format: text

text:
# The theoretical model of a magnetic white dwarf.

## 1 Introduction

The possibility of the existence of white dwarfs with large magnetic fields was predicted by Blackett in 1947. Ever since Kemp et al. in their paper presented results of the first detection of magnetic white dwarfs, these kind of stars have been intensively studied (Kemp et al. 1970; Putney 1995; Reimers et al. 1996; Jordan 1992; Chanmugan 1992; Ostriker et al. 1968; Mathews et al. 2000). However, only a small minority (the exact percentage remains uncertain) of white dwarfs have detectable magnetic fields. The study of magnetic properties of white dwarfs are expected to provide information on the role played by magnetic fields in the stellar formation and the main sequence evolution. Magnetic fields in white dwarfs are interpreted as the relic of magnetic fields of their progenitors. Thus the evolution of the main sequence stars with fields of only a few Gauss leads to white dwarfs with weak magnetic fields which remain below the threshold detection. Magnetic Ap and Bp stars are considered themselves as progenitors of magnetic white dwarfs with the field strength $`>100MG`$.
The aim of this paper is to show how the assumption of finite temperature and nonzero magnetic field influences white dwarf parameters. In the presence of magnetic field the magnetic pressure which corresponds to the Lorence force has to be taken into account. However, its inclusion causes the deformation of a star from spherical configuration, (Konno et al. 1999). In this paper all calculations are performed with the assumption that the averaged value of the energy momentum tensor gives us the condition for small deformation of a star and allows to treat a star as a spherically symmetric one. This approximation is connected with the existence of the critical density $`\rho _{\mathrm{crit}}`$ below which a star became deformed. The gained results allow to construct the mass-radius relation for a white dwarf with the magnetic field and at finite temperature which has been chosen to be equal $`10^7`$ $`K`$. The description of the interior of a white dwarf has been made in terms of degenerate, uniform, isothermal, electron gas. Using the equation of state of classical gas the atmosphere model has been formulated. The atmosphere extent, luminosity, effective temperature and the value of the critical density $`\rho _{\mathrm{crit}}`$ as functions of the temperature, density and magnetic field strength have been examined. The determination of the critical point allows to neglect the deformation of the star and perform all calculations in the spherically symmetric approximation.
This paper is organized as follows.
Section 2 outlines the considered model and contains assumptions which are indispensable in determining the form of the energy momentum tensor and the value of the critical density $`\rho _{\mathrm{crit}}`$. In section 3 the numerical results and the discussion are presented.

## 2 The theoretical model of white dwarfs in the magnetic fields

This paper presents the theoretical model of a white dwarf in which the main contribution to the pressure which supports the star against collapse comes from ultra-relativistic electrons . The electrons are supposed to be degenerate with arbitrary degree of relativity $`x=\frac{k_\mathrm{F}}{m_\mathrm{e}}`$ (in this paper the units in which $`c=\mathrm{}=1`$ were used ). The value of $`x`$ is a function of a density. Ions provide the mass of the star but their contribution to the pressure is negligible. The complete and more realistic description of a white dwarf requires taking into consideration not only the interior region of the star but also the atmosphere. The isothermal interior of a white dwarf is completely degenerated and covered by non-degenerate surface layer which is in radiative equilibrium. Thus the white dwarf matter consists of electrically neutral plasma which comprises positively charged ions and electrons.
The Lagrangian density function in this model can be represented as the sum

$$=_\mathrm{e}+_\mathrm{G}+_{\mathrm{QED}},$$
(1)
where $`_\mathrm{e}`$, $`_\mathrm{G}`$ describe the electron and gravitational terms, respectively. The $`_{\mathrm{QED}}`$ is the Lagrangian density function of the QED theory

$`_{\mathrm{QED}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}F^{\mu \nu }F_{\mu \nu }.`$
The electron part of the Lagrangian is given by

$$_\mathrm{e}=i\overline{\psi _\mathrm{e}}\gamma ^\mu D_\mu \psi _\mathrm{e}m_\mathrm{e}\overline{\psi _\mathrm{e}}\psi _\mathrm{e},$$

where $`D_\mu `$ is the covariant derivative defined as$`D_\mu =_\mu ieA_\mu `$ and $`e`$ is the electron charge. The Dirac equation for electrons obtained from the Lagrangian function $``$ has the form

$$(i\gamma ^\mu D_\mu m_\mathrm{e})\psi _e=0.$$

The vector potential is defined as $`A_\mu =\{A_0=0,A_\mathrm{i}\}`$ where

$$A_\mathrm{i}=\frac{1}{2}\epsilon _{\mathrm{ilm}}x^\mathrm{l}B_0^\mathrm{m}.$$

The symmetry in which uniform magnetic field B lies along the z-axis has been chosen

$$B_0^\mathrm{m}=(0,0,B_\mathrm{z}).$$

The energy momentum tensor is the sum of the perfect fluid part $`T_{\mu \nu }^{\mathrm{matt}}`$

$`T_{\mu \nu }^{\mathrm{matt}}=(\epsilon +p)u_\mu u_\nu +g_{\mu \nu }p,`$
and the electromagnetic one $`T_{\mu \nu }^\mathrm{B}`$

$`T_{\mu \nu }^\mathrm{B}=F_\mu ^\lambda F_{\nu \lambda }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}g_{\mu \nu }F_{\alpha \beta }F^{\alpha \beta }`$
and can be calculated taking the quantum statistical average

$`\overline{T}_{\mu \nu }=<T_{\mu \nu }>=T_{\mu \nu }^B+T_{\mu \nu }^{matt}.`$
In the cartesian coordinates the electromagnetic part of the energy momentum tensor in the flat space-time has the form

$$T_{\mu \nu }^\mathrm{B}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\frac{1}{2}B^2& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& \frac{1}{2}B^2& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& \frac{1}{2}B^2& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& \frac{1}{2}B^2\end{array}\right),$$
(2)
and presents the example of the anisotropic pressure. In general the pressure of the electron gas in the magnetic field can be written as the sum of two parts

$`P=P_\mathrm{e}+P_{\mathrm{QED}}`$
where $`P_\mathrm{e}`$ is the isotropic part of the pressure, $`P_{\mathrm{QED}}`$ can reach the value $`\pm \frac{1}{2}B^2`$ and causes that the pressure became anisotropic. On the other hand $`T_{\mu \nu }^\mathrm{B}`$ for polar coordinates can be written as follows

$`\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\frac{1}{2}B^2& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& \frac{1}{2}B^2\mathrm{cos}2\theta & \frac{1}{2}B^2r\mathrm{sin}2\theta & 0\\ 0& \frac{1}{2}B^2r\mathrm{sin}2\theta & \frac{1}{2}B^2r^2\mathrm{cos}2\theta & 0\\ 0& 0& 0& \frac{1}{2}B^2r^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta \end{array}\right).`$
Averaging over all directions allows to obtain the isotropic form of the energy momentum tensor relevant for the spherically symmetric configuration

$`\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\frac{1}{2}B^2& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& \frac{1}{6}B^2& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& \frac{1}{6}B^2& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& \frac{1}{6}B^2\end{array}\right).`$
The assumption of the positivity of the total pressure $`P`$ has been made

$`P_\mathrm{e}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}B^20.`$
Any negative contribution to the pressure reduces it, gravity can not be compensated and this diminishes the radius of the star. The described above averaging approximates a star as a spherically symmetric object with the radius $`R`$ which is smaller than the equatorial radius of the anisotropic star. The case of an anisotropic star is calculated in details in the paper by Konno et al. (Konno et al. 1999). The condition of the positivity of the total pressure establishes a limiting value of the density noted $`\rho _{\mathrm{crit}}`$ or the critical point $`x_{\mathrm{crit}}`$ and puts limit on the spherically symmetric approximation (the deformation of the star is neglected). For densities smaller than the critical one the total pressure became negative and there is no gravity compensation in this direction.
The equations describing masses and radii of white dwarfs are determined by the proper form of the equation of state. The aim of this paper is to calculate the equation of state for the theoretical model of magnetic white dwarfs with the assumption of finite temperature.
Properties of an electron in the external magnetic field have been studied, for example by Landau and Lifshitz in 1938 (Landau et al. 1938). In this paper the effects of the magnetic field on an equation of state of a relativistic, degenerate electron gas is considered. The motion of free electrons in the homogeneous magnetic field of the strength $`B`$ in the direction perpendicular to the field is confined by the oscillatory force determined by the field $`B`$ and is quantized into Landau levels with the energy $`nB`$, $`n=0,1,\mathrm{}`$. In the case of non-relativistic electrons their energy spectrum is given by the relation

$`E_{\mathrm{n},\mathrm{p}_z}=n\omega _\mathrm{c}+{\displaystyle \frac{p_\mathrm{z}^2}{2m_\mathrm{e}}}`$
where $`n=j+\frac{1}{2}+s_\mathrm{z}`$, the cyclotron energy $`\omega _c=eB/m_e`$, $`p_z`$ is the momentum along the magnetic field and can be treated as continuous. For extremely high magnetic field the cyclotron energy is comparable with the electron rest mass energy and this is the case when electrons became relativistic. Introducing the idea of the critical magnetic field strength $`B_\mathrm{c}=m_\mathrm{e}^2/e`$ which equals $`4.414\times 10^{13}`$ $`G`$, it is easy to distinguish between non-relativistic and relativistic cases, for $`BB_\mathrm{c}`$ the relativistic dispersion relation for the electron in the magnetic field is given by

$`E_{\mathrm{n},\mathrm{p}_\mathrm{z}}=\sqrt{p_\mathrm{z}^2+m_\mathrm{e}^2+2eB_\mathrm{z}n}`$ (5)
where $`n`$ is the Landau level, $`p_z`$ is the electron momentum along z-axis and $`m_e`$ is the rest mass of the electron. Along the field direction a particle motion is free and quasi-one-dimensional with the modified density of states given by a sum

$$2\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}2\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}[2\delta _{\mathrm{n0}}]\frac{eB_\mathrm{z}}{(2\pi )^2}𝑑p_z,$$
(6)
$`\delta _{\mathrm{n0}}`$ denotes the Kronecker delta (Mathews et al. 2000). The spin degeneracy equals 1 for the ground ($`n=0`$) Landau level and 2 for $`n1`$. The redefined density of states makes the distinctive difference between the magnetic and non-magnetic cases. The equation (5) implies that for $`n=0`$, $`E_0=\sqrt{p_\mathrm{z}^2+m_\mathrm{e}^2}`$ whereas for $`n1`$ $`E_n=\sqrt{p_\mathrm{z}^2+m_\mathrm{e}^2}`$. These relations indicate that the quantity $`m_e^{}`$ defined as $`m_\mathrm{e}^2=m_\mathrm{e}^2+2eB_\mathrm{z}n`$ can be interpreted as the effective electron mass which is different from the electron mass $`m_\mathrm{e}`$ for $`n1`$. The number density of electrons at zero temperature is given by the following relation

$`n_\mathrm{e}={\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{n}=0}{\overset{n=n_{\mathrm{max}}}{}}}[2\delta _{\mathrm{n0}}]2eB_zp_\mathrm{e}^F.`$
The maximum Landau level is estimated from the condition $`(p_\mathrm{e}^\mathrm{F})^20`$. One can define the critical magnetic density $`\rho _\mathrm{B}`$

$$\rho _\mathrm{B}=0.802Y_\mathrm{e}^1\gamma ^{3/2}gcm^3$$
(7)
($`\gamma =B_z/B_c`$ means a dimensionless parameter which expresses the magnetic field strength through the value of the critical field $`B_c`$) for densities lower than $`\rho _\mathrm{B}`$ only the ground Landau level is present.
Assuming the finite temperature of the system which affects the electron motion in the external magnetic field the number density of electrons can be expressed now as

$`n_\mathrm{e}={\displaystyle \frac{2m_\mathrm{e}^3\gamma }{4\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{n}=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}[2\delta _{\mathrm{n0}}]\times `$ (8)
$`(I_{0,0,+}(z/t,1+2\gamma n)I_{0,0,}(z/t,1+2\gamma n))`$
where the Fermi integral

$$I_{\lambda ,\eta \pm }(u,\alpha )=\frac{(\alpha +x^2)^{\lambda /2}x^\eta dx}{e^{\left(\sqrt{\alpha +x^2}u\right)}+1}$$
(9)
has been used. The $`\mu _{}`$ and $`T_{}`$ denote the chemical potential and temperature in the star interior and $`z=\mu _{}/m_\mathrm{e}`$, $`t=k_\mathrm{B}T_{}/m_\mathrm{e}`$, $`u=z/t`$ (Lai 2000; Bisnovatyi-Kagan 2000). Finite temperature together with decreasing value of the strength of the magnetic field tend to smear out Landau levels. The introduction of the concept of Fermi temperature

$$T_\mathrm{F}=E_\mathrm{F}/k_\mathrm{B}=(m_\mathrm{e}/k_\mathrm{B})ϵ_\mathrm{F}(\mathrm{for}\rho <\rho _\mathrm{B}),$$
(10)
and the magnetic temperature

