Abstract
The space admits a natural homogeneous pseudo-Riemannian nearly Kähler structure. We investigate almost complex surfaces in this space. In particular, we obtain a complete classification of the totally geodesic almost complex surfaces and of the almost complex surfaces with parallel second fundamental form.
MSC:
53C42
1. Introduction
Almost complex structures were introduced by C. Ehresmann in 1947 [1] in order to study the problem of finding differentiable manifolds that admit a complex analytic structure related to the differentiable structure on the manifold. Approaching the same problem but by using different methods, H. Hopf has shown that the spheres and do not have any complex structure [2]. Moreover, A. Borel and J.P. Serre [3,4] have shown that and are the only spheres admitting almost complex structures. Up to today, it is still an open problem to determine whether, on , there exists an integrable almost complex structure.
A manifold endowed with an almost complex structure is said to be an almost complex manifold. If the structure is compatible with the metric, the manifold is called an almost Hermitian manifold. We can consider different types of submanifolds of an almost Hermitian manifold (C. Ehresmann [5]). Two natural classes for instance are almost complex and totally real submanifolds, which are defined, as follows. A submanifold M of an almost complex manifold is called almost complex (resp. totally real) if each tangent space of M is mapped into itself (resp. into the normal space) by the almost complex structure of An almost complex submanifold is endowed with an almost complex structure that is induced by that of the ambient manifold. C. Ehresmann showed (non-published results) that there exist always, for any dimension of the manifold, real submanifolds. A similar statement is not true for almost complex submanifolds if the dimension of the manifold is not 2. For example, does not admit almost complex submanifolds of dimension 4 and there does not exist almost complex functions on S.S. Chern [6] also studied the problem of existence of complex analytic functions on a complex manifold.
We are interested in nearly Kähler manifolds, which are (pseudo-)Riemannian manifolds that are endowed with an almost complex structure compatible with a metric on the manifold satisfying one additional condition (Definition 1). These manifolds have been intensively studied by Gray [7]. In a recent work of J.-B. Butruille [8], it has been shown that the only homogeneous six-dimensional Riemannian nearly Kähler manifolds are the nearly Kähler six-sphere, the projective space , and the flag manifold
In this paper, we study the analogue of the nearly Kähler space in the pseudo-Riemannian case, which is . In particular, we study almost complex surfaces in the six-dimensional space , where a nearly Kähler structure exists naturally. We give this structure explicitly. Just as for its analogue , it is of course homogeneous, see [9]. However, in contrast to the Riemannian case, a complete classification of such spaces in the pseudo-Riemannian case does not yet exist. All that is known is that besides the analogues to the Riemannian spaces some exceptional examples do exist. In this paper, we investigate in details totally geodesic and parallel almost complex surfaces in .
2. Preliminaries
In this section, we will recall some basic definitions, properties, and formulas that will be used in what follows.
An almost Hermitian manifold is a (pseudo-)Riemannian manifold , which admits an endomorphism J of the tangent bundle, such that
- , i.e., J is an almost complex structure and
- J is compatible with the metric g, i.e., for all vector fields X and
We remark that the first condition requires the real dimension of M to be even.
Definition 1.
An almost Hermitian manifold is called a nearly Kähler manifold if the almost complex structure J verifies
where is the Levi–Civita connection that is associated with This is equivalent to saying that the tensor G defined by is skew-symmetric.
For all vector fields the tensor G satisfies the following properties:
Remark that, from the last two equations of (1), we can notice that the lowest dimension, in which non-Kähler (i.e., G does not vanish identically) nearly Kähler manifold can exist is 6.
There are two very natural types of submanifolds of nearly Kähler manifolds to be studied: almost complex submanifolds, for which the tangent spaces are invariant by the almost complex structure J (i.e., ) and totally real submanifolds for which J interchanges tangent and normal vectors (i.e., ).
Moreover, it will be convenient to mention some formulas that will be used through the calculation of the paper. First, the formula of Gauss that gives the decomposition of for tangent vectors on a submanifold M, where ∇ is the induced connection on The Gauss formula is given by
where is the Levi–Civita connection on the ambient space and h is the second fundamental form. Next, the formula of Weingarten that gives the decomposition along a tangent and a normal vector , is given by
where A is the shape operator that is given by the relation and is the normal connection on
We recall from [10] some useful relations that hold for an almost complex submanifold M and that follow from the Gauss and Weingarten formulas:
where are tangent vectors and is a normal vector of
Finally, let us finish this section by the Gauss and Codazzi equations that are respectively given by:
where denotes the curvature tensor of the ambient space. Another useful property is the Ricci identity, which states that
3. The Nearly Kähler Structure on SL(2,) × SL(2,)
To begin with, consider the nondegenerate indefinite inner product in given by
where ,
By identifying the real matrices space, , with the four-dimensional vector space , the above inner product can be viewed on as
Therefore, the space of -real matrices with a determinant 1, denoted by , is given by
The restriction of to the tangent spaces at the points of will also be denoted by . We then consider , equipped with the pseudo-Riemannian metric .
