text:
# Schubert Varieties and Cycle Spaces

## 0 Introduction

Let $`G`$ be a connected complex semisimple Lie group and $`Q`$ a parabolic subgroup. We refer to $`Z=G/Q`$ as a complex flag manifold. Write $`𝔤`$ and $`𝔮`$ for the respective Lie algebras of $`G`$ and $`Q`$. Then $`Q`$ is the $`G`$–normalizer of $`𝔮`$. Thus we can view $`Z`$ as the set of $`G`$–conjugates of $`𝔮`$. The correspondence is $`z𝔮_z`$ where $`𝔮_z`$ is the Lie algebra of the isotropy subgroup $`Q_z`$ of $`G`$ at $`z`$.

Let $`G_0`$ be a real form of $`G`$, and let $`𝔤_0`$ denote its Lie algebra. Thus there is a homomorphism $`\phi :G_0G`$ such that $`\phi (G_0)`$ is closed in $`G`$ and $`d\phi :𝔤_0𝔤`$ is an isomorphism onto a real form of $`𝔤`$. This gives the action of $`G_0`$ on $`Z`$.

It is well known  that there are only finitely many $`G_0`$–orbits on $`Z`$. Therefore at least one of them must be open.

Consider a Cartan involution $`\theta `$ of $`G_0`$ and extend it as usual to $`G`$, $`𝔤_0`$ and $`𝔤`$. Thus the fixed point set $`K_0=G_0^\theta `$ is a maximal compactly embedded subgroup of $`G_0`$ and $`K=G^\theta `$ is its complexification. This leads to Iwasawa decompositions $`G_0=K_0A_0N_0`$ .

By Iwasawa–Borel subgroup of $`G`$ we mean a Borel subgroup $`BG`$ such that $`\phi (A_0N_0)B`$ for some Iwasawa $`G_0=K_0A_0N_0`$ . Those are the Borel subgroups of the form $`B=B_MAN`$, where $`N`$ is the complexification of $`N_0`$, $`A`$ is the complexification of $`A_0`$, $`M=Z_K(A)`$ is the complexification of $`M_0`$ , and $`B_M`$ is a Borel subgroup of $`M`$. Since any two Iwasawa decompositions of $`G_0`$ are $`G_0`$–conjugate, and any two Borel subgroups of $`M`$ are $`M_0`$–conjugate because $`\phi (M_0)`$ is compact, it follows that any two Iwasawa–Borel subgroups of $`G`$ are $`G_0`$–conjugate.

Given an Iwasawa–Borel subgroup $`BG`$, we study the Schubert varieties $`S=\mathrm{c}\mathrm{}(𝒪)Z`$, where $`𝒪`$ is a $`B`$–orbit on $`Z`$. We extend the theory  of Schubert slices from the open $`G_0`$–orbits to arbitrary $`G_0`$–orbits. As a main application we show that the corresponding Schubert domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$ for an open $`G_0`$–orbit $`DZ`$ is equal to the linear cycle space $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)`$ considered in . That yields a direct proof that the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)`$ are Stein manifolds. Another consequence is one of the two key containments for the complete description of linear cycle spaces when $`G_0`$ is of hermitian type (Section 8 and ). The identification $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)=\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$ also plays an essential role in the subsequently proved identification of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)`$ with the universally defined domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}`$ .

Our main technical results (Theorem 3.1 and Corollary 3.4), which can be viewed as being of a complex analytic nature, provide detailed information on the $`q`$-convexity of $`D`$ and the Cauchy-Riemann geometry of the lower-dimensional $`G_0`$-orbits.

We thank the referee for pointing out an error in our original argument for the existence of supporting incidence hypersurfaces at boundary points of the cycle space. This is rectified in Section 4 below.

## 1 Duality

We will need a refinement of Matsuki’s $`(G_0,K)`$–orbit duality . Write $`Orb(G_0)`$ for the set of $`G_0`$–orbits in $`Z`$, and similarly write $`Orb(K)`$ for the set of all $`K`$–orbits. A pair $`(\gamma ,\kappa )Orb(G_0)\times Orb(K)`$ is dual or satisfies duality if $`\gamma \kappa `$ contains an isolated $`K_0`$–orbit. The duality theorem states that

(1.1) if $`\gamma Orb(G_0)`$, or if $`\kappa Orb(K)`$, there is a unique dual $`(\gamma ,\kappa )Orb(G_0)\times Orb(K)`$.
Furthermore,

(1.2) if $`(\gamma ,\kappa )`$ is dual, then $`\gamma \kappa `$ is a single $`K_0`$–orbit.
Moreover, if $`(\gamma ,\kappa )`$ is dual, then the intersection $`\gamma \kappa `$ is transversal: if $`z\gamma \kappa `$, then the real tangent spaces satisfy

(1.3) $`T_z(\gamma )+T_z(\kappa )=T_z(Z)`$ and $`T_z(\gamma \kappa )=T_z(\gamma )T_z(\kappa )=T_z(K_0(z))`$.
We will also need a certain “non–isolation” property:

(1.7)
The basic duality (1.1) is in , and the refinements (1.2) and (1.3) are given by the moment map approach (, ). See \[7, Corollary 7.2 and §9\].

The non–isolation property (1.7) is implicitly contained in the moment map considerations of  and . Following , the two essential ingredients are the following.

1. Endow $`Z`$ with a $`G_u`$–invariant Kähler metric, e.g., from the negative of the Killing form of $`𝔤_u`$ . Here $`G_u`$ is the compact real form of $`G`$ denoted $`U`$ in . The $`K_0`$-invariant gradient field $`f^+`$ of the norm function $`f^+:=\mu _{K_0}^2`$ of the moment map for the $`K_0`$-action on $`Z`$, determined by the $`G_u`$–invariant metric, is tangent to both the $`G_0`$– and $`K`$–orbits.
2. A pair $`(\gamma ,\kappa )`$ satisfies duality if and only if their intersection is non–empty and contains a point of $`\{f^+=0\}`$.

If the pair does not satisfy duality, $`p\gamma \kappa `$, $`g=g(t)`$ is the $`1`$-parameter group associated to $`f^+`$ and $`ϵ>0`$ is sufficiently small, then

$$M:=\underset{|t|<ϵ}{}g(t)(K_0(p))$$

is the desired submanifold. For this it is only important to note that $`f^+`$ does not vanish along, and is nowhere tangent to, $`K_0(p)`$. That completes the argument.

Dual pairs have a retraction property, which we prove using the moment map approach.

###### Theorem 1.8

Let $`(\gamma ,\kappa )`$ be a dual pair. Fix $`z_0\gamma \kappa =K_0(z_0)`$. Then the intersection $`\gamma \kappa `$ is a $`K_0`$-equivariant strong deformation retract of $`\gamma `$.

Proof. We use the notation of \[7, §9\]. If $`\varphi (t,x)`$ is the flow of $`f^+`$, then it follows that, if $`x\gamma `$ and $`t>0`$, then $`\varphi (t,x)\gamma `$. Furthermore, the limiting set $`\pi ^+(x)=lim_t\mathrm{}\varphi (t,x)`$ is contained in the intersection $`K_0(z_0)`$.

Let $`U`$ be a $`K_0`$–slice neighborhood of $`K_0(z_0)`$ in $`\gamma `$. In other words, if $`(K_0)_{z_0}`$ denotes the isotropy subgroup of $`K_0`$ at $`z_0`$, then there is a $`(K_0)_{z_0}`$–invariant open ball $`B`$ in the normal space $`N_{z_0}(K_0(z_0))`$ such that $`U`$ is the $`(K_0)_{z_0}`$–homogeneous fiber space $`K_0\times _{(K_0)_{z_0}}B`$ over $`B`$. The isotropy group $`(K_0)_{z_0}`$ is minimal over $`U`$ in that, given $`zU`$, it is $`K_0`$–conjugate to a subgroup of $`(K_0)_z`$.

The flow $`\varphi (t,)`$ is $`K_0`$–equivariant. Thus, since $`\pi ^+(x)K_0.z_0`$ for every $`x\gamma `$, every orbit $`K_0.z`$ in $`\gamma `$ is equivariantly diffeomorphic, via some $`\varphi (t_0,)`$, to a $`K_0`$-orbit in $`U`$. Consequently, $`K_0(z_0)`$ is minimal in $`\gamma `$.

The Mostow fibration of $`\gamma `$ is a $`K_0`$–equivariant vector bundle with total space $`\gamma `$ and base space that is a minimal $`K_0`$–orbit in $`\gamma `$. In other words the base space is $`K_0(z_0)`$. Any such vector bundle is $`K_0`$–equivariantly retractable to its $`0`$–section. We may take that $`0`$–section to be $`K_0(z_0)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 1.9

Every open $`G_0`$-orbit in $`Z`$ is simply-connected. In particular the isotropy groups of $`G_0`$ on an open orbit are connected.

Corollary 1.9 was proved by other methods in \[21, Theorem 5.4\]. In that open orbit case of Theorem 1.8, $`\kappa `$ is the base cycle, maximal compact subvariety of $`\gamma `$.

## 2 Incidence divisors associated to Schubert varieties

Fix an open $`G_0`$–orbit $`DZ`$. Its dual is the unique closed $`K`$–orbit $`C_0`$ contained in $`D`$. Denote $`q=dim_{}C_0`$ . Write $`𝒞^q(Z)`$ for the variety of $`q`$–dimensional cycles in $`Z`$. As a subset of $`Z`$, the complex group orbit $`GC_0`$ is Zariski open in its closure.

At this point, for simplicity of exposition we assume that $`𝔤_0`$ is simple. This entails no loss of generality because all our flags, groups, orbits, cycles, etc. decompose as products according to the decomposition of $`𝔤_0`$ as a direct sum of simple ideals.

In two isolated instances of $`(G_0,Z)`$ (see ), $`C_0=Z`$ and the orbit $`GC_0`$ consists of a single point. If $`G_0`$ is of hermitian type and $`D`$ is an open $`G_0`$–orbit of “holomorphic type” in the terminology of , then $`GC_0`$ is the compact hermitian symmetric space dual to the bounded symmetric domain $``$. This case is completely understood (, ). In these two cases we set $`\mathrm{\Omega }:=GC_0`$ . Here $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is canonically identified as a coset space of $`G`$, because the $`G`$–stabilizer of $`C_0`$ is its own normalizer in $`G`$.

Except in the two cases just mentioned, the $`G`$–stabilizer $`\stackrel{~}{K}`$ of $`C_0`$ has identity component $`K`$, and there is a canonical finite equivariant map $`\pi :G/KGC_0G/\stackrel{~}{K}`$. Here we set $`\mathrm{\Omega }=G/K`$. Its base point is the coset $`K`$.

