A surgery formula for the smooth Yamabe invariant

Similar documents
A surgery formula for the smooth Yamabe invariant

A surgery formula for the (smooth) Yamabe invariant

A surgery formula for the (smooth) Yamabe invariant

The Yamabe invariant and surgery

Universität Regensburg Mathematik

The kernel of the Dirac operator

Stability for the Yamabe equation on non-compact manifolds

Classification of prime 3-manifolds with σ-invariant greater than RP 3

Universität Regensburg Mathematik

Invertible Dirac operators and handle attachments

Min-max methods in Geometry. André Neves

Critical metrics on connected sums of Einstein four-manifolds

Spectral applications of metric surgeries

Edge-cone Einstein metrics and Yamabe metrics

Riemannian Curvature Functionals: Lecture III

Universität Regensburg Mathematik

The Ricci Flow Approach to 3-Manifold Topology. John Lott

Geometry of Ricci Solitons

On the mass of asymptotically hyperbolic manifolds

ON YAMABE CONSTANTS OF RIEMANNIAN PRODUCTS

Teichmüller theory, collapse of flat manifolds and applications to the Yamabe problem

Notation : M a closed (= compact boundaryless) orientable 3-dimensional manifold

Topology of the space of metrics with positive scalar curvature

Einstein Metrics, Minimizing Sequences, and the. Differential Topology of Four-Manifolds. Claude LeBrun SUNY Stony Brook

Mathematisches Forschungsinstitut Oberwolfach. Analysis, Geometry and Topology of Positive Scalar Curvature Metrics

Geometric variational theory and applications

Contents. Chapter 1. Introduction Outline of the proof Outline of manuscript Other approaches Acknowledgements 10

A new proof of Gromov s theorem on groups of polynomial growth

Perelman s proof of the Poincaré conjecture

MONOPOLE CLASSES AND PERELMAN S INVARIANT OF FOUR-MANIFOLDS

The Geometrization Theorem

Recent Progress on the Gromov-Lawson Conjecture

Geometry of Shrinking Ricci Solitons

The moduli space of Ricci-flat metrics

Linear connections on Lie groups

A compactness theorem for Yamabe metrics

Mostow Rigidity. W. Dison June 17, (a) semi-simple Lie groups with trivial centre and no compact factors and

Riemannian Curvature Functionals: Lecture I

Rigidity and Non-rigidity Results on the Sphere

THE UNIFORMISATION THEOREM OF RIEMANN SURFACES

ICM 2014: The Structure and Meaning. of Ricci Curvature. Aaron Naber ICM 2014: Aaron Naber

ERRATUM TO AFFINE MANIFOLDS, SYZ GEOMETRY AND THE Y VERTEX

Minimal submanifolds: old and new

Universität Regensburg Mathematik

Introduction. Hamilton s Ricci flow and its early success

Geometric inequalities for black holes

Positive mass theorem for the Paneitz-Branson operator

Inequalities for the ADM-mass and capacity of asymptotically flat manifolds with minimal boundary

Two simple ideas from calculus applied to Riemannian geometry

COLLAPSING MANIFOLDS OBTAINED BY KUMMER-TYPE CONSTRUCTIONS

Introduction to Poincare Conjecture and the Hamilton-Perelman program

Classification of diffeomorphism groups of 3-manifolds through Ricci flow

arxiv: v2 [math.dg] 25 Oct 2014

J-holomorphic curves in symplectic geometry

Algebraic Topology II Notes Week 12

CENTROAFFINE HYPEROVALOIDS WITH EINSTEIN METRIC

The smallest Dirac eigenvalue in a spin-conformal class and cmc immersions

Deformation and gluing constructions for scalar curvature, with applications

Essential Spectra of complete manifolds

RICCI CURVATURE: SOME RECENT PROGRESS A PROGRESS AND OPEN QUESTIONS

K-Homology, Assembly and Rigidity Theorems for Relative Eta Invariants

In 1973 R. Penrose [13] made a physical argument

Moment Measures. Bo az Klartag. Tel Aviv University. Talk at the asymptotic geometric analysis seminar. Tel Aviv, May 2013

Minimal hypersurfaces with bounded index and area

A Bird Eye s view: recent update to Extremal metrics

CMS winter meeting 2008, Ottawa. The heat kernel on connected sums

A New Proof of Lee's Theorem on the Spectrum of Conformally Compact Einstein Manifolds

