format: text

text:
# An optimal inequality between scalar curvature and spectrum of the Laplacian

## 1. Introduction

Our result is in the framework of spin geometry, in which Dirac operators and index Theorems play an important role (see \[LM89\]).

Recall that, in the sixties, by applying the index Theorem to the Dirac operator, A. Lichnerowicz \[Lic63\] found a striking topological obstruction to the existence of Riemannian metrics of positive scalar curvature on a closed spin manifold. Namely, if the $`\widehat{A}`$-genus is not zero, such metrics do not exist.

In spite of its beauty, this result was somewhat frustrating: it works in dimension $`4k`$ only, and does not give anything for such manifolds as tori, whose $`\widehat{A}`$-genus vanishes. The second break-through, was made by M. Gromov and H.B. Lawson in the late seventies (see \[GL80\]). Their idea was to write down a Bochner-Weitzenböck formula, not for the classical Dirac operator as Lichnerowicz did, but for some \<\<twisted\>\> operator, defined on the tensor product of the spin bundle by a suitable vector bundle. Then, when there exist non homologically trivial such bundles with arbitrarily small curvature, they obtained an obstruction to the existence of positive scalar curvature metrics.

More specifically, their obstruction works for *enlargeable manifolds*:

###### Definition 1.1.

Let $`(V,g)`$ be an $`n`$-dimensional closed oriented Riemannian manifold. The manifold $`V`$ is said to be *enlargeable* if for each constant $`\epsilon >0`$, there exists a finite Riemannian spin covering $`\stackrel{~}{V}_\epsilon `$ of $`V`$ such that $`\stackrel{~}{V}_\epsilon `$ admits an $`\epsilon `$-contracting map $`f_\epsilon :\stackrel{~}{V}_\epsilon S^n`$ (that is $`f_{\epsilon }^{}{}_{}{}^{}v\epsilon v`$ for all tangent vectors $`v`$ on $`\stackrel{~}{V}_\epsilon `$) of non-zero degree.

Then for a closed spin manifold with non-zero $`\widehat{A}`$-genus (A. Lichnerowicz) or for a closed enlargeable manifold (Gromov-Lawson), we have the inequality

$$inf\mathrm{scal}(V,g)0\text{ for any metric}$$

where $`\mathrm{scal}`$ denotes the scalar curvature.

In \[Ono88\], K. Ono improved this inequality. Let us first introduce the total $`\widehat{\mathrm{A}}`$-class, $`\widehat{\mathrm{A}}(V)`$, of a $`n`$-dimensional manifold $`V`$ (\[LM89, pp. 231-233\]). Then the $`\widehat{\mathrm{A}}`$-genus, denoted by $`\widehat{\mathrm{A}}_V[V]`$, is just the evaluation of the class $`\widehat{\mathrm{A}}(V)\mathrm{H}^4(V,)`$ on the fundamental homology class $`[V]\mathrm{H}_n(V)`$ of the manifold. The greatest lower bound of the spectrum of the positive Laplacian will be denoted by $`\lambda _0`$.

###### Theorem 1.2 (K. Ono).

Let $`(V,g)`$ be a closed Riemannian manifold and $`(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g})`$ be its universal covering.

(a) If $`V`$ is spin with non-zero $`\widehat{A}`$-genus then

$$inf\mathrm{scal}(V,g)4\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g}).$$

(b) If $`V`$ is enlargeable, then the same inequality holds.

K. Ono relates his result with the following result of R. Brooks \[Bro81\] which says that for a closed Riemannian manifold $`V`$, $`\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g})=0`$ if and only if the fundamental group of $`V`$ is amenable. Here we call a group $`G`$ amenable if it has a left invariant mean. Since $`\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g})`$ is always non-negative, the result is particularly interesting for a manifold of non amenable fundamental group. Indeed a closed spin manifold with non-amenable fundamental group which admits a metric of zero scalar curvature will have necessary zero $`\widehat{A}`$-genus.

In this paper we improve both statements (a) and (b) in Theorem 1.2 to optimal inequalities.

###### Theorem A.

Let $`(V,g)`$ be a closed Riemannian spin manifold of dimension $`n=4k`$ and $`(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g})`$ be its universal covering. If $`V`$ satisfies $`\widehat{\mathrm{A}}_V[V]0`$, then

(1.1)
$$inf\mathrm{scal}(V,g)4\frac{n}{n1}\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g}).$$

###### Theorem B.

Let $`(V,g)`$ be a closed Riemannian manifold of dimension $`n`$ and $`(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g})`$ be its universal covering. If $`V`$ is enlargeable, then the same inequality holds.

While K. Ono’s proof is easily adapted in the even dimensional case (we mainly use the refined Kato inequality instead of the classical one), the odd dimensional case requires more work, to which is devoted the main part of this paper. We point out that, in the odd dimensional case, K. Ono considered $`V\times S^1`$ to bring the problem back to even dimension. But in our case, this method gives rise to the constant $`(n+1)/n`$ instead of $`n/(n1)`$.

Now, let us make some remarks on the equality case. Since the bottom of the spectrum of the hyperbolic space equipped with the canonical metric is just $`(n1)^2/4`$, the inequality (1.1) is optimal in the case of closed hyperbolic (enlargeable) manifolds. Furthermore, under the assumptions of Theorem A, we can make a careful study of the *equality case*:

###### Theorem C.

Let $`(V,g)`$ be a closed Riemannian spin manifold of dimension $`n=4k`$, with non-zero $`\widehat{A}`$-genus. We have

$$inf\mathrm{scal}(V,g)=4\frac{n}{n1}\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g})\mathrm{scal}(V,g)=0.$$

Recall that A.Futaki showed in \[Fut93\] that for a manifold $`(V,g)`$ which satisfies the assumptions of Theorem A, if $`\mathrm{\#}\pi _1(V)|\widehat{\mathrm{A}}_V[V]|>2^{n/4}`$ then $`V`$ does not admit any metric with $`\mathrm{scal}(V,g)0`$. Therefore in the equality case of Theorem A we have necessarily $`\mathrm{\#}\pi _1(V)|\widehat{\mathrm{A}}_V[V]|2^{n/4}`$.

When $`\pi _1(V)`$ is finite (and therefore when $`\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g})`$ is zero) we can use $`\lambda _1(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g})`$ instead of $`\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g})`$. This improvement is due to V. Mathai in \[Mat92, Theo. 2.5\] who was inspired from Meyer’s Lemma revisited by P. Bérard in \[Ber88, Appendix III\].

## 2. Outline of the proofs

Theorem 1.2 is originally due to K. Ono \[Ono88\]; however we prefer a shorter proof given by V. Mathai in \[Mat92, Theo. 2.5\] and it is his proof which we shall update.

First we introduce some notation: $`V`$ will always be a spin closed Riemannian $`n`$-dimensional manifold and $`(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g})`$ a Riemannian covering (the universal Riemaniann covering unless otherwise stated). In the following the tilde is always used to denote the lift of the object under consideration to the covering $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$. Since $`V`$ is spin we can consider the spinor bundle $`/S`$ over $`V`$ and the associated Dirac operator $`/D`$ acting on spinors over $`V`$. If $`Y`$ is a Riemannian bundle over $`V`$ with a Riemannian connection, we can construct the Clifford bundle $`/SY`$ endowed with the associated twisted Dirac operator $`/D^Y`$ acting on sections of the bundle $`/SY`$.

In the present article we will prove the inequality

$$inf\mathrm{scal}(V,g)4\frac{n}{n1}\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g})$$

with various assumptions on $`V`$. But the proofs are essentially similar and can be decomposed into three key points:

1. We find a condition under which there exists a Dirac operator $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}`$ on $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ such that $`0`$ belongs to the spectrum of this operator. In order to use the action of $`\pi _1(V)`$, we look for such an operator as a lifted operator of a Dirac operator $`\mathrm{D}`$ on $`V`$.

In the even dimensional case we shall use Atiyah’s $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-index Theorem (see \[Ati76\] and \[Roe98, chap. 15\]). For the odd dimensional case we need the spectral flow introduced in \[APS76, $`\mathrm{\S }7`$\] (see also \[Gro96, $`\mathrm{\S }6\frac{11}{12}`$\] and \[Nic99, $`\mathrm{\S }1`$\]) and the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-index theorem developed by M. Ramachandran in \[Ram93\] for the non local Atiyah-Patodi-Singer boundary problem on non compact manifold with boundary.
2. From this, we prove an approximate inequality. The Dirac operators under consideration are Dirac operators twisted by a bundle denoted $`Y`$. Such operators give rise to a Bochner-Weitzenböck formula (see \[GL83, $`\mathrm{\S }2`$\]). Then, the refined Kato inequality \[CGH00\] combined with a standard Rayleigh quotient argument gives the following inequality, which is nearly what we want:

$$inf\mathrm{scal}(V,g)4\frac{n}{n1}\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g})+\alpha _nR^Y$$

where $`\alpha _n`$ is some universal constant and $`R^Y`$ is the curvature of the bundle $`Y`$.
3. We construct, for any $`\epsilon >0`$, a sequence of bundles $`Y_\epsilon `$ on $`V`$ such that $`0`$ belongs to the spectrum of $`\stackrel{~}{/D^{Y_\epsilon }}`$ (i.e. satisfies the condition found previously in the first step (1)) and $`R^{Y_\epsilon }\epsilon `$. Letting $`\epsilon 0`$, we obtain the desired inequality (1.1). Here the enlargeability of $`V`$ is crucial.

The paper is organized as follows. In Section 3 we recall the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-index theory and achieve the first step of the proof, especially in the odd dimensional case. Section 4 is devoted to the second point (which does not depend on the dimension). In Section 5 we prove Theorem A and its equality case, Theorem C. In Section 6 we give the proof of Theorem B in the even and odd dimensional cases. In Section 7 we make some remarks and generalizations of our results.

## 3. Use of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-index

### 3.1. Atiyah’s $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-index Theorem

For this section we refer to the original article of M. Atiyah \[Ati76\] (see also \[Roe98, chap. $`15`$\]). The general context is the following: $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ denotes a Galois covering of $`V`$ with Galois group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. The group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ acts discontinuously on $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ by deck transformations and $`\stackrel{~}{V}/\mathrm{\Gamma }=V`$. If $`S`$ is a Clifford bundle over $`V`$ with Dirac operator $`\mathrm{D}`$, let $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}`$ denote their natural lifts on $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$. In the following $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is almost always the fundamental group of $`V`$.

On the *a priori* non-compact manifold $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$, a central idea is to introduce an algebra of smoothing operators on $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ that reflects the extra structure of the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-action.

###### Definition 3.1.

With notation as above, we define the set of *$`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-Hilbert-Schmidt operators* $`A`$ on $`\mathrm{L}^2(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ by the following conditions:

1. $`A`$ is bounded on $`\mathrm{L}^2(\stackrel{~}{S})`$.
2. $`A`$ is $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant; that is, for all $`s\mathrm{L}^2(\stackrel{~}{S}),A(\gamma s)=\gamma (As)`$ where by definition $`\gamma s(\stackrel{~}{x})=s(\gamma ^1\stackrel{~}{x})`$.
3. $`A`$ is represented by a smooth kernel $`k(\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{y})`$ so that $`As(\stackrel{~}{x})=_{\stackrel{~}{V}}k(\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{y})s(\stackrel{~}{y})d\stackrel{~}{y}`$. Moreover $`\stackrel{~}{x}k(\stackrel{~}{x},)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{y}k(,\stackrel{~}{y})`$ are smooth maps of $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ into the Hilbert space $`\mathrm{L}^2(\stackrel{~}{S})`$.
4. There is a constant $`C`$ such that for all $`\stackrel{~}{x}\stackrel{~}{V}`$, we have $`_{\stackrel{~}{V}}|k(\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{y})|^2d\stackrel{~}{y}<C`$ and for all $`\stackrel{~}{y}\stackrel{~}{V}`$, we have $`_{\stackrel{~}{V}}|k(\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{y})|^2d\stackrel{~}{x}<C`$.

By the Riesz representation Theorem for functionals on Hilbert space, the quantity $`_{\stackrel{~}{V}}|k(\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{y})|^2d\stackrel{~}{y}`$ is the square of the norm of the linear functional $`sAs(\stackrel{~}{x})`$ on $`\mathrm{L}^2(\stackrel{~}{S})`$. Therefore, there is a constant $`C`$ such that $`_{\stackrel{~}{V}}|k(\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{y})|^2d\stackrel{~}{y}<C`$ if and only if $`A`$ maps $`\mathrm{L}^2(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ continuously to the space $`\mathrm{CB}(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ of bounded continuous sections of $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$. Similarly there is a constant $`C`$ such that $`_{\stackrel{~}{V}}|k(\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{y})|^2d\stackrel{~}{x}<C`$ if and only if $`A^{}`$ maps $`\mathrm{L}^2(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ continuously to $`\mathrm{CB}(\stackrel{~}{S})`$.

