text:
# On the Filling Invariants at Infinity of Hadamard Manifolds

## 1. Introduction

Asymptotic invariants have been used perviously as basic tools to study large scale geometry of various spaces. Precedents include Gromov in \[Gro93\], and Block and Weinberger in \[BW97\]. In \[Kni97\] Knieper, generalizing the work of Margulis in the case of negative curvature, studied the growth function of the volume of distance spheres in Hadamard manifolds and found an unexpected relation to the rank of the manifold.

In \[Ger94b\] Gersten studied the divergence of geodesics in $`\mathrm{CAT}(0)`$ spaces, and gave an example of a finite $`\mathrm{CAT}(0)`$ $`2`$-complex whose universal cover possesses two geodesic rays which diverge quadratically and such that no pair of geodesics diverges faster than quadratically. Adopting a definition of divergence which is a quasi-isometry invariant, Gersten introduced a new invariant for geodesic metric spaces, which we refer to as $`\mathrm{div}_0`$. In \[Ger94a\] Gersten used the $`\mathrm{div}_0`$ invariant to distinguish the quasi isometry type of graph manifolds among all closed Haken $`3`$-manifolds.

Using the same trick introduced by Gersten in \[Ger94b\] to get a quasi-isometry invariant, Brady and Farb in \[BF98\] introduced a family of new quasi-isometry invariants $`\mathrm{div}_k(X)`$ for $`0kn2`$, for a Hadamard manifold $`X^n`$. These invariants were meant to be a finer measure of the spread of geodesics in $`X`$.

The precise definition will be given below, but roughly the definition of $`\mathrm{div}_k(X)`$ is as follows: Find the minimum volume of a $`(k+1)`$-ball which is needed to fill a $`k`$-sphere which lies on the $`(n1)`$-dimensional distance sphere $`S_r(x_0)`$ in $`X`$. The filling is required to lie outside the $`n`$-dimensional open ball $`B_r^{}(x_0)`$. The $`\mathrm{div}_k(X)`$ invariant measures the asymptotic behavior of the volume of the filling as $`r\mathrm{}`$ when the volume of the $`k`$-sphere grows polynomially in $`r`$.

After computing some of these invariants for certain Hadamard manifolds, Brady and Farb posed the following two questions.
Question 1. Can the $`\mathrm{div}_k(X)`$ invariants be used to detect the rank of a noncompact symmetric space $`X`$?
Question 2. What symmetric spaces can be distinguished by the invariants $`\mathrm{div}_k`$?

In this paper we study the $`\mathrm{div}_k`$ invariants for various Hadamard manifolds including symmetric spaces of noncompact type. The first result we obtain is the following theorem.

###### Theorem 1.1.

If $`X`$ is an $`n`$-dimensional symmetric space of nonpositive curvature and of rank $`l`$, then $`\mathrm{div}_k(X)`$ has a polynomial growth of degree at most $`k+1`$ for every $`kl`$.

Brady and Farb showed in \[BF98\] that $`\mathrm{div}_{k1}(X)`$ is exponential when $`X=H^{m_1}\times \mathrm{}\times H^{m_k}`$ is a product of $`k`$ hyperbolic spaces. The idea was to show that there are quasi-isometric embeddings of $`H^{(m_1+\mathrm{}+m_k)k+1}`$ in $`X`$ and use that to show an exponential growth of the filling of a $`(k1)`$-sphere which lies in a $`k`$-flat, and therefore proving that $`\mathrm{div}_{k1}(X)`$ is indeed exponential. For more details, see section $`4`$ in \[BF98\].

The same idea was taken further by Leuzinger in \[Leu00\] to generalize the above result to any rank $`k`$ symmetric space $`X`$ of nonpositive curvature by showing the existence of an embedded submanifold $`YX`$ of dimension $`nk+1`$ which is quasi-isometric to a Riemannian manifold with strictly negative sectional curvature, and which intersects a maximal flat in a geodesic.

Combining Theorem 1.1 with Leuzinger’s result mentioned above, we obtain the following corollary which gives a positive answer to question 1.

###### Corollary 1.2.

The rank of a nonpositively curved symmetric space $`X`$ can be detected using the $`\mathrm{div}_k(X)`$ invariants.

Brady and Farb in \[BF98\] suspected that $`\mathrm{div}_1`$ has exponential growth for the symmetric space $`SL_n()/SO_n()`$. That was proved by Leuzinger to be true for $`n=3`$, see \[Leu00\]. We show that the same result does not hold anymore for $`n>3`$. More generally we prove,

###### Theorem 1.3.

If $`X`$ is a symmetric space of nonpositive curvature and rank $`k3`$, then $`\mathrm{div}_1(X)`$ has a quadratic polynomial growth.

After studying the case of symmetric spaces, we turn our focus to the class of Hadamard manifolds of pinched negative curvature. We show,

###### Theorem 1.4.

If $`X`$ is a Hadamard manifold with sectional curvature $`b^2Ka^2<0`$, then $`\mathrm{div}_k(X)`$ has a polynomial growth of degree at most $`k`$ for every $`k1`$.

A natural question at this point would be whether the same result holds if we weaken the assumption on the manifold $`X`$ to be a rank $`1`$ instead of being negatively curved. We give a negative answer to that question. We give an example of a nonpositively curved graph manifold of rank $`1`$ where $`\mathrm{div}_1`$ is exponential.

All the previously known results about the filling invariants, see \[BF98, Ger94a, Leu00\], as well as the new results in this paper suggest a connection between these invariants and the connectedness of the Tits boundary of a Hadamard manifold. Theorem 1.3 is one example. The non-simply connected Tits boundary of a symmetric space of rank $`2`$ is reflected in the the exponential growth of $`\mathrm{div}_1`$, while the quadratic polynomial growth of $`\mathrm{div}_1`$ when the rank is bigger than $`2`$ is a direct consequence of the simple connectedness of the Tits boundary.

Except in a very few special cases, very little is known in general about which part of the Tits geometry of a nonpositively curved space is preserved under a quasi isometry. Further investigation of the connection between these invariants and the connectedness of the Tits boundary may shed some light on that question.

The paper will be organized as follows: Section 1 is an introduction. In section 2 we give the precise definition of $`\mathrm{div}_k`$. In section 3 the proof of Theorem 1.1 in the simple case of rank $`1`$ symmetric spaces is given where the basic idea is illustrated. In section 4 we prove Theorem 1.1 for higher rank symmetric spaces. The proof of Theorem 1.3 is give in section 5. In section 6 we prove Theorem 1.4. In section 7 we give the graph manifold example mentioned above. In appendix A we give a different and shorter proof of Leuzinger’s Theorem, which was proved in \[Leu00\].

### Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank his advisor Chris Croke for many helpful discussions during the development of this paper, and also like to thank the University of Bonn, in particular Werner Ballmann for the opportunity to visit in the summer of 2003 when his interest began in the filling invariants.

## 2. Definitions and Background

Let $`X^n`$ be an $`n`$-dimensional Hadamard manifold, by that we mean a complete simply connected Riemannian manifold with nonpositive sectional curvature. By Cartan-Hadamard Theorem $`X^n`$ is diffeomorphic to $`^n`$. In fact the $`\mathrm{exp}_{x_0}`$ map at any point $`x_0X`$ is a diffeomorphism. For a standard source on Hadamard manifolds we refer the reader to \[BGS85\].

We denote the ideal boundary of $`X`$ by $`X(\mathrm{})`$. For any two different points $`p`$, $`qX`$, $`\overline{pq}`$, $`\stackrel{}{pq}`$ denote respectively the geodesic segment connecting $`p`$ to $`q`$, and the geodesic ray staring at $`p`$ and passing through $`q`$. By $`\stackrel{}{pq}(\mathrm{})`$ we denote the limit point in $`X(\mathrm{})`$ of the ray $`\stackrel{}{pq}`$.

Let $`\overline{X}=XX(\mathrm{})`$, if $`x_0X`$ and $`p`$, $`q\overline{X}\{x_0\}`$ then $`\mathrm{}_{x_0}(p,q)`$ is the angle between the unique geodesic rays connecting $`x_0`$ to $`p`$ and $`q`$ respectively. If $`p`$, $`qX(\mathrm{})`$, then $`\mathrm{}(p,q)=sup_{x_0X}\mathrm{}_{x_0}(p,q)`$ denotes the Tits angle between $`p`$ and $`q`$. If $`\mathrm{}_{x_0}(p,q)=\mathrm{}(p,q)<\pi `$ for some $`x_0X`$ then the geodesic rays connecting $`x_0`$ to $`p`$ and $`q`$ respectively bound a flat sector. Conversely if those rays bound a flat sector then $`\mathrm{}_{x_0}(p,q)=\mathrm{}(p,q)`$.

Let $`S_r(x_0)`$, $`B_r(x_0)`$ and $`B_r^{}(x_0)`$ denote respectively the distance sphere, the distance ball and the open distance ball of radius $`r`$ and center $`x_0`$. Let $`S^k`$ and $`B^{k+1}`$ denote respectively the unit sphere and the unit ball in $`^{k+1}`$. Let $`C_r(x_0)=XB_r^{}(x_0)`$. Projection along geodesics of $`C_r(x_0)`$ onto the sphere $`S_r(x_0)`$ is a deformation retract, which decreases distances, since the ball $`B_r(x_0)`$ is convex and the manifold is nonpositively curved. Any continuous map $`f:S^kS_r(x_0)`$ admits a continuous extension, “filling”, $`\widehat{f}:B^{k+1}C_r(x_0)`$, and the extension could be chosen to be Lipschitz if $`f`$ is Lipschitz.

Lipschitz maps are differential almost everywhere. Let $`\left|D_x(f)\right|`$ denote the Jacobian of $`f`$ at $`x`$. The $`k`$-volume of $`f`$ and the $`(k+1)`$-volume of $`\widehat{f}`$ are defined as follows,

(2.1)
$$\mathrm{vol}_k(f)=_{S^k}\left|D_xf\right|,$$

(2.2)
$$\mathrm{vol}_{k+1}(\widehat{f})=_{B^{k+1}}\left|D_x\widehat{f}\right|.$$

Let $`0<A`$ and $`0<\rho 1`$ be given. A Lipschitz map $`f:S^kS_r(x_0)`$ is called $`A`$-admissible if $`\mathrm{vol}_k(f)Ar^k`$ and a Lipschitz filling $`\widehat{f}`$ is called $`\rho `$-admissible if $`\widehat{f}(B^{k+1})C_{\rho r}(x_0)`$. Let

(2.3)
$$\delta _{\rho ,A}^k=\underset{f}{sup}\underset{\widehat{f}}{inf}\mathrm{vol}_{k+1}(\widehat{f}),$$

where the supremum is taken over all $`A`$-admissible maps and the infimum is taken over all $`\rho `$-admissible fillings.

###### Definition 2.1.

The invariant $`\mathrm{div}_k(X)`$ is the two parameter family of functions

$$\mathrm{div}_k(X)=\{\delta _{\rho ,A}^k0<\rho 1\text{ and }0<A\}.$$

Fix an integer $`k0`$, for any two functions $`f`$, $`g:^+^+`$, we write $`f_kg`$ if there exist two positive constants $`a`$, $`b`$ and a polynomial $`p_{k+1}(x)`$ of degree at most $`k+1`$ with a positive leading coefficient such that $`f(x)ag(bx)+p_{k+1}(x)`$. Now we write $`f_kg`$ if $`f_kg`$ and $`g_kf`$. This defines an equivalence relation.

We say that $`\mathrm{div}_k\mathrm{div}_k^{}`$ if there exist $`0<\rho _0`$, $`\rho _0^{}1`$ and $`A_0`$, $`A_0^{}>0`$ such that for every $`\rho <\rho _0`$ and $`A>A_0`$ there exist $`\rho ^{}<\rho _0^{}`$ and $`A^{}>A_0^{}`$ such that $`\delta _{\rho ,A}^k_k\delta _{\rho ,A}^{}_{}{}^{}k`$. We define $`\mathrm{div}_k\mathrm{div}_k^{}`$ if $`\mathrm{div}_k\mathrm{div}_k^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{div}_k^{}\mathrm{div}_k`$. This is an equivalence relation and under this identification $`\mathrm{div}_k`$ is a quasi-isometry invariant (see \[BF98\] for details).

###### Remark 2.2.

As a quasi-isometry invariant, a polynomial growth rate of $`\mathrm{div}_k`$ is only defined up to $`k+1`$. And the reader should view the $`k`$ polynomial growth rate of $`\mathrm{div}_k`$ in Theorem 1.4 accordingly.

The polynomial bound on $`\mathrm{vol}_k(f)`$ in the definition above is essential to prevent the possibility of constructing exponential $`k`$-volume maps requiring exponential volume fillings, and therefore making the filling invariants always exponential. On the other hand, allowing the filling to be “slightly” inside the ball, i.e. inside $`C_{\rho r}(x_0)`$ for some fixed $`0<\rho `$ is needed since continuous quasi-isometries map spheres to distorted spheres.

###### Remark 2.3.

Through the paper we will use the following cone construction. Given an $`n`$-dimensional Hadamard manifold $`X`$ and a Lipschitz map $`f:S^kX`$, if we cone $`f`$ from a point $`x_0X`$ we obtain a Lipschitz extension $`\widehat{f}:D^{k+1}X`$. Using comparison with Euclidean space, it is clear that $`\mathrm{vol}_{k+1}(\widehat{f})\mathrm{vol}_k(f)sup_{pS^k}d(x_0,f(p))`$. If $`X`$ has sectional curvature $`Ka^2<0`$, then there exists a constant $`C=C(a,n)`$ which does not depend on $`x_0`$ nor $`f`$ such that $`\mathrm{vol}_{k+1}(\widehat{f})C\mathrm{vol}_k(f)`$. If $`a=1`$ this constant can be chosen to be $`1`$.

## 3. Rank One Symmetric Spaces

The $`\mathrm{div}_0(X)`$ of a Hadamard manifold $`X`$ is the same as the “rate of divergence” of geodesics. Therefore for rank 1 symmetric spaces it is exponential since they have pinched negative curvature.

