In this note we give a short proof of Arnold's conjecture for the zero section of a cotangent bundle of a closed manifold. The proof is based on some basic properties of Lagrangian spectral invariants from Floer theory.
Citation: Wenmin Gong. A short proof of cuplength estimates on Lagrangian intersections[J]. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2023, 15(2): 50-57. doi: 10.3934/cam.2023003
[1] | Efstratios Stratoglou, Alexandre Anahory Simoes, Leonardo J. Colombo . Reduction in optimal control with broken symmetry for collision and obstacle avoidance of multi-agent system on Lie groups. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2023, 15(2): 1-23. doi: 10.3934/cam.2023001 |
[2] | Henryk Żołądek . Normal forms, invariant manifolds and Lyapunov theorems. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2023, 15(2): 300-341. doi: 10.3934/cam.2023016 |
[3] | Heng Yang, Jiang Zhou . Some estimates of multilinear operators on tent spaces. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2024, 16(4): 700-716. doi: 10.3934/cam.2024031 |
[4] | Xiaotian Hao, Lingzhong Zeng . Eigenvalues of the bi-Xin-Laplacian on complete Riemannian manifolds. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2023, 15(2): 162-176. doi: 10.3934/cam.2023009 |
[5] | Ho-Sik Lee, Youchan Kim . Boundary Riesz potential estimates for parabolic equations with measurable nonlinearities. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2025, 17(1): 61-99. doi: 10.3934/cam.2025004 |
[6] | Ming Liu, Binhua Feng . Grand weighted variable Herz-Morrey spaces estimate for some operators. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2025, 17(1): 290-316. doi: 10.3934/cam.2025012 |
[7] | Senhao Duan, Yue MA, Weidong Zhang . Conformal-type energy estimates on hyperboloids and the wave-Klein-Gordon model of self-gravitating massive fields. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2023, 15(2): 111-131. doi: 10.3934/cam.2023007 |
[8] | Zhiyong Wang, Kai Zhao, Pengtao Li, Yu Liu . Boundedness of square functions related with fractional Schrödinger semigroups on stratified Lie groups. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2023, 15(3): 410-435. doi: 10.3934/cam.2023020 |
[9] | Yuxuan Chen . Global dynamical behavior of solutions for finite degenerate fourth-order parabolic equations with mean curvature nonlinearity. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2023, 15(4): 658-694. doi: 10.3934/cam.2023033 |
[10] | Jiangbo Han, Runzhang Xu, Chao Yang . Continuous dependence on initial data and high energy blowup time estimate for porous elastic system. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2023, 15(2): 214-244. doi: 10.3934/cam.2023012 |
In this note we give a short proof of Arnold's conjecture for the zero section of a cotangent bundle of a closed manifold. The proof is based on some basic properties of Lagrangian spectral invariants from Floer theory.
Let M be a n-dimensional closed manifold. We denote by ω the canonical symplectic structure on the cotangent bundle T∗M, which is given by ω=−dθ with the Liouville one-form θ=pdq. Given H∈C∞([0,1]×T∗M), the Hamiltonian vector field XH is determined by dH=−ω(XH,⋅). The flow of XH is denoted by φtH and its time-one map by φH:=φ1H. Denote by Hamc(M,ω) the set of all Hamiltonian diffeomorphisms with compact support. Clearly, for any asymptotically constant Hamiltonian H we have φH∈Hamc(M,ω). Fix a ground field F, e.g., Z2, R, or Q. The singular homology of a topological space X with coefficients in F is denoted by H∗(X). The F-cuplength cl(M) of M is by definition the maximal integer k such that there exist homology classes u1,…,uk−1 in the homology H∗(M) as a ring (with the intersection product) with deg(ui)<dim(M) such that
u1∩⋯∩uk−1≠0, |
where ∩ denotes the intersection product.
The goal of this note is to use spectral invariants from Floer theory to reprove the cuplength estimate:
Theorem 1. Let OM denote the zero section of T∗M. Then we have
♯(φ(OM)∩OM)≥cl(M),∀φ∈Hamc(M,ω). |
The above estimate is a special case of the Arnold conjectures [1]. This case has already been solved by different approaches, for instance, by Chaperon [2] for the cotangent bundle of torus using variational methods given by Conley and Zehnder [4], and for general cotangent bundles by Hofer [10] applying Lyusternik-Shnirelman category theory, and Laudenbach and Sikorav [13] employing a finite dimensional method of "broken extremals", etc. All available proofs listed above were given by finite dimensional homological methods essentially. The method of our proof of Theorem 1 is making good use of the properties of Lagrangian spectral invariants [16,17] from Floer theory which, roughly speaking, is a version of infinite dimensional Morse theory.
