text:
# Kleinian groups which are almost fuchsian

## 1. The earthquake section

We consider the *Teichmüller space* $`𝒯(S)`$, namely the space of isotopy classes of finite area complete hyperbolic metrics on the surface $`S`$. Recall that $`𝒯(S)`$ is diffeomorphic to $`^\theta `$, where $`\theta =3\chi (S)p0`$ if $`\chi (S)`$ is the Euler characteristic of $`S`$ and $`p`$ is its number of ends.

A standard deformation of a metric $`m𝒯(S)`$ is the *left earthquake* $`E_m^\mu 𝒯(S)`$ along the measured geodesic lamination $`\mu `$, as constructed in \[Th2\]\[Ke1\]\[EpM\]. We consider the *infinitesimal left earthquake vector* $`e_m^\mu =\frac{d}{dt}E_m^{t\mu }{}_{|t=0}{}^{}T_m𝒯(S)`$. This provides a section $`e^\mu :𝒯(S)T𝒯(S)`$ of the tangent bundle of $`𝒯(S)`$, defined by $`me_m^\mu `$.

There similarly exists a *right earthquake* $`E_m^\mu `$ along $`\mu `$; the notation is justified by the fact that $`mE_m^\mu `$ is the inverse of $`mE_m^\mu `$. We can then consider the *infinitesimal right earthquake vector* $`e_m^\mu =\frac{d}{dt}E_m^{t\mu }{}_{|t=0}{}^{}T_m𝒯(S)`$ and the corresponding section $`e^\mu :𝒯(S)T𝒯(S)`$ of the tangent bundle of $`𝒯(S)`$. Note that $`e_m^\mu =e_m^\mu `$, but it will be convenient to keep a separate notation.

Recall that the measured geodesic laminations $`\mu `$, $`\nu (S)`$ *fill up* the surface $`S`$ if every non-trivial measured geodesic lamination has non-zero geometric intersection number with at least one of $`\mu `$, $`\nu `$. This is equivalent to the condition that every component of $`S\mu \nu `$ is, either a topological disk bounded by the union of finitely many geodesic arcs, or a topological annulus bounded on one side by the union of finitely many geodesic arcs and going to a cusp on the other side.

###### Proposition 3.

Let $`\mu `$, $`\nu (S)`$ be two non-zero measured geodesic laminations. The intersection of the two sections $`e^\mu `$, $`e^\nu :𝒯(S)T𝒯(S)`$ of the tangent bundle of $`𝒯(S)`$ is transverse. These sections meet in exactly one point if $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$ fill up the surface $`S`$, and are otherwise disjoint.

###### Proof.

We first translate the problem in terms of the length functions $`l_\mu `$, $`l_\nu :𝒯(S)`$ which to a metric $`m𝒯(S)`$ associate the $`m`$–lengths of the measured geodesic lamination $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$. The Weil-Petersson symplectic form on $`𝒯(S)`$ induces an isomorphism between its tangent bundle $`T𝒯(S)`$ and its cotangent bundle $`T^{}𝒯(S)`$. A celebrated result of Scott Wolpert \[Wo1\] asserts that this isomorphism sends the section $`e^\mu `$ of $`T𝒯(S)`$ to the section $`dl_\mu `$ of $`T^{}𝒯(S)`$. Therefore, Proposition 3 is equivalent to showing that the sections $`dl_\mu `$ and $`dl_\nu `$ transversely meet in 1 or 0 point, according to whether $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$ fill up the surface $`S`$ or not.

First consider the case where $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$ fill up $`S`$. The intersection of the section $`dl_\mu `$ and $`dl_\nu `$ of $`T^{}𝒯(S)`$ correspond to the points $`m𝒯(S)`$ where $`d_ml_\mu =d_ml_\nu `$, namely to the critical points of the function $`l_\mu +l_\nu :𝒯(S)`$. It is proved in \[Ke1\]\[Ke2\] that, because $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$ fill up $`S`$, the function $`l_\mu +l_\nu `$ admits a unique critical point $`m_0`$. In addition, the hessian of $`l_\mu +l_\nu `$ at $`m_0`$ is positive definite \[Wo2\]\[Ke2\].

Let $`u=d_{m_0}l_\mu =d_{m_0}l_\nu T_{m_0}^{}𝒯(S)`$. The intersection of the tangent spaces of the sections $`dl_\mu `$ and $`dl_\nu `$ at $`u`$ consists of all the vectors of the form $`T_{m_0}\left(dl_\mu \right)(v)=T_{m_0}\left(dl_\nu \right)(v)`$ for some $`vT_{m_0}𝒯(S)`$, where $`T_{m_0}\left(dl_\mu \right)`$, $`T_{m_0}\left(dl_\nu \right):T_{m_0}𝒯(S)T_uT^{}𝒯(S)`$ denote the tangent maps of the sections $`dl_\mu `$, $`dl_\nu :𝒯(S)T^{}𝒯(S)`$.

Note that, for an arbitrary $`wT_{m_0}𝒯(S)`$, the vectors $`T_{m_0}\left(dl_\mu \right)(w)`$ and $`T_{m_0}\left(dl_\nu \right)(w)`$ both project to $`w`$ through the tangent map of the projection $`T^{}𝒯(S)𝒯(S)`$. In particular, the difference $`T_{m_0}\left(dl_\mu \right)(w)T_{m_0}\left(dl_\nu \right)(w)`$ is tangent to the fiber, namely is an element of $`T_{m_0}^{}𝒯(S)T_uT^{}𝒯(S)`$. Using local coordinates, one easily sees that this difference is the image of $`w`$ under the homomorphism $`T_{m_0}𝒯(S)T_{m_0}^{}𝒯(S)`$ induced by the hessian of the function $`l_\mu +l_\nu `$. (Beware of optimistic simplifications, though: for instance, $`T_{m_0}\left(dl_\nu \right)`$ is not the same as $`T_{m_0}\left(dl_\nu \right)`$ since they take their values in different tangent spaces.) Since the hessian is non-degenerate, this homomorphism is actually an isomorphism.

A consequence of this analysis is that, if $`T_{m_0}\left(dl_\mu \right)(v)=T_{m_0}\left(dl_\nu \right)(v)`$, then $`v`$ must be 0. Therefore, the intersection of the two sections $`dl_\mu `$ and $`dl_\nu `$ of $`T^{}𝒯(S)`$ at the point $`u`$ is transverse, since these sections have dimension $`\theta `$ and the total space $`T^{}𝒯(S)`$ has dimension $`2\theta `$. By Weil-Petersson duality, this proves that the sections $`e^\mu `$ of $`e^\nu `$ of $`T𝒯(S)`$ have a transverse intersection consisting of exactly one point.

We now consider the case where $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$ do not fill up the surface. In this case, the function $`l_\mu +l_\nu `$ has no critical point \[Ke2\] (see also the discussion in \[Se1, §4.2\]). By the above translation, it follows that the sections $`e^\mu `$, $`e^\nu `$ are disjoint.

This concludes the proof of Proposition 3. ∎

If the measured geodesic laminations $`\mu `$, $`\nu `$ fill up the surface $`S`$, let $`\kappa (\mu ,\nu )`$ denote the (unique) critical point of the length function $`l_\mu +l_\nu :𝒯(S)`$. As above, $`\kappa (\mu ,\nu )`$ is also the unique $`m𝒯(S)`$ such that $`e_m^\mu =e_m^\nu `$.

###### Lemma 4.

If $`\kappa (\mu ^{},\nu )=\kappa (\mu ,\nu )`$, then $`\mu ^{}=\mu `$.

###### Proof.

By an (easy) infinitesimal version of \[Th2\] (see also \[Ke2\]), an infinitesimal left earthquake completely determines the measured geodesic lamination along which it is performed. If $`e_m^\mu ^{}=e_m^\nu =e_m^\mu `$, it follows that $`\mu ^{}=\mu `$. ∎

We will need a result similar to Proposition 3 in the unit tangent bundle $`T^1𝒯(S)`$. Recall that the fibers $`T_m^1𝒯(S)`$ of this bundle are the quotient of $`T_m𝒯(S)\{0\}`$ under the equivalence relation which identifies $`v`$ to $`tv`$ when $`t]0,\mathrm{}[`$. In particular, $`T^1𝒯(S)`$ is a manifold of dimension $`2\theta 1`$. Let $`\overline{e}^\mu `$, $`\overline{e}{}_{}{}^{\nu }:𝒯(S)T^1𝒯(S)`$ be the sections induced by $`e^\mu `$ and $`e^\nu `$.

###### Proposition 5.

Let $`\mu `$, $`\nu (S)`$ be two non-zero measured geodesic laminations. The intersection of the two sections $`\overline{e}^\mu `$, $`\overline{e}{}_{}{}^{\nu }:𝒯(S)T^1𝒯(S)`$ of the unit tangent bundle of $`𝒯(S)`$ is transverse. If $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$ fill up the surface $`S`$, these sections meet along a section above a line $`K(\mu ,\nu )`$ properly embedded in $`𝒯(S)`$. If $`\mu `$, $`\nu `$ do not fill up $`S`$, the intersection is empty.

###### Proof.

The two sections meet above $`m𝒯(S)`$ if $`\overline{e}{}_{m}{}^{\mu }=\overline{e}_m^\nu `$, namely if there is a $`t>0`$ such that $`e_m^\nu =te_m^\mu =e_m^{t\mu }`$. By Proposition 3, this can occur only when $`t\mu `$ and $`\nu `$ fill the surface, namely only when $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$ fill the surface. Consequently, the two sections have empty intersection if $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$ do not fill up the surface.

If $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$ fill up the surface then, for every $`t>0`$, Proposition 3 shows that there is a unique $`m=\kappa (t\mu ,\nu )𝒯(S)`$ such that $`e_m^{t\mu }=e_m^\nu `$. As a consequence, the two sections $`\overline{e}^\mu `$, $`\overline{e}{}_{}{}^{\nu }:𝒯(S)T^1𝒯(S)`$ meet exactly above the image $`K(\mu ,\nu )`$ of the map $`]0,\mathrm{}[𝒯(S)`$ defined by $`t\kappa (t\mu ,\nu )`$.

If $`m=\kappa (t\mu ,\nu )`$ so that $`e_m^{t\mu }=e_m^\nu `$, the tangent space $`T_{e_m^{t\mu }}T𝒯(S)`$ is the sum of the tangent spaces $`T_me^{t\mu }\left(T_m𝒯(S)\right)`$ and $`T_me^\nu \left(T_m𝒯(S)\right)`$ of the sections $`e^{t\mu }`$ and $`e^\nu `$, by the transversality property of Proposition 3. Therefore, in the unit tangent bundle, the tangent space $`T_{\overline{e}_m^\mu }T^1𝒯(S)`$ is the sum of $`T_m\overline{e}{}_{}{}^{\mu }\left(T_m𝒯(S)\right)`$ and $`T_m\overline{e}{}_{}{}^{\nu }\left(T_m𝒯(S)\right)`$. As a consequence, the intersection of the two sections $`\overline{e}^\mu `$ and $`\overline{e}^\nu `$ is transverse above the point $`m=\kappa (t\mu ,\nu )`$.

By transversality, the intersection of the sections is a submanifold of the image of $`\overline{e}^\mu `$. Its dimension is equal to 1, by consideration of the dimensions of $`𝒯(S)`$ and $`T^1𝒯(S)`$. Since the projection $`\overline{e}{}_{}{}^{\mu }\left(𝒯(S)\right)𝒯(S)`$ is a diffeomorphism, it follows that the projection $`K(\mu ,\nu )`$ of this projection is a 1–dimensional submanifold of $`𝒯(S)`$.

By definition, $`\kappa (t\mu ,\nu )`$ is the unique minimum of the convex function $`tdl_\mu +dl_\nu `$, which has positive hessian at this minimum. It follows that $`\kappa (t\mu ,\nu )`$ is a continuous function of $`t`$. Conversely, $`t`$ is completely determined by $`m=\kappa (t\mu ,\nu )`$ by Lemma 4. As a consequence, if $`m=\kappa (t\mu ,\nu )`$ stays in a bounded subset of $`𝒯(S)`$, then $`t`$ stays in a compact subset of $`]0,\mathrm{}[`$. In other words, the map $`]0,\mathrm{}[𝒯(S)`$ defined by $`t\kappa (t\mu ,\nu )`$ is injective, continuous and proper. It follows that its image $`K(\mu ,\nu )`$, which we already know is a 1–dimensional submanifold of $`𝒯(S)`$, is a line properly embedded in $`𝒯(S)`$. ∎

Following the terminology of \[Se1\] (motivated by \[Ke2\]), let the *Kerckhoff line* be the proper 1–dimensional submanifold $`K(\mu ,\nu )𝒯(S)`$, consisting of all the $`\kappa (t\mu ,\nu )`$ with $`t>0`$.

## 2. Necessary condition for small bending

Let $`tm_t`$, $`t[0,\epsilon [`$, be a small differentiable curve in $`𝒬(S)`$. If $`\beta (m_t)=(\beta ^+(t),\beta ^{}(t))(S)^2`$ is its bending measured geodesic lamination, it is shown in \[Bo3\] that the right derivative $`\frac{d}{dt^+}\beta (m_t)_{|t=0}`$ exists, as an element of the tangent space of $`(S)^2`$ at $`\beta (m_0)`$. In general, because $`(S)`$ is not a differentiable manifold, this tangent space consists of geodesic laminations with a transverse structure which is less regular than a transverse measure \[Bo2\]. However, if we assume in addition that the starting point $`m_0`$ of the curve is fuchsian, the tangent space of $`(S)^2`$ at $`\beta (m_0)=(0,0)`$ is just $`(S)^2`$; see \[Bo2\].

We can therefore consider the converse problem: Given a fuchsian metric $`m_0(S)`$ and a pair $`(\mu ,\nu )(S)^2`$ of measured geodesic laminations, does there exist a small differentiable curve $`tm_t𝒬(S)`$, $`t[0,\epsilon [`$, originating from $`m_0`$ and such that $`\frac{d}{dt^+}\beta (m_t)_{|t=0}=(\mu ,\nu )`$? The following result shows that $`m_0`$ is completely determined by $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$.

Note that, by construction, there is a natural identification between the submanifold $`(S)𝒬(S)`$ consisting of all fuchsian metrics and the Teichmüller space $`𝒯(S)`$.

###### Proposition 6.

Let $`\mu `$, $`\nu (S)`$ be two measured geodesic laminations, and let $`tm_t`$, $`t[0,\epsilon [`$ be a differentiable curve in $`𝒬(S)`$, originating from a fuchsian metric $`m_0`$ and such that the derivative $`\frac{d}{dt^+}\beta (m_t)_{|t=0}`$ of the bending measured lamination is equal to $`(\mu ,\nu )`$. Then $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$ fill up the surface $`S`$, and $`m_0(S)=𝒯(S)`$ is equal to the minimum $`\kappa (\mu ,\nu )`$ of the length function $`l_\mu +l_\nu :𝒯(S)`$.

###### Proof.

We consider two other curves in $`𝒬(S)`$.