In this section we calculate $`\mathrm{div}_k`$ where $`k1`$ for any rank one symmetric space. First we start with a lemma which will be needed in the proof of Theorem 3.3.

###### Lemma 3.1.

Given a Lipschitz function $`f:S^k^n`$, where $`1k<n`$, there exists a constant $`c=c(n)`$ such that for any ball $`B_r(u_0)`$, we can find a map $`g:S^k^n`$ which satisfies the following conditions:

1. $`f`$ is homotopic to $`g`$.
2. $`\mathrm{vol}_k(g)c\mathrm{vol}_k(f)`$.
3. $`g(S^k)B_r^{}(u_0)=\mathrm{}`$.
4. $`f`$ and $`g`$ agree outside $`B_r(u_0)`$.
5. The $`(k+1)`$-volume of the homotopy is bounded by $`cr\mathrm{vol}_k(f)`$.

###### Proof.

The proof follows the proof of Theorem $`\mathrm{10.3.3}`$ in \[ECH<sup>+</sup>92\]. The idea is to project the part inside the ball $`B_r(u_0)`$ to the sphere $`S_r(u_0)`$. We will project from a point within the ball $`B_{r/2}(u_0)`$, but since projecting from the wrong center might increase the volume by a huge factor, we average over all possible projections and prove that the average is under control, and therefore we have plenty of centers from which we can project and still have the volume of the new function under control.

Let $`\omega _{n1}`$ be the volume of the unit $`(n1)`$-sphere in $`^n`$. Let $`|D_xf|`$ represent the Jacobian of $`f`$ at the point $`x`$. Let $`\pi _u`$ be the projection map from the point $`uB_{r/2}(u_0)`$ to the sphere $`S_r(u_0)`$.

(3.1)
$$\mathrm{vol}_k(\pi _uf)_{f^1(B_r(u_0))}\frac{|D_xf|(2r)^k}{f(x)u^k\mathrm{cos}\theta }𝑑x+\mathrm{vol}_k(f),$$

where $`\theta `$ is the angle between the ray connecting $`u`$ to $`f(x)`$ and the outward normal vector to the sphere at the point of intersection of the ray and the sphere $`S_r(u_0)`$. If $`uB_{r/2}(u_0)`$ then it is easy to see that $`\theta \pi /6`$ and therefore $`1/\mathrm{cos}\theta 2/\sqrt{3}2`$.

By integrating (3.1) over the ball $`B_{r/2}(u_0)`$ we get,

(3.2)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill _{B_{r/2}(u_0)}\mathrm{vol}_k(\pi _uf)𝑑u& _{B_{r/2}(u_0)}_{f^1(B_r(u_0))}\frac{|D_xf|(2r)^k}{f(x)u^k\mathrm{cos}\theta }𝑑x𝑑u\hfill \\ & +\mathrm{vol}(B_{r/2}(u_0))\mathrm{vol}_k(f)\hfill \\ \hfill & _{f^1(B_r(u_0))}|D_xf|_{B_{r/2}(u_0)}\frac{2(2r)^k}{f(x)u^k}𝑑u𝑑x\hfill \\ & +\mathrm{vol}(B_{r/2}(u_0))\mathrm{vol}_k(f)\hfill \\ \hfill & 2^{k+1}r^k_{f^1(B_r(u_0))}|D_xf|_{B_{3r/2}(f(x))}\frac{1}{u^k}𝑑u𝑑x\hfill \\ & +\mathrm{vol}(B_{r/2}(u_0))\mathrm{vol}_k(f)\hfill \\ \hfill =& 2^{k+1}r^k_{f^1(B_r(u_0))}|D_xf|_{S^{n1}}_0^{3r/2}\frac{1}{t^k}t^{n1}𝑑t𝑑\mu 𝑑x\hfill \\ & +\mathrm{vol}(B_{r/2}(u_0))\mathrm{vol}_k(f)\hfill \\ \hfill =& \frac{2^{k+1}3^{nk}r^n\omega _{n1}}{2^{nk}(nk)}_{f^1(B_r(u_0))}|D_xf|𝑑x\hfill \\ & +\mathrm{vol}(B_{r/2}(u_0))\mathrm{vol}_k(f)\hfill \\ \hfill & \left[\frac{2^{2k+1}3^{nk}n}{nk}+1\right]\mathrm{vol}(B_{r/2}(u_0))\mathrm{vol}_k(f)\hfill \\ \hfill & \left[2^{2n1}3^{n1}n+1\right]\mathrm{vol}(B_{r/2}(u_0))\mathrm{vol}_k(f).\hfill \end{array}$$

The $`(k+1)`$-volume of the homotopy is bounded by $`2r[2^{2n1}3^{n1}n+1]\mathrm{vol}_k(f)`$. We take $`c=2[2^{2n1}3^{n1}n+1]`$, which now satisfies all the requirements of the lemma. ∎

Using the standard notation, we denote by $`\mathrm{sn}_k`$ respectively $`\mathrm{cs}_k`$ the solution to the differential equation $`x^{\prime \prime }(t)+kx(t)=0`$ with the initial conditions $`x(0)=0`$ and $`x^{}(0)=1`$ respectively $`x(0)=1`$ and $`x^{}(0)=0`$. We also set $`\mathrm{ct}_k=\mathrm{cs}_k/\mathrm{sn}_k`$.

Now we use Lemma 3.1 to prove a similar result for any Riemannian manifold with bounded geometry which we will call the “Deformation Lemma”.

###### Lemma 3.2 (Deformation Lemma).

Given a Riemannian manifold M, with sectional curvature $`LKH`$ and injectivity radius $`\mathrm{inj}(M)ϵ`$, then there exist constants $`\delta =\delta (L,K,ϵ)>0`$ and $`c=c(n,L,K,ϵ)`$, which do not depend on $`M`$ such that for any Lipschitz map $`f:S^kM`$ and any ball $`B_r(p)M`$ with radius $`r\delta `$, we can find a map $`g:S^kM`$ which satisfies the following conditions:

1. $`f`$ is homotopic to $`g`$.
2. $`\mathrm{vol}_k(g)c\mathrm{vol}_k(f)`$.
3. $`g(S^k)B_r^{}(p)=\mathrm{}`$.
4. $`f`$ and $`g`$ agree outside $`B_r(p)`$.
5. The $`(k+1)`$-volume of the homotopy is bounded by $`c\mathrm{vol}_k(f)`$.

###### Proof.

Take $`\delta =\mathrm{min}\{ϵ/2,\pi /2\sqrt{H}\}`$. By comparison with the spaces of constant curvature $`L`$ and $`H`$, we have the following bounds within $`B_\delta (p)`$.

(3.3) $`D\mathrm{exp}_p^1`$ $`A=\mathrm{max}\{1,\delta /\mathrm{sn}_H(\delta )\},`$
(3.4) $`D\mathrm{exp}_p`$ $`B=\mathrm{max}\{1,\mathrm{sn}_L(\delta )/\delta \}.`$
See Theorem $`2.3`$ and Corollary $`2.4`$ in chapter $`6`$ of \[Pet98\] for details but the reader should be aware that the estimate for $`D\mathrm{exp}_p^1`$ is stated incorrectly there. Note that $`A`$ and $`B`$ only depend on $`L`$, $`K`$ and $`ϵ`$ but not on $`p`$ nor $`M`$.

Now we use $`\mathrm{exp}_p^1`$ to lift the map $`f`$ locally, i.e. in $`B_\delta (p)`$, to $`T_pM`$ then use Lemma 3.1 to deform this lifted map to a map that lands outside the ball $`B_\delta (0)T_pM`$ and then project back using $`\mathrm{exp}_p`$ to the manifold $`M`$. The $`k`$-volume of the new map and the $`(k+1)`$-volume of the homotopy will be controlled because of the bounds on $`D\mathrm{exp}_p`$ and $`D\mathrm{exp}_p^1`$ given by equations (3.3) and (3.4) and the estimates given in Lemma 3.1. This finishes the proof of the lemma. ∎

###### Theorem 3.3.

If $`X`$ is a rank $`1`$ symmetric space of noncompact type, then $`\mathrm{div}_k(X)`$ has a polynomial growth of degree at most $`k`$ for every $`k1`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`x_0`$ be any point in $`X`$, $`S_r(x_0)`$ the distance sphere of radius $`r`$ centered at $`x_0`$, and $`d_{S_r(x_0)}`$ the Riemannian distance function on the sphere.

We will show that there exists $`0<\rho <1`$ such that there is a filling of any admissible $`k`$-sphere on $`S_r(x_0)`$ outside $`B_{\rho r}^{}(x_0)`$ which grows polynomially of degree at most $`k`$ as $`r\mathrm{}`$.

Let $`\pi _r^R:S_R(x_0)S_r(x_0)`$ be the radial projection from $`S_R(x_0)`$ to $`S_r(x_0)`$, and let $`\lambda _r^R:S_r(x_0)S_R(x_0)`$ be its inverse. Assume that the metric on $`X`$ is normalized such that the sectional curvature is bounded between $`4`$ and $`1`$. By comparison with the spaces of constant curvatures $`1`$ and $`4`$, it is easy to see that the map $`\pi _r^R`$ decreases distance by at least a factor of $`\mathrm{sinh}R/\mathrm{sinh}r`$, and $`\lambda _r^R`$ increases distance at most by a factor of $`\mathrm{sinh}2R/\mathrm{sinh}2r`$.

Fix $`A>0`$ and let $`f:S^kS_r(x_0)`$ be a Lipschitz map such that $`\mathrm{vol}_k(f)Ar^k`$. Then $`\mathrm{vol}_k(\pi _{\rho r}^rf)Ar^k\left(\mathrm{sinh}\rho r/\mathrm{sinh}r\right)^k`$.

Since horospheres are Lie groups with left invariant metrics, the curvature is bounded above and below and there is a lower bound on the injectivity radius. This puts a uniform bound on the curvature as well as the injectivity radius of distance spheres $`S_r(x_0)`$ as long as $`r`$ is big enough. Because of that and by using the Deformation Lemma, we could deform $`\pi _{\rho r}^rf`$ on $`S_{\rho r}(x_0)`$ to a new function $`g`$ which misses a ball, on the sphere $`S_{\rho r}(x_0)`$, of radius $`\delta `$ and has $`k`$-volume $`c\mathrm{vol}_k(\pi _{\rho r}^rf)`$ where $`\delta `$ and $`c`$ are the constants given by the Deformation Lemma. And such that the homotopy between $`\pi _{\rho r}^rf`$ and $`g`$ has $`(k+1)`$-volume $`c\mathrm{vol}_k(\pi _{\rho r}^rf)`$.

Let $`pS_{\rho r}(x_0)`$ be the center of this ball and let $`q`$ be its antipodal point. We will cone $`g`$ from $`q`$, inside the sphere, and then project the cone from $`x_0`$ back to the sphere $`S_{\rho r}(x_0)`$. Because the curvature is less than $`1`$ the $`(k+1)`$-volume of the cone is smaller than $`\mathrm{vol}_k(g)c\mathrm{vol}_k(\pi _{\rho r}^rf)`$ (see Remark 2.3).

To estimate the volume of the projection of the cone, we need to find a lower bound on the distance from $`x_0`$ to the image of the cone. Let $`xS_{\rho r}(x_0)`$ such that $`d_{S_{\rho r}(x_0)}(x,p)=\delta `$. Let $`x^{}`$ be the intersection point of $`S_{2\rho r}(q)`$ and the ray $`\stackrel{}{qx}`$. For large values of $`r`$, $`x`$ and $`x^{}`$ are close, and therefore we have $`d_{S_{2\rho r}(q)}(p,x^{})\delta /2`$. By comparison to the space of constant curvature $`4`$ we see that $`\theta =\mathrm{}_q(p,x)\delta /(2\mathrm{sinh}4\rho r)`$. Now by comparison with Euclidian space we have $`d(x_0,\stackrel{}{qx})\rho r\mathrm{sin}\theta \rho r\mathrm{sin}(\delta /(2\mathrm{sinh}4\rho r))`$. So the cone from $`q`$ misses a ball of radius $`\rho r\mathrm{sin}(\delta /(2\mathrm{sinh}4\rho r))`$ around $`x_0`$. Projecting the cone which lies inside $`S_{\rho r}(x_0)`$ from $`x_0`$ to $`S_{\rho r}(x_0)`$ gives us a filling for $`g`$ of volume $`cAr^k\left(\mathrm{sinh}\rho r/\mathrm{sinh}r\right)^k\left(\frac{\mathrm{sinh}2\rho r}{\mathrm{sinh}(2\rho r\mathrm{sin}(\delta /2\mathrm{sinh}4\rho r))}\right)^{k+1}`$.

Notice that $`\mathrm{sinh}t`$ behaves like $`e^t/2`$ as $`t\mathrm{}`$ and like $`t`$ as $`t0`$, while $`\mathrm{sin}t`$ behaves like $`t`$ as $`t0`$. Because of that the above estimate of the filling of $`g`$ behaves like $`cAr^k\left(e^{\rho r}/e^r\right)^k\left(\frac{e^{2\rho r}/2}{2\delta \rho r/e^{4\rho r}}\right)^{k+1}=\frac{cA}{(4\delta \rho )^{k+1}r}e^{((7k+6)\rho k)r}`$. Clearly we can choose $`\rho `$ small enough to make $`(7k+6)\rho k`$ negative. Therefore there exists $`r_0>0`$ such that for all $`rr_0`$ the $`(k+1)`$-volume of the filling of $`g`$ will be smaller than $`1`$. Now the filling of the original map $`f`$ consists of three parts.

1. The radial projection of $`f`$ to the sphere $`S_{\rho r}(x_0)`$, which has $`(k+1)`$-volume $`Ar^k`$.
2. The homotopy used to deform the map $`\pi _{\rho r}^rf`$ to the new map $`g`$, which has $`(k+1)`$-volume $`c\mathrm{vol}_k(\pi _{\rho r}^rf)c\mathrm{vol}_k(f)cAr^k`$.
3. The filling of $`g`$, which has $`(k+1)`$-volume $`<1`$.