BERND AMMANN AND EMMANUEL HUMBERT

Amenable groups, Jacques Tits Alternative Theorem

Infinitesimal Einstein Deformations. Kähler Manifolds

An Overview of Mathematical General Relativity

THE FUNDAMENTAL GROUP OF MANIFOLDS OF POSITIVE ISOTROPIC CURVATURE AND SURFACE GROUPS

Eigenvalue (mis)behavior on manifolds

Differential Geometry II Lecture 1: Introduction and Motivation

THE FUNDAMENTAL GROUP OF NON-NEGATIVELY CURVED MANIFOLDS David Wraith The aim of this article is to oer a brief survey of an interesting, yet accessib

BERGMAN KERNEL ON COMPACT KÄHLER MANIFOLDS

UV k -Mappings. John Bryant, Steve Ferry, and Washington Mio. February 21, 2013

arxiv: v1 [math.dg] 25 Dec 2018 SANTIAGO R. SIMANCA

The topology of positive scalar curvature ICM Section Topology Seoul, August 2014

APPLICATIONS OF ALMGREN-PITTS MIN-MAX THEORY

Measures on spaces of Riemannian metrics CMS meeting December 6, 2015

A NOTE ON FISCHER-MARSDEN S CONJECTURE

LARGE AND SMALL GROUP HOMOLOGY

DIFFERENTIAL GEOMETRY CLASS NOTES INSTRUCTOR: F. MARQUES. September 25, 2015

Holonomy groups. Thomas Leistner. Mathematics Colloquium School of Mathematics and Physics The University of Queensland. October 31, 2011 May 28, 2012

Hermitian vs. Riemannian Geometry

Some Variations on Ricci Flow. Some Variations on Ricci Flow CARLO MANTEGAZZA

On Shalom Tao s Non-Quantitative Proof of Gromov s Polynomial Growth Theorem

arxiv: v2 [gr-qc] 14 Jan 2017

On isometries of Finsler manifolds

A few words about the MTW tensor

arxiv: v2 [math.dg] 19 Sep 2016

RESEARCH STATEMENT GANG LIU

K-stability and Kähler metrics, I

AN ASPHERICAL 5-MANIFOLD WITH PERFECT FUNDAMENTAL GROUP

THE GENUS OF EMBEDDED SURFACES IN THE PROJECTIVE PLANE. P. B. Kronheimer and T. S. Mrowka

Geometry and the Kato square root problem

Secondary invariants for two-cocycle twists

From holonomy reductions of Cartan geometries to geometric compactifications

Transcription:

A surgery formula for the smooth Yamabe invariant B. Ammann 1 M. Dahl 2 E. Humbert 3 1 Universität Regensburg Germany 2 Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan, Stockholm Sweden 3 Université Henri Poincaré, Nancy France Conference on spectral theory, Potsdam 2008

Einstein-Hilbert functional History Surgery Main results Topological conclusions Comments on the proofs The numbers L(n, k)

Einstein s equation 1915: Einstein s General Relativity. What is the equation that describes evolution of spacetime (without matter)? Answer: Einstein metrics where κ is constant. Ric = κg,

Einstein s equation 1915: Einstein s General Relativity. What is the equation that describes evolution of spacetime (without matter)? Answer: Einstein metrics where κ is constant. Ric = κg,

Lagrangian formulation What is the associated Lagrange functional? Let M be the set of all semi-riemannian metrics on M n. The Einstein equations are stationary points of the Einstein-Hilbert-functional E : M R, M g scal g dv g ( M dv g) (n 2)/n David Hilbert, 1915 among compactly supported perturbations.

Lagrangian formulation What is the associated Lagrange functional? Let M be the set of all semi-riemannian metrics on M n. The Einstein equations are stationary points of the Einstein-Hilbert-functional E : M R, M g scal g dv g ( M dv g) (n 2)/n David Hilbert, 1915 among compactly supported perturbations.

The Setting Now: Let M be n-dimensional, n 3. Search for an Einstein metric on M. This are the stationary points of E : M 1 R, g M 1 := {metrics on M of volume 1}. [g] := {u 4/(n 2) g vol(u 4/(n 2) g) = 1}. M scal g dv g

Observation Inside a conformal class Y (M, [g]) := inf E( g) >. g [g] The conformal Yamabe invariant. Y (M, [g]) Y (S n ) where S n is the sphere with the standard structure. On the set of conformal classes σ(m) := sup Y (M, [g]) (, Y (S n )] [g] M 1 The smooth Yamabe invariant, also called Schoen s σ-constant. Remark σ(m) > 0 if and only if M caries a metric of positive scalar curvature.

