format: text

text:
# Question 1

THE MACROSCOPIC SPECTRUM OF NILMANIFOLDS WITH AN EMPHASIS ON THE HEISENBERG GROUPS

by Constantin Vernicos\*

**Partially supported by european project ACR OFES number 00.0349 and grant of the FNRS 20-65060.01

Abstract

Take a riemanniann nilmanifold, lift its metric on its universal cover. In that way one obtains a metric invariant under the action of some co-compact subgroup. We use it to define metric balls and then study the spectrum of the laplacian for the dirichlet problem on them. We describe the asymptotic behaviour of the spectrum when the radius of these balls goes to infinity. Furthermore we show that the first macroscopic eigenvalue is bounded from above, by an uniform constant for the three dimensional heisenberg group, and by a constant depending on the Albanese’s torus for the other nilmanifolds. We also show that the Heisenberg groups belong to a family of nilmanifolds, where the equality characterizes some pseudo left invariant metrics.

Key-words : Spectrum of the laplacian, Nilmanifolds, Homogenisation, Stable norm, Asymptotic volume, Albanese metric, rigidity.Classification : 53C24, 58C40, 74Q99
1 Introduction and claims

1.1— In this article we are investigating Riemannian nilmanifolds, these are compact manifolds obtained by taking the quotient of a nilpotent Lie group by one of its subgroups, endowed with a riemannian metric.

Our aim is to find as much informations as we can by just looking at the balls of great radius on the universal covering. One could believe that it is an object too shrewd to explore, but let us recall the theorem due to Brooks \[Bro85a\] (see also Sunada \[Sun89\]), which states that if the bottom of the spectrum of the Laplacian acting on functions on the universal cover of a compact manifold is zero then the fundamental group is amenable.

One could transform the statement by just saying that if the bottom of the spectrum on the balls goes to zero as their radius goes to infinity, then the fundamental group is amenable.

###### Question 1

Can one precise the speed of convergence to the bottom of the spectrum on the universal cover with respect to the radius and can one extract more geometric informations ?

The first step with that question in mind is to try to extract more information feeding the problem with some more geometric assumptions. As the nilpotent groups are among the amenable groups the simplest one it is thus logical to try and explore that case first. In this article we answer question $`1`$ in the following way :

###### Theorem 1

Let $`(M^n,g)`$ be nilmanifold, $`B_g(\rho )`$ the induced Riemannian ball of radius $`\rho `$ on its universal cover and $`\lambda _1\left(B_g(\rho )\right)`$ the first eigenvalue of the Laplacian on $`B_g(\rho )`$ for the Dirichlet problem.

Then

1. $`lim_{\rho +\mathrm{}}\rho ^2\lambda _1\left(B_g(\rho )\right)=\lambda _1^{\mathrm{}}\lambda _1(g,Alb)`$

2. in case of equality the stable norm coincides with the albanese metric.

Where $`\lambda _1(g,Alb)`$ is the first eigenvalue of the Kohn laplacian arising from the Albanese metric on the unit ball of the carnot-caratheodory ball arising from the same metric. Furthermore for tori and the $`3`$-dimensional Heisenberg group this is a constant independent of the metric $`g`$.

Thus we are naturally lead to explore the equality case (see \[Ver02\] for the case of tori). Feeding with new assumptions on the nilmanifold we get for example the following theorem (see also section 5), introducing a family of metric which are not far from being left invariant (see definition 18).

###### Theorem 2

For any $`2`$-step nilmanifold whose center is one dimensional, the albanese metric and the stable norm coincides if and only if the metric is pseudo left invariant.

In fact it appears that we can say as much for all the eigenvalues, and the asymptotic behaviour of the eigenvalue in theorem 1 is just a particular case of the following theorem :

###### Theorem 3

Let $`(M^n,g)`$ be nilmanifold, $`B_g(\rho )`$ the induced Riemannian ball of radius $`\rho `$ on its universal cover and $`\lambda _i\left(B_g(\rho )\right)`$ the $`i^{\mathrm{th}}`$ eigenvalue of the Laplacian on $`B_g(\rho )`$ for the Dirichlet problem.

Then there exists an hypoelliptic operator $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{}}`$ (the Kohn Laplacian of a left invariant metric), whose $`i^{\mathrm{th}}`$ eigenvalue for the Dirichlet problem on stable ball is $`\lambda _i^{\mathrm{}}`$ and such that

$$\underset{\rho \mathrm{}}{lim}\rho ^2\lambda _i\left(B_g(\rho )\right)=\lambda _i^{\mathrm{}}$$

1.2— Instead of studying the Laplacians we could just study the volume of the balls on the universal covering. As surprising at it mays seems this also gives important informations, for example a theorem of M. Gromov \[Gro81\] states that if the growth of the geodesic balls on the universal covering of a compact manifold is polynomial, then the manifold is almost nilpotent.

###### Question 2

Can we describe more precisely the asymptotic behaviour of the volume of balls with respect to their radius and can we extract more geometric informations ?

For the asymptotic behaviour of the polynomial case, i.e. the nilpotent case, the answer is given by P. Pansu \[Pan82\] who described precisely the growth of the geodesic balls on the universal cover of nilmanifolds in the following way

###### Theorem \[Pansu\]

Let $`(M^n,g)`$ be a nilmanifold, $`B_g(\rho )`$ the induced Riemannian ball of radius $`\rho `$ on its universal cover then if $`\mu _g`$ is the volume and $`d_h`$ the homogeneous dimension of $`M^n`$, then the asymptotic volume of $`g`$ is

$$\mathrm{Asvol}(g)=\underset{\rho \mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{\mu _g\left(B_g(\rho )\right)}{\rho ^{d_h}}=\mu _g(M^n)\frac{\mu \left(B_{\mathrm{}}(1)\right)}{\mu (D_M)}$$

where $`\mu `$ is a Haar measure, $`B_{\mathrm{}}(1)`$ the stable norm’s unit ball and $`D_M`$ a fundamental domain on the universal cover.

In the particular case of tori D. Burago and S. Ivanov \[BI95\] showed that the asymptotic volume is bounded from below by the constant arising from the flat cases, which depends only on the dimension, and furthermore that the equality caracterises flat tori. In \[Ver02\] there is an alternate proof using the macroscopic spectra in the $`2`$-dimensional case.

In this article we also give a lower bound on the asymptotic volume, but even if the lower bound is not uniform (and can not anyway, because except for tori we can find metrics such that the asymptotic volume is as small as we want) we still have some information on the equality case.

###### Theorem 4

Let $`(M^n,g)`$ be a nilmanifold, then its asymptotic volume satisfies the following :

1. $`\mathrm{Asvol}(\mathrm{g})\mathrm{Vol}_\mathrm{g}(M^n){\displaystyle \frac{\mu _2\left(B_2(1)\right)}{\mu _2(D_M)}}`$

2. In case of equality the stable norm coincides with the albanese metric.

where $`\mu _2`$ is the (sub-riemannian) measure associated to the sub-riemannian distance obtained from the albanese metric of $`M^n`$ on the universal cover of $`M^n`$, $`B_2(1)`$ is the unit ball of that distance and $`D_M`$ is a fundamental domain of the universal cover of $`M^n`$.

The last remark is that in the light of the case of tori, this should not be the best inequality we can expect. However even if we find the best one, the case of equality might not characterize left invariant metrics, but only a particular family of metrics (see \[NV\] for the intuition), just like in the case of the macroscopic spectrum.

2 General facts about nilmanifolds and their geometry

Our main object of study are Nilmanifolds. In all this article a nilmanifold will be a riemanniann compact manifolds $`(M^n,g)`$ which is obtained by taking the quotient of a Lie group $`G`$, whose Lie Algebra is nilpotent, by one of its co-compact subgroups $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. We would like to stress that unlike in other work, we don’t put any restriction on the metric $`g`$, i.e. the metric need not be invariant by the action of $`G`$ on the left (the whole point being to characterize those metrics among all the metric one can put on $`M`$).

Notice that following this definition the universal covering of $`M^n`$ is $`G`$. We will let $`\stackrel{~}{g}`$ be the metric $`g`$ lifted on $`G`$.

2.1 Nilpotent Lie Algebras

2.1.1— Let $`u`$ be a Lie algebra, one says that it is nilpotent if the sequence defined by

$$u^1=u,u^{i+1}=[u^i,u].$$

is such that for some $`rN`$, $`u^{r+1}=\{0\}`$.

