format: text

text:
# The orbit of the double-lined Wolf-Rayet Binary HDE 318016 (= WR 98)

## 1 Introduction

HDE 318016 was discovered to have an emission line spectrum of Wolf-Rayet type by Cannon & Mayall (1938). Because both N and C emission lines appear strong in the spectrum it was classified as WC7-N6 by Smith (1968). This star was included in the Sixth Catalogue of Galactic Wolf-Rayet Stars (van der Hucht et al. 1981) as WR 98 and classified as WN7+WC7. However WR 98 was confirmed to be a single-lined binary with a period of 47.8 days with N and C emission lines moving in phase (Niemela 1991).

The optical spectrum of WR 98 has been described by Lundström & Stenholm (1984). Conti & Massey (1989) proposed the nomeclature WN/WC for WR 98 suggesting that this star, along with others with similar emission line spectra where both N and C lines are observed, has a transition composition between the WN and WC subclasses.

Smith et al. (1996) classified WR 98 as WN8o/C7, using a new three-dimensional classification scheme, where the “o” means that no hydrogen is observed in the spectrum. Relevant parameters of WR 98 can be found in the recent VIIth Catalogue of galactic WR stars (van der Hucht 2001).

WR 98 is a probable member of the open cluster Trumpler 27 (e.g. Feinstein et al. 2000), and it has also been detected as a non-thermal radio source by Abbott et al. (1986). Furthermore, WR 98 exhibits random relatively large amplitude optical light variations ($``$ 0.1 magnitude in the Johnson V filter), typical of stars with WN8 type spectrum, but a periodicity for these variations has not been found (Marchenko et al. 1998).

In this work we present a detailed radial velocity analysis of optical spectral lines of WR 98 showing it to be a double-lined binary with high minimum masses.

## 2 Observations

### 2.1 Photographic spectra

41 photographic spectrograms were obtained at the Cerro Tololo Inter-American Observatory, Chile, between 1980 and 1984. These spectrograms were secured with the image-tube spectrograph at the Cassegrain focus of the 1-m Yale telescope. All exposures were made on Kodak IIIa-J emulsion baked in “forming gas” ($`N_2+H_2`$). The spectrograms have a reciprocal dispersion of 45 Å mm-1. A spectral region from $``$ 3600 to 5000 Å was covered. Exposure times vary between thirty and ninety minutes, giving Signal to Noise ($`S/N`$) ratios $``$ 15–30. A He-Ar lamp spectrum was used as wavelength calibration source.

A preliminary report of the binary nature of WR 98 based on these data was presented in the IAU Symp. 143 (Niemela 1991).

### 2.2 Digital spectra

28 optical digital spectral images of WR 98 were obtained with the Cassegrain Boller & Chivens (B&C) and REOSC spectrographs attached to the 2.15-m telescope at Complejo Astronómico El Leoncito (CASLEO)111operated under agreement between CONICET, SeCyT, and the Universities of La Plata, Córdoba and San Juan, Argentina in San Juan, Argentina, between 1997 and 2001. Nine spectra were secured with the B&C spectrograph, in 1997, March, and 1998, February and May. A PM 512$`\times `$512 pixels CCD, with pixel size of 20$`\mu `$m, was used as detector. The reciprocal dispersion was $`2.3`$ Å pixel-1, and the wavelength region covered was about $`\lambda \lambda `$ 3900 – 4900 Å.

Nineteen spectra were obtained with the REOSC spectrograph, between 1999, March, and 2001, October. For these spectra a TEK 1024$`\times `$1024 pixels CCD, with pixel size of 24$`\mu `$m, was used as detector. The reciprocal dispersion was $`1.6`$ Å pixel-1, and the observed wavelength region was $`\lambda \lambda `$ 3850 – 5450 Å.

We used a slit width of 2 arcsecs for all our spectra. Typical exposure times for the stellar images were between 30 and 40 minutes, resulting in spectra of signal-to-noise ratio S/N $``$ 50-100.

He-Ar (or Cu-Ar with REOSC spectrograph) comparison arc images were observed at the same telescope position as the stellar images inmediately after or before the stellar exposures. Also bias and flat-field frames were obtained each night, as well as flux and radial velocity standard stars.

All spectra were processed with IRAF 222IRAF is distributed by the NOAO, operated by the AURA, Inc, under cooperative agreement with the NSF, USA. routines at La Plata Observatory.

### 2.3 Determination of radial velocities

Radial velocities of lines in the photografic spectra of WR 98 were measured with the Grant oscilloscope comparator–microphotometer at the Instituto de Astronomía y Física del Espacio (IAFE), Buenos Aires, Argentina.

For the present study, selected photografic spectrograms and their corresponding calibrations were digitized with a Grant microphotometer, and calibrated and measured with IRAF routines.

The emission lines in the spectrum of WR 98 appear approximately gaussian in shape (cf. Fig 1). Therefore, for determination of radial velocities in our digital spectra, we measured central wavelengths of all emission lines fitting gaussian functions to the line profiles.

The journal of the spectroscopic observations with the radial velocity measurements is presented in Table LABEL:foto, where succesive columns quote: the Heliocentric Julian Date of each observation, the orbital phase, and the radial velocities for Niv, Nv, Ciii, Heii emission lines and H$`\delta `$ and H$`\gamma `$ absorption lines, respectively.

## 3 Results and Discussion

### 3.1 The spectrum

The blue optical spectrum of WR 98 is illustrated in fig 1, with identifications for main spectral features. As seen in fig 1, the spectrum of WR 98 is dominated by emission lines of Niii, Niv, Heii, Hei, with a strong Ciii feature at $`\lambda `$ 4650Å , consistent with the WN-WC classification originally proposed by Smith (1968). All of Hei emission lines in our blue spectra show P-Cygni profiles, as well as Heii 5411Å and Niv 5203Å (See Fig. 1). Relative intensities of Niii, Heii, Niv, and Ciii lines in our spectra of WR 98 indicate a spectral type WN7-8/C. No hydrogen is detected in the spectrum. Relative intensities of emission lines in the spectrum of WR 98 show no appreciable changes in the whole of our dataset spanning 20 years of observations.

We have compared WN the spectrum of WR 98 with that of stars classified as WN7o and WN8o (Smith et al. 1996), namely WR 55 and WR 123, for which we also have digital spectra observed with the same instrumental configuration as WR 98. This comparison indicates that WR 98 has a higher ionization degree than the WN8o star, because Niv emission lines in the spectrum of WR 98 are stronger and Niii emission lines are weaker. Actually, the WN spectrum of WR 98 mostly resembles that of WR 55, classified as WN7 by Smith et al. (1996). Thus our blue optical spectra of WR 98 would be best described as WN7o/WC. Fig. 2 shows the spectra of WR 123, WR 98, and WR 55 for comparison.

Several faint absorption lines were detected upon the WN emission lines in our spectra of WR 98. These absorptions are H$`\gamma `$ and H$`\beta `$, Hei $`\lambda \lambda `$ 4026, 4471, and 5015 Å and Heii $`\lambda \lambda `$ 4200, and 4540Å . As will be shown below, these lines belong to an OB companion. Because Heii absorptions appear fainter than Hei in the OB spectrum, we presume that the companion probably is of spectral type O8-9. The luminosity class is not possible to determine from our data.