Observation Inside a conformal class Y (M, [g]) := inf E( g) >. g [g] The conformal Yamabe invariant. Y (M, [g]) Y (S n ) where S n is the sphere with the standard structure. On the set of conformal classes σ(m) := sup Y (M, [g]) (, Y (S n )] [g] M 1 The smooth Yamabe invariant, also called Schoen s σ-constant. Remark σ(m) > 0 if and only if M caries a metric of positive scalar curvature.

Yamabe s idea To find stationary points of E: Find a minimizer in each conformal class, i.e. g [g] 1 with E( g) = Y (M, [g]). Such metrics always exist, and are called Yamabe metrics. They are unique if Y (M, [g 0 ]) < 0. Find a maximizing conformal class [g max ], i.e. Y (M, [g max ]) = σ(m). Hope: The minimaximizer g max is Einstein.

Example CP 2 The Fubini-Study g FS metric is Einstein and 53, 31... = E(g FS ) = Y (CP 2, [g FS ]) = σ(cp 2 ). Claude LeBrun 97 Similar examples σ(s n ) = n(n 1)ω 2/n n. Gromov & Lawson, Schoen & Yau 83: Tori R n /Z n. σ(r n /Z n ) = 0. LeBrun 99: All Kähler-Einstein surfaces with non-positive scalar curvature. Bray & Neves 04: RP 3. σ(rp 3 ) = 2 2/3 σ(s 3 ). Perelman, M. Anderson 06: compact quotients of 3-dimensional hyperbolic space

Example CP 2 The Fubini-Study g FS metric is Einstein and 53, 31... = E(g FS ) = Y (CP 2, [g FS ]) = σ(cp 2 ). Claude LeBrun 97 Similar examples σ(s n ) = n(n 1)ω 2/n n. Gromov & Lawson, Schoen & Yau 83: Tori R n /Z n. σ(r n /Z n ) = 0. LeBrun 99: All Kähler-Einstein surfaces with non-positive scalar curvature. Bray & Neves 04: RP 3. σ(rp 3 ) = 2 2/3 σ(s 3 ). Perelman, M. Anderson 06: compact quotients of 3-dimensional hyperbolic space

Example CP 2 The Fubini-Study g FS metric is Einstein and 53, 31... = E(g FS ) = Y (CP 2, [g FS ]) = σ(cp 2 ). Claude LeBrun 97 Similar examples σ(s n ) = n(n 1)ω 2/n n. Gromov & Lawson, Schoen & Yau 83: Tori R n /Z n. σ(r n /Z n ) = 0. LeBrun 99: All Kähler-Einstein surfaces with non-positive scalar curvature. Bray & Neves 04: RP 3. σ(rp 3 ) = 2 2/3 σ(s 3 ). Perelman, M. Anderson 06: compact quotients of 3-dimensional hyperbolic space

Example CP 2 The Fubini-Study g FS metric is Einstein and 53, 31... = E(g FS ) = Y (CP 2, [g FS ]) = σ(cp 2 ). Claude LeBrun 97 Similar examples σ(s n ) = n(n 1)ω 2/n n. Gromov & Lawson, Schoen & Yau 83: Tori R n /Z n. σ(r n /Z n ) = 0. LeBrun 99: All Kähler-Einstein surfaces with non-positive scalar curvature. Bray & Neves 04: RP 3. σ(rp 3 ) = 2 2/3 σ(s 3 ). Perelman, M. Anderson 06: compact quotients of 3-dimensional hyperbolic space

Dimension n = 3 Einstein 3-manifolds with κ = 0 are flat. Einstein 3-manifolds with κ > 0 are quotients of spheres. Einstein 3-manifolds with κ < 0 are quotients of hyperbolic spaces. Examples where Yamabe s idea fails There is no Einstein metric on non-prime 3-manifolds and S 2 S 1. Schoen: σ(s n 1 S 1 ) = σ(s n ). The supremum is not attained. Other problem In the case σ(m) < 0 the minimizers are unique. Hence, if a maximizing conformal class exists, then the unique minimizing metric in that class is Einstein. However, in the case σ(m) > 0, a minimizing metric in a maximizing class may be non-einstein!