2.1.2— Among the nilpotent Lie algebra, there is a family which distinguish itself, the graded nilpotent Lie algebras, these are the algebras $`u`$ with the following decomposition :

$$u=V_1\mathrm{}V_r,$$

such that

1– $`V_i`$ is a complement of $`u^{i+1}`$ in $`u^i`$ ;

2– $`[V_i,V_j]V_{i+j}`$ ;

2.1.3— What is quite important in our work is the fact that to such a graduation one can attach a one group of automorphisms $`(\tau _\rho )_\rho `$ called ”Dilatations” such that :

$$\stackrel{~}{\tau }_\rho (x)=\rho ^ix\mathrm{for}\mathrm{all}xV_i.$$

In fact the existence of such a family of dilatations is equivalent to the existence of a graduation. These dilatations plays the same role than the dilatation in the Euclidean space.

2.1.4— All nilpotent Lie algebras are not graded. But to each nilpotent Lie algebras we can associate a graded nilpotent one in the following way :

$$u_{\mathrm{}}=\underset{i1}{}u_i/u_{i+1}$$

the Lie bracket being induced. We will write

$$\stackrel{~}{\pi }:uu_{\mathrm{}}$$

and we will call Homogeneous dimension of $`u`$ the number

$$d_h=\underset{i}{}idim\left(u^i/u^{i+1}\right)$$

2.1.5— There is another way to make that graded Lie algebra appear. Let us take a nilpotent Lie algebra $`u`$, remark that for all $`i`$, $`u^{i+1}u^i`$, and take independent vectors $`X_{d_1+\mathrm{}+d_{i1}+1},\mathrm{},X_{d_1+\mathrm{}+d_{i1}+d_i}`$ such that the vector space $`V_i`$ they span is the complement of $`u^{i+1}`$ in $`u^i`$. In that way one gets a basis $`(X_i)`$ of $`u`$. Now we define an application $`\tau _\rho `$ by

$$\tau _\rho (X_p)=\rho ^{\alpha (p)}X_p$$

where $`\alpha (p)=i`$ if $`d_{i1}<pd_i`$ with $`d_0=0`$.

2.1.6— We also define a new Lie algebra $`u_\rho `$ by changing the Lie bracket in the following way : for any $`X`$ and $`Y`$ in $`u_\rho `$, $`[X,Y]_\rho =\tau _{1/\rho }[\tau _\rho X,\tau _\rho Y]`$. Thus $`\tau _\rho `$ becomes a Lie algebra isomorphism from $`u_\rho =(u,[,]_\rho )`$ to $`(u,[,])`$.

Now as $`\rho `$ goes to Infinity $`u_\rho `$ goes to $`u_{\mathrm{}}`$ in the sense that for $`i,j=1,\mathrm{},n`$ we have

$$[X_i,X_j]_{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{pr}_{V_{\alpha (i)+\alpha (j)}}[X_i,X_j]$$

Notice that the graded Lie algebra is the same for any member of this family. We will write $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }_\rho `$ the projection from $`u_\rho `$ to $`u_{\mathrm{}}`$ (in fact we could avoid the subscript in $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }_\rho `$, because we can identify the Lie algebras as linear spaces)

2.1.7— Notice that if the Lie algebra is graded then $`[X,Y]_\rho =[X,Y]`$ and $`\tau _\rho `$ is a Lie algebra automorphism. Otherwise remark that for all $`Xu_\rho `$

$$\stackrel{~}{\pi }\left(\tau _\rho (X)\right)=\stackrel{~}{\tau }_\rho \left(\stackrel{~}{\pi }_\rho (X)\right)$$

2.2 Remarks on exponential coordinates

2.2.1— Let $`G`$ be the Lie group associated with the nilpotent Lie algebra $`u`$. Thanks to the exponential coordinates we can identify $`G`$ with some $`R^n`$, as a differential manifold :

$$\varphi :R^nG,\varphi :x=(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)\mathrm{exp}x_1X_1\mathrm{}\mathrm{exp}x_nX_n$$

because for nilpotent Lie groups, the exponential is a diffeomorphism between the Lie algebra and the Lie group. Let $`\mathrm{ln}`$ be the inverse and $`X_i^{}`$ the dual form of $`X_i`$

2.2.2— Moreover, if we denote by $`\delta _\rho `$ the following family of dilatations

$$\delta _\rho (x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)=(\rho ^{\alpha (1)}x_1,\mathrm{},\rho ^{\alpha (n)})$$

and we define a family of group products $`_\rho `$ by setting

$$x_\rho y=\delta _{1/\rho }[\delta _\rho (x)\delta _\rho (y)]$$

and also

$$x_{\mathrm{}}y=\underset{\rho \mathrm{}}{lim}x_\rho y$$

we get a family of nilpotent Lie groups $`G_\rho =(G,_\rho )`$, $`\rho \overline{R}`$, whose associated family of Lie algebras are isomorphic to the family $`u_\rho `$. We also write $`\pi _\rho :G_\rho G_{\mathrm{}}`$ the application which sends $`xG_\rho `$ to $`xG_{\mathrm{}}`$. Notice also that $`d\delta _\rho =\tau _\rho `$.

2.2.3— Let us define $`\phi _i:GR`$ by $`\phi _i(g)=X_i^{}\mathrm{ln}(g)`$, then using the Campbell-Haussdorff formula, i.e.

$$\mathrm{ln}(xy)=\mathrm{ln}(x)+\mathrm{ln}(y)+\frac{1}{2}[\mathrm{ln}(x),\mathrm{ln}(y)]+C(x,y)$$

where $`C(x,y)u^3`$, for $`i=1,\mathrm{},d_1`$ we get :

$$X_i^{}\mathrm{ln}(xy)=X_i^{}\mathrm{ln}(x)+X_i^{}\mathrm{ln}(y)$$

which means that for $`i=1,\mathrm{},d_1`$ the function $`\phi _i`$ is a group morphism hence $`d\phi _i`$ is left invariant, i.e. $`d\phi _{i}^{}{}_{|\gamma g}{}^{}dl_{\gamma }^{}{}_{|g}{}^{}=d\phi _{j}^{}{}_{|g}{}^{}`$ thus

$$X_i\phi _j=d\phi _{j}^{}{}_{|g}{}^{}X_i(g)=d\phi _{j}^{}{}_{|e}{}^{}X_i(e)=X_j^{}X_i=\delta _{ij}$$

2.2.4— In other words, if we use exponential coordinates, taking as a maximum familly of independent vector in $`V_1=u^1\backslash u^2`$ the vectors $`X_1,\mathrm{},X_{d_1}`$, the previous calculation says that for $`j=1,\mathrm{},d_1`$ and all $`i`$,

$$X_ix_j=\delta _{ij}$$

2.3 Horizontal distribution and the Stable norm

2.3.1— On the graded nilpotent Lie group $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$ associated to $`G`$ we obtain a natural distribution by left multiplication of $`V_1=u_1/u_2u_{\mathrm{}}`$, we shall call that distribution Horizontal and write it $``$.

2.3.2— Let us remark that because of the nilpotency and the graduation of the Lie algebra $`u_{\mathrm{}}`$, a base of $`V_1`$ satisfies the so called Hörmander conditions in the Lie group $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$.

2.3.3— We will say that a function $`f`$ is periodic with respect to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ (the cocompact subgroup) if for every $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`xG`$ we have $`f(\gamma x)=f(x)`$. Thus $`\stackrel{~}{g}`$ is periodic with respect to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

2.3.4— We recall what the stable norm is :

###### Definition 5

Let $`||||_{\mathrm{}}^{}`$ be the quotient of the sup norm on $`1`$-forms, arising from the metric $`g`$, on the cohomology $`H^1(M^n,R)`$. Then its dual norm on the homology $`H_1(M^n,R)`$, is called the stable norm.

2.3.5— By a theorem of K. Nomizu \[Nom54\], $`H_1(M^n,R)V_1`$, hence we will call stable ball $`B_{\mathrm{}}(1)`$, the unit ball for the carnot-caratheodory metric $`d_{\mathrm{}}`$ induced by the stable norm of $`(M^n,g)`$ on $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$.

2.4 The horizontal distribution and the metric

2.4.1— We will need to consider the family $`\{G_\rho \}_{\rho R}`$ of simple connected Lie groups who corresponds to the family $`\{u_\rho \}_\rho `$ of Lie algebra associated to $`u`$. On each $`G_\rho `$ we are going to pull back the metric of $`G`$, $`\stackrel{~}{g}`$ and rescale it in the following way

$$g_\rho =\frac{1}{\rho ^2}(\delta _\rho )^{}\stackrel{~}{g}$$

thus we are also able to focus on the riemanniann spaces $`(G_\rho ,g_\rho )`$. The Laplacian in that space will be $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\rho `$.