The set of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-Hilbert-Schmidt operators is an algebra.

An operator $`A`$ is said to be *of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-trace* if there exist two $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-Hilbert-Schmidt operators $`B_1`$ and $`B_2`$ such that $`A=B_1B_2`$. If $`A`$ is an operator of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-trace, let $`k`$ be its kernel and choose any fundamental domain $`F`$ for the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-action on $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$; then

$$\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }(A):=_F\mathrm{Tr}k(\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{x})\mathrm{dvol}(\stackrel{~}{x})<\mathrm{}.$$

Now we give an important property of the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-trace (nearly the same as for the standard trace of matrix): for $`A`$ and $`B`$ two $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-Hilbert-Schmidt operators or $`A`$ an operator of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-trace and $`B`$ a bounded operator, the operators $`AB`$ and $`BA`$ are of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-trace and

$$\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }(AB)=\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }(BA).$$

We also need to recall the *$`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-dimension* which is motivated by the fact that the trace of a projection operator is the dimension of its image. If $`H`$ is a subspace of $`\mathrm{L}^2(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ with the property that the orthogonal projection operator $`P`$ from $`\mathrm{L}^2(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ onto $`H`$ is $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-Hilbert-Schmidt, then we define

$$dim_\mathrm{\Gamma }(H):=\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }(P).$$

Finally we restate the *Atiyah’s $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-index Theorem* \[Ati76\]: suppose $`\mathrm{D}`$ (and so $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}`$) is a $`_2`$-graded Dirac operator. The orthogonal projection $`P`$ onto the kernel of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}`$ is $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-Hilbert-Schmidt and

$$\mathrm{ind}_\mathrm{\Gamma }(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^+):=dim_\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mathrm{ker}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^+)dim_\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mathrm{ker}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^{})=\mathrm{ind}(\mathrm{D}^+).$$

We recall that a $`_2`$-graded operator $`\mathrm{D}`$ from $`\mathrm{L}^2(S)`$ to $`\mathrm{L}^2(S)`$ is an operator which decomposes itself as

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& \mathrm{D}^{}\\ \mathrm{D}^+& 0\end{array}\right)$$

on the eigenspaces $`S^+`$ and $`S^{}`$ of an involution $`\epsilon `$ acting on $`S`$. For example, the standard Dirac operator on a spin even-dimensional manifold $`V^{2m}`$ is $`_2`$-graded. Here $`\epsilon `$ is the Clifford multiplication by the volume form $`\omega =i^me_1e_2\mathrm{}e_{2m}`$ (where the $`(e_i)_{i=1,\mathrm{},2m}`$ form an orthonormal basis of $`T^{}V`$) acting on the spinor bundle.

### 3.2. First step in the even dimensional case

In the even dimensional case we can now give a condition which ensures the existence of a Dirac operator on $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ such that $`0`$ belongs to its spectrum.

###### Proposition 3.2.

Let $`\mathrm{D}`$ be a $`_2`$-graded Dirac operator on $`V`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}`$ be its lift. If $`\mathrm{ind}\mathrm{D}^+0`$, then $`0`$ belongs to the point spectrum of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}`$.

* It is just an application of Atiyah’s $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-index Theorem. Indeed $`\mathrm{ind}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^+0`$ implies that $`dim_\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{ker}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}})0`$. Using the definition of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-dimension, this ensures that there exists a non-zero spinor in this kernel. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 3.3.

For the Dirac operator $`/D`$ on spinors the condition is $`\widehat{A}_V[V]0`$, which is exactly the assumption of Theorem A. For the twisted Dirac operator $`/D^Y`$, the condition is $`\{\widehat{A}(V)\mathrm{ch}(Y)\}[V]0`$ (see \[LM89, Theo. $`13.10`$\]).

### 3.3. First step in the odd dimensional case

On an odd dimensional manifold, the ordinary index of every elliptic operator is always zero (\[LM89, Theo. $`13.12`$\]). In order to overcome this difficulty, we consider the spectral flow of a family of Dirac operators instead of the index Theorem of only one Dirac operator. The use of the spectral flow is inspired by the proof of Vafa-Witten’s Theorem on eigenvalues of the Dirac operator, given in \[Ati85\].

#### 3.3.1. Condition on the spectral flow

We start with a smooth family $`\{\mathrm{D}_u\}_{u[0,1]}`$ of Dirac operators on $`V`$ and lift it to $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ to obtain the family $`\{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u\}_{u[0,1]}`$ of Dirac operators on $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$. We search for a condition which ensures that there exists some $`u_0[0,1]`$ such that $`0`$ belongs to the spectrum of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_{u_0}`$. For this we will use the adequate index Theorems on $`V\times [0,1]`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{V}\times [0,1]`$. For $`V\times [0,1]`$, we need the index Theorem of Atiyah-Patodi-Singer (see \[APS76\]) for a compact manifold with boundary and its associated $`\eta `$-invariant. We will also recall what is the spectral flow of a family of Dirac operators and in particular, the link between the $`\eta `$-invariant and the spectral flow. For $`\stackrel{~}{V}\times [0,1]`$, we will use the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-index Theorem developed by M. Ramachandran in \[Ram93\] for a non-compact manifold with boundary where the $`\eta _\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant plays an important role. We will then relate the derivatives of $`\eta `$ and $`\eta _\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ (\[Gil84, $`\mathrm{\S }1.7\&1.10`$\]). In the following we will denote the spectrum of an operator $`\mathrm{D}`$ by $`\mathrm{spec}(\mathrm{D})`$.

Our main task in this section is to show:

###### Theorem 3.4.

If the spectral flow of the smooth family $`\{\mathrm{D}_u\}_{u[0,1]}`$ of Dirac operators on $`V`$ is non-zero, then there exists $`u_0[0,1]`$ such that $`0`$ belongs to the spectrum of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_{u_0}`$.

* We borrow here the presentation of the Atiyah-Patodi-Singer index Theorem and of the $`\eta `$-invariant from L.I. Nicolaescu \[Nic99, $`\mathrm{\S }1`$\]. On $`V\times [0,1]`$, we consider the operator $`𝒟=\frac{}{u}\mathrm{D}_u`$. The index Theorem with the spectral boundary condition of Atiyah-Patodi-Singer (\[APS76\]) for the manifold $`V\times [0,u]`$ with boundary $`V\times \{0\}V\times \{u\}`$, where $`V\times \{0\}`$ correspond to $`V`$ negatively oriented and $`V\times \{u\}`$ correspond to $`V`$ positively oriented (the orientation of $`(V\times [0,1])`$ is given by the outer normal), gives

$`\mathrm{ind}(𝒟,V\times [0,u])=A(u){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(\eta (0)+h(0)+\eta (u)+h(u)\right)`$
where $`\eta (u)`$ is the $`\eta `$-invariant of the manifold $`(V,\mathrm{D}_u)`$, $`h(u)=dim\mathrm{ker}\mathrm{D}_u`$ and $`A(u)`$ is the integral over $`M\times [0,u]`$ of the index density determined by the operator $`𝒟`$ which is a completely local object.

We introduce the $`\xi `$-invariant (or reduced $`\eta `$-invariant) by $`\xi (u)=(h(u)+\eta (u))/2`$. Hence

(3.1) $`\mathrm{ind}(𝒟,V\times [0,u])=A(u)\left(\xi (u)\xi (0)\right)h(0).`$
Recall what the *spectral flow* is. The discontinuities of $`\xi (u)`$ are due to jumps in $`h(u)`$. We describe how the jump in $`h(u)`$ affects $`\xi (u)`$ in a simple, yet generic situation. We assume $`\mathrm{D}_u`$ is a regular family i.e.

* the resonance set $`𝒵=\{u[0,1];h(u)0\}`$ is finite,
* For every $`u_0𝒵`$, there exists $`\epsilon >0`$, an open neighbourhood $`𝒩`$ of $`u_0`$ in $`[0,1]`$ and smooth maps $`\lambda _k:𝒩]\epsilon ,\epsilon [,k=1,\mathrm{},h(u)`$ such that for all $`u𝒩`$ the family $`\{\lambda _k(u)\}_k`$ describes *all* the eigenvalues of $`\mathrm{D}_u`$ in $`]\epsilon ,\epsilon [`$ (including multiplicities) and, moreover, $`\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}\lambda _k(u_0)0`$ for all $`k=1,\mathrm{},h(u_0)`$.

Now for each $`u𝒵`$, set $`\sigma _\pm =\mathrm{\#}\{k|\pm \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}\lambda _k(u)>0\}`$ and

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_u\sigma =\{\begin{array}{c}\sigma _{}(0)\text{ if }u=0\hfill \\ \sigma _+(u)\sigma _{}(u)\text{ if }u]0,1[\hfill \\ \sigma _+(1)\text{ if }u=1\hfill \end{array}$$

If $`\mathrm{\Delta }_u\xi :=lim_{\epsilon 0^+}\left(\xi (u+\epsilon )\xi (u\epsilon )\right)`$, we see that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_u\xi =0`$ if $`u𝒵`$ while for $`u𝒵`$ we have $`\mathrm{\Delta }_u\xi =\mathrm{\Delta }_u\sigma `$. Finally, define the spectral flow of the family $`\mathrm{D}_u`$ by

(3.2) $`\mathrm{sf}(1)=\mathrm{sf}(\mathrm{D}_u,u[0,1])={\displaystyle \underset{u[0,1]}{}}\mathrm{\Delta }_u\sigma ={\displaystyle \underset{u[0,1]}{}}\mathrm{\Delta }_u\xi .`$
In fact the spectral flow counts how many eigenvalues of $`\mathrm{D}_u`$ cross zero as $`u`$ moves from $`0`$ to $`1`$.

We rewrite the equality (3.1) as follows,

$`\xi (u)\xi (0)=A(u)\mathrm{ind}(𝒟,V\times [0,u])h(0).`$
The term $`A(u)`$ depends smoothly on $`u`$. The term $`\left(\mathrm{ind}(𝒟,V\times [0,u])h(0)\right)`$ is integer-valued so it cannot be smooth, unless it is constant. If $`\overline{\xi }(u):=\xi (u)mod`$ (seen as a map from $`[0,1]`$ to $`[0,1]`$ identified with $`S^1`$) then $`u\overline{\xi }(u)`$ is smooth. Therefore we deduct

(3.3)
$$\mathrm{sf}(u)\stackrel{(\text{3.2})}{=}\underset{v[0,u]}{}\mathrm{\Delta }_v\xi =\mathrm{ind}(𝒟,M\times [0,u])h(u)$$

and

(3.4)
$$\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}\overline{\xi }(u)=\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}A(u)\text{ and so }A(u)=_0^u\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}v}\overline{\xi }(v)dv.$$

Moreover we assume $`\mathrm{D}_0=\mathrm{D}_1`$, hence

$`\mathrm{ind}(𝒟,V\times [0,1])`$ $`\stackrel{(\text{3.1})}{=}`$ $`A(1){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(h(0)+h(1))\stackrel{(\text{hyp.})}{=}A(1)h(0)\stackrel{(\text{3.4})}{=}{\displaystyle _0^1}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}\overline{\xi }(u)duh(0)`$
$`\stackrel{(\text{3.3})}{=}`$ $`\mathrm{sf}(1)h(0).`$
Thus we have proved the following Lemma:

###### Lemma 3.5.

With the previous notations:

$$A(1)=\mathrm{sf}(1)=_0^1\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}\overline{\xi }(u)du=\frac{1}{2}_0^1\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}\overline{\eta }(u)du$$

where $`\overline{\eta }(u)=2\overline{\xi }(u)`$ (representant of $`\eta (u)`$ in $`[0,2[`$ – seen as a map from $`[0,1]`$ to $`S^1`$).

###### Remark 3.6.

The minus sign in the equality $`A(1)=\mathrm{sf}(1)`$ is due to the fact that we use $`𝒟=\frac{}{u}\mathrm{D}_u`$ instead of the convention of Atiyah-Patodi-Singer \[APS76\] which is to use $`𝒟=\frac{}{u}+\mathrm{D}_u`$. Moreover we do not use the same orientation on $`V\times [0,1]`$ as in \[APS76\]. This different convention on orientation is also used by Bismut-Freed \[BF86, Theo. $`2.11`$, Rem. $`6`$\].

