text:
# Constructing low degree hyperbolic surfaces in ℙ³

## 1. Introduction

A compact complex manifold is hyperbolic in the sense of Kobayashi if every holomorphic map from the complex line $``$ to the manifold is constant, as is the case for compact complex curves of genus $`2`$. In 1970, S. Kobayashi conjectured that generic hypersurfaces in $`^n`$ of sufficiently high degree are hyperbolic. Some progress has been made towards this conjecture. Demailly and El Goul \[DE\], and independently McQuillan \[Mc\] (with a slightly bigger degree estimate) proved that a very generic surface of degree at least 21 in $`^3`$ is hyperbolic in the sense of Kobayashi. Previously, Clemens \[Cl\] showed that very generic hypersurfaces of degree $`d2n1`$ contain no rational curves, which is a necessary condition for hyperbolicity. Actually, for $`n3`$, this also holds for $`d=2n2`$, and very generic hypersurfaces of degree $`d2n1`$ contain neither rational nor elliptic curves (Voisin \[Vo\]; see also \[CR, CLR, Ei, Pa, Xu1, Xu2\]). Thus it is natural to suppose that $`2n1`$ is the minimal degree for Kobayashi’s conjecture.

Many examples have been given of low degree hyperbolic projective hypersurfaces (e.g., \[SZ1, SZ2\] and the references therein). The examples of hyperbolic surfaces in $`^3`$ of lowest degree found to date are of degree 8 and were discovered independently by Duval \[Du\] and Fujimoto \[Fu\]. (A similar example of degree 10 was previously found by Shirosaki \[Sh\].)

In this paper, we provide a new approach to constructing hyperbolic surfaces in $`^3`$, giving another example of degree 8. Although this example is considerably more complicated than the Duval-Fujimoto example, we hope that our technique can be applied in the future to construct examples of lower degree. We also show that certain small deformations of 15 planes in general position in $`^3`$ are hyperbolic surfaces.

Our technique involves showing that small deformations $`X_t`$ of certain singular surfaces $`X_0^3`$ are hyperbolic. The surfaces $`X_0`$ that we deform, while not hyperbolic, satisfy a “hyperbolic non-percolation” property. In particular, we consider surfaces $`X_0`$ with “double curve” $`\overline{S}`$; i.e., the singular locus of $`X_0`$ is a 1-dimensional subvariety $`\overline{S}`$, and $`X_0`$ has two branches at general points of $`\overline{S}`$. If nearby surfaces in a linear pencil $`\{X_t\}`$ were not hyperbolic, then we can find a sequence $`t_n0`$ and a sequence of Brody curves $`f_{t_n}:X_{t_n}`$ converging to a Brody curve $`f:X_0`$. Recall that a Brody curve in a Hermitian complex manifold $`M`$ is a non-constant entire holomorphic curve $`g:M`$ such that $`g^{}(\zeta )`$ is bounded above by $`g^{}(0)`$. Brody \[Br\] proved that a compact complex manifold is hyperbolic iff it does not contain any Brody curves.

Our approach is to show using Hurwitz’s theorem that either

* $`f()\overline{S}\{p_j\}`$, where the $`p_j`$ are the multiple points of $`\overline{S}`$, or
* $`f()(X_0\overline{S})D`$, where $`D`$ is a finite subset of $`\overline{S}`$.

We say that $`X_0\overline{S}`$ has the property of hyperbolic non-percolation through $`D`$ if there are no Brody curves $`g:(X_0\overline{S})D`$. Hence, if in addition,

* $`\overline{S}\{p_j\}`$ is hyperbolic, and
* $`X_0\overline{S}`$ has the property of hyperbolic non-percolation through $`D`$,

then small deformations $`X_t`$ are hyperbolic. We illustrate our construction with two examples.

## 2. Deformation of 15 planes

In 1989, the second author \[Za\] showed that the complements of certain smooth, irreducible small deformations of 5 lines in $`^2`$ are complete hyperbolic and hyperbolically embedded. We begin by using our technique to give, as a parallel example, hyperbolic deformations of 15 planes in general position in $`^3`$.

Let $`L_j,j=1,\mathrm{},15`$, be linear functions on $`^4`$ defining hyperplanes

$$H_j:=\{z^3:L_j(z)=0\}$$

in general position; i.e., any 4 of the $`L_j`$ are linearly independent, or equivalently, every point of $`^3`$ is contained in at most 3 of the $`H_j`$. Let $`D=\{z^3:Q(z)=0\}`$ be a general quintic, and consider the linear pencil of surfaces:

$$G_t=\left\{_{j=1}^{15}L_j+tQ^3=0\right\}^3.$$

###### Theorem 2.1.

The surface $`G_t`$ is hyperbolic for sufficiently small $`t0`$.

###### Proof.

Suppose on the contrary that there exist $`t_n0`$ such that $`G_{t_n}`$ is not hyperbolic. Then we can find a sequence of Brody curves $`f_n:G_{t_n}`$ with $`supf_n^{}=f_n^{}(0)=1`$, where the norm is computed with respect to the Fubini-Study metric on $`^3`$. Then we can choose a subsequence, which we also denote by $`\{f_n\}`$, converging to a Brody curve $`f:_{j=1}^{15}H_j`$. Assume without loss of generality that $`f()H_{15}`$.