$`T_\mathrm{B}={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }E_\mathrm{B}}{k_\mathrm{B}}}`$ (11)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{m_\mathrm{e}}{k_\mathrm{B}}}\left(\sqrt{1+2n_{\mathrm{max}}\gamma +2\gamma }\sqrt{1+2n_{\mathrm{max}}\gamma }\right)`$
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_\mathrm{B}`$ is the energy difference between the $`n_\mathrm{L}=n_{\mathrm{max}}`$ level and the $`n_L=n_{\mathrm{max}}+1`$ level, is the convenient way for describing how the properties of free electron gas change at finite temperature and at the presence of the magnetic field. For $`\rho =\rho _\mathrm{B}`$ these temperatures equal $`T_\mathrm{F}=T_\mathrm{B}`$. The influence of the magnetic field is most significant for $`\rho \rho _\mathrm{B}`$ and $`TT_\mathrm{B}`$ when electrons occupy the ground Landau level. In this case one can deal with the strong quantizied gas and the magnetic field modifies all parameters of the electron gas. For example, for degenerate, non-relativistic electrons the pressure is proportional to $`\rho ^3`$ and this form of the equation of state which one can compare with that for the case B=0 for which $`P\rho ^{5/3}`$. When $`\rho >\rho _\mathrm{B}`$ the Fermi temperature is still greater than the magnetic temperature $`T_\mathrm{B}`$. Electrons are degenerate and there are many Landau levels, now the level spacing exceeds $`k_\mathrm{B}T`$. The properties of the electron gas are only slightly affected by the magnetic field. With increasing temperature, there is the thermal broadening of Landau levels, when $`TT_\mathrm{B}`$, the free field results are recovered. For $`TT_\mathrm{B}`$ there are many Landau levels and the thermal widths of the Landau levels are higher than the level spacing. The magnetic field does not affects the thermodynamic properties of the gas (Lai 2000 ).
The total pressure of the system can be described as the sum of the pressure coming from electrons and ions plus small corrections coming from the magnetic field

$$P=P_\mathrm{e}+P_{\mathrm{QED}}.$$

The contributions from the same constituents form the energy density

$$\epsilon =\epsilon _{\mathrm{ion}}+\epsilon _{\mathrm{QED}},$$

where $`P_{\mathrm{QED}}=\frac{1}{6}B^2`$, $`\epsilon _{\mathrm{QED}}=\frac{1}{2}B^2`$. The electron pressure is defined with the use of the Fermi integral

$`P_\mathrm{e}={\displaystyle \frac{2\gamma m_\mathrm{e}^4}{4\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}[2\delta _{\mathrm{n0}}]\times `$ (12)
$`I_{1,2,+}(z/t,1+2\gamma n)+I_{1,2,}(z/t,1+2\gamma n)).`$
The ion energy density has the simple form

$$\epsilon _{\mathrm{ion}}=\left(\frac{A}{Z}\right)n_\mathrm{e}m_\mathrm{B},$$
(13)
where $`m_\mathrm{B}`$ is the baryon mass. The ions are very heavy and are treated as classical gas. The influence of the magnetic field for ions is very small and this correction to the equation of state has been neglected.
The pressure and energy density dependence on the chemical potential $`\mu _{}`$ determines the form of the equation of state, which is calculated in the flat Minkowski space time. The obtained form of the equation of state is the fundamental input in determining macroscopic properties of a star. Outside the static spherically symmetric body the metric has the form

$`ds^2=e^{\nu (\mathrm{r})}dt^2e^{\lambda (\mathrm{r})}dr^2r^2d\theta ^2r^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\phi ^2,`$
where $`\nu (r)`$ and $`\lambda (r)`$ are metric functions. The covariant components of the metric tensor

$$g_{\mu \nu }=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}e^\nu & 0& 0& 0\\ 0& e^\lambda & 0& 0\\ 0& 0& r^2& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& r^2sin^2\theta \end{array}\right).$$
(14)
together with the specified form of the energy momentum tensor $`T_{\mu \nu }`$ allows to derive the structure equations of a spherically symmetric star (Tolman Oppenheimer Volkoff equations)

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dP(r)}{dr}}=`$ (15)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G}{r^2}}(\rho (r)+P(r)){\displaystyle \frac{(m(r)+4\pi P(r)r^3)}{(1\frac{2Gm(r)}{r})}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{dm(r)}{dr}}=4\pi r^2\rho (r).`$ (16)
As the solution the mass-radius relation for white dwarfs is obtained.
The analyzed model of the white dwarf has to include both the core of degenerate isothermal electrons and the atmosphere where the temperature changes with the radius. In this case the equation of hydrostatic equilibrium has to be supplemented by the transport equation

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d(e^{\nu (\mathrm{r})}T)}{dr}}={\displaystyle \frac{3}{16\sigma }}{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa \rho }{T_{}^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{L}{4\pi r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{\nu (\mathrm{r})}}{\sqrt{1\frac{2Gm}{r}}}},`$ (17)
where $`e^{\nu (\mathrm{r})}`$ is the redshift, $`L`$ is the luminosity, $`\kappa `$ is the opacity of the stellar material and $`\sigma `$ is the Boltzmann constant. After neglecting small corrections coming from the general relativistic form of the equation (17) and using the condition of isothermality $`T_{}=const`$ it is possible to determine the luminosity of a white dwarf. In the result the total radius of a white dwarf can be obtained from the relation

$`R=\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{R_{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{T_{}}{GM}}{\displaystyle \frac{k_\mathrm{B}}{\stackrel{~}{\mu }}}4.25\right)^1,`$ (18)
( Shapiro et al. 1983 ). In this relation $`R_{}`$ is the core radius and $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }`$ is the molecular weight of the gas particles. The boundary conditions for the equation (15) are giving in the following form: $`P(r=0)=P_\mathrm{c}=P(\rho _\mathrm{c})`$ where $`\rho _\mathrm{c}`$ denotes the density at the center of the star which in this paper ranges from $`10^5`$ $`g`$ $`cm^3`$ to $`10^{11}`$ $`g`$ $`cm^3`$. The condition $`P(r=R)=0`$ determines the star radius $`R`$. For such boundary conditions the value of the magnetic field and temperature are limited to the following values $`T=010^7`$ $`K`$, $`\gamma =00.1`$, respectively. The results are presented in figures 1-3.
Studying the properties of a star in the framework of the general-relativistic Thomas-Fermi model one can made the assumption that the temperature and chemical potential are metric dependent local quantities and the gravitational potential instead of Poisson’s equation satisfies Einstain’s field equations. The energy momentum conservation $`T_{;\nu }^{\mu \nu }=0`$ which for spherically symmetric metric (LABEL:tensor\_metryczny2) can be written as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\nu }{dr}}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{P+\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{dP}{dr}}`$ (19)
together with the Gibbs-Duhem relation and with the assumption that the heat flow and diffusion vanishes, (Israel 1976) give the condition

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mu _{}}{T_{}}}=const.`$ (20)
This implies that the temperature and chemical potential become local metric functions

$`T(r)`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\nu (\mathrm{r})/2}T_{}`$ (21)
$`\mu (r)`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\nu (\mathrm{r})/2}\mu _{}`$ (22)
where $`T_{}`$ and $`\mu _{}`$ are constant. The first equation in (21) is the well known Tolman condition for thermal equilibrium in a gravitational field, (Tolman 1934). Now, the Fermi-Dirac distribution function has to be redefined and is given in the following form

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{e^{\left(\sqrt{1+x^2+2\gamma n}z_0\right)/\mathrm{t}_{}}+1}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{e^{\left(e^{\nu (\mathrm{r})/2}\sqrt{1+x^2+2\gamma n}z_0\right)/\mathrm{t}_{}}+1}}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{e^{\left(\sqrt{1+x^2+2\gamma n}z(r)\right)/\mathrm{t}(\mathrm{r})}+1}},`$
( Bilić et al. 1999). In the result instead of the OTV equilibrium equations together with the equation of state which has been calculated in the flat space-time one can derived three self-consistent equations (15,16,19). These equations together with the local form of the equation of state are now functions of $`r`$. This is of particular importance in the case of strong gravitational fields.

## 3 Discussion

In order to construct the mass-radius relation for white dwarfs the proper form of the equation of state have to be enumerated. For our needs we have chosen the plasma as the main constituent of the theoretical model of the white dwarf interior. All calculations have been performed at finite temperature and different from zero magnetic field and compared with those of zero temperature and without magnetic field.
In Fig. 1 the applied forms of the equations of state for magnetic and non-magnetic white dwarfs have been presented. Dots indicate the location of critical points. The approximation of spherical symmetry can be used for densities grater than the critical one $`\rho _{crit}`$. The inclusion of the magnetic field makes the equation of state stiffer. In the case of zero temperature model there are clearly visible Landau levels which became smear out when the finite temperature is included. The figure in the subpanel shows the equation of state obtained for the low density range for the zero temperature case, Landau levels are visible. In Fig. 2 the mass-radius relations for magnetic white dwarfs are presented. For each value of $`\gamma `$ the maximum mass has nearly the same value however the approximation of spherical symmetry which is connected with the existence of critical point determines the configuration with maximum radius. For the sake of completeness this figure includes also the mass-radius relation obtained for the equation of state of Hamada and Salpeter (Hamada et al. 1961). The solid line represents the nonmagnetic case which has been get with the use of the Hamada Salpeter equation of state. Dashed and dotted curves have been constructed for different values of the magnetic field strength. The differences between these curves are very small. The most important effect concerns the position of the critical points connected with the applied approximation of the spherical symmetry. In this approximation stable white dwarf configurations exist only for densities higher then $`\rho _{crit}`$. Thus the critical points on the curves determine configurations with maximal radius $`R`$. The stronger the magnetic field the smaller the white dwarf radius is. The most extended objects are obtained for the weakest magnetic fields. Using the Thomas-Fermi approximation one can obtain the result in which the star interior is no longer isothermal. The temperature profiles are presented in Fig. 3 for the fixed values of the central density $`\rho _\mathrm{c}`$. The temperature has been changed but not in a significant way. This is in agreement with the value of the gravitational potential which in the case of white dwarfs is much smaller than that obtained for neutron stars. The higher the central density the more visible are changes in temperature inside the star. For the central density $`\rho _\mathrm{c}=10^{10}gcm^3`$ the temperature difference in the center of the star equals $`\mathrm{6\hspace{0.17em}10}^4`$ $`K`$. The magnetic temperatures $`T_\mathrm{B}`$ for different values of the central density $`\rho _\mathrm{c}`$ and different magnetic field strengths are presented in Tables 1, 2, 3. It has been found that $`T_\mathrm{B}`$ increases with the increasing value of the magnetic field and decreasing for increasing value of the central density. In Tables 4, 5, 6 the basic parameters of magnetic and non-magnetic white dwarfs are collected. For the maximum mass configurations the atmosphere extent drop with the increasing strength of the magnetic field. The effective temperature rises with the increasing magnetic field whereas the luminosity is altered insignificantly. All changes of white dwarf parameters are evident in the area of moderate densities. In this paper a magnetization $``$ in the medium is not included. The inclusion of magnetization changes the perpendicular to the magnetic field component of a pressure and alters the value of the star radius. In the paper by Felipe it is stated that for positive magnetization the transversal pressure exerted by the charged particles in the magnetic field is smaller than the longitudinal one by the amount $`B_\mathrm{e}`$ (Felipe et al. 2002). Thus for $`n=0`$ (the ground Landau level) $`P_{}=0`$. The vanishing of the pressure means that the instability which leads to the gravitational collapse appear. However, considering the case of finite temperature it is necessary to take into account a fact that the temperature smearing out Landau levels causes the appearance of the residual pressure which supports the star against gravitational collapse. The instability criterion given by the condition

$`n_{\mathrm{max}}\mathrm{2\hspace{0.17em}10}^{21}{\displaystyle \frac{n_\mathrm{e}^2}{B_\mathrm{z}^3}}`$
sets in for densities equal $`5.7\times 10^3`$ $`gcm^3`$ for $`\gamma =0.01`$, $`5\times 10^4`$ $`gcm^3`$ for $`\gamma =0.05`$ and $`1.5\times 10^5`$ for $`\gamma =0.1`$. This instability leads to a cigar like object whereas in the case considered in this paper gives in the limiting case a toroidal star.

The numbers from 1 to 6 denote:
1-the core radius of the white dwarf $`100R_{}/R_{}`$
2-the total radius of the white dwarf $`100R/R_{}`$
3-the extent of the atmosphere $`100\mathrm{\Delta }R/R_{}`$
4-the effective temperature $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ $`[K]`$,
5-the critical density $`\rho _{\mathrm{crit}}`$ $`[gcm^3]`$,
6-the strength of magnetic field $`\gamma `$


text:
# Blowups of surfaces and moduli of holomorphic vector bundles

## 1. Introduction

The motivation for this paper comes from the study of moduli spaces of based instantons. In , , it was shown that the moduli space of based instantons over a connected sum of $`q`$ copies of $`^2`$ is isomorphic as a real analytic space, to the moduli space of holomorphic bundles over a blow up of $`^2`$ at $`q`$ points, framed at a rational curve $`L_{\mathrm{}}^2`$. From the study of this moduli space we were led to consider the relationship betwen the moduli space over an algebraic surface $`X`$ and the moduli space over its blow up $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$. Bundles on the blow up of a complex surface have been studied in , , ,  . Our approach is inspired by that in . This paper builds up on results in , extending them to the compactification of the moduli space.

### 1.1. Results

Let $`X`$ be a smooth algebraic surface and let $`CX`$ be a curve of positive self-intersection. When $`X=^2`$ we will always take $`C`$ as a rational curve. Fix an ample divisor $`H`$ and a polynomial $`\overline{\delta }(n)`$ with positive coefficients. Let $`𝔐_k^{r,ss}(X,H,\overline{\delta })`$ denote the moduli space of $`(H,\overline{\delta })`$ semi-stable pairs $`(,\varphi )`$ where $`X`$ is a rank $`r`$ coherent sheaf with $`c_1()=0`$, $`c_2()=k`$, and $`\varphi :𝒪_C_{\mathrm{}}^r`$ is a non zero homomorphism (the framing). Stability of the pair $`(,\varphi )`$ means the following:

###### Definition 1.1.

A pair $`(,\varphi )`$ is said to be (semi)stable with respect to $`(H,\overline{\delta })`$ if for all subsheaves $`𝒜`$ we have

$$\mathrm{rk}\left(\chi (𝒜(n))\epsilon \overline{\delta }(n)\right)()<\mathrm{rk}𝒜\left(\chi ((n))\overline{\delta }(n)\right)$$

where $`\epsilon =0`$ if $`𝒜\mathrm{ker}\varphi `$ and $`\epsilon =1`$ otherwise.

This is a special case of the construction of moduli of framed sheaves in , . We will omit reference to $`(H,\overline{\delta })`$ unless the dependance on the polarization is important.

In this paper we will be looking at the subspace $`𝔐_k^r(X)𝔐_k^{r,ss}(X)`$ of pairs $`(,\varphi )`$ where $`X`$ is a holomorphic rank $`r`$ vector bundle, trivial when restricted to $`C`$, and $`\varphi `$ induces a trivialization. Let $`\overline{𝔐_k^r(X)}`$ denote the closure of $`𝔐_k^r(X)`$. The objective of this paper is to prove the theorem

###### Theorem 1.2.

Let $`\pi :\stackrel{~}{X}X`$ be the blow up of $`X`$ at a point $`x_0C`$. Given a sheaf $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$, let $`\pi _{}^{}X`$ be the sheaf defined by $`\pi _{}^{}(U)=\pi _{}(U\{x_0\})`$.