Dimension n = 3 Einstein 3-manifolds with κ = 0 are flat. Einstein 3-manifolds with κ > 0 are quotients of spheres. Einstein 3-manifolds with κ < 0 are quotients of hyperbolic spaces. Examples where Yamabe s idea fails There is no Einstein metric on non-prime 3-manifolds and S 2 S 1. Schoen: σ(s n 1 S 1 ) = σ(s n ). The supremum is not attained. Other problem In the case σ(m) < 0 the minimizers are unique. Hence, if a maximizing conformal class exists, then the unique minimizing metric in that class is Einstein. However, in the case σ(m) > 0, a minimizing metric in a maximizing class may be non-einstein!

Some known values of σ All examples above. Akutagawa & Neves 07: Some non-prime 3-manifolds, e.g. σ(rp 3 #(S 2 S 1 )) = σ(rp 3 ). Compact quotients of nilpotent Lie groups: σ(m) = 0. Unknown cases Nontrivial quotients of spheres, except RP 3. S k S m, with k, m 2. No example of dimension 5 known with σ(m) 0 and σ(m) σ(s n ).

Some known values of σ All examples above. Akutagawa & Neves 07: Some non-prime 3-manifolds, e.g. σ(rp 3 #(S 2 S 1 )) = σ(rp 3 ). Compact quotients of nilpotent Lie groups: σ(m) = 0. Unknown cases Nontrivial quotients of spheres, except RP 3. S k S m, with k, m 2. No example of dimension 5 known with σ(m) 0 and σ(m) σ(s n ).

Relations to similar invariants...... to the spectrum of the conformal Laplacian ( inf λ 1 4 n 1 ) { g + scal g Y (M, [g]) if Y (M, [g]) 0 = g [g] n 2 if Y (M, [g]) < 0... to the Perelman-invariant (Akutagawa, Ishida, LeBrun 06) λ(m) := sup λ 1 (4 g + scal g ) g M 1 { σ(m) if σ(m) 0 = + if σ(m) > 0... to the L n/2 -norm of scal inf scal g L g M n/2 ( g) = 1 { σ(m) if σ(m) 0 0 if σ(m) > 0 = Hence min{σ(m), 0} is determined by an infimum.

Relations to similar invariants...... to the spectrum of the conformal Laplacian ( inf λ 1 4 n 1 ) { g + scal g Y (M, [g]) if Y (M, [g]) 0 = g [g] n 2 if Y (M, [g]) < 0... to the Perelman-invariant (Akutagawa, Ishida, LeBrun 06) λ(m) := sup λ 1 (4 g + scal g ) g M 1 { σ(m) if σ(m) 0 = + if σ(m) > 0... to the L n/2 -norm of scal inf scal g L g M n/2 ( g) = 1 { σ(m) if σ(m) 0 0 if σ(m) > 0 = Hence min{σ(m), 0} is determined by an infimum.

Relations to similar invariants...... to the spectrum of the conformal Laplacian ( inf λ 1 4 n 1 ) { g + scal g Y (M, [g]) if Y (M, [g]) 0 = g [g] n 2 if Y (M, [g]) < 0... to the Perelman-invariant (Akutagawa, Ishida, LeBrun 06) λ(m) := sup λ 1 (4 g + scal g ) g M 1 { σ(m) if σ(m) 0 = + if σ(m) > 0... to the L n/2 -norm of scal inf scal g L g M n/2 ( g) = 1 { σ(m) if σ(m) 0 0 if σ(m) > 0 = Hence min{σ(m), 0} is determined by an infimum.

Relations to similar invariants...... to the spectrum of the conformal Laplacian ( inf λ 1 4 n 1 ) { g + scal g Y (M, [g]) if Y (M, [g]) 0 = g [g] n 2 if Y (M, [g]) < 0... to the Perelman-invariant (Akutagawa, Ishida, LeBrun 06) λ(m) := sup λ 1 (4 g + scal g ) g M 1 { σ(m) if σ(m) 0 = + if σ(m) > 0... to the L n/2 -norm of scal inf scal g L g M n/2 ( g) = 1 { σ(m) if σ(m) 0 0 if σ(m) > 0 = Hence min{σ(m), 0} is determined by an infimum.