This filling of $`f`$ is Lipschitz and lies outside $`B_{\rho r}^{}(x_0)`$, and is therefore $`\rho `$-admissible, and it has $`(k+1)`$-volume smaller than $`A(c+1)r^k+1`$. This finishes the proof of the theorem. ∎

## 4. Higher Rank Symmetric Spaces

In this section we give the proof for Theorem 1.1. The idea is similar to the one used in the proof of Theorem 3.3, namely project the Lipschitz map you wish to fill, to a smaller sphere to make the $`k`$-volume of the projection small and then fill the projection on the smaller sphere.

For the rank one symmetric space case, the projection decreases distances exponentially in all direction, which is no longer true for the higher rank case. Nevertheless, we still have $`nl`$ directions in which the projection, to smaller spheres, decreases distance by an exponential factor. Hence, the projection will decrease the volume of a Lipschitz map $`f`$ by an exponential factor as long as the dimension of the domain of $`f`$ is bigger than $`l1`$, to include at least one of the exponentially decreasing directions. See Lemma 4.1 for details.

We start by recalling some basic facts about symmetric spaces. For a general reference of symmetric spaces of nonpositive curvature and for the proofs of the facts used in this section see chapter $`2`$ in \[Ebe96\].

Let $`X=G/K`$ be a symmetric space of nonpositive curvature of dimension $`n`$ and rank $`l`$. Fix a point $`x_0X`$ and let $`𝔤=𝔨+𝔭`$ be the corresponding Cartan decomposition, where $`𝔨`$ is the Lie algebra of the isotropy group $`K`$ at $`x_0`$. Fix a maximal abelian subspace $`𝔞𝔭`$ and let $`F`$ be the flat determined by $`𝔞`$. We identify $`𝔭`$ with $`T_{x_0}X`$ in the usual way. For each regular vector $`v𝔞`$, let $`R_v:v^{}v^{}`$ denote the curvature tensor where $`R_v(w)=R(w,v)v`$. Let $`\lambda _1(v),\mathrm{},\lambda _{n1}(v)`$ be the eigenvalues of $`R_v`$ with corresponding eigenvectors $`E_1,\mathrm{},E_{n1}`$ such that $`E_1,\mathrm{},E_{l1}`$ are tangent to the $`l`$-flat $`F`$. Therefore $`\lambda _1(v)=\mathrm{}=\lambda _{l1}(v)=0`$ while $`\lambda _j(v)<0`$ for $`jl`$. Since for every $`v_1`$, $`v_2𝔞`$, $`R_{v_1}`$ and $`R_{v_2}`$ commute and therefore can be simultaneously diagonalized, $`E_l,\mathrm{},E_{n1}(T_{x_0}F)^{}`$ can be chosen not to depend on the choice of $`v`$ and the $`\lambda _j(v)`$ are continuous functions in $`v`$.

Let $`E_j(t)`$ be the parallel translates along the geodesic $`\gamma _v(t)`$ with $`\gamma _v(0)=x_0`$ and $`\dot{\gamma _v}(0)=v`$. Then $`J_j(t)=f_j(t)E_j(t)`$ determine an orthogonal basis for the space of Jacobi fields along $`\gamma _v(t)`$ which vanishes at $`x_0`$ and are orthogonal to $`\gamma _v(t)`$, where $`f_j(t)=t`$ if $`\lambda _j(v)=0`$ (i.e. $`1jl1`$) and $`f_j(t)=1/\sqrt{\lambda _j(v)}\mathrm{sinh}\sqrt{\lambda _j(v)}t`$ if $`\lambda _j(v)<0`$ (i.e. $`ljn1`$).

Let $`𝒞`$ be the collection of all Weyl chambers of the first type (i.e. Weyl chambers defined on $`S_{x_0}X`$), where $`S_{x_0}XT_{x_0}X`$ is the sphere of unit vectors in the tangent space $`T_{x_0}X`$. We will often identify $`S_{x_0}X`$ with $`S_r(x_0)`$ in an obvious way. Let $`𝒞(v)`$ be the Weyl chamber containing $`v`$ for any regular vector $`v`$. Let $`v_𝒞`$ be the algebraic centroid of the Weyl chamber $`𝒞`$. Let $``$ be the set of the algebraic centroids of all Weyl chambers. By the identification of $`S_{x_0}X`$ and $`S_r(x_0)`$, we will think of $``$ as a set of points on $`S_r(x_0)`$, a set of vectors of length $`r`$ in $`T_{x_0}X`$ and a set of points in $`X(\mathrm{})`$. The meaning will be clear from the context. Recall that the subgroup of isometries $`K`$ fixing $`x_0`$ acts transitively on $``$.

Assume $`v`$ belongs to the $`l`$-flat $`F`$. Let $`𝒞(v)`$ be the unique Weyl chamber containing $`v`$. Since $`v`$ is a regular vector then $`\lambda _l(v),\mathrm{},\lambda _{n1}(v)`$ are negative. By the continuity of $`\lambda _j`$, there exist $`ϵ>0`$ and $`\delta >0`$ such that for every $`wN_ϵ(v)`$, $`\lambda _j(w)\delta ^2`$ for every $`jl`$, where $`N_ϵ(v)=\{w𝒞(v)\mathrm{}_{x_0}(v,w)=\mathrm{}(v,w)ϵ\}`$. We choose $`ϵ`$ small enough such that $`N_ϵ(v)`$ is contained in the interior of $`𝒞(v)`$ and away from the boundary of $`𝒞(v)`$. By the transitive action of $`K`$ on $``$ we have such neighborhood around each element of $``$. Let $`𝒩_ϵ`$ be the union of these neighborhoods. Recall that any two Weyl chambers at infinity are contained in the boundary at infinity of a flat in $`X`$. Note that if $`v`$ and $`v^{}`$ is the centroid of an opposite Weyl chamber to $`𝒞(v)`$ then $`\mathrm{}(v,v^{})=\pi `$. And therefore, for any $`v`$ and any $`w𝒩_ϵ`$, we have $`\mathrm{}(v,w)<\pi ϵ`$.

From the above discussion we have immediately the following lemma.

###### Lemma 4.1.

Let $`0<\rho 1`$, $`kl`$ and $`\pi _{\rho r}^r:S_r(x_0)S_{\rho r}(x_0)`$ be the projection map. If $`f:S^kS_r(x_0)`$ is a Lipschitz map then $`\mathrm{vol}_k(\pi _{\rho r}^rf𝒩_ϵ)\mathrm{vol}_k(f𝒩_ϵ)(\mathrm{sinh}\rho \delta r/\mathrm{sinh}\delta r)\mathrm{vol}_k(f)(\mathrm{sinh}\rho \delta r/\mathrm{sinh}\delta r)`$.

Before starting the proof of Theorem 1.1 we need the following lemma.

###### Lemma 4.2.

Let $`X`$ be a Hadamard manifold, and let $`x_0X`$. For every $`ϵ>0`$ there exists $`\eta >0`$ such that for any two points $`p_1`$, $`p_2S_r(x_0)`$ with $`\mathrm{}(\stackrel{}{x_0p_1}(\mathrm{}),\stackrel{}{x_0p_2}(\mathrm{}))\pi ϵ`$ we have $`d(x_0,\overline{p_1p_2})\eta r`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`\gamma _i=\stackrel{}{x_0p_i}(t)`$ and $`z_i=\gamma _i(\mathrm{})`$ for $`i=1`$$`2`$. Let $`\alpha _i(t)=\mathrm{}_{\gamma _i(t)}(x_0,\gamma _j(t))`$ for $`ji`$.

Note that $`\pi (\alpha _1(t)+\alpha _2(t))`$ is an increasing function of $`t`$ which converges to $`\mathrm{}(z_1,z_2)`$ as $`t\mathrm{}`$. Therefore $`ϵ\alpha _1(r)+\alpha _2(r)`$. Without any loss of generality we may assume that $`ϵ/2\alpha _1(r)`$. Using the first law of cosines we have $`r^2+d(p_1,p_2)^22rd(p_1,p_2)\mathrm{cos}(ϵ/2)r^2`$. Therefore $`d(p_1,p_2)2r\mathrm{cos}(ϵ/2)`$. Let $`m`$ be the closest point on $`\overline{p_1p_2}`$ to $`x_0`$, and without loss of generality assume that $`d(m,p_1)d(m,p_2)`$. By taking $`\eta =1\mathrm{cos}(ϵ/2)`$, we have

(4.1)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill d(x_0,\overline{p_1p_2})=& d(x_0,m)\hfill \\ \hfill & d(x_0,p_1)d(p_1,m)\hfill \\ \hfill & rr\mathrm{cos}(ϵ/2)\hfill \\ \hfill =& \eta r,\hfill \end{array}$$

which finishes the proof of the lemma. ∎

###### Proof of Theorem 1.1.

Let $`\lambda ^2`$ be a lower bound on the sectional curvature of $`X`$. Fix $`A>0`$ and let $`f:S^kS_r(x_0)`$ be a Lipschitz map such that $`\mathrm{vol}_k(f)Ar^k`$. By Lemma 4.1, $`\mathrm{vol}_k(\pi _{\rho r}^rf𝒩_ϵ)\mathrm{vol}_k(f)(\mathrm{sinh}\rho \delta r/\mathrm{sinh}\delta r)`$.

Fix $`qS_{\rho r}(x_0)`$ to be the algebraic centroid of a Weyl chamber, and let $`pS_{\rho r}(x_0)`$ be its antipodal point. Since curvature and injectivity radii of large spheres are again controlled, using the Deformation Lemma as in the proof of Theorem 3.3, we can assume that $`\pi _{\rho r}^rf`$ misses a ball $`B_\mu (p)`$ on $`S_{\rho r}(x_0)`$ and $`\mu `$ does not depends on $`r`$ as long as $`r`$ is large enough.

Now cone the image of $`\pi _{\rho r}^rf`$ from $`q`$ inside the sphere $`S_{\rho r}(x_0)`$. Let $`C_f`$ be the image of the cone. Let $`C_1`$ be the part of the cone coming from $`\pi _{\rho r}^rf𝒩_ϵ`$ and $`C_2=C_fC_1`$. By Lemma 4.1, $`\mathrm{vol}_{k+1}(C_1)2\rho Ar^{k+1}(\mathrm{sinh}\rho \delta r/\mathrm{sinh}\delta r)2Ar^{k+1}(\mathrm{sinh}\rho \delta r/\mathrm{sinh}\delta r)`$ and $`\mathrm{vol}_{k+1}(C_2)2\rho Ar^{k+1}2Ar^{k+1}`$. Taking $`\eta `$ to be the constant given by Lemma 4.2, we see that $`C_2B_{\eta \rho r}^{}(x_0)=\mathrm{}`$.

By comparison with the space of constant curvature $`\lambda ^2`$ and arguing as in the proof of Theorem 3.3, it is easy to see that $`C_1`$ misses a ball of radius $`\rho r\mathrm{sin}(\mu /(2\mathrm{sinh}2\lambda \rho r))`$ around $`x_0`$. Now we project from $`x_0`$ the part of $`C_1`$ in $`B_{\eta \rho r}(x_0)`$ to the sphere $`S_{\eta \rho r}(x_0)`$ to obtain a filling $`g`$ of $`\pi _{\rho r}^rf`$ lying outside $`B_{\eta \rho r}^{}(x_0)`$. Now

(4.2)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{vol}_{k+1}(g)& \mathrm{vol}_{k+1}(C_2)+\mathrm{vol}_{k+1}(C_1)\left(\frac{\mathrm{sinh}\lambda \eta \rho r}{\mathrm{sinh}(\lambda \rho r\mathrm{sin}(\mu /(2\mathrm{sinh}2\lambda \rho r)))}\right)^{k+1}\hfill \\ \hfill & 2Ar^{k+1}\left[1+\left(\frac{\mathrm{sinh}\rho \delta r}{\mathrm{sinh}\delta r}\right)\left(\frac{\mathrm{sinh}\lambda \eta \rho r}{\mathrm{sinh}(\lambda \rho r\mathrm{sin}(\mu /(2\mathrm{sinh}2\lambda \rho r)))}\right)^{k+1}\right].\hfill \end{array}$$

This estimate behaves like $`2Ar^{k+1}[1+e^{(\rho (\delta +\lambda (k+1)(2+\eta ))\delta )r}/(2\lambda \rho \mu )^{k+1}r^{k+1}]`$ as $`r\mathrm{}`$. Clearly we can choose $`\rho `$ small enough to make the exponent $`\rho (\delta +\lambda (k+1)(2+\eta ))\delta `$ negative and therefore the $`(k+1)`$-volume of the $`\eta \rho `$-admissible filling of $`\pi _{\rho r}^rf`$ will be bounded by $`4Ar^{k+1}`$ and the (k+1)-volume of the $`\eta \rho `$-admissible filling of $`f`$ is bounded by $`5Ar^{k+1}`$. This finishes the proof of the theorem where $`\eta \rho `$ is taken in place of $`\rho `$. ∎

## 5. First filling Invariant for Symmetric Spaces

In this section we prove Theorem 1.3. The proof consists of two steps.

The first step is to deform the closed curve we wish to fill to a new curve which is continuous when viewed as a curve at infinity with respect to the Tits metric. The length of the new curve and the area of the deformation will have to be under control. The proof is valid for any symmetric space of higher rank. We will establish this in Lemma 5.1.

In the second step we will use the assumption that the rank is bigger than or equal $`3`$, to fill the new curve with a disk with controlled area. This step will be done in Proposition 5.2.

We denote by $`\lambda _r^{\mathrm{}}:S_r(x_0)(X(\mathrm{}),Td)`$ the map obtained by sending a point $`xS_r(x_0)`$ to the point $`\stackrel{}{x_0x}(\mathrm{})X(\mathrm{})`$. Notice that this map is almost never continuous.