The first one is the *pure bending* $`tB_{m_0}^{t\mu }`$, obtained by bending the surface $`S`$ along the measured geodesic lamination $`t\mu `$ while keeping the metric induced on this pleated surface equal to $`m_0`$. For $`t0`$ small enough, $`B_{m_0}^{t\mu }`$ is a quasifuchsian metric for which the positive side of the boundary $`C(B_{m_0}^{t\mu })`$ is a pleated surface with induced metric $`m_0`$ and with bending measured geodesic lamination $`t\mu `$. See \[EpM, §3\] or \[Bo1\] for the construction of $`B_{m_0}^{t\mu }`$, and \[Mar, §9\] to guarantee that it is quasifuchsian for $`t`$ sufficiently small. In addition, it is proved in \[EpM, §3.9\] \[Bo1\] that this curve is differentiable in $`𝒬(S)`$, and in particular admits a tangent vector $`b_{m_0}^\mu =\frac{d}{dt}B_{m_0}^{t\mu }{}_{|t=0}{}^{}T_{m_0}𝒬(S)`$. This tangent vector $`b_{m_0}^\mu `$ is the *infinitesimal pure bending* of $`m_0(S)`$ along the measured geodesic lamination $`\mu `$.

The second curve will use the shear-bend coordinates associated, as in \[Bo1\], to a maximal geodesic lamination $`\lambda `$ containing the support of $`\mu `$. These coordinates provide a local parametrization of $`𝒬(S)`$ in terms of the geometry of a pleated surface with pleating locus $`\lambda `$. Let $`m_t^{}`$ correspond to a pleated surface whose induced metric is equal to the metric $`m_t^+𝒯(S)`$ induced on the positive component of the boundary $`C(m_t)`$ of the convex core, and whose bending data is equal to $`t\mu `$. By \[Mar, §9\], $`m_t`$ is a quasifuchsian metric for $`t`$ small.

It is proved in \[Bo3\] that, because the curve $`tm_t`$ is differentiable and because $`\frac{d}{dt^+}\beta ^+(m_t)_{|t=0}=\mu `$, the right derivative $`\dot{m}_0^+=\frac{d}{dt}m_t^+{}_{|t=0}{}^{}T_{m_0}𝒯(S)`$ exists and the two curves $`tm_t`$ and $`tm_t^{}`$ have the same tangent vector at $`t=0`$. In particular, by differentiability of the shear-bend coordinates, the tangent vector $`\dot{m}_0=\frac{d}{dt}m_t{}_{|t=0}{}^{}=\frac{d}{dt}m_t^{}{}_{|t=0}{}^{}T_{m_0}𝒬(S)`$ is the sum of $`b_{m_0}^\mu `$ and of $`\dot{m}_0^+=\frac{d}{dt}m_t^+{}_{|t=0}{}^{}T_{m_0}𝒯(S)=T_{m_0}(S)`$.

Similarly, bending $`S`$ in the negative direction, we can define the infinitesimal pure bending vector $`b_{m_0}^\nu =b_{m_0}^\nu T_{m_0}𝒬(S)`$ of $`m_0`$ along $`\nu `$. We can also consider the metric $`m_t^{}𝒯(S)`$ induced on the negative side of $`C(m_t)`$. Then, as above, the vector $`\dot{m}_0`$ is the sum of $`b_{m_0}^\nu `$ and of $`\dot{m}_0^{}=\frac{d}{dt}m_t^{}{}_{|t=0}{}^{}T_{m_0}𝒯(S)=T_{m_0}(S)`$.

Finally, we will use the complex structure of $`𝒬(S)`$ coming from the fact that the isometry group of $`^3`$ is $`\mathrm{PSL}_2()`$. Indeed, considering the holonomy of hyperbolic metrics embeds $`𝒬(S)`$ into the space $`(S)`$ of (conjugacy classes) of representations $`\pi _1(S)\mathrm{PSL}_2()`$. This representation space $`(S)`$ is a complex manifold near the image of $`𝒬(S)`$, and admits this image as a complex submanifold (an open subset if $`S`$ is compact). The shear-bend local coordinates are well behaved with respect to this complex structure; see \[Bo1\]. In particular, multiplication by $`\mathrm{i}=\sqrt{1}`$ exchanges shearing and bending. We will use the following two consequences of this. First of all, at a fuchsian metric $`m_0`$, the tangent space $`T_{m_0}𝒬(S)`$ is the direct sum of $`T_{m_0}(S)`$ and of $`\mathrm{i}T_{m_0}(S)`$. In addition, the infinitesimal pure bending vector $`b_{m_0}^\mu `$ belongs to $`\mathrm{i}T_{m_0}(S)`$ and is equal to $`\mathrm{i}e_{m_0}^\mu `$, where $`e_{m_0}^\mu T_{m_0}𝒯(S)=T_{m_0}(S)`$ is the infinitesimal earthquake vector along $`\mu `$.

Applying the decomposition $`T_{m_0}𝒬(S)=T_{m_0}(S)\mathrm{i}T_{m_0}(S)`$ to the vector $`\dot{m}_0=\dot{m}_0^++b_{m_0}^\mu =\dot{m}_0^{}+b_{m_0}^\nu `$, we conclude that $`b_{m_0}^\mu =b_{m_0}^\nu `$. Multiplying by $`\mathrm{i}`$, it follows that $`e_{m_0}^\mu =e_{m_0}^\nu `$. As in the proof of Proposition 3, this is equivalent to the property that $`m_0=\kappa (\mu ,\nu )`$. ∎

## 3. Realizing small bending

The goal of this section is to prove a converse to Proposition 6, by constructing in Proposition 11 a small curve of quasifuchsian metrics $`tm_t𝒬(S)`$, $`t[0,\epsilon [`$, such that $`\beta (m_t)=(t\mu ,t\nu )`$ for every $`t`$.

For the measured geodesic lamination $`\mu (S)`$, let $`𝒫^+(\mu )`$ (resp. $`𝒫^{}(\mu )`$) be the space of quasifuchsian metrics $`m`$ such that the positive (resp. negative) component of the convex core boundary $`C(m)`$ has bending measured geodesic lamination $`t\mu `$, for some $`t[0,\mathrm{}[`$.

Recall that $`\theta =3\chi (S)+p`$ denotes the dimension of the Teichmüller space $`𝒯(S)`$.

###### Lemma 7.

The space $`𝒫^\pm (\mu )`$ is a submanifold-with-boundary of $`𝒬(S)`$, with dimension $`\theta +1`$ and with boundary $`(S)`$.

###### Proof.

We can use the coordinates developed in \[Bo1\], and associated to a maximal geodesic lamination $`\lambda `$ containing the support of $`\mu `$. These provide an open differentiable embedding $`\phi :𝒬(S)𝒯(S)\times _0(\lambda ;/2\pi )`$. The first component of $`\phi (m)`$ is the hyperbolic metric induced on the unique $`m`$–pleated surface $`f_m`$ with pleating locus $`\lambda `$. The second component is the bending transverse cocycle of $`f_m`$, which belongs to the topological group $`_0(\lambda ;/2\pi )\left(/2\pi \right)^\theta /2`$ of all $`\left(/2\pi \right)`$–valued transverse cocycles for $`\lambda `$ that satisfy a certain cusp condition. In general, the bending of the pleated surface $`f_m`$ is measured by a transverse cocycle and not by a measured geodesic lamination because $`f_m`$ is not necessarily locally convex.

For notational convenience, it is useful to lift $`\phi `$ to an embedding $`\psi :𝒬(S)𝒯(S)\times _0(\lambda ;)`$, such that $`\psi `$ sends $`(S)𝒯(S)`$ to $`𝒯(S)\times \{0\}`$ by the identity. Here, $`_0(\lambda ;)^\theta `$ denotes the space of $``$–valued transverse cocycle satisfying the cusp condition. Such a $`\psi `$ exists and is unique because $`𝒬(S)`$ is simply connected.

The vector space $`_0(\lambda ;)`$ contains the transverse measure (also denoted by $`\mu `$) of the measured geodesic lamination $`\mu `$, and therefore also contains the two rays $`[0,\mathrm{}[\mu `$ and $`]\mathrm{},0]\mu `$, consisting of all positive (resp. negative) real multiples of $`\mu `$.

We claim that $`𝒫^+(\mu )`$ locally corresponds, under $`\psi `$, to the intersection of $`\psi \left(𝒬(S)\right)`$ with $`𝒯(S)\times [0,\mathrm{}[\mu `$. Clearly, $`\psi `$ sends an element of $`𝒫^+(\mu )`$ to $`𝒯(S)\times [0,\mathrm{}[\mu `$. Conversely, it is proved in \[KaT\] that the map $`\eta :𝒬(S)𝒯(S)\times (S)`$ which, to a quasifuchsian metric $`m𝒬(S)`$, associates the induced metric $`m^+𝒯(S)`$ and the bending measured lamination $`\beta ^+(m)`$ of the positive boundary component of the convex core $`C(m)`$ is a local homeomorphism. In addition, interpreting the ray $`[0,\mathrm{}[\mu `$ as a subset of both $`_0(\lambda ;)`$ and $`(S)`$, the local inverse for $`\eta `$ constructed in \[KaT\] coincides with $`\psi `$ on $`𝒯(S)\times [0,\mathrm{}[\mu `$. It follows that, if $`m𝒬(S)`$ is sufficiently close to $`m_0𝒫^+(\mu )`$ and if $`\psi (m)𝒯(S)\times [0,\mathrm{}[\mu `$, the bending measured lamination $`\beta ^+(\mu )`$ is equal to the second component $`t\mu `$ of $`\psi (m)`$. Therefore, a metric $`m`$ near $`m_0𝒫^+(\mu )`$ is in $`𝒫^+(\mu )`$ if and only if $`\psi (m)𝒯(S)\times [0,\mathrm{}[\mu `$.

A similar property holds for $`𝒫^{}(\mu )`$ by symmetry. Therefore, under the diffeomorphism $`\psi `$, $`𝒫^+(\mu )`$, $`𝒫^{}(\mu )`$ and $`(S)`$ locally correspond to the intersection of $`\psi \left(𝒬(S)\right)`$ with $`𝒯(S)\times [0,\mathrm{}[\mu `$, $`𝒯(S)\times ]\mathrm{},0]\mu `$ and $`𝒯(S)\times \{0\}`$, respectively. ∎

Given two measured geodesic laminations $`\mu `$, $`\nu (S)`$, we want to consider the intersection of $`𝒫^+(\mu )`$ and $`𝒫^{}(\nu )`$. Note that this intersection is far from being transverse, since these two $`(\theta +1)`$–dimensional submanifolds both contain the $`\theta `$–dimensional submanifold $`(S)`$ as their boundary. For this reason, we will consider the manifold-with-boundary $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$ obtained by blowing-up $`𝒬(S)`$ along the submanifold $`(S)`$. Namely, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$ is the union of $`𝒬(S)(S)`$ and of the unit normal bundle $`N^1(S)`$ with the appropriate topology. Recall that the normal bundle $`N(S)(S)`$ is intrinsically defined as the bundle whose fiber $`N_m(S)`$ at $`m(S)`$ is the quotient $`T_m𝒬(S)/T_m(S)`$, and that the fiber $`N_m^1(S)`$ of the unit normal bundle $`N^1(S)(S)`$ is the quotient of $`N_m(S)\{0\}`$ under the multiplicative action of $`^+`$. Considering a tubular neighborhood of $`(S)`$, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$ is easily endowed with a natural structure of differentiable manifold with boundary $`N^1(S)`$.

Exploiting the complex structure of $`𝒬(S)`$, identify the normal bundle $`N(S)`$ to $`\mathrm{i}T(S)`$. The inclusion map $`𝒫^+(\mu )(S)𝒬(S)(S)`$ uniquely extends to an embedding $`𝒫^+(\mu )\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$, which to $`m(S)=𝒫^+(\mu )`$ associates the unit normal vector $`\overline{b}{}_{m}{}^{\mu }N^1(S)`$ which is in the direction of the infinitesimal pure bending vector $`b_m^\mu `$ of $`m`$ along $`+\mu `$. We can similarly define an embedding $`𝒫^{}(\nu )\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$, by associating to $`m(S)`$ the unit normal vector $`\overline{b}{}_{m}{}^{\nu }N^1(S)`$ which is in the direction of the infinitesimal pure bending vector $`b_m^\nu =b_m^\nu `$ of $`m`$ along $`\nu `$. Let $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )`$ and $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$ be the respective images of these embeddings.

###### Lemma 8.

The subspaces $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )`$ and $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$ are submanifolds of $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$, with boundary contained in $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$.

###### Proof.

The embedding $`\psi :𝒬(S)𝒯(S)\times _0(\lambda ;)`$ of the proof of Lemma 7 sends the vector $`b_m^\mu `$ to the vector $`(0,\mu )`$ in the tangent space of $`𝒯(S)\times _0(\lambda ;)`$. The result then immediately follows from the fact that $`\psi `$ locally identifies $`𝒫^+(\mu )`$, $`𝒫^{}(\mu )`$ and $`𝒯(S)`$ to $`𝒯(S)\times [0,\mathrm{}[\mu `$, $`𝒯(S)\times ]\mathrm{},0]\mu `$ and $`𝒯(S)\times \{0\}`$, respectively. This proves Lemma 7. ∎

###### Proposition 9.

The boundaries $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )`$ and $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$ have a non-empty intersection if and only if $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$ fill up the surface $`S`$. If $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$ fill up $`S`$, the intersection of $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )`$ and $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$ in $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$ is transverse, and is equal to the image of the Kerckhoff line $`K(\mu ,\nu )`$ under the section $`m\overline{b}{}_{m}{}^{\mu }=\overline{b}{}_{m}{}^{\nu }\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$.

###### Proof.

The diffeomorphism $`T^1𝒯(S)=T^1(S)\mathrm{i}T^1(S)=N^1(S)=\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$ defined by multiplication by $`\mathrm{i}`$ sends $`\overline{e}_m^\mu `$ to $`\overline{b}_m^\mu `$ and $`\overline{e}_m^\nu `$ to $`\overline{b}_m^\nu `$. This translates Proposition 9 to a simple rephrasing of Proposition 5. ∎

An immediate consequence of Proposition 9 is that the intersection of the two $`(\theta +1)`$–dimensional submanifolds $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )`$ and $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$ in $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$ is transverse near the boundary $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$. In particular, the intersection $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$ is a 2–dimensional submanifold of $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$ near $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$, with boundary $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$ contained in $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$.

By definition, a metric $`m𝒫^+(\mu )𝒫^{}(\nu )`$ has bending measured lamination $`\beta (m)=(t\mu ,u\nu )`$ for some $`t`$, $`u0`$. This gives a differentiable map $`\pi :𝒫^+(\mu )𝒫^{}(\nu )^2`$, defined by $`m(t,u)`$.

Let $`\stackrel{ˇ}{}^2`$ be obtained by blowing up $`^2`$ along $`\{0\}`$. Because $`\pi ^1(0)=(S)`$, the map $`\pi `$ lifts to a differentiable map $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }:\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )\stackrel{ˇ}{}^2`$.