Now, let us proceed by defining the tangent space of For that aim, let . By the natural identification
we may write a tangent vector at as or simply
Let . The tangent vector fields and given by
form an orthogonal (semi-orthonormal) basis of such that
Hence, the tangent space of can be defined as
Consequently, the vector fields
are mutually orthogonal with respect to the usual product metric on , as given by:
for tangential to We note that the usual product metric will also be denoted by Hence, the Lie brackets are
where , denotes the causal character of and and is the Levi–Civita symbol.
Now, we define the almost complex structure J on by
or more generally by
for 2-dimensional matrices of trace 0 and therefore,
The metric on that corresponds to the almost complex structure J is the metric g given as follows:
More generally, on arbitrary tangent vectors in , the metric g is given in terms of the usual product metric on by
for any of trace 0.
We can check that the almost complex structure J is compatible with the metric
Let us now consider the following lemma that will be used through the paper.
Lemma 1.
The Levi–Civita connection on with respect to the metric g is given by
Subsequently, the covariant derivative can be computed, as follows
Let us set . Afterwards, G is skew symmetric and it satisfies the following equations
for any vector fields Therefore, endowed with g and J, becomes a nearly Kähler manifold.
In order to express the curvature tensor of the nearly Kähler , it is convenient to introduce an almost product structure P on which is defined as
We can easily verify that P satisfies the following properties:
It then turns out that the Riemann curvature tensor on is given by
and the tensors and G satisfy
From (7) and by using the fact that , we deduce the following equation
Moreover, we can express the tensor G explicitly for any tangent vectors fields. For that aim, let us present the following proposition.
Proposition 1.
Let Subsequently,
where × is a product that is similar to the vector product, which we define on the space of real matrices of dimension 2 and trace 0 by
Proof.
Let be the coefficients of in the basis , similarly for Then, we write
where and . Similarly,
By using Lemma 1, we can compute
As , we obtain
Subsequently, by linearity we complete the proof of the proposition. ☐
Moreover, the almost product structure P can be expressed in terms of the usual product structure Q, given by and vice versa:
The metric g is expressed in terms of the metric by:
Afterwards,
so that the metric can be written in terms of the metric g:
Let us end this section with the following.
Lemma 2.
The relation between the Levi-Civita connection of the metric g and that of the usual product metric , denoted , is
4. Totally Geodesic Almost Complex Surfaces in SL(2,) × SL(2,)
In this section, we start by studying almost complex surfaces in , which are totally geodesic. The reasoning in some cases is similar to that applied in [10] in the case of the nearly Kähler We note that the identities in Lemma 3.1. of [10] remain true in our case and we will always assume that the almost complex surface is a regular surface, i.e., the induced metric is non degenerate. As J is compatible with the metric, this either implies that the induced metric is positive definite or negative definite.
Proposition 2.
If M is a totally geodesic almost complex surface in SL(2,)×SL(2,), then either
- (1)
- P maps the tangent space into the normal space and the Gaussian curvature K is and
- (2)
- P preserves the tangent space (and therefore also the normal space) and the Gaussian curvature is 0.
Proof.
Let be a point of M and v a tangent vector to M at such that .
Case 1: If . Using Codazzi’s equation, we have , then is a multiple of . By the Gauss equation, and using the fact that , we have
Because the metric g is positive definite on v, we can choose v such that is maximal for all unit vectors in , so that (since P is symmetric). Subsequently, the Gauss equation becomes
Now, we will distinguish between two subcases.
If , then In this case and are normal vectors because and , . We can verify in this case that the vectors and are of length 1 and , are of length
If , we have , which implies that , a non-zero multiple of , then Therefore, and . We assume that , then and
Case 2: If . Using Codazzi’s equation we have is a multiple of and by Gauss equation, we deduce
We can suppose , then the Gauss equation simplifies to
In this case, the assumption is not possible, since the vectors and are normal and so we have two tangent vectors (v and ) and two normal vectors and of negative length. Hence, , as before, , and consequently, . We assume that , which implies and . ☐
Let us now investigate in more detail the two subcases introduced in the previous proposition. We start with a flat surface for which P preserves both the tangent and normal space.