###### Lemma 5.1.

Let $`X`$ be a symmetric space of noncompact type and rank $`k2`$. There exist two constants $`c>0`$ and $`0<\rho 1`$ which depend only on $`X`$ such that, for every Lipschitz curve $`f:S^1S_r(x_0)`$, there exists a new curve $`g:S^1S_r(x_0)`$ which satisfies the following conditions:

1. $`\lambda _r^{\mathrm{}}g`$ is continuous with respect to the Tits metric.
2. There exists a homotopy between $`f`$ and $`g`$ which lies outside $`B_{\rho r}^{}(x_0)`$.
3. The area of the homotopy is bounded above by $`cr\mathrm{vol}_1(f)`$.
4. $`\mathrm{vol}_1(g)c\mathrm{vol}_1(f)`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`\delta =\mathrm{min}(1,\eta /2)`$, where $`\eta `$ is the constant given by Lemma 4.2 for $`ϵ=\pi /2`$. Divide $`f`$ into pieces each of length $`\delta r`$, the last piece possibly could be shorter than $`\delta r`$. If that is the case we will call it “short” and all the other pieces “long”.

Let $`c_j:[0,1]S_r(x_0)`$ be one of these pieces. Let $`𝒞_i`$ be a Weyl chamber containing $`c_j(i)`$ for $`i=0,1`$. Let $`𝒜`$ be an apartment containing $`𝒞_0`$ and $`𝒞_1`$. Let $`\gamma _j:[0,1]S_r(x_0)`$ be a geodesic (with respect to the Tits metric) in the apartment $`𝒜`$ connecting $`c_j(0)`$ to $`c_j(1)`$. The goal is to replace the piece $`c_j`$ with the geodesic $`\gamma _j`$. The homotopy between them which leaves the end points $`c_j(0)`$ and $`c_j(1)`$ fixed will be through geodesics in $`X`$ connecting $`c_j(t)`$ to $`\gamma _j(t)`$ for every $`0t1`$. The length of these geodesics is no longer than $`2r`$, since they lie inside the ball $`B_r(x_0)`$.

The new curve $`g`$ will be formed by replacing each piece $`c_j`$ with the curve $`\gamma _j`$. Notice that the length of each $`\gamma _j`$ is no bigger than $`\pi r`$. If $`\mathrm{vol}_1(f)<\delta r`$, i.e. we have no “long” pieces then $`g`$ is just a point and the statement trivially follows. If $`\mathrm{vol}_1(f)\delta r`$, i.e. we have at least one long piece then it is not hard to see that $`\mathrm{vol}_1(g)2\pi \mathrm{vol}_1(f)/\delta `$.

Since $`X`$ is nonpositively curved, the area of the homotopy between $`c_j`$ and $`\gamma _j`$ is no bigger than $`2\pi r^2`$. And the area of the homotopy between $`f`$ and $`g`$ is no bigger than $`cr\mathrm{vol}_1(f)`$, where $`c=4\pi /\delta `$.

To finish the proof we need to show that the homotopy lies outside $`B_{\rho r}^{}(x_0)`$. So we need to show that the distance between $`x_0`$ and the geodesic, in $`X`$, connecting $`c_j(t)`$ and $`\gamma _j(t)`$ is at least $`\rho r`$ for every $`0t1`$. Assume that $`t1/2`$, the other case is similar. Notice that $`\mathrm{}(c_j(0),\gamma _j(t))\pi /2`$. Applying Lemma 4.2, we get that $`d_X(x_0,\overline{c_j(0)\gamma _j(t)})\eta r`$, where $`\eta `$ is the constant in Lemma 4.2.

Recall that $`d_X(c_j(0),c_j(t))\delta r`$. For every point $`s`$ on the geodesic $`\overline{c_j(t)\gamma _j(t)}`$ there exists a point $`s^{}`$ on the geodesic $`\overline{\gamma _j(t)c_j(0)}`$ such that $`d_X(s,s^{})\delta r`$. Therefore $`d_X(x_0,s)(\eta \delta )r\eta r/2`$. By taking $`\rho =\eta /2`$, the image of the homotopy lies outside $`B_{\rho r}^{}(x_0)`$. This finishes the proof of the lemma. ∎

Now we proceed to the second step of the proof. We prove a more general result.

###### Proposition 5.2.

Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ be a spherical building with a re-scaled metric such that each apartment is isometric to $`S^{n1}(r)`$, the round sphere of radius $`r`$. There exists a constant $`c>0`$ which depends only on $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ but not $`r`$ such that for any Lipschitz function $`g:S^k\mathrm{\Delta }`$, where $`k<n1`$, we can extend $`g`$ to a new function $`\widehat{g}:B^{k+1}\mathrm{\Delta }`$ such that $`\mathrm{vol}_{k+1}(\widehat{g})cr\mathrm{vol}_k(g)`$.

###### Proof.

Fix a point $`p`$ to be the center of a Weyl chamber $`𝒞`$. Let $`𝒜`$ be the collection of all opposite Weyl chambers to $`𝒞`$, and let $``$ be the collection of all antipodal points to $`p`$. Let $`ϵ>0`$ be the largest positive number such for any $`q`$ the ball $`B_{ϵr}(q)`$ is contained in the interior of the Weyl chamber containing $`q`$. Notice that $`ϵ`$ only depends on $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

The proof of Lemma 3.1 can be easily modified to deform the function $`g`$ to miss the ball $`B_{ϵr}(q)`$ for every $`q`$. Now we cone the new deformed function from the point $`p`$ to obtain the desired extension. ∎

###### Proof of Theorem 1.3.

The proof is immediate. We deform the function $`f`$ we wish to fill to a new function $`g`$ using Lemma 5.1. We fill $`g`$ with a disc by invoking Proposition 5.2, for $`k=1`$, where we identify $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ with the Tits building structure on the sphere $`S_r(x_0)`$ induced from $`(X(\mathrm{}),Td)`$. The filling of $`g`$ lies on $`S_r(x_0)`$ and therefore outside $`B_r^{}(x_0)`$. ∎

###### Remark 5.3.

We expect a similar result to Theorem 1.3 to hold for a larger class than Symmetric spaces. One candidate is the class of Hadamard manifolds whose boundary at infinity is simply connected with respect to the Tits metric.

## 6. Riemannian Manifolds of Pinched Negative curvature

In this section we give the proof of Theorem 1.4. All the steps of the proof of Theorem 3.3 carry over automatically to our new setting, except the uniform bounds on the curvature and the injectivity radius of distance spheres $`S_r(x_0)`$. By uniform we mean independent of $`r`$ for large values of $`r`$. These bounds will be established in Lemma 6.3 and Lemma 6.4 below. The proofs are straightforward and we include them for completeness. First we recall proposition $`2.5`$ in chapter IV from \[Bal95\] concerning estimates on Jacobi fields.

###### Proposition 6.1.

Let $`\gamma :M`$ be a unit speed geodesic and suppose that the sectional curvature of $`M`$ along $`\gamma `$ is bounded from below by a constant $`\lambda `$. If $`J`$ is a Jacobi field along $`\gamma `$ with $`J(0)=0`$, $`J^{}(0)\dot{\gamma }(0)`$ and $`J^{}(0)=1`$, then

$$J(t)\mathrm{sn}_\lambda (t)\text{ and }J^{}(t)\mathrm{ct}_\lambda (t)J(t),$$

if there is no pair of conjugate points along $`\gamma |[0,t]`$.

Notice that the estimate on $`J^{}(t)`$ is still valid without requiring that $`J^{}(0)=1`$. From the proposition we have the following immediate corollary.

###### Corollary 6.2.

Let $`X`$ be a Hadamard manifold, with sectional curvature $`b^2Ka^2<0`$, if $`\gamma `$ is a unit speed geodesic, $`J(t)`$ is a Jacobi field along $`\gamma `$ with $`J(0)=0`$, $`J(t)\dot{\gamma }(t)`$ and $`J(r)=1`$ then $`J^{}(r)\mathrm{ct}_{b^2}(r)`$, and therefore the upper bound goes uniformly, independent of $`\gamma `$, to $`b`$ as $`r\mathrm{}`$.

We use the estimate on the derivative of Jacobi fields to put an estimate on the second fundamental form of distance spheres, and hence bounds on the sectional curvature.

###### Lemma 6.3.

Let $`X`$ be a Hadamard manifold, with sectional curvature $`b^2Ka^2<0`$, and $`x_0X`$. There exists a number $`H=H(a,b)>0`$ such that the absolute value of the sectional curvature of $`S_r(x_0)`$ is bounded by $`H`$ for every $`r1`$.

###### Proof.

The lemma is immediate using the Gauss formula for the sectional curvature of hypersurfaces, namely

$$K(Y,Z)\overline{K}(Y,Z)=B(Y,Y),B(Z,Z)B(Y,Z)^2.$$

Where $`Y`$ and $`Z`$ are orthogonal unit vectors tangent to the hypersurface.

Notice that for $`S_r(x_0)`$ we have $`B(Y,Z)J_Y^{}(r)`$, with $`J(0)=0`$ and $`J_Y(r)=Y`$, for every two unit vectors $`Y`$ and $`Z`$ tangent to the sphere. But $`J_Y^{}(r)`$ is bounded by $`b`$ for large values of $`r`$ by Corollary 6.2. ∎

In the next lemma we establish a lower bound on the injectivity radius $`\mathrm{inj}`$ of distance spheres.

###### Lemma 6.4.

Let $`X`$ be a Hadamard manifold, with sectional curvature $`b^2Ka^2<0`$, and $`x_0X`$. There exists a number $`\delta >0`$ such that $`\mathrm{inj}(S_r(x_0))\delta `$ for every $`r1`$.

###### Proof.

Using Lemma 6.3 we have a uniform upper bound $`H`$ on the sectional curvature of distance spheres $`S_r(x_0)`$ for $`r1`$ and therefore a lower bound $`\pi /\sqrt{H}`$ on the conjugate radius.

Our plan is to choose $`\delta `$ small enough and prove that if $`\mathrm{inj}(S_r(x_0))\delta `$ then $`\mathrm{inj}(S_{r+s}(x_0))\delta `$ for all $`0s1`$. Using the lower bound $`b^2`$ on the sectional curvature of $`X`$ and by comparison with the space of constant curvature $`b^2`$, there exists a constant $`0<B=B(b)<1`$ independent of $`r`$ and $`0s1`$ such that $`\pi _r^{r+s}:S_{r+s}(x_0)S_r(x_0)`$ satisfies the following inequality

(6.1)
$$Bd(x,y)d(\pi _r^{r+s}(x),\pi _r^{r+s}(y))d(x,y),x,yS_{r+s}(x_0).$$

Assume $`\delta <\mathrm{min}\{\mathrm{inj}(S_1(x_0)),B\pi /2\sqrt{H}\}`$. Let us assume that $`\mathrm{inj}(S_r(x_0))\delta `$ but $`\mathrm{inj}(S_{r+s}(x_0))<\delta `$. Since $`\delta \pi /2\sqrt{H}`$, there exists two points $`p`$, $`qS_{r+s}(x_0)`$ and two minimizing geodesic (with respect to the induced Riemannian metric on $`S_{r+s}(x_0)`$) $`\gamma _1`$, $`\gamma _2`$ connecting $`p`$ to $`q`$. Moreover $`d(p,q)<\delta `$. By Klingenberg’s Lemma, see \[dC92\], any homotopy from $`\gamma _1`$ to $`\gamma _2`$ with the end points fixed must contain a curve which goes outside $`B_{\pi /\sqrt{H}}^{}(p)`$. Therefore these two curves are not homotopic inside the ball $`B_{\delta /B}^{}(p)`$. Using (6.1) we have,

(6.2)
$$B_\delta ^{}(\pi _r^{r+s}(p))\pi _r^{r+s}(B_{\delta /B}^{}(p)).$$

Notice that $`\pi _r^{r+s}\gamma _i`$ are contained in $`B_\delta ^{}(\pi _r^{r+s}(p))`$, but not homotopic to each other within that ball, which is a topological ball since $`\mathrm{inj}(S_r(x_0))\delta `$ and this is a contradiction. This finishes the proof of the lemma. ∎

## 7. The Graph Manifold Example

In this section we give the example mentioned in the introduction showing that Theorem 1.4 is false if we relaxed the condition on the manifold from being negatively curved to being merely rank $`1`$.

Our example will be a graph manifold. Graph manifolds of nonpositive curvature form an interesting class of $`3`$-dimensional manifolds for various reasons. They are the easiest nontrivial examples of rank $`1`$ manifolds whose fundamental group is not hyperbolic. They are rank $`1`$, yet still have a lot of $`0`$-curvature. In fact every tangent vector $`vT_pX`$ is contained in a $`2`$-plane $`\sigma T_pX`$ with curvature $`K(\sigma )=0`$.

They were used by Gromov in \[Gro78\] to give examples of open manifolds with curvature $`a^2K0`$ and finite volume which have infinite topological type, contrary to the case of pinched negative curvature. The compact ones have been extensively studied by Schroeder in \[Sch86\].

Since we are mainly interested in giving a counter example, and for the sake of clarity, we will consider the simplest possible graph manifold. Even though the same idea works for a large class of graph manifolds.

We start by giving a description of the manifold. Let $`W_1`$ and $`W_2`$ be two tori with one disk removed from each one of them. Let $`B_i=W_i\times S^1`$. Each $`B_i`$ is called a block. The boundary of each block is diffeomorphic to $`S^1\times S^1`$. The manifold $`M`$ is obtained by gluing the two blocks $`B_1`$ and $`B_2`$ along the boundary after interchanging the $`S^1`$-factors.

Since the invariants $`\mathrm{div}_k`$ do not depend on the metric, we choose a metric which is convenient to work with. Take the flat torus, corresponding to the lattice $`\times ^2`$. Let $`\beta _1`$ and $`\beta _2`$ be the unique closed geodesics of length $`1`$. We picture the torus as the unit square $`[\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}]\times [\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}]^2`$ with the boundary identified. Remove a small disk in the middle and pull the boundary up, such that the metric is rotationally symmetric around the $`z`$-axis. It is easy to see we can obtain a metric on $`W_i`$ with curvature $`b^2K0`$, and make it product near the boundary which is a closed geodesic. Rescale the metric on $`W_i`$ to make the curvature $`1K0`$. The closed curves $`\beta _1`$ and $`\beta _2`$ are still closed geodesics, and generate the fundamental group of the punctured torus. Take the metric on each block to be the product of this metric with a circle of length equal to the length of the boundary of $`W_i`$. Gluing the two metrics on the two blocks together gives a smooth metric on $`M`$ with curvature $`1K0`$.