### 3.2 The orbital period

Previous results (Niemela 1991) already have shown the variability of radial velocities of the emission lines in the spectrum of WR 98. We searched for periodicities of the radial velocity variations in the strongest emission lines in our spectra, namely He $`\lambda `$ 4686Å and Ciii $`\lambda `$ 4648Å using algorithms published by Marraco & Muzzio (1980) and Cincotta et al. (1995). The most probable period obtained by both codes is 47.8 days.

Using this period as initial value, we then calculated orbital solutions for the radial velocity variations of both emission lines. We found that the solutions tend to circular orbits, with the most probable value of the period as $`47.825days\pm 0.005`$. However, other periods close to this value can not be discarded.

### 3.3 The radial velocity orbit

Orbital elements for each emission line and the H$`\gamma `$ and H$`\beta `$ absorptions were determined with an improved version of the program originally published by Bertiau & Grobben (1968). With the present data, the orbits of the four emission lines, Niv, Nv, Ciii, and Heii have negligible eccentricity, thus we have fitted circular orbits for all our radial velocities. Circular orbital elements for the individual lines are listed in Table 2, where $`V_0`$ refers to the center-of-mass velocity, $`K`$, to the semi-amplitude of the radial velocity variations, and $`T_0`$ is the time when the WR star is in the front of the system.

In our orbital fits the three best defined emission lines gave equal $`T_0`$ values within errors, therefore we adopt as ephemeris for the WR 98 binary system:

T0 = 2,445,676.4+47.825E

Niv, Nv, Ciii, and Heii emission lines move in phase, indicating that they are formed in the same stellar envelope. This is also the case in the two other known WN/C binaries, namely WR 145 (MR 111) and WR 153 (GP Cep) (Massey & Grove 1989). No detectable phase delays among emission lines are present within the errors of the orbital fits.

Semi-amplitudes of the orbital motion of the Heii and Ciii emission lines appear lower than those of ionized Nitrogen emission lines. This effect is also observed in other WR binaries, e.g. WR 29 (Niemela & Gamen 2000), and may arise if the Heii and Ciii lines are partly formed in the interaction region of the binary components.

We measured H$`\gamma `$ and H$`\beta `$ absorptions in those spectra of WR 98 were this was possible. Radial velocities of these hydrogen lines phased with the binary period move anti-phased with the emission lines, thus indicating that they belong to an O type companion of the WR component in the binary system. Fig. 3 depicts the behaviour of the H$`\beta `$ absorption line upon the Heii 4859 Å emission in four different binary phases, illustrating the antiphased movement of the absorption and emission lines.

The circular orbital elements for the hydrogen absorption lines are included in Table 2, and depicted in Fig 4.

The orbital semi-amplitudes of the radial velocity variations of the absorption lines and of Niv, Nv, Heii and Ciii emission lines indicate mass-ratios ($`_{WR}/_O=q`$) between 1 and 1.8. If a monotonic outward decreasing temperature gradient exists in the expanding WR envelope, we expect that the highest ionization emission, namely Nv, represents better the orbital motion of the WN/C component, thus a value of $`q1`$ seems more plausible. However, taking into account the rather high uncertainties in the radial velocity values of the absorption lines, these mass–ratios should not be overinterpreted. Values of minimum masses and $`q`$ for both components are tabulated for each emission line in Table 2.

We also estimated the radii of the critical Roche lobes using the expression given by Paczynski (1971), which resulted $`r_{RL}sini=79.5R_{}`$ for both components. Each component of the WR 98 binary system seems to be well inside its critical Roche radius.

### 3.4 The radial velocity analysis of P-Cygni absorption lines

We analysed the radial velocities of the three strongest P-Cygni absorption lines in our spectra of WR 98, namely Hei 3888Å, 4471Å, and 5015Å. As the Hei 3888Å absorption presents a rather asymmetric profile, we measured the barycenter of this line. Because Hei 5015Å was not observed in the wavelengh range of the photografic spectra, the radial velocities of this line were only determined in the digital spectra. The three P-Cygni absorption lines follow the orbital motion of the WN/C component of the binary, as illustrated in Fig 5.

Circular orbits were fitted to the radial velocity variations of the P–Cyg absorptions. We obtained similar systemic velocities for the three absorption lines: $`v_01130\pm 15kms^1`$. This systemic velocity could be considered as a lower limit of the terminal velocity of the WR stellar wind, and in fact the value agrees with the determination of terminal wind velocity of WR 98 by Eenens & Williams (1994).

Semi-amplitudes of the radial velocity variations of the P–Cyg absorptions gave different values, namely 65 and 104 $`kms^1`$ for Hei $`\lambda \lambda `$ 3888, and 4471 and 5015Å respectively. The lower semi-amplitude of the orbital motion of Hei 3888Å could be indicating that this line has another component, possibly originating in a common expanding envelope surrounding the binary, and which is not posible to deblend in our spectra. Similar behavior of Hei $`\lambda `$ 3888Å low-energy metastable absorption line is observed in the spectra of other WR binary stars, e.g. HD 214419 (= WR 155) (See Leung et al. 1983).

## 4 Conclusions

Our radial velocity analysis of lines in the spectrum of WR 98 based on a long term spectroscopic database confirms that this star is a binary system with a period of 47.825 days. Nitrogen and Carbon emission lines in the spectrum move in phase, which indicates that they are formed in the same stellar envelope.

We have detected faint absorption lines upon the WR emissions in our spectra. These absorptions belong to an O-type component of the binary, with orbital motion anti–phased with the WR emissions. Thus, WR 98 is one more member of the very limited sample of WR+OB double-lined binaries, the first one with a WR component which appears to be at an intermediate evolutionary phase between the WN and WC stages.

The minimun masses indicated by our radial velocity orbit are quite high. Adopting the radial velocity orbit of the Nv emission as representative of the motion of the WR component of the binary, we obtain values of minimum masses of 28 and 27 $`M_{}`$ for the WR and OB components, respectively. Therefore, the component which at present shows the WR type spectrum, must have been very massive during its main sequence stage. This is in agreement with the estimate of 80 $`M_{}`$ for the cluster turn-off of Tr 27 (Massey et al. 2001), of which WR 98 is a probable member.

A comparison of the WN spectrum of WR 98 with other stars classified as WN8o (WR 123) and WN7o (WR 55), shows a remarkable resemblance of WR 98 with the WN7o spectrum, as seen in the Fig. 3. In our data, the classification of WR 98 as WN7/C appears more likely.

P-Cygni absorption lines of Hei in our spectra of WR 98 also follow the orbital motion of the WR component of the binary, thus these lines are formed in the expanding atmosphere of the WR star. We determined a systemic velocity of the P–Cyg absorptions of $`1130kms^1`$ for WR 98, which is in good agreement with the value of the terminal wind velocity published by Eenens & Williams (1994).