Suppose that $`Y`$ is a complex analytic subset of $`Z`$. Then $`A_Y:=\{C\pi (\mathrm{\Omega })Y\mathrm{}\}`$ is a closed complex variety in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ , called the incidence variety associated to $`Y`$. For purposes of comparison we work with the preimage $`\pi ^1(A_Y)`$ in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. From now on we abuse notation: we write $`A_Y:=\{C\mathrm{\Omega }CY\mathrm{}\}`$. If $`A_Y`$ is purely of codimension $`1`$ then we refer to it as the incidence divisor associated to $`Y`$ and denote it by $`H_Y`$ .

Now suppose that the complex analytic subset $`Y`$ is a Schubert variety defined by an Iwasawa-Borel subgroup $`BG`$. Thus $`Y`$ is the closure of one or more orbits of $`B`$ on $`Z`$. Then the incidence variety $`A_Y`$ is $`B`$–invariant, because $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and $`Y`$ are $`B`$–invariant. Define $`𝒴(D)`$ to be the set of all Iwasawa-Schubert varieties $`YZ`$ such that $`YZD`$ and $`A_Y`$ is a hypersurface $`H_Y`$ . Then we define the Schubert domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$:

(2.1) $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$ is the connected component of $`C_0`$ in $`\mathrm{\Omega }(\underset{Y𝒴(D)}{}H_Y)`$.
See \[16, §6\] and . Note that any two Iwasawa-Borel subgroups are conjugate by an element of $`K_0`$. Thus

$$\underset{Y𝒴(D)}{}H_Y=\underset{kK_0}{}k(H),$$

where $`H:=H_1\mathrm{}H_m`$ is the union of the incidence hypersurfaces defined by the Schubert varieties in the complement of $`D`$ of a fixed Iwasawa-Borel subgroup. Thus $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$ is an open subset of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, and of course it is $`G_0`$-invariant by construction.

In Corollary 4.7 we will show that the cycle space $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)`$ (see (4.1)) agrees with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$. Consequently, it has the same analytic properties. For example we now check that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$ is a Stein domain.

In order to prove that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$ is Stein, it suffices to show that it is contained in a Stein subdomain $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. For then, given a boundary point $`p\text{bd}(\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D))`$ in $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$, it will be contained in a complex hypersurface $`H`$ that is equal to or a limit of incidence divisors $`H_Y`$ . Now $`H\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ is in the complement of $`D`$ and will be the polar set of a meromorphic function on $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$. So $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$ will be a domain of holomorphy in the Stein subdomain $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$, and will therefore be Stein.

As mentioned above, there are three possibilities for $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. If $`C_0=Z`$, then $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is reduced to a point, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$ is Stein in a trivial way. Now suppose $`DZ`$. Then either $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is a compact hermitian symmetric space $`G/KP_{}`$ or it is the affine variety $`G/K`$. In the latter case $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is Stein, so $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$ is Stein. Now we are down to the case where $`\mathrm{\Omega }=G/KP_{}`$ is an irreducible compact hermitian symmetric space. In particular the second Betti number $`b_2(\mathrm{\Omega })=1`$. Therefore the divisor of every complex hypersurface in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is ample. For $`Y𝒴(D)`$ this implies that $`\mathrm{\Omega }H_Y`$ is affine. Since $`𝒴(D)\mathrm{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }H_Y\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$, this implies that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$ is Stein in this case as well. Therefore we have proved

###### Proposition 2.2

If $`D`$ is an open $`G_0`$–orbit in the complex flag manifold $`Z`$, then the associated Schubert domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$ is Stein.

## 3 Schubert varieties associated to dual pairs

Fix an Iwasawa decomposition $`G_0=K_0A_0N_0`$ . Let $`B`$ be a corresponding Iwasawa–Borel subgroup of $`G`$; in other words $`A_0N_0B`$. Fix a $`K`$–orbit $`\kappa `$ on $`Z`$ and let $`𝒮_\kappa `$ denote the set of all Schubert varieties $`S`$ defined by $`B`$ (that is, $`S`$ is the closure of a $`B`$–orbit on $`Z`$) such that $`dimS+dim\kappa =dimZ`$ and $`S\text{ c}\mathrm{}(\kappa )\mathrm{}`$. The Schubert varieties generate the integral homology of $`Z`$. Hence $`𝒮_\kappa `$ is determined by the topological class of $`\text{ c}\mathrm{}(\kappa )`$.

###### Theorem 3.1

(Schubert Slices) Let $`(\gamma ,\kappa )Orb(G_0)\times Orb(K)`$ satisfy duality. Then the following hold for every $`S𝒮_\kappa `$ .

* $`S\text{ c}\mathrm{}(\kappa )`$ is contained in $`\gamma \kappa `$ and is finite. If $`wS\kappa `$, then $`(AN)(w)=B(w)=𝒪`$ where $`S=\text{ c}\mathrm{}(𝒪)`$, and $`S`$ is transversal to $`\kappa `$ at $`w`$ in the sense that the real tangent spaces satisfy $`T_w(S)T_w(\kappa )=T_w(Z)`$.
* The set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=\mathrm{\Sigma }(\gamma ,S,w):=A_0N_0(w)`$ is open in $`S`$ and closed in $`\gamma `$.
* Let c$`\mathrm{}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ and c$`\mathrm{}(\gamma )`$ denote closures in $`Z`$. Then the map $`K_0\times \text{ c}\mathrm{}(\mathrm{\Sigma })\text{ c}\mathrm{}(\gamma )`$, given by $`(k,z)k(z)`$, is surjective.

Proof. Let $`wS\text{ c}\mathrm{}(\kappa )`$. Since $`𝔤=𝔨+𝔞+𝔫`$, complexification of the Lie algebra version $`𝔤_0=𝔨_0+𝔞_0+𝔫_0`$ of $`G_0=K_0A_0N_0`$ , we have $`T_w(AN(w))+T_w(K(w))=T_w(Z)`$. As $`wS=\text{ c}\mathrm{}(𝒪)`$ and $`ANB`$, we have $`dimAN(w)dimB(w)dim𝒪=dimS`$. Furthermore $`w\text{ c}\mathrm{}(\kappa )`$. Thus $`dimK(w)dim\kappa `$. If $`w`$ were not in $`\kappa `$, this inequality would be strict, in violation of the above additivity of the dimensions of the tangent spaces. Thus $`w\kappa `$ and $`T_w(S)+T_w(\kappa )=T_w(Z)`$. Since $`dimS+dim\kappa =dimZ`$ this sum is direct, i.e., $`T_w(S)T_w(\kappa )=T_w(Z)`$. Now also $`dimAN(w)=dimS`$ and $`dimK(w)=dim\kappa `$. Thus $`AN(w)`$ is open in $`S`$, forcing $`AN(w)=B(w)=𝒪`$. We have already seen that $`K(w)`$ is open in $`\kappa `$, forcing $`K(w)=\kappa `$. For assertion 1 it remains only to show that $`S\kappa `$ is contained in $`\gamma `$ and is finite.

Denote $`\widehat{\gamma }=G_0(w)`$. If $`\widehat{\gamma }\gamma `$, then $`(\widehat{\gamma },\kappa )`$ is not dual, but $`\widehat{\gamma }\kappa `$ is nonempty because it contains $`w`$. By the non–isolation property (1.7), we have a locally closed $`K_0`$–invariant manifold $`M\widehat{\gamma }\kappa `$ such that $`dimM=dimK_0(w)+1`$. We know $`T_w(S)T_w(\kappa )=T_w(Z)`$, and $`K(w)=\kappa `$, so $`T_w(A_0N_0(w))T_w(M)=0`$. Thus $`T_w(A_0N_0(w))+T_w(K_0(w))`$ has codimension $`1`$ in the subspace $`T_w(A_0N_0(w))+T_w(M)`$ of $`T_w(\widehat{\gamma })`$, which contradicts $`G_0=K_0A_0N_0`$ . We have proved that $`(S\text{ c}\mathrm{}(\kappa ))\gamma `$. Since that intersection is transversal at $`w`$, it is finite. This completes the proof of assertion 1.

We have seen that $`T_w(AN(w))T_w(K(w))=T_w(Z)`$, so $`T_w(A_0N_0(w))T_w(K_0(w))=T_w(\gamma )`$, and $`G_0(w)=\gamma `$. With the characterization (1.2) and the transversality conditions (1.3) for duality we have $`dimA_0N_0(w)=dimT_w(\gamma )dimT_w(\kappa \gamma )=dimT_w(Z)dimT_w(\kappa )=dimAN(w)=dimS`$. Now $`A_0N_0(w)`$ is open in $`S`$, .

Every $`A_0N_0`$–orbit in $`\gamma `$ meets $`K_0(w)`$, because $`\gamma =G_0(w)=A_0N_0K_0(w)`$. Using (1.3), every such $`A_0N_0`$–orbit has dimension at least that of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=A_0N_0(w)`$. Since the orbits on the boundary of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ in $`\gamma `$ would necessarily be smaller, it follows that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is closed in $`\gamma `$. This completes the proof of assertion 2.

The map $`K_0\times \mathrm{\Sigma }\gamma `$, by $`(k,z)k(z)`$, is surjective because $`K_0A_0N_0(w)=\gamma `$. Since $`K_0`$ is compact and $`\gamma `$ is dense in $`\text{ c}\mathrm{}(\gamma )`$, assertion 3 follows. $`\mathrm{}`$

We now apply Theorem 3.1 to construct an Iwasawa-Schubert variety $`Y`$ of codimension $`q+1`$ , $`q=dimC_0`$ , which contains a given point $`p\text{ bd}(D)`$ and which is contained in $`ZD`$. Due to the presence of the large family of $`q`$–dimensional cycles in $`D`$, one could not hope to construct larger varieties with these properties.

Before going into the construction, let us introduce some convenient notation and mention several preliminary facts.

We say that a point $`p\text{bd}(D)`$ is generic, written $`p\text{ bd}(D)_{gen}`$, if $`\gamma _p:=G_0(p)`$ is open in $`\text{bd}(D)`$. This is equivalent to $`\gamma _p`$ being an isolated orbit in $`\text{bd}(D)`$ in the sense that no other $`G_0`$-orbit in $`\text{bd}(D)`$ has $`\gamma _p`$ in its closure. Clearly $`\text{bd}(D)_{gen}`$ is open and dense in $`\text{bd}(D)`$.