Surgery Let Φ : S k B n k M be an embedding. We define M Φ k := M \ Φ(Sk B n k ) (B k+1 S n k 1 )/ where / means gluing the boundaries via M Φ(x, y) (x, y) S k S n k 1. We say that M Φ k is obtained from M by surgery of dimension k. Example: 0-dimensional surgery on a surface.

Known surgery formulas Theorem (Gromov & Lawson 80, Schoen & Yau 79) If 0 k n 3, then σ(m) > 0 = σ(m Φ k ) > 0. Theorem (Kobayashi 87) If k = 0, then σ(m Φ 0 ) σ(m). Theorem (Petean & Yun 99) If 0 k n 3, then σ(mk Φ ) min{σ(m), 0}. The proof uses the characterization of min{σ(m), 0} as an infimum.

Known surgery formulas Theorem (Gromov & Lawson 80, Schoen & Yau 79) If 0 k n 3, then σ(m) > 0 = σ(m Φ k ) > 0. Theorem (Kobayashi 87) If k = 0, then σ(m Φ 0 ) σ(m). Theorem (Petean & Yun 99) If 0 k n 3, then σ(mk Φ ) min{σ(m), 0}. The proof uses the characterization of min{σ(m), 0} as an infimum.

Known surgery formulas Theorem (Gromov & Lawson 80, Schoen & Yau 79) If 0 k n 3, then σ(m) > 0 = σ(m Φ k ) > 0. Theorem (Kobayashi 87) If k = 0, then σ(m Φ 0 ) σ(m). Theorem (Petean & Yun 99) If 0 k n 3, then σ(mk Φ ) min{σ(m), 0}. The proof uses the characterization of min{σ(m), 0} as an infimum.

Main results Theorem (ADH, # 1) Let 0 k n 3. There is a positive constant L(n, k) depending only on n and k such that σ(mk Φ ) min{σ(m), L(n, k)} if Mk Φ is obtained from M by k-dimensional surgery. Furthermore L(n, 0) = Y (S n ). This theorem implies all three previously known surgery formulas. Thm # 1 follows directly from Thm # 2. Theorem (ADH, #2) Suppose that Mk Φ is obtained from M by k-dimensional surgery. Then for any metric g on M there is a sequence of metrics g i on such that M Φ k min {Y (M, [g]), L(n, k)} lim inf i Y (MΦ k, [g i]) Y (M, [g]).

Main results Theorem (ADH, # 1) Let 0 k n 3. There is a positive constant L(n, k) depending only on n and k such that σ(mk Φ ) min{σ(m), L(n, k)} if Mk Φ is obtained from M by k-dimensional surgery. Furthermore L(n, 0) = Y (S n ). This theorem implies all three previously known surgery formulas. Thm # 1 follows directly from Thm # 2. Theorem (ADH, #2) Suppose that Mk Φ is obtained from M by k-dimensional surgery. Then for any metric g on M there is a sequence of metrics g i on such that M Φ k min {Y (M, [g]), L(n, k)} lim inf i Y (MΦ k, [g i]) Y (M, [g]).

Main results Theorem (ADH, # 1) Let 0 k n 3. There is a positive constant L(n, k) depending only on n and k such that σ(mk Φ ) min{σ(m), L(n, k)} if Mk Φ is obtained from M by k-dimensional surgery. Furthermore L(n, 0) = Y (S n ). This theorem implies all three previously known surgery formulas. Thm # 1 follows directly from Thm # 2. Theorem (ADH, #2) Suppose that Mk Φ is obtained from M by k-dimensional surgery. Then for any metric g on M there is a sequence of metrics g i on such that M Φ k min {Y (M, [g]), L(n, k)} lim inf i Y (MΦ k, [g i]) Y (M, [g]).

Topological conclusions L(n) := min{l(n, 1), L(n, 2),..., L(n, n 3)}, σ(m) := min{σ(m), L(n)}. Let Mk Φ be obtained from M by surgery of dimension k {2, 3,..., n 3}, then σ(m) = σ(m k Φ). Goal: Find a bordism invariant!

Topological conclusions L(n) := min{l(n, 1), L(n, 2),..., L(n, n 3)}, σ(m) := min{σ(m), L(n)}. Let Mk Φ be obtained from M by surgery of dimension k {2, 3,..., n 3}, then σ(m) = σ(m k Φ). Goal: Find a bordism invariant!