We now study $`\stackrel{~}{𝒟}=\frac{}{u}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u`$ on $`\stackrel{~}{V}\times [0,1]`$. The relevant index Theorem in this case gives the formula \[Ram93\]

$$\mathrm{ind}_\mathrm{\Gamma }(\stackrel{~}{𝒟},\stackrel{~}{V}\times [0,u])=A(u)\frac{1}{2}\left(\eta _\mathrm{\Gamma }(0)+h_\mathrm{\Gamma }(0)+\eta _\mathrm{\Gamma }(u)+h_\mathrm{\Gamma }(u)\right)$$

where $`\eta _\mathrm{\Gamma }(u)`$ is the $`\eta _\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant of the manifold $`(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)`$ (defined in the next Sub-section 3.3.2), $`h_\mathrm{\Gamma }(u)=dim_\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{ker}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u`$ and $`A(u)`$ is the same as in the formula (3.1) (in particular it is an integral over $`V\times [0,u]`$ and not on $`\stackrel{~}{V}\times [0,u]`$).

By contradiction, we assume that for all $`u[0,1]`$, $`0\mathrm{spec}\mathrm{D}_u`$ and thus $`h_\mathrm{\Gamma }(u)=0`$. In the following Sub-section 3.3.2, we shall show the crucial lemma:

###### Lemma 3.7.

Assume $`0\mathrm{spec}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)`$ for all $`u`$. Then the $`\eta _\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant is a smooth function of $`u`$ satisfying

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}\eta _\mathrm{\Gamma }(u)=\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}\overline{\eta }(u).$$

Hence, as $`\mathrm{D}_0=\mathrm{D}_1`$ (and so $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_1`$), using Lemma 3.5 and Lemma 3.7, we have

$$0=\eta _\mathrm{\Gamma }(1)\eta _\mathrm{\Gamma }(0)=_0^1\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}\eta _\mathrm{\Gamma }(u)du=_0^1\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}\overline{\eta }(u)du=2\mathrm{sf}(1).$$

Therefore we have found a contradiction and Theorem 3.4 is proved. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 3.8.

We emphasize that the spectral flow of a family of Dirac operators does not depend on the index Theorem of the compact manifold with boundary $`V\times [0,1]`$ but on the classical Atiyah-Singer index Theorem on the closed manifold $`V\times S^1`$ (see \[BF86, Theo. $`2.11`$\]). In fact, $`\mathrm{sf}(\mathrm{D}_u;u[0,1],D_0=D_1)=\mathrm{ind}(𝒟)`$ for any operator on $`V\times [0,1]`$ such that $`𝒟|_{V\times \{u\}}=\mathrm{D}_u`$. This remark will be important when we generalize our result to the infinite $`\mathrm{K}\mathrm{area}`$ case in Section 7.

#### 3.3.2. Study of the $`\eta _{(\mathrm{\Gamma })}`$-invariant

The proof of Lemma 3.7 will occupy the whole of this section. It is based on the same principle as the proof of Atiyah’s $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-index Theorem given in \[Roe98, Chap. $`15`$\]. He used an asymptotic expansion of the kernel of $`e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^2}`$ to prove that $`\mathrm{ind}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^+`$ is given by an integral on a fundamental domain only involving the symbol of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}`$ and therefore he concluded to the index equality. Therefore, here our main task is to show that, in our case, $`\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}\eta _\mathrm{\Gamma }(u)`$ is a local invariant which can be computed as an integral of a local form.

###### Lemma 3.9.

When for every $`u[0,1]`$, $`0\mathrm{spec}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)`$,

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}\eta _\mathrm{\Gamma }(u)=_Fa_n(x,\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)dx$$

where $`F`$ is a fundamental domain and $`a_n`$ is a local invariant in the jets of the symbol of $`(\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)`$.

The result for $`\overline{\eta }`$ is already known \[Gil84, Lem. $`\mathrm{1.10.3}`$\] and corresponds to the case $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\{id\}`$. As the symbol of the operators and their lifts are the same and as we integrate over a fundamental domain, we conclude that Lemma 3.9 implies Lemma 3.7.

###### Definition – Proposition 3.10 (M. Ramachandran \[Ram93\] $`\mathrm{\S }3.1`$).

The $`\eta _\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant is defined by

$$\eta _\mathrm{\Gamma }(u)=\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1/2)}_0^{\mathrm{}}t^{1/2}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_ue^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2})dt.$$

That is, the following limits

$$\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1/2)}\underset{T\mathrm{}}{lim}\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim}_\epsilon ^Tt^{1/2}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_ue^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2})dt$$

are finite. Moreover the limits are uniform with respect to $`u`$.

* For $`0`$ the convergence is based on a Bismut-Freed estimation \[BF86, Theo. $`2.4`$\]: denoting by $`K(t,x,y)`$ the kernel of the integral operator $`e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^2}`$ then

$$|\mathrm{Tr}_x\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}K(t,x,x)|<Ct^{1/2}$$

where $`C`$ is a constant depending on the local geometry of $`V,S`$, the dimension of $`V`$ and the rank of $`S`$. Hence the limit for $`\epsilon 0`$ is well defined. Moreover, as $`C`$ does not depend on $`u`$, the convergence is uniform with respect to $`u`$.

For $`+\mathrm{}`$ we use the same standard spectral measure argument as M. Ramachandran in \[Ram93, Theo. $`\mathrm{3.1.1}`$\]. The convergence is again uniform with respect to $`u`$.

As a conclusion, the $`\eta _\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant is well defined and continuous. $`\mathrm{}`$

Now we are ready to prove Lemma 3.9.

* The proof is decomposed in three steps from ($`a`$) to ($`c`$). *A priori*, we do not know that $`\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}\eta _\mathrm{\Gamma }(u)`$ exists. Its existence will be a consequence of the proof.

($`a`$) We begin with establishing the formula:

(3.5)
$$\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_ue^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2})=(1+2t\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t})\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}).$$

The proof of this formula uses especially the article \[CG85, §$`4`$\].

Before starting, we make one remark. Subsequently, all inversions of limits and integrals, integrals and integrals, derivations and integrals, derivations and limits are permitted by the fact that we work on compacts ($`u[0,1]`$, the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-trace is an integral on a compact fundamental domain $`F`$,…) and the fact that the functions under consideration are smooth (in all variables).

Now we can start by writing Duhamel’s principle

(3.6) $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0e^{(t\epsilon )\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}e^{\epsilon \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0e^{\epsilon \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}e^{(t\epsilon )\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}`$
$`={\displaystyle _\epsilon ^{t\epsilon }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}s}}\left[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0e^{(ts)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}e^{s\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\right]ds`$
$`={\displaystyle _\epsilon ^{t\epsilon }}\left[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2e^{(ts)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}e^{s\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0e^{(ts)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}e^{s\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2\right]ds.`$
If we take the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-trace, the second term of the last line can be rewritten

(3.7) $`{\displaystyle _\epsilon ^{t\epsilon }}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0e^{(ts)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}e^{s\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2\right)ds`$
$`={\displaystyle _\epsilon ^{t\epsilon }}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left((\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0e^{(ts)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}e^{\frac{s}{2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2})(e^{\frac{s}{2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2)\right)ds`$
$`={\displaystyle _\epsilon ^{t\epsilon }}\left((e^{\frac{s}{2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2)(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0e^{(ts)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}e^{\frac{s}{2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2})\right)ds`$
$`={\displaystyle _\epsilon ^{t\epsilon }}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^3e^{(ts)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}e^{s\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\right)ds.`$
In the previous computation we have used the commutation property of the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-trace but we need to verify the assumptions, that is the two operators inverted $`(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0e^{(ts)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}e^{\frac{s}{2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2})`$ and $`(e^{\frac{s}{2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2)`$ are $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-Hilbert-Schmidt. It is the aim of the following sub-lemma:

###### Sub-lemma 3.11.

Let $`S`$ be a Clifford bundle over a compact Riemannian manifold $`V`$ of dimension $`n`$. Let $`D:C^{\mathrm{}}(S)C^{\mathrm{}}(S)`$ be a Dirac operator and $`Q:C^{\mathrm{}}(S)C^{\mathrm{}}(S)`$ be an auxiliary partial differential operator of order $`a0`$. We lift all these objects to a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-covering $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ ($`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ can be $`V`$ itself).

Then the operator $`\stackrel{~}{Q}e^{t\stackrel{~}{D}^2}`$ is a well defined (i.e. $`\mathrm{Im}e^{t\stackrel{~}{D}^2}\mathrm{dom}\stackrel{~}{Q}`$), infinitely smoothing operator with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant kernel $`k(t,\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{y})=\stackrel{~}{Q}_xK(t,\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{y})`$ (where $`K(t,\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{y})`$ is the kernel of $`e^{t\stackrel{~}{D}^2}`$ and the operator $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_x`$ acts on $`K(t,\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{y})`$, considered as a function of $`\stackrel{~}{x}`$). Moreover $`\stackrel{~}{Q}e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^2}`$ is a bounded operator from $`L^2(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ to $`L^2(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ and even a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-Hilbert-Schmidt operator.

* We prove successively all the points of the sub-lemma.

First we have $`\mathrm{Im}e^{t\stackrel{~}{D}^2}\mathrm{dom}\stackrel{~}{D}^k`$. Indeed the functional calculus ensures that the operator $`f_k(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}})=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^ke^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^2}`$ for all $`k`$ where $`f_k(x)=x^ke^{tx^2}`$ are well defined because the functions $`f_k`$ are rapidly decreasing. On the other hand the non-compact Sobolev embedding Theorem and elliptic estimates (see \[Roe98, Prop. $`15.4`$\] for a proof) assert that for any $`p>\frac{n}{2}`$ and $`r0`$, there is a constant $`c`$ such that

$$s_{CB^r}c(s+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}s+\mathrm{}+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^{p+r}s)$$

for all $`s`$ in the domain of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^{p+r}`$ where $`\mathrm{CB}^r(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ is the space of sections of $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$ which are $`r`$ times continuously differentiable with all derivatives bounded, $`s_{CB^r}`$ is the sum of the supremum norms of all the derivatives of $`s`$ and $`.`$ is the $`\mathrm{L}^2`$-norm. This proves that $`\mathrm{dom}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^{p+r}\mathrm{CB}^r(\stackrel{~}{S})`$. Thus we have proved the first point: $`\stackrel{~}{Q}e^{t\stackrel{~}{D}^2}`$ is well defined.

Moreover, for any rapidly decreasing function $`f`$, the functional calculus (see \[Roe98, Prop. $`9.20`$\] for a proof) estimates the norm of the operator $`f(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}})`$ from $`\mathrm{L}^2(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ to $`\mathrm{L}^2(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ by $`f(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}})sup|f(\lambda )|\text{ for }\lambda \text{ in the spectrum of }\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}.`$ Combining this with the non-compact Sobolev embedding Theorem gives that $`e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^2}`$ maps $`L^2(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ continuously in $`\mathrm{CB}^r(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ for all $`r`$. In addition, $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ maps trivially $`\mathrm{CB}^r(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ continuously in $`\mathrm{CB}^{ra}(\stackrel{~}{S})`$. Thus for all $`k`$, $`\stackrel{~}{Q}e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^2}`$ maps $`L^2(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ continuously in $`\mathrm{CB}^k(\stackrel{~}{S})`$: $`\stackrel{~}{Q}e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^2}`$ is smoothing.

An easy computation gives the announced kernel and the fact that it is $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant.

It remains to show that $`\stackrel{~}{Q}e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^2}:L^2(\stackrel{~}{S})L^2(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ is bounded. For this we use the closed graph Theorem i.e. consider a sequence $`(u_n,\stackrel{~}{Q}e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^2}u_n)`$ in the graph which converges to $`(u,v)`$ in $`L^2`$-norm, we must show that $`\stackrel{~}{Q}e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^2}u=v`$. But we know that the sequence $`\stackrel{~}{Q}e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^2}u_n`$ converges to $`\stackrel{~}{Q}e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^2}u`$ in $`\mathrm{CB}^r`$-norm and therefore converges pointwise. By assumptions the sequence $`\stackrel{~}{Q}e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^2}u_n`$ converges to $`v`$ in $`L^2`$-norm and so there exists a (dominated) subsequence that converges almost everywhere. By uniqueness of the limit $`\stackrel{~}{Q}e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^2}u=v`$.

Reading again Definition 3.1 of a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-Hilbert-Schmidt operator and the paragraph that follows it, we conclude that $`\stackrel{~}{Q}e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}^2}`$ is a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-Hilbert-Schmidt operator. $`\mathrm{}`$

By definition of $`_u`$, all the space $`CB^r(\stackrel{~}{S},\stackrel{~}{}_u)`$ are equal because the norms are equivalent. Therefore, $`\stackrel{~}{Q}=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0e^{(ts)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}`$ is well defined and we can apply Sub-lemma 3.11 to $`\stackrel{~}{Q}e^{\frac{s}{2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}=(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0e^{(ts)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2})e^{\frac{s}{2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}`$ as well as, directly to $`e^{\frac{s}{2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2`$ which is equal to $`\stackrel{~}{Q}e^{\frac{s}{2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2e^{\frac{s}{2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}`$.