1. Let

$$S_i𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{X})=\left\{(,\varphi )\right|c_2\left(\pi _{}^{}\right)=i\}$$

Then the map $`\pi _{}^{}:S_i𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{X})𝔐_i^r(X)`$ is a topologically trivial fibration with fiber $`S_0𝔐_{ki}(\stackrel{~}{}^2)`$;
2. Let

$$F_i\overline{𝔐_k(\stackrel{~}{X})}=\left\{(,\varphi )\right|c_2\left(\pi _{}^{}\right)i\}$$

and let $`S_i\overline{𝔐_k}=F_i\overline{𝔐_k}F_{i1}\overline{𝔐_k}`$. Then the map $`\pi _{}^{}`$ extends to a map $`\pi _{}:F_i\overline{𝔐_k(\stackrel{~}{X})}\overline{𝔐_i(X)}`$. The restriction of this map to $`S_i\overline{𝔐_k(\stackrel{~}{X})}`$ is a fibration with fiber $`S_0\overline{𝔐_{ki}(\stackrel{~}{}^2)}`$.

The filtration $`F_i\overline{𝔐_k^r}`$ induces a spectral sequence converging to $`H_{}\left(\overline{𝔐_k^r}\right)`$ with $`E^1`$ term given by

$$E_{p,q}^1=H_{p+q}(F_p\overline{𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{X})},F_{p1}\overline{𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{X})})$$

As a corolary we will prove

###### Corollary 1.3.

Let $`\widehat{𝔐}_i(X)=\pi _{}F_{i1}\overline{𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{X})}\overline{𝔐_i(X)}`$. Then there is a spectral sequence converging to $`H_{}(F_i\overline{𝔐},F_{i1}\overline{𝔐})`$ with $`E^2`$ term given by

$$E_{p,q}^2=H_p(\overline{𝔐_i(X)},\widehat{𝔐}_i(X);H_q(S_0\overline{𝔐_{ki}(\stackrel{~}{}^2)}))$$

We conjecture a similar result holds in the non compactified case.. Here the triviality of the bundle would lead to a more powerful result:

###### Conjecture 1.4.

There is an isomorphism

$$H_{}(F_i𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{X}),F_{i1}𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{X}))H_{}(\pi _{}F_i𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{X}),𝔐_i^r(X))H_{}\left(S_0𝔐_{ki}^r(\stackrel{~}{}^2)\right)$$

The plan of the paper is as follows: In section 2 we recall the definitions of the moduli space and prove some theorems concerning stability; In section 3 we prove the second part of the theorem 1.2, and corollary 1.3. In section 4 we prove the first part of the theorem 1.2. Finally in section 5 we give a monad description of the space $`S_0𝔐_k(\stackrel{~}{}^2)`$.

## 2. Definition of the moduli space

The objective of this section is to recall the definitions of the moduli spaces we will be considering, and to prove some stability results.

First we introduce a technical restriction on the pairs $`(X,C)`$ we will be considering in this paper. Then we present two definitions of the moduli space: Following , we look at $`𝔐_k^r`$ as the space of holomorphic structures on a fixed topological bundle $`E_{top}`$. The second definition uses the language of moduli functors, following , .

### 2.1. Admissible pairs

###### Definition 2.1.

Let $`X`$ be an algebraic surface and let $`CX`$ be a divisor with $`C^2>0`$. We say the pair $`(X,C)`$ is admissible if there is an ample divisor $`H`$ such that the set $`\{c_1(𝒜)H\}_{𝒜𝒞_k^r}`$ is bounded above for all $`k,r`$. Here $`𝒞_k^r`$ denotes the set of sheaves $`𝒜X`$ such that

* $`c_1(𝒜)C0`$;
* There is a torsion free rank $`r`$ sheaf $`X`$ with $`c_1()=0`$, $`c_2()=k`$ such that $`𝒜`$.

Clearly, if $`C`$ is ample, $`(X,C)`$ is admissible.

###### Proposition 2.2.

Let $`(X,C)`$ be an admissible pair with ample divisor $`H`$ and let $`\stackrel{~}{X}X`$ be the blow up of $`X`$ at a point $`x_0C`$. Then the pair $`(\stackrel{~}{X},C)`$ is admissible with respect to the ample divisor $`\stackrel{~}{H}=H+CL`$ where $`L`$ denotes the exceptional divisor..

###### Proof.

Let $`𝒜𝒞_k^r`$, $`𝒜`$. Then $`(\pi _{}𝒜)^{}(\pi _{})^{}`$. Hence, the proposition will follow if we prove that $`c_1(𝒜)L2k`$.

We may assume without loss of generality that $`𝒜,`$ are locally free. Let $`𝒯=\mathrm{Tor}/𝒜`$. Then we have the diagram

for some sheaves $`𝒬`$ and $`𝒦`$. Now observe that

$$c_1(𝒦)Hc_1(𝒜)H$$

So we may assume without loss of generality that the quotient $`/𝒜`$ is torsion free. Now write

$$𝒜|_L=\underset{j}{}𝒪(a_j),|_L=\underset{l}{}𝒪(b_l)$$

Then $`a_j=b_{l_j}`$ so

$$|c_1(𝒜)L|\underset{j}{}|a_j|\underset{l}{}|b_l|2c_2()$$

which concludes the proof. ∎

### 2.2. Analytic definition

Let $`EX`$ be an $`SU(r)`$ topological bundle with $`c_2(E)=k`$.

Let $`𝒞(X,E)`$ be the space of pairs $`(\overline{},\varphi )`$ where $`\overline{}:\mathrm{\Omega }^0(E)\mathrm{\Omega }^{0,1}(E)`$ is a holomorphic structure on $`E`$ holomorphically trivial on $`C`$ and $`\varphi :E|_C𝒪_C^r`$ is an isomorphism of holomorphic bundles.

###### Proposition 2.3.

The group $`Aut(E)`$ acts freely on $`𝒞(X,E)`$ and the quotient has the structure of a finite dimensional Hausdorff complex analytic space.

###### Proof.

It follows from

$$_{k>0}H^0(\mathrm{End}_0𝒪_C(k))=0$$

where $`_0=𝒪_C^r`$ (see  theorem 1.1 and lemma 2.6). ∎

###### Definition 2.4.

We define $`𝔐(X,E)`$ as the quotient $`(X,E)/Aut(E)`$. We will also use the notation $`𝔐_k^r(X)`$.

### 2.3. Algebraic definition

Now we present the algebraic definition. For details see , .

Let $`_0=𝒪_C^r`$. A family of framed sheaves parametrized by a Noetherian scheme $`T`$ consists of a pair $`(,\alpha )`$ where $``$ is a coherent $`𝒪_{T\times X}`$ module, flat over $`T`$, and $`\alpha :𝒪_T_0`$ is a homomorphism with $`\alpha _t0`$. A homomorphism of families $`(,\alpha )(^{},\alpha ^{})`$ is a homomorphism of sheaves $`^{}`$ compatible with $`\alpha ,\alpha ^{}`$.

The moduli functor $`\underset{¯}{^{ss}(X,_0)}`$ is the functor from $`(Schemes)`$ to $`(Sets)`$ that to a scheme $`T`$ associates the set of isomorphism classes of flat families of semistable pairs parametrized by $`T`$ (recall the definition of stability 1.1). In a similar way we define the functor $`\underset{¯}{^s(X,_0)}`$ by replacing the word semistable with stable in the definition.

In  Huybrechts and Lehn proved

###### Theorem 2.5.

There is a projective scheme $`𝔐_k^{r,ss}(X)`$ which corepresents the functor $`\underset{¯}{^{ss}(X)}`$. Moreover there is an open subscheme $`𝔐_k^{r,s}`$ which is a fine moduli space representing $`\underset{¯}{^s(X)}`$.

$`𝔐_k^r(X)𝔐_k^{r,ss}(X)`$ is defined as the subspace of pairs $`(,\varphi )`$ where $`X`$ is a holomorphic vector bundle trivial when restricted to $`C`$, and $`\varphi `$ induces a trivialization. $`\overline{𝔐_k^r(X)}`$ is defined as the closure of $`𝔐_k^r(X)`$.

### 2.4. Some results about stability

A pair $`(,\varphi )`$ is said to be $`\mu `$-stable with respect to $`(H,\delta )`$ if for every subsheaf $`𝒜`$ we have $`\mathrm{rk}(c_1(𝒜)H\epsilon \delta )\mathrm{rk}𝒜\delta `$ where $`\epsilon `$ is defined as in 1.1. Then, from Riemann-Roch we get the implications

$$\mu \text{stable}\text{stable}\text{semistable}\mu \text{semistable}$$

###### Proposition 2.6.

Let $`H`$ be an ample divisor and consider a polarization $`(H+MC,\delta ^{}+n\delta )`$ with $`M>\delta `$. Then, if a pair $`(,\varphi )`$ is semistable, $``$ is torsion free.

###### Proof.

We apply the semistability condition to $`𝒜=\mathrm{Tor}`$. We want to show $`𝒜=0`$. We divide the proof into two steps:

1. $`\mu `$-semistability implies $`c_1(𝒜)(H+MC)\epsilon \delta `$. Suppose $`c_1(𝒜)0`$. Then $`\epsilon =1`$ so the restriction of $`\varphi `$ to $`𝒜`$ is not identically zero. But then we must have $`c_1(𝒜)C>0`$ so $`(H+MC)c_1(𝒜)M>\delta `$ contradicting semistability. Hence $`c_1(𝒜)=0`$.
2. Since $`c_1(𝒜)=0`$, $`𝒜`$ is supported in codimension 2, so $`\epsilon =0`$ and $`c_2(𝒜)0`$. On the other hand semistability implies $`\chi (𝒜)=c_2(𝒜)0`$. Hence $`c_2(𝒜)=0`$. So $`𝒜=0`$.

###### Lemma 2.7.

Let $`(X,C)`$ be an admissible pair with ample divisor $`H`$. Fix a pair $`(,\varphi )`$. Then there is an integer $`\delta _0>0`$ such that, for all $`\delta >\delta _0`$ there is an integer $`M_0`$ depending on $`\delta `$ such that for all $`M>M_0`$ the following holds with respect to the choice of polarization $`(H+MC,\delta ^{}+\delta n)`$:

1. Let $`𝒜`$ be such that $`c_1(𝒜)C<0`$. Then $`𝒜`$ is not destabilizing.
2. Let $`𝒜`$ be such that $`c_1(𝒜)C0`$ and $`\epsilon =1`$. Then $`𝒜`$ is not destabilizing.

###### Proof.

For simplicity we assume $`c_1()=0`$. Let $`r_{}=\mathrm{rk},r_𝒜=\mathrm{rk}𝒜`$. Since $`(X,C)`$ is admissible we can choose $`\delta _0>r_{}c_1(𝒜)H`$. Now pick any $`\delta >\delta _0`$. Then choose $`M_0`$ so that $`M_0>c_1(𝒜)H+\delta `$. Finally pick any $`M>M_0`$. Let $`H_M=H+MC`$.

1. Assume $`c_1(𝒜)C<0`$. Then

$$r_{}c_1(𝒜)H_Mr_{}(c_1(𝒜)HM)<r_{}\delta <r_𝒜\delta .$$

So, we get

$$\frac{c_1(𝒜)H_M\epsilon \delta }{r_𝒜}<\frac{c_1()H_M\delta }{r_{}}$$
2. Assume $`c_1(𝒜)C0`$. Then

$$r_{}(c_1(𝒜)H_M\delta )r_{}c_1(𝒜)Hr_{}\delta <(1r_{})\delta r_𝒜\delta .$$

Now, since by assumption $`\epsilon =1`$,

$$\frac{c_1(𝒜)H_M\epsilon \delta }{r_𝒜}<\frac{c_1()H_M\delta }{r_{}}$$

As a corollary we have

###### Proposition 2.8.

There is an ample divisor $`H`$ and a polynomial $`\overline{\delta }`$ such that, for any $`M>0`$, the following holds with respect to the polarization $`(H+MC,\overline{\delta })`$:

Let $`X`$ be a torsion free sheaf, and let $`\varphi :_0`$ induce an isomorphism $`|_C𝒪_C^r`$. Then the pair $`(,\varphi )`$ is stable.

###### Proof.

Let $`(H+MC,\delta ^{}+n\delta )`$ be such that the conclusions of lemma 2.7 hold. The proof will follow from the following statements:

* If $`𝒜`$ then $`Cc_1(𝒜)0`$.
* If $`\epsilon =0`$ then $`Cc_1(𝒜)<0`$.