Let $`X`$ be the universal covering space of $`M`$, and $`\pi :XM`$ be the covering map. We show that $`\mathrm{div}_1(X)`$ is exponential.

Let $`Y`$ be a connected component of $`\pi ^1(B_1)`$. Since $`B_1`$ is a convex subset of $`M`$, it is easy to see that $`Y=Z\times `$ is the universal covering space of $`B_1`$, where $`Z`$ is the universal covering space of $`W_1`$, and the restriction of $`\pi `$ to $`Z\times \{0\}`$ is the covering map onto $`W_1`$. We will identify $`Z\times \{0\}`$ with $`Z`$. Clearly $`\pi _1(B_1)=\pi _1(W_1)\times `$ and $`\pi _1(W_1)=`$ is a free group generated by the closed geodesics $`\beta _1`$ and $`\beta _2`$. Moreover the universal covering space $`Z`$ is a thickening of the Cayley graph of $``$, and it retracts to it.

Let $`w_0`$ be the unique intersection point of $`\beta _1`$ and $`\beta _2`$. Take $`w_0`$ to be the base point of the fundamental group of $`W_1`$. Let $`a_1`$, $`a_2\pi _1(W_1,w_0)`$ represent the elements corresponding to $`\beta _1`$ and $`\beta _2`$.

Let $`\psi :ZW_1`$ be the covering map which is the restriction to $`Z=Z\times \{0\}`$ of the covering map $`\pi :XM`$. Fix $`p_0Z`$ such that $`\psi (p_0)=w_0`$. We denote the deck transformation corresponding to any element $`s\pi _1(W_1,w_0)`$ by $`\varphi _s`$.

Let $`\gamma _i`$ be the lift of $`\beta _i`$ to a geodesic in $`Z`$ starting at $`p_0`$. Notice that $`\varphi _{a_i}`$ is a translation along the geodesic $`\gamma _i`$. Take $`F=\gamma _1\times `$, which is a totally geodesic submanifold isometric to $`^2`$. And let $`x_0=(p_0,0)Z\times `$, where $`p_0=\gamma _1(0)=\gamma _2(0)`$. Let $`S_F(r)=S_r(x_0)F`$, be the $`1`$-sphere in F with center $`x_0`$ and radius $`r`$, $`A_Z(r)=S_r(x_0)Z`$ and $`B_Z(r)=B_r(x_0)Z`$.

Let $`f_r:S^1S_F(r)`$ be the canonical diffeomorphism with constant velocity. Notice that $`f_r`$ is a Lipschitz map and $`\mathrm{vol}_1(f_r)=2\pi r`$ and therefore an admissible map.

Our goal is to show that for every fixed $`0<\rho 1`$ the infimum over all $`\rho `$-admissible fillings of $`f_r`$ grows exponentially as $`r\mathrm{}`$. We show this first for $`\rho =1`$ and then the general case will follow easily from that.

Notice that since the curvature is nonpositive then any filling of $`f_r`$ outside $`B_r^{}(x_0)`$ can be made smaller by radial projection. Therefore a smallest filling of $`f_r`$ outside $`B_r^{}(x_0)`$ would actually lie on the sphere $`S_r(x_0)`$, so we will only look at those fillings which lie on the sphere. $`S_r(x_0)`$ is a $`2`$-dimensional sphere and $`f_r`$ is a simple closed curve on it, therefore it divides the sphere into two halves $`H_1S`$ and $`H_2S`$. Any filling of $`f_r`$ has to cover one of these two halves. So it is enough to show that $`\mathrm{vol}_2(H_iS)`$ grows exponentially with $`r`$ for $`i=1`$, $`2`$.

We will estimate the area of each half from below by estimating the area of the part which lies inside $`Y`$. The geodesic $`\gamma _1`$ divides $`Z`$ into two halves $`H_1`$ and $`H_2`$. We concentrate on one of them, say $`H_1`$. Let $`b(r)=\mathrm{vol}_2(B_Z(r)H_1)`$, which is an increasing function.

The portion of the half sphere $`H_1S`$ inside $`Y`$ has area bigger than the area of $`B_Z(r)H_1`$. That is easy to see since vertical projection of that part will cover $`B_Z(r)H_1`$, and the projection from $`Y=Z\times `$ onto $`Z`$ decreases distance since the metric is a product. So it is enough to show that $`b(r)=\mathrm{vol}_2(B_Z(r)H_1)`$ grows exponentially.

It is easy to see that $`\mathrm{vol}_2(B_Z(r))`$ grows exponentially with $`r`$. One way to see it is to consider the covering map $`\psi :ZW_1`$, and look at all lifts, under deck transformations, of a small ball around $`w_0W_1`$. The number of these disjoint lifted balls which are contained in $`B_Z(r)`$ increases exponentially because the fundamental group is free and therefore has exponential growth.

We need to show that the number of these lifted balls in each half $`H_1`$ or $`H_2`$ increases exponentially. We show that for $`H_1`$.

Without loss of generality we assume that $`\varphi _{a_2}(p_0)H_1`$. We claim that under the deck transformations corresponding to the subset $`S=\{sa_2sa_2\text{ is a reduced word}\}\pi _1(W_1,w_0)`$, the image of $`p_0`$ is in $`H_1`$. Recall that $`Z`$ is a thickening of the the Cayley graph of $``$ and the action of the deck transformation corresponding to the action of the free group on its Cayley graph. Now the statement follows since the Cayley graph is a tree. But the number of elements in $`S`$ of length less than or equal $`m`$ increases exponentially as $`m\mathrm{}`$. This finishes the proof of the claim. Therefore $`\mathrm{vol}_2(H_1S)b(r)`$ grows exponentially and that finishes the proof for $`\rho =1`$.

Now we turn to the general case where $`0<\rho 1`$. We showed that there exists $`0<ϵ`$ such that for large values of $`r`$, $`e^{ϵr}inf(\mathrm{vol}_2(\widehat{f_r}))`$, where the infimum is taken over all $`1`$-admissible fillings, i.e. the fillings which lie in $`C_r(x_0)=XB_r^{}(x_0)`$. Fix $`0<\rho 1`$ and let $`\pi _{\rho r}^r:S_r(x_0)S_{\rho r}(x_0)`$, be the projection map. Let $`g`$ be any $`\rho `$-admissible filling of $`f_r`$. Clearly $`\pi _{\rho r}^rg`$ is a $`1`$-admissible filling of $`\pi _{\rho r}^rf_r=f_{\rho r}`$. Therefore $`\mathrm{vol}_2(g)\mathrm{vol}_2(\pi _{\rho r}^rg)e^{ϵ\rho r}`$, as long as $`r`$ is big enough. And this finishes the proof.

###### Remark 7.1.

In \[Ger94a\] Gersten studied the growth rate of the $`\mathrm{div}_0`$ invariant for a large class of $`3`$-manifolds including graph manifolds. Gersten showed in Theorem 5 that a closed Haken $`3`$-manifold is a graph manifold if and only if the $`\mathrm{div}_0`$ invariant has a quadratic growth. The author would like to thank Bruce Kleiner for bringing this paper to his attention.

## Appendix A

In this appendix we give a different proof of the following theorem.

###### Theorem A.1 (Leuzinger \[Leu00\]).

If $`X`$ is a rank $`k`$ symmetric space of nonpositive curvature, then $`\mathrm{div}_{k1}(X)`$ has exponential growth.

###### Proof.

We use the same notation as in section 4. Fix a maximal $`k`$-flat $`F`$ passing through $`x_0`$. Fix a Weyl chamber $`𝒞`$ in $`F`$. Let $`v𝒞`$ be the algebraic centroid of $`𝒞`$. We identify $`X(\mathrm{})`$ and $`S_r(x_0)`$. Since the set of regular points is an open subset of $`S_r(x_0)`$ with the cone topology, we can find $`0<\eta `$ such that the set S = $`\{wS_r(x_0)\mathrm{}_{x_0}(v,w)<\eta \}`$ does not contain any singular point. Moreover by choosing $`\eta `$ small enough we may assume that $`S𝒩_ϵ`$. To see this it is enough to show a small neighborhood (with respect to the cone topology) of $`v`$ is contained in $`𝒩_ϵ`$. Take any sequence $`\{v_n\}`$ which converges to $`v`$ in the cone topology. We may assume that $`v_n`$ is a regular point for each $`n`$ since the set of regular points is open. Any open Weyl chamber is a fundamental domain of the action of $`K`$ on the set of regular points in $`X(\mathrm{})`$, see proposition $`\mathrm{2.17.24}`$ in \[Ebe96\]. Note that the algebraic centroid of a Weyl chamber is mapped to the algebraic centroid of another Weyl chamber under the action of $`K`$. Therefore for large values of $`n`$, $`v_n`$ would be close to the algebraic centroid of the unique Weyl chamber containing $`v_n`$, and therefore contained in $`𝒩_ϵ`$.

Let $`f_r:S^{k1}S_r(x_0)F`$ be a diffeomorphism. We will show that any filling of $`f_r`$ grows exponentially with $`r\mathrm{}`$. Assume not, then for each $`n`$ there is a filling $`\widehat{f_n}`$ for $`f_n`$ such that the $`\mathrm{vol}_k(\widehat{f_n})`$ grows sub-exponentially. Let $`\pi _1^n:S_n(x_0)S_1(x_0)`$ be the projection map. By Lemma 4.1 $`\mathrm{vol}_k(\pi _1^n\widehat{f_n}𝒩_ϵ)\mathrm{vol}_k(\widehat{f_n})(\mathrm{sinh}\delta /\mathrm{sinh}\delta n)`$, which goes to zero as $`n\mathrm{}`$. Let $`\varphi `$ be the projection to the flat $`F`$. And $`g_n`$ be the projection of $`\pi _1^n\widehat{f_n}`$ to $`F`$. The image of $`g_n`$ has to cover the closed unit ball in $`F`$.

For every $`w𝒩_ϵ`$, $`\mathrm{}_{x_0}(v,w)\eta `$ and therefore $`d(\varphi (w),v)2a=1\mathrm{cos}\eta `$. Let $`A=B_a(v)B_1(x_0)`$ be the part of the $`k`$-ball in the flat $`F`$ centered at $`v`$ with radius $`a`$ which lies inside the unit closed $`k`$-ball in $`F`$. Now it is easy to see that the only part of $`g_n`$ which will lie inside $`A`$ would be coming from the portion inside $`𝒩_ϵ`$. The $`k`$-volume of that part goes to zero as $`n\mathrm{}`$, nevertheless it has to cover $`A`$ which is a contradiction. Therefore the filling of $`f_r`$ grows exponentially. ∎


format: text

text:
# Time-dependent evolution of quasi-spherical, self-gravitating accretion flow

## 1 Introduction

Accretion processes are now believed to play a major role in many astrophysical objects, from protostars to disks around compact stars and AGN. Such systems have been studied at different levels depending on their physical properties. Geometry of the disk (thin or thick), transport of the thermal energy inside the disk, self-gravity of the accreting gas and the magnetic fields are among the most important factors which shape any theory for such systems. For simplicity, traditional models of accretion disks assume geometrically thin configuration and neglect self-gravity of the accreting material (Shakura and Sunyaev 1973; Pringle 1981). These models have been extended by considering large scale magnetic fields, polytropic equation of state and better understanding of the mechanism of angular momentum transport (e.g., Livio and Pringle 1992; Ogilvie 1997; Duschl, Strittmatter and Biermann 2000). However, the key ingredient in all such models is that the generated heat by turbulent viscosity does not remain in the flow. In other words, all of the viscously dissipated energy was assumed to be radiated away immediately.

Another type of accretion flow known as Advection-Dominated Accretion Flow (ADAF) has been proposed, in which generated heat by viscosity can not escape from the system and retains in the flow (Ichimaru 1977; Narayan and Yi 1994). During recent years, ADAFs have been paid attention as plausible states of accretion flows around black holes, active galactic nuclei or dim galactic nuclei (for review see Kato, Fukue and Mineshige 1998). Using similarity method, Ogilvie (1999) (hereafter; OG) extended original steady state self-similar solutions to time dependent case. His solutions describe quasi-spherical time dependent advection dominated accretion flows.

On the other hand, many authors tried to study the effects related to the disk self-gravity. Recent observations show significant deviations from Keplerian rotation in objects that are believed to be accretion disk, and in some cases, there are strong evidences that the amount of mass in the disk is large (e.g., Drimmel 1996; Greenhill 1996). The role of self-gravity in accretion disks was discussed by Paczyński (1978), who studied vertical structure of the disk under the influence of self-gravity. Some authors investigated role of self-gravity on waves in the disk (Lin and Pringle 1987; Lin and Pringle 1990). Within the framework of geometrically thin configuration, Mineshige and Umemura (1996) extended classical self-similar ADAF solution (Narayan and Yi 1994) and found a global one dimensional disk solutions influenced by self-gravity both in the radial and perpendicular directions to the disk. In another study, Mineshige and Umemura (1997) extended previous steady solutions to the time dependent case while the effect of self-gravity of the disk had been taken into account. They used isothermal equation of state and so their solutions describe a viscous accretion disk in slow accretion limit. Then, Mineshige, Nakayma and Umemura (1997) extended this study by obtaining solutions for polytropic viscous accretion disks. Also, Tsuribe (1999) studied self-similar collapse of an isothermal viscous accretion disk.

Although solution of Mineshige and Umemura (1996) describes self-gravitating ADAFs, applicability of the solution restricts to geometrically thin configurations. The most appropriate geometrical configuration for advective flows, rather than thin, is quasi-spherical as has been confirmed by many authors (e.g, Narayan and Yi 1995). OG presented the first semi-analytical quasi-spherical, time-dependent ADAFs solution. Here we note that although OG considered advection-dominated accretion flow in a point mass potential, it is straightforward to relax this assumption so as to describe the effect of self-gravitation on quasi-spherical advection-dominated accretion flows using time-dependent similarity solutions.

This paper is organized as follows. In section 2 the general problem of constructing a model for quasi-spherical, self-gravitating accretion flow is defined. The self-similar solutions are presented in section 3, and the effects of the input parameters are examined. We summarize the results in section 4.