Given $`p\text{bd}(D)_{gen}`$ the orbit $`\gamma =\gamma _p`$ need not be a real hypersurface in $`Z`$. For example, $`G_0=SL_{n+1}()`$ has exactly two orbits in $`_n()`$, an open orbit and its complement $`_n()`$. Nevertheless, for any $`z`$ in such an orbit $`\gamma `$ it follows that $`c\mathrm{}(D)\text{bd}(D)=\gamma `$ near $`z`$. If $`\kappa `$ is dual to $`\gamma `$, then, since the intersection $`\kappa \gamma `$ is transversal in $`Z`$, it follows that $`\kappa D\mathrm{}`$.

We summarize this as follows.

###### Lemma 3.2

For $`p\text{bd}(D)_{gen}`$, $`\gamma =\gamma _p=G_0(p)`$ and $`\kappa `$ dual to $`\gamma `$, it follows that $`\kappa D\mathrm{}`$. Furthermore, if $`C_0`$ is the base cycle in $`D`$, then

$$q=dimC_0<dim\kappa .$$

Proof. The property $`\kappa D\mathrm{}`$ has been verified above. For the dimension estimate note that $`C_0`$ is dimension-theoretically a minimal $`K_0`$–orbit in $`D`$, e.g., the $`K_0`$–orbits in $`\kappa D`$ are at least of its dimension. Since $`\kappa `$ is not compact, it follows that $`dim\kappa >dimC_0`$ . $`\mathrm{}`$

We will also make use of the following basic fact about Schubert varieties.

###### Lemma 3.3

Let $`B`$ be a Borel subgroup of $`G`$, let $`S`$ be a $`k`$-dimensional $`B`$–Schubert variety in $`Z`$, and suppose that $`dimZ\mathrm{}k`$. Then there exists a $`B`$-Schubert variety $`S^{}`$ with $`dimS^{}=\mathrm{}`$ and $`S^{}S`$.

Proof. We may assume that $`SZ`$. Let $`𝒪`$ be the open $`B`$–orbit in $`S`$ and $`𝒪^{}`$ be a $`B`$–orbit of minimal dimension among those orbits with c$`\mathrm{}(𝒪^{})𝒪`$.

For $`p𝒪`$ it follows that c$`\mathrm{}(𝒪^{})𝒪=𝒪^{}`$ near $`p`$. Since $`𝒪^{}`$ is affine, it then follows that $`dim𝒪^{}=(dim𝒪)+1`$. Applying this argument recursively, we find Schubert varieties $`S^{}:=\text{c}\mathrm{}(𝒪^{})`$ of every intermediate dimension $`\mathrm{}`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

We now come to our main application of Theorem 3.1.

###### Corollary 3.4

Let $`D`$ be an open $`G_0`$–orbit on $`Z`$ and fix a boundary point $`p\text{bd }D`$. Then there exist an Iwasawa decomposition $`G_0=K_0A_0N_0`$ , an Iwasawa–Borel subgroup $`BA_0N_0`$ , and a $`B`$–Schubert variety $`Y`$, such that (1) $`pYZD`$, (2) codim$`{}_{Z}{}^{}Y=q+1`$, and (3) $`A_Y`$ is a $`B`$–invariant analytic subvariety of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$.

Proof. Let $`p\text{bd}(D)_{gen}`$, let $`\gamma =\gamma _p`$ , and let $`\kappa `$ be dual to $`\gamma `$. First consider the case where $`p\gamma \kappa `$. From Lemma 3.2, codim$`Sq+1`$ for every $`S𝒮_\kappa `$.

Now, given $`S𝒮_\kappa `$, further specify $`p`$ to be in $`S\kappa `$ and let $`Y`$ be a $`(q+1)`$-codimensional Schubert variety containing $`S`$ (see Lemma 3.3).

Since $`\mathrm{dim}_{}C_0=q`$ and $`\mathrm{codim}_{}Y=q+1`$, if $`YD\mathrm{}`$, then there would be a point of intersection $`zYC_0`$ . Since $`A_0N_0(z)Y`$, it would follow that

$$q=dim_{}C_0=\text{ codim}_{}A_0N_0(z)\text{ codim}_{}Y=q+1.$$

Thus $`Y`$ does not meet $`D`$. On the other hand, using Theorem 3.1, it meets every $`G_0`$-orbit in c$`\mathrm{}(\gamma )`$. Thus, by conjugating appropriately, we have the desired result for any point in the closure of $`\gamma `$. Since $`\gamma `$ was chosen to be an arbitrary isolated orbit in bd$`(D)`$, the result follows for every point of bd$`(D)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 4 Supporting hypersurfaces at the cycle space boundary

Let $`D=G_0(z_0)`$ be an open $`G_0`$–orbit on $`Z`$. Let $`C_0`$ denote the base cycle $`K_0(z_0)=K(z_0)`$ in $`D`$, i.e., the dual $`K`$-orbit $`\kappa `$ to the open $`G_0`$-orbit $`\gamma =D`$. Then the cycle space of $`D`$ is given by

(4.1)
$$\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D):=\text{ component of }C_0\text{ in }\{gC_0gG\text{ and }gC_0D\}.$$

Since $`D`$ is open and $`C_0`$ is compact, the cycle space $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)`$ initially sits as an open submanifold of the complex homogeneous space $`G/\stackrel{~}{K}`$, where $`\stackrel{~}{K}`$ is the isotropy subgroup of $`G`$ at $`C_0`$ . In the Appendix, Section 9, we will see (with the few Hermitian exceptions which have already been mentioned) that the finite covering $`\pi :\mathrm{\Omega }:=G/K\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}:=G/\stackrel{~}{K}`$ restricts to an equivariant biholomorphic diffeomorphism of the lifted cycle space

(4.2)
$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)}:=\text{ component of }gK\text{ in }\{gKgG\text{ and }gC_0D\}\mathrm{\Omega }$$

onto $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)`$.

The main goal of the present section is, given $`C\text{bd}(\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D))`$, to determine a particular point $`pC`$ which is contained in a Iwasawa–Schubert variety $`Y`$ with codim$`{}_{Z}{}^{}Y=q+1`$, so that $`YD=\mathrm{}`$, and $`A_Y=H_Y`$ is of pure codimension $`1`$. It is then an immediate consequence (see Corollary 4.7) that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)=\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$.

Given $`pC\text{bd}(D)`$, we consider Iwasawa–Schubert varieties $`S=\mathrm{c}\mathrm{}(𝒪)`$ of minimal possible dimension that satisfy the following conditions:

1. $`pS𝒪:=E`$
2. $`SD\mathrm{}`$
3. The union of the irreducible components of $`E`$ that contain $`p`$ is itself contained in $`ZD`$.

Notation: Let $`A`$ denote the union of all the irreducible components of $`E`$ contained in $`ZD`$ and let $`B`$ denote the union of the remaining components of $`E`$. In particular $`E=AB`$.

Note that by starting with the Schubert variety $`S_0:=Y`$ as in the proof of Corollary 3.4, and by considering a chain $`S_0S_1\mathrm{}`$ with $`dimS_{i+1}=dimS_i+1`$ , we eventually come to a Schubert variety $`S=S_k`$ with these properties. Of course, given $`p`$, the Schubert variety $`S`$ may not be unique, but $`dimS=:nq+\delta nq`$.

The following Proposition gives a constructive method for determining an Iwasawa–Borel invariant incidence hypersurface that contains $`C`$ and is itself contained in the complement $`\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)`$. Here $`S`$ is constructed as above.

###### Proposition 4.3

If $`\delta >0`$, then $`CAB\mathrm{}`$.

Given Proposition 4.3, take a point $`p_1CAB`$ and replace $`S`$ by a component $`S_1`$ of $`B`$ that contains $`p_1`$ . Possibly there are components of $`E_1:=S_1𝒪_1`$ that contain $`p_1`$ and also have non-empty intersection with $`D`$. If that is the case, we replace $`S_1`$ by any such component. Since this $`S_1`$ still has non-empty intersection with the Iwasawa–Borel invariant $`A`$, at least some of the components of its $`E_1`$ do not intersect in this way. Continuing in this way, we eventually determine an $`S_1`$ that satisfies all of the above conditions at $`p_1`$. The procedure stops because Schubert varieties of dimension less than $`nq`$ have empty intersection with $`D`$.

###### Corollary 4.4

If $`S_0`$ satisfies the above conditions at $`p_0`$, then there exist $`p_1\text{bd}(D)`$ and a Schubert subvariety $`S_1S_0`$ that satisfies these conditions at $`p_1`$ and has dimension $`nq`$.

Proof. We recursively apply the procedure indicated above until $`\delta =0`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 4.5

If $`C\text{bd}(\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D))`$, there exists an Iwasawa–Schubert variety $`S`$ of dimension $`nq`$ such that $`E:=S𝒪`$ has non-empty intersection with $`C`$.

###### Corollary 4.6

Let $`C\text{bd}(\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D))`$. Then there exists an Iwasawa–Borel subgroup $`BG`$, and a component $`H_E`$ of a $`B`$–invariant incidence variety $`A_E`$, where $`E=S𝒪`$ as above, such that $`H_E\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)`$, $`CH_E`$ , and $`\text{codim}_\mathrm{\Omega }H_E=1`$, i.e., $`H_E`$ is an incidence divisor.

Proof. The hypersurface $`E`$ in $`S`$ is the support of an ample divisor . Thus the trace-transform method (, see also \[16, Appendix\]) produces a meromorphic function on $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ with a pole at $`C`$ and polar set contained in $`A_E`$. Hence $`A_E`$ has a component $`H_E`$ as required. $`\mathrm{}`$

In the language of Section 3 this shows that for every $`C\text{bd}(\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D))`$ there exists $`Y𝒴(D)`$ such that $`CH_Y`$ . In other words, every such boundary point is contained in the complement of the Schubert domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$. By definition $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$ . Using that, the equality of these domains follows immediately:

###### Corollary 4.7

$`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)=\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D).`$

Let us now turn to certain technical preparations for the proof of Proposition 4.3. For $`S`$ as in its statement, let $`𝒰_S`$ be its preimage in the universal family $`𝒰`$ parameterized by $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. The mapping $`\pi :𝒰_S\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is proper and surjective and the fiber $`\pi ^1(C)`$ over a point $`C\mathrm{\Omega }`$ can be identified with $`CS`$. All orbits of the Iwasawa–Borel group that defines $`S`$ are transversal to the base cycle $`C_0`$ ; in particular, $`C_0S`$ is pure–dimensional with $`dimC_0S=\delta `$. Thus the generic cycle in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ has this property.

Choose a $`1`$-dimensional (local) disk $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ with $`C`$ corresponding to its origin, such that $`I_z:=\pi ^1(z)`$ is $`\delta `$–dimensional for $`z0`$. Define $`𝒳`$ to be the closure of $`\pi ^1(\mathrm{\Delta }\{0\})`$ in $`𝒰_S`$. The map $`\pi _𝒳:=\pi |_𝒳:𝒳\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is proper and its fibers are purely $`\delta `$–dimensional.