Remark 1. By a modification of the method used here, one can prove a slightly general case of Arnold's conjecures: If L is a closed Lagrangian submanifold of a smooth tame symplectic manifold (P,ω) satisfying π2(M,L)=0, then for any φ∈Hamc(P,ω), L∩φ(L) has at least cl(L) points. This case was independently proved by Floer [7] and Hofer [11]. It seems to the author that the spectral method from Floer theory fits in the degenerate Arnold conjecture very well. For the case that L is a closed monotone Lagrangian submanifold of of a smooth tame symplectic manifold P, we refer to [9] for partial results about the Arnold conjecture on Lagrangian intersections in degenerate (non-transversal) sense. Maybe other methods (eg Hofer's) could also be modified to deal with this case, but we are not aware of any reference about it at the time of writing. As far as the author knows the degenerate Arnold's conjecture in the monotone case is not understood quite well, and even for a weaker problem, ie estimating the number of intersections of a closed Lagrangian submanifold with itself under Hamiltonian flows without the nondegenerate assumption. We believe that the spectral method from Floer theory would provide further potential value for attacking these kinds of problems.
Let X be a closed n-dimensional manifold X and let f∈C∞(X). For any μ∈R we put
Xμ:={x∈X|f(x)<μ}. |
To a non-zero singular homology class α∈H∗(X), we associate a numerical invariant by
cLS(α,f)=inf{μ∈R|α∈Im(iμ∗)}, |
where iμ∗:H∗(Xμ)→H∗(X) is the map induced by the natural inclusion iμ:Xμ→X. This number is a critical value of f. The function cLS:H∗(X)∖{0}×C∞(X) is often called a minmax critical value selector. The following proposition summarizing the properties of the resulting function, which can be easily extracted from the classical Ljusternik–Schnirelman theory, see, e.g., [3,5,8,12,19].
Proposition 2. The minmax critical value selector cLS satisfies the following properties.
(1) cLS(α,f) is a critical value of f, and cLS(kα,f)=cLS(α,f) for any nonzero k∈F.
(2) cLS(α,f) is Lipschitz in f with respect to the C0-topology.
(3) Let [pt] and [X] denote the class of a point and the fundamental class respectively. Then
cLS([pt],f)=minf≤cLS(α,f)≤maxf=cLS([X],f). |
(4) cLS(α∩β,f)≤cLS(α,f) for any β∈H∗(X) with α∩β≠0.
(5) If β≠k[X] for some k∈F and cLS(α∩β,f)=cLS(α,f), then the set Σ={x∈Crit(f)|f(x)=cLS(α,f)} is homologically non-trivial.
Here a subset S of a topological space X is called homologically non-trivial in X if for every open neighborhood U of S the map i∗:Hk(U)→Hk(X) induced by the inclusion i:U↪X is non-trivial.
In this subsection we briefly recall the construction of Lagrangian spectral invariants for Hamiltonian diffeomorphism mainly following Oh [16,17], see also [15,18]. Denote Hac the set of Hamiltonians H∈C∞([0,1]×T∗M) which are asymptotically constant at infinity.
For H∈Hac, the action functional is defined as
AH(γ)=∫10H(t,γ(t))dt−∫γ∗θ |
on the space of paths in T∗M
P={γ:[0,1]→T∗M|γ(0),γ(1)∈OM}. |
Set L=φ1H(OM). We define the Lagrangian action spectrum of H on T∗M by
Spec(L,H)={AH(γ)|γ∈Crit(AH)}. |
This is a compact subset of R of measure zero, see for instance [16].
Given a generic H∈Hac, the intersection φ1H(OM)∩OM is transverse and hence Crit(AH) is finite. There is an integer-valued index, called the Maslov-Viterbo index, μMV:Crit(AH)→Z which is normalized so that if H:T∗M→R is a lift of a Morse function f then μMV coincides with the Morse index of f.
Denote by CF<ak(L,H), where a∈(−∞,∞] is not in Spec(L,H), the vector space of formal sums
∑xi∈Pσixi, |
where σi∈F, μMV(xi)=k and AH(xi)<a. The graded F-vector space CF<ak(L,H) has the Floer differential counting the anti-gradient trajectories of the action functional in the standard way whenever a time-dependent almost complex structure compatible with ω is fixed and the regularity requirements are satisfied, see for instance [6,16]. As a consequence, we have a filtration of the total Lagrangian Floer complex CF∗(L,H):=CF(−∞,∞)∗(L,H). Since the resulting homology, the filtered Lagrangian Floer homology of H, does not depend on H∈Hac (due to continuation isomorphisms), one can extend this construction to all asymptotically constant Hamiltonians. Let H∈Hac be an arbitrary Hamiltonian and let a be outside of Spec(L,H). We define
HF<a∗(L,H)=HF<a∗(L,˜H), |
where ˜H is a C2-small perturbation of H so that φ1˜H(OM)∩OM is transverse. It is not hard to see that HF<a∗(L,˜H) is independent of ˜H provided that ˜H is sufficiently close to H.