Acknowledgements

We are indebted to Federico Bareilles for his support in computer facilities. We thank the Directors and staff of CTIO and CASLEO for the use of their facilities. The CCD and data aqcuisition system at CASLEO has been partly financed by R.M. Rich through U.S. NSF Grant AST-90-15827. This research was supported in part through IALP-CONICET, Argentina.


text:
# Singularities of Codimension Two Mean Curvature Flow of Symplectic Surfaces

## 1 Introduction

Geometers have been interested in constructing minimal surfaces for long time. One possible way to produce such surfaces is to deform a given surface by its mean curvature vector. More precisely, the surface evolves in the gradient flow of the area functional, and such a flow is the so-called mean curvature flow. A mean curvature flow, however, develops singularity after finite time in general \[H2\]. It is therefore desirable to understand behavior of the flow near the singular points (cf. \[B\], \[CL\], \[E1-E2\], \[H1-H3\], \[HS1-HS2\], \[I1-I2\], \[Wa1\], \[Wh1-Wh2\] and so on). We consider this problem, in this paper, for compact symplectic surfaces moving by mean curvature flow in a Kähler-Einstein surface. It was observed in \[CT2\] that symplectic surface remains symplectic along the flow (also see \[CL\], \[Wa1\]), and the flow has long time existence in the graphic case as discussed in \[CLT\] and \[Wa2\]. One of our motivations of considering symplectic surfaces is inspired by the symplectic isotopic problem for symplectic surfaces in Del Pezzo surfaces, i.e., those complex surfaces with positive first Chern class. It was conjectured in \[T\] that every embedded orientable closed symplectic surface in a compact Kähler-Einstein surface is isotopic to a symplectic minimal surface in a suitable sense. When Kähler-Einstein surfaces are of positive scalar curvature, this was proved for lower degrees by using pseudo-holomorphic curves (cf. \[ST\], \[Sh\]). It would be interesting to have a proof of this result, even for lower degrees, by using the mean curvature flow. In the negative scalar curvature case, Arezzo \[Ar\] pointed out that a symplectic minimal surface may not be holomorphic even it represents a $`(1,1)`$-type class, by constructing examples of symplectic minimal surfaces which are not holomorphic. Moving Lagrange surfaces by mean curvature flow was studied by Smoczyk \[Sm1-Sm3\].

Let $`M`$ be a compact Kähler-Einstein surface. On $`M`$, let $`\omega `$ be the Kähler form, $`,`$ the Kähler metric and $`J`$ the complex structure which is compatible with $`\omega `$ and $`,`$, i.e., for any tangent vectors $`X,Y`$ to $`M`$ at an arbitrary point in $`M`$,

$`X,Y`$ $`=`$ $`\omega (X,JY),`$
$`\omega (X,Y)`$ $`=`$ $`\omega (JX,JY).`$
For a compact oriented real surface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ without boundary which is smoothly immersed in $`M`$, one defines, following \[CW\], the Kähler angle $`\alpha `$ of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ in $`M`$ by

$$\omega |_\mathrm{\Sigma }=\mathrm{cos}\alpha d\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma },$$

where $`d\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is the area element of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ in the induced metric from $`,`$. As a function on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, $`\alpha `$ is continuous everywhere and is smooth possibly except at the complex or anti-complex points of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, i.e. where $`\alpha =0`$ or $`\pi `$. We say that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is a holomorphic curve if $`\mathrm{cos}\alpha 1`$, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is a Lagrangian surface if $`\mathrm{cos}\alpha 0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is a symplectic surface if $`\mathrm{cos}\alpha >0`$.

Given an immersion $`F_0:\mathrm{\Sigma }M`$, we consider a one-parameter family of immersions $`F_t=F(,t):\mathrm{\Sigma }M`$, and denote the image surfaces by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t=F_t(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$. The immersed surfaces $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ satisfy a mean curvature flow if

$$\{\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{d}{dt}F(x,t)=𝐇(x,t)\hfill & & \\ F(x,0)=F_0(x),\hfill & & \end{array}$$
(1)
where $`𝐇(x,t)`$ is the mean curvature vector of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ at $`F(x,t)`$ in $`M`$.

The standard parabolic theory implies that the mean curvature flow (1) has a smooth solution for short time. More precisely, there exists $`T>0`$ such that (1) has a smooth solution in the time interval $`[0,T)`$. If the second fundamental form $`|𝐀|^2`$ on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ is bounded uniformly in $`t`$ near $`T`$, then the solution can be extended smoothly to $`[0,T+ϵ)`$ for some $`ϵ>0`$. However, in general $`\mathrm{max}_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}|𝐀|^2`$ becomes unbounded as $`tT`$. In this case we say that the mean curvature flow blows up at $`T`$; moreover, to classify the singularities of mean curvature flows, Huisken, according to the blowing up rate of $`|𝐀|`$, introduced

###### Definition 1.1

(Huisken \[H1\]) On a mean curvature flow $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$, suppose that

$$\underset{tT^{}}{lim}\underset{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}{\mathrm{max}}|𝐀|^2=\mathrm{}.$$

If there exists a positive constant $`C`$ such that

$$\underset{tT^{}}{lim\; sup}\left((Tt)\underset{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}{\mathrm{max}}|𝐀|^2\right)C,$$

the mean curvature flow $`F`$ has a Type I singularity at $`T`$; otherwise it has a Type II singularity at $`T`$.

In the codimension one case, singularities of mean curvature flows have been studied in depth (cf. \[E1\], \[H1-H3\], \[HS1-HS2\], \[I1-I2\], \[Wh2\]). For higher codimesions, if the initial compact surface is symplectic in a compact Kähler-Einstein surface, the motion of the mean curvature flow preserves symplecticity of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ as long as the smooth solution exists; and furthermore the flow does not develop any Type I singularities (cf. \[CT2\], \[CL\], \[Wa1\]).

In this paper, we shall study the Type II singularities of the mean curvature flow of a compact symplectic surface in a compact Kähler-Einstein surface. Especially, we shall focus on the structure of tangent cones of the mean curvature flow where a singularity occurs at the first singular time $`T<\mathrm{}`$.

To describe the tangent cones, suppose $`(X_0,T)`$ is a singular point of the flow (1), i.e. $`|𝐀(x,t)|`$ becomes unbounded when $`(x,t)(X_0,T)`$. For an arbitrary sequence of numbers $`\lambda \mathrm{}`$ and any $`t<0`$, if $`T+\lambda ^2t>0`$ we set

$$F_\lambda (x,t)=\lambda (F(x,T+\lambda ^2t)X_0).$$

We denote the scaled surface by $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda ,d\mu _t^\lambda )`$. If the initial surface is symplectic, it is proved in Lemma 2.3 that there is a subsequence $`\lambda _i\mathrm{}`$ such that for any $`t<0`$, $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^{\lambda _i},d\mu _t^{\lambda _i})`$ converges to $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}},d\mu ^{\mathrm{}})`$ in the sense of measures; the limit $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ is called a tangent cone arising from the rescaling $`\lambda `$, or simply a $`\lambda `$ tangent cone at $`(X_0,T)`$. This tangent cone is independent of $`t`$ as shown in Lemma 2.3. There is also a time dependent scaling which we would like to consider

$$\stackrel{~}{F}(,s)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2(Tt)}}F(,t),$$
(2)
where $`s=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}(Tt)`$, $`c_0s<\mathrm{}`$. Here we have chosen the coordinates so that $`X_0=0`$. Rescaling of this type arises naturally in classifying Type I and Type II singularities for mean curvature flows \[H2\]. Denote $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_s`$ the rescaled surface by $`\stackrel{~}{F}(,s)`$. If a subsequence of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_s`$ converges in measures to a limit $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{\mathrm{}}`$, then the limit is called a tangent cone arising from the time dependent scaling at $`(X_0,T)`$, or simply a $`t`$ tangent cone. In this paper, a tangent cone of the mean curvature flow at $`(X_0,T)`$ means either a $`\lambda `$ tangent cone or a $`t`$ tangent cone at $`(X_0,T)`$.