The first statement follows from $`𝒜|_C|_C𝒪^r`$. To prove the second we observe that $`\mathrm{Ker}\varphi =(C)`$ so if $`𝒜\mathrm{Ker}\varphi `$ then $`𝒜(C)`$. The result follows. ∎

Now we prove a converse to lemma 2.7:

###### Proposition 2.9.

Let $`(H,\overline{\delta }(n)=\delta ^{}+n\delta )`$ be a polarization for which the conclusions of lemma 2.7 hold. Let $`(,\varphi )\overline{𝔐_k^r(X)}`$. Then, for all subsheaves $`𝒜`$, we have either $`c_1(𝒜)C<0`$ or $`c_1(𝒜)C=0,\epsilon =1`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`(,\varphi )\overline{𝔐_k^r(X)}𝔐^{ss}(H,\overline{\delta })`$ and suppose there was some $`𝒜`$ with either $`c_1(𝒜)C>0`$ or $`c_1(𝒜)C=\epsilon =0`$. We want to show this is not possible. Consider a new polarization $`(H_M,\overline{\delta }_M)`$ with $`H_M=H+M_HC`$, $`\overline{\delta }_M(n)=\overline{\delta }(n)+nM_\delta `$, for some constants $`M_H>M_\delta >0`$. Then

1. We claim that if $`(^{},\varphi ^{})`$ is any pair semistable with respect to $`(H_M,\overline{\delta }_M)`$, then $`(^{},\varphi ^{})`$ is stable with respect to $`(H,\overline{\delta })`$. Let $`𝒜^{}^{}`$. By lemma 2.7 we may assume either $`c_1(𝒜^{})C>0`$ or $`c_1(𝒜^{})C=\epsilon =0`$. Then $`\mu `$-semistability with respect to $`(H_M,\overline{\delta }_M)`$ implies

$$\begin{array}{c}0r_{}(c_1(𝒜^{})H_M\epsilon (\delta +M_\delta ))+r_𝒜(\delta +M_\delta )\hfill \\ \hfill r_{}(c_1(𝒜^{})H\epsilon \delta )+r_𝒜\delta +M_Hr_{}c_1(𝒜^{})C+M_\delta (1r_{})>\\ \hfill >r_{}(c_1(𝒜^{})H\epsilon \delta )+r_𝒜\delta \end{array}$$

where $`r_{}=\mathrm{rk},r_𝒜=\mathrm{rk}𝒜`$. So $`(^{},\varphi ,)`$ is $`\mu `$-stable with respect to $`(H,\overline{\delta })`$.
2. We claim that for $`M_H>M_\delta 0`$, $`(,\varphi )`$ is unstable with respect to $`(H_M,\overline{\delta }_M)`$; We have two cases:

* If $`c_1(𝒜)C>0`$ then we just have to choose $`M_H`$ big enough so that $`(,\varphi )`$ is $`\mu `$unstable;
    * If $`c_1(𝒜)C=\epsilon =0`$ then stability questions are not affected by $`M_H`$ and making $`M_\delta `$ big enough we can make $`(,\varphi )`$ $`\mu `$unstable.

Using the fact $`𝔐^{ss}`$ corepresents the moduli functor, property (1) implies there is a map $`𝔐^{ss}(H_M,\overline{\delta }_M)𝔐^s(H,\delta )`$. Let $`D\overline{𝔐_k^r(X)}𝔐^{ss}(H,\overline{\delta })`$ be a one dimensional disk and suppose the origin $`0D`$ corresponds to $`(,\varphi )`$ and $`D0`$ is contained in $`𝔐_k^r(X)`$. Then, by proposition 2.8, the restriction of the universal family to $`D0`$ gives a family of $`(H_M,\overline{\delta }_M)`$-stable pairs. Hence we have a map $`D0𝔐^{ss}(H_M,\overline{\delta }_M)`$. Since $`𝔐^{ss}(H_M,\overline{\delta }_M)`$ is projective this map extends to a map $`D𝔐^{ss}(H_M,\overline{\delta }_M)`$. We get a commutative diagram

But this contradicts the fact that $`(,\varphi )𝔐^{ss}(H_M,\overline{\delta }_M)`$. This concludes the proof. ∎

As a corollary we have

###### Corollary 2.10.

For a convenient choice of polarization, $`\overline{𝔐_k^r(X)}𝔐_k^{r,s}`$.

## 3. The map $`\pi _{}`$

In this section we prove the second part of theorem 1.2. Recall that

$`F_i\overline{𝔐_k(\stackrel{~}{X})}=\left\{(,\varphi )\right|c_2\left(\pi _{}^{}\right)i\}`$
$`S_i\overline{𝔐_k(\stackrel{~}{X})}=\left\{(,\varphi )\right|c_2\left(\pi _{}^{}\right)=i\}`$
First we want to show the existence of a map $`\pi _{}:F_i\overline{𝔐_k(\stackrel{~}{X})}\overline{𝔐_i(X)}`$ extending $`\pi _{}^{}`$. We will define this map locally. Let $`TF_i\overline{𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{X})}`$ be an open subset and consider the universal family $`(,\alpha )`$, $`T\times \stackrel{~}{X}`$, $`\alpha :p^{}_0`$. Let $`L`$ be the exceptional divisor.

###### Proposition 3.1.

For each $`N`$ define the family $`\pi _{}^NT\times X`$ by

$$\pi _{}^N(W)=(\text{1}\times \pi )_{}(NL)(W(T\times x_0))$$

For each $`t=[,\varphi ]T`$ let $`ı_t:\{t\}\times XT\times X`$ be the inclusion. Then we have, for $`N0`$,

1. $`(\pi _{}^N,\alpha )`$ is a flat family of stable pairs over $`X`$, hence it induces a map $`\pi _{}:T\overline{𝔐_k^r(X)}`$ given by $`t(ı_t^{}\pi _{},\alpha |_t)`$.
2. If $`tTS_i𝔐_k^r`$, then $`ı_t^{}\pi _{}=(\pi _{})^{}`$. Hence $`\pi _{}`$ extends $`\pi _{}^{}`$.

###### Proof.

We begin by showing part (1). We have to show flatness and stability.

* We prove flatness in two steps. First we show that $`^{}=(\text{1}\times \pi )_{}(NL)`$ is flat. It is enough to show that the Hilbert polynomial of $`ı_t^{}^{}`$ is constant with $`t`$ (see , proposition 2.1.2). This follows from the Grothendieck-Riemann-Roch theorem applied to $`ı_t^{}(\text{1}\times \pi )_{}(NL)=\pi _{}ı_t^{}(NL)`$ (for this equality see the appendix) plus the vanishing of the higher direct image sheaves $`R^i\pi _{}`$ for $`N0`$.

Now we want to show $`\pi _{}^N`$ is flat. It is enough to check for points $`(t_0,x_0)`$ for some $`t_0T`$. Fix an ideal $`I𝒪_{t_0,T}`$. Let $`_ia_im_iI\pi _{}_{t_0,x_0}`$ and assume $`_ia_im_i=0\pi _{}_{t_0,x_0}`$. We want to show $`_ia_im_i=0`$.

Pick an open set $`WT\times X`$ such that the following holds:

+ For all $`i`$, $`a_i𝒪_T(p(W))`$ and $`m_i^{}(W(T\times x_0))`$;
    + There are generators $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_j`$ of $`I`$ such that $`f_j𝒪_T(p(W))`$.

Then $`_ia_im_i=0^{}(W(T\times x_0))`$ hence $`_ia_im_i=0_{(t,x)}^{}`$ for any $`xx_0`$ and any $`t`$.

Define the sheaf $``$ as the sheaf of ideals $`(V)=I𝒪_T(p(W))𝒪_T(V)`$. Then $`_{t_0}=I`$. Then by flatness of $`^{}`$ it follows that $`_ia_im_i=0_t_{(t,x)}^{}`$. Hence $`_ia_im_i=0(^{})(W(T\times x_0))`$. Now

$$(^{})(W(T\times x_0))=(p(W))\pi _{}(W)$$

The flatness of $`\pi _{}`$ follows.
* Now we prove stability. We want to show that, for every $`tT`$, $`ı_t^{}\pi _{}`$ is stable. Let $`X`$ be a sheaf defined by $`(V)=ı_t^{}\pi _{}(V\{x_0\})`$. Then stability of $``$ is equivalent to stability of $`ı_t^{}\pi _{}`$. Let $`𝒜`$. We may assume $`𝒜`$ is locally free at $`x_0`$. We claim that, for $`M0`$, $`\pi ^{}𝒜(ML)ı_t^{}`$. To see this notice that $`=\pi _{}ı_t^{}(ML)`$ hence we have the inclusion map $`\pi ^{}𝒜\pi ^{}\pi _{}ı_t^{}(ML)ı_t^{}(ML)`$.

Now notice that $`𝒜`$ and $`\pi ^{}𝒜(ML)`$ are isomorphic on $`Xx_0`$. Hence, since $`ı_t^{}`$ is stable, it follows by proposition 2.9 that either $`c_1(𝒜)C<0`$ or $`c_1(𝒜)C=0,\epsilon =1`$. But then, by lemma 2.7, $`𝒜`$ is not destabilizing.

Now we prove statement (2): $`\pi _{}`$ restricted to $`S_i𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{X})`$ is given by $`(,\varphi )((\pi _{})^{},\varphi )`$. That is, if $`t=[,\varphi ]S_i𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{X})`$ then $`ı_t^{}\pi _{}=(\pi _{})^{}`$.

First observe that, for $`t=[,\varphi ]S_i𝔐_k^rT`$, $`ı_t^{}\pi _{}=\pi _{}`$ on $`X\{x_0\}`$ hence $`(ı_t^{}\pi _{})^{}=(\pi _{})^{}`$. In particular $`c_2((ı_t^{}\pi _{})^{})=i`$. Now flatness implies $`c_2(ı_t^{}\pi _{})`$ is constant with $`t`$ so it is enough to show that for some $`tS_i𝔐_k^rT`$, $`ı_t^{}\pi _{}`$ is locally free.

To prove this last statement observe that in $`(S_i𝔐_k^rT)\times X`$ we have $`\pi _{}=((\text{1}\times \pi )_{})^{}`$. Hence its singularities lie in codimension three. This implies the desired result. ∎

Now we want to show that the restriction of $`\pi _{}`$ to $`S_i\overline{𝔐_k(\stackrel{~}{X})}`$ is a fibration with fiber $`S_0\overline{𝔐_{ki}(\stackrel{~}{}^2)}`$.

Let $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝔐}_i^r(X)`$ be the subspace of pairs $`(,\varphi )`$ such that $``$ is locally free at $`x_0`$.

###### Proposition 3.2.

$`\pi _{}^1\stackrel{ˇ}{𝔐}_i^r(X)=S_i\overline{𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{X})}`$

###### Proof.

We begin by remarking that, for any sheaf $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$, $`\pi _{}`$ and $`\pi _{}^{}`$ coincide over $`X\{x_0\}`$. So $`(,\varphi )\pi _{}^1\stackrel{ˇ}{𝔐}_i^r(X)`$ if and only if $`\pi _{}=\pi _{}^{}`$. Now

* Suppose $`\pi _{}=\pi _{}^{}`$. Then, by definition of $`S_i`$, $`(,\varphi )S_i\overline{𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{X})}`$.
* If $`(,\varphi )S_i\overline{𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{X})}`$ then $`c_2(\pi _{}^{})=c_2(\pi _{})`$ hence $`\pi _{}=\pi _{}^{}`$.

###### Proposition 3.3.

The restriction of $`\pi _{}`$ to $`\pi _{}^1(\stackrel{ˇ}{𝔐}_i^r(X))`$ is a fibration with fiber $`S_0\overline{𝔐_{ki}^r(\stackrel{~}{}^2)}`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`T_X\stackrel{ˇ}{𝔐}_i^r(X)`$ be an open set. We want to build an isomorphism $`T_X\times S_0\overline{𝔐(\stackrel{~}{}^2)}\pi _{}^1(T_X)`$. Let $`T_P𝔐_{ki}^r(\stackrel{~}{}^2)`$ be an open set. Consider the universal families $`(_X,\alpha _X)`$ over $`T_X`$ and $`(_P,\alpha _P)`$ over $`T_P`$. The next step is to build trivializations $`\psi _X,\psi _P`$ of $`_X,_P`$:

* For $`T_X`$ small enough we can choose a neighborhood of $`x_0`$, $`UX`$, such that $`_X`$ is free on $`T_X\times U`$. Fix a trivialization $`\psi :|_{T_X\times U}𝒪_{T_X\times U}^r`$;
* By definition of $`S_0\overline{𝔐_{ki}^r(\stackrel{~}{}^2)}`$, for any $`tT_P`$ the sheaves $`ı_t^{}_P|_{\stackrel{~}{}^2L}`$ are free. It follows that, for $`T_P`$ small enough, $`_P|_{\stackrel{~}{}^2L}`$ is a free sheaf. Then Hartog’s theorem implies there is a unique isomorphism $`\psi _P:_P|_{\stackrel{~}{}^2L}𝒪_{\stackrel{~}{}^2L}^r`$ which is compatible with $`\alpha _P`$.

Now consider the sheaf $`_{XP}\stackrel{~}{X}\times T_X\times T_P`$ given by

$$_{XP}=p_X^{}_X|_{X\{x_0\}}\underset{\psi _P^1\psi _X}{}p_P^{}_P|_{\stackrel{~}{}^2E}$$

where $`p_X:T_X\times T_PT_X`$, $`p_P:T_X\times T_PT_P`$ are the projections, and let $`\alpha _{XP}=\alpha _Xp_X`$. We claim $`(_{XP},\alpha _{XP})`$ is a flat family of stable framed sheaves. Flatness follows since both $`p_X^{}_X`$ and $`p_P^{}_P`$ are flat (see , proposition III.9.2). To prove stability let $`(t_X,t_P)T_X\times T_P`$ and let $`𝒜ı_t^{}_{XP}`$. Then $`(\pi _{}𝒜)^{}ı_{t_X}^{}_X`$. Now we repeat the argument used in the proof of proposition 3.1.

The family $`(_{XP},\alpha _{XP})`$ induces a map $`g_\psi :T_X\times T_P𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{X})`$ such that $`\pi _{}g_\psi =p_X`$. We want to build an inverse to this map, $`\pi _{}\times g_{\stackrel{~}{\psi }}`$, where

$$g_{\stackrel{~}{\psi }}:\pi _{}^1(T_X)S_0\overline{𝔐_{ki}^r(\stackrel{~}{}^2)}$$

Let $`T\pi _{}^1(T_X)`$ and consider the universal family $`(,\alpha )`$ over $`T`$. We have an isomorphism

$$\stackrel{~}{\psi }:|_{T\times \stackrel{~}{U}L}=\pi _{}|_{T\times U\{x_0\}}(\text{1}\times \pi _{})^{}_X|_{T\times U\{x_0\}}\stackrel{(\text{1}\times \pi _{})^{}\psi }{}𝒪_{T\times U\{x_0\}}^r$$

Then we define the sheaf over $`\stackrel{~}{}^2\times T`$

$$_p=|_{\stackrel{~}{U}}\underset{\stackrel{~}{\psi }}{}𝒪_{^2\{x_0\}}^r$$

As above, this is a flat family of framed sheaves inducing the desired map $`g_{\stackrel{~}{\psi }}`$.