We first show that

(1)
$$f()\left(H_{15}\underset{j=1}{\overset{14}{}}H_j\right)D.$$

To verify (1), suppose that $`D`$ does not pass through any of the points $`H_iH_jH_k`$ ($`i,j,k`$ distinct), and that on the contrary $`f(\zeta _0)H_kD`$, where $`k15`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ be a small disk about $`\zeta _0`$ so that $`f(\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ does not intersect $`D`$; i.e., $`Qf(\zeta )0`$ for $`\zeta \overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$. Hence

$$_jL_jf_n(\zeta )=t_nQ^3f_n(\zeta )0,\zeta \mathrm{\Delta },n0.$$

Since $`L_kf(\zeta _0)=0`$, it follows from Hurwitz’s Theorem that $`L_kf0`$; i.e., $`f()H_kH_{15}`$. If $`j\{k,15\}`$ and $`f()`$ passes through the point $`p_{jk}:=H_jH_kH_{15}D`$, then by the above argument (replacing $`k`$ with $`j`$), we again conclude from Hurwitz’s Theorem that $`f()\{p_{jk}\}`$, contradicting the fact that $`f`$ is non-constant. Hence

$$f()H_kH_{15}\{p_{jk}:1j14,jk\}^1\{\text{13 points}\},$$

which implies that $`f`$ is constant, a contradiction. Therefore (1) holds.

We assume that the curves $`DH_j`$ are smooth (or have at most 4 double points), so that the degree 5 curve $`DH_{15}`$ is hyperbolic and hence $`f()D`$. Then by the Cartan Second Main Theorem \[Ca\] (see also \[Ko, §3.B\]) applied to the map $`f:H_{15}^2`$ and the 14 lines $`H_jH_{15}`$, we have

(2)
$$(143)T_f(r)\underset{j=1}{\overset{14}{}}N_2(H_j,r)+O(\mathrm{log}T_f(r)).$$

(Note that since Brody curves are of finite order $`2`$, the inequality holds without exceptional intervals.) As we have assumed that $`D`$ does not pass through any of the points $`H_iH_jH_k`$, (1) implies that

(3)
$$\underset{j=1}{\overset{14}{}}N_2(H_j,r)2\underset{j=1}{\overset{14}{}}N_1(H_j,r)2N(D,r).$$

Furthermore, by the Carlson-Griffiths First Main Theorem \[CG\] (see also \[NO, §5.2\], \[Ko, §8.4\]) applied to the divisor $`D`$, we have

(4)
$$N(D,r)5T_f(r)+O(1).$$

Combining the inequalities (2)–(4), we arrive at a contradiction.

Remark: In the second part of the proof of Theorem 2.1, we showed that the complement of 14 general lines in $`^2`$ has the property of hyperbolic non-percolation through (the intersection of these lines with) a general quintic. This should also hold for fewer lines; e.g., an open problem is whether the complement of 5 general lines in $`^2`$ has the property of hyperbolic non-percolation through a general sextic curve. This would imply that a general small deformation of 6 planes in general position in $`^3`$ is a hyperbolic sextic surface.

## 3. Deformation of a singular abelian surface

We now use our hyperbolic non-percolation technique to construct a new example of a hyperbolic surface of degree 8. This time, instead of deforming a reducible surface, we deform an irreducible surface $`X_0`$ with self-intersections.

The surface $`X_0`$ is described in \[LB\] and is defined as follows. Let $`A`$ be a simple abelian surface with an ample line bundle $`LA`$ of type $`(1,4)`$. Recall that an abelian variety is said to be simple if it does not contain any proper abelian subvariety. See \[LB, p. 47\] for the definition of line bundles of type $`(d_1,d_2)`$ on an abelian surface.

It follows from the Riemann-Roch Theorem and the Kodaira vanishing theorem that $`h^0(A,L)=\chi (L)=\frac{1}{2}LL=4`$ and hence $`\mathrm{deg}L:=LL=8`$ (see \[LB, p. 289\]). We let $`X_0=\phi _L(A)`$, where $`\phi _L:A^3`$ is the rational map defined by the linear system $`|L|`$. We shall establish the following result:

###### Theorem 3.1.

General small deformations of the surface $`X_0^3`$ are hyperbolic surfaces of degree $`8`$.

We begin with the description of $`X_0`$. By \[LB, pp. 308–312\], the surface $`X_0`$ is birational to $`A`$ and is given by

$$X_0=\{z^3:Q=0\},$$

where

$`Q`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda _{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\left(z_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{4}z_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{4}+z_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{4}z_{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{4}\right)+\lambda _{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\left(z_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{4}z_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{4}+z_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{4}z_{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{4}\right)+\lambda _{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\left(z_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{4}z_{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{4}+z_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{4}z_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{4}\right)`$
$`+2\lambda _1\lambda _2\left(z_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+z_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z_{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\right)\left(z_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+z_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z_{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\right)`$
$`+2\lambda _1\lambda _3\left(z_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z_{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\right)\left(z_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z_{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\right)`$
$`+2\lambda _2\lambda _3\left(z_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+z_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z_{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\right)\left(z_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z_{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+z_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\right)+\lambda _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z_{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}.`$
In fact, general choices of $`(\lambda _0,\mathrm{},\lambda _3)^4`$ give singular abelian surfaces (see Remark 3.3 in \[LB, p. 301\]).