###### Lemma 10.

The map $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }:\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )\stackrel{ˇ}{}^2`$ is a local diffeomorphism near $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$.

###### Proof.

We will prove that, at any point $`p_0\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$, the (linear) tangent map $`T_{p_0}\stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }:T_{p_0}\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )T_{p_0}\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )T_{\stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }(p_0)}\stackrel{ˇ}{}^2`$ is injective.

Let $`vT_{p_0}\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )T_{p_0}\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$ be such that $`T_{p_0}\stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }(v)=0`$. Considering the map $`𝒫^+(\mu )[0,\mathrm{}[`$ which to $`m𝒫^+(\mu )`$ associates $`\beta ^+(m)/\mu [0,\mathrm{}[`$ and the induced map $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )[0,\mathrm{}[`$, we see that $`v`$ must necessarily be in the tangent space of the boundary $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )`$. Symmetrically, it must be in $`T_{p_0}\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$. Therefore, $`v`$ is tangent to the intersection $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$.

Let us analyze the restriction of $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }`$ to the boundary $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$. By Proposition 9, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$ is equal to the image of the Kerckhoff line $`K(\mu ,\nu )`$ under the section $`m\overline{b}{}_{m}{}^{\mu }=\overline{b}{}_{m}{}^{\nu }\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$. Recall that an element of the Kerckhoff line $`K(\mu ,\nu )`$ is of the form $`m=\kappa (t\mu ,\nu )`$ for some $`t>0`$, which is equivalent to the property that $`b{}_{m}{}^{t\mu }=b_m^\nu `$. We will also need a coordinate chart for $`\stackrel{ˇ}{}^2`$ near $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }(p_0)`$. Noting that the image of $`\pi `$ is contained in the quadrant $`[0,\mathrm{}[^2`$, we can use for this the chart $`\phi :]0,\mathrm{}[\times [0,\mathrm{}[\stackrel{ˇ}{}^2`$ defined on the interior by $`(x,y)(xy,y)`$.

We claim that, if $`m=\kappa (t\mu ,\nu )K(\mu ,\nu )`$, then $`\phi ^1\stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }(\overline{b}{}_{m}{}^{\mu })`$ is just equal to $`(t,0)`$. To see this, choose, in the 2–dimensional manifold $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$, a small curve $`s\stackrel{ˇ}{m}_s`$, $`s[0,\epsilon [`$, such that $`\stackrel{ˇ}{m}_0=\overline{b}{}_{m}{}^{\mu }\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$ and such that $`\frac{d}{ds^+}\stackrel{ˇ}{m}_s_{|t=0}`$ is not tangent to the boundary. The curve $`s\stackrel{ˇ}{m}_s`$ projects to a differentiable curve $`tm_t𝒬(S)`$ with $`m_0=m`$. By definition of $`𝒫^+(\mu )`$ and $`𝒫^{}(\nu )`$, the bending measured lamination $`\beta (m_s)`$ is of the form $`(t(s)\mu ,u(s)\nu )`$ for two differentiable functions $`t(s)`$, and $`u(s)`$ with $`t(0)=u(0)=0`$. Since $`\frac{d}{ds^+}\stackrel{ˇ}{m}_s_{|t=0}`$ points away from the boundary, the curve $`sm_s`$ is not tangent to $`(S)`$ at $`s=0`$, and it follows that at least one of the derivatives $`t^{}(0)`$, $`u^{}(0)`$ is non-trivial. If we apply Proposition 6, we conclude that $`m=\kappa (t^{}(0)\mu ,u^{}(0)\nu )`$. Since $`m=\kappa (t\mu ,\nu )`$, it follows that $`t^{}(0)/u^{}(0)=t`$ by Lemma 4. In particular, $`t(s)/u(s)`$ tends to $`t`$ as $`s`$ tends to 0. Therefore, $`\phi ^1\stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }(\overline{b}{}_{m}{}^{\mu })`$, which is the limit of $`\phi ^1\stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }\left(\stackrel{ˇ}{m}_s\right)=\phi ^1\pi \left(m_s\right)=\phi ^1(t(s),u(s))=(t(s)/u(s),u(s))`$ as $`s>0`$ tends to 0, is equal to $`(t,0)`$.

This computation shows that the restriction of $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }`$ to the boundary $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$ is a diffeomorphism onto its image. In particular, if $`vT_{p_0}\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )T_{p_0}\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$ is such that $`T_{p_0}\stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }(v)=0`$, then necessarily $`v=0`$.

This concludes the proof that the tangent map $`T_{p_0}\stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }:T_{p_0}\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )T_{p_0}\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )T_{\stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }(p_0)}\stackrel{ˇ}{}^2`$ is injective. Since $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }`$ sends the boundary of the 2-dimensional manifold $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$ to the boundary of the 2-dimensional manifold $`\stackrel{ˇ}{}^2`$, this proves that $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }:\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )\stackrel{ˇ}{}^2`$ is a local diffeomorphism near $`p_0\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$. ∎

This immediately gives the following converse to Proposition 6.

###### Proposition 11.

Let $`\mu `$, $`\nu (S)`$ be two measured geodesic laminations which fill up the surface $`S`$, and let $`m_0`$ be the minimum $`\kappa (\mu ,\nu )`$ of the length function $`l_\mu +l_\nu `$. Then there is a small differentiable curve $`tm_t𝒬(S)`$, $`t[0,\epsilon [`$, beginning at $`m_0`$ and such that the bending measured lamination $`\beta (m_t)`$ is equal to $`(t\mu ,t\nu )`$ for every $`t`$.

###### Proof.

Consider the curve $`t(t,t)`$, $`t[0,\epsilon [`$, in $`^2`$. By Lemma 10, for $`\epsilon `$ small enough, there is a curve $`t\stackrel{ˇ}{m}_t\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$ such that $`t\stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }\left(\stackrel{ˇ}{m}_t\right)`$ coincides with the lift of $`t(t,t)`$ to $`\stackrel{ˇ}{}^2`$. By definition of the map $`\pi `$, this just means that the projection $`m_t𝒬(S)`$ of $`\stackrel{ˇ}{m}_t\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$ is such that $`\beta (m_t)=(t\mu ,t\nu )`$. ∎

## 4. Parametrizing quasi-fuchsian groups by their small bending

Recall that $`(S)`$ denotes the open subset of $`(S)^2`$ consisting of those pairs $`(\mu ,\nu )`$ such that $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$ fill up the surface $`S`$.

Let $`\stackrel{ˇ}{}(S)`$ be obtained by blowing up $`(S)\{(0,0)\}`$ along $`\{(0,0)\}`$. Namely, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{}(S)`$ is formally obtained from $`(S)`$ by extending each ray $`]0,\mathrm{}[(\mu ,\nu )`$ to a semi-open ray $`[0,\mathrm{}[(\mu ,\nu )`$, with the obvious topology. Note that the boundary $`\stackrel{ˇ}{}(S)`$ is just the quotient space of $`(S)`$ under the multiplicative action of $`^+`$.

For every $`(\mu ,\nu )(S)`$, Proposition 11 provides a maximal ray $`R_{\mu \nu }=[0,\epsilon _{\mu \nu }[(\mu ,\nu )`$ in $`(S)\{(0,0)\}`$ and a differentiable map $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mu \nu }:R_{\mu \nu }Q(S)`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mu \nu }(\mu ^{},\nu ^{})`$ has bending measured lamination $`(\mu ^{},\nu ^{})`$ for every $`(\mu ^{},\nu ^{})R_{\mu \nu }`$ and such that $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )`$ and $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$ meet transversely along $`\beta (R_{\mu \nu })`$. Here, the statement that $`R_{\mu \nu }`$ is maximal means that $`\epsilon _{\mu \nu }]0,\mathrm{}]`$ is maximal for this property.

Note that $`R_{\mu \nu }`$ and $`\phi _{\mu \nu }`$ depend only on the orbit of $`(\mu ,\nu )`$ under the action of $`^+`$, namely on the corresponding point of $`\stackrel{ˇ}{}(S)`$. Let $`\stackrel{ˇ}{R}_{\mu \nu }`$ be the lift of $`R_{\mu \nu }`$ in $`\stackrel{ˇ}{}(S)`$, and lift $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mu \nu }`$ to $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\mu \nu }:\stackrel{ˇ}{R}_{\mu \nu }\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$. In particular, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\mu \nu }`$ sends the initial point of $`\stackrel{ˇ}{R}_{\mu \nu }`$ to the bending vector $`\overline{b}{}_{m}{}^{\mu }=\overline{b}{}_{m}{}^{\nu }N^1(S)=\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$ with $`m=\kappa (\mu ,\nu )`$.

Let $`\stackrel{ˇ}{U}\stackrel{ˇ}{}(S)`$ denote the union of all the $`\stackrel{ˇ}{R}_{\mu \nu }`$, and let $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{\Phi }}:\stackrel{ˇ}{U}(S)`$ restrict to $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\mu \nu }`$ on each $`\stackrel{ˇ}{R}_{\mu \nu }`$. Note that the property that $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mu \nu }(\mu ^{},\nu ^{})`$ has bending measured lamination $`(\mu ^{},\nu ^{})`$ implies that the $`\stackrel{ˇ}{R}_{\mu \nu }`$ are pairwise disjoint, so that $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ is well-defined. We want to show that $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ is continuous.

###### Lemma 12.

As the measured geodesic lamination $`\mu `$ tends to $`\mu _0`$ for the topology of $`(S)`$, the submanifold $`𝒫^\pm (\mu )`$ tends to $`𝒫^\pm (\mu _0)`$ for the topology of $`\mathrm{C}^{\mathrm{}}`$ convergence on compact subsets.

###### Proof.

We will use the tools developed in \[Bo1\].

Let $`\mu _n(S)`$, $`n`$, be a sequence converging to $`\mu _0`$. Let $`\lambda _n`$ be a maximal geodesic lamination containing the support of $`\mu _n`$. Passing to a subsequence if necessary, we can assume that, for the Hausdorff topology, the geodesic lamination $`\lambda _n`$ converges to a geodesic lamination $`\lambda _0`$, which is necessarily maximal and contains the support of $`\mu _0`$.

The shear-bend coordinates associated to $`\lambda _n`$ provide an open biholomorphic embedding $`\mathrm{\Phi }_n:𝒬(S)_0(\lambda _n;/2\pi \mathrm{i})`$. Here $`_0(\lambda _n;/2\pi \mathrm{i})`$ is the topological group of $`/2\pi \mathrm{i}`$–valued transverse cocycles for the maximal geodesic lamination $`\lambda _n`$ which satisfy the cusp condition, and is isomorphic to $`\left(/2\pi \mathrm{i}\right)^\theta /2`$. For a metric $`m𝒬(S)`$, the real part of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_n(m)_0(\lambda _n;/2\pi \mathrm{i})=_0(\lambda _n;)\mathrm{i}_0(\lambda _n;/2\pi )`$ measures the induced metric of the unique $`m`$–pleated surface with bending locus $`\lambda _n`$, and the imaginary part measures its bending. In particular, $`𝒫^\pm (\mu _n)`$ locally corresponds to $`\mathrm{\Phi }_n^1\left(_0(\lambda _n;)\mathrm{i}\mu _n\right)`$, or more precisely to a branch of the immersion which is the composition of the projection $`_0(\lambda _n;)\mathrm{i}\mu _n_0(\lambda _n;/2\pi \mathrm{i})`$ and of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_n^1`$.

To compare the various $`_0(\lambda _n;/2\pi \mathrm{i})`$ pick a train track $`\tau `$ carrying $`\lambda _0`$. Since $`\lambda _n`$ converges to $`\lambda _0`$ for the Hausdorff topology, $`\tau `$ also carries the $`\lambda _n`$ for $`n`$ large enough. Then there is a well-defined isomorphism $`\mathrm{\Psi }_n:_0(\lambda _n;/2\pi \mathrm{i})𝒲(\tau ;/2\pi \mathrm{i})`$, where $`𝒲(\tau ;/2\pi \mathrm{i})`$ is the group of $`/2\pi \mathrm{i}`$–valued edge weights for $`\tau `$ satisfying the switch and cusp relations.

Because $`\lambda _n`$ converges to $`\lambda _0`$ for the Hausdorff topology, if follows from the explicit construction of \[Bo1, §5, §8\] that $`\mathrm{\Phi }_n^1\mathrm{\Psi }_n^1`$ converges to $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0^1\mathrm{\Psi }_0^1`$, uniformly on compact subsets of the image of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$. Because these maps are holomorphic, the convergence is actually $`\mathrm{C}^{\mathrm{}}`$. Since $`\mu _n`$ converges to $`\mu _0`$ for the topology of $`(S)`$, the edge weight system $`\mathrm{\Psi }_n(\mu _n)`$ converges to $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0(\mu _0)`$ in $`𝒲_0(\tau ,)`$. It follows that $`𝒫^\pm (\mu _n)`$, which locally corresponds to $`\mathrm{\Phi }_n^1\mathrm{\Psi }_n^1\left(𝒲_0(\tau ;)\mathrm{i}\mathrm{\Psi }_n(\mu _n)\right)`$, converges to $`𝒫^\pm (\mu _0)`$, which locally corresponds to $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0^1\mathrm{\Psi }_0^1\left(𝒲_0(\tau ;)\mathrm{i}\mathrm{\Psi }_0(\mu _0)\right)`$, in the topology of $`\mathrm{C}^{\mathrm{}}`$–convergence on compact subsets. ∎

Note that we actually proved real analytic convergence in Lemma 12. However, we will only need $`\mathrm{C}^2`$ convergence.

###### Theorem 13.

The subset $`\stackrel{ˇ}{U}`$ is an open neighborhood of $`\stackrel{ˇ}{}(S)`$ in $`\stackrel{ˇ}{}(S)`$, and $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ is a homeomorphism from $`\stackrel{ˇ}{U}`$ to an open neighborhood $`\stackrel{ˇ}{V}`$ of $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$ in $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$.

###### Proof.

The restriction $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\mu \nu }`$ of $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ to $`\stackrel{ˇ}{R}_{\mu \nu }`$ was constructed by considering the transverse intersection of the submanifolds $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )`$ and $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$ near the boundary of $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$. By Lemma 12, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )`$ and $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$ depend continuously on $`(\mu ,\nu )`$ for the topology of $`\mathrm{C}^1`$ convergence. (Note that one needs the $`\mathrm{C}^2`$ continuity of $`𝒫^+(\mu )`$ and $`𝒫^{}(\nu )`$ to guarantee the $`\mathrm{C}^1`$ continuity of $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )`$ and $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$ near the boundary.) It follows that the length $`\epsilon _{\mu \nu }`$ of $`R_{\mu \nu }=[0,\epsilon _{\mu \nu }[(\mu ,\nu )`$ is a lower semi-continuous function of $`(\mu ,\nu )`$, and that $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mu \nu }`$ depends continuously on $`(\mu ,\nu )`$. This proves that the union $`\stackrel{ˇ}{U}`$ of the $`\stackrel{ˇ}{R}_{\mu \nu }`$ is open in $`\stackrel{ˇ}{}(S)`$, and that $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ is continuous.