Now it is a direct verification to check that $`\pi _{}\times g_{\stackrel{~}{\psi }}`$ is the inverse map of $`g_\psi `$. ∎

Now we turn to the proof of corollary 1.3. We will need the lemma:

###### Lemma 3.4.

Let $`f:XY`$ be a proper map betwen metric spaces $`X,Y`$. Let $`CY`$ be a closed subspace. Then, for any neighborhood $`W`$ of $`f^1(C)`$, there is a neighborhood $`V`$ of $`C`$ such that $`f^1(V)W`$.

###### Proof.

We claim that, for any $`yC`$ we can build a neighborhood $`V_y`$ of $`y`$ such that $`f^1(V_y)W`$: if not we could build a sequence $`x_nW`$ with $`f(x_n)y`$. Then properness of $`f`$ leads to a contradiction. Now, just take $`V=_{yC}V_y`$. ∎

###### Proof of Corollary 1.3.

To simplify notation we will write $`F_i=F_i\overline{𝔐(\stackrel{~}{X})}`$, $`\widehat{𝔐}_i=\widehat{𝔐}_i(X)`$. Recall that $`\widehat{𝔐}_i=\pi _{}F_{i1}`$. We begin by building open sets $`V_0,V_1\overline{𝔐_i^r(X)}`$ and $`W_0,W_1F_i\overline{𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{X})}`$ such that

1. $`\pi _{}^1V_1W_1\pi _{}^1V_0W_0`$;
2. $`\widehat{𝔐}_iV_j,j=0,1`$ are strong deformation retracts and $`V_1\widehat{𝔐}_iV_0\widehat{𝔐}_i`$ is a homotopy equivalence;
3. $`F_{i1}W_n,n=0,1`$ are strong deformation retracts and $`W_1F_{i1}W_0F_{i1}`$ is a homotopy equivalence.

The existence of such neighborhoods follows from lemma 3.4 and .

Now it follows from the five lemma applied to the homotopy exact sequence coming from the fibrations $`\pi _{}^1V_jF_{i1}V_j\widehat{𝔐}_i`$, $`j=1,2`$, that the inclusion $`\pi _{}^1V_1F_{i1}\pi _{}^1V_0F_{i1}`$ is a homotopy equivalence. Now, using the inclusionmaps in (1) we see that the spaces $`\pi _{}^1V_1F_{i1}`$ and $`W_1F_{i1}`$ are homotopycally equivalent. Now, by excision,

$$H_{}(F_i,F_{i1})H_{}(S_i,W_1F_{i1})H_{}(S_i,\pi _{}^1V_1F_{i1})$$

where $`S_i=S_i\overline{𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{X})}`$. To conclude the proof we apply the relative Leray-Serre spectral sequence to the pair of fibrations $`S_i\overline{𝔐_i}\widehat{𝔐}_i`$ and $`\pi _{}^1V_1F_{i1})V_1\widehat{𝔐}_i`$. The $`E^2`$ term is

$$E_{p,q}^2=H_p(\overline{𝔐_i}\widehat{𝔐}_i,V_1\widehat{𝔐}_i;H_q(S_0\overline{𝔐_{ki}(\stackrel{~}{}^2)}))$$

To finish the proof we apply excision. ∎

## 4. Stratification of $`𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{X})`$

The results in this section first appeared in . Recall that

$$S_i𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{X})=\left\{(,\varphi )𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{X})\right|c_2\left((\pi _{})^{}\right)=i\}$$

The objective of this section is to prove part one of theorem 1.2:

###### Theorem 4.1.

The map

$$\pi _{}:S_i𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{X})𝔐_i^r(X)$$

is a trivial fibration with fiber $`S_0𝔐(\stackrel{~}{}^2)`$.

The proof will be done using the analytic definition of the moduli space. Fix $`SU(r)`$ bundles $`E\stackrel{~}{X}`$, $`E_XX`$, $`E_P\stackrel{~}{}^2`$ with $`c_2(E)=k`$, $`c_2(E_X)=i`$ and $`c_2(E_P)=ki`$. We will use the notation $`𝔐(\stackrel{~}{X},E)`$, $`𝔐(X,E_X)`$, $`𝔐(\stackrel{~}{}^2,E_P)`$ for the moduli spaces.

We begin by introducing the enlarged moduli spaces:

###### Definition 4.2.

let $`UX`$ be an open topological ball around $`x_0`$ intersecting $`C`$ in a non-empty disk and let $`\stackrel{~}{U}=\pi ^1(U)`$. Then we define

1. $`𝔐^U(X,E_X)`$ is the quotient by $`Aut(E_X)`$ of the space of triples $`(\overline{}_X,\varphi _X,\psi _X)`$ where $`\overline{}_X`$ is a holomorphic structure on $`E_X`$, $`\varphi _X:E_X|_C_0`$ is an isomorphism and $`\psi _X`$ is a holomorphic trivialization of $`E|_U`$ that agrees with $`\varphi _X`$ in $`UC`$;
2. $`S_i𝔐^{\stackrel{~}{U}L}(\stackrel{~}{X},E)`$ is the quotient by $`Aut(E)`$ of the space of triples $`(\overline{},\varphi ,\psi )`$ where $`\overline{}`$ is a holomorphic structure on $`E`$ such that $`c_2(\pi _{}E^{})=i`$, $`\varphi :E|_C_0`$ is an isomorphism and $`\psi `$ is a holomorphic trivialization of $`E|_{\stackrel{~}{U}L}`$ (this bundle is always trivial) that agrees with $`\varphi `$ in $`\stackrel{~}{U}C`$;
3. $`S_0𝔐^{\stackrel{~}{}^2L}(\stackrel{~}{}^2,E_P)`$ is the quotient by $`Aut(E_P)`$ of the space of triples $`(\overline{}_P,\varphi _P,\psi _P)`$ where $`\overline{}_P`$ is a holomorphic structure on $`E_P`$ such that $`c_2(\pi _{}E_P^{})=0`$, $`\varphi _P:E|_C_0`$ is an isomorphism and $`\psi _P`$ is a holomorphic trivialization of $`E_P|_{\stackrel{~}{}^2L}`$ (trivial since $`c_2(\pi _{}E_P^{})=0`$) that agrees with $`\varphi _P`$ in $`C_{\mathrm{}}`$.

Before we proceed we introduce the useful result:

###### Lemma 4.3.

Let $`B`$ be a 4 dimensional ball and consider two holomorphic vector bundles $`E_1,E_2B`$. Let $`\varphi :E_1|_{B0}E_2|_{B0}`$ be an isomorphism. Then $`\varphi `$ extends to an isomorphism $`\varphi :E_1E_2`$.

###### Proof.

$`\varphi `$ is equivalent to a map $`\varphi :B0Gl(r,)^{r^2}`$. By Hartog’s theorem this map extends to a map $`\varphi :B^{r^2}`$. Composing with the determinant we get a map $`det\varphi :B`$ which can only vanish at $`0B`$, hence it never vanishes. We conclude that the image of $`\varphi `$ lies in $`Gl(r,)`$. ∎

###### Proposition 4.4.

The spaces $`𝔐^U(X,E_X)\times S_0𝔐^{\stackrel{~}{}^2L}(\stackrel{~}{}^2,E_P)`$ and $`S_i𝔐^{\stackrel{~}{U}L}(\stackrel{~}{X},E)`$ are homeomorphic.

###### Proof.

We divide the proof into four steps:

1. The first goal is to define a map

$$g:𝔐^U(X,E_X)\times S_0𝔐^{\stackrel{~}{}^2L}(\stackrel{~}{}^2,E_P)𝔐^{\stackrel{~}{U}L}(\stackrel{~}{X},E).$$

Let $`[\overline{}_X,\varphi _X,\psi _X]𝔐^U(X,E_X)`$, $`[\overline{}_P,\varphi _P,\psi _P]S_0𝔐^{\stackrel{~}{}^2L}(\stackrel{~}{}^2,E_P)`$. Let

$$E_{XP}=E_X|_{X\{x_0\}}\underset{\psi _P^1\psi _X}{}E_P|_{\stackrel{~}{U}}$$

We claim $`E_{XP}`$ is isomorphic to $`E`$ as topological vector bundles. It is enough to show that $`c_2(E_{XP})=k`$. To prove this fix trivializations $`h_X`$ of $`E_X`$ on $`X\{x_0\}`$ and $`h_P`$ of $`E_P`$ on $`\stackrel{~}{U}`$. Then,

$$E_X_{X\{x_0\}}\underset{\psi _Xh_X^1}{}_U,E_P_{\stackrel{~}{}^2L}\underset{h_P\psi _P^1}{}_{\stackrel{~}{U}}$$

Hence, seen as maps $`S^3Gl(r,)`$, $`\psi _Xh_X^1`$ and $`h_P\psi _P^1`$ have degree $`i`$ and $`ki`$ respectivelly. Now

$$E_{XP}_{X\{x_0\}}\underset{\psi _Xh_X^1h_P\psi _P^1}{}_{\stackrel{~}{U}}$$

hence $`c_2(E_{XP})=k`$.

Now we define the map $`g`$. $`\overline{}_X`$ and $`\overline{}_P`$ induce a holomorphic structure $`\overline{}_{XP}`$ on $`E_{XP}`$ and we have $`[\overline{}_{XP},\varphi _X,\psi _X|_{\stackrel{~}{U}L}]𝔐^{\stackrel{~}{U}L}(\stackrel{~}{X},E_{XP})`$.

Choose an isomorphism $`f:E_{XP}E`$. Then $`f`$ induces a map $`f_\mathrm{\#}:𝔐^{\stackrel{~}{U}L}(\stackrel{~}{X},E_{XP})𝔐^{\stackrel{~}{U}L}(\stackrel{~}{X},E)`$. We define

$$g([\overline{}_X,\varphi _X,\psi _X],[\overline{}_P,\varphi _P,\psi _P])=f_\mathrm{\#}([\overline{}_{XP},\varphi _X,\psi _X|_{\stackrel{~}{U}L}])$$

This map does not depend on the choice of isomorphism $`f`$.
2. Now we show that the image of $`g`$ lies in $`S_i𝔐^{\stackrel{~}{U}L}(\stackrel{~}{X},E)`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ be the bundle $`E_{XP}`$ with holomorphic structure induced by $`\overline{}_X`$ and $`\overline{}_P`$. We claim that $`(\pi _{})^{}`$ is biholomorphic to $`E_X`$ with holomorphic structure $`\overline{}_X`$. This is a consequence of lemma 4.3 since the restriction of the bundles to $`X\{x_0\}`$ are biholomorphic. Hence the image of $`g`$ lies in $`S_i𝔐^{\stackrel{~}{U}L}(\stackrel{~}{X},E)`$.
3. Now we show $`g`$ is continuous. Fix $`q_X=(\overline{}_X,\varphi _X,\psi _X)^U(X,E_X)`$, $`q_P=(\overline{}_P,\varphi _P,\psi _P)^{\stackrel{~}{}^2L}(\stackrel{~}{}^2,E_P)`$. Fix balls $`B_r(x_0)B_R(x_0)U`$ and let $`K=\overline{B_R(x_0)}B_r(x_0)`$. Choose $`\epsilon >0`$ such that $`W=B_\epsilon (\text{1})Gl(r,)`$ Then $`(K,W)`$ defines an open neighborhood of 1 in $`C^{\mathrm{}}(U,Gl(r,))`$.

For each pair $`q=([\overline{}_X,\varphi _X,\psi _X],[\overline{}_P,\varphi _P,\psi _P]))`$ let

$$E_q=E_X|_{X\{x_0\}}\underset{\psi _P^1\psi _X}{}E_P|_{\stackrel{~}{U}}$$

Continuity of $`g`$ will follow if we construct a continuous family of isomorphisms $`f_q:E_qE`$, or, what amounts to the same, a continuous family $`f_q:E_qE_{q_0}`$ for fixed

$$q_0=([\overline{}_{X0},\varphi _{X0},\psi _{X0}],[\overline{}_{P0},\varphi _{P0},\psi _{P0}]))$$

A map $`f_q:E_qE_{q_0}`$ is equivalent to the diagram

Assume $`\psi _{X0}\psi _X^1`$ and $`\psi _{P0}\psi _P^1`$ are in a $`(K,W)`$ neighborhood of $`q_0`$. Fix a monotonous $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ function $`\eta `$ such that $`\eta (\rho )=0`$ for $`\rho <r`$ and $`\eta (\rho )=1`$ for $`\rho >R`$. $`\eta `$ induces a map $`\stackrel{~}{\eta }:K`$, $`x\eta (|x|)`$. We define

$`f_X=\text{1}`$ $`|x|>R`$
$`f_U=\stackrel{~}{\eta }\psi _{X0}\psi _X^1+(1\eta )\psi _{P0}\psi _P^1`$ $`r<|x|<R`$
$`f_P=\text{1}`$ $`|x|<r`$
This completes the proof of continuity of $`g`$.
4. Now we construct maps

$$g_X:S_i𝔐^{\stackrel{~}{U}L}(\stackrel{~}{X},E)𝔐^U(X,E_X)$$

$$g_P:S_i𝔐^{\stackrel{~}{U}L}(\stackrel{~}{X},E)S_0𝔐^{\stackrel{~}{}^2L}(\stackrel{~}{}^2,E_P)$$

Let $`[\overline{}_{\stackrel{~}{X}},\varphi ,\psi ]S_i𝔐^{\stackrel{~}{U}L}(\stackrel{~}{X},E)`$. Define the bundles

$$\widehat{E}_X=E|_{\stackrel{~}{X}L}\underset{\psi }{}U\times ^r$$

$$\widehat{E}_P=E|_{\stackrel{~}{U}}\underset{\psi }{}\stackrel{~}{}^2L\times ^r$$

Then $`\overline{}_{\stackrel{~}{X}}`$ induces holomorphic structures $`\overline{}_X`$ on $`\widehat{E}_X`$ and $`\overline{}_P`$ on $`\widehat{E}_P`$. Proceeding as above we choose isomorphisms $`f_X:\widehat{E}_XE_X`$ and $`f_P:\widehat{E}_PE_P`$. Then we define

$$g_X([,\varphi ,\psi ])=(f_X)_\mathrm{\#}([\widehat{}_X,\varphi _X,\text{1}])$$

$$g_P([,\varphi ,\psi ])=(f_P)_\mathrm{\#}([\widehat{}_P,\text{1},\text{1}])$$

The proof that $`g_X,g_P`$ are well defined continuous maps proceeds as the corresponding proof for $`g`$. To conclude the proof we observe that $`g(g_X\times g_P)=\text{1}`$ and $`(g_X\times g_P)g=\text{1}`$.

