text:
# Metrics of positive Ricci curvature on vector bundles over nilmanifolds

## 1 Introduction

According to the soul theorem of J. Cheeger and D. Gromoll, a complete open manifold of nonnegative sectional curvature is diffeomorphic to the total space of the normal bundle of a compact totally geodesic submanifold. Furthermore, a finite cover of any compact manifold with $`sec0`$ is diffeomorphic to the product $`C\times T`$ where $`T`$ is a torus, and $`C`$ is simply-connected with $`sec0`$. (The same is actually true when $`sec`$ is replaced by $`Ric`$.)

It was shown in \[ÖW94, BKb, BKa\] that a majority of vector bundles over $`C\times T`$ admit no metric with $`sec0`$ provided $`dim(T)`$ is sufficiently large. For example, any vector bundle over a torus whose total space admits a metric with $`sec0`$ becomes trivial in a finite cover, and there are only finitely many such bundles in each rank.

It is then a natural question which of the bundles can carry metrics with $`Ric0`$ or $`Ric>0`$. J. Nash and L. Berard-Bergery \[Nas79, BB78\] constructed metrics with $`Ric>0`$ on every vector bundle of rank $`2`$ over a compact manifold $`C`$ with $`Ric(C)>0`$. Their method generally fails if $`C`$ only has $`Ric(C)0`$. In fact, the metrics produced in \[Nas79, BB78\] have the property that the bundle projection is a Riemannian submersion, while according to \[BKb, 2.2\], any vector bundle over a torus with $`\text{Ric}0`$ on the total space becomes trivial in a finite cover provided the bundle projection is a Riemannian submersion.

Recall that a nilmanifold is the quotient of a simply-connected nilpotent group by a discrete subgroup. Any nilmanifold is diffeomorphic to the product of a compact nilmanifold and a Euclidean space \[Mal51\]. Compact nilmanifolds can be described as iterated principal circle bundles \[TO97\]. Here is our main result (see also 6.1 for a more technical version).

###### Theorem 1.1.

Let $`L`$ be a complex line bundle over a nilmanifold. Then for all sufficiently large $`k`$, the total space of the Whitney sum of $`k`$ copies of $`L`$ admits a complete Riemannian metric of positive Ricci curvature.

Note that if the total spaces $`E(\xi )`$, $`E(\eta )`$ of vector bundles of $`\xi `$, $`\eta `$ over a smooth aspherical manifold $`M`$ admit complete metrics with $`Ric0`$, then so does the total space of $`\xi \eta TM`$ because $`E(\xi \eta TM)`$ is the covering of $`E(\xi )\times E(\eta )`$ corresponding to the subgroup $`d_{}\pi _1(M)`$ where $`d:MM\times M`$ is the diagonal embedding. Since complete nilmanifolds are aspherical and parallelizable, Theorem 1.1 generalizes, up to taking sum with some trivial bundle, to vector bundles with tori as structure groups (the structure group of a vector bundle is a $`k`$-torus iff the bundle is a Whitney sum of $`k`$ complex line bundles and a trivial bundle). Combining 6.1 with \[BKb, 1.2\], we deduce the following.

###### Corollary 1.2.

Let $`C`$ be a point or a compact manifold with $`Ric0`$, and let $`T`$ be a torus of dimension $`4`$. Then for all sufficiently large $`k`$, there is an infinite sequence of rank $`k`$ vector bundles over $`C\times T`$ whose total spaces are pairwise nonhomeomorphic, admit complete Riemannian metrics with $`Ric>0`$, and are not homeomorphic to complete Riemannian manifolds with $`sec0`$.

Corollary 1.2 gives a new type of examples of manifolds with $`Ric>0`$. These manifolds are topologically similar but not homeomorphic to manifolds with $`sec0`$. We refer to \[Gro93\] for the survey of known examples. Now the following question is natural.

###### Question 1.3.

Do most vector bundles over tori (or more generally compact manifolds with $`Ric0`$ or $`sec0`$) admit metrics with $`Ric0`$, or $`Ric>0`$?

Note that by M. Anderson’s first Betti number estimate \[And90\], no vector bundle of rank $`2`$ over a torus admits a metric with $`Ric>0`$. This however seems to be the only known obstruction. Theorem 1.1 also gives metrics of $`Ric>0`$ on some nontrivial vector bundles over many nilmanifolds as follows.

###### Corollary 1.4.

Let $`N`$ be a nilmanifold such that there exists a class in $`H^2(N,)`$ with nontorsion cup-square. Then for all sufficiently large $`k`$, there is an infinite sequence of rank $`k`$ vector bundles over $`N`$ whose total spaces are pairwise nonhomeomorphic and admit complete Riemannian metrics with $`Ric>0`$.

The existence of a $`2`$-class with a nontorsion cup-square is equivalent, by A.4, to the existence of a complex line bundle $`L`$ over $`N`$ such that for any $`k`$, the Whitney sum of $`k`$ copies of $`L`$ is nontrivial as a real vector bundle. In A.3 we give an example of a compact nilmanifold of dimension $`5`$ for which such an $`L`$ does not exist.

Metrics of positive Ricci curvature on vector bundles over nilmanifolds are interesting in their own right. Apparently, besides Anderson’s growth estimate \[And90\], no obstructions are known to the existence of such metrics.

Here is the idea of the proof of Theorem 1.1. The second author showed in \[Wei88\] that if $`G`$ is a simply-connected nilpotent Lie group, then $`G\times ^k`$ has a warped product metric with $`Ric>0`$ such that $`G`$ lies in the isometry group. In this paper we start with a similar metric on $`G\times ^k`$ where $`G`$ has a central one-parametric subgroup $`Q`$. Let $`Q`$ act on $`G`$ by left multiplication, fix an epimorphism $`QS^1`$, and a diagonal isometric action of $`S^1`$ on $`^k`$. We then show that the Riemannian submersion metric on $`(G\times ^k)/Q`$ has $`Ric>0`$ for all large enough $`k`$. (Note that, generally, Ricci curvature may decrease under Riemannian submersions, namely, there is an error term in the O’Neill submersion formula for Ricci curvature. The error term always vanishes for submersions with minimal fibers, however, in our case the fibers clearly have different volume on the $`^k`$-factor so they are not minimal. We prove that $`(G\times ^k)/Q`$ has $`Ric>0`$ by being able to control the error term when $`k`$ is sufficiently large.) The obvious $`G`$-action on $`(G\times ^k)/Q`$ is isometric so the quotients of $`(G\times ^k)/Q`$ by discrete subgroups of $`G`$ also carry metrics with $`\text{Ric}>0`$. The bundles described in 1.1 can be obtained as $`(P\times ^k)/Q`$ where $`P`$ is a principal circle bundle associated with $`L`$. Finally, 1.1 follows from the fact that a principal circle bundle over a nilmanifold is again a nilmanifold.

The structure of the paper is as follows. In sections 2 and 3 we define the metric, and choose a coordinate system to compute the Ricci curvature. This computation is done in sections 4 and 5. Applications are discussed in section 6. In Appendix we prove some facts on the existence of line bundles over nilmanifolds.

The first author is grateful to Vitali Kapovitch for motivating discussions.

## 2 Defining the metric

Let $`G`$ be a simply-connected nilpotent Lie group with the Lie algebra $`g`$. Fix an arbitrary central element $`X_1g`$ and use the ascending central series for $`g`$ to choose a basis $`X_1,\mathrm{},X_n`$ for $`g`$ such that $`[X,X_i]\text{span}\{X_1,\mathrm{},X_{i1}\}`$ for all $`Xg`$. In particular,

$$[X_1,X_i]=0\text{for all}i=1,\mathrm{},n.$$
(2.1)
Equip $`G\times ^k`$ with the warped product metric constructed in \[Wei88\]. Namely, let

$$g=g_r+dr^2+f^2(r)ds_{2k1}^2$$

be the metric on $`G\times ^k`$, where $`f(r)=r(1+r^2)^{1/4}`$, $`ds_{2k1}^2`$ is the canonical metric on the sphere $`S^{2k1}`$ (the one induced by the inclusion of the unit sphere into $`^k`$), and $`g_r`$ is a special family of almost flat left invariant metrics on $`G`$ defined as follows.

Let $`Y_i=X_i/h_i(r)`$, where

$$h_i(r)=(1+r^2)^{\alpha _i},$$
(2.2)
and $`\alpha _i=2^{ni+1}+2^{1i}\frac{1}{2}`$. (This value of $`\alpha _i`$ is obtained by choosing $`\alpha _n=2^{1n}+\frac{3}{2}`$ in \[Wei88\].) Then let $`g_r`$ be the left-invariant metric on $`G`$ such that $`\{Y_1,\mathrm{},Y_n\}`$ form an orthonormal basis. As we explain in 3.2, the Ricci tensor of the metric $`g_r`$ satisfies

$$|\text{Ric}_G(Y_i,Y_j)|c(1+r^2)^1,$$
(2.3)
where $`c`$ is a constant depending on $`n`$ and the structure constants. Clearly, $`g`$ is a complete metric on $`G\times ^k`$ whose isometry group contains $`G`$. By \[Wei88\], $`\text{Ric}(g)>0`$ for all sufficiently large $`k`$.