Let $`p:\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)𝒬(S)`$ be the natural projection and, as usual, let $`\beta :𝒬(S)(S)^2`$ be the bending map. By construction, $`\beta p\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ is the identity map on $`\stackrel{ˇ}{U}\stackrel{ˇ}{}(S)(S)^2`$. It follows that $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ is injective on $`\stackrel{ˇ}{U}\stackrel{ˇ}{}(S)`$, and therefore on all of $`\stackrel{ˇ}{U}`$ by Proposition 6.

The two spaces $`\stackrel{ˇ}{U}\stackrel{ˇ}{}(S)`$ and $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$ are topological manifolds-with-boundary of the same dimension $`2\theta `$. The map $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{\Phi }}:\stackrel{ˇ}{U}(S)`$ is continuous and injective, and sends boundary points to boundary points. By the Theorem of Invariance of the Domain, it follows that its image $`\stackrel{ˇ}{V}=\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\left(\stackrel{ˇ}{U}\right)`$ is open in $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$, and that $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ restricts to a homeomorphism $`\stackrel{ˇ}{U}\stackrel{ˇ}{V}`$. ∎

###### Theorem 14.

There exists an open neighborhood $`V`$ of the fuchsian submanifold $`(S)`$ in $`𝒬(S)`$ such that the bending map $`\beta :𝒬(S)(S)^2`$ induces a homeomorphism between $`V(S)`$ and its image.

###### Proof.

For the canonical identifications between $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$ and $`𝒬(S)(S)`$, and between $`\stackrel{ˇ}{}(S)\stackrel{ˇ}{}(S)`$ and $`(S)`$, the inverse of the restriction of $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ to $`\stackrel{ˇ}{U}\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)`$ coincides with $`\beta `$. Therefore, the only part which requires some checking is that the image $`V`$ of $`\stackrel{ˇ}{V}=\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\left(\stackrel{ˇ}{U}\right)`$ under the canonical projection $`p:\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒬}(S)𝒬(S)`$ is open in $`𝒬(S)`$. However, this immediately follows from the fact that the preimages of points under $`p`$ are all compact, which implies that $`p`$ is an open map. (Note that this is false for the projection $`\stackrel{ˇ}{}(S)(S)\{0\}`$.) ∎

Theorem 14 is just Theorem 1 stated in the introduction. Theorem 2 immediately follows from the definition of $`\stackrel{ˇ}{U}`$ and from the fact that $`\stackrel{ˇ}{U}`$ is open (Theorem 13).

We conclude with a few remarks.

A recent result of Caroline Series \[Se2\] shows that we can restrict the neighborhood $`V`$ of Theorem 14 so that $`\beta ^1\left(\beta (V)\right)=V`$.

When $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$ are multicurves, namely when their supports consist of finitely many closed geodesics, it follows from \[HoK\] that the submanifolds $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^+(\mu )`$ and $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒫}^{}(\nu )`$ are everywhere transverse, by a doubling argument as in \[BoO\]. Consequently, the open subset $`V`$ of Theorem 14 can be chosen so that the image $`U=\beta (V)(S)^2`$ contains all rays of the form $`[0,\mathrm{}[(\mu ,\nu )`$ where $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$ are multicurves.

As indicated in the introduction, it is conjectured that we can take $`V`$ equal to the whole space $`𝒬(S)`$. See \[BoO\] for a characterization of the image of $`𝒬(S)`$ under $`\beta `$.


format: text

text:
# The Loop Homology Algebra of Spheres and Projective Spaces

## Introduction

The loop homology of a closed orientable manifold $`M^d`$ of degree $`d`$ is the ordinary homology of the free loop space $`LM=\text{Map}(S^1,M^d)`$, with degree shifted by $`d`$, i.e.

$$_{}(LM;)=H_{+d}(LM;).$$

In , Chas and Sullivan defined a type of intersection product on the chains of $`LM`$, yielding an algebra structure on $`_{}(LM)`$.

Roughly, the loop product is defined as follows. Let $`\alpha :\mathrm{\Delta }^pLM`$ and $`\beta :\mathrm{\Delta }^qLM`$ be singular simplices in $`LM`$. The evaluation at $`1S^1`$ defines a map $`ev:LMM`$. Assume that $`ev\alpha `$ and $`ev\beta `$ define a map

$$\mathrm{\Delta }^p\times \mathrm{\Delta }^qLM\times LMM\times M$$

that is transverse to the diagonal. At each point $`(s,t)\mathrm{\Delta }^p\times \mathrm{\Delta }^q`$ where $`ev\alpha `$ intersects $`ev\beta `$, one can define a single loop by first traversing the loop $`\alpha (s)`$ and then traversing the loop $`\beta (t)`$. This then defines a chain $`\alpha \beta C_{p+qd}(LM)`$. In  Chas and Sullivan showed that this procedure defines a chain map

$$C_p(LM)C_q(LM)C_{p+qd}(LM)$$

which induces an associative, commutative algebra structure on the loop homology, $`_{}(LM)`$. Chas and Sullivan also described other structures this pairing induces, such as a Lie algebra structure on the equivariant homology of the loop space. In , the first two authors used the Pontryagin - Thom construction to show that the loop product is realized on the homotopy level on Thom spaces (spectra) of bundles over the loop space. In particular let $`TM`$ denote the tangent bundle of $`M`$, and $`TM`$ denotes its inverse as a virtual bundle in $`K`$ \- theory. Let $`M^{TM}`$ denote the Thom spectrum of this bundle, and $`LM^{TM}`$ the Thom spectrum of $`ev^{}(TM)`$. Then in  it was shown that $`LM^{TM}`$ is a homotopy commutative ring spectrum with unit, whose product realizes the Chas - Sullivan product in homology, after applying the Thom isomorphism, $`H_q(LM^{TM})H_{q+d}(LM)_q(LM)`$.

The goal of this paper is to describe a spectral sequence of algebras converging to the loop homology algebra of a manifold, and to use it to compute the loop homology algebra of spheres and projective spaces. More specifically we shall prove the following theorems.

###### Theorem 1.

Let $`M`$ be a closed, oriented, simply connected manifold. There is a second quadrant spectral sequence of algebras $`\{E_{p,q}^r,d^r:p0,q0\}`$ such that

1. $`E_,^r`$ is an algebra and the differential $`d^r:E_,^rE_{r,+r1}^r`$ is a derivation for each $`r1`$.
2. The spectral sequence converges to the loop homology $`_{}(LM)`$ as algebras. That is, $`E_,^{\mathrm{}}`$ is the associated graded algebra to a natural filtration of the algebra $`_{}(LM)`$.
3. For $`m,n0`$,

$$E_{m,n}^2H^m(M;H_n(\mathrm{\Omega }M)).$$

Here $`\mathrm{\Omega }M`$ is the space of base point preserving loops in $`M`$. Furthermore the isomorphism $`E_,^2H^{}(M;H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }M))`$ is an isomorphism of algebras, where the algebra structure on $`H^{}(M;H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }M))`$ is given by the cup product on the cohomology of $`M`$ with coefficients in the Pontrjagin ring $`H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }M)`$.
4. The spectral sequence is natural with respect to smooth maps between manifolds.

We then use this spectral sequence to do the following calculations. Let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }[x_1,\mathrm{},x_n]`$ denote the exterior algebra (over the integers) generated by $`x_1,\mathrm{}x_n`$, and let $`[a_1,\mathrm{},a_m]`$ denote the polynomial algebra generated by $`a_1,\mathrm{},a_m`$.

###### Theorem 2.

There exist isomorphisms of graded algebras,

1. $$_{}(LS^1)\mathrm{\Lambda }[a][t,t^1]$$

where $`a_1(LS^1)`$ and $`t,t^1_0(LS^1)`$.
2. For $`n>1`$,

$$_{}(LS^n)=\{\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Lambda }[a][u],\hfill & \text{for }n\text{ odd}\hfill \\ (\mathrm{\Lambda }[b][a,v])/(a^2,ab,2av),\hfill & \text{for }n\text{ even},\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`a_n(LS^n)`$, $`b_1(LS^n)`$, $`u_{n1}(LS^n)`$, and $`v_{2n2}(LS^n)`$.

###### Theorem 3.

There is an isomorphism of algebras,

$$_{}(L^n)(\mathrm{\Lambda }[w][c,u])/(c^{n+1},(n+1)c^nu,wc^n)$$

where $`w_1(L^n)`$, $`c_2(L^n)`$, and $`u_{2n}(L^n)`$.

The organization of this paper is as follows. In section 1 we will review the construction of the loop product that was used in  and describe it on the chain level. In section 2 we will construct the spectral sequence and prove theorem 1. In section 3 we use this spectral sequence to do the calculations presented in theorems 2 and 3.

## 1. The Loop Product

For the remainder of the paper, let $`M`$ be a closed, connected, oriented manifold of dimension $`d`$. The goal of this section is to give a description of the loop product on $`_{}(LM)`$ at the chain level. Of course this was done originally by Chas and Sullivan in , but our approach will be slightly different. It will be more amenable to the construction and the analysis of the loop homology spectral sequence to be done in the next section.

We begin by recalling a chain level description of the intersection product arising from Poincare duality on the homology of the manifold,

$$<,>:H_q(M)H_p(M)H_{p+qd}(M).$$

For pairs of spaces $`(X,A)`$ with $`AX`$, denote by $`C_{}(X,A)`$ and $`C^{}(X,A)`$ the groups of singular chains and cochains.

Recall that the normal bundle of the diagonal embedding $`\mathrm{\Delta }:MM\times M`$ is naturally isomorphic to the tangent bundle $`TM`$. Let $`M^{TM}`$ denote the Thom space of this bundle. The Thom-Pontryagin map for the diagonal embedding is therefore a map

(1.1)
$$\tau :M\times MM^{TM},$$

which collapses everything outside a tubular neighbourhood of the diagonal to the base point of $`M^{TM}`$.

Choose a Riemannian metric on $`TM`$ and let $`D_TM`$ and $`S_TM`$ be the unit disk and sphere bundles of $`TM`$. Since $`S_TM`$ has a collar, $`S_TM\times ID_TM`$, there is a chain equivalence

$$\theta _{\mathrm{}}:C_{}(D_TM/S_TM,)C_{}(D_TMcS_TM,cS_TM)C_{}(D_TM,S_TM)$$

where $``$ is the base point of $`D_TM/S_TM`$, $`cS_TM`$ is the cone on $`S_TM`$, and $`D_TMcS_TM`$ is the mapping cone of the inclusion $`S_TMD_TM`$. Let $`tC^d(D_TM,S_TM)`$ be a cochain that represents the Thom class $`[t]H^d(D_TM,S_TM)`$. Then taking the cap product with $`t`$ at the chain level followed by the projection from $`D_TM`$ to $`M`$,

(1.2)
$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\sigma _{\mathrm{}}:C_{}(D_TM,S_TM)& \stackrel{t}{}& C_d(D_TM)& \stackrel{\pi _{}}{}& C_d(M)\end{array}$$

induces the Thom isomorphism

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\stackrel{~}{H}_{}(M^{TM})& \stackrel{\theta _{}}{}& H_{}(D_TM,S_TM)& \stackrel{\sigma _{}}{}& H_d(M)\end{array}$$

in homology.

Let $`ϵ_{\mathrm{}}:C_{}(D_TM/S_TM)C_{}(D_TM/S_TM,)`$ be the projection map onto the quotient complex, and denote by $`u_{\mathrm{}}`$ the composition of the chain maps

(1.3)
$$\begin{array}{ccccccc}u_{\mathrm{}}:C_{}(M^{TM})& \stackrel{ϵ_{\mathrm{}}}{}& C_{}(D_TM/S_TM,)& \stackrel{\theta _{\mathrm{}}}{}& C_{}(D_TM,S_TM)& \stackrel{\sigma _{\mathrm{}}}{}& C_d(M).\end{array}$$

Now let $`A`$ be a graded ring. Recall that the intersection product structure on $`H_{}(M;A)`$ is defined so that the Poincare duality isomorphism

$`D:H^{}(M;A)`$ $`H_d(M;A)`$
$`\alpha `$ $`\alpha [M]`$
is an isomorphism of graded algebras. Here $`[M]H_d(M;A)`$ is the fundamental class determined by the orientation of $`M`$. The commutativity of the following diagram describes the well known relation between the intersection product, the Thom - Pontryagin map and the Thom isomorphism:

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}H_{p+q}(M\times M)& \stackrel{\tau _{}}{}& H_{p+q}(M^{TM})& \stackrel{u_{}}{}& H_{p+qd}(M)\\ \times & & & & & & \\ H_p(M)H_q(M)& & \stackrel{(1)^{d(dp)}<>}{}& & H_{p+qd}(M),\end{array}$$

where $`<>`$ is the intersection product on $`H_{}(M)`$, and $`\times `$ denotes the cross product. We therefore have the following chain description of the intersection pairing:

###### Proposition 4.

Let $`M`$ be as above. Then the following composition of chain maps

$$\begin{array}{ccccccc}C_p(M)C_q(M)& \stackrel{\times }{}& C_{p+q}(M\times M)& \stackrel{\tau _{\mathrm{}}}{}& C_{p+q}(M^{TM})& \stackrel{u_{\mathrm{}}}{}& C_{p+qd}(M)\end{array}$$

is a representative of the intersection product

$$(1)^{d(dp)}<>:H_p(M)H_q(M)H_{p+qd}(M).$$

We next turn our attention to the loop space and the loop product. Let $`LM=C^{\mathrm{}}(S^1,M)`$ be the free loop space of $`M`$, where $`S^1`$ denotes the unit circle in the complex line, parametrized by $`exp:[0,1]S^1`$ with $`1S^1`$ chosen as the basepoint. We now recall some constructions in .

The loop evaluation map

$`ev:LM`$ $`M`$
$`\gamma `$ $`\gamma (1),`$
is a Serre fibration. Let $`LM\times _MLM`$ denote the pull back of the product of this fibration with itself along the diagonal embedding $`\mathrm{\Delta }:MM\times M`$, denoted by $`LM\times _MLM`$:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}LM\times _MLM& \stackrel{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}{}& LM\times LM\\ \text{ev}_{\mathrm{}}& & ev\times ev& & \\ M& \underset{\mathrm{\Delta }}{}& M\times M.\end{array}$$

Notice that $`LM\times _MLM`$ is the space of pairs of loops having the same basepoint. The map $`\text{ev}_{\mathrm{}}`$ in this fiber square is given by $`\text{ev}_{\mathrm{}}(\alpha ,\beta )=\alpha (1)=\beta (1)`$. The map $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ is an embedding of a codimension $`d`$ infinite dimensional submanifold of the infinite dimensional manifold $`LM\times LM`$.