2.4.2— If $`eG`$ is the unit element and $`Xu`$ then for $`\rho \overline{R}`$, $`X^\rho `$ will be the $`_\rho `$ left invariant field in $`G_\rho `$ such that $`X^\rho (e)=X(e)`$. Thus to the base $`(X_i)`$ defined in 2.1.5 we will associate the $`_\rho `$ left invariant fields $`(X_i^\rho )`$. Notice also that

$$d\delta _\rho (X_i^\rho )=\tau _\rho (X_i^\rho )=\rho ^{\alpha (i)}X_i$$

2.4.3— Let us write the metric $`\stackrel{~}{g}`$ in the basis $`(X_i)`$.

$$\stackrel{~}{g}=(g_{ij})$$

We can distinguish two distincts parts when writing the laplacian in coordinates

$$det\stackrel{~}{g}\mathrm{\Delta }=\underset{1i,jd_1}{}X_i\left(detgg^{ij}X_j\right)+\underset{\alpha (i)+\alpha (j)>2}{}\left(X_idetgg^{ij}X_j\right)$$

which will be of significant importance in what follows.

2.4.4— It is a straightforward calculation to find that the metric $`g_\rho `$ in the coordinates $`(X_i^\rho )`$ is written (for $`xG_\rho `$ and $`\rho R`$):

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill det\stackrel{~}{g}(\delta _\rho x)\mathrm{\Delta }_\rho =& \underset{1i,jd_1}{}X_i^\rho \left(detgg^{ij}(\delta _\rho x)X_j^\rho \right)+\hfill \\ & \underset{\alpha (i)+\alpha (j)>2}{}\rho ^{2\alpha (i)\alpha (j)}X_i^\rho \left(det\stackrel{~}{g}g^{ij}(\delta _\rho x)X_j^\rho \right)\hfill \end{array}$$
$`(1)`$
In this formula the whole difference between the two parts becomes clear, indeed it is quite apparent now that the second part vanishes when $`\rho `$ goes to infinity.

2.4.5— That is the reason why we introduce $`_{}`$ by :

$$_{}f=(X_1^{\mathrm{}}f,\mathrm{},X_{d_1}^{\mathrm{}}f)$$

2.5 Gromov-Haussdorff convergence of balls

2.5.1— In what follows $`B_g(\rho )`$ will always mean the geodesic ball of radius $`\rho `$ on the universal cover of $`(M^n=\mathrm{\Gamma }\backslash G,g)`$, and $`B_\rho (1)`$ will be the geodesic ball of radius one on $`(G_\rho ,g_\rho )`$. We will also need to define $`\mu _\rho `$ (resp. $`\mu _g`$) the Riemannian volume associated to $`g_\rho `$ (resp. $`g`$) and $`\mu _{\mathrm{}}`$ defined as follows : Let $`D_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a fundamental domain in $`G`$ and $`\mu `$ a Haar measure on $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$ then

$$\mu _{\mathrm{}}=\frac{\mu _g(D_\mathrm{\Gamma })}{\mu \left(\pi (D_\mathrm{\Gamma })\right)}\mu $$

###### Theorem 6

Let $`(M^n,g)`$ be a riemanniann nilmanifold, $`d_g`$ the induced distance on its universal cover and $`(\delta _\rho )_{\rho R}`$ the familly of isomorphisme between $`G_\rho `$ and $`G`$ if one writes for any $`x,yG_\rho `$ :

$$d_\rho (x,y)=\frac{d_g(\delta _\rho x,\delta _\rho y)}{\rho }$$

and $`B_\rho (1)`$ the unit ball for each of this rescaled distances, then the family of metric spaces $`(B_\rho (1),d_\rho ,\mu _\rho )`$ converges in the Gromov-Haussdorff measure topology to $`(B_{\mathrm{}}(1),d_{\mathrm{}},\mu _{\mathrm{}})`$ as $`\rho `$ goes to infinity.

Proof. The Gromov-Haussdorff convergence comes from P. Pansu work \[Pan82\], which implies

$$\underset{\rho \mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{d_{\mathrm{}}(\pi _\rho (x),\pi _\rho (y))}{d_\rho (x,y)}=\underset{\rho \mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{d_{\mathrm{}}(\pi \delta _\rho (x),\pi \delta _\rho (y))}{d_g(\delta _\rho x,\delta _\rho y)}=1$$

It remain to show the measure part.

###### Claim

for any compact domain $`A`$ in $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$, whose boundary is of haar measure $`0`$, and any function $`fL^1(A,\mu _{\mathrm{}})`$ we have

$$\underset{\rho \mathrm{}}{lim}_{\pi _\rho ^1(A)}f\left(\pi _\rho (x)\right)𝑑\mu _\rho (x)=_Af𝑑\mu _{\mathrm{}}$$

Indeed, let $`A`$ be a domain in $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$, then $`\pi _\rho ^1(A)`$ belongs to $`G_\rho `$ and $`\delta _\rho \pi _\rho ^1(A)`$ belongs to $`G`$. We will write $``$ the law group of $`G`$. Let $`z_1,\mathrm{},z_k`$ and $`\zeta _1,\mathrm{},\zeta _l`$ be elements of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ such that $`\zeta _jD_\mathrm{\Gamma }\delta _\rho \pi _\rho ^1(A)\mathrm{}`$ for any $`j`$ and

$$\underset{i}{}z_iD_\mathrm{\Gamma }\delta _\rho \pi _\rho ^1(A)\underset{j}{}\zeta _jD_\mathrm{\Gamma }$$

Let us notice that

$$\mu _g(D_\mathrm{\Gamma })=\frac{\mu _g(D_\mathrm{\Gamma })}{\mu \left(\pi (D_\mathrm{\Gamma })\right)}\mu \left(\pi (D_\mathrm{\Gamma })\right)=\mu _{\mathrm{}}\left(\pi (D_\mathrm{\Gamma })\right)$$

then we get

$$\begin{array}{c}\text{ }\underset{i}{}\underset{\delta _\rho \pi _\rho ^1(x)z_iD_\mathrm{\Gamma }}{inf}f(x)\mu _{\mathrm{}}\left(\pi (D_\mathrm{\Gamma })\right)\text{ }\hfill \\ \text{ }_{\delta _\rho \pi _\rho ^1(A)}f\left(\stackrel{~}{\delta }_{1/\rho }\pi (x)\right)𝑑\mu _g(x)\underset{j}{}\underset{\delta _\rho \pi _\rho ^1(x)\zeta _jD_\mathrm{\Gamma }}{sup}f(x)\mu _{\mathrm{}}\left(\pi (D_\mathrm{\Gamma })\right)\text{ }\hfill \end{array}$$

divide all members by $`\rho ^{d_h}`$ (see 2.1.4) we get :

$$\begin{array}{c}\text{ }\underset{i}{}\underset{x\pi _\rho \delta _{1/\rho }(z_iD_\mathrm{\Gamma })}{inf}f(x)\mu _{\mathrm{}}\left(\stackrel{~}{\delta }_{1/\rho }\pi (D_\mathrm{\Gamma })\right)\text{ }\hfill \\ \text{ }_{\pi _\rho ^1(A)}f\left(\pi _\rho (x)\right)𝑑\mu _\rho \underset{j}{}\underset{x\pi _\rho \delta _{1/\rho }(\zeta _jD_\mathrm{\Gamma })}{sup}f(x)\mu _{\mathrm{}}\left(\stackrel{~}{\delta }_{1/\rho }\pi (D_\mathrm{\Gamma })\right)\text{ }\hfill \end{array}$$

then the extremal terms are riemann’s sums which converge toward $`_Af𝑑\mu _{\mathrm{}}.`$

Using the claim and the fact that the functionals $`xd_\rho (0,\pi _\rho ^1(x))`$ converges simply toward the functional $`xd_{\mathrm{}}(0,x)`$ on $`B_{\mathrm{}}(1)\backslash B_{\mathrm{}}(1)`$ we can conclude. o

2.5.2— Let us introduce the asymptotic volume as

$$\mathrm{Asvol}(g)=\underset{\rho \mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{\mu _g\left(B_g(\rho )\right)}{\rho ^{d_h}}$$

following our last statement it is straightforward that

$$\mathrm{Asvol}(g)=\mu _{\mathrm{}}\left(B_{\mathrm{}}(1)\right)$$

3 Looking for convergences

For the proof of theorem 3 we will a few more definitions. Indeed we are going to look at a family of $`L^2`$-spaces which are not defined on the same space. More exactly we are going to look at $`L^2(B_\rho (1),\mu _\rho )`$. However we are going to show that in some sens (see below 2.5) these spaces converge towards $`L^2(B_{\mathrm{}}(1),\mu _{\mathrm{}})`$. So now we would like to give a precise meaning to the fact that a net composed of functions in $`L^2(B_\rho (1),\mu _\rho )`$ converges toward a function in $`L^2(B_{\mathrm{}}(1),\mu _{\mathrm{}})`$.

Once this will be done, we will be able to give a meaning to the convergence of a net of operators (the resolvent of the Laplacian for example).

3.1 Convergence on a net of Hilbert spaces

In what follows $`𝒜`$ and $``$ are directed set.