Now we look more closely at the map $`g_X:S_i𝔐^{\stackrel{~}{U}L}(\stackrel{~}{X},E)𝔐^U(X,E_X)`$ introduced in the proof of the previous proposition.

###### Proposition 4.5.

Consider the projection maps

$`pr_{\stackrel{~}{X}}:S_i𝔐^{\stackrel{~}{U}L}(\stackrel{~}{X},E)S_i𝔐(\stackrel{~}{X},E)`$
$`pr_X:𝔐^U(X,E_X)𝔐(X,E_X)`$
$`g_X`$ preserves the orbits of $`pr_{\stackrel{~}{X}}`$ and $`pr_X`$, hence it induces a map $`\widehat{g}_X:S_i𝔐(\stackrel{~}{X},E)𝔐(X,E_X)`$. Furthermore, $`\widehat{g}_X=\pi _{}^{}=\pi _{}`$ and is determined by the following property:

* Let $`[,\varphi ]𝔐(\stackrel{~}{X},)`$. Then there is a unique holomorphic bundle $`_XX`$ such that $`|_{\stackrel{~}{X}L}=_X|_{X\{x_0\}}`$ and we have $`\widehat{g}_X([,\varphi ])=[_X,\varphi ]`$.

###### Proof.

We begin by proving the last statement. Let $`[,\varphi ]𝔐(\stackrel{~}{X},)`$ and define $`_X=\pi _{}^{}`$. Then clearly $`|_{\stackrel{~}{X}L}=_X|_{X\{x_0\}}`$. Uniqueness of $`_X`$ then follows from lemma 4.3.

Now, from this uniqueness property and by definition of $`g_X`$ it follows that $`pr_Xg_X([,\varphi ,\psi ])=[_X,\varphi ]`$. This shows $`g_X`$ preserves the fibers of $`pr_X`$ hence $`\widehat{g}_X`$ is well defined.

Now it follows that $`\widehat{g}_X=\pi _{}`$, ∎

###### Proposition 4.6.

Consider the projection maps

$`pr_{\stackrel{~}{X}}:𝔐^{\stackrel{~}{U}L}(\stackrel{~}{X},E)𝔐(\stackrel{~}{X},E)`$
$`pr_X:𝔐_k^U(X)𝔐_k(X)`$
$`pr_P:𝔐_k^{\stackrel{~}{}^2L}(\stackrel{~}{}^2)𝔐_k(\stackrel{~}{}^2)`$
These maps are principal bundle maps with contractible fiber.

###### Proof.

We divide the proof into three steps:

1. For an open set $`A`$ we define

$$G(A)=\{\eta \mathrm{Hol}(A,Gl(r,)):\eta |_{AC}=\text{1}\}$$

Then, for $`A=\stackrel{~}{U}L,U,\stackrel{~}{}^2L`$, $`G(A)`$ acts on $`𝔐^A(Y)`$ (where $`Y=\stackrel{~}{X},X,\stackrel{~}{}^2`$ respectivelly) by

$$\eta [,\varphi ,\psi ]=[,\varphi ,\eta \psi ]$$

This action is free and its orbits are the fibers of $`pr,pr_X,pr_P`$ respectivelly.
2. $`G(U)`$ is clearly contractible. From lemma 4.3 it follows that $`G(\stackrel{~}{U}L)=G(U)`$ and $`G(\stackrel{~}{}^2L)=G(^2)=\{\text{1}\}`$.
3. Finally we need to show the existence of local sections. We will first build a section $`s_X`$ of $`pr_X`$. As in the proof of proposition 3.3, for $`T_X𝔐(X,E_X)`$ we choose a trivialization $`\psi _X:|_{T_X\times U}𝒪_{T_X\times U}^r`$. We can choose $`\psi _X`$ compatible with $`\alpha _X`$ on $`CU`$. Now, for $`t=[,\varphi ]T_X`$, $`\psi _X`$ gives a map $`\psi _{Xt}:|_U=ı_t^{}_X|_U𝒪_U^r`$. Then $`s_X(,\varphi )=(,\varphi ,\psi _{Xt})`$.

Sections of $`pr_{\stackrel{~}{X}}`$ $`p_P`$ are built in a similar way: for $`T𝔐(\stackrel{~}{X},E)`$ and $`T_P𝔐(\stackrel{~}{}^2,E_P)`$ we build trivializations $`\psi _{\stackrel{~}{X}}`$ and $`\psi _P`$ following the same procedure as in the proof of proposition 3.3.

###### Corollary 4.7.

The spaces $`𝔐_i(X,E_X)\times S_0𝔐_{ki}(\stackrel{~}{}^2,E_P)`$ and $`S_i𝔐_k(\stackrel{~}{X},E)`$ are homotopically equivalent.

We are ready to prove theorem 4.1

###### Proof.

Fix a global section $`s:𝔐(X,E_X)𝔐^U(X,E_X)`$ of $`pr_X`$. Define $`f_s:𝔐(X,E_X)\times S_0𝔐(\stackrel{~}{}^2,E_P)S_i𝔐(\stackrel{~}{X},E)`$ by $`f_s=prg(s\times \text{1})`$. It is easy to check that $`f_s`$ is a bijection. We need to show that its inverse is continuous. To that end we construct a local inverse as follows: let $`S𝔐(\stackrel{~}{X},E)`$ be affine. Then $`s`$ induces a map $`s_{\stackrel{~}{X}}:S𝔐^{\stackrel{~}{U}L}(\stackrel{~}{X},E)`$ given by the restriction of $`s\widehat{g}_X`$ to $`\stackrel{~}{U}L`$ (see the construction of a trivialization $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }`$ in the proof of proposition 3.3). We define $`F_s=(pr\times \text{1})(g_X\times g_P)s_{\stackrel{~}{X}}`$. Then $`F_s`$ is the inverse of $`f_s`$ which concludes the proof. ∎

### 4.1. Rank Stabilization

Direct sum with a trivial bundle induces maps $`j:𝔐_k^r(X,E)𝔐_k^r^{}(X,E𝒪_X^{r^{}r})`$ for $`r^{}>r`$. We define the rank stable moduli space by

$$𝔐_k^{\mathrm{}}(X)=\underset{\begin{array}{c}\\ r\end{array}}{lim}𝔐_k^r$$

The definitions of $`S_i,F_i`$ carry through to the rank stable situation. We want to extend the previous results to these moduli spaces:

###### Theorem 4.8.

The spaces $`S_i𝔐_k^{\mathrm{}}(\stackrel{~}{X})`$ and $`𝔐_i^{\mathrm{}}(X)\times S_0𝔐_{ki}^{\mathrm{}}(\stackrel{~}{}^2)`$ are homotopically equivalent.

###### Proof.

We will show that the maps $`f_s,F_s`$ introduced in the last section can be defined on the direct limits and they are homotopic inverse of each other.

We first observe that the rank stable enlarged moduli spaces $`𝔐_k^{\mathrm{},A}(X)`$ ($`A=U,\stackrel{~}{U}L,\stackrel{~}{C}P^2L`$) can be defined in the same way Consider then $`f_s=prg(s\times \text{1})`$. $`pr,g`$ commute with the inclusion $`j`$. So we only need to show that the diagram

is homotopy commutative. First observe that $`prjs_r=prs_r^{}j=j`$. Hence, from proposition 4.6 we can find, for each $`t=[,\varphi ]𝔐_k^r(X)`$, a map $`h_t\mathrm{Hol}(U,Gl(r^{},))`$ such that $`h(js_1(t))=s_2j(t)`$. This defines a map $`H:𝔐_k^r(X)\mathrm{Hol}(U,Gl(r^{},))`$. Since the space of such maps is connected, $`js_r`$ is homotopic to $`s_r^{}j`$. We conclude that the map $`f_s`$ can be defined in the direct limit. In the same way we define the inverse map $`F_s`$ in the direct limit. This concludes the proof. ∎

## 5. Caracterization of $`S_0\overline{𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{}^2)}`$ using Monads

The objective of this section is to give a characterization of points in $`S_0𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{}^2)`$ in terms of a monad description. This result also appears in  and . We also give an explicit description of the map $`S_0𝔐(\stackrel{~}{}^2)S_0𝔐^{\stackrel{~}{}^2L}(\stackrel{~}{}^2)`$ from section 4.

We begin by sketching the monad description of the spaces $`𝔐_k^r(^2)`$ and $`𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{}^2)`$. We follow . See also .

Let $`L_{\mathrm{}}^2`$ be a rational curve and let $`L`$ be the exceptional divisor. Let $`W,W_0,W_1`$ be $`k`$ dimensional complex vector spaces. Choose sections $`x_1,x_2,x_3`$ spanning $`H^0(𝒪(L_{\mathrm{}}))`$ and $`y_1,y_2`$ spanning $`H^0(𝒪(L_{\mathrm{}}L))`$ so that $`x_3`$ vanishes on $`L_{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`x_1y_1+x_2y_2`$ spans the kernel of

$$H^0(𝒪(L_{\mathrm{}}))H^0(𝒪(L_{\mathrm{}}L))H^0(𝒪(2L_{\mathrm{}}L))$$

### 5.1. The moduli space over $`^2`$

Let $``$ be the space of 4-tuples $`m=(a_1,a_2,b,c)`$ with $`a_i\mathrm{End}(W)`$, $`b\mathrm{Hom}(^r,W)`$, $`c\mathrm{Hom}(W,^r)`$, obeying the integrability condition $`[a_1,a_2]+bc=0`$. For each $`m=(a_1,a_2,b,c)`$ we define maps $`A_m,B_m`$

by

$$A_m=\left[\begin{array}{c}x_1a_1x_3\\ x_2a_2x_3\\ cx_3\end{array}\right],B_m=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}x_2+a_2x_3& x_1a_1x_3& bx_3\end{array}\right]$$

Then $`B_mA_m=0`$. The assignement $`m_m=\mathrm{Ker}B_m/\mathrm{Im}A_m`$ induces a map $`f:\overline{𝔐_k^r(^2)}`$.

A point $`m`$ is called non-degenerate if $`A_m`$ and $`B_m`$ have maximal rank at every point in $`^2`$. Then $`_m`$ is locally free.

###### Theorem 5.1.

Let $`_k^r(^2)`$ denote the quotient of the space of non degenerate points in $``$ by the action of $`Gl(W)`$:

$$g(a_1,a_2,b,c)=(g^1a_1g,g^1a_2g,g^1b,cg)$$

Then the map $`f`$ induces an isomorphism $`_k^r(^2)𝔐_k^r(^2)`$.

For a proof see , proposition 1.

###### Theorem 5.2.

Let $`\overline{_k^r(^2)}`$ be the algebraic quotient $`/Gl(W)`$. This space is isomorphic to the Donaldson-Uhlenbeck completion of the moduli space of instantons over $`S^4`$.

For a proof see , sections 3.3, 3.4, 3.4.4.

For future reference we sketch here how the map from $`/Gl(W)`$ to the Donaldson-Uhlenbeck completion of the moduli space of instantons is constructed (see  for details):

Let $`m=(a_1,a_2,b,c)`$. A subspace $`VW`$ is called $`b`$-special with respect to $`m`$ if

(1)
$$a_i(V)V(i=1,2)\mathrm{and}\mathrm{Im}bV$$

A subspace $`VW`$ is called $`c`$-special with respect to $`m`$ if

(2)
$$a_i(V)V(i=1,2)\mathrm{and}V\mathrm{Ker}c$$

$`m`$ is called completely reducible if for every $`VW`$ which is $`b`$-special or $`c`$-special, there is a complement $`V^{}W`$ which is $`c`$-special or $`b`$-special respectively.

###### Proposition 5.3.

Let $`m=(a_1,a_2,b,c)`$.

1. $`m`$ is non degenerate if and only if the only $`b`$-special subspace is $`W`$ and the only $`c`$-special subspace is $`0`$;
2. For every $`m`$, the orbit of $`m`$ under $`Gl(W)`$ contains in its closure a canonical completely reducible orbit and completely reducible orbits have disjoint closures;
3. If $`m`$ is completely reducible then, after acting with some $`gGl(W)`$ we can write

$$a_i=\left[\begin{array}{cc}a_i^{red}& 0\\ 0& a_i^\mathrm{\Delta }\end{array}\right],b=\left[\begin{array}{c}b^{red}\\ 0\end{array}\right],c=\left[\begin{array}{cc}c^{red}& 0\end{array}\right]$$

where $`(a_1^{red},a_2^{red},b^{red},c^{red})`$ is non-degenerate and the matrices $`a_1^\mathrm{\Delta },a_2^\mathrm{\Delta }`$ can be simultaneously diagonalized. Such a configuration is equivalent to the following data:

* An irreducible integrable configuration $`(a_1^{red},a_2^{red},b^{red},c^{red})`$ corresponding to a bundle with $`c_2=lk`$;
    * $`kl`$ points in $`^2=^2L_{\mathrm{}}`$ given by the eigenvalue pairs of $`a_1^\mathrm{\Delta },a_2^\mathrm{\Delta }`$

This is precisely the Donaldson-Uhlenbeck completion.