## 2 Formulation of the Problem

We start with the approach adopted by Ogilvie (1999) who studied quasi-spherical accretion flow without self-gravity. In his approach, the equations are written in spherical coordinates $`(r,\theta ,\phi )`$ by considering the equatorial plane $`\theta =\frac{\pi }{2}`$ and neglecting terms with any $`\theta `$ and $`\phi `$ dependence. It implies that each physical variable represents approximately spherically averaged quantity. So, all the physical quantities depend only on the spherical radius $`r`$ and time $`t`$. Self-gravity of the accreting gas can be considered simply by Poisson equation and the corresponding term in the momentum equation. The governing equations are the continuity Equation,

$$\frac{\rho }{t}+\frac{1}{r^2}\frac{}{r}(r^2\rho v_\mathrm{r})=0,$$
(1)
the Equations of motion,

$$\frac{v_\mathrm{r}}{t}+v_\mathrm{r}\frac{v_\mathrm{r}}{r}+\frac{1}{\rho }\frac{p}{r}+\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{r}+\frac{GM_{}}{r^2}=\frac{v_\phi ^2}{r},$$
(2)
$$\rho (\frac{}{t}(rv_\phi )+v_\mathrm{r}\frac{}{r}(rv_\phi ))=\frac{1}{r^2}\frac{}{r}[\nu \rho r^4\frac{}{r}(\frac{v_\phi }{r})],$$
(3)
the Poisson’s Equation,

$$\frac{1}{r^2}\frac{}{r}(r^2\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{r})=4\pi G\rho ,$$
(4)
and the energy Equation,

$$\frac{1}{\gamma 1}(\frac{p}{t}+v_\mathrm{r}\frac{p}{r})+\frac{\gamma }{\gamma 1}\frac{p}{r^2}\frac{}{r}(r^2v_\mathrm{r})=\nu \rho r^2[\frac{}{r}(\frac{v_\phi }{r})]^2.$$
(5)
In order to solve the equations, we need to assign the kinematic coefficient of viscosity $`\nu `$. Although there are many uncertainties about the exact form of viscosity, authors introduce some prescriptions for $`\nu `$ regarding dimensional analysis or just based on phenomenological considerations (e.g, Duschl, Strittmatter and Biermann 2000). We employ the usual $`\alpha `$ prescription for the viscosity, which we write as (Shakura and Sunyaev 1973)

$$\nu =\alpha \frac{p}{\rho \mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{k}},$$
(6)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{k}=(GM_{}/r^3)^{1/2}`$ is the Keplerian angular velocity at radius $`r`$. This prescription originally introduced for viscosity in thin accretion disk, however, it has been widely used for studying dynamics of thick accretion disk, such as ADAFs.

To simplify the equations, we make the following substitutions:

$$\rho \widehat{\rho }\rho ,p\widehat{p}p,v_{r,\phi }\widehat{v}v_{r,\phi },\mathrm{\Psi }\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{\Psi },r\widehat{r}r,t\widehat{t}t,$$
(7)
where

$$\widehat{v}=\sqrt{\frac{GM_{}}{\widehat{r}}}=\frac{\widehat{r}}{\widehat{t}},\widehat{t}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{4\pi G\widehat{\rho }}},\widehat{p}=\widehat{\rho }\widehat{v}^2,\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}=\frac{GM_{}}{\widehat{r}}.$$
(8)
Under these transformation, the continuity equation does not change and the rest of equations are cast into

$$\frac{v_\mathrm{r}}{t}+v_\mathrm{r}\frac{v_\mathrm{r}}{r}+\frac{1}{\rho }\frac{p}{r}+\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{r}+\frac{1}{r^2}=\frac{v_\phi ^2}{r},$$
(9)
$$\rho (\frac{}{t}(rv_\phi )+v_\mathrm{r}\frac{}{r}(rv_\phi ))=\frac{\alpha }{r^2}\frac{}{r}[pr^{11/2}\frac{}{r}(\frac{v_\phi }{r})],$$
(10)
$$\frac{1}{r^2}\frac{}{r}(r^2\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{r})=\rho ,$$
(11)
$$\frac{1}{\gamma 1}(\frac{p}{t}+v_\mathrm{r}\frac{p}{r})+\frac{\gamma }{\gamma 1}\frac{p}{r^2}\frac{}{r}(r^2v_\mathrm{r})=\alpha pr^{7/2}[\frac{}{r}(\frac{v_\phi }{r})]^2.$$
(12)
## 3 Self-Similar Solutions

We look for self-similar solutions of Equations (1) and (9)-(12) and reduce this system into a set of ordinary differential equations. We define a self-similar variable

$$\xi =\frac{r}{(t_0t)^{2/3}},$$
(13)
where $`t<t_0`$ and demand that

$$\rho (r,t)=(t_0t)^2R(\xi ),$$
(14)
$$p(r,t)=(t_0t)^{8/3}P(\xi ),$$
(15)
$$v_\mathrm{r}(r,t)=(t_0t)^{1/3}V(\xi ),$$
(16)
$$v_\phi (r,t)=(t_0t)^{1/3}\mathrm{\Phi }(\xi ),$$
(17)
$$\mathrm{\Psi }(r,t)=(t_0t)^{2/3}S(\xi ).$$
(18)
Substituting these expressions into the above Equations, we obtain the following set of self-similar Equations:

$$\frac{2}{9}\xi +\frac{1}{R}\frac{dP}{d\xi }+\frac{dS}{d\xi }+\frac{1}{\xi ^2}=\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }^2}{\xi },$$
(19)
$$\xi ^3R(\mathrm{\Phi }+2\xi \frac{d\mathrm{\Phi }}{d\xi })=3\alpha \frac{d}{d\xi }[P\xi ^{11/2}\frac{d}{d\xi }(\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }}{\xi })],$$
(20)
$$\frac{1}{\xi ^2}\frac{d}{d\xi }(\xi ^2\frac{dS}{d\xi })=R,$$
(21)
$$\frac{2}{3}(\frac{43\gamma }{\gamma 1})=\alpha \xi ^{7/2}[\frac{d}{d\xi }(\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }}{\xi })]^2.$$
(22)
Interestingly, the continuity Equation is integrable and gives $`\xi ^2R(\xi +3V/2)=C`$, where $`C`$ is a constant and should be zero. Thus,

$$V=\frac{2}{3}\xi .$$
(23)
Also, we can obtain rotational similarity function $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\xi )`$ simply by integrating Equation (22),

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\xi )=\frac{\xi }{\xi _\mathrm{s}}\mathrm{\Phi }_s+\frac{4\lambda }{3}(\xi ^{1/4}\xi _\mathrm{s}^{3/4}\xi ).$$
(24)
where

$$\lambda =\sqrt{\frac{2}{3\alpha }(\frac{43\gamma }{1\gamma })},$$
(25)
and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{s}`$ is rotational velocity at some $`\xi _\mathrm{s}`$. For simplicity, we assume that $`\xi _\mathrm{s}`$ defines the outer boundary of the accretiong gas. This Equation correctly gives $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\xi =0)=0`$, and reaches to a maximum $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{m}`$ by increasing $`\xi `$ from zero to a point at $`\xi _\mathrm{m}`$. One can simply show

$$\xi _\mathrm{m}=\frac{1}{4\sqrt[3]{4}}(\frac{\xi _\mathrm{s}}{\sqrt[4]{\xi _\mathrm{s}}\sqrt[4]{\xi _0}})^{4/3},$$
(26)
where $`\xi _0=3\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{s}/4\lambda `$ and

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{m}=\frac{\lambda }{\sqrt[3]{4}}(\frac{\xi _\mathrm{s}}{\sqrt[4]{\xi _\mathrm{s}}\sqrt[4]{\xi _0}})^{1/3}.$$
(27)
Clearly, behaviour of rotational velocity and the other physical variables except for the radial velocity, depend on $`\xi _\mathrm{s}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{s}`$. We can consider both $`\xi _\mathrm{s}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{s}`$ as free parameters, however, it’s possible to determine them uniquely, if we parameterize self-similar solutions using conserved quantities, e.g. mass of the system. As can be seen from the definition of $`\lambda `$, the above self-similar solutions are applicable within the range of $`1<\gamma <4/3`$ if we consider a positive value for $`\alpha `$.

We can derive asymptotic solutions when approaching the origin $`\xi =0`$ as follows

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\xi )\frac{4}{3}\lambda \xi ^{1/4},$$
(28)
$$R(\xi )4(\frac{2}{3}\lambda ^2+\frac{1}{11\alpha })\xi ^{3/2},$$
(29)
$$P(\xi )\frac{32}{33\alpha }(\frac{2}{3}\lambda ^2+\frac{1}{11\alpha })\xi ^1.$$
(30)
These asymptotic solutions are valuable when performing numerical integrations to obtain similarity solutions starting from $`x0^+`$. Note that the behaviour of the solutions near to origin only depends on $`\lambda `$ and $`\alpha `$.

We now proceed to solve the rest of above similarity Equations. By substituting Equation (24) into Equation (20), we obtain

$$\frac{15}{4}P+\xi \frac{dP}{d\xi }=f(\xi )R.$$
(31)
where

$$f(\xi )=\frac{\xi ^{1/4}}{3\alpha \lambda }[3\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{s}}{\xi _\mathrm{s}}\xi +4\lambda (\frac{1}{2}\xi ^{1/4}\xi _\mathrm{s}^{3/4}\xi )].$$
(32)
After some algebra, from this Equation and Equations (19) and (21), the following Equation is obatined:

$$\frac{15}{4}fP\frac{d^2P}{d\xi ^2}=S_1(\xi ,P,dP/d\xi )+S_2(\xi ,P,dP/d\xi )+S_3(\xi ,P,dP/d\xi ),$$
(33)
where

$$S_1=\frac{19}{4}f(\frac{dP}{d\xi })^2(\frac{df}{d\xi })(\frac{dP}{d\xi })(\frac{15}{4}P+\xi \frac{dP}{d\xi }),$$
(34)
$$S_2=\frac{g}{\xi ^2}(\frac{15}{4}P+\xi \frac{dP}{d\xi })^2\frac{1}{f}(\frac{15}{4}P+\xi \frac{dP}{d\xi })^3,$$
(35)
$$S_3=2\frac{f}{\xi }\frac{dP}{d\xi }(\frac{15}{4}P+\xi \frac{dP}{d\xi }),$$
(36)
$$g(\xi )=\frac{d}{d\xi }(\frac{2}{9}\xi ^3+\xi \mathrm{\Phi }^2).$$
(37)
This Equation can easily be integrated considering appropriate boundary conditions. We can parameterize the solutions by $`\xi _\mathrm{s}`$ as a function of the mass of the accreting gas and the viscosity parameter $`\alpha `$. For simplicity, we assume $`R(\xi _\mathrm{s})=R_\mathrm{s}`$ and $`P(\xi _\mathrm{s})=P_\mathrm{s}`$. Total mass of the accreting gas is

$$M=4\pi _0^{\mathrm{}}\rho r^2𝑑r.$$
(38)
Using similarity solutions, this Equation reads

$$M=M_{}_0^{\xi _\mathrm{s}}R\xi ^2𝑑\xi .$$
(39)
Substituting from Poisson Equation (21), we have

$$M=M_{}\xi _\mathrm{s}^2\frac{dS}{d\xi }|_{\xi _\mathrm{s}},$$
(40)
By inserting $`dS/d\xi `$ from Equation (19) into the above Equation, we finally obtain

$$M=M_{}[\xi _\mathrm{s}\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{s}^2+\frac{2}{9}\xi _\mathrm{s}^3\frac{\xi _\mathrm{s}^2}{R_\mathrm{s}}(\frac{dP}{d\xi })_\mathrm{s}1].$$
(41)
Another relation is obtained from Equation (31), as follows

$$\frac{15}{4}P_\mathrm{s}+\xi _\mathrm{s}(\frac{dP}{d\xi })_\mathrm{s}=f(\xi _\mathrm{s})R_\mathrm{s},$$
(42)
where

$$f(\xi _\mathrm{s})=\frac{\sqrt[4]{\xi _\mathrm{s}}}{3\alpha \lambda }(3\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{s}2\lambda \sqrt[4]{\xi _\mathrm{s}}).$$
(43)
Now, we can use the standard fourth-order Runge-Kutta scheme to integrate nonlinear ordinary differential equation (33) from sufficiently small $`\xi `$ to $`\xi _\mathrm{s}`$. Given $`\xi _\mathrm{s}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{s}`$ and using asymptotic solutions near to the origin (i.e., equations (29) and (30)), one can start numerical integration and equation (41) gives corresponding ratio of masses, i.e. $`M/M_{}`$. Before presenting results of integration, it would be interesting to explore the typical behaviour of rotational velocity $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\xi )`$.

Just as an illustrative example we follow another approach: lets assume that we know $`R_\mathrm{s}`$, $`P_\mathrm{s}`$ and $`M/M_{}`$ from numerical integration and so, one can determine $`\xi _\mathrm{s}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{s}`$ from Equations (41) and (42) uniquely. For example, if we set $`P_\mathrm{s}=0`$ and $`(dP/d\xi )_\mathrm{s}=0`$ and consider non-zero but negligible $`R_\mathrm{s}`$, the outer boundary of the system is determined analytically

$$\xi _\mathrm{s}=\sqrt[3]{2\lambda ^4+4.5(\frac{M}{M_{}}+1)\sqrt{4\lambda ^4(\lambda ^4+4.5(\frac{M}{M_{}}+1))}},$$
(44)
and

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{s}=\frac{2}{3}\lambda \sqrt[4]{\xi _\mathrm{s}}.$$
(45)
In this case, Figure 1 shows $`\xi _\mathrm{s}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{s}`$ as functions of $`\alpha `$ for $`\gamma =5/4`$ and $`M/M_{}=0.6,1,1.5`$ and $`2.5`$. As this Figure shows for fixed ratio of masses, the outer radius of the system increases by increasing the viscosity coefficient $`\alpha `$. Also, if the ratio of masses increases, the outer radius increases irrespective of the exact value of $`\alpha `$. However, rotational velocity at $`\xi _\mathrm{s}`$ (i.e. $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{s}`$) is not very sensitive to values of $`\alpha `$ or $`M/M_{}`$ for large values of $`\alpha `$. If the viscosity coefficient $`\alpha `$ tends to small values, on the other hand, the rotational velocity $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{s}`$ increases significantly.