3.1.1— Let $`(X_\alpha ,d_\alpha ,m_\alpha )_{\alpha 𝒜}`$ be a net of compact measured metric spaces converging in the Gromov-Hausdorff measured topology to $`(X_{\mathrm{}},d_{\mathrm{}},m_{\mathrm{}})`$. We will write $`L_\alpha ^2=L^2(X_\alpha ,m_\alpha )`$ (resp. $`L_{\mathrm{}}^2(X_{\mathrm{}},m_{\mathrm{}})`$) for the square integrable function spaces. Their respective scalar product will be $`,_\alpha `$ (resp. $`,_{\mathrm{}}`$) and $`||||_\alpha `$ (resp. $`||||_{\mathrm{}}`$).

3.1.2— Furthermore we suppose that in every $`L_\alpha ^2`$ the continuous functions form a dense subset $`C^0(X_\alpha )`$.

###### Definition 7

We say that a net $`(u_\alpha )_{\alpha 𝒜}`$ of functions $`u_\alpha L_\alpha ^2`$ strongly converges to $`uL_{\mathrm{}}^2`$ if there exists a net $`(v_\beta )_\beta C^0(X_{\mathrm{}})`$ converging to $`u`$ in $`L_{\mathrm{}}^2`$ such that

$$\underset{\beta }{lim}\underset{\alpha }{lim\; sup}f_\alpha ^{}v_\beta u_\alpha _\alpha =0;$$

where $`(f_\alpha )`$ is the net of Hausdorff approximations. We will also talk of strong convergence in $`^2`$.

###### Definition 8

We say that a net $`(u_\alpha )_{\alpha 𝒜}`$ of functions $`u_\alpha L_\alpha ^2`$ weakly converges to $`uL_{\mathrm{}}^2`$ if and only if for every net $`(v_\alpha )_{\alpha 𝒜}`$ strongly converging to $`vL_{\mathrm{}}^2`$ we have

$$\underset{\alpha }{lim}u_\alpha ,v_\alpha _\alpha =u,v_{\mathrm{}}$$
$`(2)`$
We will also talk of weak convergence in $`^2`$.

The following claim (whose proof we don’t give, see \[Ver01\] pages 32—33) justifies those two definitions

###### Lemma 9

Let $`(u_\alpha )_{\alpha 𝒜}`$ be a net of functions $`u_\alpha L_\alpha ^2`$. If $`(u_\alpha _\alpha )`$ is uniformly bounded, then there exists a weakly converging subnet. Furthermore every weakly converging net is uniformly bounded.

3.1.3— Now that we gave sense to the convergence of a net of functions, we are going to define convergences of a net of operators. Let $`B_{\mathrm{}}(L_{\mathrm{}}^2)`$ and $`B_\alpha (L_\alpha ^2)`$ for every $`\alpha 𝒜`$.

###### Theorem and Definition 10

Let $`u,vL_{\mathrm{}}^2`$ and $`(u_\alpha )_{\alpha 𝒜}`$, $`(v_\alpha )_{\alpha 𝒜}`$ two nets such that $`u_\alpha ,v_\alpha L_\alpha ^2`$. We say that the net of operators $`(B_\alpha )_{\alpha 𝒜}`$ strongly (resp. weakly, compactly) converges to $`B`$ if $`B_\alpha u_\alpha Bu`$ strongly (resp. weakly, strongly) for every net $`(u_\alpha )`$ strongly (resp. weakly, weakly) converging to $`u`$

$$\underset{\alpha }{lim}B_\alpha u_\alpha ,v_\alpha _\alpha =Bu,v_{\mathrm{}}$$
$`(3)`$
for every $`(u_\alpha )`$, $`(v_\alpha )`$, $`u`$ and $`v`$ such that $`u_\alpha u`$ strongly (resp. weakly, weakly) and $`v_\alpha v`$ weakly (resp. strongly, weakly), (See \[Ver01\] page 35 for the justifications).

3.2 The importance of being compactly convergent

The theorem and definition of the previous section is useful, for the goal we would like to achieve thanks to the following one (whose proof can be found in \[Ver02\] for example), which links the convergence of the resolvents $`R_\zeta ^\alpha `$ associated to a family of functionals $`A_\alpha `$, with their spectra.

###### Theorem 11

Let $`R_\zeta ^\alpha R_\zeta `$ compactly for all $`\zeta `$ outside the spectra of $`(A_\alpha )`$. Assume that all resolvents $`R_\zeta ^\alpha `$ are compact. Let $`\lambda _k`$ (resp. $`\lambda _k^\alpha `$) be the $`k^{\mathrm{th}}`$ eigenvalue of $`A`$ (resp. $`A_\alpha `$) with multiplicity. We take $`\lambda _k=+\mathrm{}`$ if $`k>dimL_{\mathrm{}}^2+1`$ when $`dimL_{\mathrm{}}^2<\mathrm{}`$ and $`\lambda _k^\alpha =+\mathrm{}`$ if $`k>dimL_\alpha ^2+1`$ when $`dimL_\alpha ^2<\mathrm{}`$. Then for every $`k`$

$$\underset{\alpha }{lim}\lambda _k^\alpha =\lambda _k$$

Furthermore let $`\{\phi _k^\alpha k=1,\mathrm{},dimL_\alpha ^2\}`$ be an orthonormal bases of $`L_\alpha ^2`$ such that $`\phi _k^\alpha `$ is an eigenfunction of $`A_\alpha `$ for $`\lambda _k^\alpha `$. Then there is a sub-net such that for all $`kdimL_{\mathrm{}}^2`$ the net $`(\phi _k^\alpha )_\alpha `$ strongly converges to the eigenfunction $`\phi _k`$ of $`A`$ for the eigenvalue $`\lambda _k`$, and such that the family $`\{\phi _kk=1,\mathrm{},dimL_\alpha ^2\}`$ is an orthonormal basis of $`L_{\mathrm{}}^2`$.

3.3 What shall we finally study ?

We are now going to focus on the spectrum of the balls $`B_g(\rho )`$, and we want to show that the eigenvalues of the laplacian are converging to zero with a $`1/\rho ^2`$ speed, to be more specific we want to find a precise equivalent.

For this let recall that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\rho `$ is the Laplacian (or Laplace-Beltrami operator) associated to the rescaled metrics $`g_\rho =1/\rho ^2(\delta _\rho )^{}g`$ on $`G_\rho `$, and for any function $`f`$ from $`B_g(\rho )`$ to $`R`$ lets associate a function $`f_\rho `$ on $`B_\rho (1)`$ by $`f_\rho (x)=f(\delta _\rho x)`$. Then it is an easy calculation to see that for any $`xB_\rho (1)`$ :

$$\rho ^2\left(\mathrm{\Delta }f\right)(\delta _\rho x)=\left(\mathrm{\Delta }_\rho f_\rho \right)(x)$$

hence the eigenvalues of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\rho `$ on $`B_\rho (1)`$ are exactly the eigenvalues of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ on $`B_g(\rho )`$ multiplied by $`\rho ^2`$ and our problems becomes the study of the spectrum of the laplacian $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\rho `$ on $`B_\rho (1)`$.

Enlightened by what happens on tori we would like to show that there is some operator $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{}}`$ acting on $`B_{\mathrm{}}(1)`$ (see 2.3.5) such that, in a good sense, the net of laplacian $`(\mathrm{\Delta }_\rho )`$ converges towards $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{}}`$ and the spectra also converge to the spectrum of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{}}`$.

In the light of theorem 11, the good sense is the compact convergence of the resolvent like in our paper on the macroscopical sound of tori \[Ver02\]. The proof is quite similar, but needs some adaptation to the geometry of nilmanifolds. The following section gives the proof.

4 Homogenisation and proof of theorem 3

The first step consisted in showing the convergence of the metric geodesic balls w.r.t. the Gromov-Haussdorff measure topology (see 2.5).

The next step will consist in introducing some functions linked with the Albanese metric (see 4.1) which will lead us to the definitions of the functional spaces involved and the compact inclusion we can deduce (see 4.2). Finaly we prove the compact convergence of the resolvent (see 4.3), which thanks to theorem 11 finishes the proof.

4.1 Homogenisation of the Laplacian and Albanese’s Torus

In this section we are going to ”built” the operator $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{}}`$ of theorem 3 and give the proof of theorem 4.