We denote by ia∗:HF<a∗(L,H)→HF∗(L,H) the induced inclusion maps. It is well known that for Hf=π∗f where π:T∗M→M is the projection map and f is a Morse function on M, HF∗(L,Hf) is canonically isomorphic to the singular homology H∗(M), and hence H∗(M)≅HF(L,H) for all H∈Hac. Using this identification, for α∈H∗(M) and H∈Hac we define
ℓ(α,H)=inf{a∈R∖Spec(L,H)|α∈Im(ia∗)}. |
By convention, we have ℓ(0,H)=−∞.
Proposition 3. The Lagrangian spectral invariant ℓ:H∗(M)∖{0}×Hac→R has the following properties:
(a) ℓ(α,H)∈Spec(L,H), in particular it is a finite number.
(b) ℓ is Lipschitz in H in the C0-topology.
(c) ℓ([M],H)=−ℓ([pt],¯H) with ¯H(t,H)=−H(−t,H).
(d) ℓ([pt],H)≤ℓ(α,H)≤ℓ([M],H) for all α∈H∗(M)∖{0}.
(e) ℓ(α,H)=ℓ(α,K), when φH=φK in the universal covering of the group of Hamiltonian diffeomorphisms, and H,K are normalized.
(f) ℓ(α∩β,H♯K)≤ℓ(α,H)+ℓ(β,K), where (H♯K)(t,x)=H(t,x)+K(t,(φtH)−1(x)).
(g) If φH(OM)=φK(OM), then there exists C∈R such that ℓ(α,H)=ℓ(α,K)+C for all α∈H∗(M)∖{0}.
(h) Let f:M→R be a smooth function, and let Hf:T∗M→R denote a compactly supported autonomous Hamiltonian so that Hf=f∘π on a ball bundle T∗RM:={(q,p)∈T∗M||p|≤R} containing Lf:={(q,∂qf(q))∈T∗M|q∈M}, and Hf=0 outside T∗R+1M in M, where |⋅| is the norm induced by a metric ρ on M, and π:T∗M→M is the natural projection map. Then ℓ(α,Hf)=cLS(α,f) for all α∈H∗(M)∖{0}.
Our main theorem follows immediately from the following lemma.
Lemma 4. Let H∈Hac and α,β∈H∗(M)∖{0} with deg(α)<n. If the intersections of OM and φH(OM) are isolated, then
ℓ(α∩β,H)<ℓ(β,H). |
Proof. Since the intersections of OM and φH(OM) are isolated, we can pick a small open neighborhood U of OM∩φH(OM) in M so that Hk(¯U)=0 for all k>0. Let f:M→R be a C2-small function such that f=0 on ¯U and f<0 on M∖¯U, and let Hf be the lift of f to the cotangent bundle T∗M as in Proposition 3(h). We claim that for any α∈H<n(M), it holds that
ℓ(α,Hf)<0. | (3.1) |
For this end, we first prove that cLS(α,f)<0 for all α∈H<n(M). In fact, if there exists a homology class αl∈H<n(M) such that cLS(αl,f)=0, then we have cLS(αl∩[M],f)=cLS(αl,f)=0. It follows from Proposition 2(3) that cLS([M],f)=maxMf=0. So we have cLS(αl∩[M],f)=cLS([M],f) with αl∈H<n(M)∖{0}. Then by Proposition 2(5) the zero level set ¯U of f is homologically non-trivial – a contradiction. Therefore, for any α∈H<n(M), we have cLS(α,f)<0. This, together with Proposition 3(h), yields ℓ(α,Hf)<0.