Explicit Examples
In this section, we explicitly find the submanifolds M, such that with Gauss curvature :
Let be a point of M and v a tangent vector to M, such that The vectors v and form an orthonormal basis of Additionally, we have
and
Similar to Lemma 3.1. in [10], we know in this case that for any tangent vectors , which leads to . On the other hand, is a multiple of which gives . Subsequently, for any tangent vector
similarly for
Consequently, and therefore we can find coordinates s and t on the surface, such that
where F denotes the immersion, i.e.,
Similar to [10], we may assume that and therefore there are -real matrices with vanishing trace, such that
The matrices are such that
This comes from , which implies the following equations
Now, we will distinguish between two subcases:
Additionally, the usual connection ∇ vanishes on the vectors and then we deduce
which is equivalent to say that the second derivatives of the components A and B satisfy the following equations
On the other hand, the integrablity condition implies that is a constant matrix. Hence, by deriving (14), we get
By identifying (15) and (16), we obtain
where I is the identity matrix. The above equation is equivalent to
where are the coefficients of in the basis
By using now that on the nearly Kähler , the map
is an isometry. We can assume that
Now we are able to solve equations (14).
Proposition 3.
A flat totally geodesic almost complex surface M of with positive definite induced metric is isometric to the immersion where
and
Proof.
The system is now equivalent to
which has the solution
where k is a constant. By applying some isometries, we can suppose that Subsequently, we have the solution given in the proposition. In a similar way, we obtain the solution ☐
- We now study the case, where g is negative definite
We proceed similarly as before to obtain that the second derivatives of the components A and B satisfy in this case
and is a constant matrix that satisfies
hence,
Now the equations (14) can be solved by posing, as before, and , we will obtain the solution that is given by the following.
Proposition 4
A flat totally geodesic almost complex surface M of with negative definite induced metric is isometric to the immersion where
and
5. Parallel Almost Complex Surfaces in SL(2,) × SL(2,)
Now, we start the study of almost complex surfaces with parallel second fundamental form. As mentioned before, the properties of Lemma 3.1 of [10] remain valid for almost complex surfaces in SL(2,)×SL(2,.
Theorem 1.
If M is an almost complex surface in SL(2,)×SL(2,) with parallel second fundamental form, then either
- (1)
- P maps the tangent space into the normal space and, in this case, either M is totally geodesic with constant Gaussian curvature or M has constant Gaussian curvature
- (2)
- P preserves the tangent space, in this case the Gaussian curvature is 0 and M is totally geodesic and, therefore, M is congruent to one of the two previous mentioned examples.
Proof.
Let be a point of M and v a tangent vector to M at such that
- -
- Case 1. We supposeFrom Codazzi’s equation, we can see that is a multiple of As we mentioned before, (in Theorem 2) we can supposeSubsequently, from Gauss equation, we havewithWe study the two subcases andIf then it follows from the Codazzi equation that is a tangent vector. Hence, P preserves the tangent space. Therefore we can take v, such that hence It follows then from the Gauss equation that and the Gauss curvature Accordingly, On the other hand, as P preserves the tangent space, we have that . Moreover, as P is symmetric, and P anticommutes with J, we can locally find a frame , such that and . It now follows immediately from that . Hence, we deduce that the surface is flat. As , it follows that . This implies that the surface is totally geodesic.If then P maps tangent vectors into normal vectors and from the Gauss equationBecause Ricci equation impliesOn the other hand, Ricci identity givesBy identification, we have the equationwhich has the solutions
- -
- Case 2. We suppose In a similar way as we did in case 1, we haveIf similarly as before we get that P preserves the tangent space. Moreover, andAs and the eigenvalues of P are constant, namely , it again follows immediately that the surface is flat and, therefore, totally geodesic.If it follows that is a normal with negative length. As the tangent space is negative definite in view of the index of the metric, we have that the normal space has to be positive definite. Hence, we obtain a contradiction. ☐
Now, in order to be able to exclude the case with constant constant Gaussian curvature in the previous theorem and obtain an explicit expression of the (totally geodesic) almost complex surface with constant Gaussian curvature we will study more generally almost complex submanifolds with arbitrary Gauss curvature in more detail. We will, in particular, focus on those for which P maps the tangent space into the normal space.
Let M be an almost complex surface of defined by the almost complex immersion , where are the isothermal coordinates on Similarly as in [10], we may assume and there exist -real matrices with vanishing trace , such that
Subsequently, the matrices are such that
Furthermore, by using the integrability conditions and , we have the two equations
where we define the product × by
Note that, in the special case , we have that and are orthogonal with respect to the induced Euclidean product metric and of the same length (this is also true for and ).