For a nonzero integer $`m`$, let $`\phi ^m:U(1)`$ be the homomorphism given by $`\phi ^m(q)=e^{imq}`$. Define a sequence of isometric $``$-actions $`\mathrm{\Phi }_m`$ on $`G\times ^k`$ by

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_m(q)(x,u)=(\mathrm{exp}(qX_1)x,\phi ^m(q)u)\text{for any}xG,u^k.$$
(2.4)
Equip $`(G\times ^k)/\mathrm{\Phi }_m()`$ with the Riemannian submersion metric. Note that the isometric $`G`$-action on $`G\times ^k`$ given by $`g(h,z)=(gh,z)`$ induces an isometric $`G`$-action on the quotient $`(G\times ^k)/\mathrm{\Phi }_m()`$; the kernel of the action is exactly $`K_m=\mathrm{exp}(\frac{2\pi }{m}X_1)`$ so that $`G/K_m`$ acts effectively.

## 3 Setting up the computation

Let Ric denote the Ricci curvature on the total space $`G\times ^k`$ of the submersion and $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\text{Ric}}`$ the Ricci curvature on the base $`(G\times ^k)/\mathrm{\Phi }_m()`$. Then for any vector fields $`X,Y`$ on the base, the Ricci curvatures are related by the following (see \[Bes87, p.244\])

$$\stackrel{ˇ}{\text{Ric}}(X,Y)=\text{Ric}(X,Y)+2A_X,A_Y+TX,TY\frac{1}{2}(_XS,Y+_YS,X),$$
(3.5)
where $`A,T`$ are the O’Neill tensors, and $`S`$ is the mean curvature of the fiber (for precise definition, see, e.g. \[Bes87, p.239\]). In our case $`A_X,A_Y=A_XW,A_YW,TX,TY=T_WX,T_WY`$ where $`W`$ is defined in (3.7).

We want to show that for all sufficiently large $`k`$, the Riemannian submersion metric on $`(G\times ^k)/\mathrm{\Phi }_m()`$ has positive Ricci curvature. To prove this, it suffices to control the error term $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\text{Ric}}(X,Y)\text{Ric}(X,Y)`$ in (3.5) coming from the mean curvature tensor of the fiber of the $``$-action.

For the rest of the computation, fix a point $`(g_{},r_{},s_{})`$ of $`G\times ^k`$ and show that the horizontal space tangent to the point has all Ricci curvatures positive.

At the point $`s_{}`$ of the sphere $`(S^{2k1},ds_{2k1}^2)`$ choose an orthonormal frame $`V_1,\mathrm{},V_{2k1}`$ with $`V_1`$ tangent to the orbit of the action $`\mathrm{\Phi }_m`$ restricted to $`S^{2k1}`$ such that

$$_{V_i}V_j|_s_{}=0\text{for all}i,j=1,\mathrm{},2k1.$$
(3.6)
Let $`U_j=V_j/f(r)`$. Then $`_r=\frac{}{r},U_1,\mathrm{}U_{2k1},Y_1,\mathrm{},Y_n`$ form an orthonormal basis of $`g`$ on $`G\times ^k`$ in a neighborhood of $`(g_{},r_{},s_{})`$. The vector field $`X_1+mV_1`$ is tangent to the orbits of the $``$-action $`\mathrm{\Phi }_m`$ on $`G\times ^k`$. Let

$$W=(X_1+mV_1)/(h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2f^2)^{1/2}=(h_1Y_1+mfU_1)/(h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2f^2)^{1/2}$$
(3.7)
be its unit vector. Then $`_r,U_2,\mathrm{}U_{2k1},Y_2,\mathrm{},Y_n,W^{}`$ form an orthonormal basis of $`(N\times ^k)/\mathrm{\Phi }_m()`$, where

$$W^{}=(mfY_1h_1U_1)/(h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2f^2)^{1/2}.$$
(3.8)
The mean curvature vector $`S`$ of the fiber is $`S=(_WW)^H`$, the horizontal projection of $`_WW`$. Using the Koszul’s formula for the Riemannian connection (the one used to prove its existence) and (2.1), (3.6), we have

$$_{Y_1}Y_1=\frac{h_1^{}}{h_1}_r,_{U_1}U_1=\frac{f^{}}{f}_r,_{Y_1}U_1=_{U_1}Y_1=0.$$

Since any function of $`r`$ has zero derivatives in the directions $`Y_1`$, $`U_1`$, the Koszul’s formula implies

$$S=\frac{h_1h_1^{}+m^2ff^{}}{h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2f^2}_r.$$
(3.9)
The Ricci curvature on the total space $`G\times ^k`$ are given by \[Wei88, Wei89\] and 3.2.

$`\text{Ric}(_r,U_j)=0`$ $`(1j2k1),`$
$`\text{Ric}(Y_i,_r)=\text{Ric}(Y_i,U_j)=0`$ $`(1in,12k1),`$
$`|\text{Ric}(Y_i,Y_j)|c(1+r^2)^1,`$ $`(ij,1i,jn),`$
where $`c`$ is a constant depending only on $`n`$ and the structure constants.

$`\text{Ric}(_r,_r)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{h_i^{\prime \prime }(r)}{h_i(r)}}(2k1){\displaystyle \frac{f^{\prime \prime }(r)}{f(r)}},`$ (3.10)
$`=`$ $`\left\{{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}}2\alpha _i[(2\alpha _i+1)r^21]+(2k1){\displaystyle \frac{r^2+6}{4}}\right\}/(1+r^2)^2.`$
$`\text{Ric}(Y_i,Y_i)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{h_i^{\prime \prime }(r)}{h_i(r)}}(2k1){\displaystyle \frac{h_i^{}(r)f^{}(r)}{h_i(r)f(r)}}+Ric_G(Y_i){\displaystyle \underset{ij}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{h_i^{}(r)h_j^{}(r)}{h_i(r)h_j(r)}}`$ (3.11)
$``$ $`\{2\alpha _i[(2\alpha _i+1)r^21]+(2k1)\alpha _i(2+r^2)`$
$`c(1+r^2){\displaystyle \underset{ij}{}}4\alpha _i\alpha _jr^2\}/(1+r^2)^2(1in),`$
$`\text{Ric}(U_j,U_j)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{f^{\prime \prime }(r)}{f(r)}}+(2k2){\displaystyle \frac{1f^{}(r)^2}{f(r)^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{h_i^{}(r)f^{}(r)}{h_i(r)f(r)}}`$ (3.12)
$`(1j2k1).`$
The Ricci tensor is positive definite since each of the diagonal terms of the Ricci tensor has a positive term with a factor $`k`$ which controls the negative terms \[Wei89\] and dominates the off-diagonal terms when $`kk_0(n,\alpha _i,c)`$.

###### Remark 3.1.

It was claimed in \[Wei88, Wei89\] that $`\text{Ric}(Y_i,Y_j)=0`$ if $`ij`$. Actually, this is only true when the basis $`X_1,\mathrm{},X_n`$ of the Lie algebra of $`G`$ satisfies

$$[X_i,X_j],[X_j,X_k]=0\text{for all}ik,$$
(3.13)
which holds in many cases but it is unclear whether such a basis can be always found. Say, for the nilpotent Lie algebra of strictly upper triangular matrices, (3.13) is satisfied by the so-called triangular basis given by strictly upper triangular matrices with $`1`$ at one spot and $`0`$’s elsewhere (see \[Wei89\]). Note that by Ado’s theorem any nilpotent Lie algebra is isomorphic to a subalgebra of the algebra of strictly upper triangular matrices, but it is not always possible to choose a basis of the subalgebra to be a subset of the triangular basis. Other examples of nilpotent Lie algebras with a basis satisfying (3.13) include all the two-step nilpotent Heisenberg algebras (see e.g. \[CG90\]), all nilpotent Lie algebra in $`dim5`$ \[Dix58\], and $`22`$ out of $`24`$ nilpotent Lie algebra in dimension $`6`$ \[Mor58\].