In the sequel we use the standard moving lemma of intersection theory and argue using a desingularization $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }:\stackrel{~}{S}S`$, where only points $`E`$ are blown up. Let $`\stackrel{~}{E}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{A}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{B}`$ denote the corresponding $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }`$-preimages. By taking $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ in generic position we may assume that for $`z0`$ no component of $`I_z`$ is contained in $`E`$. Hence we may lift the family $`𝒳\mathrm{\Delta }`$ to a family $`\stackrel{~}{𝒳}\mathrm{\Delta }`$ of $`\delta `$-dimensional varieties such that $`\stackrel{~}{𝒳}𝒳`$ is finite to one outside of the fiber over $`0\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{I}_z`$ denote the fiber of $`\stackrel{~}{𝒳}\mathrm{\Delta }`$ at $`z\mathrm{\Delta }`$, and shrink $`\stackrel{~}{𝒳}`$ so that $`\stackrel{~}{I}:=\stackrel{~}{I}_0`$ is connected. Since $`\stackrel{~}{I}_z\stackrel{~}{A}=\mathrm{}`$ for $`z0`$, it follows that the intersection class $`\stackrel{~}{I}.\stackrel{~}{A}`$ in the homology of $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$ is zero.

An irreducible component of $`\stackrel{~}{I}`$ is one of the following types: it intersects $`\stackrel{~}{A}`$ but not $`\stackrel{~}{B}`$, or it intersects both $`\stackrel{~}{A}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{B}`$, or it intersects $`\stackrel{~}{B}`$ but not $`\stackrel{~}{A}`$. Write $`\stackrel{~}{I}=\stackrel{~}{I_A}\stackrel{~}{I_{AB}}\stackrel{~}{I_B}`$ correspondingly.

###### Lemma 4.8

$`\stackrel{~}{I_{AB}}\mathrm{}`$.

Proof. Since $`\stackrel{~}{I_A}\stackrel{~}{I_{AB}}\mathrm{}`$, it is enough to consider the case where $`\stackrel{~}{I_A}\mathrm{}`$. Let $`H`$ be a hyperplane section in $`Z`$ with $`HS=E`$ (see e.g. ) and put $`H`$ in a continuous family $`H_t`$ of hyperplanes with $`H_0=H`$ such that $`H_tI_A`$ is $`(\delta 1)`$–dimensional for $`t0`$ and such that the lift $`\stackrel{~}{E}_t`$ of $`E_t:=H_tS`$ contains no irreducible component of $`\stackrel{~}{I_A}`$. In particular, $`\stackrel{~}{E}_t.\stackrel{~}{I_A}0`$ for $`t0`$. Since $`\stackrel{~}{I_A}.\stackrel{~}{A}=\stackrel{~}{I_A}.\stackrel{~}{E}=\stackrel{~}{I_A}.\stackrel{~}{E}_t`$, it follows that $`\stackrel{~}{I_A}.\stackrel{~}{A}0`$. But $`0=\stackrel{~}{I}.\stackrel{~}{A}=\stackrel{~}{I_A}.\stackrel{~}{A}+\stackrel{~}{I_{AB}}.\stackrel{~}{A}`$ and therefore $`\stackrel{~}{I_{AB}}\mathrm{}`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Proof of Proposition 4.3. We first consider the case where $`\delta 2`$. Since $`\stackrel{~}{I_{AB}}\mathrm{}`$, it follows that some irreducible component $`I^{}`$ of $`I`$ has non-empty intersection with both $`A`$ and $`B`$. Of course $`I^{}E=(I^{}A)(I^{}B)`$. But $`E`$ is the support of a hyperplane section, and since $`dimI^{}2`$, it follows that $`(I^{}E)`$ is connected. In particular $`(I^{}A)`$ meets $`(I^{}B)`$. Therefore $`I^{}AB\mathrm{}`$ and consequently $`CAB\mathrm{}`$.

Now suppose that $`\delta =1`$, i.e., that $`\stackrel{~}{I}`$ is $`1`$-dimensional. Since $`\stackrel{~}{I}.\stackrel{~}{A}=0`$, the (non-empty) intersection $`\stackrel{~}{I}\stackrel{~}{A}`$ is not discrete. We will show that some component of $`\stackrel{~}{I_{AB}}`$ is contained in $`\stackrel{~}{A}`$. It will follow immediately that $`CAB\mathrm{}`$. For this we assume to the contrary that every component of $`\stackrel{~}{I}`$ which is contained in $`\stackrel{~}{A}`$ is in $`\stackrel{~}{I_A}`$ . We decompose $`\stackrel{~}{I}=\stackrel{~}{I}_1\stackrel{~}{I}_2`$ , where $`\stackrel{~}{I}_1`$ consists of those components of $`\stackrel{~}{I}`$ which are contained in $`\stackrel{~}{A}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{I}_2`$ of those which have discrete or empty intersection with $`\stackrel{~}{A}`$.

Now $`\stackrel{~}{I}_1.\stackrel{~}{A}=\stackrel{~}{I}_1.\stackrel{~}{E}`$. Choosing $`H_t`$ as above, we have $`\stackrel{~}{I}_1.\stackrel{~}{E}=\stackrel{~}{I}_1.\stackrel{~}{E}_t0`$ for $`t0`$. If $`\stackrel{~}{I}_2\stackrel{~}{I}_B`$, then $`\stackrel{~}{I}_2.\stackrel{~}{A}>0`$. This would contradict $`0=\stackrel{~}{I}.\stackrel{~}{A}=\stackrel{~}{I}_1\stackrel{~}{A}+\stackrel{~}{I}_2.\stackrel{~}{A}`$. Thus $`\stackrel{~}{I}_2=\stackrel{~}{I}_B`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{I}_1=\stackrel{~}{I}_A`$. But $`\stackrel{~}{I}_A`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{I}_B`$ are disjoint, contrary to $`\stackrel{~}{I}`$ being connected. Thus it follows that $`\stackrel{~}{I_{AB}}`$ does indeed contain a component that is contained in $`\stackrel{~}{A}`$. The proof is complete.$`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 4.9

In the non–hermitian case, the main result of  leads to a non–constructive, but very short, proof of the existence of an incidence hypersurface $`HG/\stackrel{~}{K}`$ containing a given boundary point $`C\text{bd}(\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D))`$. (The analogous construction in the Hermitian case is somewhat easier; see Section 8 below.) For this, note that if $`S`$ is a $`q`$–codimensional Schubert variety with $`SC_0\mathrm{}`$, then, using  as above, for $`Y:=S𝒪`$, it follows that $`H:=H_Y`$ is indeed a hypersurface. Now let $`\mathrm{\Omega }_H`$ be the connected component containing the base point of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{kK}k(H)`$. It is shown in  that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_H`$ agrees with the Iwasawa domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }_I`$ which can be defined as the intersection of all $`\mathrm{\Omega }_H`$, where $`H`$ is a hypersurface in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ which is invariant under some Iwasawa–Borel subgroup of $`G`$ (see Section 6). It follows that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)=\mathrm{\Omega }_H`$, because by definition $`\mathrm{\Omega }_I\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)\mathrm{\Omega }_I`$.

By Corollary 3.4 there is an incidence variety $`A_Y`$ in $`ZD`$ which contains $`C`$ and is invariant by some Iwasawa–Borel subgroup $`B`$. Since the open $`B`$–orbit in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is affine, there exists a $`B`$–invariant hypersurface $`H`$ which contains $`A_Y`$. Since $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)=\mathrm{\Omega }_I`$, it is also contained in $`Z/D`$ and thus it has the desired properties. That completes the short proof. In fact it follows that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)=\mathrm{\Omega }_I=\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)=\mathrm{\Omega }_H`$ . $`\mathrm{}`$

## 5 Intersection properties of Schubert slices

Let $`(\gamma ,\kappa )`$ be a dual pair and $`z_0\gamma \kappa `$. Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ be the Schubert slice at $`z_0`$ , i.e., $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=A_0N_0(z_0)\gamma `$. In particular $`z_0\mathrm{\Sigma }\kappa `$. We take a close look at the intersection set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }\kappa `$.

Let $`L_0`$ denote the isotropy subgroup $`(G_0)_{z_0}`$, and therefore $`(K_0)_{z_0}=K_0L_0`$ and $`(A_0N_0)_{z_0}=(A_0N_0)L_0`$ . Define $`\alpha :(K_0)_{z_0}\times (A_0N_0)_{z_0}L_0`$ by group multiplication.

###### Lemma 5.1

The map $`\alpha :(K_0)_{z_0}\times (A_0N_0)_{z_0}L_0`$ is a diffeomorphism onto an open subgroup of $`L_0`$.

Proof. Since $`dimK_0(z_0)+dim(A_0N_0)(z_0)=dimG_0(z_0)`$ and $`dimK_0+dim(A_0N_0)=dimG_0`$ we have $`dim(K_0)_{z_0}+dim(A_0N_0)_{z_0}=dimL_0`$ . Thus the orbit of the neutral point under the action of the compact group $`(K_0)_{z_0}`$ is the union of certain components of $`L_0/(A_0N_0)_{z_0}`$, i.e., $`\text{Image }(\alpha )=(K_0)_{z_0}(A_0N_0)_{z_0}`$ is an open subgroup of $`L_0`$ .

The injectivity of $`\alpha `$ follows from the fact that $`G_0`$ is the topological product $`G_0=K_0\times (A_0N_0)`$. This product structure also yields the fact that $`(K_0)_{z_0}(m)`$ is transversal to $`(A_0N_0)_{z_0}`$ at every $`m(A_0N_0)_{z_0}`$ . Thus, $`\alpha `$ is a local diffeomorphism along $`(A_0N_0)_{z_0}`$ and by equivariance is therefore a diffeomorphism onto its image. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 5.2

If $`L_0`$ is connected, in particular if $`\gamma `$ is simply connected, then $`\mathrm{\Sigma }\kappa =\{z_0\}`$.

Proof. If $`z_1\mathrm{\Sigma }\kappa `$, then there exists $`kK_0`$ and $`anA_0N_0`$ so that $`k^1(z_0)=(an)(z_0)`$, i.e., $`kanL_0`$ . Therefore $`k(K_0)_{z_0}`$, $`an(A_0N_0)_{z_0}`$, and $`z_1=z_0`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Theorem 5.3

Let $`D`$ be an open $`G_0`$-orbit in $`Z`$, $`C_0D`$ the base cycle, $`z_0C_0`$ , and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=A_0N_0(z_0)`$ a Schubert slice at $`z_0`$ . If $`C\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)`$, then $`\mathrm{\Sigma }C`$ consists of a single point, and the intersection $`\mathrm{\Sigma }C`$ at that point is transversal.