4.1.1— Let $`D_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a fundamental domain. Let $`\chi ^i`$ be the unique periodic with respect to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ solution (up to an additive constant) of (for $`1ir`$)

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\chi ^i=\mathrm{\Delta }x_i\mathrm{on}D_\mathrm{\Gamma }$$

The operator $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{}}`$ is then defined by (we use Einstein’s summation convention)

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{}}f=\frac{1}{\mathrm{Vol}(g)}\underset{1i,jd_1}{}\left(_{D_\mathrm{\Gamma }}g^{ij}g^{ik}X_k\chi ^jd\mu _g\right)X_i^{\mathrm{}}X_j^{\mathrm{}}f$$
$`(4)`$
Now let us write $`\eta _j(x)=\chi ^j(x)x_j`$ the induced harmonic function and

$$q^{ij}=\frac{1}{\mathrm{Vol}(g)}\left(_{D_\mathrm{\Gamma }}g^{ij}g^{ik}X_k\chi ^jd\mu _g\right)$$

we can notice that the $`d\eta _i`$ are harmonic $`1`$-forms on the nilmanifold. It is not difficult now to show that

###### Proposition 12

Let $`,_2`$ be the scalar product induced on $`1`$-forms by the Riemannian metric $`g`$. Then

$$q^{ij}=\frac{1}{\mathrm{Vol}(g)}d\eta _i,d\eta _j_2=q^{ji}$$

thus $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{}}`$ is an Hyppoelliptic operator.

4.1.2— In fact we can say more, $`(q^{ij})`$ induces a scalar product on harmonic $`1`$-forms (whose norm will be written $`||||_2`$) and then to $`H^1(M^n,R)`$, which can be identified with the horizontal $``$ following a theorem of K. Nomizu \[Nom54\]. Indeed, as mentioned earlier, we can see the $`(d\eta _i)`$ as $`1`$-forms over the nilmanifold. Being a free family they can be seen as a basis of $`H^1(M^n,R)`$ (Hodge’s theorem). Thus by duality this yields also a scalar product $`(q_{ij})`$ over $`H_1(M^n,R)`$ (whose induced norm will be written $`||||_2^{}`$).

4.1.3— The question naturally arising is to know how is this norm related to the stable norm. To understand their link we have to go back on $`H^1(M^n,R)`$. Indeed the stable norm is the dual of the norm obtained by quotient of the sup norm on $`1`$-forms (see Pansu \[Pan99\] lemma 17), which we write $`||||_{\mathrm{}}^{}`$, and the norm $`||||_2`$ comes from the normalised $`L^2`$ norm. Thus mixing the Hölder inequality and the Hodge-de Rham theorem we get :

###### Proposition 13

For every $`1`$-form $`\alpha `$ we have

$$\alpha _2\alpha _{\mathrm{}}^{}$$

thus by duality, for every $`\gamma H_1(M^n,R)`$ we have

$$\gamma _{\mathrm{}}\gamma _2^{}$$

in other words the unit ball of the sub-riemannian metric arising from $`||||_2^{}`$ is included in $`B_{\mathrm{}}(1)`$.

4.1.4— Let us recall that the manifold $`H_1(M^n,R)/H_1(M^n,Z)`$ with the flat metric induced by $`||||_2^{}`$ is usually called the Jacobi manifold or the Albanese torus of $`(M^n,g)`$. This last proposition also implies the following inequality, regarding the asymptotic volume

###### Corollary 14

Let $`(M^n,g)`$ be a nilmanifold, then its asymptotic volume satisfies the following inequality :

$$\mathrm{Asvol}(\mathrm{g})\mu _\mathrm{g}(M^n)\frac{\mu _2\left(B_2(1)\right)}{\mu _2(D_\mathrm{\Gamma })}$$

where $`\mu _2`$ is the (sub-riemanniann) measure associated to the sub-riemanniann distance obtained from the albanese metric of $`M^n`$ on the universal cover of $`M^n`$, $`B_2(1)`$ is the unit ball of that distance and $`D_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a fundamental domain of the universal cover of $`M^n`$.

Proof. Following Nomizu \[Nom54\] we can identify the horizontal space $``$ with $`H_1(M^n,R)`$. This allows us to get two sub-riemannian distances $`d_2`$ and $`d_{\mathrm{}}`$ from $`||||_2^{}`$ and $`||||_{\mathrm{}}`$ respectively. The previous proposition implies that the ball of $`d_2`$ is inside the stable ball. Thus for any Haar measure $`\mu `$ one gets the following inequality :

$$\mu \left(B_2(1)\right)\mu \left(B_{\mathrm{}}(1)\right)$$

now taking for $`\mu `$ the haar measure $`\mu _{\mathrm{}}`$ (see section 2.5) giving the asymptotic volume we can conclude. o

Remark that theorem 4 is now a simple corollary of that last corollary.

4.2 Asymptotic compactness

4.2.1— Let us now define the various functional spaces involved. For $`\rho \overline{R}`$, $`L_\rho ^2=L^2(B_\rho (1),d\mu _\rho )`$ will be the space of square integrable functions over the ball $`B_\rho (1)`$, which is a Hilbert space with the scalar product

$$(u,v)_\rho =_{B_\rho (1)}uv𝑑\mu _\rho $$

whose norm will be $`||_\rho `$. Hence $`^2`$ will be the net of spaces $`(L_\rho ^2)`$ with either the strong or weak topoly induced by the definitions 7 and 8.

4.2.2— Following the usual nomenclature we will be interested in the following spaces

$$\begin{array}{cc}& H_\rho ^1\left(B_\rho (1)\right)=\left\{v\right|v,X_i^\rho vL^2(B_\rho (1),d\mu _\rho ),1\alpha (i)r\}\hfill \\ \hfill (\mathrm{resp}.& H_{\mathrm{}}^1\left(B_{\mathrm{}}(1)\right)=\left\{v\right|v,X_i^{\mathrm{}}vL^2(B_{\mathrm{}}(1),d\mu _{\mathrm{}}),1id_1\})\hfill \end{array}$$

which becomes Hilbert spaces with the norm $`||||_\rho `$ defined by

$$\begin{array}{cc}& ||v||_\rho ^2=|v|_\rho ^2+\underset{1\alpha (i)r}{\overset{n}{}}|X_i^\rho v|_\rho ^2\hfill \\ \hfill (\mathrm{resp}.& ||v||_{\mathrm{}}^2=|v|_{\mathrm{}}^2+\underset{1id_1}{\overset{n}{}}|X_i^{\mathrm{}}v|_{\mathrm{}}^2)\hfill \end{array}$$

4.2.3— Hence $`H_{\rho ,0}^1\left(B_\rho (1)\right)`$ will be the closure of the $`C^{\mathrm{}}\left(B_\rho (1)\right)`$ functions with compact support, in $`H_\rho ^1\left(B_\rho (1)\right)`$ for the norm $`||||_\rho `$.

4.2.4— We can define a ”spectral structure” on $`L_\rho ^2`$ by expanding the Laplacian (sub-laplacian for $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{}}`$) defined on $`H_{\rho ,0}^1\left(B_\rho (1)\right)`$ thanks to the following quadratic form

$$v_{\rho ,0}^2=|v|_\rho ^2+(v,\mathrm{\Delta }_\rho v)_\rho $$

Now let us see what can we say of a bounded net in $`H_{\rho ,0}^1\left(B_\rho (1)\right)`$ for this quadratic form.

###### Lemma 15

Let $`(u_\rho )_\rho `$ be a net with $`u_\rho H_{\rho ,0}^1\left(B_\rho (1)\right)`$ for every $`\rho `$, if there is a constant $`C`$ such that for all $`\rho >0`$ we have

$$u_\rho _{\rho ,0}C$$

then there is a strongly converging sub-net in $`^2`$.

Proof. Let $`B`$ a compact set such that $`_\rho \pi _\rho \left(B_\rho (1)\right)BG_{\mathrm{}}`$ we are going to show that the strong convergence in $`L^2(B,\mu _{\mathrm{}})`$ implies the strong convergence in $`^2`$. Then the compact embedding of $`H_{\mathrm{}}^1\left(B\right)`$ in $`L^2(B,\mu _{\mathrm{}})`$ will conclude the proof.

Let us first notice that the periodicity with respect to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, and the co-compactness of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ gives the existence of two constants $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ such that (we suppose the norms defined on $`B`$, and identify $`B`$ et $`\pi _\rho ^1B`$)

$$\alpha |v|_{\mathrm{}}|v|_\rho \beta |v|_{\mathrm{}}.$$

Let us start by taking a net $`(v_\rho )`$ strongly converging in $`L^2(B,\mu _{\mathrm{}})`$ to $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$ we also assume $`v_\rho \pi _\rho H_{\rho ,0}^1\left(B_\rho (1)\right)`$ for every $`\rho `$ (because it is all we need). The first remark to be done is that thanks to the Gromov Haussdorff convergence, $`v_{\mathrm{}}L_{\mathrm{}}^2`$ (we mean that $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$ can be considered equal to zero outside $`B_{\mathrm{}}(1)`$). Thus, let us take $`c_pC_0^{\mathrm{}}\left(B_{\mathrm{}}(1)\right)`$ be a sequence of functions strongly converging to $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$ in $`L_{\mathrm{}}^2`$. We have

$$|c_p\pi _\rho v_\rho \pi _\rho |_\rho \beta |c_pv_{\mathrm{}}|_{\mathrm{}}+\gamma |v_{\mathrm{}}v_\rho |_{\mathrm{}}$$

now let $`\epsilon >0`$ then for $`p`$ large enough $`\beta |c_pv_{\mathrm{}}|_{\mathrm{}}\epsilon `$. We fix $`p`$ large enough and take $`\rho `$ large enough for the second term to converge to $`0`$ which gives us the strong convergence needed (see 7).