### 5.2. The moduli space over $`\stackrel{~}{}^2`$

Let $`\stackrel{~}{}`$ be the space of 5-tuples $`\stackrel{~}{m}=(a_1,a_2,d,b,c)`$ with $`a_i\mathrm{Hom}(W_1,W_0)`$, $`d\mathrm{Hom}(W_0,W_1)`$, $`b\mathrm{Hom}(^r,W_0)`$, $`c\mathrm{Hom}(W_1,^r)`$, such that $`a_1(W_1)+a_2(W_1)+b(^r)=W_0`$, obeying the integrability condition $`a_1da_2a_2da_1+bc=0`$. For each $`\stackrel{~}{m}=(a_1,a_2,d,b,c)\stackrel{~}{}`$ we define maps $`A_{\stackrel{~}{m}},B_{\stackrel{~}{m}}`$

$$\begin{array}{c}W_1(L_{\mathrm{}})W_0(LL_{\mathrm{}})\stackrel{A_{\stackrel{~}{m}}}{}\left(W_0W_1\right)^2^n\stackrel{B_{\stackrel{~}{m}}}{}\hfill \\ \hfill W_0(L_{\mathrm{}})W_1(L_{\mathrm{}}L)\end{array}$$

by

$$A_{\stackrel{~}{m}}=\left[\begin{array}{cc}a_1x_3& y_2\\ x_1da_1x_3& 0\\ a_2x_3& y_1\\ x_2da_2x_3& 0\\ cx_3& 0\end{array}\right],B_{\stackrel{~}{m}}=\left[\begin{array}{ccccc}x_2& a_2x_3& x_1& a_1x_3& bx_3\\ dy_1& y_1& dy_2& y_2& 0\end{array}\right]$$

Then $`B_{\stackrel{~}{m}}A_{\stackrel{~}{m}}=0`$. The assignement $`\stackrel{~}{m}_{\stackrel{~}{m}}=\mathrm{Ker}B_{\stackrel{~}{m}}/\mathrm{Im}A_{\stackrel{~}{m}}`$ induces a map $`\stackrel{~}{f}:\stackrel{~}{}\overline{𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{}^2)}`$.

A point $`\stackrel{~}{m}\stackrel{~}{}`$ is called non-degenerate if $`A_{\stackrel{~}{m}}`$ and $`B_{\stackrel{~}{m}}`$ have maximal rank at every point in $`\stackrel{~}{}^2`$.

###### Theorem 5.4.

Let $`_k^r(\stackrel{~}{}^2)`$ denote the quotient of the space of non degenerate points in $`\stackrel{~}{}`$ by the action of $`Gl(W_0)\times Gl(W_1)`$:

$$(g_0,g_1)(a_1,a_2,b,c,d)=(g_0^1a_1g_1,g_0^1a_2g_1,g_0^1b,cg_1,g_1^1dg_0)$$

Then the map $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$ induces an isomorphism $`_k^r(\stackrel{~}{}^2)𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{}^2)`$.

### 5.3. The theorem and its proof

We are now in conditions to state the theorem:

###### Theorem 5.5.

Let $`\stackrel{~}{m}=(a_1,a_2,d,b,c)\stackrel{~}{}`$. Then $`_{\stackrel{~}{m}}S_0\overline{𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{}^2)}`$ if and only if $`da_1`$, $`da_2`$ are nilpotent and, for any sequence $`i_1,\mathrm{},i_n\{1,2\}`$, we have

$$c\left(\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}da_{i_j}\right)db=0$$

We divide the proof into several propositions.

###### Proposition 5.6.

Let $`\pi _\mathrm{\#}:\stackrel{~}{}`$ be given by $`\pi _\mathrm{\#}(a_1,a_2,d,b,c)=(da_1,da_2,db,c)`$. Let $`m=\pi _\mathrm{\#}\stackrel{~}{m}`$. Then $`_{\stackrel{~}{m}}|_{\stackrel{~}{X}L}`$ is isomorphic to $`_m|_{X\{x_0\}}`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`m=\pi _\mathrm{\#}\stackrel{~}{m}`$. Fix an isomorphism $`WW_1`$. Let $`p`$ be the projection $`p:W^2^r(W_0W_1)^2^r`$ with kernel $`W_0^2`$. After restricting to $`\stackrel{~}{X}L`$ we can rescale the sections so that $`y_2=x_1`$, $`y_1=x_2`$. Then a direct verification shows that, for any $`\stackrel{~}{m}`$, $`p`$ induces maps $`\mathrm{Ker}B_{\stackrel{~}{m}}\mathrm{Ker}B_m`$ and $`\mathrm{Im}A_{\stackrel{~}{m}}\mathrm{Im}A_m`$. Hence we get a map $`_{\stackrel{~}{m}}_m`$. It is a direct computation to check that this map is an isomorphism. ∎

It follows from this proposition and theorem 5.2 that, for $`\stackrel{~}{m}\stackrel{~}{}`$, $`_{\stackrel{~}{m}}S_0\overline{𝔐_k^r(\stackrel{~}{}^2)}`$ if and only if $`_{\pi _\mathrm{\#}\stackrel{~}{m}}`$ is a sheaf whose whole charge is concentrated at $`[0,0,1]^2`$, that is, $`\mathrm{}\left(_{\pi _{\mathrm{\#}\stackrel{~}{m}}}^{}/_{\pi _{\mathrm{\#}\stackrel{~}{m}}}\right)=k`$. We proceed to study this situation:

###### Lemma 5.7.

Let $`m=(a_1,a_2,b,c)`$ be such that $`_m`$ has its whose whole charge concentrated at $`[0,0,1]`$. Then, after a change of basis we can write

$$a_i=\left[\begin{array}{cc}J& \\ 0& J\end{array}\right],b=\left[\begin{array}{c}\\ 0\end{array}\right],c=\left[\begin{array}{cc}0& \end{array}\right]$$

where $`J`$ represents any nilpotent matrix in the Jordan canonical form.

Before we begin the proof we observe that this lemma implies one direction of theorem 5.5.

###### Proof.

We begin by proving by induction on the charge that, after acting with an element $`gGl(W)`$, we can write.

$$a_i=\left[\begin{array}{cc}a_{iu}& \\ 0& a_{id}\end{array}\right],b=\left[\begin{array}{c}\\ 0\end{array}\right],c=\left[\begin{array}{cc}0& \end{array}\right]$$

Clearly the configuration $`(a_1,a_2,b,c)`$ cannot be non-degenerate hence there is a subspace $`V`$ which is either $`b`$-special or $`c`$-special (proposition 5.3, 1). We consider both cases:

1. If $`m`$ is $`b`$ special, after a change of basis we can write

$$a_i=\left[\begin{array}{cc}a_i^{}& \\ 0& f_i\end{array}\right],b=\left[\begin{array}{c}b^{}\\ 0\end{array}\right],c=\left[\begin{array}{cc}c^{}& \end{array}\right]$$

So the point $`(\left[\begin{array}{cc}a_i^{}& 0\\ 0& f_i\end{array}\right],\left[\begin{array}{c}b^{}\\ 0\end{array}\right],\left[\begin{array}{cc}c^{}& 0\end{array}\right])`$ is in the closure of the orbit of $`m`$. It follows then from proposition 5.3 that $`m^{}=(a_1^{},a_2^{},b^{},c^{})`$ corresponds to an ideal bundle with charge concentrated at $`[0,0,1]`$. Hence we can apply the induction hypothesis to $`m^{}`$. We get

$$a_i=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}a_{iu}^{}& & \\ 0& a_{id}^{}& \\ 0& 0& f_i\end{array}\right],b=\left[\begin{array}{c}\\ 0\\ 0\end{array}\right],c=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}0& & \end{array}\right]$$

which is in the desired form.
2. If $`m`$ is $`c`$-special, after a change of basis we can write

$$a_i=\left[\begin{array}{cc}f_i& \\ 0& a_i^{}\end{array}\right],b=\left[\begin{array}{c}\\ b^{}\end{array}\right],c=\left[\begin{array}{cc}0& c^{}\end{array}\right]$$

Applying induction hypothesis to $`(a_1^{},a_2^{},b^{},c^{})`$ as in the previous case, we can write

$$a_i=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}f_i& & \\ 0& a_{iu}^{}& \\ 0& 0& a_{id}^{}\end{array}\right],b=\left[\begin{array}{c}\\ \\ 0\end{array}\right],c=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}0& 0& \end{array}\right]$$

This is in the desired form.

Now the condition $`[a_1,a_2]+bc=0`$ implies $`[a_{1u},a_{2u}]=[a_{1d},a_{2d}]=0`$. So, after a change of basis we can put all these matrices in the Jordan canonical form. Since all charge is concentrated at $`[0,0,1]`$, proposition 5.3 implies the eigenvalues of these matrices are all $`0`$. ∎

The other direction of theorem 5.5 follows directly from the proposition

###### Proposition 5.8.

Let $`m`$ be such that $`a_1,a_2`$ are nilpotent and, for any $`n_1,n_2`$ we have

(3)
$$ca_1^{n_1}a_2^{n_2}b=0$$

Then $`_m|_{^2[0,0,1]}`$ is free.

###### Proof.

We will build an explicit trivialization. First we need to introduce some notation. Let $`^2=\{[x_1,x_2,x_3]\}`$ and define an open cover of $`^2[0,0,1]`$ by $`U_1=\{x_10\}`$, $`U_2=\{x_20\}`$. Let $`e_1,\mathrm{},e_r`$ be the canonical basis of $`^r`$. Choose coordinates $`(\alpha _2,\alpha _3)[1,\alpha _2,\alpha _3]`$ in $`U_1`$ and $`(\beta _1,\beta _3)[\beta _1,1,\beta _3]`$ in $`U_2`$. Then define functions $`s_i^j:U_j\mathrm{Ker}B_m`$ by

$$s_i^1=(0,\alpha _3(\text{1}\alpha _3a_1)^1be_i,e_i)$$

$$s_i^2=(\beta _3(\text{1}\beta _3a_2)^1be_i,0,e_i)$$

(since $`a_1,a_2`$ are nilpotent, $`\text{1}\lambda a_i`$ is invertible for any $`\lambda `$). It is a direct verification that indeed the image of $`s_i^1,s_i^2`$ lie in $`\text{Ker}B_m`$. We want to show that $`s_i^1,s_i^2`$ induce a trivialization of $`_m`$. We will have to show that $`S_i^1s_i^2\text{Im}A_m`$ in $`U_1U_2`$. Then $`s_i^1,s_i^2`$ induce a section of $`_m`$. We will show these sections are linearly independent.

1. We begin by looking at the space $`\mathrm{Im}A+\mathrm{Im}s_1^1+\mathrm{}+\mathrm{Im}s_r^1`$. We can represent the image of $`s_i^1`$ in terms of column vectors in matrix form. Then, joining this matrix with $`A_m`$ we have

$$𝔄_1=\left[\begin{array}{cc}\text{1}\alpha _3a_1& 0\\ \alpha _2\alpha _3a_2& \alpha _3(\text{1}\alpha _3a_1)^1b\\ \alpha _3c& \text{1}\end{array}\right]$$

This matrix clearly has maximum rank since $`\text{1}\alpha _3a_1`$ is non-singular. Hence, for dimensional reasons its columns form a basis for $`\mathrm{Ker}B`$. In particular $`s_i^1`$ are linearly independent.
2. Now we repeat the argument for $`s_i^2`$. In $`U_2`$ we have a similar matrix:

$$𝔄_2=\left[\begin{array}{cc}\beta _1\beta _3a_1& \beta _3(\text{1}\beta _3a_2)^1b\\ \text{1}\beta _3a_2& 0\\ \beta _3c& \text{1}\end{array}\right]$$

which has also clearly maximum rank. Its columns form a basis for $`\mathrm{Ker}B`$. In particular $`s_i^2`$ are linearly independent.
3. Now we will show $`s_i^1s_i^2\mathrm{Im}A`$ in $`U_1U_2`$. We have, with $`\beta _1=\alpha _2^1`$ and $`\beta _3=\alpha _2^1\alpha _3`$,

$$s^2(\alpha _2^1,\alpha _2^1\alpha _3)=\left[\begin{array}{c}\alpha _3(\alpha _2\alpha _3a_2)^1b\\ 0\\ \text{1}\end{array}\right]$$

Since $`s^2`$ is in the kernel of $`B`$, it must be in the image of the surjective matrix $`𝔄_1`$. So we can solve

$$\left[\begin{array}{ccc}\text{1}\alpha _3a_1& 0& \\ \alpha _2\alpha _3a_2& \alpha _3(\text{1}\alpha _3a_1)^1b& \\ \alpha _3c& \text{1}& \end{array}\right]\left[\begin{array}{c}\xi _1\\ \xi _2\end{array}\right]=\left[\begin{array}{c}\alpha _3(\alpha _2\alpha _3a_2)^1b\\ 0\\ \text{1}\end{array}\right]$$

We obtain immediately $`\xi _1=\alpha _3(\text{1}\alpha _3a_1)^1(\alpha _2\alpha _3a_2)^1b`$. Now equation 3 implies $`c\xi _1=0`$. From here it follows immediately that $`\xi _2=\text{1}`$ hence $`s_i^2s_i^1=A_m\xi _1`$.

This completes the proof. ∎

Notice that this proof gives an explicit description of the map $`S_0𝔐(\stackrel{~}{}^2)S_0𝔐^{\stackrel{~}{}^2L}(\stackrel{~}{}^2)`$.

## Appendix A Direct Image

Let $`S`$ be a scheme and let $`sS`$. let $`ı_s:XS\times X`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{ı}_s:\stackrel{~}{X}S\times \stackrel{~}{X}`$ be the inclusions $`x(s,x)`$.