Let return to the computation. The equality $`(\text{3.6})`$ yields

(3.8) $`\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0e^{(t\epsilon )\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}e^{\epsilon \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\right)\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0e^{\epsilon \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}e^{(t\epsilon )\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\right)`$
$`={\displaystyle _\epsilon ^{t\epsilon }}\left[\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2e^{(ts)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}e^{s\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\right)\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0e^{(ts)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}e^{s\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2\right)\right]ds`$
$`={\displaystyle _\epsilon ^{t\epsilon }}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2)e^{(ts)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}e^{s\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\right)ds.`$
If we differentiate (3.8) with respect to $`u`$ and set $`u=0`$, the right-hand side becomes

$`{\displaystyle _\epsilon ^{t\epsilon }}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2)e^{(ts)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}e^{s\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\right)ds`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _\epsilon ^{t\epsilon }}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2)e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}\right)ds`$
$`=(t2\epsilon )\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2)_{|u=0}e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\right)`$
$`=(t2\epsilon )\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(tD_0{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)_{|u=0}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)_{|u=0}e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\right)`$
$`=(t2\epsilon )\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)_{|u=0}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\right)\text{ by permuting factors as in (}\text{3.7}\text{)}.`$
Taking the limit $`\epsilon 0`$, we get

(3.9) $`2t\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)_{|u=0}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\right)=2t{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t}}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)_{|u=0}e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\right).`$
To make the corresponding evaluation for the left-hand side of (3.8) note that

(3.10) $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}\left(\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_ue^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}\right)\right)=\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}\right)+\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}(e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2})\right).`$
Also for fixed $`\epsilon `$, as $`e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}=e^{(t\epsilon )\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}e^{\epsilon \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}=e^{\epsilon \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}e^{(t\epsilon )\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}`$,

(3.11) $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_ue^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}\right)`$
$`+\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}(e^{(t\epsilon )\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2})e^{\epsilon \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}\right)`$
$`+\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_ue^{(t\epsilon )\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}(e^{\epsilon \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2})\right).`$
Letting $`\epsilon 0`$ and comparing (3.10) with (3.11) gives

$`\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_ue^{(t\epsilon )\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}(e^{\epsilon \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2})\right)=\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}(e^{\epsilon \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2})e^{(t\epsilon )\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}\right)=0.`$
So the derivative at $`u=0`$ of the left-hand side of (3.8) is

$`\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim}\left[\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}(e^{(t\epsilon )\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2})_{|u=0}e^{\epsilon \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\right)\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}(e^{\epsilon \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2})_{|u=0}e^{(t\epsilon )\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\right)\right]`$
(3.12) $`={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_ue^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}\right)_{|u=0}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)_{|u=0}e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\right).`$
Combining (3.9) and (3.3.2) gives

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}\left(\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_ue^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}\right)\right)_{|u=0}=\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)_{|u=0}e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\right)+2t{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t}}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)_{|u=0}e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_0^2}\right).`$
This ends the proof of the formula (3.5).

If $`\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}\eta _\mathrm{\Gamma }(u)`$ exists, using the equality (3.5), it would be equal to the following limits

$`\underset{T\mathrm{}}{lim}\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1/2)}}{\displaystyle _\epsilon ^T}t^{1/2}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}\right)\mathrm{d}t`$
(3.13) $`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1/2)}}{\displaystyle _\epsilon ^T}2t^{1/2}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t}}\left(\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}\right)\right)\mathrm{d}t).`$
Now, in the previous expression (3.3.2), we integrate the second term by parts and obtain

$$\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1/2)}\underset{T\mathrm{}}{lim}2T^{1/2}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)e^{T\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}\right)\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1/2)}\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim}2e^{1/2}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)e^{\epsilon \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}\right).$$

We will now compute the limits of these both terms.

($`b`$) We will show that:

(3.14) $`\underset{T\mathrm{}}{lim}T^{1/2}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)e^{T\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}\right)=0.`$
For this, we recall the useful Proposition $`4.15`$ of \[Ati76\]: for a bounded, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant operator $`A`$ on $`L^2(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ which is of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-trace class and a sequence of bounded, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant operators $`B_j`$ on $`L^2(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ which converges to a bounded, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant operator $`B`$ on $`L^2(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ i.e. $`fL^2(\stackrel{~}{S}),B_jfBf`$ in $`L^2`$-norm, we have $`\underset{j+\mathrm{}}{lim}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }(AB_j)=\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }(AB)`$.

Let $`T_0`$ be a strictly positive real. Consider

$$A=\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)e^{T_0\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}=\left(\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)e^{\frac{T_0}{2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}\right)\left(e^{\frac{T_0}{2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}\right).$$

Since the operator $`A`$ is the composition of two $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-Hilbert-Schmidt operators (Sub-lemma 3.11), the operator $`A`$ is, by definition, of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-trace class. Let $`T_j`$ be an increasing sequence of real which tends to infinity. We defined

$$B_j=T_j^{1/2}e^{(T_jT_0)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}=T_j^{1/2}e^{(T_jT_0)c^2}e^{(T_jT_0)(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2c^2)}$$

where $`c`$ is chosen such that $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2c^2>\alpha >0`$ (it’s possible because $`0\mathrm{spec}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)`$). Then the spectral theory shows that $`e^{(T_jT_0)(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2c^2)}`$ converges to $`B`$ the operator of projection on the kernel of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2c^2`$ which is $`\{0\}`$. On the other hand $`T_j^{1/2}e^{(T_jT_0)c^2}`$ converges to $`0`$ as $`j`$ tends to infinity. Therefore we have proved that $`B_j`$ converges to the bounded $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant operator $`B`$ (projection on $`\{0\}`$). Finally we have the desired formula (3.14).

($`c`$) Now we prove the formula:

(3.15) $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1/2)}}\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim}2\epsilon ^{1/2}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)e^{\epsilon \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}\right)={\displaystyle _F}a_n(x,{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)dx`$
where $`F`$ is a fundamental domain and $`a_n`$ is a local invariant in the jets of the symbols of $`(\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)`$.

Using symbolic calculus (see \[Gil84, $`\mathrm{\S }1.7`$\]), we can improve Sub-lemma 3.11 as follows.

###### Sub-lemma 3.12.

Under the same assumptions as in Sub-lemma 3.11, there is an asymptotic expansion on the diagonal:

$$k(t,\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{x})=\{\stackrel{~}{Q}_xK(t,\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{y})\}_{\stackrel{~}{y}=\stackrel{~}{x}}\underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}t^{(kna)/2}e_k(\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{Q},\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}})$$

where $`e_k`$ are smooth local invariants of the jets of the symbols of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$. This means that given any integer $`l`$ there exists an integer $`k(l)`$ such that

$$|k(t,\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{x})\underset{0kk(l)}{}t^{(kna)/2}e_k(\stackrel{~}{x})|<C_kt^k\text{ for }0<t<1.$$

* The proof of this sub-lemma is nearly the same as when the manifold is closed, which is the case in \[Gil84, Lemma $`\mathrm{1.7.7}.`$\]. As in the proof of Sub-lemma 3.11, we use the non-compact Sobolev embedding associated to the elliptic estimates in order to compute the norm of the operators from $`(L^2(\stackrel{~}{S}),.)`$ to $`(\mathrm{CB}^r(\stackrel{~}{S}),._{\mathrm{CB}^r})`$. Here the fact that we are on a covering of a closed manifold with lifted operators plays an important role. In the closed manifold case, we use the norm of the operators from the Sobolev space $`(L^2(S),.)`$ onto higher order Sobolev spaces and use the Sobolev embedding only at the end of the proof. The remainder of the proof is local and thus is exactly the same. $`\mathrm{}`$

If we have such an asymptotic expansion for the kernel, we deduce immediately the following asymptotic expansion for the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-trace:

$$\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\stackrel{~}{Q}e^{t\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}}\right)=_F\mathrm{Tr}k(t,\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{x})\mathrm{dvol}(\stackrel{~}{x})\underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}t^{(kna)/2}_F\mathrm{Tr}e_k(\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{Q},\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}})\mathrm{dvol}(\stackrel{~}{x}).$$

And therefore, in our case, with $`\stackrel{~}{Q}=\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{D}=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u`$, we obtain

$$\epsilon ^{1/2}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)e^{\epsilon \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}\right)\underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\epsilon ^{(kn)/2}_F\mathrm{Tr}e_k(\stackrel{~}{x},\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u),\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)\mathrm{dvol}(\stackrel{~}{x}).$$

As the symbols of the operators and of their lifts are the same, we can replace the integration over the fundamental domain $`F`$ by an integration over $`V`$, thus

$$\epsilon ^{1/2}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)e^{\epsilon \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u^2}\right)\underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\epsilon ^{(kn)/2}_V\mathrm{Tr}e_k(x,\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}(\mathrm{D}_u),\mathrm{D}_u)\mathrm{dvol}(x).$$

We know that $`\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}\overline{\eta }`$ exists (see \[Gil84, $`\mathrm{\S }1.10`$\]). By the same computation as for $`\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}\overline{\eta }_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, we show that the limit $`lim_{\epsilon 0}\epsilon ^{1/2}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}(\mathrm{D}_u)e^{\epsilon \mathrm{D}_u^2}\right)`$ is finite and is equal to $`\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Gamma }(1/2)\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}\overline{\eta }`$. Moreover, we have also

$$\epsilon ^{1/2}\mathrm{Tr}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}(\mathrm{D}_u)e^{\epsilon \mathrm{D}_u^2}\right)\underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\epsilon ^{(kn)/2}_V\mathrm{Tr}e_k(x,\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}(\mathrm{D}_u),\mathrm{D}_u)\mathrm{dvol}(x).$$

As a consequence we obtain $`_F\mathrm{Tr}e_k(\stackrel{~}{x},\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}_u)=_V\mathrm{Tr}e_k(x,\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}u}(\mathrm{D}_u)=0`$ for $`k<n`$. The only terms which arise in the computation of the limit (3.15), are the ones for $`kn`$, which ones are non-zero when $`\epsilon 0`$ only for $`k=n`$ and the result follows.

Finally we combine the points ($`a`$),($`b`$) and ($`c`$) to achieve the proof of Lemma 3.9. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 4. Approximate inequality

In the present section we will develop the second step of the proof as announced in Section 2.

### 4.1. Refined Kato inequality

First we introduce the context. Let $`V`$ be a closed Riemannian spin manifold of dimension $`n`$. Let $`\mathrm{D}:C^{\mathrm{}}(S)C^{\mathrm{}}(S)`$ be a first order operator. The *twisted operator* $`\mathrm{D}^Y`$ of $`\mathrm{D}`$ by a unitary bundle $`(Y,^Y)`$ is the operator whose symbol is $`\sigma (\mathrm{D}^Y)=\sigma (\mathrm{D})1`$ defined as follows

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}C^{\mathrm{}}(SY)& \stackrel{^{SY}}{}& C^{\mathrm{}}(T^{}V(SY))=C^{\mathrm{}}((T^{}VS)Y)& \stackrel{\sigma (\mathrm{D})1}{}& C^{\mathrm{}}(SY)\end{array}$$

So we have $`\mathrm{D}^Y=(\sigma (\mathrm{D})1)^{SY}=\sigma `$ where $`\sigma `$ is just the symbol of the operator. We now recall the refined Kato inequality \[CGH00\]:

###### Proposition 4.1.

Consider $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ an element of $`\mathrm{ker}\sigma `$ at some point and $`\phi `$ an element of $`SY`$ at the same point. Then

$$\underset{|\phi |=1}{sup}|\mathrm{\Phi },\phi |k_\sigma |\mathrm{\Phi }|,$$

where the constant $`k_\sigma (<1)`$ only depends on the symbol of the operator $`\mathrm{D}`$.
Futhermore, for $`\psi \mathrm{ker}\mathrm{D}^Y`$ i.e. $`\mathrm{\Phi }=\psi \mathrm{ker}\sigma `$, $`|\mathrm{d}|\psi ||k_\sigma |\psi |`$ $`()`$.