Proof. Let $`S:=\text{c}\mathrm{}B(z_0)`$ be the Schubert variety containing $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, and let $`k`$ denote the intersection number $`[S][C_0]`$. We know from Theorem 3.1 that intersection points occur only in the open $`A_0N_0`$–orbits in $`S`$. The open $`G_0`$–orbit $`D`$ is simply connected, and therefore Corollary 5.2 applies. Thus $`\mathrm{\Sigma }C_0=\{z_0\}`$. From Theorem 3.1(1) it follows that intersection this transversal. Hence it contributes exactly $`1`$ to $`[S][C_0]`$. Now we have $`k`$ different open $`A_0N_0`$–orbits in $`S`$, each of which contains exactly one (transversal) intersection point.

Cycles $`C\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)`$ are homotopic to $`C_0`$ . Thus $`[S][C]=k`$. As we homotopy $`C_0`$ to $`C`$ staying in $`D`$, the intersection points of course move around, but each stays in its original open $`A_0N_0`$–orbits in $`S`$. Since $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is one of those open $`A_0N_0`$–orbits, it follows that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }C`$ consists of a single point, and the intersection there is transversal, as asserted. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 5.4

One might hope that the orbit $`D`$ would be equivariantly identifiable with a bundle of type $`K\times _{(K_0)_{z_0}}\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, but the following example shows that this is not the case. Let $`Z=_2()`$ be equipped with the standard $`SU(2,1)`$-action. Let $`D`$ be the open $`SU(2,1)`$–orbit consisting of positive lines, i.e, the complement of the closure of the unit ball $`B`$ in its usual embedding. The Schubert slice $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ for $`D`$ is contained in a projective line tangent to bd$`(B)`$; see . If $`z_0C_0D`$, the only $`(K_0)_{z_0}`$–invariant line in $`_2()`$ that contains $`z_0`$ and is not contained in $`C_0`$ is the line determined by $`z_0`$ and the $`K_0`$-fixed point in $`B`$.

## 6 The domains $`\mathrm{\Omega }_I`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}`$

The Schubert domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$ is defined as a certain subspace of the cycle space $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. When $`G_0`$ is of hermitian type and $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the associated compact hermitian symmetric space, the situation is completely understood : $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)`$ is the bounded symmetric domain dual to $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ in the sense of symmetric spaces. Now we put that case aside. Then $`\mathrm{\Omega }G/K`$, and we have

(6.1)
$$\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)=\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)\mathrm{\Omega }=G/K.$$

Let $`B`$ be an Iwasawa–Borel subgroup of $`G`$. It has only finitely many orbits on $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, and those orbits are complex manifolds. The orbit $`B(1K)`$ is open, because $`ANK`$ is open in $`G`$, and its complement $`S\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is a finite union $`H_i`$ of $`B`$–invariant irreducible complex hypersurfaces. For any given open $`G_0`$–orbit, some of these $`H_i`$ occur in the definition (2.1) of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$. The Iwasawa domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }_I`$ is defined as in (2.1) except that we use all the $`H_i`$ :

(6.2)
$$\mathrm{\Omega }_I\text{ is the connected component of }C_0\text{ in }=\mathrm{\Omega }(\underset{gG_0}{}g(S)).$$

This definition is independent of choice of $`B`$ because any two Iwasawa–Borel subgroups of $`G`$ are $`G_0`$–conjugate. Just as in the case of the Schubert domains, we note here that

$$\underset{gG_0}{}g(S)=\underset{kK_0}{}k(S)$$

is closed. By definition, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_I\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$ for every open $`G_0`$–orbit $`D`$ in $`Z`$.

The argument for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$ also shows that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_I`$ is a Stein domain in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. See  for further properties of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_I`$

The Iwasawa domain has been studied by several authors from a completely different viewpoint and with completely different definitions. See , , ,  and . Here is the definition in . Let $`X_0`$ be the closed $`G_0`$–orbit in $`G/B`$ and let $`𝒪_{max}`$ be the open $`K`$–orbit there. The polar $`\widehat{X_0}`$ of $`X_0`$ is the connected component of $`1.K`$ in $`\{gK\mathrm{\Omega }gG\text{ and }g^1X_0𝒪_{max}\}`$.

###### Proposition 6.3

 $`\widehat{X_0}=\mathrm{\Omega }_I`$ .

Proof. Let $`\pi :GG/K=\mathrm{\Omega }`$ denote the projection. As $`S`$ is the complement of $`BK`$ in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, $`\pi ^1(\mathrm{\Omega }_I)`$ is the interior of $`I:=_{gG_0}g(ANK)`$. Note that $`hIg^1hANK`$ for all $`gG_0`$ $`h^1gKAN`$ for all $`gG_0`$ $`h^1G_0KAN`$. Viewing $`1B`$ as the base point in $`X_0`$ , the condition for $`hK`$ being in $`\widehat{X_0}`$ is that $`h^1G_0BKB=KAN`$. Thus $`hIhK\widehat{X_0}`$ , in other words $`\widehat{X_0}=\pi (I)=\mathrm{\Omega }_{gG_0}g(S)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 6.4

The polar $`\widehat{X_0}`$ to the closed $`G_0`$–orbit $`X_0`$ is a Stein subdomain of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$.

Now we turn to the domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}`$ . The Cartan involution $`\theta `$ of $`𝔤_0`$ defines the usual Cartan decomposition $`𝔤_0=𝔨_0+𝔭_0`$ and the compact real form $`𝔤_u=𝔨_0+\sqrt{1}𝔭_0`$ of $`𝔤`$. Let $`G_u`$ be the corresponding compact real form of $`G`$, real–analytic subgroup for $`𝔤_u`$ , acting on $`\mathrm{\Omega }=G/K`$. Then

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}:=\{x\mathrm{\Omega }\text{ the isotropy subgroup }(G_0)_x\text{ is compactly embedded}\}^0,$$

the topological component of $`x_0=1K`$. It is important to note that the action of $`G_0`$ on the Akhiezer-Gindikin domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}`$ is proper .

In work related to automorphic forms (, ) it was shown that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}\widehat{X_0}`$, when $`G_0`$ is a classical group. Other related results were proved in .

By means of an identification of $`\widehat{X_0}`$ with a certain maximal domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{adpt}`$ for the adapted complex structure inside the real tangent bundle of $`G_0/K_0`$, and using basic properties of plurisubharmonic functions, it was shown by the first author that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}\mathrm{\Omega }_I`$ in complete generality . Barchini proved the opposite inclusion in . Thus $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}=\mathrm{\Omega }_I`$ . In view of Theorem 6.3, we now have

###### Theorem 6.5

$`\mathrm{\Omega }_I=\widehat{X_0}=\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}`$ .

###### Remark 6.6

In particular, this gives yet another proof that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}`$ is Stein. That result was first proved in  where a plurisubharmonic exhaustion function was constructed.

Summary: In general, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)=\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_I=\widehat{X_0}=\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}`$ .

## 7 Cycle spaces of lower-dimensional $`G_0`$-orbits

Let us recall the setting of . For $`Z=G/Q`$, $`\gamma Orb_Z(G_0)`$ and $`\kappa Orb_Z(K)`$ its dual, let $`G(\gamma )`$ be the connected component of the identity of $`\{gG:g(\kappa )\gamma \text{is non-empty and compact}\}`$. Note that $`G(\gamma )`$ is an open $`K`$-invariant subset of $`G`$ which contains the identity. Define $`𝒞(\gamma ):=G(\gamma )/K`$. Finally, define $`𝒞`$ as the intersection of all such cycle spaces as $`\gamma `$ ranges over $`Orb_Z(G_0)`$ and $`Q`$ ranges over all parabolic subgroups of $`G`$.

###### Theorem 7.1

$`𝒞=\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}`$ .

This result was checked in  for classical and hermitian exceptional groups by means of case by case computations, and the authors of  conjectured it in general. As will be shown here, it is a consequence of the statement

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)=\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)\text{ when }D\text{ is an open }G_0\text{–orbit in }G/B,$$

and of the following general result \[12, Proposition 8.1\].

###### Proposition 7.2

$`\left(_{DG/B\text{ open}}\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)\right)𝒞`$.

Proof of Theorem. The polar $`\widehat{X_0}`$ in $`Z=G/B`$ coincides with the cycle space $`𝒞_Z(\gamma _0)`$, where $`\gamma _0`$ is the unique closed $`G_0`$-orbit in $`Z`$. As was shown above, this agrees with the Iwasawa domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }_I`$ which in turn is contained in every Schubert domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$. Thus, for every open $`G_0`$-orbit $`D_0`$ in $`Z=G/B`$ we have the inclusions

$$\left(\underset{DG/B\text{ open}}{}\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)\right)𝒞𝒞_Z(\gamma _0)=\widehat{X_0}=\mathrm{\Omega }_I\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D_0)=\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D_0).$$

Intersecting over all open $`G_0`$-orbits $`D`$ in $`G/B`$, the equalities

$$\left(\underset{DG/B\text{ open}}{}\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)\right)=𝒞=\mathrm{\Omega }_I=\left(\underset{DG/B\text{ open}}{}\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)\right)$$

are forced, and $`𝒞=\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}`$ is a consequence of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_I=\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

As noted in our introductory remarks, using in particular the results of the present paper, it was shown in  that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)=\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}`$ with the obvious exceptions in the well-understood hermitian cases. This is an essentially stronger result than the above theorem on intersections. On the other hand, it required a good deal of additional work and therefore it is perhaps of interest that the intersection result follows as above in a direct way from $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)=\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$. So, for example, in any particular case where this latter point was verified, the intersection theorem would be immediate (see e.g.  for the case of $`SL(n,)`$).

## 8 Groups of hermitian type

Let $`G_0`$ be of hermitian type. Write $``$ for the bounded symmetric domain $`G_0/K_0`$ with a fixed choice of invariant complex structure. Drop the colocation convention leading to (6.1), so that now the cycle space $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)`$ really consists of cycles as in  and . It has been conjectured (see ) that, whenever $`D`$ is an open $`G_0`$–orbit in a complex flag manifold $`Z=G/Q`$, there are just two possibilities:

1. A certain double fibration (see ) is holomorphic, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)`$ is biholomorphic either to $``$ or to $`\overline{}`$, or
2. both $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)`$ and $`\times \overline{}`$ have natural biholomorphic embeddings into $`G/K`$, and there $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)=\times \overline{}`$ .

The first case is known (, ), and the second case has already been checked  in the cases where $`G_0`$ is a classical group.