Let $`H_j`$ denotes the coordinate plane $`\{z_j=0\}`$, and let

$$p_j:=(\delta _0^j:\delta _1^j:\delta _2^j:\delta _3^j)X_0\text{(so that }p_0=(1:0:0:0),\text{etc.)}$$

denote the vertices of the coordinate tetrahedron $`\{H_0,H_1,H_2,H_3\}`$ ($`0j3`$). The singular locus of $`X_0`$ consists of 4 double curves $`\overline{S}_j:=X_0H_j`$, $`j=0,1,2,3`$. The equation for, say, $`\overline{S}_3H_3`$ is

$$\lambda _1z_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+\lambda _2z_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+\lambda _3z_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}=0.$$

It is known \[LB, p. 312\] that $`\overline{S}_3`$ is an irreducible rational curve with $`3`$ ordinary double points at $`\{p_0,p_1,p_2\}`$. Generic points of $`\overline{S}_3`$ are ordinary double points of the surface $`X_0`$; i.e., $`X_0`$ is the union of two transversal smooth surface germs at generic points of $`\overline{S}_3`$. The set of points of $`\overline{S}_3`$ which are not ordinary double points of $`X_0`$ consists of the 3 double points $`\{p_0,p_1,p_2\}`$ of $`\overline{S}_3`$ together with 12 smooth points of $`\overline{S}_3`$, which are pinch points of $`X_0`$ (see \[LB, p. 312\]). The same description applies to the other double curves $`\overline{S}_0,\overline{S}_1,\overline{S}_2`$.

We need to know the structure of $`X_0`$ at the 4 vertices $`\{p_j\}`$. Let $`\overline{S}=_{j=0}^3\overline{S}_j`$. The singular set of $`\overline{S}`$ consists of the 4 points $`\{p_j\}`$. We shall show that each $`p_j`$ is an ordinary 6-fold singularity of $`\overline{S}`$; i.e., the germ of $`\overline{S}`$ at $`p_j`$ consists of 6 smooth local curves $`\{B_j^i\}_{1i6}`$ with distinct tangents ($`j=0,1,2,3`$). For example, $`\overline{S}_1,\overline{S}_2,\overline{S}_3`$ pass through $`p_0`$, each contributing 2 local components of the germ of $`\overline{S}`$ at $`p_0`$. To describe the tangents to the $`B_0^i`$, we write

$$\mu _1=\sqrt{\lambda _1},\mu _2=\sqrt{\lambda _2},\mu _3=\sqrt{\lambda _3},$$

and we use the affine coordinates

$$x=z_1/z_0,y=z_2/z_0,z=z_3/z_0$$

about $`p_0=(0,0,0)`$. Then the 6 tangent lines are

$$\mathrm{}_1^\pm =\{x=0,\mu _2y=\pm \mu _3z\},\mathrm{}_2^\pm =\{y=0,\mu _1x=\pm \mu _3z\},\mathrm{}_3^\pm =\{z=0,\mu _1x=\pm \mu _2y\},$$

where the 2 lines $`\mathrm{}_j^+,\mathrm{}_j^{}`$ are tangent to $`\overline{S}_j`$ at $`p_0`$ ($`j=1,2,3`$).

###### Lemma 3.2.

Let $`0j3`$. The germ of $`X_0`$ at $`p_j`$ consists of 4 smooth surface germs $`Y_j^1,\mathrm{},Y_j^4`$. Each of these surfaces contains exactly 3 of the 6 components $`B_j^1,\mathrm{}B_j^6`$ of the germ of $`\overline{S}`$ at $`p_j`$, and each of these components $`B_j^k`$ is contained in exactly 2 of the $`Y_j^i`$. The intersection of any 3 of the $`Y_j^i`$ is the germ of the point $`p_j`$.

###### Proof.

Clearly, the orbit of $`p_0`$ under Aut$`(X_0)`$ consists of the 4 vertices $`\{p_j\}`$. Thus it suffices to consider $`j=0`$. As before, fix the affine coordinates

$$x=z_1/z_0,y=z_2/z_0,z=z_3/z_0$$

about $`p_0`$. Then

$`Q`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda _{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\left(x^4+y^4z^4\right)+\lambda _{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\left(y^4+x^4z^4\right)+\lambda _{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\left(z^4+x^4y^4\right)`$
$`+2\lambda _1\lambda _2\left(x^2+y^2z^2\right)\left(y^2+x^2z^2\right)+2\lambda _1\lambda _3\left(x^2y^2z^2\right)\left(z^2x^2y^2\right)`$
$`+2\lambda _2\lambda _3\left(y^2+x^2z^2\right)\left(z^2+x^2y^2\right)+\lambda _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}x^2y^2z^2`$
$`=`$ $`az^4+bz^2+c,`$
where

$`a`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda _{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}x^4+2\lambda _2\lambda _1x^2y^2+\lambda _{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}y^4+2\lambda _3\lambda _2x^22\lambda _3\lambda _1y^2+\lambda _{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{2},`$
$`b`$ $`=`$ $`2\lambda _3\lambda _2x^4y^2+2\lambda _3\lambda _1x^2y^4+2\lambda _2\lambda _1x^42\lambda _2\lambda _1y^4+\lambda _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}x^2y^2+2\lambda _3\lambda _2y^2+2\lambda _3\lambda _1x^2,`$
$`c`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda _{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}x^4y^4+2\lambda _3\lambda _2x^2y^42\lambda _3\lambda _1x^4y^2+\lambda _{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}y^42\lambda _2\lambda _1x^2y^2+\lambda _{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}x^4`$
$`=`$ $`\left(\lambda _3x^2y^2\lambda _1x^2+\lambda _2y^2\right)^2.`$
We compute the discriminant

$$\delta :=b^24ac=x^2y^2\left(16\lambda _1\lambda _2\lambda _{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+\mathrm{}\right).$$