###### Remark 3.2.

However, all the results of \[Wei88\] are true as stated because $`|\text{Ric}(Y_i,Y_j)|c(1+r^2)^1`$ which suffices for the positivity of Ricci curvature. The above estimate is obtained by computing $`\text{Ric}(Y_i,Y_j)`$ in the basis $`_r,U_1,\mathrm{}U_{2k1},Y_1,\mathrm{},Y_n`$. By \[Wei89\] the terms $`R(Y_i,_r)_r,Y_j`$, $`R(Y_i,U_k)U_k,Y_j`$ vanish, and

$`R(Y_i,Y_k)Y_k,Y_j`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}h_i^1(r)h_k^2(r)h_j^1(r)[X_i,X_k],[X_k,X_j],\text{if}i<k<j,`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}h_i^1(r)h_k^2(r)h_j^1(r)[X_i,X_k],[X_k,X_j]\text{if}i<j<k,\text{or}k<i<j.`$
Clearly $`h_i^1(r)h_k^2(r)h_j^1(r)|[X_i,X_k],[X_k,X_j]|c(1+r^2)^1`$, for some $`c`$ depending only on $`n`$ and the structure constants. Thus, the same estimate holds for $`|\text{Ric}(Y_i,Y_j)|`$.

## 4 Controlling the error term

In this section we show that the extra terms $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\text{Ric}}(X,Y)\text{Ric}(X,Y)`$ in (3.5) (to which we refer to as the error) are controlled by some positive term from the Ricci curvature of the total space.

To compute the error for $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\text{Ric}}(_r,_r)`$, note that

$`T_r,T_r`$ $`=`$ $`T_W_r,T_W_r`$
$`=`$ $`(_W_r)^V,(_W_r)^V`$
$`=`$ $`_W_r,W^2=W,[_r,W]^2.`$
Since $`[_r,X_1+mV_1]`$=0, it follows from (3.7) that

$$[_r,W]=\frac{h_1h_1^{}+m^2ff^{}}{h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2f^2}W.$$
(4.14)
So

$$T_r,T_r=\left(\frac{h_1h_1^{}+m^2ff^{}}{h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2f^2}\right)^2.$$

Also

$`A__r,A__r`$ $`=`$ $`A__rW,A__rW=(__rW)^H,(__rW)^H`$
$`=`$ $`__rW,W^{}^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}W,[_r,W^{}]^2,`$
where for the third equality we use the Koszul’s formula for the Riemannian connection to show that $`(__rW)^H`$ only has $`W^{}`$-component, and for the last equality we combine the Koszul’s formula with (4.14). Now from (3.8), we compute

$$[_r,W^{}]=\frac{h_1h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{}+m^2ff^{}}{h_1^2+m^2f^2}W^{}+\frac{f^{}h_1fh_1^{}}{(h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2f^2)^{1/2}}\left(\frac{m}{h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}X_1+\frac{1}{f^2}V_1\right).$$
(4.15)
Thus

$$A__r,A__r=\left(m\frac{fh_1^{}h_1f^{}}{h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2f^2}\right)^2.$$

On the other hand, since by the Koszul’s formula $`__r_r=0`$, we get

$`__rS,_r`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{h_1h_1^{}+m^2ff^{}}{h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2f^2}}\right)^{}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+h_1h_1^{\prime \prime }+m^2f_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2ff^{\prime \prime })(h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2f^2)2(h_1h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{}+m^2ff^{})^2}{(h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2f^2)^2}}.`$
Hence, the error for $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\text{Ric}}(_r,_r)`$ is

$`2A__r,A__r+T_r,T_r__rS,_r`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{3m^2(h_1^{}ff^{}h_1)^2}{(h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2f^2)^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{h_1h_1^{\prime \prime }+m^2ff^{\prime \prime }}{h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2f^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{h_1h_1^{\prime \prime }+m^2ff^{\prime \prime }}{h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2f^2}}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{\frac{h_1^{\prime \prime }}{h_1}+m^2\frac{f^{\prime \prime }}{f}(\frac{f}{h_1})^2}{1+m^2(\frac{f}{h_1})^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{2\alpha _1\left[(2\alpha _1+1)r^21\right]m^2(\frac{3}{2}+\frac{1}{4}r^2)r^2(1+r^2)^{2^{n+1}1}}{\left[1+m^2r^2(1+r^2)^{2^{n+1}1}\right](1+r^2)^2}}.`$
Here in the last equality we used some of the the following equations.

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{f}{h_1}}\right)^2`$ $`=`$ $`r^2(1+r^2)^{2^{n+1}1},`$ (4.16)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{h_i^{}}{h_i}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\alpha _ir}{1+r^2}},{\displaystyle \frac{h_i^{\prime \prime }}{h_i}}={\displaystyle \frac{2\alpha _i[(2\alpha _i+1)r^21]}{(1+r^2)^2}},`$ (4.17)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{f^{}}{f}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1+\frac{r^2}{2}}{r(1+r^2)}},{\displaystyle \frac{f^{\prime \prime }}{f}}={\displaystyle \frac{\frac{3}{2}+\frac{1}{4}r^2}{(1+r^2)^2}}.`$ (4.18)
By (3.10), $`\text{Ric}(_r,_r)`$ has a positive term $`(2k1)\frac{r^2+6}{4}/(1+r^2)^2`$. Clearly,

$$(2k1)\frac{r^2+6}{4}>\frac{2\alpha _1\left[(2\alpha _1+1)r^21\right]m^2(\frac{3}{2}+\frac{1}{4}r^2)r^2(1+r^2)^{2^{n+1}1}}{1+m^2r^2(1+r^2)^{2^{n+1}1}}$$

for $`k\frac{2}{3}\alpha _1+\frac{3}{2}`$. Note that $`\alpha _1=2^n\frac{1}{4}`$. Therefore, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\text{Ric}}(_r,_r)`$ is positive for all integers $`kk_0+\frac{2^{n+1}}{3}+\frac{4}{3}`$, where $`k_0`$ has been chosen before Remark 3.1.

For $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\text{Ric}}(Y_i,Y_i)`$, $`i=2,\mathrm{},n`$, the error $`_{Y_i}S,Y_i`$. We can compute

$`_{Y_i}S,Y_i`$ $`=`$ $`Y_i,[S,Y_i]`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{h_i^{}}{h_i}}{\displaystyle \frac{h_1h_1^{}+m^2ff^{}}{h_1^2+m^2f^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{h_i^{}}{h_i}}{\displaystyle \frac{\frac{h_1^{}}{h_1}+m^2\frac{f^{}}{f}(\frac{f}{h_1})^2}{1+m^2(\frac{f}{h_1})^2}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\alpha _ir^2\left[2\alpha _1+m^2(1+\frac{r^2}{2})(1+r^2)^{2^{n+1}1}\right]}{1+m^2r^2(1+r^2)^{2^{n+1}1}}}/(1+r^2)^2,`$
which again is controlled by the positive term $`(2k1)\alpha _i(2+r^2)/(1+r^2)^2`$ in $`\text{Ric}(Y_i,Y_i)`$ (see (3.11)) when $`k1`$.

For $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\text{Ric}}(U_j,U_j)`$, $`j=2,\mathrm{},2k1`$, the error $`_{U_j}S,U_j`$. Again

$`_{U_j}S,U_j`$ $`=`$ $`U_j,[S,U_j]`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{f^{}}{f}}{\displaystyle \frac{h_1h_1^{}+m^2ff^{}}{h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2f^2}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(1+\frac{r^2}{2})(2\alpha _1+m^2(1+\frac{r^2}{2})(1+r^2)^{2^{n+1}1})}{(1+m^2r^2(1+r^2)^{2^{n+1}1})(1+r^2)^2}}.`$
This is controlled by the positive term $`(2k2)\frac{1f_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{f^2}`$ in $`\text{Ric}(U_j,U_j)`$ (see (3.12)) when $`k\frac{2^{n+1}}{3}+1`$. Note that

$$\frac{1f_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{f^2}\frac{\frac{3}{2}+r^2}{(1+r^2)^2}.$$

For $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\text{Ric}}(W^{},W^{})`$, the error $`_W^{}S,W^{}=W^{},[S,W^{}]`$. Denote $`g=\frac{h_1h_1^{}+m^2ff^{}}{h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2f^2}`$. Then $`S=g_r`$, and $`[S,W^{}]=g[_r,W^{}]`$. Applying (4.15) we have

$`_W^{}S,W^{}`$ $`=`$ $`g^2+g{\displaystyle \frac{f^{}h_1fh_1^{}}{h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2f^2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{m^2f}{h_1}}{\displaystyle \frac{h_1}{f}}\right]`$
$`=`$ $`g{\displaystyle \frac{\frac{f^{}}{f}+m^2\frac{h_1^{}}{h_1}(\frac{f}{h_1})^2}{1+m^2(\frac{f}{h_1})^2}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\frac{h_1^{}}{h_1}+m^2\frac{f^{}}{f}(\frac{f}{h_1})^2\right)\left(\frac{f^{}}{f}+m^2\frac{h_1^{}}{h_1}(\frac{f}{h_1})^2\right)}{(1+m^2(\frac{f}{h_1})^2)^2}}.`$
Now