As shown in  this pullback square allows for a Thom - Pontryagin map $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }:LM\times LM(LM\times _MLM)^{TM}`$, where $`(LM\times _MLM)^{TM}`$ denotes the Thom space of the pull back bundle $`\text{ev}_{\mathrm{}}^{}(TM)`$, which is the normal bundle of the embedding $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$. Notice that we have a commutative diagram of Thom - Pontryagin maps:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}LM\times LM& \stackrel{\stackrel{~}{\tau }}{}& (LM\times _MLM)^{TM}\\ ev\times ev& & \text{ev}_{\mathrm{}}& & \\ M\times M& \stackrel{\tau }{}& M^{TM}.\end{array}$$

In this diagram the map $`\text{ev}_{\mathrm{}}`$ is the induced map on the Thom spaces.

Loop composition $`\alpha \beta `$ is defined for two loops $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ having the same base point by first traversing the loop $`\alpha `$, then the loop $`\beta `$, i.e.

(1.4)
$$\alpha \beta (t)=\{\begin{array}{cc}\alpha (2t)\hfill & \text{if}0t\frac{1}{2},\hfill \\ \beta (2t1)\hfill & \text{if}\frac{1}{2}t1.\hfill \end{array}$$

Denote this operation by

$`\gamma :LM\times _MLM`$ $`LM`$
$`(\alpha ,\beta )`$ $`\alpha \beta .`$
Notice that $`\gamma `$ preserves the base points of loops in $`LM\times _MLM`$ and $`LM`$, thus the composition

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}LM\times _MLM& \stackrel{\gamma }{}& LM& \stackrel{ev}{}& M\end{array}$$

coincides with $`\text{ev}_{\mathrm{}}`$. Therefore $`\gamma `$ induces a map of bundles, $`\gamma :\text{ev}_{\mathrm{}}^{}(TM)ev^{}(TM)`$, and therefore an induced map of Thom spaces,

$$\stackrel{~}{\gamma }:(LM\times _MLM)^{TM}LM^{TM}.$$

Putting the above maps together, we obtain the following commutative diagram

(1.5)
$$\begin{array}{ccccc}LM\times LM& \stackrel{\stackrel{~}{\tau }}{}& (LM\times _MLM)^{TM}& \stackrel{\stackrel{~}{\gamma }}{}& LM^{TM}\\ ev\times ev& & \text{ev}_{\mathrm{}}& & ev& & \\ M\times M& \stackrel{\tau }{}& M^{TM}& \stackrel{=}{}& M^{TM}.\end{array}$$

Let $`D_LM`$ and $`S_LM`$ be the pulls back of $`D_TM`$ and $`S_TM`$ via $`ev`$. They are the unit disk and sphere bundles of $`ev^{}(TM)`$. Recall that the cochain $`t`$ in $`C^d(D_TM,S_TM)`$ represents the Thom class and therefore its pull back $`\stackrel{~}{t}=ev^{}(t)`$ is a cochain in $`C^d(D_LM,S_LM)`$ representing the Thom class of $`ev^{}(TM)`$. Similar to (1.2), capping with $`\stackrel{~}{t}`$ at the chain level followed by the projection of $`D_LM`$ to $`LM`$

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_{\mathrm{}}:C_{}(D_LM,S_LM)& \stackrel{\stackrel{~}{t}}{}& C_d(D_LM)& \stackrel{\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{}}{}& C_d(LM)\end{array}$$

induces the Thom isomorphism

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\stackrel{~}{H}_{}(LM^{TM})& \stackrel{}{}& H_{}(D_LM,S_LM)& \stackrel{\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_{}}{}& H_d(LM)\end{array}$$

in homology. Similar to the argument used for (1.3), there is a chain map

(1.6)
$$\begin{array}{ccccccc}\stackrel{~}{u}_{\mathrm{}}:C_{}(LM^{TM})& \stackrel{\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_{\mathrm{}}}{}& C_{}(D_LM/S_LM,)& \stackrel{\stackrel{~}{\theta }_{\mathrm{}}}{}& C_{}(D_LM,S_LM)& \stackrel{\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_{\mathrm{}}}{}& C_d(LM),\end{array}$$

such that the following diagram commutes:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}H_{}(LM^{TM})& \stackrel{\stackrel{~}{u}_{}}{}& H_d(LM)\\ ev_{}& & ev_{}& & \\ H_{}(M^{TM})& \stackrel{u_{}}{}& H_d(M).\end{array}$$

In  the first two authors proved that the composition of $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_{}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_{}`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{u}_{}`$ realizes the Chas - Sullivan loop product. That is, the following diagram commutes:

(1.7)
$$\begin{array}{ccccc}H_p(LM)H_q(LM)& & \stackrel{(1)^{d(dp)}()}{}& & H_{p+qd}(LM)\\ \times & & & & \stackrel{~}{u}_{}& & \\ H_{p+q}(LM\times LM)& \stackrel{\stackrel{~}{\tau }_{}}{}& H_{p+q}(LM\times _MLM)^{TM}& \stackrel{\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_{}}{}& H_{p+q}(LM^{TM})\end{array}$$

where $`:H_p(LM)H_q(LM)H_{p+qd}(LM)`$ is the Chas - Sullivan loop product. We therefore have the following proposition, which should be viewed as the analogue of proposition 4.

###### Proposition 5.

The composition of the four chain maps

(1.8) $`\times :`$ $`C_{}(LM)C_{}(LM)C_{}(LM\times LM),`$
(1.9) $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_{\mathrm{}}:`$ $`C_{}(LM\times LM)C_{}(LM\times _MLM)^{TM},`$
(1.10) $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_{\mathrm{}}:`$ $`C_{}(LM\times _MLM)^{TM}C_{}(LM^{TM}),\text{ and}`$
(1.11) $`\stackrel{~}{u}_{\mathrm{}}:`$ $`C_{}(LM^{TM})C_d(LM).`$
gives a chain representative of the Chas - Sullivan loop product up to sign

$`H_p(LM)H_q(LM)`$ $`H_{p+qd}(LM)`$
$`\alpha \beta `$ $`\alpha \beta .`$
## 2. The Loop Algebra Spectral Sequence

In this section we will describe the loop algebra spectral sequence and prove theorem 1. To do this we describe a filtration of simplicial sets arising from the fibration $`\mathrm{\Omega }MLMM`$, which will induce the Serre spectral sequence for this fibration. We then analyze how the loop product behaves with respect to this spectral sequence, using the chain level description of the product given in the last section. We then apply Poincare duality to regrade the spectral sequence (and in particular change a first quadrant spectral sequence into a second quadrant one), and prove theorem 1.

Given a topological space $`X`$, let $`𝒮.X`$ denote its singular simplicial set. The $`p`$ \- simplices are given by singular simplices $`S_p(X)=\{\sigma :\mathrm{\Delta }^pX\}`$, where $`\mathrm{\Delta }^p`$ is the standard $`p`$ \- simplex, $`\mathrm{\Delta }^p=\{(x_0,\mathrm{},x_p)^{p+1}:x_i0\text{ and }x_i=1\}.`$ $`𝒮.X`$ has the usual face and degeneracy operations, and it is well known that its geometric realization $`|𝒮.X|`$ has the weak homotopy type of $`X`$. See  for details.

Number the vertices of $`\mathrm{\Delta }^p`$ $`\{0,1,\mathrm{},p\}`$. Then for a non-decreasing sequence of integers $`0i_0\mathrm{}i_rp`$, define a map of simplices

$$(i_0,i_1,\mathrm{},i_r):\mathrm{\Delta }^r\mathrm{\Delta }^p,$$

by requiring that $`(i_0,i_1,\mathrm{},i_r)`$ be a linear map that sends the vertex $`k`$ of $`\mathrm{\Delta }^r`$ to the vertex $`i_k`$ of $`\mathrm{\Delta }^p`$. Given a singular $`p`$ \- simplex $`\sigma :\mathrm{\Delta }^pX`$, the composition of $`\sigma `$ with $`(i_0,i_1,\mathrm{},i_r)`$ defines an $`r`$ \- simplex

$$\sigma (i_0,i_1,\mathrm{},i_r):\mathrm{\Delta }^r\mathrm{\Delta }^pX.$$

Now let $`\begin{array}{ccc}FE& \stackrel{\pi }{}& B\end{array}`$ be a fibration. There is a filtration of the simplicial set $`𝒮.E`$ defined as follows.

###### Definition 1.

Let $`F_p(𝒮.E)𝒮.E`$ be the subsimplicial set whose $`r`$ simplices are given by

(2.1)
$$\begin{array}{c}F_p(𝒮_r(E))=\{T:\mathrm{\Delta }^rE:\pi T=\sigma (i_0,\mathrm{},i_r),\text{for some}\sigma 𝒮_q(B),qp,\hfill \\ \hfill \text{and some sequence}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}i_0\mathrm{}i_rq\}.\end{array}$$

Given a simplicial set $`Y.`$, let $`C_{}(Y.)`$ be the associated simplicial chain complex, whose $`q`$ \- chains $`C_q(Y.)`$ are the free abelian group on the $`q`$ \- simplices $`Y_q`$, and whose boundary homomorphisms are given by the alternating sum of the face maps. Again, see  for details. In particular for a space $`X`$, we have $`C_{}(𝒮.X)`$ is the singular chain complex which we previously denoted simply by $`C_{}(X)`$. The following is is verified in .

###### Proposition 6.

Let $`FEB`$ be a fibration as above. Consider the filtration of chain complexes,

$$\{0\}\mathrm{}F_{p1}(C_{}(E))F_p(C_{}(E))\mathrm{}C_{}(E)$$

defined by $`F_p(C_{}(E))=C_{}(F_p(𝒮.E))`$ where $`F_p(𝒮.E)`$ is the $`p^{th}`$ filtration of the singular simplicial set defined above. Then this filtration induces the Serre spectral sequence converging to $`H_{}(E)`$.

We will study this spectral sequence in the examples of the fibrations

$`ev:`$ $`LMM,`$
$`\text{ev}_{\mathrm{}}:`$ $`LM\times _MLMM,`$
$`ev:`$ $`D_LMD_TM,\text{and}`$
$`ev:`$ $`S_LMS_TM`$
described in the last section. In particular notice that by taking the filtration of pairs

$$F_p(C_{}(D_LM,S_LM))=F_p(C_{}(D_LM))/F_p(C_{}(S_DM))$$

we get a spectral sequence (the relative Serre spectral sequence) converging to $`H_{}(D_LM,S_LM)=\stackrel{~}{H}_{}(LM^{TM})`$ and whose $`E_2`$ term is $`E_{p,q}^2=H_p(D_TM,S_TM;H_q(\mathrm{\Omega }M))=\stackrel{~}{H}_p(M^{TM};H_q(\mathrm{\Omega }M)).`$ Using the fibration $`\text{ev}_{\mathrm{}}:LM\times _MLMM`$ there is a similar filtration $`F_p(C_{}(\text{ev}_{\mathrm{}}^{}(D_TM),\text{ev}_{\mathrm{}}^{}(S_TM)))`$ which yields a relative Serre spectral sequence converging to $`\stackrel{~}{H}_{}((LM\times _MLM)^{TM})`$ and whose $`E_2`$ term is $`\stackrel{~}{H}_{}(M^{TM};H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }M\times \mathrm{\Omega }M))`$.

The following is an immediate observation based on the chain descriptions in the last section.

###### Proposition 7.

The chain maps

$`\times :`$ $`C_{}(LM)C_{}(LM)C_{}(LM\times LM)(\text{1.8}),`$
$`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_{\mathrm{}}:`$ $`C_{}(LM\times LM)C_{}(LM\times _MLM)^{TM}(\text{1.9}),\text{and}`$
$`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_{\mathrm{}}:`$ $`C_{}(LM\times _MLM)^{TM}C_{}(LM^{TM})(\text{1.10})`$
described in the last section all preserve the above filtrations:

$`\times :`$ $`F_p(C_{}(LM))F_q(C_{}(LM))F_{p+q}(C_{}(LM\times LM)),`$
$`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_{\mathrm{}}:`$ $`F_m(C_{}(LM\times LM))F_m(C_{}(\text{ev}_{\mathrm{}}^{}(D_TM),\text{ev}_{\mathrm{}}^{}(S_TM))),`$
$`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_{\mathrm{}}:`$ $`F_m(C_{}(\text{ev}_{\mathrm{}}^{}(D_TM),\text{ev}_{\mathrm{}}^{}(S_TM)))F_m(C_{}(D_LM,S_LM)),`$
and therefore induce maps of the associated Serre spectral sequences.

The following is a bit more delicate.

###### Theorem 8.

The chain map

$$\stackrel{~}{u}_{\mathrm{}}:C_{}(LM^{TM})C_d(LM)(\text{1.11})$$

induces a map of filtered chain complexes that lowers the filtration by $`d`$,

$$\stackrel{~}{u}_{\mathrm{}}:F_p(C_{}(D_LM,S_LM))F_{pd}(C_{}(LM)).$$

and therefore induces a map of the associated Serre spectral sequences that shifts grading,

$$\stackrel{~}{u}_{}:E_{p,q}^r(D_LM,S_LM)E_{pd,q}^r(LM).$$

In particular on the $`E_2`$ \- level $`\stackrel{~}{u}_{}`$ is the Thom isomorphism,

$$H_p(M^{TM};H_q(\mathrm{\Omega }M))H_{pd}(M;H_q(\mathrm{\Omega }M)).$$

###### Proof.

By the definition of the chain map $`\stackrel{~}{u}_{\mathrm{}}`$, to prove this theorem it suffices to show that taking the cap product with the Thom class $`\stackrel{~}{t}C^d(D_LM,S_LM)`$ induces a map of filtered chain complexes that lowers the filtration by $`d`$,

$$\begin{array}{ccc}F_p(C_{}(D_LM,S_LM))& \stackrel{\stackrel{~}{t}}{}& F_{pd}(C_{}(D_LM)).\end{array}$$

To verify this, recall that the cap product has the following chain level description. Consider the operations on singular $`n`$ \- simplices,

$$_p\text{and}_p:𝒮_n(X)𝒮_p(X)$$

defined by

$$\sigma _p=(d_{p+1})^{np}(\sigma ),_p\sigma =(d_0)^{np}(\sigma ).$$

That is, $`\sigma _p`$ is the restriction of $`\sigma `$ to the “front” $`p`$ \- face, and $`{}_{p}{}^{}\sigma `$ is the restriction of $`\sigma `$ to the “back” $`p`$ -face.

Now we can choose our cochain $`\stackrel{~}{t}C^{}(D_LM,S_LM)`$ to represent the Thom class so that if we view it as an element in $`\text{Hom}(C_d(D_LM);)`$ it satisfies

(2.2) $`C_d(S_LM)\text{Ker}(\stackrel{~}{t}),`$
(2.3) $`\text{Im}(s_j:𝒮_{d1}(D_LM)𝒮_d(D_LM)C_d(D_LM))\text{Ker}(\stackrel{~}{t}),`$
That is, $`\stackrel{~}{t}`$ vanishes on chains on $`S_LM`$ and degenerate chains on $`D_LM`$. Let $`\sigma 𝒮_p(D_LM)`$ for some $`pd`$, then the cap product can be described as

(2.4)
$$\sigma \stackrel{~}{t}=(1)^{d(pd)}\stackrel{~}{t}({}_{d}{}^{}\sigma )\sigma _{pd}.$$

This gives a well defined chain map $`\stackrel{~}{t}:C_p(D_LM,S_LM)C_{pd}(D_LM)`$ that represents capping with the Thom class in cohomology.