Let Γ be a finitely presented group. Let Ω spin n (BΓ) the spin cobordism group over BΓ. Any class in Ω spin n (BΓ) has a π 1 -bijective representative, i.e. it is represented by (M, f ), where M is a connected compact spin manifold, and where f : M BΓ induces an isomorphism π 1 (M) π 1 (BΓ) = Γ. Lemma n 5. Let (M 1, f 1 ) and (M 2, f 2 ) be spin cobordant over BΓ and let (M 2, f 2 ) be π 1 -bijective. Then σ(m 2 ) σ(m 1 ). We define s Γ ([M, f ]) := max σ(n) where the maximum runs over all (N, h) with [M, f ] = [N, h] Ω spin n (BΓ).

Let Γ be a finitely presented group. Let Ω spin n (BΓ) the spin cobordism group over BΓ. Any class in Ω spin n (BΓ) has a π 1 -bijective representative, i.e. it is represented by (M, f ), where M is a connected compact spin manifold, and where f : M BΓ induces an isomorphism π 1 (M) π 1 (BΓ) = Γ. Lemma n 5. Let (M 1, f 1 ) and (M 2, f 2 ) be spin cobordant over BΓ and let (M 2, f 2 ) be π 1 -bijective. Then σ(m 2 ) σ(m 1 ). We define s Γ ([M, f ]) := max σ(n) where the maximum runs over all (N, h) with [M, f ] = [N, h] Ω spin n (BΓ).

σ := min{σ(m), L(n)} s Γ ([M, f ]) := σ(m) if (M, f ) is π 1 -bijective s Γ : Ω spin n (BΓ) (, L(n)] Corollary Let n 5 and ɛ (0, L(n)). The groups {x Ω spin n (BΓ) s Γ (x) > ɛ} and {x Ω spin n (BΓ) s Γ (x) ɛ} are subgroups.

Application Let n 5. Take M n with σ(m) (0, L(n)). Let p, q N be relatively prime. Then or σ(m# #M) = σ(m) }{{} p times σ(m# #M) = σ(m). }{{} q times Are there such manifolds M? Schoen conjectured: σ(s n /Γ) = σ(s n )/(#Γ) 2/n (0, L(n)) for #Γ large.

Application Let n 5. Take M n with σ(m) (0, L(n)). Let p, q N be relatively prime. Then or σ(m# #M) = σ(m) }{{} p times σ(m# #M) = σ(m). }{{} q times Are there such manifolds M? Schoen conjectured: σ(s n /Γ) = σ(s n )/(#Γ) 2/n (0, L(n)) for #Γ large.

Application Let n 5. Take M n with σ(m) (0, L(n)). Let p, q N be relatively prime. Then or σ(m# #M) = σ(m) }{{} p times σ(m# #M) = σ(m). }{{} q times Are there such manifolds M? Schoen conjectured: σ(s n /Γ) = σ(s n )/(#Γ) 2/n (0, L(n)) for #Γ large.

Application Let n 5. Take M n with σ(m) (0, L(n)). Let p, q N be relatively prime. Then or σ(m# #M) = σ(m) }{{} p times σ(m# #M) = σ(m). }{{} q times Are there such manifolds M? Schoen conjectured: σ(s n /Γ) = σ(s n )/(#Γ) 2/n (0, L(n)) for #Γ large.

Proof of Theorem # 2 Theorem (ADH, #2) Suppose that Mk Φ is obtained from M by k-dimensional surgery. Then for any metric g on M there is a sequence of metrics g i on such that M Φ k min {Y (M, [g]), L(n, k)} lim inf i Y (MΦ k, [g i]) Y (M, [g]). Easy part: Difficult and important part lim inf i Y (MΦ k, [g i]) Y (M, [g]) min {Y (M, [g]), L(n, k)} lim inf i Y (MΦ k, [g i]) For this, we construct a sequence explicitly and study the behavior of the minimizers in [g i ] for i.

Proof of Theorem # 2 Theorem (ADH, #2) Suppose that Mk Φ is obtained from M by k-dimensional surgery. Then for any metric g on M there is a sequence of metrics g i on such that M Φ k min {Y (M, [g]), L(n, k)} lim inf i Y (MΦ k, [g i]) Y (M, [g]). Easy part: Difficult and important part lim inf i Y (MΦ k, [g i]) Y (M, [g]) min {Y (M, [g]), L(n, k)} lim inf i Y (MΦ k, [g i]) For this, we construct a sequence explicitly and study the behavior of the minimizers in [g i ] for i.