In particular, for any (twisted) Dirac operator $`/D^Y`$, we know $`k_\sigma =((n1)/n)^{1/2}`$. Moreover we have equality in the previous inequality $`()`$ if and only if there exists a $`1`$-form $`\alpha `$ such that

$$\psi =\alpha \psi +\frac{1}{n}e_ie_i\alpha \psi .$$

* We adapt the general proof to the particular case of a Dirac operator. It is well known that the symbol $`\sigma `$ of the Dirac operator is the Clifford multiplication. We define $`\mathrm{\Pi }:C^{\mathrm{}}(T^{}V(SY))C^{\mathrm{}}(T^{}V(SY))`$ by $`\mathrm{\Pi }(\alpha \psi )=\frac{1}{n}e_ie_i\alpha \psi `$ where $`e_i`$ is an orthonormal basis of $`T^{}V`$, $`\alpha T^{}V`$, $`\psi SY`$ and $``$ the Clifford multiplication. We have $`\mathrm{ker}\sigma =\mathrm{ker}\mathrm{\Pi }`$, the endomorphisms $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ and $`1\mathrm{\Pi }`$ are orthogonal projections. Let $`\phi `$ be a section of $`SY`$ with norm $`1`$. Thus, if $`\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{ker}\mathrm{\Pi }`$ we have $`|\mathrm{\Phi },\phi |=sup_{|\alpha |=1}|\mathrm{\Phi },\alpha \phi |`$. But, by the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, $`|\mathrm{\Phi },\alpha \phi |=|\mathrm{\Phi },(1\mathrm{\Pi })(\alpha \phi )||\mathrm{\Phi }||(1\mathrm{\Pi })(\alpha \phi )|`$. We now write Pythagoras’ equality $`1=|\alpha \phi |^2=|\mathrm{\Pi }(\alpha \phi )|^2+|(1\mathrm{\Pi })(\alpha \phi )|^2`$. We can compute directly

$$|\mathrm{\Pi }(\alpha \phi )|^2=\frac{1}{n^2}\underset{i}{}e_ie_i\alpha \phi ,\underset{j}{}e_je_j\alpha \phi =\frac{1}{n}|\alpha |^2|\phi |^2=\frac{1}{n}.$$

The constant $`k_\sigma `$ follows.

As in \[CGH00, Theo. $`3.1`$\], we can study the equality case. In this case, we have equality in the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, hence there exists a $`1`$-form $`\alpha `$ and a section $`\phi `$ of $`SY`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Phi }=(1\mathrm{\Pi })(\alpha \phi )`$. Furthermore, for $`\psi \mathrm{ker}/D^Y`$, the equality implies that there exists a $`1`$-form $`\alpha `$ such that $`\psi =\alpha \psi +\frac{1}{n}e_ie_i\alpha \psi `$. This will be useful in Section 5. $`\mathrm{}`$

### 4.2. Bochner-Lichnerowicz-Weitzenböck formula

For this section we refer to the article \[GL83, §$`2`$\]. Let $`\mathrm{D}`$ denote a Dirac operator acting on a Dirac bundle $`S`$ on $`V`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}`$ denote the lifted Dirac operator acting on $`\mathrm{L}^2(\stackrel{~}{S})`$, the Hilbert space of $`\mathrm{L}^2`$-integrable sections of $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$ on $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$. The inner product and the norm on $`\mathrm{L}^2(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ will be denoted by $`.,.`$, respectively $`.`$ ; they are induced as usual by the pointwise inner product $`.,.`$ on $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$ and the canonical volume form $`\mathrm{dvol}_{\stackrel{~}{V}}`$ on $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$.

We define the *Sobolev space* $`\mathrm{L}^{1,2}(\stackrel{~}{S})`$. For $`\psi C_c^{\mathrm{}}(\stackrel{~}{S})`$, the smooth sections of $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$ which have compact support, we set

$$\psi _1^2=_{\stackrel{~}{V}}(\psi ,\psi +\stackrel{~}{}\psi ,\stackrel{~}{}\psi )$$

and denote $`\mathrm{L}^{1,2}(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ the completion of $`C_c^{\mathrm{}}(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ in this norm.

Let consider the twisted Dirac operators. Let $`Y`$ be an hermitian bundle over $`V`$ and $`/D^Y`$ be the associated twisted Dirac on $`V`$ acting on sections of $`/SY`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{/D^Y}`$ be the lifted Dirac operator on $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ be the lifted bundle over $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$. The operator $`\stackrel{~}{/D^Y}`$ is the same as the Dirac operator $`\stackrel{~}{/D}`$ twisted by the bundle $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$. We emphasize that, on $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ (as on $`V`$), we have the fundamental Bochner-Lichnerowicz-Weitzenböck formula

$$\stackrel{~}{/D^Y}\psi ^2=\stackrel{~}{}\psi ^2+\frac{\mathrm{scal}}{4}\psi ,\psi +^{\stackrel{~}{Y}}\psi ,\psi $$

where $`^{\stackrel{~}{Y}}`$ is defined by the formula

$$^{\stackrel{~}{Y}}(se)=\frac{1}{2}\underset{i,j}{}(e_ie_js)R_{e_i,e_j}^{\stackrel{~}{Y}}(e)\text{ where }R_{v,w}^{\stackrel{~}{Y}}=[\stackrel{~}{}_v^{\stackrel{~}{Y}},\stackrel{~}{}_w^{\stackrel{~}{Y}}]\stackrel{~}{}_{[v,w]}^{\stackrel{~}{Y}}$$

with $`s`$ a section of $`\stackrel{~}{/S}`$, $`e`$ a section of $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$, $`(e_i)`$ an orthonormal basis of $`T^{}\stackrel{~}{V}`$, $``$ is the Clifford multiplication and $`R^{\stackrel{~}{Y}}`$ is the curvature $`2`$-form with value in $`\mathrm{End}(\stackrel{~}{Y})`$. Moreover, we can bound above the norm of the operator $`^{\stackrel{~}{Y}}`$ as follows:

(4.1)
$$^{\stackrel{~}{Y}}\alpha _nR^{\stackrel{~}{Y}}=\alpha _nR^Y$$

where $`\alpha _n`$ only depends on the dimension of $`V`$.

As a consequence of the Bochner-Lichnerowicz-Weitzenböck formula and of the fact that the curvature term $`\mathrm{scal}/4+^{\stackrel{~}{Y}}`$ is uniformly bounded on $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$, the maximal domain of $`\stackrel{~}{/D}`$ on $`\mathrm{L}^2(\stackrel{~}{/S})`$ is exactly $`\mathrm{L}^{1,2}(\stackrel{~}{/S})`$ (see \[GL83, Theo. 2.8\]).

### 4.3. Key Lemma

The main purpose of the section is to prove the following Lemma.

###### Lemma 4.2.

Let $`Y`$ be a Riemannian bundle over $`V`$ and $`/D^Y`$ be the associated twisted Dirac operator on $`V`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{/D^Y}`$ be the lifted Dirac operator on $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$. If $`0`$ belongs to the spectrum of $`\stackrel{~}{/D^Y}`$, we have

$$inf\mathrm{scal}(V,g)4\frac{n}{n1}\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g})+\alpha _nR^Y$$

where $`\alpha _n`$ only depends on the dimension of $`V`$.

* We need to distinguish two cases. The trivial one is when there exists an eigenvector associate to the eigenvalue $`0`$. Then we write the Bochner formula and can conclude in a trivial way. If not, $`0`$ is in the essential spectrum and we cannot directly use the refined Kato inequality.

For sake of simplicity we will denote $`\mathrm{D}`$ for $`/D^Y`$ and $`S`$ for $`/S`$.

*If $`0`$ is in the point spectrum* there exists an eigenspinor $`\psi \mathrm{L}^{1,2}(\stackrel{~}{S}^+\stackrel{~}{Y})`$ of the operator $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}`$ on $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$. We apply the Bochner-Weitzenböck formula to this $`\psi `$:

$$0=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}\psi ^2=\stackrel{~}{}\psi ^2+\frac{\mathrm{scal}}{4}\psi ,\psi +^{\stackrel{~}{Y}}\psi ,\psi .$$

To obtain the desired inequality, we estimate the three terms of this equality. For the first term, we use successively the refined Kato inequality (Proposition 4.1) and the Rayleigh’s quotient. For the second, we just bound below the scalar curvature with its infimum. For the third, we use the upper bound (4.1) of the norm of the operator $`^{\stackrel{~}{Y}}`$.

We finally obtain

$$0\left(\frac{n}{n1}\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g})+\frac{inf\mathrm{scal}(V,g)}{4}\alpha _nR^Y\right)\psi ^2.$$

As $`\psi ^2>0`$ the result follows.

*If $`0`$ is in the essential spectrum*, there exists a sequence $`\psi _k\mathrm{L}^{1,2}(\stackrel{~}{S}^+\stackrel{~}{Y})`$ such that $`\psi _k^2=1`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}\psi _k^2\frac{1}{k}\psi _k^2=\frac{1}{k}`$. We have $`2|\mathrm{d}|\psi |||\psi |=|\mathrm{d}|\psi |^2|=2|\stackrel{~}{}\psi ,\psi |`$, thus $`|\mathrm{d}|\psi ||^2=|\stackrel{~}{}\psi ,\phi |`$ where $`\phi =\frac{\psi }{|\psi |}`$. Writing $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}=\mathrm{\Pi }\stackrel{~}{}`$, we obtain:

$$|\stackrel{~}{}\psi ,\phi |^2=|\mathrm{\Pi }\stackrel{~}{}\psi ,\phi |^2+|(1\mathrm{\Pi })\stackrel{~}{}\psi ,\phi |^2.$$

As $`\mathrm{\Phi }=(1\mathrm{\Pi })\stackrel{~}{}\psi \mathrm{ker}\mathrm{\Pi }`$, $`|\mathrm{\Phi },\phi |k_\mathrm{\Pi }|\mathrm{\Phi }|k_\mathrm{\Pi }|\stackrel{~}{}\psi |`$ (Proposition 4.1). Moreover $`|\mathrm{\Pi }\stackrel{~}{}\psi ,\phi |=|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}\psi ,\phi ||\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}\psi ||\phi |=|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}\psi |`$, hence

$$|\stackrel{~}{}\psi ,\frac{\psi }{|\psi |}|^2|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}\psi |^2+k_\mathrm{\Pi }^2|\stackrel{~}{}\psi |^2.$$

Applying this to $`\psi _k`$ and replacing $`k_\mathrm{\Pi }`$ by its value $`\sqrt{\frac{n1}{n}}`$, we obtain

$$0|\mathrm{d}|\psi _k||^2\frac{1}{k}+\frac{n1}{n}\stackrel{~}{}\psi _k^2.$$

Now we write the Bochner-Weitzenböck formula applied to $`\psi _k`$

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}\psi _k^2=\stackrel{~}{}\psi _k^2+\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{scal}\psi _k,\psi _k+^{\stackrel{~}{Y}}\psi _k,\psi _k,$$

consequently

$$\frac{1}{k}\frac{|\mathrm{d}|\psi _k||^2\frac{1}{k}}{\frac{n1}{n}}+\frac{1}{4}inf\mathrm{scal}\psi _k^2\alpha _nR^Y\psi _k^2.$$

Now we use the Rayleigh’s quotient

$$\frac{1}{k}\frac{\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V})\frac{1}{k}}{\frac{n1}{n}}+\frac{1}{4}inf\mathrm{scal}\alpha _nR^Y.$$

Letting $`k\mathrm{}`$

$$0\frac{\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V})}{\frac{n1}{n}}+\frac{1}{4}inf\mathrm{scal}\alpha _nR^Y.$$

This ends the proof of Lemma 4.2. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 5. Proof of Theorem A and Theorem C

### 5.1. Proof of Theorem A

Let $`V`$ be a closed Riemannian spin manifold with non-zero $`\widehat{\mathrm{A}}`$-genus. We use the Atiyah $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-index Theorem to ensure that $`\mathrm{ind}_\mathrm{\Gamma }\stackrel{~}{/D}^+=\mathrm{ind}/D^+=\widehat{\mathrm{A}}_V[V]0`$ thus there exists $`\psi \mathrm{L}^{1,2}(\stackrel{~}{S}^+),\psi 0`$ such that $`\stackrel{~}{/D}\psi =0`$. Therefore we can use the key Lemma 4.2 simply for the (untwisted) usual Dirac operator and obtain directly the desired inequality.

### 5.2. Equality case (Theorem C)

As we know the equality case in the refined Kato inequality \[CGH00, Theo. $`3.1`$\], we can study the equality case in Theorem A. Since one of the implications is trivial (i.e. $`\mathrm{scal}(V,g)=0`$ implies the equality), we have only to prove the other one. So we state the following Proposition.

###### Proposition 5.1.

Under the same assumptions as in Theorem A. If we are in the equality case, that is

$$inf\mathrm{scal}(V,g)=4\frac{n}{n1}\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g}),$$

then $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ is compact and $`\mathrm{scal}(V,g)=0`$.

* Suppose that we are in the equality case of Theorem A, we distinct two cases: $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ is compact or $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ is non compact. If $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ is compact we are going to show that $`\mathrm{scal}(V,g)=0`$. On the other hand, we will show that the case $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ non-compact is impossible.

*If $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ is compact,* then we have trivially $`\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g})=0`$ and hence we get $`inf\mathrm{scal}(V,g)=4\frac{n}{n1}\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g})=0`$. Using the $`\widehat{A}`$-genus vanishing Theorem of Lichnerowicz we conclude that $`\mathrm{scal}(V,g)=0`$.

