo M of Q, a neighborhoo N of the zero section in T Q an a iffeomorphism ϕ : M N such that ϕ ω θ = ω, where ω θ is the LCS form escribe above. Proof. We first wish to transport the form ω θ from T Q to a neighborhoo of Q in M. Fix a Riemannian metric on M; we then have a canonical isomorphism of vector bunles between (T Q) an T Q, given by: (T Q) (q, v) (q, w )

7 DARBOUX-WEINSTEIN THEOREM FOR LCS MANIFOLDS 7 where w is uniquely foun by g(v, ) = ω(w, ) an w = g(w, ) (the key point in this ientification is the fact that T q Q is Lagrangian in T q M for each q Q). Furthermore, by means of the exponential map, a neighborhoo of Q in M is iffeomorphic to a neighborhoo of the zero section in (T Q). Consequently, we can transport the form ω θ to a neighborhoo U of Q. We nee only remember that Q is also Lagrangian for this new form an apply theorem Theorem 1.3 in light of Remark 2.2 to complete the proof. References [BK] G. Bane, D. Kotschick, Moser stability for locally conformally symplectic structures, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 137 (2009), [CS] A. Cannas a Silva, Lectures on Symplectic Geometry, Lecture Notes in Mathematics no. 1764, Springer-Verlag. [HaR] S. Haller an T. Rybicki, On the group of iffeomorphisms preserving a locally conformal symplectic form, Ann. Global Anal. an Geom. 17 (1999) [Lee] H.C.Lee, A kin of even-imensional ifferential geometry an its application to exterior calculus, Amer. J. of Math. 65 (1943), [Lef] J. Lefebvre, Propriétés u groupe es transformations conformes et u groupe es automorphismes une variété localement conformément symplectique, C. R. Aca. Sci. Paris Sér. A B 268 (1969) A717 A719. [Li] P. Libermann, Sur le problème équivalence e certaines structures infinitésimales régulières, Ann. Mat. Pura. Appl., 36 (1954), [MS] D. McDuff, D. Salamon, Introuction to symplectic topology, Clarenon Press, Oxfor, [Va] I. Vaisman, Locally conformal symplectic manifols, Int. J. Math. Math. Sci. 8 (3) (1985), [We] A. Weinstein, Symplectic Manifols an Their Lagrangian Submanifols, Avances in Mathematics 6 (1971), Institute of Mathematics Simion Stoilow of the Romanian Acaemy, 21, Calea Grivitei Street, , Bucharest, Romania, an, University of Bucharest, Faculty of Mathematics an Computer Science, 14 Acaemiei Str., Bucharest, Romania aress: alexanra otiman@yahoo.com an mirostnc@gmail.com