Hence in the local ring $`{}_{3}{}^{}𝒪_{0}^{}=[[x,y,z]]`$, we have the factorization $`Q=Q^+Q^{}`$, where

$`Q^\pm =\sqrt{a}z^2+{\displaystyle \frac{b\pm \sqrt{\delta }}{2\sqrt{a}}}`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda _3z^2+\lambda _1x^2+\lambda _2y^2\pm 2\sqrt{\lambda _1\lambda _2}xy+R_3(Q^\pm )`$
$`=`$ $`(\mu _1x\pm \mu _2y)^2(\mu _3z)^2+R_3(Q^\pm ).`$
Here, for any $`f{}_{3}{}^{}𝒪_{0}^{}`$, we let $`R_n(f)=_{k=n}^{\mathrm{}}f_k`$, where $`f_k`$ denotes the homogeneous terms of order $`k`$ in the Taylor expansion of $`f`$.

It follows that the tangent cone of $`X_0`$ at $`p_0`$ is the union of the 4 planes (in general position):

$`P^{++}`$ $`=`$ $`\{\mu _1x+\mu _2y+\mu _3z=0\},`$
$`P^+`$ $`=`$ $`\{\mu _1x+\mu _2y\mu _3z=0\},`$
$`P^+`$ $`=`$ $`\{\mu _1x\mu _2y+\mu _3z=0\},`$
$`P^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\{\mu _1x\mu _2y\mu _3z=0\}.`$
The planes $`P^{++}`$ and $`P^+`$ are tangent to $`\{Q^+=0\}`$, while $`P^+`$ and $`P^{}`$ are tangent to $`\{Q^{}=0\}`$.

To show that $`Q^+`$ and $`Q^{}`$ are reducible in $`{}_{3}{}^{}𝒪_{0}^{}`$, we now expand $`Q=a^{}x^4+b^{}x^2+c^{}`$, where

$`a^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda _{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}y^4+2\lambda _3\lambda _2z^2y^2+\lambda _{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z^42\lambda _3\lambda _1y^2+2\lambda _2\lambda _1z^2+\lambda _{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2},`$
$`b^{}`$ $`=`$ $`2\lambda _3\lambda _1z^2y^4+2\lambda _2\lambda _1z^4y^2+2\lambda _3\lambda _2z^4+2\lambda _3\lambda _2y^4+\lambda _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z^2y^2+2\lambda _3\lambda _1z^22\lambda _2\lambda _1y^2,`$
$`c^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda _{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z^4y^42\lambda _3\lambda _1z^4y^22\lambda _2\lambda _1z^2y^4+\lambda _{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}z^4+2\lambda _3\lambda _2z^2y^2+\lambda _{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}y^4`$
$`=`$ $`\left(\lambda _1z^2y^2+\lambda _3z^2+\lambda _2y^2\right)^2.`$
Again we compute the discriminant

$$\delta ^{}=b^{}{}_{}{}^{2}4a^{}c^{}=y^2z^2(16\lambda _{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\lambda _2\lambda _3+\mathrm{}).$$

Hence we have the factorization $`Q=Q^{}{}_{}{}^{+}Q_{}^{}^{}`$, where

$`Q^{}{}_{}{}^{\pm }=\sqrt{a^{}}x^2+{\displaystyle \frac{b^{}\pm \sqrt{\delta ^{}}}{2\sqrt{a^{}}}}`$ $`=`$ $`(\mu _1x)^2(\mu _2y\pm \mu _3z)^2+R_3(Q^{}{}_{}{}^{\pm }).`$
This time the planes $`P^{++}`$ and $`P^{}`$ are tangent to $`\{Q^{}{}_{}{}^{+}=0\}`$, while $`P^+`$ and $`P^+`$ are tangent to $`\{Q^{}{}_{}{}^{}=0\}`$.

Since $`{}_{3}{}^{}𝒪_{0}^{}`$ is a unique factorization domain, $`Q^+`$ and $`Q^{}^+`$ must have a common factor

$$Q^{++}=\mu _1x+\mu _2y+\mu _3z+R_2(Q^{++})$$

with zero set tangent to the plane $`P^{++}`$. By considering all such possible pairs, we see that the germ of $`X_0`$ at $`p_0`$ consists of 4 smooth surfaces, each tangent to one of the planes $`P^{++},P^+,P^+,P^{}`$. One easily checks that each of the lines $`\mathrm{}_j^\pm `$ is the intersection of exactly 2 of these planes, and each plane contains exactly 3 of the lines. The conclusion of the lemma immediately follows. ∎

We recall that a simple complex torus does not contain rational or elliptic curves. Moreover, the following holds.

###### Proposition 3.3.

Let $`f:T`$ be a Brody curve in a simple complex 2-dimensional torus $`T=^2/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Then for any compact complex curve $`S`$ in $`T`$, the intersection $`f()S`$ is infinite.