The main result of this paper is

###### Theorem 1.2

Let $`M`$ be a compact Kähler-Einstein surface. If the initial compact surface is symplectic and $`T>0`$ is the first blow-up time of the mean curvature flow (1) and $`(X_0,T)`$ is a singular point, then the tangent cone of the mean curvature flow at $`(X_0,T)`$ consists of a finite union of more than one 2-planes in $`𝐑^4`$ which are complex in a complex structure on $`𝐑^4`$.

It is interesting to compare our result with the one obtained by Morgan in \[M\] (also see \[MW\]): the tangent cone to an oriented area minimizing surface in $`𝐑^4`$ consists of 2-planes which are complex in $`𝐑^4`$ (see Remark 6.8).

An important technical device in the present paper is a monotonicity formula, which is established in \[CL\] and also see Proposition 2.1, for

$$_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}\frac{1}{\mathrm{cos}\alpha }\rho (F,t)\varphi 𝑑\mu _t,$$

where $`F:\mathrm{\Sigma }_0\times [0,T)M`$ is the mean curvature flow, $`\varphi `$ is a cut-off function supported in a small geodesic ball in $`M`$ which is contained in a single coordinate chart, and $`\rho `$ is defined by the backward heat kernel on $`𝐑^4`$. The weight function $`1/\mathrm{cos}\alpha `$ captures some key geometric information of the symplectic surfaces in the flow, and this quantity is sensitive to orientation.

The organization of the paper is follows. From section 2 to section 5 of this paper, we consider the $`\lambda `$ scaling near a singular point $`(X_0,T)`$. In section 2, first we derive four integral estimates in Proposition 2.2, by using the weighted monotonicity formula (10). These estimates play a crucial role in our analysis of the tangent cones. Then we prove in Lemma 2.3 that a subsequence of the rescaled surfaces $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda `$ converges in measure to a limit $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$, which is independent of $`t`$. In section 3, we prove that the tangent cone $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ is rectifiable. This is done by first showing that the density function of the tangent cone exists and then applying a local regularity theorem of White for classical mean curvature flows (cf. \[Wh1\], \[E1\]) to obtain a positive lower bound for the density function of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$, and then using Priess’s theorem in \[P\] to conclude the rectifiability of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$. The positive lower bound can also be obtained by using the isoperimetric inequality (cf. the proof of Lemma 6.4). In section 4, using Proposition 2.2 and Allard’s compactness theorem in \[A\] we first show, in Proposition 4.2, that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ is stationary. Then we prove that the restriction of the Kähler form on the scaled surface converges to the restriction of a constant 2-form $`\omega _0`$ in $`𝐑^4`$ along $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$, and further we prove that $`\omega _0|_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}=\theta _0d\mu ^{\mathrm{}}`$ for an $`^2`$ a.e. constant function $`\theta _0`$ on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$. A theorem of Harvey-Shiffman in \[HS\] then implies that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ is a holomorphic subvariety. In section 5, we further use Proposition 2.2 and Allard’s compactness theorem to conclude $`F_{\mathrm{}}^{}`$ equals zero and then show $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ is flat away from its singular locus, which is a collection of finitely many points. Section 6 concerns with the time dependent scaling. The arguments essentially proceed in a similar fashion as those in the previous sections.

## 2 Monotonicity formula and integral estimates

Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t=F(\mathrm{\Sigma },t)`$ be the family of immersed surfaces, which are determined by the mean curvature flow $`F`$, in the 4-dimensional manifold $`M`$. Denote the Riemannian metric on $`M`$ by $`,`$. In a normal coordinate chart around a point in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$, the induced metric on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ from $`,`$ is given by

$$g_{ij}=_iF,_jF,$$

where $`_i`$ ($`i=1,2`$) are the partial derivatives with respect to the local coordinates. In the sequel, we denote by $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $``$ the Laplace operator and covariant derivative for the induced metric on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ respectively. We choose a local field of orthonormal frames $`e_1,e_2`$, $`v_1,v_2`$ of $`M`$ along $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ such that $`e_1,e_2`$ are tangent vectors of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ and $`v_1,v_2`$ are in the normal bundle over $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$. The second fundemantal form $`𝐀`$ and the mean curvature vector $`𝐇`$ of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ can be expressed, in the local frame, as

$`𝐀`$ $`=`$ $`A^\alpha v_\alpha `$
$`𝐇`$ $`=`$ $`H^\alpha v_\alpha `$
where and throughout this paper all repeated indices are summed over suitable range. For each $`\alpha `$, the coefficient $`A^\alpha `$ is a $`2\times 2`$ matrix $`(h_{ij}^\alpha )`$. By Weingarten’s equation (cf. \[Sp\]), we have

$$h_{ij}^\alpha =_iv_\alpha ,_jF=_jv_\alpha ,_iF=h_{ji}^\alpha .$$

The trace and the norm of the second fundamental form of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ in $`M`$ are:

$$H^\alpha =g^{ij}h_{ij}^\alpha =h_{ii}^\alpha $$

$$|𝐀|^2=\underset{\alpha }{}|A^\alpha |^2=g^{ij}g^{kl}h_{ik}^\alpha h_{jl}^\alpha =h_{ik}^\alpha h_{ik}^\alpha .$$

The area element of the induced metric $`g_{ij}`$ on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ is $`\sqrt{det(g_{ij})}dxdy`$. Along the mean curvature flow, it is well known that

$$\frac{d}{dt}\sqrt{det(g_{ij})}=|𝐇|^2\sqrt{det(g_{ij})}.$$

Logarithmic integration implies that $`F`$ remains immersed as long as the smooth solution of (1) exists.