Proof of Theorem # 2 Theorem (ADH, #2) Suppose that Mk Φ is obtained from M by k-dimensional surgery. Then for any metric g on M there is a sequence of metrics g i on such that M Φ k min {Y (M, [g]), L(n, k)} lim inf i Y (MΦ k, [g i]) Y (M, [g]). Easy part: Difficult and important part lim inf i Y (MΦ k, [g i]) Y (M, [g]) min {Y (M, [g]), L(n, k)} lim inf i Y (MΦ k, [g i]) For this, we construct a sequence explicitly and study the behavior of the minimizers in [g i ] for i.

Construction of the metrics Let Φ : S k B n k M be an embedding. We write close to S := Φ(S k {0}), r(x) := d(x, S) g g S + dr 2 + r 2 g n k 1 round where g n k 1 round is the round metric on S n k 1. t := log r. 1 r 2 g e2t g S + dt 2 + g n k 1 round We define a metric g for r > r 1 1 g i = g for r (2ρ, r r 2 0 ) f 2 (t)g S + dt 2 + g n k 1 for r < 2ρ that extends to a metric on M Φ k. round

Construction of the metrics Let Φ : S k B n k M be an embedding. We write close to S := Φ(S k {0}), r(x) := d(x, S) g g S + dr 2 + r 2 g n k 1 round where g n k 1 round is the round metric on S n k 1. t := log r. 1 r 2 g e2t g S + dt 2 + g n k 1 round We define a metric g for r > r 1 1 g i = g for r (2ρ, r r 2 0 ) f 2 (t)g S + dt 2 + g n k 1 for r < 2ρ that extends to a metric on M Φ k. round

Construction of the metrics Let Φ : S k B n k M be an embedding. We write close to S := Φ(S k {0}), r(x) := d(x, S) g g S + dr 2 + r 2 g n k 1 round where g n k 1 round is the round metric on S n k 1. t := log r. 1 r 2 g e2t g S + dt 2 + g n k 1 round We define a metric g for r > r 1 1 g i = g for r (2ρ, r r 2 0 ) f 2 (t)g S + dt 2 + g n k 1 for r < 2ρ that extends to a metric on M Φ k. round

g i = g g i = F 2 g S n k 1 has constant length

Proof of Theorem #2, continued Any class [g i ] contains a minimizing metric written as u 4/(n 2) i g i. We obtain a PDE: u i > 0, 4 n 1 n 2 g i u i + scal g i u i = λ i ui n+2 n 2 u 2n/(n 2) i dv g i = 1, λ i = Y ([g i ]) This sequence might: Concentrate in at least one point. Then lim inf λ i Y (S n ). Concentrate on the old part M \ S. Then lim inf λ i Y ([g]). Concentrate on the new part. Then study pointed Gromov-Hausdorff limits. Limit spaces: M c := H k+1 c S n k 1 H k+1 c : simply connected, complete, K = c 2

Proof of Theorem #2, continued Any class [g i ] contains a minimizing metric written as u 4/(n 2) i g i. We obtain a PDE: u i > 0, 4 n 1 n 2 g i u i + scal g i u i = λ i ui n+2 n 2 u 2n/(n 2) i dv g i = 1, λ i = Y ([g i ]) This sequence might: Concentrate in at least one point. Then lim inf λ i Y (S n ). Concentrate on the old part M \ S. Then lim inf λ i Y ([g]). Concentrate on the new part. Then study pointed Gromov-Hausdorff limits. Limit spaces: M c := H k+1 c S n k 1 H k+1 c : simply connected, complete, K = c 2

Proof of Theorem #2, continued Any class [g i ] contains a minimizing metric written as u 4/(n 2) i g i. We obtain a PDE: u i > 0, 4 n 1 n 2 g i u i + scal g i u i = λ i ui n+2 n 2 u 2n/(n 2) i dv g i = 1, λ i = Y ([g i ]) This sequence might: Concentrate in at least one point. Then lim inf λ i Y (S n ). Concentrate on the old part M \ S. Then lim inf λ i Y ([g]). Concentrate on the new part. Then study pointed Gromov-Hausdorff limits. Limit spaces: M c := H k+1 c S n k 1 H k+1 c : simply connected, complete, K = c 2