Now to conclude observe that from the assumptions the net $`(u_\rho \pi _\rho ^1)`$ (if need be we extend this function by zero outside $`B_\rho (1)`$) is bounded in $`H_{\mathrm{}}^1\left(B\right)`$, hence using the compact embedding of $`H_{\mathrm{}}^1\left(B\right)`$ in $`L^2(B,\mu _{\mathrm{}})`$ (with the right regularity assumption on the boundary of $`B`$) we can extract a strongly converging net in $`L^2(B,\mu _{\mathrm{}})`$ an by what we just did in $`^2`$. o

4.3 Compact convergence of the resolvents

4.3.1— Let $`\lambda >0`$, $`a_\lambda ^\rho (u,v)=(\mathrm{\Delta }_\rho u,v)_\rho +\lambda (u,v)_\rho `$ and $`G_\lambda ^\rho `$ be the operator from $`L_\rho ^2`$ to $`H_{\rho ,0}^1L_\rho ^2`$ such that

$$a_\lambda ^\rho (G_\lambda ^\rho f,\varphi )=(f,\varphi )_\rho \varphi H_{\rho ,0}^1.$$
$`(5)`$
4.3.2— We want to show that the net of operators $`(G_\lambda ^\rho )`$ converges compactly to $`G_\lambda `$ the operator corresponding to the homogenised problem:

$$a_\lambda ^{\mathrm{}}(G_\lambda F,\mathrm{\Phi })=(F,\mathrm{\Phi })_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Phi }H_{\mathrm{},0}^1$$
$`(6)`$
with $`(F,\mathrm{\Phi })_{\mathrm{}}=_{B_{\mathrm{}}(1)}F\mathrm{\Phi }𝑑\mu _{\mathrm{}}`$ and

$$a_\lambda ^{\mathrm{}}(u,v)=_{B_{\mathrm{}}(1)}q^{ij}X_i^{\mathrm{}}uX_j^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\mu _{\mathrm{}}+\lambda (u,v)_{\mathrm{}}$$

in other word we want to show the following theorem

###### Theorem 16

For every $`\lambda <0`$, the net of resolvents $`(R_\lambda ^\rho )_\rho `$ of the Laplacian $`(\mathrm{\Delta }_\rho )`$ converges compactly to $`R_\lambda ^{\mathrm{}}`$, the resolvent of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{}}`$ from the homogenised problem. Thus the net $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }_\rho )`$ compactly converges to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\mathrm{}}`$.

Proof. This comes from the fact that $`R_\lambda ^\rho =G_\lambda ^\rho `$ and $`R_\lambda ^{\mathrm{}}=G_\lambda `$.

First step :

Let $`f_\rho `$ be a weakly convergent net to $`f`$ in $`^2`$, lemma 9 tells us that this net is uniformly bounded in $`^2`$ and in $`H_\rho ^1`$, the dual space of $`H_{\rho ,0}^1`$.

Let $`f_\rho H_{\rho ,0}^1`$ then thanks to (5) we have :

$$\alpha G_\lambda ^\rho f_\rho _{\rho ,0}^2(f_\rho ,G_\lambda ^\rho f_\rho )_\rho Kf_\rho _{H_\rho ^1}G_\lambda ^\rho f_\rho _{\rho ,0}$$

thus

$$G_\lambda ^\rho f_\rho _{\rho ,0}Cf_\rho _{H_\rho ^1}$$

the net $`(G_\lambda ^\rho f_\rho )`$ being uniformly bounded for the norms $`||||_{\rho ,0}`$, using lemma 15 there is a subnet strongly converging in $`^2`$. i.e.

$$u_\rho =G_\lambda ^\rho f_\rho \stackrel{~}{u}_\lambda \mathrm{strongly}\mathrm{in}^2$$
$`(7)`$
Furthermore $`P_\rho =(g_\rho ^{ij})G_\lambda ^\rho f_\rho `$ is also bounded in $`^2`$ thus there is a subnet of the net $`P_\rho `$ weakly converging in $`^2`$ to $`\stackrel{~}{P}_\lambda L_{\mathrm{}}^2`$, moreover $`\stackrel{~}{P}_\lambda `$ is horizontal for if we write $`P_\rho ^i`$ and $`P_\lambda ^i`$ the coordinates of $`P_\rho `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{P}_\lambda `$ then we have $`P_\rho ^i=(g_\rho ^{ij})G_\lambda ^\rho f_\rho =\rho ^{2\alpha (i)\alpha (j)}\left(g^{ij}(\delta _\rho x)\right)G_\lambda ^\rho f_\rho `$, so if $`\alpha (i)2`$ then this coordinates strongly converges to $`0`$ in $`^2`$, because $`\left(g^{ij}(\delta _\rho x)\right)G_\lambda ^\rho f_\rho `$ is also bounded.

Now for any $`\varphi _{\mathrm{}}L_{\mathrm{}}^2`$ let $`\varphi _\rho `$ be a strongly converging net to $`\varphi _{\mathrm{}}`$ in $`^2`$ then

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill _{B_\rho (1)}P_\rho \varphi _\rho d\mu _\rho +\lambda (G_\lambda ^\rho f_\rho ,\varphi _\rho )_\rho & =(f_\rho ,\varphi _\rho )_\rho \hfill \\ \hfill _{B_{\mathrm{}}(1)}\stackrel{~}{P}_\lambda _{}\varphi _{\mathrm{}}d\mu _{\mathrm{}}+\lambda (u_\lambda ^{},\varphi _{\mathrm{}})_{\mathrm{}}& =(f,\varphi _{\mathrm{}})_{\mathrm{}}.\hfill \end{array}$$
$`(8)`$
Thus it is enough to show that $`\stackrel{~}{P}_\lambda =\left(q^{ij}\right)_{}\stackrel{~}{u}_\lambda `$ on $`B_{\mathrm{}}(1)`$ because it induces $`\stackrel{~}{u}_\lambda =G_\lambda f`$.

Second step :

We first take $`\chi ^k(y)`$ (see 4.1) such that $`(\chi ^k)=0`$ and we define

$$w_\rho (x)=x_k\frac{1}{\rho }\chi ^k(\delta _\rho x)$$
$`(9)`$
for every $`k=1,\mathrm{},d_1`$. Then

$$w_\rho x_k\mathrm{strongly}\mathrm{in}^2.$$
$`(10)`$
and by construction of $`\chi ^k`$ (see 4.1) we have

$$X_i^\rho \left(det\stackrel{~}{g}(\delta _\rho x)g_\rho ^{ij}X_j^\rho w_\rho \right)=0\mathrm{on}B_\rho (1).$$
$`(11)`$
We multiply this equation by a test function $`\varphi _\rho V_\rho `$ and after an integration we get

$$_{B_\rho (1)}g_\rho ^{ij}X_j^\rho w_\rho X_i^\rho \varphi _\rho 𝑑\mu _\rho =0$$
$`(12)`$
Let $`\phi C_0^{\mathrm{}}(B_{\mathrm{}}(1))`$ (notice that for $`\rho `$ large enough the support of $`\phi `$ will be in $`\pi _\rho \left(B_\rho (1)\right)`$ ) and $`\varphi _\rho =\phi \pi _\rho w_\rho `$ which we put into the equation (5) and into the equation (12) we put $`\varphi _\rho =\phi \pi _\rho u_\rho `$, and then we subtract the results

$$\begin{array}{c}\text{ }_{B_\rho (1)}g_\rho ^{ij}\left(X_j^\rho u_\rho \left(X_i^\rho (\phi \pi _\rho )\right)w_\rho X_j^\rho w_\rho \left(X_i^\rho (\phi \pi _\rho )\right)u_\rho \right)𝑑\mu _\rho \text{ }\hfill \\ \text{ }=_{B_\rho (1)}f_\rho w_\rho \phi \pi _\rho 𝑑\mu _\rho \lambda _{B_\rho (1)}\phi \pi _\rho u_\rho w_\rho 𝑑\mu _\rho (13)\text{ }\hfill \end{array}$$

Now let $`\rho \mathrm{}`$ in (13), all terms converge because they are product of one strongly converging net and one weakly converging net in $`^2`$. More precisely,

(i) $`P_\rho `$, remember that $`P_\rho ^i=g_\rho ^{ij}X_j^\rho u_\rho `$, weakly converges to $`\stackrel{~}{P}_\lambda `$ in $`^2`$ following (8);

(ii) $`\left(X_i^\rho (\phi \pi _\rho )\right)w_\rho `$ strongly converges to $`(X_i^{\mathrm{}}\phi )x_k`$ in $`^2`$ from (10) and because, writing $`l_x^\rho `$ the function left multiplication by $`x`$ in $`G_\rho `$:

$$X_i^\rho (\phi \pi _\rho )_x=d\phi _{\pi _\rho l_x^\rho (e)}d\pi _{\rho }^{}{}_{l_x^\rho (e)}{}^{}dl_x^\rho X_i^\rho (e)$$

now by definition $`l_x^\rho l_x^{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`\pi _\rho id_G_{\mathrm{}}`$ which explains why

$$X_i^\rho (\phi \pi _\rho )X_i^{\mathrm{}}\phi $$

pointwise (and weakly $`^2`$ from the claim in the proof of section 2.5).