*When $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ is non-compact,* we will find a contradiction.

We begin with the equality cases in the inequalities that we use in the proof of the key Lemma 4.2:

+ Equality in the Refined Kato inequality: $`|\mathrm{d}|\psi ||^2=\frac{n}{n1}|\stackrel{~}{}\psi |^2`$ and, as recalled in Proposition 4.1, there exists a $`1`$-form $`\alpha `$ on $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ such that $`\stackrel{~}{}\psi =\alpha \psi +\frac{1}{n}_ie_ie_i\alpha \psi `$, where $`e_i`$ is an orthonormal basis of $`T^{}\stackrel{~}{V}`$ and $``$ is the Clifford multiplication,
    + Equality for the Rayleigh’s quotient: $`\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V})=\frac{{\scriptscriptstyle |\mathrm{d}|\psi ||^2}}{{\scriptscriptstyle |\psi |^2}}`$ therefore $`\mathrm{\Delta }|\psi |=\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V})|\psi |`$,
    + Equality for the infimum: $`inf\mathrm{scal}(V,g)=\mathrm{scal}(V,g)`$ and thus $`\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g})=\frac{n1}{n}\frac{\mathrm{scal}(V,g)}{4}`$.

Next we make some intermediate computations in order to conclude to a contradiction in a last time.

With ($`a`$) we compute $`|\stackrel{~}{}\psi |^2`$ as follows

$`|\stackrel{~}{}\psi |^2`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha \psi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}e_ie_i\alpha \psi ,\alpha \psi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}{\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}e_je_j\alpha \psi `$
$`=`$ $`|\alpha |^2|\psi |^2+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{n}}{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}e_i,\alpha e\psi ,e_i\alpha \psi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i,j}{}}e_i,e_je_i\alpha \psi ,e_j\alpha \psi `$
$`=`$ $`|\alpha |^2|\psi |^2+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{n}}{\displaystyle \underset{i,j}{}}e_i,\alpha e_j,\alpha e\psi ,e_ie_j\psi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}e_i\alpha \psi ,e_i\alpha \psi `$
$`=`$ $`|\alpha |^2|\psi |^2+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{n}}{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}e_i,\alpha ^2e\psi ,e_ie_i\psi `$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{n}}{\displaystyle \underset{i<j}{}}e_i,\alpha e_j,\alpha e\psi ,(e_ie_j+e_je_i)\psi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}|\alpha |^2|\psi |^2.`$
Hence, we obtain

(5.1) $`|\stackrel{~}{}\psi |^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{n1}{n}}|\alpha |^2|\psi |^2.`$

We will now find the contradiction proving first:

###### Lemma 5.2.

We have $`|\alpha |^2=\left(\frac{n}{n1}\right)^2\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{g}})`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }|\psi |^2=0`$.

* We have two different manners to calculate $`\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Delta }|\psi |^2`$:

+ First,

    $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Delta }|\psi |^2`$ $`=`$ $`|\stackrel{~}{}\psi |^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\mathrm{scal}|\psi |^2`$
    $`\stackrel{(\text{5.1})}{=}`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{n1}{n}}|\alpha |^2|\psi |^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\mathrm{scal}|\psi |^2`$
    $`\stackrel{(c)}{=}`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{n1}{n}}|\alpha |^2+{\displaystyle \frac{n}{n1}}\lambda _0\right)|\psi |`$
    where we have used $`\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Delta }|\psi |^2=|\stackrel{~}{}\psi |^2\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{scal}|\psi |^2.`$ Indeed we always have $`\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Delta }|\psi |^2=\stackrel{~}{}^{}\stackrel{~}{}\psi ,\psi |\stackrel{~}{}\psi |^2`$. As $`\psi `$ is harmonic, $`0=/D^2\psi ,\psi =\stackrel{~}{}^{}\stackrel{~}{}\psi +\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{scal}\psi ,\psi `$, hence we have the desired formula.
    + On the other hand, since $`\mathrm{\Delta }f^2=2|\mathrm{d}f|^2+2f\mathrm{\Delta }f,`$ we have

    $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Delta }|\psi |^2`$ $`=`$ $`|\mathrm{d}|\psi ||^2+|\psi |\mathrm{\Delta }|\psi |`$
    $`\stackrel{(a)}{=}`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{n1}{n}}|\stackrel{~}{}\psi |^2+|\psi |\mathrm{\Delta }|\psi |`$
    $`\stackrel{(\text{5.1})}{=}`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{n1}{n}}\right)^2|\alpha |^2|\psi |^2+|\psi |\mathrm{\Delta }|\psi |`$
    $`\stackrel{(b)}{=}`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{n1}{n}}\right)^2|\alpha |^2|\psi |^2+\lambda _0|\psi |^2`$
    $`=`$ $`\left(\left({\displaystyle \frac{n1}{n}}\right)^2|\alpha |^2+\lambda _0\right)|\psi |^2.`$

Finally we have

$$\left(\frac{n1}{n}\right)^2|\alpha |^2+\lambda _0=\frac{n1}{n}|\alpha |^2+\frac{n}{n1}\lambda _0$$

consequently

$$|\alpha |^2=\left(\frac{n}{n1}\right)^2\lambda _0.$$

Thanks to this equality, we deduce that $`\mathrm{\Delta }|\psi |^2=0`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

On the other hand we check that

(5.2)
$$\mathrm{d}|\psi |^2=2\frac{n1}{n}\alpha |\psi |^2.$$

Indeed we have

$$\mathrm{d}|\psi |^2=2e\stackrel{~}{}\psi ,\psi \stackrel{(a)}{=}2\alpha |\psi |^2+\frac{2}{n}\underset{i}{}ee_i\alpha \psi ,\psi e_i.$$

For $`X\mathrm{ker}\alpha `$, we have $`_iee_i\alpha \psi ,\psi e_i(X)=eX^{\mathrm{}}\alpha \psi ,\psi =0`$ using the properties of the Clifford algebra and the fact that the hermitian metric is adapted to the Clifford multiplication. For $`X=\alpha ^\mathrm{\#}`$, we compute $`_iee_i\alpha \psi ,\psi e_i(\alpha ^\mathrm{\#})=e\alpha \alpha \psi ,\psi =|\alpha |^2|\psi |^2`$. The equality (5.2) follows.

We now improve Lemma 5.2 as follows:

###### Lemma 5.3.

We have $`|\alpha |=0`$ and so $`\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{g}})=0`$.

* *By contradiction*, we suppose that the constant $`|\alpha |`$ is non-zero i.e. $`\lambda _00`$. Let $`f=|\psi |^2`$. We know that $`f\mathrm{L}^1(\stackrel{~}{V})`$ (because $`\psi \mathrm{L}^2(\stackrel{~}{S})`$), $`\mathrm{\Delta }f=0`$ (Lemma 5.2) and $`|\mathrm{grad}f|=2\sqrt{\lambda _0}f`$ (Equality (5.2) and Lemma 5.2). Notice that $`f>0`$ everywhere because $`\psi `$ is a non-zero harmonic spinor.

We define the vector field

$$X=\frac{\mathrm{grad}f}{|\mathrm{grad}f|}$$

which is the unit normal to the level-submanifolds $`\stackrel{~}{V}_c=f^1(c)`$. The vector field $`X`$ is complete on $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ because $`|X|`$ is constant, equal to $`1`$.

On an integral curve $`\gamma `$ of $`X`$, $`\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t}f=2\sqrt{\lambda _0}f`$, therefore $`f(t)=k_\gamma e^{2\sqrt{\lambda _0}t}`$ where $`k_\gamma `$ is a strictly positive constant depending on the curve.

If there exists a closed integral curve $`\gamma `$ then there are two different times $`t`$ and $`t^{}`$ such that $`k_\gamma e^{2\sqrt{\lambda _0}t}=k_\gamma e^{2\sqrt{\lambda _0}t^{}}`$: it is impossible. Therefore no such curve is closed.

Choose $`f_0\mathrm{Im}f`$ and a little transverse neighbourhood $`𝒱_0\stackrel{~}{V}_{f_0}`$ of the vector field $`X`$ around a point $`x_0\stackrel{~}{V}_{f_0}`$. Let $`\gamma `$ the integral curves of $`X`$ such that $`\gamma (0)𝒱_0`$ thus we have $`f(t)=f_0e^{2\sqrt{\lambda _0}t}`$ on this curves. The neighbourhood $`𝒱_0`$ is chosen sufficiently small such that the flow of $`X`$ defines a map $`\mathrm{\Phi }:𝒱_0\times \stackrel{~}{V}:(x,t)\phi _t(x)`$ which is a diffeomorphism on its image. Let us introduce some notations: $`𝒱_t=\mathrm{\Phi }(𝒱_0\times \{t\})\stackrel{~}{V}_{f(t)}`$, its volume form will be denoted by $`\omega _t`$ and $`\omega `$ will be the volume form of $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$. We know that $`\omega _t=i_X\omega `$. By definition of the divergence, we have $`\mathrm{d}\omega _t=\mathrm{d}(i_X\omega )=\mathrm{div}(X)\omega `$, therefore $`\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t}\omega _t=\mathrm{div}(X)\omega _t`$. The computation of $`\mathrm{div}(X)`$ gives

$`\mathrm{div}(X)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{div}\left((2\sqrt{\lambda _0}f)^1\mathrm{grad}f\right)`$
$`=`$ $`(2\sqrt{\lambda _0}f)^1\mathrm{div}\mathrm{grad}fi_{\mathrm{grad}\left((2\sqrt{\lambda _0}f)^1\right)}\mathrm{grad}f`$
$`=`$ $`(2\sqrt{\lambda _0}f)^1\mathrm{\Delta }f(2\sqrt{\lambda _0})^1\mathrm{grad}\left(f^1\right),\mathrm{grad}f`$
$`=`$ $`(2\sqrt{\lambda _0})^1{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{grad}f}{f^2}},\mathrm{grad}f=(2\sqrt{\lambda _0}f^2)^1|\mathrm{grad}f|^2=2\sqrt{\lambda _0}.`$
We conclude that $`\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t}\omega _t=2\sqrt{\lambda _0}\omega _t`$, thus $`\omega _t=e^{2\sqrt{\lambda _0}t}\omega _0`$ where $`\omega _0`$ is the $`(n1)`$-volume form of $`\stackrel{~}{V}_{f_0}`$. As a result, $`\mathrm{vol}(𝒱_t)=e^{2\sqrt{\lambda _0}t}v_0`$ where $`v_0=\mathrm{vol}(𝒱_0)`$ is a strictly positive constant.

As $`(\mathrm{\Phi }(𝒱_0\times ),\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{g}})`$ is isometric to $`(𝒱_0\times ,g_t+\mathrm{d}t^2)`$ where $`(𝒱_0\times \{t\},g_t)`$ is isometric to $`(𝒱_t,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{g}}|_{\stackrel{~}{V}_{f(t)}})`$, we can compute the following integral

$$_{\mathrm{\Phi }(𝒱_0\times )}f\omega =_{}_{𝒱_t}f(t)\omega _tdt=_{}f_0e^{2\sqrt{\lambda _0}t}e^{2\sqrt{\lambda _0}t}v_0dt=\mathrm{}.$$

This is in contradiction with the fact that $`f\mathrm{L}^1(\stackrel{~}{V})`$. Hence we have proved the desired result i.e. $`|\alpha |=0`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Finally we deduce a contradiction. Thanks to the equality (5.1), Lemma 5.3 and ($`a`$), we write $`|\stackrel{~}{}\psi |=0=|\mathrm{d}|\psi ||`$, thus $`|\psi |`$ is constant. As $`\psi `$ belongs to $`\mathrm{L}^2(\stackrel{~}{V})`$ with $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ non-compact, we deduct that $`|\psi |=0`$. This is impossible ($`\psi `$ is non-zero by construction). We conclude that if $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ is non-compact, we cannot be in the equality case.

This ends the proof of Proposition 5.1. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 5.4.

In the compact case we also have $`|\alpha |=0`$. Therefore using the equality (5.1), we have proved that in the equality case there exists a harmonic parallel non-zero spinor on $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$. This is a very strong constraint on the holonomy of $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$. The paper of M. Wang \[Wan89\] is an illustration of this general philosophy.

### 5.3. Consequences and remarks

Let $`(V,g)`$ satisfy the assumptions of Theorem A, then using Theorem C we obtain the following possiblities:

* either $`\mathrm{scal}(V,g)=0`$ and then the equality holds in Theorem A, hence $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ is compact. Moreover, as $`\widehat{\mathrm{A}}_V[V]0`$, we conclude that $`\mathrm{Ricci}(V,g)0`$ (see \[Bou75, VIII.6.\] or \[KW75, Lem. $`5.2.`$\] for a proof).
* or $`inf\mathrm{scal}(V,g)<0`$ therefore we cannot be in the equality case, that is $`inf\mathrm{scal}(V,g)<4\frac{n}{n1}\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g})`$.