###### Proof.

Assume without loss of generality that $`S`$ is irreducible. The lift $`\stackrel{~}{f}:^2`$ of $`f`$ is also a Brody curve and hence is given by degree $`1`$ polynomials, as observed in \[Gr\]. By a translation of coordinates, we may suppose that $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$ is linear and hence $`f()`$ is a subgroup of $`T`$. We first note that $`S`$ is not contained in any translate of $`f()`$. For if on the contrary $`S^{}:=S+vf()`$, then $`f^1(S^{})`$, being analytic and of positive dimension, must be all of $``$; i.e., $`S^{}=f()`$. Hence $`S^{}`$, being a compact complex curve and a subgroup of $`T`$, must be a complex 1-dimensional subtorus of $`T`$, contradicting the assumption that $`T`$ is simple.

Let $`Y`$ denote the closure of $`f()`$ in the metric topology on $`T`$. As $`T`$ is a simple Lie group and $`YT`$ is a closed subgroup, we conclude that either $`Y=T`$ or $`Y`$ is a real 3-subtorus of $`T`$. Choose new coordinates $`\{z_1=x_1+iy_1,z_2=x_2+iy_2\}`$ in $`^2`$ so that $`f()`$ is the image of the axis $`\{z_1=0\}`$ via the projection $`\tau :^2T`$, and in the latter case, $`Y`$ is the image of $`\{y_1=0\}`$.

Claim: $`SY`$ is nonempty.

Proof of the claim: We need to consider only the case where $`Y`$ is a real 3-torus. Notice that the universal cover of $`TY`$ can be identified with a strip in $`^2=^4`$ between two parallel hyperplanes $`y_1=0`$ and $`y_1=a>0`$, and that $`y_1`$ generates a well-defined bounded harmonic function on $`TY`$. If $`SY=\mathrm{}`$, then $`y_1|_S=`$const, whence $`z_1|_S=`$const, so $`S`$ is contained in a translate of $`f()`$, which is impossible as noted above. This completes the proof of the claim.

Now let $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\epsilon ^2`$ be a coordinate bidisk centered about a point $`s=(s_1,s_2)YS`$. We may assume by our choice of coordinates in $`^2`$ that $`\mathrm{}s_1=0`$ and

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_\epsilon ^2=\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\times \mathrm{\Delta }^{\prime \prime }=\{(w_1,w_2)^2:|w_js_j|<\epsilon ,j=1,2\}\stackrel{\tau }{}T.$$

We also have $`f()\mathrm{\Delta }_\epsilon ^2=E\times \mathrm{\Delta }^{\prime \prime }`$, where $`E`$ is a dense subset of the disk $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ if $`Y=T`$, or is a dense subset of the real interval $`I_\epsilon :=\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ if $`Y`$ is a real 3-torus.

We observe that $`S\{s_1\}\times \mathrm{\Delta }^{\prime \prime }`$. Indeed, if on the contrary $`S`$ contains the disk $`\{s_1\}\times \mathrm{\Delta }^{\prime \prime }`$, then a translate $`S^{}`$ of $`S`$ contains a disk $`\{s_1^{}\}\times \mathrm{\Delta }^{\prime \prime }f()`$, so the analytic set $`f^1(S^{})`$ cannot be 0-dimensional. Hence $`f^1(S^{})=`$, or equivalently $`f()S^{}`$, and therefore $`Y=\overline{f()}S^{}`$, a contradiction.

Let $`\rho _1:\mathrm{\Delta }_\epsilon ^2\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ denote the projection to the $`z_1`$-axis. Since $`S(\{s_1\}\times \mathrm{\Delta }^{\prime \prime })`$ must be 0-dimensional, it follows that $`\rho _1(S\mathrm{\Delta }_\epsilon ^2)`$ contains a neighborhood of $`s_1`$. Since $`s_1`$ is a cluster point of $`E`$, the set $`E\rho _1(S\mathrm{\Delta }_\epsilon ^2)`$ must be infinite. Since

$$E\rho _1(S\mathrm{\Delta }_\epsilon ^2)=\rho _1((E\times \mathrm{\Delta }^{\prime \prime })S)=\rho _1(f()S\mathrm{\Delta }_\epsilon ^2),$$

it follows that $`f()S`$ is also infinite. ∎

Remark: (i) Proposition 3.3 can be rephrased as follows: For any compact complex curve $`S`$ in a simple abelian surface $`T`$ and for any divisor $`D`$ on $`S`$, the complement $`T\backslash S`$ has the property of hyperbolic non-percolation through $`D`$.

(ii) Note that if $`S`$ were a rational or elliptic curve in a simple complex torus $`T`$, then we would have a Brody curve $`f:ST`$, and by the first paragraph of the proof of Proposition 3.3, $`S`$ must contain a translate of a subgroup of $`T`$, contradicting the assumption that $`T`$ is simple.

Proof of Theorem 3.1. Let $`X_{\mathrm{}}=\{z^3:F(z)=0\}`$ be a general octic surface and consider the linear pencil of surfaces

$$X_t=\{z^3:Q(z)+tF(z)=0\}.$$

Suppose on the contrary that $`X_{t_n}`$ is not hyperbolic for some sequence $`t_n0`$. Then as in the proof of Theorem 2.1, after passing to a subsequence of $`\{t_n\}`$, we can find a sequence of Brody curves $`f_n:X_{t_n}`$ converging to a Brody curve $`f:X_0`$.