Let $`J_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}`$ be an almost complex structure in a tubular neighborhood of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ on $`M`$ with

$$\{\begin{array}{cccc}J_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}e_1& =\hfill & e_2& \\ J_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}e_2& =\hfill & e_1& \\ J_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}v_1& =\hfill & v_2& \\ J_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}v_2& =\hfill & v_1.& \end{array}$$
(3)
It is not difficult to verify (cf. Lemma 3.1 in \[CL\]), with $`\overline{}`$ being the covariant derivative of the metric $`,`$ on $`M`$, that

$`|\overline{}J_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}|^2`$ $`=`$ $`|h_{11}^2+h_{12}^1|^2+|h_{21}^2+h_{22}^1|^2+|h_{12}^2h_{11}^1|^2+|h_{22}^2h_{21}^1|^2`$ (4)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}|𝐇|^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(((h_{11}^1+h_{22}^1)+2(h_{12}^2h_{22}^1))^2+(h_{11}^2+h_{22}^2+2h_{21}^12h_{11}^2)^2\right)`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}|𝐇|^2.`$
Let $`H(𝐗,𝐗_0,t)`$ be the backward heat kernel on $`𝐑^4`$. Define

$$\rho (𝐗,𝐗_0,t,t_0)=4\pi (t_0t)H(𝐗,𝐗_0,t)=\frac{1}{4\pi (t_0t)}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{|𝐗𝐗_0|^2}{4(t_0t)}\right)$$

for $`t<t_0`$. Let $`i_M`$ be the injective radius of $`M^4`$. We choose a cut off function $`\varphi C_0^{\mathrm{}}(B_{2r}(𝐗_0))`$ with $`\varphi 1`$ in $`B_r(𝐗_0)`$, where $`𝐗_0M`$, $`0<2r<i_M`$. Choose a normal coordinates in $`B_{2r}(𝐗_0)`$ and express $`F`$, by the coordinates $`(F^1,F^2,F^3,F^4)`$, as a surface in $`𝐑^4`$. We define

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(𝐗_0,t_0,t)=_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}\varphi (F)\rho (F,𝐗_0,t,t_0)𝑑\mu _t.$$
(5)
Huisken derived the following useful monotonicity formula in \[H1\]: there are positive constants $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$ depending only on $`M^4`$, $`F_0`$ and $`r`$ where $`r`$ is the constant in the definition of $`\varphi `$, such that

$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}\left(e^{c_1\sqrt{t_0t}}\mathrm{\Phi }(𝐗_0,t_0,t)\right)`$ $``$ $`e^{c_1\sqrt{t_0t}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}}\varphi \rho (F,𝐗_0,t,t_0)\left|𝐇+{\displaystyle \frac{(F𝐗_0)^{}}{2(t_0t)}}\right|^2𝑑\mu _t`$ (6)
$`+c_2(t_0t).`$
Note that $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$ equal 0 when $`M`$ is a Euclidean space.

When $`M`$ is a Kähler-Einstein surface with scalar curvature $`R`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ evolves under the mean curvature flow, the Kähler angle $`\alpha `$ of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ in $`M`$ satisfies the parabolic equation (cf. \[CL\], \[CT\]):

$$\left(\frac{}{t}\mathrm{\Delta }\right)\mathrm{cos}\alpha =|\overline{}J_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}|^2\mathrm{cos}\alpha +R\mathrm{sin}^2\alpha \mathrm{cos}\alpha .$$
(7)
Suppose that the initial surface is symplectic, i.e., $`\mathrm{cos}\alpha (,0)`$ has a positive lower bound. Then by applying the parabolic maximum principle to the evolution equaiotn (7), one concludes that $`\mathrm{cos}\alpha `$ remains positive as long as the mean curvature flow has a smooth solution, no matter $`R`$ is positive, 0 or negative (cf. \[CT2\], \[CL\], \[Wa1\]).

Let $`R_0=\mathrm{max}\{0,R\}`$ and set

$$v(x,t)=e^{R_0t}\mathrm{cos}\alpha (x,t).$$

By (7), we have

$$\left(\frac{}{t}\mathrm{\Delta }\right)\frac{1}{v}|\overline{}J_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}|^2\frac{1}{v}\frac{2}{v^3}|v|^2.$$
(8)
Along the flow, we introduce a function

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(𝐗_0,t_0,t)=_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}\frac{1}{v}\varphi \rho (F,𝐗_0,t,t_0)𝑑\mu _t.$$
(9)
The following weighted monotonicity formula in \[CL\] will play a crucial role in this paper.

###### Proposition 2.1

(Weighted Monotonicity Formula) If the initial compact surface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$ is symplectic in a Kähler-Einstein surface $`M`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ evolves under the mean curvature flow (1), then

$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}\left(e^{c_1\sqrt{t_0t}}\mathrm{\Psi }(X_0,t_0,t)\right)`$ $``$ $`e^{c_1\sqrt{t_0t}}\left({\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{v}}\varphi \rho (F,𝐗_0,t,t_0)\right|𝐇+{\displaystyle \frac{(F𝐗_0)^{}}{2(t_0t)}}|^2d\mu _t`$ (10)
$`+{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{v}}\varphi \rho (F,𝐗_0,t,t_0)\left|\overline{}J_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}\right|^2𝑑\mu _t`$
$`+{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}}{\displaystyle \frac{2}{v^3}}|v|^2\varphi \rho (F,𝐗_0,t,t_0)d\mu _t)+c_2(t_0t).`$
Here the positive constants $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$ depend on $`M`$, $`F_0`$ and $`r`$ where $`r`$ is the constant in the definition of $`\varphi `$.

Suppose that $`(X_0,T)`$ is a singular point of the mean curvature flow (1). We now describe the rescaling process around $`(X_0,T)`$. For any $`t<0`$, we set

$$F_\lambda (x,t)=\lambda (F(x,T+\lambda ^2t)X_0),$$

where $`\lambda `$ are positive constants which go to infinity. The scaled surface is denoted by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda =F_\lambda (\mathrm{\Sigma },t)`$ on which $`d\mu _t^\lambda `$ is the area element obtained from $`d\mu _t`$. If $`g^\lambda `$ is the metric on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda `$, it is clear that

$$g_{ij}^\lambda =\lambda ^2g_{ij},(g^\lambda )^{ij}=\lambda ^2g^{ij}.$$

We therefore have

$`{\displaystyle \frac{F_\lambda }{t}}`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda ^1{\displaystyle \frac{F}{t}}`$ (11)
$`𝐇_\lambda `$ $`=`$ $`\lambda ^1𝐇`$ (12)
$`|𝐀_\lambda |^2`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda ^2|𝐀|^2.`$ (13)
It follows that the scaled surface also evolves by a mean curvature flow

$$\frac{F_\lambda }{t}=𝐇_\lambda .$$
(14)
###### Proposition 2.2

Let $`M`$ be a Kähler-Einstein surface. If the initial compact surface is symplectic, then for any $`R>0`$ and any $`\mathrm{}<s_1<s_2<0`$, we have

$$_{s_1}^{s_2}_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda B_R(0)}|\overline{}J_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda }|^2𝑑\mu _t^\lambda 𝑑t0\mathrm{as}\lambda \mathrm{},$$
(15)
$$_{s_1}^{s_2}_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda B_R(0)}|\mathrm{cos}\alpha _\lambda |^2𝑑\mu _t^\lambda 𝑑t0\mathrm{as}\lambda \mathrm{},$$
(16)
$$_{s_1}^{s_2}_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda B_R(0)}|𝐇_\lambda |^2𝑑\mu _t^\lambda 𝑑t0\mathrm{as}\lambda \mathrm{},$$
(17)
and

$$_{s_1}^{s_2}_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda B_R(0)}|F_\lambda ^{}|^2𝑑\mu _t^\lambda 𝑑t0\mathrm{as}\lambda \mathrm{}.$$
(18)
Proof: For any $`R>0`$, we choose a cut-off function $`\varphi _RC_0^{\mathrm{}}(B_{2R}(0))`$ with $`\varphi _R1`$ in $`B_R(0)`$, where $`B_r(0)`$ is the metric ball centered at $`0`$ with radius $`r`$ in $`𝐑^4`$. For any fixed $`t<0`$, the mean curvature flow (1) has a smooth solution near $`T+\lambda ^2t<T`$ for sufficiently large $`\lambda `$, since $`T>0`$ is the first blow-up time of the flow. It is clear