(iii) for $`1i,jd_1`$, $`g_\rho ^{ij}X_i^\rho w_\rho `$ is periodic with respect to $`\delta _{1/\rho }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and weakly converges in $`^2`$ towards the mean value

$$q^{jk}=\frac{1}{\mu _g(D_\mathrm{\Gamma })}_{D_\mathrm{\Gamma }}\left(g^{ij}(y)\left(\delta _{ik}X_i\chi ^k(y)\right)\right)𝑑\mu _g$$

this comes from the following claim

###### Lemma 17

Let $`h`$ be a function periodic with respect to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`G`$. Let $`h_\rho `$ be defined on $`G_\rho `$ by $`h_\rho (x)=h(\delta _\rho x)`$. Then $`(h_\rho )`$ weakly converges in $`^2`$ toward

$$h_{\mathrm{}}=\frac{1}{\mu _g(D_\mathrm{\Gamma })}_{D_\mathrm{\Gamma }}h𝑑\mu _g$$

i.e. for any $`u_\rho u_{\mathrm{}}`$ strongly in $`^2`$ we have

$$_{B_\rho (1)}u_\rho h_\rho 𝑑\mu _\rho h_{\mathrm{}}_{B_{\mathrm{}}(1)}u_{\mathrm{}}𝑑\mu _{\mathrm{}}$$

To see this apply the proof in section 2.5 to $`h^{1/n}g`$ instead of $`g`$ (even if it is not a measure, what makes everything work in that proof is the fact that $`detg`$ in the coordinates $`(X_i)`$ is periodic with respect to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$).

(iv) for $`\alpha (i)+\alpha (j)>2`$, $`g_\rho ^{ij}X_i^\rho w_\rho =\rho ^{2\alpha (i)\alpha (j)}g^{ij}(\delta _\rho x)X_i^\rho w_\rho `$ thus this term weakly converges in $`^2`$ towards $`0`$.

(v) $`\left(X_j^\rho (\phi \pi _\rho )\right)u_\rho `$ strongly converges to $`(X_j^{\mathrm{}}\phi )\stackrel{~}{u}_\lambda `$ by (7), because $`\phi `$ has compact support.

(vi) Now for the right side, $`w_\rho `$ strongly converges as $`u_\rho `$ does and $`f_\rho `$ weakly converges to $`f`$.

To summarise (13) converges to (remember that $`\stackrel{~}{P}_\lambda ^i`$ are the coordinates of $`\stackrel{~}{P}_\lambda `$ which is horizontal)

$$_{B_{\mathrm{}}(1)}\left(\stackrel{~}{P}_\lambda ^jx_kq^{jk}\stackrel{~}{u}_\lambda \right)X_j^{\mathrm{}}\phi 𝑑\mu _{\mathrm{}}=_{B_{\mathrm{}}(1)}fx_k\phi 𝑑\mu _{\mathrm{}}\lambda _{B_{\mathrm{}}(1)}\phi u_\lambda x_k𝑑\mu _{\mathrm{}}$$
$`(14)`$
furthermore if we put into equation (8), $`\varphi _{\mathrm{}}=\phi x_k`$ it gives

$$_{B_{\mathrm{}}(1)}fx_k\phi 𝑑\mu _{\mathrm{}}\lambda _{B_{\mathrm{}}(1)}\phi \stackrel{~}{u}_\lambda x_k𝑑\mu _{\mathrm{}}=_{B_{\mathrm{}}(1)}\stackrel{~}{P}_\lambda ^jX_j^{\mathrm{}}(\phi x_k)𝑑\mu _{\mathrm{}}$$
$`(15)`$
and by mixing (14) and (15) we get for every $`\phi 𝒞_c^{\mathrm{}}(B_{\mathrm{}}(1))`$ the following equality :

$$_{B_{\mathrm{}}(1)}\left(\stackrel{~}{P}_\lambda ^jx_kq^{jk}\stackrel{~}{u}_\lambda \right)X_j^{\mathrm{}}\phi 𝑑\mu _{\mathrm{}}=_{B_{\mathrm{}}(1)}\stackrel{~}{P}_\lambda ^jX_j^{\mathrm{}}(\phi x_k)𝑑\mu _{\mathrm{}}$$

which in terms of distribution can be translated into :

$$\underset{j=1}{\overset{d_1}{}}X_j^{\mathrm{}}\left(\stackrel{~}{P}_\lambda ^jx_kq^{jk}\stackrel{~}{u}_\lambda \right)=\underset{j=1}{\overset{d_1}{}}X_j^{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{~}{P}_\lambda ^jx_k\stackrel{~}{P}_\lambda ^k=\underset{j=1}{\overset{d_1}{}}q^{jk}X_j^{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{~}{u}_\lambda $$

which allow us to conclude that $`\stackrel{~}{u}_\lambda =G_\lambda f`$. o

4.3.3— It is now easy to finish the proof, for theorem 16 gives the compact convergence of the resolvents fact which thanks to theorem 11 gives the convergence of the spectrum which is what theorem 3 is all about.

5 Macroscopic spectral rigidity

In this section we give the proof of the upper bound on the first eigenvalue and of theorem 2.

5.1 The upper bound

By proposition 13 we have $`B_{\mathrm{}}(1)B_2(1)`$ thus by the minmax property, we have

$$\lambda _i(B_{\mathrm{}}(1))\lambda _i(B_2(1))$$
$`(16)`$
for any $`i`$ and equality holds, by the maximum principle (see J.-M. Bony \[Bon69\]) if and only if the two balls coincides.

5.2 Nilmanifolds having a one dimensional center

The aim of this part is to characterize the case of equality in (16) for a class of nilmanifold, which contains the Heisenberg groups.

Let us first introduce the description of the metrics involved.

###### Definition 18

Let $`N^{n+1}`$ be a $`2`$-step nilmanifold whose kernel is one dimensional. Suppose that there is a submersion $`p`$ of $`N^{n+1}`$ onto a flat torus $`T^n`$. Let $`(\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _n)`$ be the lift of an orthonormal base of harmonic $`1`$-forms over the torus. Choose a $`1`$-form $`\vartheta `$ of $`N^{n+1}`$ such that $`d\vartheta =p^{}b`$ where $`b`$ is a closed $`2`$-form over the torus (in other words we chose a connection). Let $`g_\vartheta `$ be the Riemanniann metric such that the dual base of $`(\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _n,\vartheta )`$ is orthonormal. Thus $`p`$ becomes a Riemannian submersion. We will call such a metric pseudo left invariant.

The idea is that if your choice of connections gives a left invariant base of vector fields then the above construction gives a left invariant metric. Thus this pseudo left invariant metric can be seen as perturbation of a left invariant metric, by perturbation of a left invariant base of vector fields.

We are now able to give our precise claim

###### Lemma 19

Let $`(H_{2n+1},g)`$ be the $`2n+1`$-dimensional Heisenberg group, then its stable norm coincides with its albanese Metric if and only if $`g`$ is pseudo left invariant.

which thanks to theorem 1 allows us to obtain the following corollary :

###### Corollary 20

Let $`(H_3,g)`$ be the $`3`$-dimensional Heisenberg group, $`B_g(\rho )`$ the induced Riemannian ball of radius $`\rho `$ on its universal cover and $`\lambda _1\left(B_g(\rho )\right)`$ the first eigenvalue of the Laplacian on $`B_g(\rho )`$ for the Dirichlet problem.

Then

1. $`lim_{\rho +\mathrm{}}\rho ^2\lambda _1\left(B_g(\rho )\right)=\lambda _1^{\mathrm{}}\lambda _1^_3`$

2. in case of equality the metric is pseudo left invariant.

Where $`\lambda _1^_3`$ is the first eigenvalue of the Kohn laplacian arising from the Albanese metric on the unit ball of the carnot-caratheodory ball arising from the same metric.