The map $`\stackrel{~}{t}`$ on $`C_{}(D_LM,S_LM)`$ is completely determined by its composition with the projection $`C_{}(D_LM)C_{}(D_LM,S_LM)`$. So to prove the lemma it now suffices to prove that $`\stackrel{~}{t}`$ maps $`F_p(C_{}(D_LM))`$ to $`F_{pd}(C_{}(D_LM))`$.

Let $`TF_p(𝒮_r(D_LM))`$ be a singular $`r`$ \- simplex in filtration $`p`$. Then, by definition,

$$ev(T)=\sigma (i_0,i_1,\mathrm{}i_r)$$

for some $`q`$-simplex $`\sigma 𝒮_q(D_TM)`$, and some sequence $`i_0\mathrm{}i_rqp`$. By the above formula for the cap product, we then have

$$ev(T\stackrel{~}{t})=ev(T)t=\pm t(\sigma (i_{rd},\mathrm{},i_r))\sigma (i_0,\mathrm{},i_{rd}),$$

where, as above, $`tC^d(D_TM,S_TM)`$ represents the Thom class of the tangent bundle $`TMM`$. By (2.3) $`t`$ vanishes on degenerate simplices. Therefore this expression can only be nonzero if $`i_{rd}<\mathrm{}<i_rq`$, and therefore $`rdqdpd`$. Hence $`T\stackrel{~}{t}F_{pd}(C_{}(D_LM))`$ as claimed. ∎

Notice that if we compose the chain maps in proposition 7 and theorem 8, we have a map of filtered chain complexes

$$\mu :F_p(C_{}(LM))F_q(C_{}(LM))F_{p+qd}(C_{}(LM))$$

which, by proposition 5 induces the loop product in homology. Therefore $`\mu `$ induces a map of spectral sequences

(2.5)
$$\mu :E_{p,s}^r(LM)E_{q,t}^r(LM)E_{p+qd,s+t}^r(LM).$$

For simply connected $`M`$, on the $`E_2`$ \- level, $`\mu `$ defines a map

$$\mu :H_p(M;H_s(\mathrm{\Omega }M))H_q(M;H_t(\mathrm{\Omega }M))H_{p+qd}(M;H_{s+t}(\mathrm{\Omega }M))$$

which we claim is given up to sign, by the intersection product with coefficients on the Pontryagin ring $`H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }M)`$. More explicitly,

$$\mu ((ag)(bh))=\pm (ab)(gh)$$

where $`aH_p(M)`$, $`gH_s(\mathrm{\Omega }M)`$, $`bH_q(M)`$, and $`hH_t(\mathrm{\Omega }M)`$, and where $`ab`$ is the intersection product and $`gh`$ is the Pontryagin product.

To see this, notice that the composition of chain maps used to define $`\mu `$ is given by a composition of chain maps of fibrations (and pairs of fibrations). On the base space level this is given by the composition of maps described in proposition 4 realizing the intersection product. On the fiber level, the fact that this chain map induces the Pontrjagin product comes from the fact that map $`\gamma :LM\times _MLMLM`$ as defined in (1.4) is a map of fibrations

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{\Omega }M\times \mathrm{\Omega }M& \stackrel{\rho }{}& \mathrm{\Omega }M\\ & & & & \\ LM\times _MLM& \stackrel{\gamma }{}& LM\\ \text{ev}_{\mathrm{}}& & ev& & \\ M& \underset{=}{}& M\end{array}$$

where $`\rho `$ is the Pontryagin product.

Thus $`\mu `$ defines a multiplicative structure on the Serre spectral sequence for the fibration $`\mathrm{\Omega }MLMM`$ which converges to the loop homology algebra structure on $`H_{}(LM)`$, and on the $`E^2`$ -level is given (up to sign) by the intersection product on $`M`$ with coefficients in the Pontryagin ring $`H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }M)`$. However the grading is shifted in a way that is confusing for calculational purposes. To remedy this, define a second quadrant spectral $`\{E_{s.t}^r(_{}(LM));d_r:E_{s,t}^rE_{sr,t+r1}^r\}`$ with $`s0`$, $`t0`$, which converges to the loop homology $`_{s+t}(LM)`$ by regrading the Serre spectral spectral sequence in the following way.

(2.6)
$$E_{s.t}^r(_{}(LM))=E_{s+d,t}^r(LM),$$

where $`d`$ is the dimension of $`M`$, and the right hand side is the Serre spectral sequence for the fibration $`\mathrm{\Omega }MLMM`$ we have been considering. Notice that $`E_{s.t}^r(_{}(LM))`$ can only be nonzero for $`ds0`$. Moreover with the new indexing the spectral sequence converges to the loop homology in a grading preserving way, $`E_{s.t}^r(_{}(LM))_{s+t}(LM)`$. We also see that with this new indexing, the loop multiplication in the spectral sequence (2.5) preserves the bigrading,

$$\mu :E_{s,t}^r(_{}(LM))E_{p,q}^r((_{}(LM))E_{s+p,t+q}^r((_{}(LM)).$$

Finally notice that the $`E^2`$ \- term is given by

$$E_{s,t}^2(_{}(LM))=H_{s+d}(M;H_t(\mathrm{\Omega }M))$$

for $`ds0`$. By applying Poincare duality we have

$$E_{s,t}^2(_{}(LM))=H^s(M;H_t(\mathrm{\Omega }M)).$$

Since under Poincare duality the intersection pairing in homology coincides with the cup product in cohomology, on the $`E^2`$ \- level the multiplication $`\mu `$ is given (up to sign) by cup product with coefficients in the Pontryagin ring $`H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }M)`$.

$$\mu :H^s(M;H_t(\mathrm{\Omega }M))H^p(M;H_q(\mathrm{\Omega }M))H^{(s+p)}(M;H_{t+q}(\mathrm{\Omega }M))$$

for $`ds,p0`$ and $`t,q0`$. This completes the proof of theorem 1.

## 3. The Loop Product on $`S^n`$ and $`^n`$

Our goal in this section is to use the loop homology spectral sequence constructed in the last section to perform the calculations described in theorems 2 and 3.

We first prove theorem 2 by calculating the ring structure of $`_{}(LS^n)`$. If $`n=1`$, the fibration $`\mathrm{\Omega }S^1LS^1S^1`$ is trivial. Since the components of the based loop space $`\mathrm{\Omega }S^1`$ are all contractible, and $`\pi _0(\mathrm{\Omega }S^1)`$, we have a homotopy equivalence

$$LS^1S^1\times \mathrm{\Omega }S^1S^1\times .$$

Similarly, there is a homotopy equivalence $`LS^1\times _{S^1}LS^1S^1\times \times `$. With respect to these equivalences, it is clear that the map $`\gamma :LS^1\times _{S^1}LS^1LS^1`$ is given by

$`S^1\times \times `$ $`S^1\times `$
(3.1) $`(x,m,n)`$ $`(x,m+n).`$
It is also clear that with respect to these equivalences, the Thom - Pontryagin map $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }:LS^1\times LS^1(LS^1\times _{S^1}LS^1)^{TS^1}`$ is given by

$$\tau \times 1:S^1\times S^1\times \times (S^1)^{TS^1}(\times )_+$$

where $`\tau :S^1\times S^1(S^1)^{TS^1}`$ is the Thom - Pontryagin construction for the diagonal map $`\mathrm{\Delta }:S^1S^1\times S^1`$. Thus by (1.7) the loop homology algebra structure on $`_{}(LS^1)`$ is, with respect to the equivalence $`LS^1S^1\times `$, given by the tensor product of the intersection ring structure on $`H_{}(S^1)`$ with the group algebra structure, $`H_0()[t,t^1]`$. Using Poincare duality, we then have an algebra isomorphism

(3.2)
$$_{}(LS^1)H^{}(S^1)H_0()\mathrm{\Lambda }[a][t,t^1]$$

where $`a_1(LS^1)`$ corresponds to the generator in $`H^0(S^1)`$.

We now proceed with a calculation of $`_{}(LS^n)`$ for $`n>1`$. Consider the loop homology spectral sequence in this case. For dimension reasons, the only nontrivial differentials occur at the $`E^n`$ level. Recall that there is an isomorphism of algebras, $`H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }S^n)[x]`$, where $`x`$ has degree $`n1`$. It then follows that

$$E_{p,q}^2(_{}(LS^n))\mathrm{}E_{p,q}^nH^p(S^n)H_q(\mathrm{\Omega }S^n).$$

The differentials $`d^n`$ can be computed using the results in  and . An exposition of this calculation (for the Serre spectral sequence of the fibration $`\mathrm{\Omega }S^nLS^nS^n`$) is given in . Inputting the change of grading used to define the loop homology spectral sequence, we have the following picture of the differentials:

Denote by $`\iota `$, $`\sigma `$ the generators of $`H^n(S^n)`$ and $`H^0(S^n)`$, respectively. Let $`1_\mathrm{\Omega }`$ be the unit of $`H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }S^n)`$. In both spectral sequences $`\sigma 1_\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is an infinite cycle and therefore represents a class in $`_0(LS^n)`$. This class is the unit in the algebra $`_{}(LS^n)`$, which we denote by $`1`$. Similarly $`a=\iota 1_\mathrm{\Omega }`$ represents a class in $`_n(LS^n)`$, and for dimension reasons $`a^2`$ must vanish in $`_{}(LS^n)`$.

Let $`u=\sigma xE_{0,n1}^n`$. In the case when $`n`$ is odd, the spectral sequence collapses. Since $`n>1`$, for dimensional reasons there can be no extension problems, and so we have an isomorphism of algebras

$$_{}(LS^n)E_,^2H^{}(S^n)H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }S^n)\mathrm{\Lambda }[a][u].$$

If $`n`$ is even, the $`u^{2k}`$ terms survive to $`E^{\mathrm{}}`$, and

$$d_n(u^{2k+1})=2au^{2k+2}$$

for all nonnegative integers $`k`$. Let $`v=u^2=\sigma x^2`$. Being an infinite cycle it represents a class in $`_{2(n1)}(LS^n)`$. Then $`v^k`$ represents a generator of a subgroup of $`_{2k(n1)}(LS^n)`$ represented by classes in $`E_{0,2k(n1)}^{\mathrm{}}`$. Notice that the ideal $`(2av)`$ vanishes in $`E^{\mathrm{}}`$. Thus $`[a,v]/(a^2,2av)`$ is a subalgebra in $`E_,^{\mathrm{}}`$. Let $`b=\iota xE_{n,n1}^{\mathrm{}}`$. Then $`E_,^{\mathrm{}}`$ is generated by $`[a,v]/(a^2,2av)`$ and $`b`$. Again for dimension reasons $`b^2=ab=0E^{\mathrm{}}`$, and so

$$E_,^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Lambda }[b][a,v])/(a^2,ab,2av),\text{if }n\text{ is even.}$$

When $`n>2`$, for dimensional reasons there can be no extension issues, so $`_{}(LS^n)(\mathrm{\Lambda }[b][a,v])/(a^2,ab,2av)`$ for $`n`$ even and $`n>2`$. For $`n=2`$ we consider the potential extension problem. For filtration reasons, there are unique classes in $`_{}(LS^2)`$ represented by $`a`$ and $`b`$ in $`E_,^{\mathrm{}}`$. The ambiguity in the choice of class represented by $`vE_{0,2}^{\mathrm{}}`$ lies in $`E_{2,4}^{\mathrm{}}`$ generated by $`av`$. Since $`a^2=0`$ in $`_{}(LS^2)`$, any choice $`\stackrel{~}{v}_2(LS^2)`$ will satisfy $`2a\stackrel{~}{v}=0`$. Thus any choice of $`\stackrel{~}{v}`$ together with $`a`$ and $`b`$ will generate the same algebra, namely $`_{}(LS^2)(\mathrm{\Lambda }[b][a,\stackrel{~}{v}])/(a^2,ab,2a\stackrel{~}{v})`$.

This completes the proof of theorem 2.

We now proceed with the proof of theorem 3 by calculating the ring structure of $`_{}(^n)`$. Notice that if $`n=1`$, $`_{}(L^n)_{}(LS^2)`$, and this case was already discussed above. So for what follows we assume $`n>1`$. The $`E^2`$ -term of the loop homology spectral sequence is $`H^{}(^n;H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }^n))`$. The cohomology ring $`H^{}(^n)[c_1]/(c_1^{n+1})`$ is generated by the first Chern class $`c_1`$. We now recall the Pontryagin ring structure of $`H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }^n)`$.

Consider the homotopy fibration

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{\Omega }S^{2n+1}& \stackrel{\mathrm{\Omega }\eta }{}& \mathrm{\Omega }^n\mathrm{\Omega }^{\mathrm{}}S^1,\end{array}$$

where $`\eta :S^{2n+1}^n`$ is the Hopf map. Since this is a fibration of loop spaces that has a section (because $`\pi _1(\mathrm{\Omega }^n)\pi _1(\mathrm{\Omega }^{\mathrm{}}))`$ we can conclude the following.

1. The fibration is homotopically trivial, $`\mathrm{\Omega }^n\mathrm{\Omega }S^{2n+1}\times S^1`$.
2. The Serre spectral sequence of this fibration is a spectral sequence of algebras.

Therefore we have that in the Serre spectral sequence,

$`E_,^{\mathrm{}}`$ $`H_{}(S^1)H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }S^{2n+1})`$
(3.3) $`\mathrm{\Lambda }[t][x]`$
where $`tH_1(S^1)`$ and $`xH_{2n}(\mathrm{\Omega }S^{2n+1})`$ are generators. This isomorphism is one of algebras. Indeed it is clear that there are no extension issues in this spectral sequence so that

$$H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }^n)H_{}(S^1)H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }S^{2n+1})\mathrm{\Lambda }[t][x].$$

Now consider the loop homology spectral sequence for $`L^n`$. We therefore have

$`E_,^2(_{}(L^n))`$ $`H^{}(^n;H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }^n))`$
$`[c_1]/(c_1^{n+1})\mathrm{\Lambda }[t][x]`$
as algebras.

It was computed in  that

$$H_k(L^n)=\{\begin{array}{cc}𝐙\hfill & \text{if }k=0,1,\mathrm{},k2mn\text{}m1,\hfill \\ 𝐙𝐙_{n+1}\hfill & \text{if }k=2mn\text{}m1.\hfill \end{array}$$

This calculation implies the following pattern of differentials in the loop homology spectral sequence:

That is, the only nonzero differentials are $`d_{2n}`$ and

$$d_{2n}(y)=(n+1)c^nu,$$

where $`c=c_11`$, $`u=\sigma x`$, and $`y=\sigma t`$. Here $`\sigma `$ is a generator of $`H^0(^n)`$. For dimension reasons $`d_{2n}(u)=0`$, and since $`d_{2n}`$ is a derivation,

$$d_{2n}(yu^k)=d_{2n}(y)u^k=(n+1)c^nu^{k+1},$$

and these are all the nonzero differentials.