Hence, from the relation between the nearly Kähler metric and the usual Euclidean product metric (see (4)), we have
Because are the isothermal coordinates, we may assume for a smooth positive function on M. Subsequently, the induced metric on the surface M is given by
It follows that the Levi–Civita connection on the surface M is given by
So far, the above equations remained valid for any almost complex surface for which P maps to tangent space to the normal space. From now on we will assume that the surface is moreover totally geodesic. Subsequently, we have the following.
Proposition 5.
A totally geodesic almost complex surface M of for which P maps tangent vectors into normal vectors is isometric to the immersion , where
and
where is a point of the hyperbolic quadric
Proof.
Using
which relates the pseudo Euclidean connection with the Levi–Civita connection of the nearly kähler metric and by supposing that M is totally geodesic and then by using Proposition 1 we have
and
Hence, by identification, we deduce that and are determined by the following system of partial differential equations
which in terms of and become
Afterwards, locally there exists a matrix , such that , . The surface is determined by
A unit normal vector field on the surface M determined by the matrix is given by .
On the other hand, , by identification with the second equation of (24), we deduce that , in a similar way Hence, the surface determined by is totally umbilical with shape operator Moreover, as , we deduce that is a hyperbolic space of cartesian equation
From this, we can now reverse engineer the original immersion. We can take a local isothermal parametrisation of this hypersurface by
where we look at as the matrix
It then follows immediately that
From this, we now deduce that
Solving now the differential equations for A and B, we find that
Replacing now the coordinates by and rescaling completes the proof of the proposition. ☐
Finally, we will study the case when and We consider the basis
where V is a unit tangent vector. All of these vectors are mutually orthogonal, are of unit length and are of length
By using the relation (8), we have
Let denote the Levi-Civita connection on We will write (the coefficients of and are 0 from page 6 in [10]), where are functions to determine and let .
The Levi–Civita connection is computed in term of and , more precisely
From the Gauss equation, we have that the Gauss curvature is given by
which implies that
Subsequently,
Now, by applying that for , with , we deduce the following equations
If the surface is parallel, gives the following equations
This system has a unique null solution, which is in contradiction with . Thus, no solutions exist. Subsequently, Proposition 1 becomes
Theorem 2.
If M is an almost complex surface in with parallel second fundamental form, then either
- P maps the tangent space into the normal space and, in this case, M is totally geodesic with constant Gaussian curvature . Moreover, M is totally geodesic and congruent to the example that is described in Proposition 5.
- P preserves the tangent space, in this case the Gaussian curvature is 0. Moreover, M is totally geodesic and congruent to either the example described in Proposition 3 or the example described in Proposition 4.
This means that every parallel almost complex surface in is totally geodesic.
Author Contributions
Investigation, E.G.; Supervision, L.V.; Writing—original draft, E.G.; Writing—review & editing, L.V. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
- Ehresmann, C. Sur la Théorie des Espaces fibrés; Colloques internationaux Centre national de la recherche scientifique: Paris, France, 1947; pp. 3–35. [Google Scholar]
- Hopf, H. Sur les Champs d’Éléments de Surface dans les Variétés à 4 Dimension; Colloques internationaux Centre national de la recherche scientifique: Paris, France, 1947; pp. 55–59. [Google Scholar]
- Borel, A.; Serre, J.P. Groupes de Lie et puissances réduites de Steenrod. Am. J. Math. 1953, 75, 409–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Serre, J.P. Groupes de Lie et puissances réduites de Steenrod. Séminaire Bourbaki 1954, 2, 37–46. [Google Scholar]
- Ehresmann, C. Sur les variétés presque complexes. In Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians; American Mathematical Society: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1950; Volume 2, pp. 412–419. [Google Scholar]
- Chern, S.S. Pseudogroupes Infinis Continus; Colloques internationaux Centre national de la recherche scientifique: Strasbourg, France, 1953; pp. 119–136. [Google Scholar]
- Gray, A. Nearly Kähler manifolds. J. Differ. Geom. 1970, 4, 283–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Butruille, J.-B. Homogeneous nearly Kähler manifolds. In Handbook of Pseudo-Riemannian Geometry and Supersymmetry; European Mathematical Society: Zürich, Switzerland, 2010; pp. 399–423. [Google Scholar]
- Schäfer, L. Nearly Pseudo-Kähler Manifolds and Related Special Holonomies; Lecture Notes in Mathematics 2201; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Bolton, J.; Dillen, F.; Dioos, B.; Vrancken, L. Almost complex surfaces in the nearly Kähler S3×S3. Tohoku Math. J. 2015, 67, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).