Claim: $`f()(X_0\backslash \overline{S})(\overline{S}X_{\mathrm{}})\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the set of 48 pinch points of $`X_0`$.

Proof of the claim: Suppose on the contrary that $`f(\zeta _0)=x_0\overline{S}(X_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. We first consider the case where $`x_0\{p_0,p_1,p_2,p_3\}`$, so that $`x_0`$ is an ordinary double point of $`X_0`$. Choose a small neighborhood $`U^3X_{\mathrm{}}`$ of $`x_0`$ such that we have a factorization $`Q|_U=Q^{}Q^{\prime \prime }`$, where $`Q^{},Q^{\prime \prime }`$ are holomorphic on $`U`$ and vanish at $`x_0`$; hence $`X_0U`$ consists of two components $`X^{}=\{Q^{}=0\}`$, $`X^{\prime \prime }=\{Q^{\prime \prime }=0\}`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ be a small disk about $`\zeta _0`$ such that $`f(\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }})U`$. Then (by the same argument as in the proof of Theorem 2.1) for $`n`$ sufficiently large, $`f_n(\mathrm{\Delta })`$ does not meet $`X_0`$ and hence $`Qf_n(\zeta )0`$ for $`\zeta \mathrm{\Delta }`$. Since $`f(\zeta _0)=x_0X^{}X^{\prime \prime }`$, it follows by Hurwitz’s theorem applied to $`Q^{}f_n`$ and to $`Q^{\prime \prime }f_n`$ that $`f(\mathrm{\Delta })X^{}X^{\prime \prime }=\overline{S}U`$, and thus $`f()\overline{S}`$. We shall complete this case below.

We now turn to the case $`x_0=p_j`$ ($`j=0,1,2,3`$). By virtue of Lemma 3.2, this time $`X_0U`$ consists of 4 components, and we conclude as above that $`f()`$ is contained in the intersection of these 4 components. But (by Lemma 3.2) this intersection is the point $`p_j`$, and hence $`f`$ is constant, a contradiction.

Returning to the first case, we can now conclude that $`f:\overline{S}\{p_0,p_1,p_2,p_3\}`$. However, the variety $`\overline{S}\{p_0,p_1,p_2,p_3\}`$ consists of 4 components $`\overline{S}_j\{p_i:ij\}`$, $`0j3`$, each a $`^1`$ with 6 points (corresponding to the 3 double points of $`S_j`$) punctured out. Again we conclude that $`f`$ is constant, and this contradiction completes the proof of the claim.

As the morphism $`\phi _L:AX_0`$ is birational and proper, it provides a normalization of $`X_0`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{f}:A`$ be the lift of $`f`$ to the normalization, and let $`S:=\phi _L^1(\overline{S})A`$. The image $`\stackrel{~}{f}()`$ meets $`S`$ inside the finite set $`D:=S\phi _L^1(X_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. Although $`f`$ is a Brody curve, $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$ is not a priori Brody, but we can construct a Brody curve from $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$ as follows. Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }_n`$ denote the disk of radius $`n`$ about the origin. By Brody’s reparametrization lemma \[Br\], we can find a sequence of holomorphic maps

$$g_n=\stackrel{~}{f}\rho _n\alpha _n:\mathrm{\Delta }_n\stackrel{~}{f}()(AS)D,$$

with $`g_n^{}(0)=c>0`$ and $`g_n^{}(\zeta )\frac{n^2c}{n^2|\zeta |^2}`$, where $`\alpha _n`$ is a suitably chosen automorphism of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_n`$ and $`\rho _n(\zeta )=r_n\zeta `$, $`r_n>0`$ (see \[Ko, (3.6.2), (3.6.4)\], \[NO, (1.6.6)\]). After passing to a subsequence, we may suppose that $`g_n`$ converges as $`n\mathrm{}`$ to a Brody curve $`g:A`$.

By Proposition 3.3, $`g()S`$ is infinite. Hence, there is a point $`\zeta _0`$ such that $`g(\zeta _0)SD`$. We choose a small disk $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ about $`\zeta _0`$ such that $`g_n(\mathrm{\Delta })`$ does not meet $`D`$ and hence $`g_n(\mathrm{\Delta })AS`$ for $`n0`$. We then conclude as before by Hurwitz’s theorem that $`g()S`$. But since $`A`$ is a simple abelian variety, $`S`$ cannot be rational or elliptic. Thus $`g`$ is constant, a contradiction.

Therefore, $`X_t`$ is hyperbolic for $`t`$ sufficiently small. ∎

Remark: Note that the only condition on $`X_{\mathrm{}}`$ is that it does not contain any of the $`p_j`$.