In fact we are going to show a little more, we are going to focus on $`2`$-step nilmanifolds for which the center of their Lie algebra is of dimension $`1`$.

###### Lemma 21

Let $`(M^{n+1},g)`$ be a $`2`$-step nilmanifold whose center is of dimension $`1`$, then its stable norm and its Albanese metric coincides if and only if the metric is pseudo left invariant.

Proof. The main idea comes from the fact that the albanese metric and the stable norm coincides if and only if every harmonic $`1`$-form has constant length.

Now take an orthonormal base of Harmonic $`1`$-forms $`\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _n`$ (which can be seen as lift of harmonic forms over the Albanese torus), and consider their dual vector fields with respect to the metric $`X_1,\mathrm{},X_n`$, they span $``$. Using the fact that for a closed one form $`\alpha `$ and any vector fields $`X`$ and $`Y`$ we have:

$$\alpha ([X,Y])=X\alpha (Y)Y\alpha (X)$$

we see that for any $`i,j`$

$$[X_i,X_j]^{}$$

(remark that we can also deduce from that fact that $`[X_i,X_j]=2_{X_i}X_j`$) Now look at $`Z`$ the dual vector field to the $`1`$-form $`Z^{\mathrm{}}=(\alpha _1\mathrm{}\alpha _n)`$ ($``$ is the Hodge operator, thus this form is co-closed), its length is constant by construction. Furthermore $`Z`$ belongs and spans $`^{}`$.

For a co-closed one form $`\alpha `$ we have

$$\underset{i}{}_{X_i}\alpha \alpha _i+_Z\alpha Z^{\mathrm{}}=0$$

which implies that for $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$

$$[X_i,Z]=0$$

which also implies that $`Z`$ is a killing field.

hence we have

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill [X_i,X_j]& =f_{ij}Z\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`f_{ij}`$ are some functions, which are not all zero, otherwise our nilmanifold will be locally a flat torus.

Let us remark that ($`Z`$ being a killing field) we have

$$dZ^{\mathrm{}}(X,Y)=2g(_XZ,Y)$$
$`(17)`$
thus if we decompose $`dZ^{\mathrm{}}`$ in the base given by $`\alpha _i\alpha _j`$, $`Z^{\mathrm{}}\alpha _i`$ and $`Z^{\mathrm{}}Z^{\mathrm{}}`$ for all $`i,j`$ then thanks to and (17) we get that

$$dZ^{\mathrm{}}=\underset{i<j}{}f_{ij}\alpha _i\alpha _j$$

In other words $`dZ^{\mathrm{}}`$ is horizontal and there exists some $`2`$-form $`\beta `$ on the albanese torus such that $`dZ^{\mathrm{}}=\pi ^{}\beta `$.

Hence $`g`$ is pseudo left invariant.

o

5.3 On the higher dimensional case

The case of tori, which is quite exceptional has been treated in \[Ver02\].

For other, non abelian nilmanifolds, it seems that things are not that simple, as in the case of the Heisenberg groups, it seems that there can be metrics which are not left invariant, but for which the equality between the stable norm and the albanese metric holds.

The interested reader will be able to consult \[NV\], where this question is studied in details, and where we explain the rigidity involved.

5.4 Graded nilmanifolds with totally geodesic fibers  over a Torus

There is one last particular case we would like to study, the case where the nilmanifold is graded (i.e. its algebra is nilpotent and graded as defined in section 2.1.2) and the metric on $`(M^n,g)`$ is as follows : We suppose that the first betti number $`b_1(M^n)=k`$, we recall that $``$ is the horizontal distribution coming from $`V_1`$ (see sections 2.3.1 and 2.1.2). Moreover we assume that we have the following riemanniann submersion, with totally geodesics fibers and with a metric equivariant on the fibers :

$$[M,M](M^n,g)\stackrel{p}{}(T^k,\stackrel{ˇ}{g})$$

where $`dp_x`$ is an isometry (we write $`\widehat{g}=g_{}`$) from $`(_x,\widehat{g}_x)`$ to $`(T_{p(x)}T^k,\stackrel{ˇ}{g}_{p(x)})`$.

Then, in case of equality in the theorems 1 and 4, the albanese map is a riemanniann submersion, which implies that $`\stackrel{ˇ}{g}`$ is flat. Which in turn, using our assumptions implies that the metric $`g`$ is left invariant (indeed see chapter 9 section F in \[Bes87\]). In other words :

###### Proposition 22

Let $`(M,g)`$ satisfying the above assumptions. The albanese metric and the stable norm coincides if and only if the metric is left invariant.

In other words, we could say heuristically that for sub-riemannian metrics the equality case in theorems 1 (which holds in that context too, see \[Ver01\] for the convergence of the spectrum) characterises the left-invariant sub-riemannian metrics.

References

| \[Ale02\] | G. K. Alexopoulos. Sub-Laplacians with Drift on Lie Groups of Polynomial Volume Growth, volume 155, number 739 of Memoirs of the AMS. AMS, January 2002. |
| --- | --- |
| \[BI95\] | D. Burago and S. Ivanov. On asymptotic volume of tori. GAFA, 5(5):800–808, 1995. |
| \[BLP78\] | A. Bensousan, J.-L. Lions, and G. Papanicolaou. Asymptotic analysis for periodic structures. Studies in mathematics and its applications. North Holland, 1978. |
| \[BMT96\] | M. Biroli, U. Mosco, and N. A. Tchou. Homogenization for degenerate operators with periodical coefficients with respect to the heisenberg group. C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, t. 322, Série I:439–444, 1996. |
| \[BMT97\] | M. Biroli, U. Mosco, and N. A. Tchou. Homogenization by the heisenberg group. Advances in Mathematics, 7:809–837, 1997. |
| \[Bon69\] | J.-M. Bony. Principe du maximum, inégalite de Harnack et unicité du problème de Cauchy pour les opérateurs elliptiques dégénérés. Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble), 19(fasc. 1):277–304 xii, 1969. |
| \[BP92\] | R. Benedetti and C. Petronio. Lectures on Hyperbolic Geometry. Springer-Verlag, 1992. |
| \[Bes87\] | A. L. Besse. Einstein Manifolds. Springer-Verlag, 1987. |
| \[Bro85a\] | R. Brooks. The bottom of the spectrum of a Riemannian covering. J. Reine Angew. Math., 357:101–114, 1985. |
| \[Fed69\] | H. Federer. Geometric Measure Theory. Springer Verlag, 1969. |
| \[GHL90\] | S. Gallot, D. Hulin, and J. Lafontaine. Riemannian geometry. Universitext. Springer-Verlag, second edition, 1990. |
| \[Gro81\] | M. Gromov. Groups of polynomial growth and expanding maps. Inst. Hautes études Sci. Publ. Math., (53):53–73, 1981. |
| \[KS\] | K. Kuwae and T. Shioya. Convergence of spectral structures: a functional analytic theory and its applications to spectral geometry. preprint. |
| \[Mas93\] | Dal Maso. An Introduction to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-convergence. Birkhäuser, 1993. |
| \[Mos94\] | U. Mosco. Composite media and asymptotic dirichlet forms. J. Funct. Anal., 123(2):368–421, 1994. |
| \[NV\] | P.A. Nagy and C. Vernicos. On manifolds with eigenforms of constant length. In preparation. |
| \[Nom54\] | K. Nomizu. On the cohomology of compact homogeneous spaces of nilpotent lie groups. Annals of Math., 59(3):531–538, 1954. |
| \[Pan82\] | P. Pansu. Géometrie du groupe de Heisenberg. Thèse de docteur 3ème cycle, Université Paris VII, 1982. |
| \[Pan99\] | P. Pansu. Profil isopérimétrique, métriques périodiques et formes d’équilibre des cristaux. prépublication d’orsay, 1999. |
| \[Rud91\] | W. Rudin. Functional Analysis. International series in Pure and Applied Mathematics. Mc Graw-Hill, second edition, 1991. |
| \[Sun89\] | T. Sunada. Unitary representations of fundamental groups and the spectrum of twisted Laplacians. Topology, 28(2):125–132, 1989. |
| \[Ver01\] | C. Vernicos. Spectres asymptotiques des nilvariétés graduées. Thèse de doctorat, Université Grenoble I, Joseph Fourier, 2001. |
| \[Ver02\] | C. Vernicos. The macroscopical sound of tori. preprint. |
| \[ZKON79\] | V.V. Zhikov, S.M. Kozlov, O.A. Oleinik, and Kha T’en Ngoan. Averaging and g-convergence of differential operators. Russian Math. Surveys, 34(5):69–147, 1979. |

Constantin Vernicos

Université de Neuchâtel

Institut de Mathématiques

11, rue Emile Argand

2007 Neuchâtel

Switzerland

mail: Constantin.Vernicos@unine.ch