In Figure 2, we plot rotational velocity of representative cases with $`\alpha =0.01,0.1`$ and $`M/M_{}=0.6,1.5,2.5`$. As this Figure shows, rotation of the flow increases from the center to the outer radius. There are two regimes as rotation of the flow concerns. While in the outer part, profile of the rotational velocity in similarity space is nearly flat, in the inner portion this velocity strongly increases. However, for low values of $`\alpha `$ (e.g. $`0.01`$), rotational velocity reaches to a maximum then with nearly constant and small slope decreases. Also, the rotational velocity increases as the parameter $`\alpha `$ decreases and the outer region with flat rotation profile becomes larger, as the ratio of the mass of the accreting gas to the mass of the central object increases. In other words, while rotational behaviour of the inner part is nearly independent of the ratio of masses, the outer portion’s rotation and it’s extension are sensitive to that ratio.

In Figure 3, typical behaviour of the density and the pressure in similarity space are shown. We can see in the inner region the solutions can clearly be described by asymptotic solutions (29) and (30), however, outer region has different density and pressure profiles. Interestingly, behaviour of solutions in the inner region is independent of the extension of the system ($`\xi _\mathrm{s}`$) and the rotational velocity $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{s}`$. As the ratio of $`M/M_{}`$ increases, the extension of the outer region becomes larger. Flows with large values of $`\alpha `$ have lower central mass concentration comparing to accretions with low values of $`\alpha `$. Generally, one can say quasi-spherical, self-gravitating accretion flows of our model consist of two parts, one inner portion with high density and an outer part with nearly lower density and flat rotation profile. However, in both regions the radial velocity is the same, irrespective of the input parameters.

From Equations (16) and (17), we can simply show that the ratio of the radial velocity to the rotational velocity is $`v_\mathrm{r}(r,t)/v_\phi (r,t)=V/\mathrm{\Phi }`$. Figure 4 shows this ratio for $`\alpha =0.1`$ and $`0.01`$ and three different values of $`M/M_{}`$. Clearly, this ratio of velocities are much smaller than unity, implying that at each radius $`r`$ and at any time $`t`$, rotational velocity is greater than the radial velocity. However, as the viscosity parameter $`\alpha `$ increases, the ratio increases as well. This behaviour is easy to understand; because we showed that radial similarity velocity $`V`$ is proportional to similarity variable $`\xi `$, independent of the input parameters. However, rotational similarity velocity $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ decreases by increasing the parameter $`\alpha `$, as can be seen from Figure 2. So, the ratio $`V/\mathrm{\Phi }`$ increases in the case that $`\alpha `$ increases.

As we showed the total mass of the accreting gas is conserved. We can simply write the integral representing the angular momentum as $`J=4\pi \rho v_\phi r^3𝑑r`$. Using the similarity solutions, we can show that the total angular momentum $`J`$ is proportional to $`(t_0t)^{1/3}`$. In non-self-gravitating quasi-spherical accretion flow, $`J`$ is conserved and the total mass $`M`$ is proportional to $`(t_0t)^{1/3}`$ as has been shown by OG. But our solutions imply that the total mass of accreting material is conserved and angular momentum is decreasing. Also, the central density $`\rho _\mathrm{c}`$ increases as $`\rho _\mathrm{c}(t_0t)^2`$. For non-self-gravitating flow, we see another behaviour: $`\rho _\mathrm{c}(t_0t)^{7/3}`$. However, the radius of the flow in both cases decreases in proportion to $`(t_0t)^{2/3}`$.

## 4 Summary

In this paper, we have studied quasi-spherical accretion flow, in which heat generated by viscosity retained in the flow. In opposition to the usual studies performed up to now, we have considered self-gravity of the flow. We derived similarity solutions for such flows which are applicable within the range $`0<\gamma <4/3`$, if we consider positive value of $`\alpha `$. Radial and rotational velocities have been obtained analytically. Obtained solutions parameterized by the ratio of the disk mass to the central object mass, $`M/M_{}`$, and the viscosity parameter, $`\alpha `$. We showed that the extension of the accreting gas depends on this ratio and the viscosity parameter. More importantly, these input parameters have direct effect on the rotational velocity.

Our solutions are different from the solutions by OG in various respects. We found that the radial similarity velocity is in proportion to $`\xi `$, implying no critical point. This fortunate circumstance let us to integrate rest of the Equations simply, although physically one should bear in mind this kind of velocity (i.e., independent of input parameters) is as a result of mathematical limitations of similarity method. At the outer edge of the accreting gas, the density and the pressure have low values comparing to the central region.

Other viscosity laws have been proposed, for instance the $`\beta `$-prescription which is based on analogy with turbulence observed in laboratory sheared flows and gives $`\nu v_\phi r`$ (Duschl, Strittmatter and Biermann 2000). Although we have not explored self-gravitating accretion with this prescription, there are self-similar solutions with similarity indices the same as those have been found with $`\alpha `$-prescription in this paper. However, ordinary differential equations governing the similarity physical variables are different and should be solved numerically. It would be interesting one compare the similarity solutions with $`\beta `$-prescription with those we have obtained here.

I thank the anonymous referee for his/her report which showed an error in the initial version of the paper, prompting me to find the correct form of the asymptotic solutions near to the origin.


text:
# Heisenberg Spins on a Circular Conical Surface

Abstract

We investigate classical Heisenberg spins on a conical surface. The energy and configuration of non-trivial spin distributions are obtained using a non-conventional method based on Einstein theory of gravity in lower dimensions.
PACS numbers: 75.10. Hk; 75.10.-b; 05.45.Yv;
Keywords: Solitons; Magnetic materials; Curved surfaces.
Corresponding author: A. R. Pereira
e-mail: apereira@ufv.br
Tel.: +55-31-3899-2988.
Fax: +55-31-3899-2483.

The study of low-dimensional, artificially structured materials is becoming increasingly important as we move to an era of important technological realizations. Physics in two spatial dimensions has generated a lot of information and surprises. Moreover, if the system lies on a curved surface, it adds further richness to the physical phenomena \[1-4\]. Recently, it has become possible the fabrication of magnetic films grown on a curved substrate . Researchers already discovered how to produce graphitic cones in 1997 . In this letter we consider Heisenberg spins on a conic support. Although we do not know of physically relevant examples, it should be interesting to investigate the behavior of topological structures on exotic surfaces. After all, artificially structured materials are produced each day leading to new knowledge and technologies. Besides, the idea that topologically nontrivial excitations arise in real physical systems had a strong impact on modern physics. These structures became an object of intensive investigations in many condensed matter models and particularly they are believed to play an important role in magnetic systems . Our main interest is to study the configuration and energy of such topological excitations on the surface of a cone.
As it is well known, the classical two-dimensional static ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic materials are well described, in the continuum limit, by the non-linear $`\sigma `$ model. This theory on the surface of a curved geometry is

$`H={\displaystyle \frac{J}{2}}{\displaystyle _S(D_i\stackrel{}{\psi })(D^i\stackrel{}{\psi })\sqrt{|g|}𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }},i=1,2`$ (1)
where $`D_i`$ is the covariant derivative, $`dS=\sqrt{|g|}d\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the surface , $`\sqrt{|g|}`$ is the determinant of the metric tensor $`g_{ij}`$ and the classical spin field $`\stackrel{}{\psi }`$ obeys the constraint $`\stackrel{}{\psi }^2=\psi _1^2+\psi _2^2+\psi _3^2=1`$. Here, we consider a non-conventional approach that may simplify the calculations significantly. Instead of using Hamiltonian (1) with adequate metric tensor for a cone surface and resolving it, we apply some results of general relativity. In fact, the conical geometry has connections with the problem of Einstein gravity in three space-time $`(2+1)`$ dimensions. This theory exhibits some unusual features, which can be deduced from the properties of the Eintein field equations and the curvature tensor . In regions which are free of matter, space-time is locally flat when the cosmological constant is zero . Although the local curvature in regions free of sources is unaffected by any matter in space-time, there is still nontrivial global effects. The reason that these spaces are not completely trivial is because of nontrivial boundary conditions on the flat coordinates. For instance, in the case of a massive point-particle sitting at rest in the origin, we have to remove a wedge out of space-time and identify opposite points of the wedge. In the static case, the unique two-dimensional spatial geometry satisfying this description is the cone . Really, the three-dimensional space-time around a point-particle of mass $`M`$ has an interval given by \[13-15\] $`ds^2=dt^2r^{8GM}(dr^2+r^2d\phi ^2)`$, where $`G`$ is the gravitational constant and $`r,\phi `$ are assumed to be the polar coordinates. Since the curvature vanishes everywhere except at the particle position, this interval can be written using local flat coordinates as $`ds^2=dt^2d\rho ^2\rho ^2d\varphi ^2`$, where

$`\rho ={\displaystyle \frac{r^\beta }{\beta }},\varphi =\beta \phi ,`$ (2)
and $`\beta =14GM`$. Note that although the situation looks trivial, the new coordinate $`\varphi `$ ranges from $`0`$ to $`2\pi \beta `$, indicating that there is a deficit angle in space. Thus, it is always possible to transform to coordinates in which $`g_{ij}`$ becomes the Minkowski metric, but paying a price, i.e., we will have to work with multivalued coordinates (or coordinates with strange boundary conditions). For a static space-time, coordinates can be chosen for which each of the $`t=constant`$ spatial sections are identical. We use these results to study a Heisenberg spin system on a conic surface.
In the case in which $`r,\phi `$ are the polar coordinates of a point in a two-dimensional plane, the metric tensor can be written as

$`g_{ij}=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}1& 0& \\ 0& r^2& \end{array}\right]`$ (5)
Then, it is easy to write Hamiltonian (1) for spins in a flat metric. In order to transform this Hamiltonian on a flat space to the problem of a conical surface, we write first $`r`$ and $`\phi `$ in terms of $`\rho `$ and $`\varphi `$ respectively, using $`\beta =1\alpha `$ for a space with a deficit angle equal to $`2\pi \alpha `$. It would imply that the cone surface makes an angle of $`\gamma =\mathrm{arcsin}(\beta )`$ with its symmetry z-axis (this axis passes for a point on the tip of the cone). Thus, Hamiltonian (1) can be easily written on a conical geometry as

$`H={\displaystyle \frac{J}{2}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi \beta }}(_i\stackrel{}{\psi })(^i\stackrel{}{\psi })\rho 𝑑\rho 𝑑\varphi ,`$ (6)
where $`_i`$ is the gradient written in terms of the coordinates ($`\rho ,\varphi `$). Now, we would like to get nonlinear excitation solutions with non-zero but finite energy on the surface of a cone. For the two-dimensional plane ($`\beta =1`$), these solutions are the well known Belavin-Polyakov (BP) solitons . Structurally, these excitations correspond to a mapping of the spin sphere ($`\stackrel{}{\psi }^2=1`$) onto the physical coordinate plane with a constant field $`\stackrel{}{\psi }`$ far from the soliton center. Essentially, the plane is compacted into a spherical surface and $`\stackrel{}{\psi }`$ is a mapping of the sphere to itself classified by a topological charge $`q`$ that gives the number of times $`\stackrel{}{\psi }`$ does this. Hence, there is the Bogomol’nyi inequality  $`H4\pi J|q|`$, where the minimum energy for a given $`q`$ is $`4\pi J|q|`$. In terms of the conformal representation $`w=(\psi _1+i\psi _2)/(1\psi _3)`$ , which is simply the stereographic projection of the vector $`\stackrel{}{\psi }`$ onto the complex plane, the BP-solitons are expressed as $`w_S=[(zz_0)/R]^n`$, where $`z=x+iy`$ and the constants $`R,z_0`$ appear due to scale and translational symmetry. The energy of these static structures is finite depending only upon the total topological charge $`|q|=n=1,2,3,\mathrm{}`$, and is given by $`4\pi J|q|`$; there is no preferred size $`R`$, position or orientation for a fundamental soliton.
For the conical geometry ($`0<\beta <1`$), part of the spin space sphere is not included in the mapping due to the deficit angle. Now, the exigency that $`\stackrel{}{\psi }`$ must be constant at infinity makes that the plane be compacted into a spherical surface with a hole on it. The area of the hole ($`4\pi \alpha `$) is surrounded by two lines (part of geodesics or great circles) drawn from the top point of the sphere (north pole) to the bottom (south pole) and separated each other along the equator by an arc length equal to $`2\pi \alpha `$. However, the identification of points across the wedge will close this hole, transforming the space sphere into a spheroid (something like an oval ball of the American football) with area $`4\pi \beta `$. At the same time, the spin sphere will have to become also a spin spheroid with the same shape of the space spheroid, due to the boundary conditions used after to remove a wedge from the physical space, i.e., the spins will have to obey the relation $`\stackrel{}{\psi }(0)=\stackrel{}{\psi }(2\pi \beta )`$. The surface of the spin spheroid should be written in terms of a new spin field $`\stackrel{}{\chi }=(\beta \psi _1,\beta \psi _2,\psi _3)`$, since this surface is flattened at equator, which has a radius $`\beta `$. As a consequence, we will find an one-to-one mapping from the set of points on the spin spheroid onto the set points on the cone (stereographic projection). However, this stereographic projection is difficult to be done because the spheroid surface does not has a so simple expression. Then, instead of using the elegant topological arguments as Belavin and Polyakov did for the flat space, we will solve explicitly the nonlinear partial differential equations obtained from Hamiltonian (4). To do this, we will consider explicitly only excitations with unitary topological charge. The generalization of the arguments is direct for generic $`q`$. To solve this Hamiltonian problem, it is convenient to parametrize the spin field in terms of two scalar fields $`\stackrel{}{\psi }=(\sqrt{1m^2}\mathrm{cos}(\mathrm{\Phi }),\sqrt{1m^2}\mathrm{sin}(\mathrm{\Phi }),m)`$, where $`m=\mathrm{cos}(\theta )`$, and $`\theta `$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ are the polar and the azimuthal angles respectively. Then, Hamiltonian (4) is expressed as