Acknowledgment. We are grateful to Gerd Dethloff for useful comments. We also thank Herb Clemens for informing us of the preprint \[Ra\] as well as his own recent related results (unpublished).


format: text

text:
# Quaternionic equation for electromagnetic fields in inhomogeneous media

## 1 Introduction

Quaternionic reformulation of the Maxwell equations in a vacuum is quite well known (see, for example, , , , ). The system of Maxwell equations

$`\mathrm{div}𝐃`$ $`=\mathrm{div}𝐁=0`$
(1)
$`\mathrm{rot}𝐄`$ $`=_t𝐁,\mathrm{rot}𝐇=_t𝐃,`$
where $`D=\epsilon _0E`$ and $`B=\mu _0H`$ ($`\epsilon _0`$ and $`\mu _0`$ are the permittivity and permeability of free space), is equivalent to the quaternionic equation

$$(\frac{1}{c_0}_t+iD)\stackrel{}{f}=0,$$
(2)
where $`c_0`$ is the speed of light in a vacuum, $`D`$ is the Moisil-Theodoresco operator (see the definition below) and $`\stackrel{}{f}`$ is a purely vectorial complex quaternion. The equivalence between (1) and (2) can be established by putting

$$\mathrm{Re}\stackrel{}{f}=\sqrt{\epsilon _0}E\text{and }\mathrm{Im}\stackrel{}{f}=\sqrt{\mu _0}H.$$

The quaternionic approach to Maxwell’s equations for homogeneous media was intensively used in a number of works (e.g., , , , ), but even the question as to how to write the Maxwell equations for arbitrary inhomogeneous media in a compact quaternionic form remained open until recently (an attempt in this direction can be found in \[5, Section 4.5\]). In  such a reformulation was proposed in the case of a time-harmonic electromagnetic field and in  for the time-dependent case. Here we make one additional step which leads us to Maxwell’s system in the form of a single quaternionic equation, which can be considered as a generalization of the well known in complex analysis Vekua equation describing generalized analytic functions .

## 2 Preliminaries

We will consider continuously differentiable functions of four variables $`(t,x_1,x_2,x_3)`$ with values in the algebra of complex quaternions $`()`$. By $`D`$ we denote the operator $`D=_{k=1}^3i_k_k`$. Here $`_k=\frac{}{x_k}`$ and $`i_k`$ are the imaginary quaternionic units. Let us notice the following property of the operator $`D`$. Let $`\phi `$ be a scalar complex function and $`g`$ be an $`()`$-valued function. Then

$$D[\phi g]=D[\phi ]g+\phi D[g].$$
(3)
Taking into account that $`D[\phi ]=\mathrm{grad}\phi =i_1_1\phi +i_2_2\phi +i_3_3\phi `$ and assuming that $`\phi `$ is different from zero we can rewrite (3) in the form

$$(D+\frac{\mathrm{grad}\phi }{\phi })g=\frac{1}{\phi }D[\phi g].$$
(4)
We will use the following notations for the operators of multiplication from the left-hand side and from the right-hand side

$${}_{}{}^{\alpha }Mg:=\alpha g\text{and }M^\alpha g:=g\alpha ,$$

where $`\alpha ()`$. The usual complex conjugation we denote by “\*”. Vectors from $`^3`$ are identified with purely vectorial complex quaternions. Note that for an $`()`$-valued function $`g=g_0+\stackrel{}{g}`$ the action of the operator $`D`$ can be represented as follows

$$Dg=div\stackrel{}{g}+gradg_0+rot\stackrel{}{g}.$$

## 3 Maxwell equations

We assume that the relative permittivity $`\epsilon _r`$ and the relative permeability $`\mu _r`$ of the material are differentiable functions of coordinates $`\epsilon _r=\epsilon _r(x_1,x_2,x_3)`$ and $`\mu _r=\mu _r(x_1,x_2,x_3)`$. The permittivity and the permeability of the medium are introduced as follows

$$\epsilon =\epsilon _0\epsilon _r\text{ and }\mu =\mu _0\mu _r.$$

Then Maxwell’s equations for an inhomogeneous medium have the form

$$\mathrm{rot}𝐇=\epsilon _t𝐄+𝐣,$$
(5)
$$\mathrm{rot}𝐄=\mu _t𝐇,$$
(6)
$$\mathrm{div}(\epsilon 𝐄)=\rho ,$$
(7)
$$\mathrm{div}(\mu 𝐇)=0,$$
(8)
where all the magnitudes are real. Equations (7) and (8) can be written as follows

$$div𝐄+<\frac{\mathrm{grad}\epsilon }{\epsilon },𝐄>=\frac{\rho }{\epsilon }$$

and

$$div𝐇+<\frac{\mathrm{grad}\mu }{\mu },𝐇>=0,$$

where $`<,>`$ denotes the usual scalar product. Combining these equations with (5) and (6) we obtain the Maxwell system in the form

$$D𝐄=<\frac{\mathrm{grad}\epsilon }{\epsilon },𝐄>\mu _t𝐇\frac{\rho }{\epsilon }$$
(9)
and

$$D𝐇=<\frac{\mathrm{grad}\mu }{\mu },𝐇>+\epsilon _t𝐄+𝐣.$$
(10)
Let us make a simple observation: the scalar product of two vectors $`\stackrel{}{p}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{q}`$ can be represented as follows

$$<\stackrel{}{p},\stackrel{}{q}>=\frac{1}{2}(^\stackrel{}{p}M+M^\stackrel{}{p})\stackrel{}{q}.$$

Using this fact, from (9) and (10) we obtain the pair of equations

$$(D+\frac{1}{2}\frac{\mathrm{grad}\epsilon }{\epsilon })𝐄=\frac{1}{2}M^{\frac{\mathrm{grad}\epsilon }{\epsilon }}𝐄\mu _t𝐇\frac{\rho }{\epsilon }$$
(11)
and

$$(D+\frac{1}{2}\frac{\mathrm{grad}\mu }{\mu })𝐇=\frac{1}{2}M^{\frac{\mathrm{grad}\mu }{\mu }}𝐇+\epsilon _t𝐄+𝐣.$$
(12)
Note that

$$\frac{1}{2}\frac{\mathrm{grad}\epsilon }{\epsilon }=\frac{\mathrm{grad}\sqrt{\epsilon }}{\sqrt{\epsilon }}.$$