The spectral sequence collapses beyond $`E^{2n}`$ level, therefore $`c`$ and $`u`$ represent homology classes in $`_2(L^n)`$ and $`_{2n}(L^n)`$ respectively. Notice also that the ideal $`(c^{n+1},(n+1)c^nu)`$ vanishes in $`E_,^{\mathrm{}}`$. Therefore we have a subalgebra

$$𝐙[c,u]/(c^{n+1},(n+1)c^nu)E_,^{\mathrm{}}(_{}(L^n)).$$

Let $`w=ycE_,^2.`$ $`w`$ is an infinite cycle in this spectral sequence and represents a class in $`_1(^n)`$. Notice that $`w^2=0`$ in $`E_{4,2}^{\mathrm{}}`$. Similarly $`wc^n`$ also vanishes in $`E_,^{\mathrm{}}`$. Thus the $`E^{\mathrm{}}`$ \- term of the loop homology spectral sequence can be written as follows:

$$E_,^{\mathrm{}}(_{}(L^n))(\mathrm{\Lambda }[w]𝐙[c,u])/(c^{n+1},(n+1)c^nu,wc^n).$$

The extension issues are handled just as they were for $`_{}(LS^2)=_{}(L^1)`$ above. We then conclude that

$$_{}(L^n)(\mathrm{\Lambda }[w]𝐙[c,u])/(c^{n+1},(n+1)c^nu,wc^n)$$

as algebras. This completes the proof of theorem 3.


text:
# Metrics building of pp waves orbifold geometries

## 1 Introduction

It is by now possible to derive spectrum of string theory from the gauge theory point of view not only on a flat space but also on plane wave of $`AdS_5\times S^5`$ . This is amongst the fruits of the AdS/CFT correspondance  relating the spectrum of type IIB string theory on $`AdS_5\times S^5`$ to the spectrum of single trace operators in $`4D`$ $`𝒩=4`$ super Yang Mills theory. The idea is based on considering chiral primary operators in the conformal field side and look for their corresponding states in the string side but here on pp-wave backgrounds. For instance, a field operator like $`Tr[Z^J]`$ with large $`J`$ is associated with the string vacuum state in the light cone gauge $`|0,p_+_{l.c}`$ with large momentum $`p^+`$. Both objects have a vanishing $`\mathrm{\Delta }J`$ interpreted on the string side as the light cone energy $`E_c`$ of type IIB string on the pp wave background and on the field side as an anomalous dimension. The correspondance between the whole tower of string states $`\left(_{r,s}a^{n_r}S^{m_s}\right)|0,p_+_{l.c}`$ with $`E_c=n`$ and gauge invariant conformal operators $`Tr[O]`$ is deduced from the previous trace $`Tr[Z^J]`$ by replacing some of the $`Z`$’s by monomials involving the gauge covariant derivative $`DZ`$ or/and the remaining four transverse scalars $`\varphi ^j`$ and fermions $`\chi ^a`$ of the $`𝒩=4`$ multiplet. The BMN correspondence rule between superstring states creation operators $`a^{}`$ and $`S^{}`$ and CFT4 field operators is.

$`a^i`$ $``$ $`D_iZ\text{for }i=1,\mathrm{},4`$
$`a^j`$ $``$ $`\varphi ^{j4}\text{for }j=5,\mathrm{},8`$ (1)
$`S^a`$ $``$ $`\chi _{J=1/2}^a,`$
For more details, see . Soon after this discovery, an intensive interest has been devoted to further explore this issue; in particular the extension of the BMN results to pp wave orbifolds with $`U\left(N\right)`$ symmetries  and orientifolds of D-brane system with an $`Sp\left(N\right)`$ gauge invariance , see also . In , the BMN proposal has been extended to type IIB superstring propagating on pp-wave $`𝐙_k`$ orbifolds. There, it has been shown that first quantized free string theory on such background is described by the large $`N`$, fixed gauge coupling limit of $`𝒩=2`$ $`\left[U\left(N\right)\right]^k`$ quiver gauge theory and have proposed a precise map between gauge theory operators and string states for both untwisted and twisted sectors. For $`\mathrm{\Delta }J=0`$, the BMN correspondence for the lowest string state reads as,

$$Tr\left[S^q𝒵^J\right]|0,p^+_q,$$
(2)
where $`|0,p^+_q`$ is the vacuum in the q-th twisted sector and where

$$S=diag(1,\mathrm{exp}i\frac{2\pi }{k},\mathrm{},\mathrm{exp}i\frac{2\left(k1\right)\pi }{k}).$$
(3)
One may also write down the correspondence for the other states with $`\mathrm{\Delta }J=n>0`$. Here one has a rich spectrum due to the presence of $`k1`$ twisted sectors in addition to the usual one. This analysis remains however incomplete since it concerns only a special kind of $`𝒩=2`$ CFT4 model; the more familiar supersymmetric scale invariant theory one can have in four dimension. In fact there are several others $`𝒩=2`$ CFT4’s in one to one correspondence with both ordinary and Affine $`ADE`$ singularities of the ALE space. These models have very different moduli spaces; and then it would be interesting to explore how the BMN correspondence extends for general $`𝒩=2`$ CFT4 models and how the machinery works in general.

The aim of this paper is to further develop the analysis initiated in  by considering all possible kinds of abelian and non abelian pp wave orbifolds. Here we will focus our attention on the type IIB string side by deriving explicity the moduli dependent metrics of all kinds of pp wave orbifolds preserving sixteen supersymmetries. We will put the accent on the way the analogue of the field moduli, of the quiver gauge theory, enters in the game in the string side. In , we will give the details concerning its correspondings $`𝒩=2`$ CFT4 side.

The presentation is as follows: In section 2, we recall some aspects of the pp wave geometry in the BMN limit of $`AdS_5\times S^5`$. In section 3, we study ordinary $`SU\left(k\right)`$ pp waves geometry. In section 4, we consider its $`\widehat{SU\left(k\right)}`$ affine analogue and also give the explicit derivation of the moduli dependent metrics. In section 5, we derive the results for Affine $`\widehat{SO\left(k\right)}`$ pp wave geometries and make comments regarding the other kinds of orbifolds.

## 2 pp waves orbifold geometries

To start recall that the general form of the plane wave metric of the $`AdS_5\times S^5`$ in the BMN limit reads as,

$$ds^2=4dx^{}dx^+A_{ij}\left(x^+\right)x^ix^j\left(dx^+\right)^2+\underset{i=1}{\overset{8}{}}dx^idx^i.$$
(4)
Here the symmetric matrix $`A_{ij}\left(x^+\right)`$ is in general a funtion of $`x^+`$. For simplicity, we will take it as $`A_{ij}=\mu \delta _{ij}`$. In this case, the five form field strength is given by $`F=\mu dx^+(dx^1dx^2dx^3dx^4+dx^5dx^6dx^7dx^8)`$, and the previous metric reduces to,

$$ds^2=4dx^{}dx^+\mu ^2\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{8}{}}x^ix^i\right)\left(dx^+\right)^2+\underset{i=1}{\overset{8}{}}dx^idx^i$$
(5)
The study of type IIB strings on the Penrose limit of $`AdS_5\times S^5`$ orbifolds, $`AdS_5\times S^5/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, depends on the nature of the discrete finite group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Group theoretical analysis  on the types of discrete symmetries $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ one can have in such kind of situation, shows that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ has to be contained in a specific $`SU\left(2\right)`$ subgroup of the $`SO\left(6\right)`$ R-symmetry of the underlying $`𝒩=4`$ CFT4.

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }SU\left(2\right)SO\left(6\right)$$
(6)
It follows from this constraint eq that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ may be any finite subgroups of the $`\stackrel{~}{ADE}`$ 111$`\stackrel{~}{ADE}`$ denote $`SU\left(2\right)`$ discrete subgroups and should not be confused with the usual notations for ordinary $`ADE`$ and affine $`\widehat{ADE}`$ Lie algebras. classification of discrete finite subgroups of $`SU\left(2\right)`$ . These finite groups, which are well known in the mathematical litterature, are either abelian as for the usual cyclic $`𝐙_k`$ group or non abelian as for the case of binary $`\stackrel{~}{DE}`$ groups defined by,

$`\stackrel{~}{D_{2k}}`$ $`=`$ $`\left\{a,b\right|b^2=a^k;ab=ba^1;a^{2k}=I_{id}\},`$
$`\stackrel{~}{E_6}`$ $`=`$ $`\left\{a,b\right|a^3=b^3=\left(ab\right)^3\},`$ (7)
together with analogous relations for $`\stackrel{~}{E_7}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{E_8}`$. In what follows, we shall address the question of metrics building of pp wave orbifolds with respect to some of these groups; more details on the way they are involved in the BMN correspendence will be exposed in a subsequent paper .

To derive the moduli dependent metric of orbifolds of the pp wave geometries, we start from eq(5) and use the local coordinates $`(𝐱;z_1,z_2)`$ of the space $`𝐑^4\times 𝐂^2𝐑^4\times 𝐑^4`$ where $`𝐱=(x^2,x^3,x^4,x^5)`$ and where $`z_1=\left(x^6+ix^7\right)`$ and $`z_2=\left(x^8+ix^9\right)`$. In this coordinate system, the metric of the pp wave background has a manifest $`SO(4)\times SU\left(2\right)\times U(1)SO(4)\times SO\left(4\right)`$ isometry group and reads as

$`ds^2`$ $`=`$ $`4dx^+dx^{}+d𝐱^2`$
$`\mu ^2(𝐱^2+\left|z_1\right|^2+\left|z_2\right|^2)(dx^+)^2`$
$`+\left|dz_1\right|^2+\left|dz_2\right|^2.`$
where $`\left|z_i\right|^2=z_i\overline{z}_i`$. In type IIB closed string theory where these coordinates are interpreted as two dimension world sheet bosonic periodic fields,

$`x(\sigma ^0,\sigma ^1+2\pi )`$ $`=`$ $`x(\sigma ^0,\sigma ^1)`$
$`z(\sigma ^0,\sigma ^1+2\pi )`$ $`=`$ $`z(\sigma ^0,\sigma ^1),`$ (9)
the above relation leads to a very remarkable field action which, in the light cone gauge, is nothing but the action of a system of free and massive harmonic oscillators,

$$S_{Bose}[𝐱;z]d^2\sigma \left[_\alpha 𝐱^\alpha 𝐱+_\alpha z_i^\alpha \overline{z}_i+\nu ^2(𝐱^2+\left|z_1\right|^2+\left|z_2\right|^2)\right]$$
(10)
where $`\nu =p^+\mu `$ and where $`_\alpha ^\alpha =_\tau ^2+_\sigma ^2`$. The field eq of motion $`\left(_\alpha ^\alpha \nu ^2\right)𝐱`$ and $`\left(_\alpha ^\alpha \nu ^2\right)z`$ are exactly solved as,

$$x(\tau ,\sigma )=\underset{nZ}{}\frac{i}{\sqrt{2\omega _n}}\left(e^{i\omega _n\tau +in\sigma }a_ne^{i\omega _n\tau in\sigma }a_n^{}\right),$$
(11)
and similarly for the $`z`$’s and for fermionic partners. In this equation, $`a_n`$ and $`a_n^{}`$ are, roughly speaking, the harmonic annihilation and creation operators of string states and the $`\omega _n`$ frequencies are as follows,

$$\omega _n=\omega _n=\sqrt{n^2+\nu ^2}.$$
(12)
Due to the presence of the background field, these $`\omega _n`$’s are no longer integers as they are shifted with respect to the standard zero mass results.

To study the field theory associated with pp waves orbifolds with $`\stackrel{~}{ADE}`$ singularities and their complex deformations, we consider the form (2) of the metric and impose

$`x(\sigma ^0,\sigma ^1+2\pi )`$ $`=`$ $`x(\sigma ^0,\sigma ^1)`$
$`z(\sigma ^0,\sigma ^1+2\pi )`$ $`=`$ $`Uz(\sigma ^0,\sigma ^1)U^1,`$ (13)
where $`U`$ is an element of the orbifold symmetry group and where $`UzU^1`$ elements belong to the same equivalent class as $`z`$. For the special case of the $`Z_k`$ abelian discrete symmetry where $`UzU^1=z\mathrm{exp}i\frac{2q\pi }{k}`$, the analogue of the expansion (11) has twisted sectors and reads as

$$z_1(\tau ,\sigma )=\underset{nZ}{}\frac{i}{\sqrt{2\omega _{n\left(q\right)}}}e^{in\left(q\right)\sigma }\left(e^{i\omega _{n\left(q\right)}\tau }b_ne^{i\omega _{n\left(q\right)}\tau }d_n^{}\right),$$
(14)
with

$`n\left(q\right)`$ $`=`$ $`n+{\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}};0qk1`$
$`b_n`$ $`=`$ $`a_n^6+ia_n^7;d_n^{}=a_n^6+ia_n^7,`$ (15)
and similar relations for $`z_2(\tau ,\sigma )`$ with the upper indices $`6`$ and $`7`$ replaced by $`8`$ and $`9`$. Note that the metric (2) allows to realize manifestly the orbifold group actions and, as we will see, permits to read directly the various types of fundamental and bi-fundamental matter moduli one has on the $`𝒩=2`$ field theory side and too particularly in the CFT4 model we are interesed in here.

## 3 $`SU\left(k\right)`$ pp waves geometry

There are two known kinds of $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetric CFT4s associated with $`A_k`$ singularity. This is due to the fact that there are two kinds of $`A_k`$ singularities one may have at the origin of complex surfaces: the first kind involving the ordinary $`SU\left(k\right)`$ Lie algebra classification and the other implying $`\widehat{SU\left(k\right)}`$ affine one. In this section, we focus our attention on the first case. In the forthcoming section, we consider the affine one. Note in passing that while conformal invariance presents no problem in the second case; there is however extra constraint eqs one should take into account for the first class of models. This feature, which is mainly associated with the inclusion of fundamental matters in addition to bifundamental matter, will be considered in .