The inclusion $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)\times \overline{}`$ was proved in general (; or see ). It is also known  that $`\times \overline{}=\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}`$ . Combine this with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}\mathrm{\Omega }_I`$ (; or see Theorem 6.5), with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)=\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$ (Corollary 4.7), and with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_I\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)`$ (compare definitions (2.1) and (6.2)) to see that

(8.1)
$$\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)=\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)(\times \overline{})=\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}\mathrm{\Omega }_I\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D).$$

Now we have proved the following result. (Also see .)

###### Theorem 8.2

Let $`G_0`$ be a simple noncompact group of hermitian type. Then either (1) a certain double fibration (see ) is holomorphic, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)`$ is biholomorphic to $``$ or to $`\overline{}`$, or (2) $`\mathrm{\Omega }=G/K`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)=\mathrm{\Omega }_S(D)=\mathrm{\Omega }_I=\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}=(\times \overline{})`$.

###### Remark 8.3

Since the above argument already uses the inclusion $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)(\times \overline{})`$ of , it should be noted that the construction for the proof of Corollary 4.7 can be replaced by the following treatment. Using Corollary 3.4, given $`p\text{ bd}(\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D))`$, one has an Iwasawa–Borel subgroup $`BG`$ and a $`B`$–invariant incidence variety $`A_Y`$ such that $`pA_Y\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)`$. Since the open $`B`$–orbit in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is affine, it follows that $`A_Y`$ is contained in a $`B`$–invariant hypersurface $`H`$. But $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}\mathrm{\Omega }_I`$ , and $`H\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Omega }_I`$ by definition of the latter. Thus $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)=\mathrm{\Omega }_I=\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}=(\times \overline{})`$.

## 9 Appendix: Lifting the cycle space to $`G/K`$

As mentioned in connection with the definitions (4.1) and (4.2), we can view the cycle space $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)`$ inside $`G/K`$ because of

###### Theorem 9.1

The projection $`\pi :G/KG/\stackrel{~}{K}`$ restricts to a $`G_0`$–equivariant holomorphic cover $`\pi :\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)}\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)`$, and $`\pi :\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)}\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)`$ is one to one.

We show that $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)}`$ is homeomorphic to a cell, and then we apply \[11, Corollary 5.3\].

Without loss of generality we may assume that $`G`$ is simply connected. Let $`G_u`$ denote the $`\theta `$–stable compact real form of $`G`$ such that $`G_uG_0=K_0`$ , connected. Then $`G_u`$ is simply connected because it is a maximal compact subgroup of the simply connected group $`G`$. It follows that $`G_u/K_0`$ is simply connected. We view $`G_u/K_0`$ as a riemannian symmetric space $`M_u`$ , using the negative of the Killing form of $`G_u`$ for metric and $`\theta |_{G_u}`$ for the symmetry at $`1K_0`$ . It is connected and simply connected.

###### Definition 9.2

Let $`x_0`$ denote the base point $`1K_0G_u/K_0=M_u`$ . Let $`LT_{x_0}(M_u)`$ denote the conjugate locus at $`x_0`$ , all tangent vectors $`\xi `$ at $`x_0`$ such that $`d\mathrm{exp}_{x_0}`$ is nonsingular at $`t\xi `$ for $`0t<1`$ but singular at $`\xi `$. Then we define

$$\frac{1}{2}M_u:=\left\{\mathrm{exp}_{x_0}(t\xi )\right|\xi L\text{ and }0t<\frac{1}{2}\}.$$

The conjugate locus $`L`$ and the cut locus are the same for $`M_u`$ , so $`\frac{1}{2}M_u`$ consists of the points in $`M_u`$ at a distance from $`x_0`$ less than half way to $`\mathrm{exp}_{x_0}(L)`$. For example, if $`G_0/K_0`$ is a bounded symmetric domain $``$, then a glance at the polysphere that sweeps out $`M_u`$ under the action of $`K_0`$ shows that $`\frac{1}{2}M_u=`$.

###### Proposition 9.3

The lifted cycle space $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)}=G_0\frac{1}{2}M_uG/K`$. It is $`G_0`$–equivariantly diffeomorphic to $`(G_0/K_0)\times M_u`$ . In particular it is homeomorphic to a cell.

Proof. According to \[10, Theorem 5.2.6\], the lifted cycle space $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)}G/K`$ coincides with the Akhiezer–Gindikin domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}`$. The restricted root description  of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}`$ is (in our notation)

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}=G_0\mathrm{exp}(\{\xi 𝔞_u|\alpha (\xi )|<\pi /2\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }(𝔤,𝔞)\})K/K,$$

where $`𝔞_u`$ is a maximal abelian subspace of $`\{\xi 𝔤_u\theta (\xi )=\xi \}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }(𝔤,𝔞)`$ is the resulting family of restricted roots. A glance at Definition 9.2 shows that

$$\frac{1}{2}M_u=K_0\mathrm{exp}(\{\xi 𝔞_u|\alpha (\xi )|<\pi /2\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }(𝔤,𝔞)\})K/K.$$

Thus $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)}=\mathrm{\Omega }_{AG}=G_0\mathrm{exp}(\{\xi 𝔞_u|\alpha (\xi )|<\pi /2\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }(𝔤,𝔞)\})K/K=G_0\frac{1}{2}M_u`$ . That is the first assertion.

For the second assertion note that $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)}`$ fibers $`G_0`$–equivariantly over $`G_0/K_0`$ by $`gxgK_0`$ for $`gG_0`$ and $`x\frac{1}{2}M_u`$ . For the third assertion note that $`G_0/K_0`$ and $`\frac{1}{2}M_u`$ are homeomorphic to cells. $`\mathrm{}`$

Proof of Theorem. As $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)}`$ is a cell, $`H^q(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)};)=0`$ for $`q>0`$ and the Euler characteristic $`\chi (\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)})=1`$. Let $`\gamma `$ be a covering transformation for $`\pi :\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)}\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)`$ and let $`n`$ be its order. Then the cyclic group $`\gamma `$ acts freely on $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)}`$ and the quotient manifold $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)}/\gamma `$ has Euler characteristic $`\chi (\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)})/n`$ \[11, Corollary 5.3\], so $`n=1`$. Now the covering group of $`\pi :\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)}\mathrm{\Omega }_W(D)`$ is trivial, so $`\pi `$ is one to one. $`\mathrm{}`$

ATH: JAW:  Fakultät für Mathematik Department of Mathematics  Ruhr–Universität Bochum University of California  D-44780 Bochum, Germany Berkeley, California 94720–3840, U.S.A.  ahuck@cplx.ruhr-uni-bochum.de jawolf@math.berkeley.edu


format: text

text:
# The thermal energy of a scalar field in a one-dimensional compact space

## 1 Introduction

In a recent paper Brevik, Milton and Odintsov  calculated the thermal energy associated with several types of quantum fields living in $`S^1\times S^{d1}`$ geometries with $`d=2,3`$. In particular the thermal energy of a quantum neutral scalar field defined on a one-dimensional compact space at finite temperature ($`S^1\times S^1`$) was found by those authors to depend quadratically and also linearly on the temperature in the high-temperature limit. Their result reads

$$E\left(\beta \right)\frac{1}{24a}\left(\frac{2\pi a}{\beta }\right)^2\frac{1}{2\beta },a/\beta \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1},$$
(1)
where $`\beta `$ is the reciprocal of the thermal equilibrium temperature $`T`$. This expression is in agreement with the corresponding one obtained by Kutasov and Larsen  (in the high-temperature limit) but at variance with the one obtained by Klemm *et al* . These last authors justify their result by arguing that the contribution of the zero modes becomes significant only when the saddle-point approximation does not hold anymore. This disagreement has arisen some doubts concerning the correctness of Brevik *et al*’s evaluation. Some other authors also strongly support the necessity to get rid of the zero mode (see, for instance, ), a common practice also in e.g. zeta function regularization. However, it has been argued by Dowker that the correct result for the thermal energy for this particular arrangement of quantum field and geometry contains a positive, linearly-dependent term in the temperature that in the high-temperature limit cancels exactly the corresponding negative term in (1), see  and references therein. This same result can be inferred from Cardy’s analysis of partition functions for conformal field theories in higher dimensions . Besides a fundamental problem concerning the associated entropy function, this disagreement may have consequences for the Verlinde-Cardy relations .

The purpose of this brief note is to examine such questions a little bit further. We will see that a generalised zeta function approach to the problem shows that: (i) there is indeed a contribution to the thermal energy of the spatial zero mode as calculated independently by Dowker  and Dowker and Kirsten , and also Cardy ; (ii) though the thermal energy is independent of the scaling mass inherent to zeta function regularization, the free energy and the entropy associated with the spatial zero mode depend on the scaling mass; and finally, (iii) that there is no sense in discarding the terms that depend on the scaling mass, since this would lead to a violation of the fundamental thermodynamical relations; in fact, these need the inclusion of a dimensionful parameter to go with $`\beta `$ and provide the unit scale in such a way that the laws of thermodynamics be obeyed by the thermodynamics of the zero mode. Or, to put it in other words, it does not seem to have a sense to choose a particular, convenient value of the scaling mass at this stage of the procedure, any such value being inescapably arbitrary. The full resolution of the problem can only be obtained after carrying out a compulsory renormalization procedure which makes contact with physical experiment.

## 2 Zeta function approach to the partition function

We begin by briefly sketching a generalised zeta function  approach to the partition function of a quantum scalar field in thermal equilibrium with a heat bath at a fixed temperature $`\beta ^1`$.