$`(1+r^2)^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{h_1^{}}{h_1}}+m^2{\displaystyle \frac{f^{}}{f}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{f}{h_1}}\right)^2\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{f^{}}{f}}+m^2{\displaystyle \frac{h_1^{}}{h_1}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{f}{h_1}}\right)^2\right)`$
$`=\left(2\alpha _1+m^2(1+{\displaystyle \frac{r^2}{2}})(1+r^2)^{2^{n+1}1}\right)\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{r^2}{2}}2\alpha _1m^2r^4(1+r^2)^{2^{n+1}1}\right)`$
$`=\left[2\alpha _1m^4r^4(1+{\displaystyle \frac{r^2}{2}})(1+r^2)^{2^{n+2}2}m^2\left(4\alpha _1^2r^4+(1+{\displaystyle \frac{r^2}{2}})^2\right)(1+r^2)^{2^{n+1}1}+2\alpha _1(1+{\displaystyle \frac{r^2}{2}})\right]`$
On the other hand,

$`\text{Ric}(W^{},W^{})`$ $`=`$ $`\text{Ric}({\displaystyle \frac{mfY_1h_1U_1}{(h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2f^2)^{1/2}}},{\displaystyle \frac{mfY_1h_1U_1}{(h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2f^2)^{1/2}}})`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2f^2}}\left[m^2f^2\text{Ric}(Y_1,Y_1)+h_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\text{Ric}(U_1,U_1)\right]`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+m^2(\frac{f}{h_1})^2}}\left[m^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{f}{h_1}}\right)^2\text{Ric}(Y_1,Y_1)+\text{Ric}(U_1,U_1)\right].`$
Now the positive term $`\frac{1}{1+m^2(\frac{f}{h_1})^2}(2k1)\alpha _1m^2(\frac{f}{h_1})^2(2+r^2)/(1+r^2)^2`$ in $`\text{Ric}(W^{},W^{})`$ controls $`\frac{1}{(1+m^2(\frac{f}{h_1})^2)^2}\left[2\alpha _1m^4r^4(1+\frac{r^2}{2})(1+r^2)^{2^{n+2}2}\right]/(1+r^2)^2`$ when $`k1`$, and the positive term $`\frac{1}{1+m^2(\frac{f}{h_1})^2}(2k2)\frac{1f_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{f^2}`$ in $`\text{Ric}(W^{},W^{})`$ controls $`\frac{1}{(1+m^2(\frac{f}{h_1})^2)^2}2\alpha _1(1+\frac{r^2}{2})/(1+r^2)^2`$ when $`k\frac{2^{n+1}}{3}+1`$.

## 5 Computing mixed terms

Here we show that the errors from the mixed terms either vanish, or controlled by the positive diagonal term of the Ricci curvature of the total space.

First, from (3.9) one can compute that $`[S,X]`$ only has component in the $`X`$ direction for $`X=_r`$, $`Y_i`$ or $`U_j`$. Also $`[S,W^{}]`$ is a linear combination of $`Y_1`$ and $`U_1`$. So the last term

$$\frac{1}{2}\left(_XS,Y+_YS,X\right)$$

in (3.5) of the error of all mixed terms is zero.

Second, note that $`T_WX`$ vanishes for $`X=Y_i`$, $`U_i`$, or $`W^{}`$. (Indeed, $`T_WX=(_WX)^V`$ so $`T_WX,W=_WX,W=[W,X],W`$, and $`[W,X]=0`$ since any function of $`r`$ has zero derivative in the direction of $`X`$.) Thus, the $`T`$-component of the error always vanishes for the mixed terms, and it remains to control the $`A`$-component.

By the remark preceding (4.15), we have $`A__rW=(__rW)^H=__rW,W^{}W^{}`$. By the Koszul’s formula $`A_{Y_i}W,W^{}=0`$ since $`[W,X]=0`$ for $`X=Y_i`$, or $`W^{}`$. So the error is zero and $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\text{Ric}}(_r,Y_i)=0`$ for $`i=2,\mathrm{},n`$. Similarly, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\text{Ric}}(_r,U_j)=0`$, for $`j=2,\mathrm{},2k1`$.

Now the error for $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\text{Ric}}(Y_i,Y_j)`$ with $`ij`$, $`i,j=2,\mathrm{},n`$ is equal to $`A_{Y_i},A_{Y_j}`$. By the Koszul’s formula $`A_{Y_i}W,Y_k=W,[Y_k,Y_i]/2`$ and $`A_{Y_i}W`$ has zero components in $`U_j`$, $`_r`$, $`W^{}`$. Hence, $`A_{Y_i},A_{Y_j}`$ is the sum of the terms $`W,[Y_k,Y_i]W,[Y_k,Y_j]/4`$. Since $`W`$ has length one, the absolute value of each of the terms is bounded above by the product $`|[Y_i,Y_k]||[Y_k,Y_j]|`$, which is bounded above by $`c(1+r^2)^1`$ as in 3.2. Hence, the error is controlled by the positive diagonal terms of the total space.

Similarly, by the Koszul’s formula $`A_{U_i}W,U_k=W,[U_k,U_i]/2`$ and $`A_{U_i}W`$ has zero components in $`Y_j`$, $`_r`$, $`W^{}`$. Hence, $`A_{U_i},A_{U_j}`$ is the sum of the terms $`W,[U_k,U_i]W,[U_k,U_j]/4`$ which vanishes, if $`ij`$ and $`i,j=2,\mathrm{},2k1`$, because by (3.6) we have $`[U_i,U_k]=0`$. Thus, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\text{Ric}}(U_i,U_j)=0`$ if $`ij`$ and $`i,j=2,\mathrm{},2k1`$,

By above $`A_{Y_i},A_{U_j}`$ are orthogonal since they only have nonzero components in $`Y_k`$’s and $`U_k`$’s, respectively. Thus, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\text{Ric}}(Y_i,U_j),i=2,\mathrm{},n,j=2,\mathrm{},2k1`$ is zero.

Finally, the errors for

$`\stackrel{ˇ}{\text{Ric}}(_r,W^{}),`$
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{\text{Ric}}(Y_i,W^{}),i=2,\mathrm{},n,`$
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{\text{Ric}}(U_j,W^{}),j=2,\mathrm{},2k1`$
vanish since $`_W^{}W`$ only has a nonzero component in $`_r`$, and $`_{Y_i}W,_r=_{U_j}W,_r=0`$.

This completes the proof that the manifold $`(G\times ^k)/\mathrm{\Phi }_m()`$ has positive Ricci curvature for all integers $`kk_0+\frac{2^{n+1}}{3}+\frac{4}{3}`$.

###### Remark 5.1.

Note that our $`k`$ depends only on $`n,c,\alpha _i`$, and is not optimal. There are other choices of $`\alpha _i`$ (or even $`h_i(r)`$ which work in special cases) that can make $`k`$ smaller (cf. \[Wei89\]).

## 6 Metrics on vector bundles over nilmanifolds

Here is a technical version of 1.1 which we need for the applications.

###### Theorem 6.1.

Let $`N`$ be a nilmanifold and $`\alpha H^2(N,)`$. For an integer $`m`$, let $`L_m`$ be a (unique up to isomorphism) complex line bundle with the first Chern class $`c_1(L_m)=m\alpha `$. Let $`\xi _{k,m}`$ be the Whitney sum of $`k`$ copies of $`L_m`$. Then there exists $`K_0=K_0(N,\alpha )`$ such that for each $`kK_0`$ the total space of $`\xi _{k,m}`$ admits a complete Riemannian metric with $`\text{Ric}>0`$.

###### Proof.

By \[Mal51\] $`N`$ is diffeomorphic to the product $`N_c\times ^s`$ where $`N_c`$ is a compact nilmanifold. Let $`P`$ be a principal $`U(1)`$-bundle over $`N_c`$ with the first Chern class equal to $`\alpha `$. (Recall that $`c_1`$ gives a bijection between the set $`[X,BU(1)]`$ of $`U(1)`$-bundles over a finite cell complex $`X`$ and the group $`H^2(X,)`$.)

Being a principal circle bundle over a compact nilmanifold, $`P`$ is a compact nilmanifold so by \[Mal51\] $`P=G_c/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ where $`G_c`$ is a simply-connected nilpotent Lie group, and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a discrete subgroup of $`G`$. Let $`z`$ be the (central) element of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ corresponding to a fiber of $`P`$. By \[CG90, 5.1.5\], $`z`$ lies in the center of $`G_c`$. Let $`Q`$ be the (necessarily central) one-parametric subgroup containing $`z`$. Consider the nilpotent Lie group $`G=G_c\times ^s`$ and think of $`Q`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ as subgroups of $`G`$. The subgroup $`Q\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is generated by $`z`$ (else $`z`$ would be a power of some element of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ which is then projected to a torsion element of the torsion free group $`\pi _1(N)=\mathrm{\Gamma }/z`$). Thus, the group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }/z`$ is a discrete subgroup of $`G/Q`$ with factor space $`N`$. Now $`G/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ gets the structure of a principal $`Q/zU(1)`$-bundle over $`N`$ which is isomorphic to $`P\times ^s`$. (Since the bundle projections induce the same maps of fundamental groups, the bundles are fiber homotopy equivalent which implies isomorphism for principal circle bundles.)