Then using (4), equation (11) can be rewritten in the following form

$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{\epsilon }}D(\sqrt{\epsilon }𝐄)+𝐄\stackrel{}{\epsilon }=\mu _t𝐇\frac{\rho }{\epsilon },$$
(13)
where

$$\stackrel{}{\epsilon }:=\frac{\mathrm{grad}\sqrt{\epsilon }}{\sqrt{\epsilon }}.$$

Analogously, (12) takes the form

$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{\mu }}D(\sqrt{\mu }𝐇)+𝐇\stackrel{}{\mu }=\epsilon _t𝐄+𝐣,$$
(14)
where

$$\stackrel{}{\mu }:=\frac{\mathrm{grad}\sqrt{\mu }}{\sqrt{\mu }}.$$

Introducing the notations

$$\stackrel{}{}:=\sqrt{\epsilon }𝐄,\stackrel{}{}:=\sqrt{\mu }𝐇$$

and multiplying (13) by $`\sqrt{\epsilon }`$ and (14) by $`\sqrt{\mu }`$ we arrive at the equations

$$(D+M^\stackrel{}{\epsilon })\stackrel{}{}=\frac{1}{c}_t\stackrel{}{}\frac{\rho }{\sqrt{\epsilon }},$$
(15)
and

$$(D+M^\stackrel{}{\mu })\stackrel{}{}=\frac{1}{c}_t\stackrel{}{}+\sqrt{\mu }𝐣,$$
(16)
where $`c=1/\sqrt{\epsilon \mu }`$ is the speed of propagation of electromagnetic waves in the medium.

Equations (15) and (16) can be rewritten even in a more elegant form. Consider the function

$$\stackrel{}{f}:=\stackrel{}{}+i\stackrel{}{}$$

Let us apply to it the quaternionic Maxwell operator

$$\frac{1}{c}_t+iD.$$

We obtain

$$(\frac{1}{c}_t+iD)\stackrel{}{f}=\frac{1}{c}_t\stackrel{}{}D\stackrel{}{}+i(\frac{1}{c}_t\stackrel{}{}+D\stackrel{}{}).$$

For the real part of this expression we use equation (16) and for the imaginary part equation (15). Then we have

$$(\frac{1}{c}_t+iD)\stackrel{}{f}=i(M^\stackrel{}{\epsilon }\stackrel{}{}+iM^\stackrel{}{\mu }\stackrel{}{})\sqrt{\mu }𝐣\frac{i\rho }{\sqrt{\epsilon }}.$$
(17)
Note that

$$\stackrel{}{}=\frac{1}{2}(\stackrel{}{f}+\stackrel{}{f}^{})\text{and }\stackrel{}{}=\frac{1}{2i}(\stackrel{}{f}\stackrel{}{f}^{}).$$

Hence

$$M^\stackrel{}{\epsilon }\stackrel{}{}+iM^\stackrel{}{\mu }\stackrel{}{}=\frac{1}{2}(M^{(\stackrel{}{\epsilon }+\stackrel{}{\mu })}\stackrel{}{f}+M^{(\stackrel{}{\epsilon }\stackrel{}{\mu })}\stackrel{}{f}^{}).$$

Let us notice that

$$\stackrel{}{\epsilon }+\stackrel{}{\mu }=\frac{\mathrm{grad}c}{c}\text{and }\stackrel{}{\epsilon }\stackrel{}{\mu }=\frac{\mathrm{grad}W}{W},$$

where $`W=\sqrt{\mu /\epsilon }`$ is the intrinsic wave impedance of the medium. Denote

$$\stackrel{}{c}:=\frac{\mathrm{grad}\sqrt{c}}{\sqrt{c}}\text{and }\stackrel{}{W}:=\frac{\mathrm{grad}\sqrt{W}}{\sqrt{W}}.$$

Then

$$M^\stackrel{}{\epsilon }\stackrel{}{}+iM^\stackrel{}{\mu }\stackrel{}{}=(M^\stackrel{}{c}\stackrel{}{f}+M^\stackrel{}{W}\stackrel{}{f}^{}).$$

From (17) we obtain the Maxwell equations for an inhomogeneous medium in the following form

$$(\frac{1}{c}_t+iD)\stackrel{}{f}M^{i\stackrel{}{c}}\stackrel{}{f}M^{i\stackrel{}{W}}\stackrel{}{f}^{}=(\sqrt{\mu }𝐣+\frac{i\rho }{\sqrt{\epsilon }})$$
(18)
(compare with (2)). This equation is completely equivalent to the Maxwell system (5)-(8) and represents Maxwell’s equation for inhomogeneous media in a quaternionic form.

###### Remark 1

Equation (18) can be considered as a generalization of the well known in complex analysis Vekua equation describing generalized analytic functions . Recently in  using the L. Bers approach ,  another quaternionic generalization of the Vekua equation was considered. Probably some of the interesting results discussed in  can be obtained for (18) also. Then their physical meaning would be of a great interest.

###### Acknowledgement 2

This work was supported by CONACYT Project 32424-E, Mexico.