###### Lemma A.1.

For any sheaf $``$ over $`S\times \stackrel{~}{X}`$ we have

$$ı_s^{}(\text{1}\times \pi )_{}\pi _{}\stackrel{~}{ı}_s^{}$$

###### Proof.

Let $`VX`$. Then

$$ı_s^{}(\text{1}\times \pi )_{}(V)=\left(\underset{\begin{array}{c}\\ s\times VW\end{array}}{lim}\left((\text{1}\times \pi )^1W\right)\right)\underset{\underset{\begin{array}{c}\\ s\times VW\end{array}}{lim}𝒪_{S\times X}(W)}{}𝒪_X(V)$$

$$\pi _{}\stackrel{~}{ı}_s^{}(V)=\left(\underset{\begin{array}{c}\\ s\times \pi ^1(V)U\end{array}}{lim}(U)\right)\underset{\underset{\begin{array}{c}\\ s\times \pi ^1\left(V\right)U\end{array}}{lim}𝒪_{S\times \stackrel{~}{X}}(U)}{}𝒪_{\stackrel{~}{X}}(\pi ^1(V))$$

which we can rewrite as

$$ı_s^{}(\text{1}\times \pi )_{}(V)=\underset{\begin{array}{c}\\ U_1𝒮_1\end{array}}{lim}(U_1)\underset{\underset{\begin{array}{c}\\ U_1𝒮_1\end{array}}{lim}𝒪_{S\times \stackrel{~}{X}}(U_1)}{}𝒪_X(V)$$

$$\pi _{}\stackrel{~}{ı}_s^{}(V)=\underset{\begin{array}{c}\\ U_2𝒮_2\end{array}}{lim}(U_2)\underset{\underset{\begin{array}{c}\\ U_2𝒮_2\end{array}}{lim}𝒪_{S\times \stackrel{~}{X}}(U_2)}{}𝒪_X(V)$$

where

$`𝒮_1=\left\{(\text{1}\times \pi )^1W\right|s\times VW\}`$
$`𝒮_2=\left\{U\right|(\text{1}\times \pi )^1(s\times V)U\}`$
We claim that $`𝒮_1=𝒮_2`$: Just observe that if $`U_2𝒮_2`$ then $`U_2=(1\times \pi )^1(1\times \pi )(U_2)`$. This concludes the proof. ∎


text:
# Lightcurves of thermonuclear supernovae as a probe of the explosion mechanism and their use in cosmology

## 1 Introduction

Supernovae of type Ia (SNe Ia) are important for cosmology (better to say, for cosmography) due to their brightness. They are not standard candles, but can be used for measuring distances with the help of the peak luminosity – decline rate correlation, established by Yu.P. Pskovskii  and M.M. Phillips  (see the review ). To exclude systematic effects in linking the observed light of distant SNe Ia to the parameters of cosmological models, one has to understand the nature of supernova outbursts and to build accurate algorithms for predicting their emission.

This involves: identifying the progenitors of SNe Ia; the birth of thermonuclear flame and its accelerated propagation leading to explosion; light curve and spectra modeling.

When the full understanding will be achieved, one can try to evaluate the importance of evolution effects in using supernovae as distance indicators. In spite of great progress in recent years, a number of issues remains unsolved both in flame physics and light curve modeling. We point out some problems which seem most important to us.

## 2 Progenitors

Mechanical equilibrium and evolution of stars is easily understood from the virial theorem for a star: $`3P𝑑V=U,`$ where $`P`$ is the pressure, $`V`$ is volume, and $`U`$ is the gravitational energy of a star. Crude estimates $`VR^3,MR^3\rho ,UGM^2/R`$ in the virial equation give $`PGM^{2/3}\rho ^{4/3}.`$ For an ideal classical gas, the equation of state $`P=\rho T`$ implies $`TGM^{2/3}\rho ^{1/3},`$ with $``$ the gas constant. This is already enough to understand the evolution of massive stars! While a star loses energy and contracts, its internal temperature $`T`$ grows. If the losses are balanced by a nuclear energy release, then the contraction stops and a thermal equilibrium is established:

$$\mathrm{nuclear}\mathrm{heating}\mathrm{power}L^+=\mathrm{radiative}\mathrm{cooling}(\mathrm{luminosity})L^{}.$$

The rate of thermonuclear heating scales as $`\sigma v_0\mathrm{exp}[(\alpha _G/T)^{1/3}]`$ due to the Gamow’s peak: the chances to penetrate the Coulomb barrier for fast nuclei grow, but the tail of Maxwell distribution goes down. Here $`\alpha _G`$ depends strongly on nuclei charges $`Z_i`$: $`\alpha _GZ_1^2Z_2^2`$, thus high-$`Z`$ ions can fuse only at high $`T`$. Small perturbations of $`T`$ produce huge variations in $`L^+`$ since, normally, $`T\alpha _G`$.

The cooling $`L^{}`$ depends on $`T`$ moderately, and it seems that $`L^{}`$ cannot compensate an overheating perturbation. Why then do not all stars explode violently? The reason is the same as for the growth of $`T`$ in stars losing the energy at contraction: they have negative heat capacity. For a star made of a classical plasma with $`\gamma =5/3`$ the internal energy $`Q=\frac{3}{2}MT`$ and the virial theorem implies $`U=2Q`$, so the total energy $``$ is negative: $`=U+Q=Q<0`$. Thus any growth in $``$ due to heating leads to the drop of $`T`$ (because nuclear energy is used for expansion against gravity). The perturbations decay, and there is no hope to get a thermonuclear supernova from a normal star composed of a classical plasma.

The situation changes, if a star is made of a degenerate matter. Then the heat $`\frac{3}{2}MT`$ resides in ions, but its absolute value is much less than $`Q`$ which is now governed by Fermi energy of electrons. We have crudely for a mixture of non-relativistic electron Fermi gas and classical ions: $`PK\rho ^{5/3}+\rho TGM^{2/3}\rho ^{4/3},`$ and $`TGM^{2/3}\rho ^{1/3}K\rho ^{2/3}.`$ So at high density, the equilibrium temperature $`T`$ decreases with growing $`\rho `$, i.e. goes the same way as $``$. The total heat capacity becomes positive, and runaway can set in as in terrestrial explosives. So, a progenitor of SN Ia must be a degenerate star - a white dwarf.

A single white dwarf is unable to explode, it cools down. But when it is in a binary system the chances to produce a supernova do appear (we need only one in $`300`$ dying white dwarfs to explode in order to explain the rate of SNe Ia). Even if the binary has two dead white dwarfs, it can explode because they can merge due to emission of gravitation waves (double-degenerate, or DD scenario ). If one star in the binary is alive, the white dwarf can accrete its lost mass and reach an instability (single-degenerate, or SD scenario ). It is unclear which scenario is most important, there are strong arguments from chemical evolution that only SD is the viable one. On the other hand, it seems that DD can produce a richer variety of SN Ia events. Moreover, discoveries of intergalactic SNe Ia  can be explained more naturally, because a DD system may evaporate from a galaxy. It is quite likely that both scenarios are being played, but their relative role may change in young and old galaxies. If so, a systematic trend may appear in SNe Ia properties with the age of Universe, and this may have important consequences for cosmology.

## 3 Thermonuclear flames

After merging in DD scenario, or after the white dwarf accretes large amount of material in SD case, the explosive instability develops. In principle, combustion can propagate either in the form of a supersonic *detonation*  wave, or as a subsonic *deflagration*  (flame). In detonation, the unburned fuel is ignited by a shock front propagating ahead of the burning zone itself. In deflagration, the ignition is governed by heat and active reactant transport, i.e. by thermal conduction and diffusion.

Most likely, the runaway starts as a laminar flame propagating due to thermal conduction. In terrestrial flames, the ‘fusion’ of molecules goes with the rate: $`\sigma v_0\mathrm{exp}(E_a/T),`$ – the Arrhenius law of chemical burning. Here $`E_a`$ is *activation energy*. The parameter, showing the strong $`T`$-dependence of the heating $`\mathrm{Ze}=\mathrm{log}\sigma v_0/\mathrm{log}TE_a/T`$ is called the Zeldovich number in the theory of chemical flames. For them typically $`\mathrm{Ze}10\mathrm{}20`$. The classical theory  predicts the flame speed $`v_\mathrm{f}\mathrm{Ze}^1[v_Tl_T/\tau _{\mathrm{reac}}(T_b)]^{1/2}`$, with $`\tau _{\mathrm{reac}}(T)\mathrm{exp}[E_a/(T)]`$. In SNe, for nuclear flames, $`\tau _{\mathrm{reac}}(T)\mathrm{exp}[\alpha _G^{1/3}/(3T^{1/3})]`$, and, $`\mathrm{Ze}=\mathrm{log}\sigma v_0/\mathrm{log}T\alpha _G^{1/3}/(3T^{1/3})`$, which has values very similar to terrestrial chemical flames.

A big difference with chemical flames is the ratio of heat conduction and mass diffusion, the Lewis number, $`\mathrm{Le}=(v_Tl_T)/(v_Dl_D)`$. One finds $`\mathrm{Le}1`$ in laboratory gaseous flames, while $`\mathrm{Le}10^7`$ in thermonuclear SNe, since heat is transported by relativistic electrons, $`v_Tc`$, and there is almost no diffusion, $`l_Tl_D`$. Nevertheless, the modern computations  follow the old theory  closely. The conductive flame propagates in a presupernova with $`v_\mathrm{f}`$ which is too slow to produce an energetic explosion: the ratio of $`v_\mathrm{f}`$ to sound speed, i.e. the Mach number, Ma, is very small (see Table 1). The star has enough time to expand, to cool down, and the burning dies completely. So an acceleration of the flame is necessary in order to explain the SN phenomenon. This is the main problem in current research of SNe Ia hydrodynamics.

There is a rich variety of instabilities that can severely distort the shape of a laminar flame. The Rayleigh–Taylor (RT) instability governs the corrugation of the front on the largest scales. On the smallest scales the flame is controlled by the Landau-Darrieus (LD) instability. RT, LD instabilities and turbulence make computations difficult, but without them a star would not explode. All these instabilities were considered already by L.Landau  as a means to accelerate the flame.

Because of instabilities, the flame surface becomes wrinkled and its area grows as $`S\overline{R}^\alpha ,`$ with average radius $`\overline{R}`$ and $`\alpha >2`$, i.e. faster than $`S\overline{R}^2`$. In other words the surface becomes ‘fractal’. The exponent $`\alpha `$ is actually the fractal dimension, $`\alpha =D_\mathrm{F}`$. The effective flame speed is determined  by the ratio of the maximum scale of the instability to the minimum one: $`v_{\mathrm{eff}}=v_\mathrm{f}(\lambda _{\mathrm{max}}/\lambda _{\mathrm{min}})^{D_\mathrm{F}2}.`$ When the vorticity is not important it is possible to study in detail the non-linear stage of LD instability and to find the fractal dimension . A similar dependence of the flame fractal dimension on the density jump across the front was found in SPH simulations of the flame subject to RT instability .

The fractal description is good for LD while it remains mild, because it operates in a star on the scales from the flame thickness (a tiny fraction of a cm) up to $`1`$ km. For the RT instability, $`\lambda _{\mathrm{max}}/\lambda _{\mathrm{min}}`$ is very uncertain and the fractal dimension is uncertain too. So a direct 3D numerical simulation is necessary. The same is true for a low density regime of LD when it is strongly coupled to turbulence (generated on the front, or cascading from large RT vortices). A great progress is achieved here in several groups . When simulating 3D turbulent deflagrations one encounters two problems: the representation of the thin moving surface separating hot and cold material, and the prescription of the local velocity $`v_\mathrm{f}`$ of this surface as a function of the large-scale flow with a crude numerical resolution $`>1`$ km. One solution is sketched in ; for a different approach see . In spite of the progress this problem cannot be treated as completely solved, and even 1D approach may give interesting results, especially for unusual SNe Ia .

## 4 Light curves of SNe Ia

Given a hydrodynamic structure of SN ejecta, one can compute a light curve which should be compared with observations. There are several effects in SNe physics which lead to difficulties in the light curve modeling of any type of SNe. For instance, an account should be taken correctly for deposition of gamma photons produced in decays of radioactive isotopes, mostly 56Ni and 56Co. To find this one has to solve the transfer equation for gamma photons together with hydrodynamical equations. Full system of equations should involve also radiative transfer equations in the range from soft X-rays to infrared for the expanding medium. There are millions of spectral lines that form SN spectra, and it is not a trivial problem to find a convenient way how to treat them even in the static case. The expansion makes the problem much more difficult to solve: hundreds or even thousands of lines give their input into emission and absorption at each frequency.

Currently, powerful codes appear aimed to attack a full 3D time-dependent problem of SN Ia light . Yet there are some basic questions, like averaging the line opacity in expanding media, that remain controversial.

In our work we predict the broad-band UBVI and bolometric light curves of SNe Ia, using our 1D-hydro code which models multi-group time-dependent non-equilibrium radiative transfer inside SN ejecta. In our previous analysis we have studied two Chandrasekhar-mass models: the classical deflagration model W7  and the delayed detonation one DD4 , as well as two sub-Chandrasekhar-mass models: helium detonation model LA4  and low-mass detonation model WD065 with low 56Ni production , which was constructed for modelling subluminous SNe Ia events, such as SN 1991bg. All those models were simplified spherically-symmetrical (1D) ones.

The UBVI light curves of 1D models are shown in Fig. 1. The Chandrasekhar-mass models demonstrate almost identical light curves. The sub-Chandrasekhar-mass ones are more different. WD065 has almost similar element distribution as Chandrasekhar-mass models, and the shape of its light curve is in principle the same as that of W7 and DD4. It is just much dimmer due to a very low 56Ni abundance.

LA4 is very different from any other model, since the explosion there started on the surface of a white dwarf, not in the center, as for every other model, so there is a 56Ni layer near the surface in LA4. This feature explains why the model is essentially bluer than other ones.

Currently we employ our new corrected treatment for line opacity  in the expanding medium, which is important especially in UV and IR bands. It seems that 1D thermonuclear supernova models, e.g. the deflagration W7  model and the delayed detonation DD4  one, produce the light curves fitting the observations not so good as the recent 3D deflagration model MR computed at MPA . We believe that the main feature of the latter model which allows us to get the correct flux during the first month, is strong mixing that moves the material enriched with radioactive 56Ni to the outermost layers of SN ejecta.

Fig. 2 demonstrates that in spite of quite different structure of the old W7 model and the new MR one their light curves are similar in many details. Moreover the new model behaves better in $`U`$ and $`B`$ bands. Unfortunately, the bolometric light curve for MR model is somewhat too slow. The ejecta must expand with a higher speed to let photons to diffuse out faster.

## 5 Conclusions

There are several points which require attention for applying SNe Ia in cosmology: progenitors may be different in younger galaxies; burning regimes may change with the age of Universe . The physical understanding of the Pskovskii-Phillips is not yet achieved.

In the flame modeling the new 3D SN Ia model  is very appealing. Yet it is not a final one: a detailed post-processing of nucleosynthesis is not yet checked in the light curve calculation.

The SN light curve modeling still has a lot of physics to be added, such as a 3D time-dependent radiative transfer, including as much as possible of NLTE effects , which are especially essential for SNe Ia. All this will improve our understanding of thermonuclear supernovae and their role in cosmology.

Our work is partly funded by RFBR (grants 00-02-17230 and 02-02-16500). SB is grateful to Ana Mourao for support.