Now let $`X_1`$ be a nonzero element of the Lie algebra of $`G`$ tangent to $`Q`$. Use $`X_1`$ to define the $``$-action $`\mathrm{\Phi }_m`$ as in (2.4). Thus, there exists a positive $`K_0=K_0(P)`$ such that for all $`kK_0`$, the manifold $`X=(G\times ^k)/\mathrm{\Phi }_m()`$ has a complete $`G`$-invariant metric with $`\text{Ric}>0`$, so we can consider the quotient of $`X`$ by the isometric action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }G`$. Note that the kernel of the $`G`$-action is $`K_m`$, hence the kernel of the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-action is $`K_m\mathrm{\Gamma }=z`$.

The actions of $`G`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_m()`$ on $`G\times ^k`$ commute, so $`X/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the quotient of $`G/\mathrm{\Gamma }\times ^k`$ by the drop of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_m`$. The drop of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_m`$ can be described as the $`Q/z`$-action on the $`G/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-factor, and the same diagonal $`U(1)`$-action on $`^k`$.

Thus, $`X/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the total space of a complex vector bundle over $`N`$. The bundle is the Whitney sum of $`k`$ copies of the same line bundle which we denote $`L_m^{}`$. Finally, we show that the first Chern class of $`L_m^{}`$ is $`m\alpha `$. Indeed, since $`L_1^{}`$ is constructed via the standard $`U(1)`$-action on $``$, we get $`c_1(L_1^{})=\alpha `$. Look at the associated circle bundles $`S(L_1^{})`$ and $`S(L_m^{})`$. There is a covering $`S(L_1^{})S(L_m^{})`$ which is an $`m`$-fold covering on every fiber. Then the classifying map for $`S(L_m^{})`$ can be obtained as the classifying map for $`S(L_1^{})`$ followed by the selfmap of $`BS^1`$ induced by the $`m`$-fold selfcover of $`S^1`$. By the homotopy sequence of the universal $`S^1`$-bundle, this selfmap of $`BS^1`$ induces the multiplication by $`m`$ on the second homotopy group $`\pi _2(BS^1)`$. By Hurewitz it induces the same map on $`H_2(BS^1,)`$ and hence on $`H^2(BS^1,)`$. Since the first Chern class of the universal bundle generates $`H^2(BS^1,)`$, we deduce $`c_1(L_m^{})=mc_1(L_1^{})=m\alpha `$.

Since the first Chern class determines (the isomorphism type of) the complex line bundle, $`L_m^{}`$ is isomorphic to $`L_m`$, and the proof is complete. ∎

###### Proof of 1.4.

Let $`\alpha H^2(N,)`$ be a class with a nontorsion cup-square. Let $`L_m`$ be a (unique up to isomorphism) complex line bundle over $`N`$ with $`c_1(L)=m\alpha `$. By 6.1 for all sufficiently large $`k`$ the Whitney sum $`\xi _{k,m}`$ of $`k`$ copies of $`L_m`$ has a complete metric with $`Ric>0`$. The total Pontrjagin class of $`\xi _{k,m}`$ can be computed as

$$p(\xi _{k,m})=c(\xi _{k,m}\overline{\xi }_{k,m})=c(L_m)^kc(\overline{L}_m)^k=(1+c_1(L_m))^k(1c_1(L_m))^k=(1c_1(L_m)^2)^k,$$

hence the first Pontrjagin class $`\xi _{k,m}`$ is given by $`p_1(\xi _{k,m})=kc_1(L_m)^2=km^2\alpha ^2`$.

It remains to show that the total spaces $`E(\xi _{k,m})`$ of $`\xi _{k,m}`$ are pairwise nonhomeomorphic for different values of $`|m|`$. Being the quotient of a Lie group by a discrete subgroup, $`N`$ is parallelizable (because the tangent bundle to any Lie group has a left-invariant trivialization which descends to quotients by discrete subgroups). Hence, the tangent bundle $`TE(\xi _{k,m})`$ has first Pontrjagin class $`km^2\alpha ^2`$. Assume that $`h:E(\xi _{k,m^{}})E(\xi _{k,m})`$ is a homeomorphism. Since rational Pontrjagin classes are topologically invariant, $`km^2h^{}(\alpha ^2)`$ is equal to $`k(m^{})^2\alpha ^2`$ up to elements of finite order. Thus, the projections of the classes to $`H^4(N,)/Tors`$ are mapped to each other by the automorphism $`h^{}`$ of $`H^4(N,)/Tors`$. Since any automorphism of a finitely generated, free abelian group preserves multiplicities of primitive elements, $`m=\pm m^{}`$, and we are done. ∎

###### Proof of 1.2.

Since $`dim(T)4`$, we can find $`\alpha H^2(T,)`$ with a nontorsion cup-square (see A.1). Furthermore, we can choose $`\alpha `$ so that $`\alpha ^3=0`$, say, by taking $`\alpha `$ to be the pullback of a class with a nontorsion cup-square via an obvious projection of $`T`$ onto the $`4`$-torus.

As in proof of 1.4, we find a vector bundle $`\xi _{k,m}`$ over $`T`$ such that $`p_1(\xi _{k,m})=km^2\alpha ^2`$ and $`\text{Ric}(E(\xi _{k,m}))>0`$. Since $`\alpha ^3=0`$, all the higher Pontrjagin classes of $`\xi _{k,m}`$ vanish. Since $`p_1(\xi _{k,m})`$ is a nontorsion class, $`\xi _{k,m}`$ does not become stably trivial after passing to a finite cover because finite covers induce injective maps on rational cohomology.

Now the product $`C\times E(\xi _{k,m})`$ has a (product) metric with $`\text{Ric}0`$ which by \[BB86\] can be assumed of $`\text{Ric}>0`$ after replacing $`E(\xi _{k,m})`$ with $`E(\xi _{k,m})\times ^3`$ (or equivalently, after replacing $`\xi _{k,m}`$ by its Whitney sum with a trivial rank $`3`$ bundle). By \[BKb, 1.2\] the manifold $`C\times E(\xi _{k,m})`$ admits no metric with $`sec0`$.

It remains to show that the manifolds $`C\times E(\xi _{k,m})`$ are pairwise nonhomeomorphic for different values of $`|m|`$. The tangent bundle to $`C\times E(\xi _{k,m})`$ is isomorphic to $`TC\times TE(\xi _{k,m})`$. Let $`i0`$ be the largest number such that the $`i`$th integral Pontrjagin class $`p_i(TC)`$ is nontorsion. Since $`T`$ is parallelizable, the bundle $`TE(\xi _{k,m})`$ has first integral Pontrjagin class $`km^2\alpha ^2`$, and zero higher Pontrjagin classes. Up to elements of order two, the total Pontrjagin classes satisfy the product formula $`p(TC\times TE(\xi _{k,m}))=p(TC)\times p(TE(\xi _{k,m}))`$. In particular, $`p_{i+1}(TC\times TE(\xi _{k,m}))=p_i(TC)\times p_1(TE(\xi _{k,m}))`$ is a nontorsion class since it is a product of nontorsion classes.

Assume that $`h:C\times E(\xi _{k,m^{}})C\times E(\xi _{k,m})`$ is a homeomorphism. Since rational Pontrjagin classes are topologically invariant, $`h^{}`$ maps $`p_i(TC)\times (km^2\alpha ^2)`$ to $`p_i(TC)\times (k(m^{})^2\alpha ^2)`$ up to elements of finite order. Thus, the projections of the classes to $`H^{4(i+1)}(C\times T,)/Tors`$ are mapped to each other by the automorphism $`h^{}`$ of $`H^{4(i+1)}(N,)/Tors`$. Since any automorphism of a finitely generated, free abelian group preserves multiplicities of primitive elements, $`m=\pm m^{}`$, and we are done. ∎

###### Remark 6.2.

The above proof applies verbatim when $`C`$ is a complete manifold with $`Ric0`$ which is the total space of a vector bundle over a compact smooth manifold. Say, we can take $`C`$ to be any Ricci positively curved vector bundles of \[Nas79, BB78\].