$`{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{v_\lambda }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{0t}}\varphi _R(F_\lambda )\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{|F_\lambda |^2}{4(0t)}}\right)𝑑\mu _t^\lambda `$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_{T+\lambda ^2t}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{v_\lambda }}\varphi (F_\lambda ){\displaystyle \frac{1}{T(T+\lambda ^2t)}}\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{|F(x,T+\lambda ^2t)X_0|^2}{4(T(T+\lambda ^2t))}}\right)𝑑\mu _t,`$
where $`\varphi `$ is the function defined in the definition of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$. Note that $`T+\lambda ^2tT`$ for any fixed $`t`$ as $`\lambda \mathrm{}`$. By (10),

$$\frac{}{t}\left(e^{c_1\sqrt{t_0t}}\mathrm{\Psi }\right)c_2(t_0t),$$

and it then follows that $`lim_{tt_0}e^{c_1\sqrt{t_0t}}\mathrm{\Psi }`$ exists. This implies, by taking $`t_0=T`$ and $`t=T+\lambda ^2s`$, that for any fixed $`s_1`$ and $`s_2`$ with $`\mathrm{}<s_1<s_2<0`$,

$`e^{c_1\sqrt{T(T+\lambda ^2s_2)}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_{s_2}^\lambda }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{v_\lambda }}\varphi _R{\displaystyle \frac{1}{0s_2}}\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{|F_\lambda |^2}{4(0s_2)}}\right)𝑑\mu _{s_2}^\lambda `$ (19)
$`e^{c_1\sqrt{T(T+\lambda ^2s_1)}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_{s_1}^\lambda }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{v_\lambda }}\varphi _R{\displaystyle \frac{1}{0s_1}}\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{|F_\lambda |^2}{4(0s_1)}}\right)𝑑\mu _{s_1}^\lambda `$
$``$ $`0\text{as}\lambda \mathrm{}.`$
Integrating (10) from $`s_1`$ to $`s_2`$ yields

$`e^{c_1\sqrt{\lambda ^2s_2}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_{s_2}^\lambda }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{v_\lambda }}\varphi _R{\displaystyle \frac{1}{0s_2}}\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{|F_\lambda |^2}{4(0s_2)}}\right)𝑑\mu _{s_2}^\lambda `$ (20)
$`+e^{c_1\sqrt{\lambda ^2s_1}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_{s_1}^\lambda }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{v_\lambda }}\varphi _R{\displaystyle \frac{1}{0s_1}}\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{|F_\lambda |^2}{4(0s_1)}}\right)𝑑\mu _{s_1}^\lambda `$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle _{s_1}^{s_2}}e^{c_1\sqrt{\lambda ^2t}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{v_\lambda }}\varphi _R\rho (F_\lambda ,t)\left|𝐇_k+{\displaystyle \frac{(F_k)^{}}{2(t_0t)}}\right|^2𝑑\mu _t^\lambda `$
$`+{\displaystyle _{s_1}^{s_2}}e^{c_1\sqrt{\lambda ^2t}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{v_\lambda }}\varphi _R\rho (F_k,t)|\overline{}J_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda }|^2𝑑\mu _t^\lambda `$
$`+{\displaystyle _{s_1}^{s_2}}e^{c_1\sqrt{\lambda ^2t}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda }}{\displaystyle \frac{2}{v_\lambda ^3}}|v_\lambda |^2\varphi _R\rho (F_\lambda ,t)𝑑\mu _t^\lambda `$
$`c_2\lambda ^2(s_2^2s_1^2).`$
Putting (19) and (20) together, we have

$$\underset{\lambda \mathrm{}}{lim}_{s_1}^{s_2}_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda }\varphi _R\rho (F_k,t)\left|\overline{}J_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda }\right|^2𝑑\mu _t^\lambda =0,$$

and

$$\underset{\lambda \mathrm{}}{lim}_{s_1}^{s_2}_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda }\left|v_\lambda \right|^2\varphi _R\rho (F_\lambda ,t)𝑑\mu _t^\lambda =0,$$

which yield (15) and (16) respectively, and

$$\underset{\lambda \mathrm{}}{lim}_{s_1}^{s_2}_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda }\varphi _R\rho (F_\lambda ,t)\left|𝐇_\lambda +\frac{(F_\lambda )^{}}{2(t_0t)}\right|^2𝑑\mu _t^\lambda =0.$$
(21)
Finally, (4) and (15) imply (17), and (17) and (21) imply (18). Q.E.D.

###### Lemma 2.3

For any $`\lambda ,R>0`$ and any $`t<0`$,

$$\mu _t^\lambda (\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda B_R(0))CR^2,$$
(22)
where $`B_R(0)`$ is a metric ball in $`𝐑^4`$ and $`C>0`$ is independent of $`\lambda `$. For any sequence $`\lambda _i\mathrm{}`$, there is a subsequence $`\lambda _k\mathrm{}`$ such that $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^{\lambda _k},\mu _t^{\lambda _k})(\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}},\mu ^{\mathrm{}})`$ in the sense of measure, for any fixed $`t<0`$, where $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}},\mu ^{\mathrm{}})`$ is independent of $`t`$. The multiplicity of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ is finite.

Proof: We shall first prove the inequality (22). We shall use $`C`$ below for uniform positive constants which are independent of $`R`$ and $`\lambda `$. Straightforward computation shows

$`\mu _t^\lambda (\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda B_R(0))`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda ^2{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_{T+\lambda ^2t}B_{\lambda ^1R}(X_0)}}𝑑\mu _t`$
$`=`$ $`R^2(\lambda ^1R)^2{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_{T+\lambda ^2t}B_{\lambda ^1R}(X_0)}}𝑑\mu _t`$
$``$ $`CR^2{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_{T+\lambda ^2t}B_{\lambda ^1R}(X_0)}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi (\lambda ^1R)^2}}e^{\frac{|XX_0|^2}{4(\lambda ^1R)^2}}𝑑\mu _t`$
$`=`$ $`CR^2\mathrm{\Phi }(X_0,T+(\lambda ^1R)^2+\lambda ^2t,T+\lambda ^2t).`$
By the monotonicity inequality (6), we have

$`\mu _t^\lambda (\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda B_R(0))`$ $``$ $`CR^2\left(\mathrm{\Phi }(X_0,T+(\lambda ^1R)^2+\lambda ^2t,T/2)+C\right)`$
$``$ $`C{\displaystyle \frac{R^2}{T}}\left(\mu _{T/2}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{T/2})+C\right).`$
Since

$$\frac{}{t}\mu _t(\mathrm{\Sigma }_t)=_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}|𝐇|^2𝑑\mu _t,$$

we can now conclude (22)

$$\mu _t^\lambda (\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda B_R(0))CR^2.$$

By (22), the compactness theorem of the measures (c.f. \[Si1\], 4.4) and a diagonal subsequence argument, we conclude that there is a subsequence $`\lambda _k\mathrm{}`$ such that $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{t_0}^{\lambda _k},\mu _{t_0}^{\lambda _k})(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{t_0}^{\mathrm{}},\mu _{t_0}^{\mathrm{}})`$ in the sense of measures for a fixed $`t_0<0`$.