We can compare this result with the Cheeger-Gromoll Theorem \[CG85\]. Our work proves again that a manifold $`(V,g)`$ with $`\mathrm{Ricci}(V,g)0`$ and $`\widehat{\mathrm{A}}_V[V]0`$ has a finite fundamental group (or equivalently, has a compact universal covering).

## 6. Proof of Theorem B

Let $`V^n`$ be a closed Riemannian manifold which is enlargeable in the sense of Gromov-Lawson (see Definition 1.1).

### 6.1. Even dimensional case ($`dimV=n=2m`$)

It is exactly the same idea as when M. Gromov and H.B. Lawson proved the obstruction result cited in the introduction for enlargeable manifolds of even dimension (\[GL83, $`\mathrm{\S }5`$\], \[GL80\]). For sake of completeness we recall the method.

To prove Theorem B in the even dimensional case, we proceed *by contradiction*. Assume that the inequality (1.1) does not hold i.e.

$$inf\mathrm{scal}(V,g)>4\frac{n}{n1}\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g}).$$

Then Theorem A asserts that $`\widehat{\mathrm{A}}_V[V]=0`$.

In order to use Lemma 4.2, we must find ($`_2`$-graded) Dirac operator on $`V`$ satisfying the condition of Propositition 3.2. As announced in Section 2 we will use twisted Dirac operators with unitary bundles $`Y`$. For such an operator, it is well known that $`\mathrm{ind}(/D_{}^{Y}{}_{}{}^{+})=\{\widehat{\mathrm{A}}(V)\mathrm{ch}(Y)\}[V]`$. Hence we must construct bundles $`Y`$ such that $`\{\widehat{\mathrm{A}}(V)\mathrm{ch}(Y)\}[V]0`$.

##### Fundamental construction.

Let $`f:VS^{2m}`$ be a map of non-zero degree. Consider the pullback bundle $`Y`$ via $`f`$ of a bundle $`X`$ on $`S^{2m}`$ (that we will specify afterwards).

Computation of the index of those twisted Dirac operators. In the case above we can compute the Chern character of the bundle $`Y`$. We know that $`\mathrm{ch}(Y)\mathrm{H}^2(V)`$ and $`\mathrm{ch}(Y)=f^{}\mathrm{ch}(X)`$. Decomposing $`\mathrm{ch}(X)=\mathrm{rank}(X)+\mathrm{ch}_1(X)+\mathrm{}+\mathrm{ch}_m(X)`$ where $`\mathrm{ch}_i(X)\mathrm{H}^{2i}(S^{2m})`$, as we know the cohomology of the sphere $`S^{2m}`$, we obtain

$$\mathrm{ch}(X)=\mathrm{rank}(X)+\mathrm{ch}_m(X)\text{ and therefore }\mathrm{ch}(Y)=\mathrm{rank}(X)+f^{}\mathrm{ch}_m(X).$$

Next considering the $`\widehat{\mathrm{A}}`$-class $`\widehat{\mathrm{A}}(V)=1+\widehat{\mathrm{A}}_1(V)+\mathrm{}`$ where $`\widehat{\mathrm{A}}_i(V)\mathrm{H}^{4i}(V)`$, we check that

$$\{\widehat{\mathrm{A}}(V)\mathrm{ch}(Y)\}[V]=\{\begin{array}{c}\{\mathrm{rank}(X)\widehat{\mathrm{A}}_{m/2}(V)+f^{}\mathrm{ch}_m(X)\}[V]\text{ if }m\text{ is even,}\hfill \\ \{f^{}\mathrm{ch}_m(X)\}[V]\text{ if }m\text{ is odd.}\hfill \end{array}$$

But $`\{\widehat{\mathrm{A}}_{m/2}(V)\}[V]=\widehat{\mathrm{A}}_V[V]=0`$, thus in the two cases

$$\{\widehat{\mathrm{A}}(V)\mathrm{ch}(Y)\}[V]=\mathrm{deg}f\{\mathrm{ch}_m(X)\}[S^{2m}].$$

Choice of $`X`$ such that the index is non-zero. We have already chosen $`f`$ such that $`\mathrm{deg}f0`$. If we choose $`X`$ equal to the positive half spinor bundle over $`S^{2m}`$, it is well known that $`\{ch_m(X)\}[S^{2m}]0`$. Therefore we have constructed the desired bundle.

##### Use of enlargeability.

Note that, as $`Y=f^{}X`$, we get $`R^Y\mathrm{d}f^2R^X`$. Using enlargeability, for all $`\epsilon >0`$, we can find a finite Riemannian spin covering $`\stackrel{~}{V}_\epsilon `$ of $`V`$ and a map $`f_\epsilon :\stackrel{~}{V}_\epsilon S^{2m}`$ of non-zero degree such that the bundle $`Y_\epsilon `$ constructed as above satisfies

$$R^{Y_\epsilon }\epsilon \text{ and }\{\widehat{\mathrm{A}}(\stackrel{~}{V}_\epsilon )\mathrm{ch}(Y_\epsilon )\}[\stackrel{~}{V}_\epsilon ]0.$$

(Since the $`\widehat{\mathrm{A}}`$-genus is multiplicative under coverings, the $`\widehat{\mathrm{A}}`$-genus of $`V`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{V}_\epsilon `$ are both zero.) In fact we consider the following diagram:

Then we construct the twisted Dirac operator $`/D_\epsilon `$ on $`\stackrel{~}{V}_\epsilon `$ acting on sections of the bundles $`/SY_\epsilon `$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{/D}_\epsilon `$ be its lift on $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$. We have $`\mathrm{ind}_\mathrm{\Gamma }(\stackrel{~}{/D}_\epsilon ^+)=\mathrm{ind}(/D_\epsilon ^+)=\{\widehat{\mathrm{A}}(\stackrel{~}{V}_\epsilon )\mathrm{ch}(Y_\epsilon )\}[\stackrel{~}{V}_\epsilon ]0`$. Using Proposition 3.2, we deduce that $`0`$ belongs to the point spectrum of $`\stackrel{~}{/D}_\epsilon `$. Thus we can apply Lemma 4.2 to the manifold $`\stackrel{~}{V}_\epsilon `$ to obtain

$$inf\mathrm{scal}(V,g)=inf\mathrm{scal}(\stackrel{~}{V}_\epsilon ,\stackrel{~}{g}_\epsilon )4\frac{n}{n1}\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g})+\alpha _n\epsilon .$$

Letting $`\epsilon 0`$, we get a contradiction. Consequently the inequality (1.1) holds.

### 6.2. Odd dimensional case ($`dimV=n=2m1`$)

Since Section 3.3 we know that if we use a family of Dirac operators in order to find an operator $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}`$ on $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ such that $`0`$ belongs to the spectrum of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{D}}`$, we must satisfy Theorem 3.4: the spectral flow must be non-zero. In particular, we will look for a family of twisted Dirac operators $`/D^{Y_u}`$ such that its spectral flow is non-zero. In fact it is exactly the same idea as in the even dimensional case: we pull back a bundle from $`S^{2m1}\times [0,1]`$ to $`V\times [0,1]`$. Then, the key Lemma 4.2 permits to conclude using enlargeability.

##### Fundamental construction.

We borrow this construction from M. Atiyah in \[Ati85, p. 258-259\]. Let $`h:S^{2m1}\mathrm{Gl}_N()`$ (that we will choose later) where we take $`N`$ sufficiently large. Fix a trivialization on the trivial bundle $`X_0=S^{2m1}\times ^N`$ and consider $`h`$ as a multiplication operator on this bundle. We denote $`_0`$ the trivial connection on $`X_0`$ with respect to the fixed trivialization and $`_1=h^{}_0`$. Consider now the linear family of connections $`_u=u_1+(1u)_0`$ joining $`_0`$ to its gauge transform $`_1`$. We also deduce a (trivial) bundle $`X`$ on $`S^{2m1}\times [0,1]`$ with connection $`=_u+\frac{}{u}`$ and a fixed trivialization.

With a map $`f:VS^{2m1}`$ of non-zero degree we construct the corresponding family of bundles $`(Y_0,A_u)=(f^{}X_0,f^{}_u)`$ on $`V`$, the (trivial) bundle $`Y`$ on $`V\times [0,1]`$ with connection $`A=A_u+\frac{}{u}`$ and the corresponding family of twisted Dirac operator $`\mathrm{D}_u=/D^{Y_u}`$. We want to find a family $`Y_u`$ (i.e. maps $`f`$ and $`h`$) such that the spectral flow is non-zero.

Computation of the spectral flow of this family. In the case of twisted Dirac operators $`/D^{Y_u}`$ and of the operator $`𝒟=\frac{}{u}/D^{Y_u}`$ (take care on the convention on $`𝒟`$, see Remark 3.6), we know that $`A(1)=\{\widehat{\mathrm{A}}(V\times [0,1])\mathrm{ch}(Y,A)\}[V\times [0,1]]`$. Moreover, thanks Lemma 3.5, the spectral flow is equal to $`A(1)`$.

Let notice that, on a manifold *with boundary*, the Chern character depends on the connection. Thus even if a bundle is trivial, it can have a non-trivial Chern character.

By construction $`\mathrm{ch}(Y,A)=(f\times \mathrm{id})^{}\mathrm{ch}(X,)`$. Moreover, the fact that $`\mathrm{ch}(X,)\mathrm{H}^2(S^{2m1}\times [0,1])`$ and the Künneth formula assert

$$\mathrm{ch}(X,)=\mathrm{rank}(X)+\mathrm{ch}_m(X,),\text{ hence }\mathrm{ch}(Y,A)=\mathrm{rank}(X)+(f\times \mathrm{id})^{}\mathrm{ch}_m(X,).$$

We have also that $`\widehat{\mathrm{A}}(V\times [0,1])=\widehat{\mathrm{A}}(V)\mathrm{H}^4(V\times [0,1])`$. Thus

$`\mathrm{sf}(1)`$ $`=`$ $`\{\widehat{\mathrm{A}}(V\times [0,1])\mathrm{ch}(Y,A)\}[V\times [0,1]]`$
$`=`$ $`\{\widehat{\mathrm{A}}(V)\left(\mathrm{rank}(X)+(f\times \mathrm{id})^{}\mathrm{ch}_m(X,)\right)\}[V\times [0,1]]`$
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{rank}(X)\widehat{\mathrm{A}}_V[V]+\mathrm{deg}f\{ch_m(X,)\}[S^{2m1}\times [0,1]].`$
For an odd dimensional manifold, we always have a zero $`\widehat{\mathrm{A}}`$-genus. It remains to know how $`\{ch_m(X,)\}[S^{2m1}\times [0,1]]`$ depends on $`h`$.

To begin, in the above fixed trivialization, the connection $`1`$-form of $`(X_0,_1=h^{}_0)`$ is given by $`\omega ^1=h^1\mathrm{d}h`$. Thus the connection $`1`$-form of the bundle $`(X_0,_u=u_1+(1u)_0)`$ is $`\omega ^u=uh^1\mathrm{d}h+(1u)\omega _0`$ but $`_0`$ is trivial in the fixed trivialization hence $`\omega _0=0`$. Therefore the connection $`1`$-form of the bundle $`(X,)`$ at the point $`(s,u)S^{2m1}\times [0,1]`$ is

$$\omega _{(s,u)}=\omega _s^u=uh^1\mathrm{d}h.$$

Now we calculate the connection $`2`$-form of the bundle $`(X,)`$ remarking that $`d(h^1)=h^1\mathrm{d}hh^1`$

$$\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{d}uh^1\mathrm{d}h(u+u^2)h^1\mathrm{d}hh^1\mathrm{d}h.$$

Recall that a differential form representing $`\mathrm{ch}_m(X)`$ is given by

$$\left(\frac{i}{2\pi }\right)^m\frac{1}{m!}\mathrm{Tr}(\mathrm{\Omega }^m).$$

If $`h^1\mathrm{d}h`$ appears an even number of times, the trace is zero. If $`\mathrm{d}u`$ appears twice, the form is zero. Therefore

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{i}{2\pi }}\right)^m{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m!}}\mathrm{Tr}(\mathrm{\Omega }^m)`$ $`=`$ $`C\mathrm{Tr}((u+u^2)^{m1}\mathrm{d}u\underset{2m1}{\underset{}{h^1\mathrm{d}h\mathrm{}h^1\mathrm{d}h}})`$
$`=`$ $`C(u+u^2)^{m1}\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{Tr}(h^1\mathrm{d}h\mathrm{}h^1\mathrm{d}h)`$
consequently

$$\{ch_m(X,)\}[S^{2m1}\times [0,1]]=C_0^1(u+u^2)^{m1}du_{S^{2m1}}\mathrm{Tr}(h^1\mathrm{d}h\mathrm{}h^1\mathrm{d}h)$$

where $`C`$ is a non-zero constant.