## Appendix A Existence of line bundles over nilmanifolds

Let $`N`$ be a nilmanifold. In this appendix we discuss when there is $`\alpha H^2(N,)`$ with nontorsion cup-square $`\alpha ^2`$. As we note in A.4, this is equivalent to the existence of a complex line bundle $`L`$ such that, for any $`k`$, the Whitney sum of $`k`$ copies of $`L`$ is nontrivial as a real vector bundle. Since any nilmanifold is diffeomorphic to the product of a compact nilmanifold and a Euclidean space, it suffices to discuss the case when $`N`$ is compact which we assume from now on. Clearly, one necessary condition for the existence of $`\alpha `$ as above is $`dim(N)4`$, however it is not sufficient, in general, as we show in A.3.

###### Example A.1.

One situation in which $`dim(N)4`$ is sufficient is when $`N`$ is a torus, or more generally, a symplectic nilmanifold. (Indeed, since nondegeneracy is an open condition, the symplectic form $`\omega `$ can be approximated by a nondegenerate rational form $`\omega ^{}`$ (where “rational” means that the cohomology class of $`\omega ^{}`$ lies in the image of $`H^2(N,)H^2(N,)`$). Finally, we take $`\alpha `$ to be the cohomology class of a suitable integer multiple of $`\omega ^{}`$.) We refer to \[TO97\] for concrete examples of symplectic nilmanifolds. Of course, if $`N`$ carries a cohomology $`2`$-class with a nontorsion cup-square, then so does any product $`N\times N^{}`$.

###### Example A.2.

If $`N_1`$, $`N_2`$ are arbitrary compact nilmanifolds of dimension $`2`$, then there is $`\alpha H^2(N_1\times N_2,)`$ with nontorsion cup-square. To see that first note if $`N`$ is a compact nilmanifold of dimension $`2`$, then the second Betti number of $`N`$ is positive. (Indeed, the conclusion is obvious if $`N`$ is a $`2`$-torus, so we can assume $`dim(N)3`$. Since $`N`$ can be obtained as an iterated principal circle bundle, there is a $`\pi _1`$-surjective map of $`N`$ onto a $`2`$-torus. In particular, the first Betti number of $`N`$ is $`2`$. Since $`dim(N)3`$, the second Betti number satisfies $`b_2(N)b_1(N)^2/4`$ \[FHT97\] which implies $`b_2(N)>0`$.) Then given compact nilmanifolds $`N_1`$, $`N_2`$ of dimensions $`2`$, we can choose a class $`\omega _iH^2(N_i,)`$ so that there is $`F_iH_2(N_i,)`$ with $`\omega _i,F_i0`$. Let $`p_i:N_1\times N_2N_i`$ be the projection. Now one of the classes $`p_1^{}\omega _1`$, $`p_2^{}\omega _2`$, $`p_1^{}\omega _1+p_2^{}\omega _2`$ has a nontorsion cup-square because if $`p_1^{}\omega _1^2`$, $`p_2^{}\omega _2^2`$ are torsion classes, then up to elements of finite order $`(p_1^{}\omega _1+p_2^{}\omega _2)^2=\omega _1\times \omega _2`$, and $`\omega _1\times \omega _2,F_1\times F_2=\omega _1,F_1\omega _2,F_20.`$

###### Counterexample A.3.

We now present a compact $`5`$-dimensional nilmanifold $`N`$ such that any class in $`H^2(N,)`$ has a zero cup-square. Let $`x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4`$ be generators of $`H^1(T,)`$ where $`T`$ is the $`4`$-torus. Let $`p:NT`$ be a principal circle bundle over $`T`$ with Euler class $`e=x_1x_2+x_3x_4.`$ Look at the Gysin sequence of the bundle with integer coefficients:

$$H^0(T,)\stackrel{e}{}H^2(T,)\stackrel{p^{}}{}H^2(N,)H^1(T,)\stackrel{e}{}H^3(T,)\mathrm{}$$

By a direct computation $`H^1(T,)\stackrel{e}{}H^3(T,)`$ is an isomorphism (this also follows from the Hard Lefschetz theorem since $`e`$ is proportional to the standard Kähler form for $`T`$). By exactness $`p^{}`$ is onto. Now take an arbitrary $`yH^2(N,)`$ and find $`x`$ with $`y=p^{}(x)`$. Since $`H^4(T,)`$, the class $`x^2`$ is a rational multiple of $`e^2`$, hence $`y^2=(p^{}x)^2=p^{}(x^2)`$ is a rational multiple of $`p^{}(e^2)=(p^{}e)^2=0`$ where the last inequality holds because $`e`$ is in the kernel of $`p^{}`$.

###### Lemma A.4.

Given a space $`X`$ homotopy equivalent to a finite cell complex, the following are equivalent:

(i) there exists $`\alpha H^2(X,)`$ whose cup-square $`\alpha ^2`$ is nontorsion;

(ii) there exists a complex line bundle $`L`$ over $`X`$ such that, for any $`k`$, the Whitney sum of $`k`$ copies of $`L`$ is nontrivial as a real vector bundle.

###### Proof.

Assume (i), and find a complex line bundle $`L`$ over $`X`$ with first Chern class $`c_1(L)=\alpha `$. Let $`\xi _k`$ be the Whitney sum of $`k`$ copies of $`L`$. Hence $`p_1(\xi _k)=kc_1(L)^2=k\alpha ^2`$ is nontorsion. This proves (ii).

Now assume (ii) and take $`\alpha =c_1(L)`$. Arguing by contradiction, assume $`\alpha ^2`$ is a torsion class, that is $`k\alpha ^2=0`$ for some $`k>0`$. As above we get $`p_1(\xi _k)=k\alpha ^2=0`$, hence all rational Pontrjagin classes vanish. In particular, the Pontrjagin character $`ph`$ of $`\xi _k`$ vanishes. Recall that $`ph`$ defines an isomorphism of $`\stackrel{~}{KO}(X)`$ and $`_{i>0}H^{4i}(X,)`$, thus $`\xi _k`$ has finite order in $`\stackrel{~}{KO}(X)`$. In particular, for some $`m>0`$, the Whitney sum of $`m`$ copies of $`\xi _k`$ is trivial, as a real bundle. The contradiction proves (i). ∎

DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS, 253-37, CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, PASADENA, CA 91125, USA

email: ibeleg@its.caltech.edu

DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA BARBARA, SANTA BARBARA, CA 93106, USA

email: wei@math.ucsb.edu


format: text

text:
# Causality, stability and passivity for a mirror in vacuum

## Introduction

A mirror moving in vacuum experiences a mean force which is associated through linear response theory with the quantum fluctuations of the vacuum stress tensor .

This motional force, denoted hereafter $`F_m`$, has been computed by Fulling and Davies  for a perfectly reflecting mirror scattering a scalar vacuum field in a two dimensional spacetime. A linear approximation in the mirror’s displacement leads from their result to a force proportional to the third derivative of the time dependent mirror’s position $`q`$

$$F_m(t)=\frac{\mathrm{}q^{\prime \prime \prime }(t)}{6\pi c^2}$$
(1)
As required by Lorentz invariance of the vacuum state, this force vanishes for a uniform velocity. It also vanishes for a uniform acceleration so that the inertial mass of the mirror is not modified.

The motional force modifies the mechanical response of the mirror to an applied force $`F_a`$ since the equation of motion can be written

$$kq(t)+mq^{\prime \prime }(t)=F_a(t)+F_m(t)k=m\omega _0^2$$
(2)
where $`m`$ is the mass of the mirror, $`\omega _0`$ is the eigenfrequency of the suspension system ($`\omega _0=0`$ in the limiting case of a free mass) and $`F_m`$ is the motional force. Consequently, it has to be taken into account in a complete analysis of the sensitivity of interferometric measurements. This seems particularly important for interferometric detection of gravitational waves .

The force (1) has the same expression, with a modification of the numerical factor, as the radiation reaction force computed in classical electron theory . It is well known that severe problems are associated with the resulting equation of motion (2): a historical account is given in ref. ; more recent references can be found in . First, it turns out that ‘runaway solutions’ exist, which correspond to an exponential increase of the velocity in the absence of applied force. These runaway solutions may be prohibited by a special choice of boundary conditions, but a ‘preacceleration’ phenomenon then occurs, with an acceleration of the mass before the force is applied .

Clearly, the equation of motion (2) violates causality for a perfect mirror when the motional force is given by equation (1). We show in this letter that this problem is solved in a simple manner by considering partially transmitting mirrors rather than perfect ones. We will assume that the mirror is transparent at frequencies higher than a reflection cutoff $`\omega _C`$ and that this cutoff obeys the following inequality

$$\mathrm{}\omega _Cmc^2$$
(3)
This condition, obeyed by realistic mirrors ($`m`$ is a macroscopic mass), implies that the recoil effect for reflected fields can be ignored in the derivation of the motional force ***The perfect mirror corresponds to $`\omega _C\mathrm{}`$ and does not obey condition (3). It is therefore necessary to take the recoil into account, which was not done in the derivation of the force (1). This probably explains the inconsistencies associated with expression (1) of the force..