The zeta function for conformally coupled massless scalars fields living on a compact $`d_R`$-dimensional manifold at finite temperature reads

$`\zeta (s;{\displaystyle \frac{^2+\xi R}{\mu ^2}})`$ $`=`$ $`\text{Tr}\left({\displaystyle \frac{^2+\xi R}{\mu ^2}}\right)^s`$ (2)
$`=`$ $`\mu ^{2s}{\displaystyle \underset{\lambda }{}}\left(\omega _\lambda ^2\right)^s,`$
where $`^2:=^2+^2/^2\tau `$, $`\mu `$ is a scaling mass, $`\xi =\left(D2\right)/4\left(D1\right)`$ is the conformal parameter and $`R`$ is the Ricci curvature scalar. Here $`D=d_R+1`$ where $`d_R`$ denotes the number of dimensions of the manifold. The eigenvalues $`\omega _\lambda ^2`$ of the Euclidean d’Alembertian operator are given by

$$\omega _\lambda ^2=\left(\frac{2\pi n}{\beta }\right)^2+\left(\frac{M_{\mathrm{}}^2}{a^2}\right)^2,$$
(3)
where, in principle, $`n=0,\pm 1,\pm 2,\mathrm{}`$. Here $`M_{\mathrm{}}^2/a^2`$ denote the eigenvalues of the Laplace operator on the $`d_R`$-dimensional manifold. For a bosonic neutral scalar field the partition function can be obtained from the zeta function through

$$\mathrm{log}Z\left(\beta \right)=\frac{1}{2}\zeta ^{}\left(s=0;\frac{^2+\xi R}{\mu ^2}\right).$$
(4)
We can separate the infinite temperature sector, which corresponds to $`n=0`$, i.e., the zero mode associated with the compactified Euclidean temporal dimension, from the finite temperature sector and at the same time isolate the spatial zero mode in the following way. Suppose that the spatial zero mode corresponds to $`\mathrm{}=0`$ and the remaining $`\mathrm{}`$ are shifted to $`\mathrm{}+1`$ such that $`\mathrm{}=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$ with an appropriate degeneracy factor taken into account. For convenience, however, suppose initially that the spatial zero mode is absent. Then taking Eq. (3) into (2), performing a Mellin transform, and making use of the Poisson sum formula (or Jacobi theta function identity)

$$\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}e^{n^2\pi \tau }=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\tau }}\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}e^{n^2\pi /\tau },$$
(5)
with $`\tau =4\pi t/\beta ^2`$, we have

$`\zeta (s;{\displaystyle \frac{^2+\xi R}{\mu ^2}})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mu ^{2s}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(s\right)}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑tt^{s1}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}D_{\mathrm{}}e^{\left(M_{\mathrm{}}^2/a^2\right)t}{\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}e^{\left(4\pi ^2n^2/\beta ^2\right)t}`$ (6)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mu ^{2s}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(s\right)}}{\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{\sqrt{4\pi }}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}D_{\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑tt^{s3/2}e^{\left(M_{\mathrm{}}^2/a^2\right)t}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mu ^{2s}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(s\right)}}{\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{\sqrt{\pi }}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}D_{\mathrm{}}`$
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑tt^{s3/2}e^{n^2\beta ^2/4tM_{\mathrm{}}^2/a^2t},`$
where $`D_{\mathrm{}}`$ is the degeneracy factor. It is not hard to see that the spatial zero mode can be taken into account by considering the additional term

$$\zeta _{Z.M.}(s;\frac{^2+\xi R}{\mu ^2})=\frac{\mu ^{2s}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(s\right)}\frac{\beta }{\sqrt{\pi }}\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑tt^{s3/2}e^{n^2\beta ^2/4t}.$$
(7)
The contribution of the spatial zero mode as it stands is divergent, the origin of this divergence being the simultaneous consideration of two zero modes, the temporal and the spatial ones. Nevertheless, we can regularise it and extract its finite contribution in several ways. One of this ways is to apply Eq. (5) and discard terms that do not depend on $`\beta `$ or contribute to the partition function with a term which is linear in $`\beta `$. We obtain

$$\zeta _{Z.M.}(s;\frac{^2+\xi R}{\mu ^2})=2\left(\frac{\mu \beta }{2\pi }\right)^{2s}\zeta _R\left(2s\right).$$
(8)
Since $`\zeta _R\left(0\right)0`$, we can expect a scaling mass dependence of some or all thermodynamical quantities associated with the spatial zero mode. The derivative at $`s=0`$ reads

$$\zeta _{Z.M.}^{}\left(s=0;\frac{^2+\xi R}{\mu ^2}\right)=4\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{\mu \beta }{2\pi }\right)\zeta _R\left(0\right)+4\zeta ^{}\left(0\right).$$
(9)
The last term is linear in $`\beta `$ and can be discarded, as we did above (its contribution can readily be absorbed in the regularization mass $`\mu `$).

An alternative way (much more elegant mathematically) of treating the thermal contribution of the zero mode is to proceed along the lines pioneered in , that is (in a nutshell) to use the ordinary formulas of zeta regularization till the end, while ‘lifting’ the zero modes (e.g. preventing them from becoming zero), both the spatial and temporal one in this case, with the help of two small parameters (say $`\epsilon `$ and $`\eta `$), which are finally taken to zero after the whole zeta regularization process (which uses the ordinary expressions in the absence of zero modes) has been carried through. This method provides, in some situations, a justification of the usual principal part prescription (see ), and in the present case leads also to a complete cancellation (more than that, it actually avoids the appearence) of the divergences that we have just discarded on physical (dimensional) grounds.

Making use of the integral representation for the modified Bessel function of the third kind

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑xx^{\nu 1}e^{\frac{a}{x}bx}=2\left(\frac{a}{b}\right)^{\nu /2}K_\nu \left(2\sqrt{ab}\right),$$
(10)
for the temperature-dependent part describing the non-zero modes, and adding the zero-mode contribution, we have

$$\mathrm{log}Z\left(\beta \right)=\frac{\beta }{2a}\underset{\mathrm{}=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}D_{\mathrm{}}M_{\mathrm{}}\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{\mu \beta }{2\pi }\right)\underset{\mathrm{}=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}D_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{log}\left(1e^{\beta M_{\mathrm{}}/a}\right),$$
(11)
where we have also used the explicit form of $`K_{1/2}\left(z\right)`$ . Notice that in this approach —and also in the one described in — there is no temperature dependent pole as in . The factor $`2\pi `$ in the denominator of the log term in this equation is fully arbitrary (it can obviously be absorbed into the $`\mu `$ parameter). It would lack any sense to set $`\mu `$ equal to a particular value (say 1, or $`2\pi `$), as $`\mu `$ clearly provides the (regularization) scale.

Equation (11) can be applied to several situations concerning scalar conformally coupled fields on a $`d_R`$-dimensional manifold. The first term of Eq. (11) is associated with the zero temperature vacuum energy, the second one describes the thermal corrections due to the spatial zero mode (when present, if not so, this term has just to be deleted), and the third one is the thermal contribution due to real excitations of the conformally coupled fields on $`S^{d1}`$. This simple and easy to interpret formula is the result of the generalised zeta function approach used here.

## 3 The thermodynamics associated with the zero mode

We consider, to start with, the thermodynamics associated with the zero mode. First of all, let us remark that the thermal energy associated with the zero mode does not depend on the scaling mass, in fact

$$E_{Z.M.}\left(\beta \right)=\frac{d}{d\beta }\mathrm{log}Z_{Z.M.}\left(\beta \right)=\frac{d}{d\beta }\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{\mu \beta }{2\pi }\right)=\frac{1}{\beta }.$$
(12)
On the contrary, the free energy and the entropy do. The free energy is

$$F_{Z.M.}\left(\beta \right)=\frac{1}{\beta }\mathrm{log}Z_{Z.M.}\left(\beta \right)=\frac{1}{\beta }\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{\mu \beta }{2\pi }\right),$$
(13)
and the entropy reads

$$S_{Z.M.}\left(\beta \right)=\beta ^2\frac{d}{d\beta }\frac{1}{\beta }\mathrm{log}Z_{Z.M.}\left(\beta \right)=\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{\mu \beta }{2\pi }\right)+1.$$
(14)
Since the thermal energy and the free energy are related by

$$\beta F\left(\beta \right)=E\left(\beta \right)+C,$$
(15)
we see that, in order to have complete compatibility between (12) and (13), we must necessarily choose $`C=\mathrm{log}\left(\mu /2\pi \right)`$. One can also verify, quite easily, that the fundamental relation between the three quantities above,

$$S=\beta \left(EF\right),$$
(16)
is actually satisfied by (12), (13) and (14). These results are in complete agreement with the ones obtained by Cardy , provided that we choose $`\mu =2\pi `$ ‘in inverse length units’. Their physical relevance, however, is dubious because, as we have already advanced and clearly see now, in order to maintain internally consistent thermodynamics, the need for a dimensionfull parameter $`\mu `$ is unavoidable and setting it equal to any particular value at this stage (that is, setting arbitrarily a mass scale) is not justified. For this reason, in the following we will leave the zero mode aside (however, we will discuss the effect of its inclusion a bit later).

## 4 The high-temperature regime

For conformally coupled scalar fields on $`S^{d1}`$, the relevant contribution from Eq. (11) (skipping the zero mode) reads

$$\mathrm{log}Z\left(\beta \right)=\underset{\mathrm{}=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\mathrm{}+1\right)^{d2}\mathrm{log}\left(1e^{\beta \left(\mathrm{}+1\right)/a}\right).$$
(17)
And, also from Eq. (11), the zero temperature vacuum energy is

$$E_0=\frac{1}{2a}\underset{\mathrm{}=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\mathrm{}+1\right)^{d2}\left(\mathrm{}+1\right)=\frac{1}{2a}\zeta \left(1d\right).$$
(18)
Let us consider the one-dimensional compact space for which $`d_R=1`$ and $`D=d=2`$. In this case

$$E_0=\frac{1}{2a}\zeta \left(1\right)=\frac{1}{24a}.$$
(19)
On the other hand, Eq. (LABEL:log\_thermal\_part\_function) reads

$$\mathrm{log}Z\left(\beta \right)=\underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\mathrm{log}\left(1e^{\beta \mathrm{}/a}\right),$$
(20)
where we have shifted the quantum number $`\mathrm{}`$ by one unit. Since the thermal energy is given by

$$\stackrel{~}{E}\left(\beta \right)=\frac{d}{d\beta }\mathrm{log}Z\left(\beta \right),$$
(21)
one can combine (19), (20) and (21) to obtain the total energy, in the form

$`E\left(\beta \right)`$ $`=`$ $`E_0+\stackrel{~}{E}\left(\beta \right)`$ (22)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{24a}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{a}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{e^{\beta \mathrm{}/a}1}}.`$
One can now make use of an appropriate sum formula, say Euler-MacLaurin, Abel-Plana, or Poisson, in one of its several versions, to evaluate the sum on the rhs of (22). As an alternative to Euler-Maclaurin’s formula employed in , let us consider here the Abel-Plana sum formula

$$\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}f\left(n\right)=\frac{1}{2}f\left(0\right)+_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑xf\left(x\right)+i_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑x\frac{f\left(ix\right)f\left(ix\right)}{e^{2\pi x}1}.$$
(23)
A straightforward application of this expression, with $`f\left(x\right)=x/\left(e^{\beta x/a}1\right)`$, leads to

$$E\left(\beta \right)=\frac{1}{2\beta }+\frac{1}{24a}\left(\frac{2\pi a}{\beta }\right)^2,a/\beta \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1},$$
(24)
which is the result obtained in  and questioned in . The inclusion of the zero mode here would have certainly led, unambiguously, to a cancellation of the $`\beta ^1`$ dependence. But this is a very specific feature of the thermal energy, which is the only thermodynamical quantity that does not depend on the regularization scale of the zero mode.