$`H_c={\displaystyle \frac{J}{2}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi \beta }}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{(\stackrel{}{}m)^2}{1m^2}}+(1m^2)(\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Phi }})^2\right]\rho 𝑑\rho 𝑑\varphi .`$ (7)
The equations of motion, obtained after variation of the above Hamiltonian $`\delta H_c=0`$, are given by

$`^2m+{\displaystyle \frac{m(\stackrel{}{}m)^2}{1m^2}}+m(1m^2)(\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{\Phi })^2=0,`$ (8)
$`^2\mathrm{\Phi }{\displaystyle \frac{2m\stackrel{}{}m\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{\Phi }}{1m^2}}=0.`$ (9)
Clearly, a special solution of Eqs.(6) and (7) is the soliton $`(m_c,\mathrm{\Phi }_c)`$ given by

$`m_c=\pm {\displaystyle \frac{\rho ^2\rho _0^2}{\rho ^2\rho _0^2}},\mathrm{\Phi }_c=\varphi .`$ (10)
where $`\rho _0`$ is a constant. In analogy with the usual case of a flat space, we associate the signals $`+`$ and $``$ with configurations with topological charges equal to $`+1`$ and $`1`$ respectively.
Now, to see the configuration of a soliton on the conical surface more clearly, it would be useful to return to variables $`(r,\phi )`$. Here, since the coordinate $`r`$ becomes the smallest distance of a point on the cone surface from the point in which the cone narrows to, i.e., the origin of the coordinates system or the tip of the cone, the soliton structure can be written in a general way as a simple function of $`\beta `$. In this case, the identification $`\mathrm{\Phi }_c(0)`$ with $`\mathrm{\Phi }_c(2\pi \beta )`$ is always possible for a configuration with radial symmetry. Thus, the soliton structure on a conic support is

$`m_c=\pm {\displaystyle \frac{r^{2\beta }R^{2\beta }}{r^{2\beta }+R^{2\beta }}},\mathrm{\Phi }_c=\beta \phi .`$ (11)
where $`R=\beta \rho _0^{1/\beta }`$ is the soliton size, obtained considering the points on the conical surface in which the spins are perpendicular to the cone axis (z-axis). These points form a circumference that divide the cone into two parts with relation to spin directions: above this line, $`m_c>0`$ ($`m_c<0`$), while below it, $`m_c<0`$ ($`m_c>0`$). This soliton size can be chosen arbitrarily since the energy of this structure is

$`E_c=4\pi J\beta ,`$ (12)
and does not depend on $`R`$. Then, such an excitation can have arbitrarily large size, thanks to the scale invariance of the Hamiltonian (5), and consequently, it can occupy all of space. Further, this structure has the spin $`\stackrel{}{\psi }`$ pointing in all different directions as $`\stackrel{}{r}`$ varies, but each cone can support only one soliton, since there is a preferred position for its nucleation. In fact, the solutions obtained here cannot move on the conical surface even for antiferromagnetic systems, which are, in general, Lorentz invariant. The reasons are simple; first, the translational symmetry was broken. Second, the Lorentz transformation is a global one while the cone surface has a Minkowski metric only locally. Hence these solitons are pinned to the tip point of the cone. Curiously, pinned non-linear excitations are also possible in a flat space with vacancies. Recently, some soliton solutions pinned to a nonmagnetic impurity were obtained \[8-12\] and experimentally observed  in two-dimensional flat magnetic materials. In this case, part of the spin space sphere cannot be included in the mapping (around the impurity), since there is no spin on a vacancy. Essentially, in these two situations (the flat space with vacancy and the cone), solitons are pinned to a determined point due to oppositive causes: in one case, there is a missing spin while in the other, it is missing space to put spins.
The above calculations can be easily generalized to excitations with $`|q|>1`$, which leads to a soliton energy equal to $`4\pi J\beta |q|`$. Clearly, $`q`$ gives the number of times the spin spheroid is traversed as we span the coordinate space as compacted into another spheroid. Of course, as expected, when $`\beta 1`$, $`E_c4\pi J|q|`$, which is the BP-soliton energy for solitons in the flat space. It is also important to note that Eqs. (9) and (10) are explicitly dependent on the geometry of the support (the parameter $`\beta `$ or $`\gamma =\mathrm{arcsin}(\beta )`$). While a cone does not have a characteristic length, it has a characteristic angle $`\gamma `$. The spin projection along the symmetry axis (z-axis) is extremely dependent on this angle. In Fig.(1), we plotted $`m_c`$ as a function of $`r`$ for $`q=\pm 1`$, $`\beta =1,1/2`$, $`1/4`$ and $`R=5`$ (in units of lattice constants). For small $`\beta `$ (i.e., a large deficit angle), $`m_c(r)`$ varies very slowly for $`r>R`$. Figures (2) and (3) show schematic representations of the spin configuration of a magnetic soliton with $`q=\pm 1`$ on a conical surface.
In summary, we have studied the Heisenberg spins on a conic support and obtained soliton solutions. It was shown that solitons can be formed on the tip of a cone. Part of the spin sphere on the region covered by the deficit angle is not included in the mapping, which results in a soliton energy equal to $`4\pi J\beta |q|`$. Then, the effect of removing a wedge from the flat space and identifying points across the wedge is essentially to change the BP-soliton configuration decreasing its energy. The results presented here may have relevance for the recently synthesized carbon nanocones  with appropriate magnetic coatings. If one or more sectors are excised from a single layer of graphite and the remainder is joined seamlessly, a cone results . By considering the symmetry of a graphite sheet and the Euler’s theorem, it can be shown that only five types of cone can be made from a continuous sheet of graphite corresponding to the following values of cone angles $`2\gamma =19.2^o,38.9^o,60.0^o,84.6^o,112.9^o`$. These are all synthesized . The solitons excited on the tips of these magnetically coated carbon nanocones would have energies given by $`E_c2.1J,4.2J,6.3J,8.5J`$ and $`10.5J`$ respectively. Besides the carbon nanocones, magnetic nanodots can be made of different shapes and display a variety of magnetic excitations. In the case of a magnetic dot with conical shape, the above solitons may be important for the resulting magnetization distributions. Really, in magnetic nanostructures, solitons can be stabilized by surface-induced interactions . Another possibility is to study a spin-polarized electron gas on the conical surface. Such an electron system was studied on a mesoscopic cylinder . Here, not only charges but also the spins may develop important role near the sharp point of the cone. These results are also relevant to field theories considered on manifolds with nontrivial geometry and have connection with lower dimensional gravity, mainly three-dimensional gravity, in which the non-linear $`\sigma `$ model is coupled to Einstein field.

We acknowledge support from CNPq (Brazil).

Figure Captions
Figure 1. The z-spin components $`m_c`$ of a soliton with $`q=1`$ on a conical surface versus $`r`$ for $`\beta =1`$ (solid line), $`\beta =1/2`$ (dashed line) and $`\beta =1/4`$ (dotted line). All these solitons have the same size $`R=5`$ (in units of lattice constants)
Figure 2. Schematic representation of a magnetic soliton with $`q=+1`$ on the conic support.
Figure 3. Schematic representation of a magnetic soliton with $`q=1`$ on the conic support.


text:
# The Pulsed Spectra of Two Extraordinary Pulsars

## 1 Introduction to the G11.2$``$0.3 Field

The region near the supernova remnant G11.2$``$0.3 is incredibly rich. Within a $`1\mathrm{deg}^2`$ are at least 5 supernova remnants (Brogan et al., 2003) and several young pulsars. $`1.2^{}`$ away is the Soft Gamma-Ray Repeater SGR 1806$``$20 and not much further away is the possible SGR 1801$``$23. However, this region does not appear to be along a tangent line of a spiral arm or especially abundant in star forming regions for an inner region of the Galactic plane. The region is within the area covered by the RXTE Galactic bulge montoring program (Swank and Markwardt, 2001). This in combination with the facts that SNR G11.2$``$0.3 is one of only 6-8 remnants associated with historical events (Clark and Stephenson, 1977) and SGR 1806$``$20 is one of only 4 confirmed SGRs has caused this small region to be unusually well observed. Even so, it is quite surprising that not only does the pulsar in SNR G11.2$``$0.3 have unusual X-ray properties, but that while monitoring it with RXTE a transient Anomalous X-ray Pulsar appeared within the PCA field of view. Here we report on the pulsed spectra of these two extraordinary pulsars.

## 2 PSR J1811$``$1925, the pulsar in SNR G11.2$``$0.3

SNR G11.2$``$0.3 is remarkable in several ways. It has a circular shell which is bright in both radio and X-rays with a central pulsar wind nebula (see Roberts et al., 2003; Tam et al., 2002, for details of the nebular emission). Measurements of the expansion of the radio shell have established its age to be $`\tau 2,000`$ yr (Tam and Roberts, 2003), which is consistent with being born in the historical event of 386 A.D. The PWN is powered by one of the brightest X-ray emitting pulsars, PSR J1811$``$1925, whose characteristic age is $`\tau _c24,000`$ yr (Torii et al., 1999). The discrepancy with the true age of the SNR implies it was born spinning near its current spin period $`P65`$ ms (Kaspi et al., 2001). The pulsar’s X-ray spectrum is very hard ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }1`$) and has broad, nearly sinusoidal pulse profile reminiscent of the profiles of PSR B1509$``$58 (Rots et al., 1998) and the pulsar in the distant young remnant Kes75 (Gotthelf et al., 2000), which are also very young spin-powered pulsars with very high hard X-ray efficiencies.

We have been monitoring PSR J1811$``$1925 with RXTE on a monthly basis since March 2002, with the hope of constraining the pulsar braking index to strengthen the case for a slow initial period. The timing properties will be reported elsewhere. Here, we present the pulse profile from the combined data set as a function of energy which is seen in both the PCA and HEXTE data (Fig. 1, 2), and measurements of the hard X-ray pulsed spectrum. The pulsed emission is very hard, the spectrum being well fit in the 2.5-30 keV band by a single power law with a photon index of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=1.16`$ (0.97 - 1.36, 90% confidence) with no sign of a cutoff in either the PCA or HEXTE data. The pulsations are clearly seen above 45 keV in the HEXTE data, remaining nearly sinusoidal. At the best determined distance of 5 kpc, assuming beaming into $`\pi `$ steradians implies a remarkable $`1\%`$ of the spin-down power is being emitted as pulsed 1-50 keV X-rays. The pulsed properties of PSR J1811$``$1925 are very similar to those of the young ($`\tau 1700`$ yr) 150 ms pulsar PSR B1509$``$58 (Rots et al., 1998). Both have broad profiles with no apparent dependence on energy, similar spectra up to 50 keV, and similar X-ray efficiencies. The spectrum of PSR B1509$``$58 shows curvature which becomes apparent only above 50 keV (Cusumano et al., 2001), steepening to a power law of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }1.7`$ before cutting off at $`10`$ MeV. The high X-ray efficiency of PSR J1811$``$1925 requires its emission to have curvature, a spectral break or cut-off below a few MeV, similar to PSR B1509$``$58 and leaves little power for GeV emission. However, unlike PSR B1509$``$58 which has $`B1.5\times 10^{13}`$ G and about three times the spin-down energy, or PSR J1846$``$0248 in Kes 75 which has an even higher magnetic field, PSR J1811$``$1925 has a typical magnetic field of $`2\times 10^{12}`$ G. This suggests that unusually efficient magnetospheric pulsed X-ray emission results from a special geometry and not from a high magnetic field or spin-down energy, which may have important implications for models of magnetospheric emission. Note as well that while PSR B1509$``$58 is a radio pulsar, neither PSR J1811$``$1925 or PSR J1846$``$0248 have yet been seen in radio despite targetted searches (Crawford et al., 2001).

## 3 A New AXP? XTE J1810$``$197 / PSR J1809$``$1943

In July 2003, a TOO observation of the soft $`\gamma `$-ray repeater SGR 1806$``$20 revealed the previously undetected 5.54 s X-ray pulsar XTE J1810$``$197/ PSR J1809$``$1943 (Markwardt et al., 2003) with a sinusoidal profile (Fig.3). Analysis of our G11.2$``$0.3 monitoring data showed the new pulsar first became detectable by RXTE in Jan. 2003. In combination with data from the PCA monitoring program of the Galactic bulge region (Swank and Markwardt, 2001), a phase connected timing solution has been obtained which shows large torque variations but an overall spin-down consistent with the new source being an anomalous X-ray pulsar Ibrahim et al. (2003). Subsequent observations with Chandra and XMM-Newton localized the source and measured its soft spectrum, which is best fit by a two component blackbody ($`kT0.3`$ keV and $`kT0.7`$ keV). Archival ROSAT and ASCA observations detected the source at a flux level about a factor of 100 less than the outburst flux, with a temperature similar to the lower blackbody temperature observed by XMM-Newton (Gotthelf et al., 2003).

In Fig.4 we present the pulsed flux history of the transient X-ray pulsar PSR J1809$``$1943 as observed in the G11.2$``$0.3 monitoring data covering the period from Jan. 2003 to Sep. 2003. All of the PCA observations are well fit by a single blackbody with $`kT=0.7`$ keV in the 2.5-8 keV range. There is no evidence for a change in the spectrum other than a drop of about 30% in the overall flux. During this time, there were spin-down torque fluctuations of more than a factor of 2. For the last three observations, spanning about 90 days, both the flux and the torque have remained essentially constant. If the current torque is approximately that of dipole braking, then the implied surface magnetic field is $`B3\times 10^{14}`$ G, on the low end of claimed magnetars. The absorption column towards the source is only $`nH0.6\times 10^{21}\mathrm{cm}^2`$, about one third that of G11.2$``$0.3, suggesting it might be significantly closer than the latter’s distance of 5 kpc. This also makes this source a good target for infrared studies. Even at a distance of only 1 kpc, the X-ray luminosity is $`5\times 10^{34}\mathrm{erg}^1`$, significantly larger than the spin-down torque. Thus, it meets the basic criteria for being an Anomalous X-ray pulsar.

This research was partially supported by NSERC Discovery and Steacie grants, the Canada Research Chairs, NATEQ, CIAR and NASA.