Using a previously derived expression for the motional force associated with a partially transmitting mirror , we will demonstrate that the mirror coupled to the vacuum radiation pressure is a stable system (runaway solutions disappear). More precisely, we will show that the mirror obeys ‘passivity’  when some inequality which is a consequence of condition (3) is satisfied. Passivity is closely connected to energy considerations: the moving mirror radiates energy into vacuum and is therefore damped, while the vacuum cannot provide energy for exciting the mirror’s motion. Then, stability follows and problems associated with runaway solutions are eliminated.

## The susceptibility function associated with the motional force

At the limit of small displacements, the motional force is a function of $`q`$ easily defined in the frequency domain in terms of a linear susceptibility $`\chi `$

$`F_m(t)={\displaystyle dt^{}\chi (tt^{})q(t^{})}`$ ()
$`F_m[\omega ]=\chi [\omega ]q[\omega ]`$ ()
Any function $`f`$ is written in the time domain or in the frequency domain according to the rule

$`f(t)={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}\omega }{2\pi }f[\omega ]e^{i\omega t}}`$

The motional force (1) computed for a perfect mirror corresponds to the susceptibility

$$\chi [\omega ]=\frac{i\mathrm{}\omega ^3}{6\pi c^2}=im\tau \omega ^3\tau =\frac{\mathrm{}}{6\pi mc^2}$$
(4)
where $`\tau `$ is a time constant, characteristic of the coupling of the mirror of mass $`m`$ to the vacuum radiation pressure. The corresponding time constant for the electron is of the order of 10-22s. It is much smaller for a macroscopic mirror.

In a scattering approach , a partially transmitting mirror is described by a reflectivity function $`r[\omega ]`$ and a transmitivity function $`s[\omega ]`$, which obey unitarity and causality conditions. The mirror is supposed to become transparent at the high frequency limit ($`r0`$ when $`\omega \mathrm{}`$). The perfect mirror is then replaced by the more realistic model of a causal mirror having a perfect reflection below a reflection cutoff $`\omega _C`$, but transparent at higher frequencies.

This approach has provided us with an expression for the mean Casimir force between two motionless mirrors , which is free from the divergences usually associated with the infiniteness of the vacuum energy, as well as a causal expression for the motional Casimir force between moving mirrors .

When condition (3) is obeyed, it is possible to ignore the recoil effect and the motional force can be written as The motional force for a mirror in vacuum is given by equations (33) and (11) of ref.

$$\chi [\omega ]=im\tau \omega ^3\mathrm{\Gamma }[\omega ]$$
(5)
where

$`\omega ^3\mathrm{\Gamma }[\omega ]={\displaystyle _0^\omega }3d\omega ^{}(\omega \omega ^{})\omega ^{}\alpha [\omega \omega ^{},\omega ^{}]`$ ()
$`\alpha [\omega ,\omega ^{}]=1s[\omega ]s[\omega ^{}]+r[\omega ]r[\omega ^{}]`$ ()
The function $`\mathrm{\Gamma }[\omega ]`$ is regular at the low frequency limit

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }[\omega ]\mathrm{\Gamma }[0]=r[0]^2\mathrm{for}\omega 0`$

When $`r[0]=1`$, the susceptibility (5) is recovered at low frequencies whatever the reflectivity may be at high frequencies. At high frequencies, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }[\omega ]`$ behaves as a cutoff function. Its behaviour will be discussed in more detail later on.

A simple example is provided by the following model fulfilling unitarity, causality and transparency conditions

$$r[\omega ]=\frac{1}{1\frac{i\omega }{\mathrm{\Omega }}}s[\omega ]=1+r[\omega ]$$
(6)
One obtains in this case

$`\chi [\omega ]`$ $`=`$ $`6m\tau \mathrm{\Omega }^3`$ (7)
$`\times `$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{i\omega }{\mathrm{\Omega }}}{\displaystyle \frac{\omega ^2}{2\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{i\omega }{\mathrm{\Omega }}}\right)\mathrm{ln}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{i\omega }{\mathrm{\Omega }}}\right)\right)`$ (8)
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }[\omega ]`$ $`=`$ $`6\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2.3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3.4}}{\displaystyle \frac{i\omega }{\mathrm{\Omega }}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4.5}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{i\omega }{\mathrm{\Omega }}}\right)^2+\mathrm{}\right)`$ ()
$`\mathrm{for}\omega \mathrm{\Omega }`$
## Positivity of the dissipative functions

Coming back to the general case, we introduce the real and imaginary parts of the functions written in the frequency domain, which are associated with dissipation and dispersion

$`\chi [\omega ]=\chi _R[\omega ]+i\chi _I[\omega ]\mathrm{\Gamma }[\omega ]=\mathrm{\Gamma }_R[\omega ]+i\mathrm{\Gamma }_I[\omega ]`$
$`\chi _I[\omega ]=m\tau \omega ^3\mathrm{\Gamma }_R[\omega ]\chi _R[\omega ]=m\tau \omega ^3\mathrm{\Gamma }_I[\omega ]`$
$`\chi _R`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_R`$ are even functions of $`\omega `$ while $`\chi _I`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_I`$ are odd functions of $`\omega `$ (see eqs 4, 6). The dissipative part $`\chi _I`$ of the susceptibility, which was denoted $`\xi _{FF}`$ in ref. , is the commutator of the force operator.

Using the unitarity of the $`S`$matrix associated with the mirror , one shows that

$`2Re\alpha [\omega ,\omega ^{}]`$ $`=`$ $`|\alpha [\omega ,\omega ^{}]|^2+|\beta [\omega ,\omega ^{}]|^2`$
$`\beta [\omega ,\omega ^{}]`$ $`=`$ $`s[\omega ]r[\omega ^{}]r[\omega ]s[\omega ^{}]`$
The following positivity property follows

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_R[\omega ]`$ $``$ $`0\mathrm{for}\omega \mathrm{real}`$ (10)
$`\chi _I[\omega ]`$ $``$ $`0\mathrm{for}\omega \mathrm{real}0`$ ()
This property corresponds to the dissipative character (see for example ref. ) of the motional perturbation in the vacuum and will play an important role in the following.

## Dispersion relations

Causality  is associated with the fact that the susceptibility function, written in the time domain (see eq 4), vanishes for negative times

$`\chi (t)=0\mathrm{for}t<0`$

In the frequency domain, a causal function is analytic and regular in the half plane $`Im\omega >0`$. For the susceptibility given by equations (6), these properties follow  from the causality of the scattering coefficients $`r`$ and $`s`$.

The real and imaginary parts of a causal function are related through dispersion relations, which take the simple form of Kramers-Kronig relations when the function decreases sufficiently rapidly at high frequencies . But this is not the case for the susceptibility function $`\chi `$, so that it is necessary to write dispersion relations with subtractions .

From equations (6), one knows that the three quantities $`\chi [0]`$, $`\chi ^{}[0]`$ and $`\chi ^{\prime \prime }[0]`$ vanish. It is therefore tempting to write the dispersion relation with three subtractions at $`\omega =0`$ which is just the Kramers-Kronig relation for the function $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }[\omega ]=\frac{\mathrm{d}\omega ^{}}{i\pi }\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_R[\omega ^{}]}{\omega ^{}\omega iϵ}$$
(11)
Assuming that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }[\omega ]`$ decreases sufficiently rapidly at high frequencies so that it is a square integrable function, the relation (9) is actually equivalent to causality for the susceptibility function. This follows from the Titchmarsh theorem .

As $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_R`$ is positive, one deduces that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }[\omega ]`$ behaves as $`\frac{1}{\omega }`$ at high frequencies

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }[\omega ]\frac{\omega _C}{i\omega }\mathrm{for}\omega \mathrm{}$$
(12)
where the parameter $`\omega _C`$ can be considered as the definition of the reflection cutoff (we suppose that the integral is finite)

$$\omega _C=\frac{\mathrm{d}\omega }{\pi }\mathrm{\Gamma }_R[\omega ]=\frac{\mathrm{d}\omega }{\pi }\frac{\chi _I[\omega ]}{m\tau \omega ^3}$$
(13)
For example, the model of equations (7) corresponds to $`\omega _C=3\mathrm{\Omega }`$.

The behaviour of the susceptibility is described by a high frequency mass $`\mu `$

$`\chi [\omega ]`$ $``$ $`\mu \omega ^2\mathrm{for}\omega \mathrm{}`$ (14)
$`\mu `$ $`=`$ $`m\omega _C\tau ={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}\omega _C}{6\pi c^2}}`$ ()
The induced mass $`\mu `$ is quite similar to the ‘electromagnetic mass’ of electron theory . It is positive (see eq 8) and much smaller than $`m`$ for realistic macroscopic mirrors (see eq 3).