We now show that, for any $`t<0`$, the subsequence $`\lambda _k`$ which we have chosen above satisfies $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^{\lambda _k},\mu _t^{\lambda _k})(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{t_0}^{\mathrm{}},\mu _{t_0}^{\mathrm{}})`$ in the sense of measure. And consequently the limiting surface $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{t_0}^{\mathrm{}},\mu _{t_0}^{\mathrm{}})`$ is independent of $`t_0`$. Recall that the following standard formula for mean curvature flows

$$\frac{d}{dt}_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda }\varphi 𝑑\mu _t^\lambda =_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^\lambda }\left(\varphi |𝐇_\lambda |^2+\varphi 𝐇_\lambda \right)𝑑\mu _t^\lambda $$
(23)
is valid for any test function $`\varphi C_0^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$ (cf. (1) in Section 6 in \[I2\] and \[B\] in the varifold setting).

Then for any given $`t<0`$ integrating (23) yields

$`{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^{\lambda _k}}}\varphi 𝑑\mu _t^{\lambda _k}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_{t_0}^{\lambda _k}}}\varphi 𝑑\mu _{t_0}^{\lambda _k}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _t^{t_0}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^{\lambda _k}}}\left(\varphi |𝐇_{\lambda _k}|^2+\varphi 𝐇_{\lambda _k}\right)𝑑\mu _t^{\lambda _k}𝑑t`$
$``$ $`0\mathrm{as}k\mathrm{}\mathrm{by}(\text{17}).`$
So, for any fixed $`t<0`$, $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^{\lambda _k},\mu _t^{\lambda _k})(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{t_0}^{\mathrm{}},\mu _{t_0}^{\mathrm{}})`$ in the sense of measures as $`k\mathrm{}`$. We denote $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{t_0}^{\mathrm{}},\mu _{t_0}^{\mathrm{}})`$ by $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}},\mu ^{\mathrm{}})`$, which is independent of $`t_0`$.

The inequality (22) yields a uniform upper bound on $`R^2\mu _t^{\lambda _k}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^{\lambda _k}B_R(0))`$, which yields finiteness of the multiplicity of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$. Q.E.D.

###### Definition 2.4

Let $`(X_0,T)`$ be a singular point of the mean curvature flow of a closed symplectic surface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$ in a compact Kähler-Einstein surface $`M`$. We call $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}},d\mu ^{\mathrm{}})`$ obtained in Lemma 2.3 a $`\lambda `$ tangent cone of the mean curvature flow $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ at $`(X_0,T)`$.

## 3 Rectifiability of the $`\lambda `$ tangent cones

In this section we shall show that the $`\lambda `$ tangent cone $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ is $`^2`$-rectifiable, where $`^2`$ is the 2-dimensional Hausdorff measure.

###### Proposition 3.1

Let $`M`$ be a compact Kähler-Einstein surface. If the initial compact surface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$ is symplectic, then the $`\lambda `$ tangent cone $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}},d\mu ^{\mathrm{}})`$ of the mean curvature flow at $`(X_0,T)`$ is $`^2`$-rectifiable.

Proof: We set

$$A_R=\left\{t(\mathrm{},0)\right|\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim}_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^kB_R(0)}|𝐇_k|^2𝑑\mu _t^k0\},$$

and

$$A=\underset{R>0}{}A_R.$$

Denote the measures of $`A_R`$ and $`A`$ by $`|A_R|`$ and $`|A|`$ respectively. It is clear from (17) that $`|A_R|=0`$ for any $`R>0`$. So $`|A|=0`$.

For any $`\xi \mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$, choose $`\xi _k\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k`$ with $`\xi _k\xi `$ as $`k\mathrm{}`$. By the monotonicity identity (17.4) in \[Si1\], we have

$`\sigma ^2\mu _t^k(B_\sigma (\xi _k))`$ $`=`$ $`\rho ^2\mu _t^k(B_\rho (\xi _k)){\displaystyle _{B_\rho (\xi _k)B_\sigma (\xi _k)}}{\displaystyle \frac{|D^{}r|^2}{r^2}}𝑑\mu _t^k`$ (24)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _{B_\rho (\xi _k)}}(x\xi _k)𝐇_k\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{r_\sigma ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho ^2}}\right)𝑑\mu _t^k,`$
for all $`0<\sigma \rho `$, where $`\mu _t^k(B_\sigma (\xi _k))`$ is the area of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^kB_\sigma ((\xi _k))`$, $`r=r(x)`$ is the distance from $`\xi _k`$ to $`x`$, $`r_\sigma =\mathrm{max}\{r,\sigma \}`$, and $`D^{}r`$ denotes the orthogonal projection of $`Dr`$ (which is a vector of length 1) onto $`(T_{\xi _k}\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k)^{}`$. Choosing $`tA`$, we have

$$\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim}_{B_\rho (\xi _k)}|𝐇_k|^2𝑑\mu _t^k=0.$$

Hölder’s inequality and (22) then lead to

$`\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim}\left|{\displaystyle _{B_\rho (\xi _k)}}(x\xi _k)𝐇_k\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{r_\sigma ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho ^2}}\right)𝑑\mu _t^k\right|`$ (25)
$``$ $`C\rho \left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sigma ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho ^2}}\right)\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim}\left(\sqrt{\mu _t^k(B_\rho (\xi _k))}\sqrt{{\displaystyle _{B_\rho (\xi _k)}}|𝐇_k|^2𝑑\mu _t^k}\right)`$
$``$ $`C\rho ^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sigma ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho ^2}}\right)\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim}\sqrt{{\displaystyle _{B_\rho (\xi _k)}}|𝐇_k|^2𝑑\mu _t^k}`$
$`=`$ $`0.`$
Letting $`k\mathrm{}`$ in (24) and using (25), we obtain

$$\sigma ^2\mu ^{\mathrm{}}(B_\sigma (\xi ))\rho ^2\mu ^{\mathrm{}}(B_\rho (\xi )),$$

for all $`0<\sigma \rho `$. By (22) we know that

$$\underset{\rho 0}{lim}\rho ^2\mu ^{\mathrm{}}(B_\rho (\xi ))<C<\mathrm{}.$$

Therefore, $`lim_{\rho 0}\rho ^2\mu ^{\mathrm{}}(B_\rho (\xi ))`$ exists.