Proof of Theorem #2, continued Any class [g i ] contains a minimizing metric written as u 4/(n 2) i g i. We obtain a PDE: u i > 0, 4 n 1 n 2 g i u i + scal g i u i = λ i ui n+2 n 2 u 2n/(n 2) i dv g i = 1, λ i = Y ([g i ]) This sequence might: Concentrate in at least one point. Then lim inf λ i Y (S n ). Concentrate on the old part M \ S. Then lim inf λ i Y ([g]). Concentrate on the new part. Then study pointed Gromov-Hausdorff limits. Limit spaces: M c := H k+1 c S n k 1 H k+1 c : simply connected, complete, K = c 2

Proof of Theorem #2, continued Any class [g i ] contains a minimizing metric written as u 4/(n 2) i g i. We obtain a PDE: u i > 0, 4 n 1 n 2 g i u i + scal g i u i = λ i ui n+2 n 2 u 2n/(n 2) i dv g i = 1, λ i = Y ([g i ]) This sequence might: Concentrate in at least one point. Then lim inf λ i Y (S n ). Concentrate on the old part M \ S. Then lim inf λ i Y ([g]). Concentrate on the new part. Then study pointed Gromov-Hausdorff limits. Limit spaces: M c := H k+1 c S n k 1 H k+1 c : simply connected, complete, K = c 2

The numbers L(n, k) L(n, k) := inf c [0,1] Y (Hk+1 c S n k 1 ) Note: H k+1 1 S n k 1 = S n \ S k. k = 0: L(n, 0) = Y (R S n 1 ) = Y (S n ) k = 1,..., n 3: L(n, k) > 0 Conjecture #1: L(n, k) = Y (R k+1 S n k 1 ) Conjecture #2: For determining Y (H k+1 c S n k 1 ) it suffices to consider O(k + 1) O(n k) invariant functions.

The numbers L(n, k) L(n, k) := inf c [0,1] Y (Hk+1 c S n k 1 ) Note: H k+1 1 S n k 1 = S n \ S k. k = 0: L(n, 0) = Y (R S n 1 ) = Y (S n ) k = 1,..., n 3: L(n, k) > 0 Conjecture #1: L(n, k) = Y (R k+1 S n k 1 ) Conjecture #2: For determining Y (H k+1 c S n k 1 ) it suffices to consider O(k + 1) O(n k) invariant functions.

The numbers L(n, k) L(n, k) := inf c [0,1] Y (Hk+1 c S n k 1 ) Note: H k+1 1 S n k 1 = S n \ S k. k = 0: L(n, 0) = Y (R S n 1 ) = Y (S n ) k = 1,..., n 3: L(n, k) > 0 Conjecture #1: L(n, k) = Y (R k+1 S n k 1 ) Conjecture #2: For determining Y (H k+1 c S n k 1 ) it suffices to consider O(k + 1) O(n k) invariant functions.

The numbers L(n, k) L(n, k) := inf c [0,1] Y (Hk+1 c S n k 1 ) Note: H k+1 1 S n k 1 = S n \ S k. k = 0: L(n, 0) = Y (R S n 1 ) = Y (S n ) k = 1,..., n 3: L(n, k) > 0 Conjecture #1: L(n, k) = Y (R k+1 S n k 1 ) Conjecture #2: For determining Y (H k+1 c S n k 1 ) it suffices to consider O(k + 1) O(n k) invariant functions.

The numbers L(n, k) L(n, k) := inf c [0,1] Y (Hk+1 c S n k 1 ) Note: H k+1 1 S n k 1 = S n \ S k. k = 0: L(n, 0) = Y (R S n 1 ) = Y (S n ) k = 1,..., n 3: L(n, k) > 0 Conjecture #1: L(n, k) = Y (R k+1 S n k 1 ) Conjecture #2: For determining Y (H k+1 c S n k 1 ) it suffices to consider O(k + 1) O(n k) invariant functions.

If both conjectures are true, then L(4, 1) = 59, 4... Y (S 4 ) = 61, 5... Y (S 2 S 2 ) = 50, 2... One obtains S 2 S 2 via 1-dimensional surgery from S 4. Hence σ(s 2 S 2 ) 59, 4 > 50, 2... = Y (S 2 S 2 ).

If both conjectures are true, then L(4, 1) = 59, 4... Y (S 4 ) = 61, 5... Y (S 2 S 2 ) = 50, 2... One obtains S 2 S 2 via 1-dimensional surgery from S 4. Hence σ(s 2 S 2 ) 59, 4 > 50, 2... = Y (S 2 S 2 ).