Notice that (22) is more appropriate for a low-temperature representation of the energy, and upon the use of the Abel-Plana sum formula it yields the high-temperature result. As is well known, this is a property of this kind of sum formulas (starting with the Jacobi identity), which relate a series expansion valid for say low values of the relevant parameter with a corresponding series expansion for large values of the parameter. In spite of those formulas being identities (both expansions correspond of course to the same function), one should be careful not to mix terms of one of the expansions with terms of the other one.

It can be verified precisely that it is the third term in the Abel-Plana formula the one that exactly cancels the zero temperature contribution. In fact, the contribution of this term reads

$$i_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑x\frac{f\left(ix\right)f\left(ix\right)}{e^{2\pi x}1}=_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑x\frac{x}{e^{2\pi x}1}=\frac{1}{24}.$$
(25)
Observe also that the result given by (24) is closed, in the sense that the use of the Abel-Plana sum formula does not allow for exponential corrections, hence it holds only in the very high temperature regime.

## 5 The low-temperature regime

We will now construct an alternative representation for the thermal energy. Contrary to what has been done in the preceding section, through most of the present one we will be dealing with expressions valid in the high-temperature regime, and towards the end we will make use of the Abel-Plana formula in order to obtain the desired low-temperature expansion.111Both the high and low temperature expansions can be derived, in a completely equivalent but more direct way, from the representation of Eq. (22) in terms of the normalized Eisenstein series $`E_2(\tau )`$ .

In order to obtain, to begin with, a high-temperature representation of the free energy, we make use of the Poisson sum formula, in the form

$$\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}f\left(n\right)=\frac{f\left(0\right)}{2}+_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑xf\left(x\right)+2\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑xf\left(x\right)\mathrm{cos}\left(2\pi nx\right),$$
(26)
where here $`f\left(x\right)=\mathrm{log}\left(1e^{\beta x/a}\right)`$. A straightforward application of (26) to (20) yields

$$\mathrm{log}Z\left(\beta \right)=\frac{f\left(0\right)}{2}I\left(0\right)2\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}I\left(n\right),$$
(27)
where

$$I\left(n\right):=_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑xf\left(x\right)\mathrm{cos}\left(2\pi nx\right),n=0,1,2,3,\mathrm{}.$$
(28)
The integrals defined by $`I\left(n\right)`$ can be readily evaluated with the help of formulas to be found in , and the result is

$$\mathrm{log}Z\left(\beta \right)=\frac{f\left(0\right)}{2}+\frac{\pi ^2a}{6\beta }\frac{\beta }{24a}+\frac{1}{2}\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{coth}\left(\frac{2\pi ^2na}{\beta }\right).$$
(29)
The contribution due to $`f\left(0\right)`$ can be explicitly calculated as follows. Expanding the log as usual we can write

$$f\left(x\right)=\frac{1}{2\pi i}_{ci\mathrm{}}^{c+i\mathrm{}}𝑑\alpha \mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\alpha \right)\zeta \left(\alpha +1\right)\left(\frac{\beta x}{a}\right)^\alpha $$
(30)
where we have made use of the representation

$$e^s=\frac{1}{2\pi i}_{ci\mathrm{}}^{c+i\mathrm{}}𝑑\alpha \mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\alpha \right)s^\alpha ,s,c\text{real},\left|s\right|<1,c>1.$$
(31)
In the limit $`x0`$ the finite contribution of $`f\left(x\right)`$ is determined by the double pole of the integrand in Eq. (30) at $`\alpha =0`$,

$$\underset{x0}{lim}f\left(x\right)=f\left(0\right)=\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{\beta }{2\pi a}\right).$$
(32)
On the other hand, we can also make use of the expansion

$$\mathrm{coth}\left(x\right)=1+2\underset{p=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}e^{2px},x>0.$$
(33)
As a consequence, after discarding an unphysical (formally divergent) constant we end up with

$$\mathrm{log}Z\left(\beta \right)=\frac{\pi ^2a}{6\beta }+\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{\beta }{2\pi a}\right)\frac{\beta }{24a}+\underset{p,n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{n}e^{4\pi ^2npa/\beta }.$$
(34)
It follows that the thermal part of the free energy in this representation is given by

$`\stackrel{~}{F}\left(\beta \right)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta }}\mathrm{log}Z\left(\beta \right)`$ (35)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2a}{6\beta ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\beta }}\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{2\pi a}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{24a}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta }}{\displaystyle \underset{p,n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}e^{4\pi ^2npa/\beta }.`$
As in the case of Sect. 2, an alternative calculation can be performed using standard zeta function methods ab initio, namely, the transform (31) already in the expansion of the starting expression (LABEL:log\_thermal\_part\_function). The final result obtained is exactly the same, but the calculation is very much shortened and (as before) it avoids at every step the formation of divergences.222We owe K. Kirsten this observation and the correction of an error in our previous result.

Notice that our result, Eq. (35), has a log term and therefore does not fulfill the general relations given in , namely: that the high temperature expansion of the free energy must have the general form

$$\stackrel{~}{F}\left(\beta \right)a=a_d\left(\frac{2\pi a}{\beta }\right)^d+a_{d1}a_d\left(\frac{2\pi a}{\beta }\right)^{d2}+\mathrm{}+a_0\left(\frac{2\pi a}{\beta }\right)^0+O\left(e^{4\pi ^2a/\beta }\right),$$
(36)
the coefficients of this expansion satisfying the relation

$$\underset{k=0}{\overset{d/2}{}}\left(1\right)^k\left(2k1\right)a_{2k}=0.$$
(37)
If not for the log term, these relations would be fulfiled. Observe, however, that there would not be an immediate cancellation of the log term if we had included the zero mode contribution. In fact, the matching of the zero mode term, $`\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{\mu \beta }{2\pi }\right)`$, with the one, with opposite sign, coming from the high-$`T`$ limit, -$`\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{\beta }{2\pi a}\right)`$, is not a triviality. On the contrary, it has a very deep meaning: it takes place if and only if we prescribe that the regulating mass-dimensional parameter be set exactly equal to the inverse of the compactification length, $`\mu =1/a`$. This may certainly be viewed as a most natural choice and a physically meaningful one —being $`1/a`$ the only caracteristic dimension in our model— but even then, this is no substitute for the pertinent renormalization procedure.

The total free energy is

$$F\left(\beta \right)=E_0+\stackrel{~}{F}\left(\beta \right)=\frac{\pi ^2a}{6\beta ^2}\frac{1}{2\beta }\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{\beta }{2\pi a}\right)\frac{1}{\beta }\underset{p,n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{n}e^{4\pi ^2npa/\beta }.$$
(38)
The total energy reads

$$E\left(\beta \right)=\frac{d}{d\beta }\left(\beta F\left(\beta \right)\right)=\frac{\pi ^2a}{6\beta ^2}\frac{1}{2\beta }\frac{4\pi ^2a}{\beta ^2}\underset{p,n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}pe^{4\pi ^2npa/\beta },$$
(39)
and can be summed over $`n`$ to yield the high temperature representation

$$E\left(\beta \right)=\frac{\pi ^2a}{6\beta ^2}\frac{1}{2\beta }\frac{4\pi ^2a}{\beta ^2}\underset{p=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{p}{e^{4\pi ^2pa/\beta }1}.$$
(40)
If we now, as before, make use of the Abel-Plana sum formula (23), we obtain

$$E\left(\beta \right)=\frac{1}{24a},a/\beta \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}.$$
(41)
Notice that, as anounced above, we have here started from a high-temperature representation for the energy and now, upon the use of the Abel-Plana sum formula, we obtain the energy in the zero-temperature limit, a procedure that can be considered the reciprocal of the one employed in Ref. . Notice also that in the Abel-Plana formula, the first term leads to the zero temperature term, the second cancels out the linear contribution and the third one cancels out the Stefan-Boltzmann term.

## 6 Final remarks

In this brief analysis, we have focused on the possible contribution of the spatial zero mode to the thermal energy of a scalar field in a $`S^1\times S^1`$ geometry. We have shown that, though the thermal energy does not depend on the scaling mass $`\mu `$, the partition function, the free energy and the entropy do depend on the choice of value for this parameter. The important obstruction to be circumvented is to satisfy the third law of thermodynamics for, as it stands, the entropy (14) associated with the spatial zero mode diverges in the zero temperature limit, a fact also noticed in . It was argued in  that the scaling mass can be redefined. Unfortunately, any tentative of redefining the scaling mass, that is, of eliminating the scaling mass dependence from (14), will lead to clear contradictions among the thermodynamical relations linking the basic quantities (12), (13) and (14). In fact, the scaling mass parameter cannot be made disappear. At most, it can be traded for a characteristic mass or inverse length of the system considered (here $`1/a`$, the inverse compactification radius). A subsequent renormalization procedure seems inescapable, which makes contact in the end with physical reality.

Let us point out that, although we have here considered a very simple model, in order to keep all terms under easy control and render the argument clear, the results obtained are valid under much more general circumstances, affecting very general physical systems that develop zero modes. The treatment has been that of (a natural extension of) the zeta function regularization prescription.

To sum up, only if one restricts the analysis to the thermal energy —and nothing else— can one avoid the situation here presented, since this is the only thermodynamical quantity that does not depend on the scaling mass. It would seem, thus, that coherence forces one to set the zero mode and its thermodynamics aside. Notice also that the thermal energy, the entropy and the free energy of the zero mode do not explicitly depend on the radius (or characteristic compactification length) of the manifold. This means that (at least at the one-loop level) their contribution to any isothermal process —e.g., the only ones permitted if the system is in thermal equilibrium with a heath bath— will not be physically observable. But this consideration would be completely reversed if the necessity for setting in fact $`\mu =1/a`$ would prevail in the end (as one of the factions in the already mentioned controversy tend to support), and this would open the door to an experimental manifestation of the zero mode and to the possibility of answering in the affirmative the important question of the controverted physical relevance of these zero modes. In that sense, a fine experimental validation of Eq. (24) would be crucial (presence or absence of the linear dependence). For what we have seen, this would imply, necessarily, the breaking of the thermodynamical relations and the necessity of reformulating the third principle in the quantum field theory domain.

## Acknowledgments

The authors are indebted with K. Kirsten for several valuable observations. A.C.T. wishes to acknowledge the hospitality of the Institut d’Estudis Espacials de Catalunya (IEEC/CSIC) and the Universitat de Barcelona, Departament d’Estructura i Constituents de la Matèria and the financial support of CAPES, the Brazilian agency for faculty improvement, Grant BExt 0168-01/2. The investigation of E.E. has been supported by DGI/SGPI (Spain), project BFM2000-0810, and by CIRIT (Generalitat de Catalunya), contract 1999SGR-00257.