Next we show that for sufficiently small ε>0
ℓ(α∩β,H)=ℓ(α∩β,εHf♯H). | (3.2) |
Observe that φtHf(q,p)=(q,p+t∂qf(a))∈T∗M for t∈[0,1] and (q,p)∈T∗RM. Set LHR=φ1H(OM)∩T∗RM. Then we have
φεHf(LHR)={(q,p+εdf(q))|(q,p)∈LHR}. |
Since LHR∩π−1(OM∖U) is compact and has no intersections with OM, we deduce that for small enough ε>0, φεHf(LHR)∩π−1(OM∖U) has no intersections with OM as well. For (q,p)∈T∗M with R≤‖(q,p)‖≤R+1 we have
dg(φεHf(q,p),(q,p))≤‖∫10ddtφtεHf(q,p)dt‖≤εsupR≤‖(q,p)‖≤R+1‖XHf‖, |
where dg is the distance function induced by some Riemannian metric g on M. Therefore, for sufficiently small ε>0, φεHf(T∗R+1M∖T∗RM) does not intersect OM. Note that the Hamiltonian diffeomorphism φεHf is supported in T∗R+1M, we conclude that φεHfφH(OM)∩π−1(OM∖U) does not intersect OM provided that ε>0 is sufficiently small. On the other hand, we have that φεHfφH(OM)∩π−1(U)=φH(OM)∩π−1(U) because f=0 on U. So if ε>0 is sufficiently small then the Lagrangians φεHfφH(OM) and φH(OM) have the same intersections with OM. A direct calculation shows that for every such intersection point, the two action values corresponding to εHf♯H and H are the same. Indeed, there is a one-to-one correspondence between the set φH(OM)∩OM and the set P(H):={x∈P|˙x=XH(x(t))} of Hamiltonian chords by sending q∈φH(OM)∩OM to x=φtH(φ−1H(q)). So we get a bijective map defined by
Υ:Crit(AH)⟶Crit(AεHf♯H),x(t)⟼φtεHf(x(t)). |
Notice that the Hamiltonian flow has the following property
(φεHf)∗θ−θ=dFt, |
where the function F:[0,1]×T∗M→R is given by Ft=∫t0(θ(XεHf)−εHf)∘φsεHfds, see for instance [14,Proposition 9.3.1]. As a consequence, for any x∈P(H) we have
ddtFt(x(t))=dFt(˙x(t))+(θ(XεHf)−εHf)∘φtεHf(x(t)). |
which implies
(φεHf)∗θ(˙x(t))=θ(˙x(t))+ddtFt(x(t))−(θ(XεHf)−εHf)∘φtεHf(x(t)). |
Then we compute
AεHf♯H(Υ(x(t)))=∫10εHf(φtεHf(x(t)))dt+∫10Ht∘(φtεHf)−1(φtεHf(x(t)))dt−∫10θ(ddtφεHf(x(t)))dt=∫10εHf(φtεHf(x(t)))dt+∫10Ht(x(t))dt−∫10(φεHf)∗θ(˙x(t))dt−∫10θ(XεHf(φεHf(x(t))))dt=AH(x(t))+∫10εHf(φtεHf(x(t)))−ddtFt(x(t))dt+∫10(θ(XεHf)−εHf)∘φtεHf(x(t))dt−θ(XεHf(φεHf(x(t))))dt=AH(x(t))+F1(x(1))−F0(x(0))=AH(x(t)), | (3.3) |
where in the last equality we have used the fact that the value of an autonomous Hamiltonian Hf is constant along its Hamiltonian flow, and f=0 on U which contains x(1). Therefore, the action spectra Spec(L,εHf♯H) and Spec(L,H) are the same. Now fix a sufficiently small ε>0 and consider the family of Lagrangians φsεHfφH(OL) with s∈[0,1]. As before, the action spectra Spec(L,sεHf♯H), s∈[0,1] are all the same. Since the action spectrum is a closed nowhere dense subset of R, it follows from Proposition 3(b) that ℓ(α∩β,sεHf♯H) do not depend on s. So we have ℓ(α∩β,H)=ℓ(α∩β,εHf♯H).
Combining (3.1) and (3.2), it follows from Proposition 3(f) that
ℓ(α∩β,H)=ℓ(α∩β,εHf♯H)≤ℓ(α,εHf)+ℓ(β,H)<ℓ(β,H). |
This completes the proof of the lemma.
The proof of Theorem 1. Without loss of generality we may assume that the intersections of OM and φH(OM) are isolated, otherwise, nothing needs to prove. Set cl(M)=k+1. By definition there exist ui∈H<n(M), i=1…,k such that u1∩⋯∩uk=[pt]. We put
[M]=α0,α1,…,αk∈H∗(M),αi=uk−i+1∩αi−1. |
For any φ∈Hamc(M,ω), there exists a Hamiltonian H∈Hac such that φ=φ1H. It follows from Lemma 4 and Proposition 3(a) that there exist k+1 elements xi∈Crit(AH) such that
ℓ(αk,H)=AH(xk)<ℓ(αk−1,H)=AH(xk−1)<⋯<ℓ(α0,H)=AH(x0). |
Hence, all xi, i=0,…,k are different. The one-to-one correspondence between the intersection points of OM and φ1H(OM) and the critical points of AH concludes the desired result.