The dispersion relation (9) can be written equivalently in the time domain

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }(t)=2\theta (t)\mathrm{\Gamma }_R(t)`$

It is thus clear that the susceptibility function does not obey the same simple dispersion relation; one can indeed write

$`\chi (t)=2m\tau `$ $`(\theta (t)\mathrm{\Gamma }_R^{\prime \prime \prime }(t)+\delta (t)\mathrm{\Gamma }_R^{\prime \prime }(0)`$
$`+\delta ^{}(t)\mathrm{\Gamma }_R^{}(0)+\delta ^{\prime \prime }(t)\mathrm{\Gamma }_R(0))`$
It follows that the expression (4a) of the motional force cannot be written simply in terms of the force commutator $`\chi _I(t)`$ since quasistatic motions must be subtracted up to the second order in a Mac-Laurin expansion. However, using the parity property of the function $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_R`$, one recovers the consistency condition of linear response theory The dispersion relation written in refs.  and  did not account for subtractions and has therefore to be amended. However, this does not affect the expressions for the linear susceptibility, the force commutator and the force fluctuations which were independently computed. Also, the conclusion that these quantities are consistent with linear response theory remains valid.

$`\chi (t)\chi (t)=2m\tau \mathrm{\Gamma }_R^{\prime \prime \prime }(t)=2i\chi _I(t)`$

## Mechanical impedance of the mirror

When the coupling of the mirror to vacuum radiation pressure is taken into account, the equation of motion (2) is easily solved in the frequency domain.

The mechanical impedance $`Z`$ gives the frequency components of the force $`F_a`$ as a function of the velocity $`v`$

$`v(t)`$ $`=`$ $`q^{}(t)v[\omega ]=i\omega q[\omega ]`$ (15)
$`F_a[\omega ]`$ $`=`$ $`Z[\omega ]v[\omega ]`$ (16)
$`i\omega Z[\omega ]`$ $`=`$ $`km\omega ^2\chi [\omega ]`$ ()
The two real functions $`Z_R`$ and $`Z_I`$ are respectively the dissipative and dispersive parts of the impedance

$`Z[\omega ]`$ $`=`$ $`Z_R[\omega ]+iZ_I[\omega ]`$ (17)
$`Z_R[\omega ]`$ $`=`$ $`m\tau \omega ^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_R[\omega ]`$ (18)
$`Z_I[\omega ]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k}{\omega }}m\omega +m\tau \omega ^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_I[\omega ]`$ ()
Equivalently, we can write the velocity $`v`$ as a function of the applied force $`F_a`$ and of the mechanical admittance $`Y`$

$`v[\omega ]=Y[\omega ]F_a[\omega ]Y[\omega ]={\displaystyle \frac{1}{Z[\omega ]}}`$

## Stability

From causality, we know that the motional force is a retarded function of the mirror’s position, which implies that the impedance function $`Z[\omega ]`$ is analytic and has no poles in the half plane $`Im\omega >0`$.

The analytic properties of the admittance function $`Y[\omega ]`$ require a closer examination since its expression in terms of the susceptibility $`\chi [\omega ]`$ has the form of a ‘closed loop gain’, so that a self oscillation could occur. Such a self oscillation would be associated with the presence of a pole for $`Y`$, that is a zero for $`Z`$, in the half plane $`Im\omega >0`$.

But, if the suspended mirror coupled to the vacuum is a stable system, the self oscillation cannot take place. It follows that the admittance function $`Y[\omega ]`$ shall also be analytic and regular in the half plane $`Im\omega >0`$ and that the impedance function $`Z[\omega ]`$ should have no zero in this domain.

Using the susceptibility function (5) of a perfect mirror (with neglected recoil) and assuming that the mirror is free ($`k=0`$), one checks that the function $`Y`$ has a pole in the half plane $`Im\omega >0`$, at $`\omega =\frac{i}{\tau }`$, in this case. This is similar to the well known instability problem of electron theory .

This result is modified when a partially transmitting mirror is studied. Indeed, the pole associated with runaway solutions corresponds to a frequency well above the reflection cutoff (see eq 3). Due to the asymptotic behaviour of the cutoff function $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ (see eq 10), the pole which was located at $`\omega =\frac{i}{\tau }`$ for a perfect mirror is shifted to $`\omega i\omega _C`$ so that the instability is suppressed.

## Passivity

We demonstrate now in a more rigorous manner that the instability is suppressed for any reflectivity function, provided that the following inequality is obeyed

$$\mu m$$
(19)
In particular, this will be the case as soon as the cutoff fulfills condition (3).

The demonstration relies upon the dispersion relation (9) which reads for the impedance function, for $`Im\omega >0`$

$`Z[\omega ]=\omega ^2{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}\omega ^{}}{\pi }\frac{Z_R[\omega ^{}]}{\omega ^{2}\left(ϵi\omega +i\omega ^{}\right)}}+{\displaystyle \frac{ik}{\omega }}im\omega `$

Using Laplace transforms instead of Fourier transforms

$`f\{p\}=f[ip]Rep>0`$

this relation can be transformed to

$$Z\{p\}=d\mathrm{\Phi }(\rho )\frac{1ip\rho }{pi\rho }+\frac{k}{p}+p(m\mu )$$
(20)
with $`\mu `$ defined by equations (12) and (11) and the spectral function $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ given by

$`\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Phi }(\rho )={\displaystyle \frac{Z_R[\rho ]\mathrm{d}\rho }{\pi \left(1+\rho ^2\right)}}`$

One knows that $`Z_R`$ is positive at all frequencies (see eqs 8 and 14), that the function $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is bounded (this follows from the finiteness of $`\mu `$) and that the coefficients $`k`$ and $`m\mu `$ are positive (when $`\mu m`$). Then, equation (16) is actually the spectral representation for a passive function, that is a function obeying the property

$$ReZ\{p\}0\mathrm{for}Rep>0$$
(21)
Causality and stability follow from passivity , so that the problems associated with runaway solutions are eliminated.

It has to be emphasized that the passivity condition (17) is more stringent than the already known positivity property (8): as an example, the expressions corresponding to the perfect mirror obey condition (8) but not condition (17).

It is also worth to stress that the passivity property is obtained only when the mass $`m`$ of the mirror is greater than the induced mass $`\mu `$ which is similar to an electromagnetic mass. As far as electron theory is concerned, the same conclusion is reached by Dekker . In other words, passivity is obeyed by the impedance $`Z`$ but not by the contribution of the motional susceptibility taken separately §§§At low frequencies $`\frac{\chi [\omega ]}{i\omega }m\tau \omega ^2\mathrm{\Gamma }[0]`$, so that this function does not obey the passivity property (17) in the vicinity of $`\omega =0`$., in contrast with the usual models of Brownian motion where the motional contribution itself is a passive function .

## Energy considerations

Passivity is equivalent to the proposition that a positive amount of energy is transfered from the reservoir (source of the applied force $`F_a`$) to the moving mirror

$$W_a(t)=_{\mathrm{}}^tdt^{}F_a(t^{})v(t^{})0$$
(22)
One immediately deduces from the equation of motion (2) that

$`W_a(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }E(t)+W_m(t)`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }E(t)`$ $`=`$ $`E(t)E(\mathrm{})`$
$`E(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}kq(t)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}mv(t)^2`$
$`W_m(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^t}dt^{}F_m(t^{})v(t^{})`$
The energy $`W_a`$ provided by the reservoir is the sum of an energy $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ stored in the mirror’s motion and of a part $`W_m`$ radiated in the vacuum state.

When we consider a situation where the force $`F_a`$ is applied only during a limited time interval  and where the initial and final states of the mirror are the same ($`\mathrm{\Delta }E(\mathrm{})=0`$), we conclude from condition (18) that the net radiated energy is positive

$`W_a(\mathrm{})=W_m(\mathrm{})0`$

Thus, passivity appears to be connected to the fact that vacuum can damp the mirror’s motion but cannot excite it. This is the ultimate reason why stability follows from passivity: the vacuum cannot provide energy for sustaining runaway solutions.

## Conclusion

The expression (1) of the damping force for a perfect mirror in vacuum is associated with unacceptable runaway solutions. We have shown that this problem does not take place for a realistic mirror with a reflectivity cutoff obeying condition (3).

The impedance function can be computed explicitly, neglecting the recoil effect, and is found to be a passive function, so that stability is ensured. This is connected to the fact that no energy can be extracted from the vacuum state.

It is tempting to consider that passivity is actually a general property of the impedance function for a scatterer in vacuum. Then, a consistent treatment of a perfect mirror, taking into account the recoil effect for reflected fields, would necessarily provide us with a passive function. This would also be true for a satisfactory treatment of the electron. Attempts in this direction, unsuccessful up to now, are discussed by Rueda .