### 3.1 Degenerate orbifold Metric

To start recall that the nearby of the singular point $`x^6=x^7=x^8=x^9=0`$ of the real four dimension space$`𝐑^4/𝐙_k𝐂^2/𝐙_k`$ is just an ALE space with a $`SU\left(k\right)`$ singularity. In other words in the neighbourhood of the singularity, the space $`𝐑^4\times 𝐂^2/𝐙_k`$ may be thought of as $`𝐑^4\times 𝐓^{}\mathrm{𝐂𝐏}^1`$. The cotangeant bundle $`𝐓^{}\mathrm{𝐂𝐏}^1`$ is known to have two toric actions :

$$ze^{i\theta }z;we^{i\theta }w,$$
(16)
and

$$ze^{i\varphi }z;ww,$$
(17)
where $`z`$ is the non compact direction and $`w`$ is the coordinate of $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐏}^1`$. If we denote by $`c`$ and $`c^{}`$ the two one dimensional cycles of T2 corresponding to the action $`\theta `$ and $`\varphi `$, then $`𝐓^{}\mathrm{𝐂𝐏}^1`$ may be viewed as $`𝐓^2`$ fibration over $`𝐑_+^2`$ with coordinates $`\left|z\right|`$ and $`\left|w\right|`$. The toric action has three fixed loci:

$`cc^{}`$ $`=`$ $`0\left|w\right|=0,\left|z\right|`$
$`c^{}`$ $`=`$ $`0{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\left|w\right|}}=0,\left|z\right|,`$ (18)
$`c+c^{}`$ $`=`$ $`0\left|z\right|=0,\left|w\right|`$
At the singular point where the two cycles shrink, the product $`zw`$ goes, in general, to zero as

$$zw=\zeta ^k,k2,$$
(19)
with $`\zeta 0`$. Eq(19) tells us, amongst others, that the local variables to deal with the geometry of the Penrose limit of $`AdS_5\times S^5/𝐙_k`$ are

$$z_1=z;z_2=\frac{\zeta ^k}{z}.$$
(20)
Using these new variables as well as the explicit expression of the differential,

$$dz_2=k\frac{\zeta }{z}^{k1}d\zeta \frac{\zeta ^k}{z^2}dz,$$
(21)
the metric of the pp wave orbifold geometry (2) reads near the singularity as,

$`ds^2|_{SU\left(k\right)}`$ $`=`$ $`4dx^+dx^{}+d𝐱^2`$
$`\mu ^2G_{++}dx^+{}_{}{}^{2}+G_{z\overline{z}}|dz|^2+G_{\zeta \overline{\zeta }}|d\zeta |^2`$
$`+\left(G_{z\overline{\zeta }}dzd\overline{\zeta }+G_{\zeta \overline{z}}d\zeta d\overline{z}\right),`$
where the metric factors $`G_{ij}`$ are given by,

$`G_{++}`$ $`=`$ $`𝐱^2+\left|z\right|^2\left(\left|z\right|^4+\left|\zeta \right|^{2k}\right),`$
$`G_{z\overline{z}}`$ $`=`$ $`1+{\displaystyle \frac{\left|\zeta \right|^{2k}}{\left|z\right|^4}};G_{\zeta \overline{\zeta }}=k^2{\displaystyle \frac{\left|\zeta \right|^{2\left(k1\right)}}{\left|z\right|^2}},`$ (23)
$`G_{z\overline{\zeta }}`$ $`=`$ $`k{\displaystyle \frac{\left|\zeta \right|^{2\left(k1\right)}}{\left|z\right|^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\zeta }{z}};G_{\zeta \overline{z}}={\displaystyle \frac{\left|\zeta \right|^{2\left(k1\right)}}{\left|z\right|^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\zeta }}{\overline{z}}}.`$
This metric has degenerate zeros at $`z=\zeta =0`$, which may be lifted by deformations of $`G_{ij}`$’s. In what follows, we describe a way to lift this degeneracy by using complex deformations of ALE space singularity.

### 3.2 Moduli dependent pp wave geometry

To lift degeneracy of eq(23), one can use either Kahler or complex resolutions of the $`SU\left(k\right)`$ singularity. In the second case, this is achieved by deformation of the complex structure of the orbifold point of $`𝐂^2/𝐙_k`$ which amount to repalce eq(19) by

$$z_1z_2=\zeta ^k+a_1\zeta ^{k1}+\mathrm{}+a_{k1}\zeta ,$$
(24)
where $`a_i`$ are complex numbers. Note that if all the $`a_i`$’s are non zero, the degeneracy is completely lifted, otherwise it is partially lifted. Note also that from the field theory point of view, the $`a_i`$ moduli are interpreted as the vev’s of the hypermultiplets in the bi-fundamental representations of the $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetric $`_iU\left(N_i\right)`$ quiver gauge theory . The ratio $`z_i=\frac{a_{i1}a_{i+1}}{a_i^2}`$ are the gauge coupling moduli. From this relation, eq(20) extends as,

$$z_2=a_0\frac{\zeta ^k}{z}+\underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}a_j\frac{\zeta ^{kj}}{z},$$
(25)
with $`a_0=1`$ and so the holomorphic differential $`dz_2`$ reads as,

$$dz_2=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}a_j\frac{\zeta ^{kj1}}{z}\left[\left(kj\right)d\zeta \frac{\zeta }{z}dz\right]+\underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}\frac{\zeta ^{kj}}{z}da_j.$$
(26)
In eq(26), we have also varied the complex moduli; this is what one should do in $`𝒩=2`$ CFT4 with $`SU\left(k\right)`$ geometry which, in addition to gauge fields and bi-fundamental matters, requires the introduction of fundamental matters as well. We shall not consider this aspect here; we will then purely and simply set $`da_j=0`$. As such the previous metric of the degenerate $`SU\left(k\right)`$ pp waves geometry reads now as,

$`G_{++}`$ $`=`$ $`𝐱^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\left|z\right|^2}}\left(\left|z\right|^4+\left|{\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}}a_j\zeta ^{kj}\right|^2\right),`$
$`G_{z\overline{z}}`$ $`=`$ $`1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\left|z\right|^2}}\left|{\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}}a_j{\displaystyle \frac{\zeta ^{kj}}{z^2}}\right|^2,G_{\zeta \overline{\zeta }}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\left|z\right|^2}}\left|{\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}}\left(kj\right)a_j\zeta ^{kj1}\right|^2,`$ (27)
$`G_{z\overline{\zeta }}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\left|z\right|^2}}\left|{\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}}\left(kj\right)a_j\zeta ^{kj}\right|^2{\displaystyle \frac{\zeta }{z}},G_{\zeta \overline{z}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\left|z\right|^2}}\left|{\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}}\left(kj\right)a_j\zeta ^{kj}\right|^2{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\zeta }}{\overline{z}}}.`$
By making appropriate choices of the $`a_j`$ complex moduli, one can cover all the kinds of pp wave geometries involving subgroups of the $`SU\left(k\right)`$ singularity.

## 4 Affine $`\widehat{ADE}`$ pp waves geometry

Here we are interested in the Penrose limit of $`AdS_5\times S^5`$ orbifolds with affine $`\widehat{ADE}`$ singularities. We will focus our attention on the metric building of the pp wave geometry with affine $`\widehat{A_k}`$ singularity. Then we give the results for the other cases. To start recall that affine $`\widehat{A_k}`$ singularity is given by the following holomorphic eq

$$z_1^2+z_2^3+z_2^2=\zeta ^{k+1};$$
(28)
describing a family of complex two surfaces embedded in $`𝐂^3`$. A tricky way to handle this singularity is to use elliptic fibration over the complex plane considered in . In this method, one considers instead of eq(28), the following equivalent one,

$$v\left(z_1^2+z_2^3+\zeta ^6+az_1z_2\zeta \right)+\zeta ^{k+1}=0,$$
(29)
where the parameter $`a`$ is the torus complex structure. Note that these eqs are homogeneous under the change $`(z_1,z_2,\zeta ,v)(\lambda ^3z_1,\lambda ^2z_2,\lambda \zeta ,\lambda ^{k5}v)`$ allowing to fix one of them; say $`v=1`$. With this constraint, one recovers the right dimension of the $`\widehat{SU\left(k\right)}`$ geometry near the origin. In what follows, we consider the case $`k=2n1`$, $`n2`$ and set $`v=1`$.

### 4.1 Degenerate Orbifold metric

Starting from eq(29), which we rewrite as

$$z_1^22z_1f+g=0,$$
(30)
where $`f`$ and $`g`$ are holomorphic functions given by,

$`f`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{a}{2}}z_2\zeta ,`$
$`g`$ $`=`$ $`z_2^3+\zeta ^6+{\displaystyle \frac{\zeta ^{2n}}{v}},`$ (31)
one can solve eq(30) as a homogenous function of $`z_2`$, $`\zeta `$ and $`v`$222one may also take the other solution namely $`z_1=f\sqrt{f^2g}`$.

$$z_1=f+\sqrt{f^2g}$$
(32)
Using this relation, one may compute the differential $`dz_1`$ in terms of $`dz_2`$, $`d\zeta `$ and $`dv`$ as follows

$$dz_1=\left(1+\frac{f}{\sqrt{f^2g}}\right)df\text{ }\frac{1}{2\sqrt{f^2g}}dg,$$
(33)
with

$$d\chi =dz_2_{z_2}\chi +d\zeta _\zeta \chi +dv_v\chi ,$$
(34)
where $`\chi `$ stands for the functions $`f`$ and $`g`$. In the coordinate patch $`v=1`$ where $`dv=0`$, the metric of pp waves background, near the orbifold point with affine $`\widehat{SU\left(2n1\right)}`$ singularity, reads as,

$`ds^2`$ $`=`$ $`4dx^+dx^{}+d𝐱^2`$
$`\mu ^2\left[𝐱^2+\left|f+\sqrt{f^2g}\right|^2+\left|z\right|^2\right](dx^+)^2`$
$`+G_{z\overline{z}}\left|dz\right|^2+G_{\zeta \overline{\zeta }}\left|d\zeta \right|^2+\left(G_{z\overline{\zeta }}dzd\overline{\zeta }+hc\right)`$
where

$`G_{z\overline{z}}`$ $`=`$ $`1+\left|\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{f}{\sqrt{f^2g}}}\right)_{z_2}f\text{ }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\sqrt{f^2g}}}_{z_2}g\right|^2,`$
$`G_{\zeta \overline{\zeta }}`$ $`=`$ $`\left|\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{f}{\sqrt{f^2g}}}\right)_\zeta f\text{ }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\sqrt{f^2g}}}_\zeta g\right|^2,`$
$`G_{z\overline{\zeta }}`$ $`=`$ $`[(1+{\displaystyle \frac{f}{\sqrt{f^2g}}})_zf\text{ }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\sqrt{f^2g}}}_zg]\times `$
$`\left[\overline{\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{f}{\sqrt{f^2g}}}\right)_\zeta f\text{ }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\sqrt{f^2g}}}_\zeta g}\right]`$
A more explicit expression of this degenerate metric may be obtained by using eqs(31,32).

### 4.2 pp waves metric

To lift the degeneracy of the orbifold metric eq(4.1), we use the following complex deformation of eq(29),

$$0=v\left(z_1^2+z_2^3+\zeta ^6+az_1z_2\zeta \right)+\zeta ^{2n}+\mathrm{\Delta },$$
(37)
with

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\underset{i=1}{\overset{n1}{}}a_{2i}z_2^i\zeta ^{2n2i}+a_{2n}z_2^n+z_1\underset{i=0}{\overset{n2}{}}b_{2i+1}z_2^i\zeta ^{2n2i3},$$
(38)
where $`a_{2i}`$ and $`b_{2i+1}`$ are complex numbers describing the complex deformations of the singularity. This relation may also be rewritten as,

$$z_1^22z_1F+G=0,$$
(39)
where now,

$`F`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(az_2\zeta +{\displaystyle \underset{i=0}{\overset{n2}{}}}b_{2i+1}z_2^i\zeta ^{2n2i3}\right),`$
$`G`$ $`=`$ $`z_2^3+\zeta ^6+\left({\displaystyle \frac{\zeta ^{2n}}{v}}+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}}a_{2i}z_2^i\zeta ^{2n2i}\right),`$ (40)
To get the metric of the pp wave geometry, one does the same analysis as we have done in subsection 4.1 for the case where $`a_i=b_i=0`$. The relations one gets are formally similar to those we have obtained before; one has just to replace $`f`$ and $`g`$ by $`F`$ and $`G`$ respectively.

## 5 Conclusion

The analysis we have described above may be applied for the remaining other kinds of pp waves orbifolds with ordinary $`ADE`$ and affine $`\widehat{ADE}`$ singularities. All one has to do is to identify the explicit expressions of the analogue of the holomorphic functions $`F`$ and $`G`$ and redo the same calculations. For the case of affine $`\widehat{SO\left(k\right)}`$ pp wave orbifolds, the analogue of eqs(40) is given by,

$`F`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(az_2\zeta +b_1\zeta ^{2n}+c_1\zeta ^4z_2^{n2}\right),`$
$`G`$ $`=`$ $`z_2^3+\zeta ^6+\left(b_2\zeta ^{2n+2}+c_2\zeta ^3z_2^n+{\displaystyle \underset{i=0}{\overset{2n4}{}}}a_{2i}z_2^i\zeta ^{4n2i}\right),`$ (41)
for $`k=2n`$ and

$`F`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(az_2\zeta +b_1\zeta ^{2n}+c_1\zeta ^3z_2^{n2}\right),`$
$`G`$ $`=`$ $`z_2^3+\zeta ^6+\left(b_2\zeta ^{2n+2}+c_2\zeta ^4z_2^{n1}+{\displaystyle \underset{i=0}{\overset{2n4}{}}}a_{2i}z_2^i\zeta ^{4n2i}\right)`$ (42)
fo $`k=2n1`$. One may also write down the expression of these holomorphic functions $`F`$ and $`G`$ for the other remaining geometries. More details on these calculations including Kahler deformations method as well as the corresponding CFT4 models will be exposed in .


text:
# Preliminary results from VLT (FORS1) photometry of NGC 6397

## 1. Introduction

GC stars fainter than the MSTO are substantially unevolved and are located along the MS according to their initial mass. Their luminosity distribution is usually described by the Initial Mass Function as modified by subsequent dynamical evolution to become the Present Day Mass Function. The mass segregation then should be seen as a radial dependence of the LFs. but to verify these theoretical predictions we need to obtain a statistically significative sample of data starting from the central regions of the cluster. Now this is possible also by ground observations thank’s to the great power of the VLT and the FORS cameras.

## 2. Data analysis and discussion

Our observations consist of severals 600 s exposures in the filter V and I Bessel (proposals 63.H-0721(A); 65.H-0531(B)) of two fields (6.8’ $`\times `$ 6.8’) partially overlapping and located at $``$ 7.5’ southeast of the center of the cluster. We have used HST observations (Cool et al., 1996 ApJ, 468, 655) in common with our fields (figure b) to make the calibration of the data. The LFs (in bin of 0.5 mag V) for the stars in the regions R1 $`<`$ 5.5’ and 5.5’ $``$ R2 $``$ 9.8’ have been obtained by following the usual procedure and taking into account for the incompleteness of the images (figure a). It is evident from figure a) that both the observed LFs show a maximum at V $``$ 22, then decrease steadily to fainter luminosities maintaining a similar shape, but a tangible different slope. In particular the LFR2 (19.5 $``$ V $``$ 22), is steeper (x = 0.16 $`\pm `$ 0.01) than the LFR1 (x = 0.076 $`\pm `$ 0.003), suggesting that the relative ratio luminous stars/faint stars is greater within S1 than S2 and then confirming the mass-segregation effect in this cluster. 111This work has been supported by the MURST/Cofin2000 under the project: Stellar observables of cosmological relevance.