The author is supported by by the National Nature Science Foundation of China 11701313.
The authors declare there is no conflict of interest.
[1] | V.I. Arnold, Sur une propriété topologique des applications canoniques de la mécanique classique, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, 261 (1965), 3719–3722. |
[2] | M. Chaperon, Quelques questions de géométrie symplectique, Séminaire Bourbaki, Astérisque, 1982/83 (1983), 231–249. |
[3] | K.C. Chang, Infinite Dimensional Morse Theory and Multiple Solution Problem, Progress in Nonlinear Differential Equations and their Applications, volume 6, Birkhäuser, Boston, MA, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-0385-8 |
[4] |
C.C. Conley, E. Zehnder, The Birkhoff-Lewis fixed point theorem and a conjecture of V. I. Arnold, Invent. Math., 73 (1983), 33–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01393824 doi: 10.1007/BF01393824
![]() |
[5] | O. Cornea, G. Lupton, J. Oprea, D. Tanré, Lusternik-Schnirelmann category, volume 103 of Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-0385-8 |
[6] |
A. Floer, Morse theory for Lagrangian intersections, J. Differential Geom., 28 (1988), 513–547. https://doi.org/10.4310/jdg/1214442477 doi: 10.4310/jdg/1214442477
![]() |
[7] |
A. Floer, Cuplength estimates on Lagrangian intersections, Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 42 (1989), 335–356. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpa.3160420402 doi: 10.1002/cpa.3160420402
![]() |
[8] |
V. L. Ginzburg, B.Z. Gürel, Action and index spectra and periodic orbits in Hamiltonian dynamics, Geom. Topol., 13 (2009), 2745–2805. https://doi.org/10.2140/gt.2009.13.2745 doi: 10.2140/gt.2009.13.2745
![]() |
[9] | W. Gong, Lagrangian Ljusternik–Schnirelman theory and Lagrangian intersections, preprint, arXiv: 2111.15442. |
[10] |
H. Hofer, Lagrangian Embeddings and Critical Point Theory, Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré Anal. Non Linéaire, 2 (1985), 407–462. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0294-1449(16)30394-8 doi: 10.1016/S0294-1449(16)30394-8
![]() |
[11] |
H. Hofer, Lusternik-Schnirelman-theory for Lagrangian intersections, Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré Anal. Non Linéaire, 5 (1988), 465–499. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0294-1449(16)30339-0 doi: 10.1016/S0294-1449(16)30339-0
![]() |
[12] | H. Hofer, E. Zehnder, Symplectic invariants and Hamiltonian dynamics, Birkhäuser Advanced Texts: Basler Lehrbücher. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 1994. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-0348-8540-9 |
[13] |
F. Laudenbach, J.C. Sikorav, Persistance d'intersection avec la section nulle au cours d'une isotopie hamiltonienne dans un fibré cotangent, Invent. Math., 82 (1985), 349–357. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01388807 doi: 10.1007/BF01388807
![]() |
[14] | D. McDuff, D. Salamon, Introduction to symplectic topology, 3nd edition, Oxford Mathematical Monographs, The Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, New York, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198794899.001.0001 |
[15] |
A. Monzner, N. Vichery, F. Zapolsky, Partial quasi-morphisms and quasi-states on cotangent bundles, and symplectic homogenization, J. Mod. Dyn., 6 (2012), 205–249. https://doi.org/10.3934/jmd.2012.6.205 doi: 10.3934/jmd.2012.6.205
![]() |
[16] |
Y.G. Oh, Symplectic topology as the geometry of action functional, I. Relative Floer theory on the cotangent bundle, J. Differential Geom., 46 (1997), 499–577. https://doi.org/10.4310/jdg/1214459976 doi: 10.4310/jdg/1214459976
![]() |
[17] | Y.G. Oh, Symplectic topology as the geometry of action functional. II. Pants product and cohomological invariants. Comm. Anal. Geom., 7 (1999), 1–55. https://dx.doi.org/10.4310/CAG.1999.v7.n1.a1 |
[18] | Y.G. Oh, Geometry of generating functions and Lagrangian spectral invariants, preprint, arXiv: 1206.4788. |
[19] |
C. Viterbo, Some remarks on Massey products, tied cohomology classes, and the Lusternik-Shnirelman category, Duke Math. J., 86 (1997), 547–564. https://doi.org/10.1215/S0012-7094-97-08617-8 doi: 10.1215/S0012-7094-97-08617-8
![]() |