Choice of $`h`$ such that the spectral flow is non-zero. We have already chosen $`f`$ such that $`\mathrm{deg}f0`$ and we have trivially that $`_0^1(u+u^2)^{m1}du0`$. Thus we must choose $`h`$ such that $`_{s^{2m1}}\mathrm{Tr}(h^1\mathrm{d}h\mathrm{}h^1\mathrm{d}h)0`$.

For constructing $`h`$, we begin with choosing $`J_0,\mathrm{},J_{2m}`$ in $`\mathrm{Aut}(V)=\mathrm{Gl}_{2N}()`$ which satisfy the identities

$$J_\alpha J_\beta =J_\beta J\alpha \text{ if }\alpha \beta \text{ and }(J_\alpha )^2=\mathrm{Id}.$$

($`N`$ must be sufficiently large so that $`^N`$ is such a Clifford module, for example $`N=2^m`$). Let $`J`$ be $`i^mJ_1J_2\mathrm{}J_{2m}`$. As $`J^2=\mathrm{Id}`$, if we denote $`V_0=\mathrm{Ker}(J\mathrm{Id})`$ and $`V_1=\mathrm{Ker}(J+Id)`$, we have $`V=V_0V_1`$, each automorphism $`J_\alpha `$ maps $`V_0`$ onto $`V_1`$ (note that $`J_\alpha J=JJ_\alpha `$) and $`dimV_0=dimV_1=N`$. We also remark that for an even number $`k<m`$ of distinct $`\alpha _i`$ we have $`\mathrm{Tr}((J_{\alpha _1}\mathrm{}J_{\alpha _{2k}})_{|V_0})=0`$. Now we define $`h:S^{2m1}\mathrm{Aut}(V_0)=\mathrm{Gl}_N()`$ by $`h(x_1,\mathrm{},x_{2m})=J_1(x_1J_1+x_2J_2+\mathrm{}+x_{2m}J_{2m})`$ restricted to $`V_0`$. By noticing that $`\mathrm{d}(h^1)=h^1\mathrm{d}hh^1`$, that $`(x_1J_1+\mathrm{}+x_{2m}J_{2m})^2=\mathrm{Id}`$ and that $`(J_\alpha \mathrm{d}x_\alpha )(J_\beta \mathrm{d}x_\beta )=(J_\beta \mathrm{d}x_\beta )(J_\alpha \mathrm{d}x_\alpha )`$ we can prove that

$$\mathrm{Tr}(\underset{2m1}{\underset{}{h^1\mathrm{d}h\mathrm{}h^1\mathrm{d}h}})=(2m1)!N\underset{j=1}{\overset{2m}{}}(1)^jx_j\mathrm{d}x_1\mathrm{}\widehat{\mathrm{d}x_j}\mathrm{}\mathrm{d}x_{2m}.$$

i.e. $`\mathrm{Tr}(h^1\mathrm{d}h\mathrm{}h^1\mathrm{d}h)`$ is proportional to the volume form of the sphere $`S^{2m1}`$. We conclude that $`_{S^{2m1}}\mathrm{Tr}(h^1\mathrm{d}h\mathrm{}h^1\mathrm{d}h)0`$. Moreover $`h`$ define a non-zero element in $`\pi _{2m1}(\mathrm{Gl}_N())=`$.

##### Use of enlargeability.

It is the same as in the even dimensional case. For a family constructed as above, using the key Lemma 4.2, we have

$$inf\mathrm{scal}(V,g)4\frac{n}{n1}\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g})+\alpha _nR^{Y_{u_0}}\text{ for some }u_0[0,1].$$

Recall that $`Y_u=f^{}(X_u)`$ where $`f:VS^{2m1}`$ is of non-zero degree. Thus $`R^{Y_u}\mathrm{d}f^2R^{X_u}`$. But by construction, we know that $`R^{X_u}C`$ where $`C`$ is a constant independent of $`u`$. Therefore we have

$$R^{Y_u}C\mathrm{d}f^2.$$

If we replace $`V`$ by a Riemannian finite covering (using enlargeability), this does not change the result and we can choose $`f`$ such that $`R^{Y_u}`$ is as small as we want, for example $`R^{Y_u}\epsilon `$ with $`\epsilon >0`$. Letting $`\epsilon 0`$ in Lemma 4.2, we conclude as in the even dimensional case.

## 7. Generalizations and Remarks

### 7.1. Unification of Theorem A and Theorem B

We can use a more general notion of enlargeability (see \[GL83, $`\mathrm{\S }5\&6`$\]), more precisely:

###### Definition 7.1.

A closed Riemannian $`n`$-manifold $`(V,g)`$ is said to be *area-enlargeable in dimension $`p`$* if given any $`\epsilon >0`$, there exists a finite Riemannian covering $`\stackrel{~}{V}_\epsilon `$ of $`V`$ which is spin and a $`C^1`$-map $`f_\epsilon :\stackrel{~}{V}_\epsilon S^p`$ which is $`\epsilon `$-contracting on $`2`$-vectors (i.e. if $`f_{}\phi \epsilon \phi `$ for all $`2`$-vectors $`\phi `$ on $`\stackrel{~}{V}_\epsilon `$) and of non-zero $`\widehat{\mathrm{A}}`$-degree (i.e. the $`\widehat{\mathrm{A}}`$-genus $`\widehat{\mathrm{A}}(f^1(y))`$ of the inverse image of each regular value $`y`$ is non-zero).

We remark that for a closed Riemannian $`n`$-manifold $`(V,g)`$ which is area-enlargeable in dimension $`p`$, we have necessary $`pnmod4`$. The case $`p=0`$ correspond to the non-zero $`\widehat{\mathrm{A}}`$-genus case. The case $`p=n`$ correspond to the enlargeable manifold as defined in the introduction. We use *area-contracting map* because we notice that in the proof of Theorem B we only need the contraction of $`2`$-vectors (and not necessary of vectors themselves). Thus we can give the following unified statement:

###### Theorem D.

Let $`(V,g)`$ be a closed Riemannian manifold of dimension $`n`$. If $`V`$ is area-enlargeable in dimension $`p`$, then the inequality (1.1) holds.

### 7.2. On $`\mathrm{K}\mathrm{area}`$

In the paper \[Gro96\], M. Gromov sets the notion of enlargeability in a broader perspective. He defines a Riemannian invariant, the $`\mathrm{K}\mathrm{area}`$. Roughly speaking, $`(V,g)`$ has a big $`\mathrm{K}\mathrm{area}`$ if it carries a (non trivial !) vector bundle with small curvature. More precisely:

###### Definition 7.2.

Let $`(V^{2m},g)`$ be a closed even-dimensional oriented Riemannian manifold.

A bundle $`X`$ over $`V`$ is said *homologically significant* if at least one characteristic (Chern) number of $`X`$ does not vanish.

Let

$$C(V,g)=infR^X$$

be the infimum taken on all hermitian homologically significant bundles $`X`$. We define the $`\mathrm{K}\mathrm{area}`$ to be the inverse of this number:

$$\mathrm{K}\mathrm{area}(V,g)=C(V,g)^1.$$

It follows immediately that if $`V`$ is enlargeable, $`\mathrm{K}\mathrm{area}(M,g)`$ is infinite for any $`g`$. In fact the property for the $`\mathrm{K}\mathrm{area}`$ to be infinite is, like enlargeability, a topological property. For details on this new Riemannian invariant we refer to the original paper \[Gro96, $`\mathrm{\S }4\&5`$\].

Then M. Gromov proves a theorem which can replace the Gromov-Lawson Theorem on enlargeable manifolds (\[GL80\]). It states that for a closed Riemannian spin manifold $`V`$, if $`inf\mathrm{scal}(V,g)\epsilon ^2`$ then $`\mathrm{K}\mathrm{area}(V,g)C\epsilon ^2`$ if $`V`$ is even dimensional and $`\mathrm{K}\mathrm{area}(V\times S^1,g\times \mathrm{can})C\epsilon ^2`$ if $`V`$ is odd dimensional ; where $`C`$ is a constant which depends only on the dimension of $`V`$. As a consequence: a closed even-dimensional spin Riemannian manifold of infinite $`\mathrm{K}\mathrm{area}`$ does not carry any metric of strictly positive scalar curvature. Therefore the proof of Theorem B can be adapted to obtain the following:

###### Theorem E.

Let $`(V,g)`$ be a closed Riemannian spin manifold of dimension $`n`$. If $`V`$ is even dimensional and $`\mathrm{K}\mathrm{area}(V)=\mathrm{}`$ or if $`V`$ is odd dimensional and $`\mathrm{K}\mathrm{area}(V\times S^1)=\mathrm{}`$, then the inequality (1.1) holds.

* To prove this theorem, it suffices to remark that the assumptions on $`\mathrm{K}\mathrm{area}`$ allow to construct the desired bundles in the even dimensional as in the odd dimensional cases and then to use Lemma 4.2.

If the $`\mathrm{K}\mathrm{area}`$ of a closed even-dimensional manifold $`V`$ is infinity, for every $`\epsilon >0`$ there exists a bundle $`Y_\epsilon `$ on $`V`$ such that $`R^{Y_\epsilon }\epsilon `$ and $`\{\widehat{A}(V)\mathrm{ch}(Y_\epsilon )\}0`$. Afterwards, the proof is exactly the same as for an enlargeable even-dimensional manifold.

In the odd dimensional case, recall that the spectral flow only depends on Atiyah-Singer index Theorem on the compact manifold $`V\times S^1`$ (see Remark 3.8). Hence it suffices to replace $`V`$ by $`V\times S^1`$ in the previous statement to obtain the result. $`\mathrm{}`$

### 7.3. Consequences

In \[Gro96, $`\mathrm{\S }5\frac{1}{2}`$\], M.Gromov gives the following corollary which is a very interesting non-approximation interpretation of the inequality of K. Ono (or a fortiori ours) and we give here a concise proof.

###### Corollary 7.3 (M. Gromov).

Let $`(V,g_0)`$ be a closed Riemannian manifold which is area-enlargeable in dimension $`p`$ and with a non amenable fundamental group. Then, there exist a constant $`\sigma _0=\sigma _0(g_0)>0`$ such that $`g_0`$ admits no $`C^0`$-approximation by $`C^2`$-metrics $`g`$ on $`V`$ with $`\mathrm{scal}(V,g)\sigma _0`$.

* The Riemannian manifold $`(V,g)`$ satisfies the assumptions of Theorem D, consequently

$$inf\mathrm{scal}(V,g)4\frac{n}{n1}\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g}).$$

A basis of neighbourhoods of $`g_0`$ is given by the sets $`𝒱_{ab}=\{g,a^2g_0gb^2g_0\}`$ where $`0<a^2<1<b^2`$. Then for all $`g𝒱_{ab}`$ and for all $`k`$ we have $`\frac{a^n}{b^{n+2}}\lambda _k(\stackrel{~}{g}_0)\lambda _k(\stackrel{~}{g})\frac{b^n}{a^{n+2}}\lambda _k(\stackrel{~}{g}_0)`$ from the Courant-Fisher min-max characterization of the eigenvalues of the Laplace operator. This implies that the function $`g\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g})`$ is continuous therefore there exists a $`C^0`$-neighbourhood $`𝒱`$ of $`g_0`$ such that for all metric $`g`$ in $`𝒱`$

$$|\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g})\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g_0})|<\epsilon .$$

As the fundamental group is non amenable, we know that $`\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g_0})0`$ (\[Bro81\]). Letting $`\sigma _0(g_0)=4\frac{n}{n1}(\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g_0})\epsilon )>0`$ (for $`\epsilon `$ sufficiently small) then for all metric $`g`$ in $`𝒱`$,

$$inf\mathrm{scal}(V,g)4\frac{n}{n1}\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g})<4\frac{n}{n1}(\lambda _0(\stackrel{~}{V},\stackrel{~}{g_0})\epsilon )=\sigma _0(g_0).$$

Consequently we cannot approximate $`g_0`$ by a $`C^0`$-sequence of $`C^2`$-metrics such that $`inf\mathrm{scal}(V,g)\sigma _0(g_0)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

## Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Jacques Lafontaine for his advice and encouragement. I am also grateful to Marc Herzlich for explaining the refined Kato inequality to me and for his many useful comments and careful reading of the manuscript. Finally, I would like to thank Xiaonan Ma for pointing out the paper of Bismut-Freed, as well as Gilles Carron for helpful communications. I also wish to thank M. Min-Oo for his series of lectures on $`\mathrm{K}\mathrm{area}`$ at the CRM (Centre de Recerca Matemàtica) during Summer $`2001`$.