We shall show that there exists a positive number $`r_0`$ such that for any $`0<r<r_0<1`$ the following density estimate holds

$$\underset{\rho 0}{lim}\rho ^2\mu ^{\mathrm{}}(B_\rho (\xi ))\frac{1}{16}.$$
(26)
Assume (26) fails to hold. Then there is $`\rho _0>0`$ such that

$$(2\rho _0)^2\mu ^{\mathrm{}}(B_{2\rho _0}(\xi ))<\frac{1}{16}.$$

By the monotonicity formula (24) and that $`\mu _t^k`$ converges to $`\mu ^{\mathrm{}}`$ as measures, there exists $`k_0>0`$ such that, for all $`0<\rho <2\rho _0`$ and $`k>k_0`$, we have

$$\rho ^2\mu _t^k(B_\rho (\xi ))<\frac{1}{8}.$$
(27)
Take a cut-off function $`\varphi _\rho C_0^{\mathrm{}}(B_\rho (\xi ))`$ on the 4-dimensional ball $`B_\rho (\xi _k)`$ so that

$`\varphi _\rho 1\mathrm{in}B_{\frac{\rho }{2}}(\xi )`$
$`0\varphi _\rho 1,\mathrm{and}|\varphi _\rho |{\displaystyle \frac{C}{\rho }},\mathrm{in}B_\rho (\xi ).`$
From (23), we have

$`\rho ^2{\displaystyle _{B_\rho (\xi )}}\varphi _\rho 𝑑\mu _{tr^2}^k\rho ^2{\displaystyle _{B_\rho (\xi )}}\varphi _\rho 𝑑\mu _t^k`$
$``$ $`2\rho ^2{\displaystyle _{tr^2}^t}{\displaystyle _{B_\rho (\xi )}}|𝐇_k|^2𝑑\mu _s^k𝑑s+C\rho ^3{\displaystyle _{tr^2}^t}{\displaystyle _{B_\rho (\xi )}}|𝐇_k|𝑑\mu _s^k𝑑s`$
$``$ $`C\rho ^2{\displaystyle _{tr^2}^t}{\displaystyle _{B_\rho (\xi )}}|𝐇_k|^2𝑑\mu _s^k𝑑s+C\rho ^3{\displaystyle _{tr^2}^t}\left({\displaystyle _{B_\rho (\xi )}}|𝐇_k|^2𝑑\mu _s^k\right)^{1/2}\mu _s^k(B_\rho (\xi ))^{1/2}𝑑s`$
$``$ $`C\rho ^2{\displaystyle _{tr^2}^t}{\displaystyle _{B_\rho (\xi )}}|𝐇_k|^2𝑑\mu _s^k𝑑s+C\rho ^2{\displaystyle _{tr^2}^t}\left({\displaystyle _{B_\rho (\xi )}}|𝐇_k|^2𝑑\mu _s^k\right)^{1/2}𝑑s\mathrm{by}(\text{22})`$
$``$ $`0,\mathrm{as}k\mathrm{}\mathrm{by}(\text{17}).`$
Here we have used $`C`$ for uniform positive constants which are independent of $`k`$ and $`\rho `$. Therefore, there are constants $`\delta _1>0`$ and $`k_1>0`$ such that for all $`\rho `$ and $`k`$ with $`0<\rho <\delta _1`$, $`0<r<1`$, and $`k>k_1`$ the estimate

$$\rho ^2\mu _{tr^2}^k(B_\rho (\xi ))<\frac{1}{4}<1$$
(28)
holds. Let $`d\sigma _{tr^2}^k`$ be the arc-length element of $`B_\rho (\xi )\mathrm{\Sigma }_{tr^2}^k`$. By the co-area formula, for $`0<r<<1`$,

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_k(\xi ,t,tr^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi r^2}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_{tr^2}^k}}e^{\frac{|F_k\xi |^2}{4r^2}}𝑑\mu _{tr^2}^k`$ (29)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi r^2}}{\displaystyle _0^{\delta _1}}{\displaystyle _{B_\rho (\xi )\mathrm{\Sigma }_{tr^2}^k}}e^{\frac{\rho ^2}{4r^2}}𝑑\sigma _{tr^2}^k𝑑\rho `$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi r^2}}{\displaystyle _{\delta _1}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle _{B_\rho (\xi )\mathrm{\Sigma }_{tr^2}^k}}e^{\frac{\rho ^2}{4r^2}}𝑑\sigma _{tr^2}^k𝑑\rho `$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi r^2}}{\displaystyle _0^{\delta _1}}e^{\frac{\rho ^2}{4r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\rho }}\mathrm{Vol}(B_\rho (\xi )\mathrm{\Sigma }_{tr^2}^k)𝑑\rho `$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi r^2}}{\displaystyle _{\delta _1}^{\mathrm{}}}e^{\frac{\rho ^2}{4r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\rho }}\mathrm{Vol}(B_\rho (\xi )\mathrm{\Sigma }_{tr^2}^k)𝑑\rho `$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi r^2}}{\displaystyle _0^{\delta _1}}e^{\frac{\rho ^2}{4r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{2r^2}}\mathrm{Vol}(B_\rho (\xi )\mathrm{\Sigma }_{tr^2}^k)𝑑\rho `$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi r^2}}{\displaystyle _{\delta _1}^{\mathrm{}}}e^{\frac{\rho ^2}{4r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{2r^2}}\mathrm{Vol}(B_\rho (\xi )\mathrm{\Sigma }_{tr^2}^k)𝑑\rho `$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi r^2}}{\displaystyle _0^{\delta _1}}e^{\frac{\rho ^2}{4r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho ^3}{2r^2}}𝑑\rho +o(r)\mathrm{by}(\text{28})\mathrm{and}(\text{22})`$
$``$ $`1+o(r).`$
For any classical mean curvature flow $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_t`$ in a compact Riemannian manifold which is isometrically embedded in $`𝐑^N`$, White proves a local regularity theorem (Theorem 3.1 and Theorem 4.1 in \[Wh1\]). When dim$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_t=2`$, White’s theorem asserts that there is a constant $`ϵ>0`$ such that if the Gaussian density satisfies

$$\underset{r0}{lim}_{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{tr^2}}\frac{1}{4\pi r^2}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{|yx|^2}{4r^2}\right)𝑑\mu (y)<1+ϵ,$$

then the mean curvature flow is smooth in a neighborhood of $`x`$. Combining this regularity result with (29), we are led to choose $`r>0`$ sufficiently small and then conclude that

$$\underset{B_r(\xi )\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k}{sup}|𝐀_k|C$$

and consequently $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k`$ converges strongly in $`B_r(\xi )\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k`$ to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^{\mathrm{}}B_r(\xi )`$, as $`k\mathrm{}`$. So $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}B_r(\xi )`$ is smooth. Smoothness of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}B_r(\xi )`$ immediately implies

$$\underset{\rho 0}{lim}\rho ^2\mu ^{\mathrm{}}(B_\rho (\xi ))=1.$$

This contradicts (27). Hence we have established (26).

In summary, we have shown that $`lim_{\rho 0}\rho ^2\mu ^{\mathrm{}}(B_\rho (\xi ))`$ exists and for $`^2`$ almost all $`\xi \mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$,

$$\frac{1}{16}\underset{\rho 0}{lim}\rho ^2\mu ^{\mathrm{}}(B_\rho (\xi ))<\mathrm{}.$$
(30)
Finally, we recall a fundamental theorem of Priess in \[P\]: if $`0mn`$ are integers and $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is a Borel measure on $`𝐑^n`$ such that

$$0<\underset{r0}{lim}\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }(B_r(x))}{r^m}<\mathrm{},$$

for almost all $`x\mathrm{\Omega }`$, then $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is $`m`$-rectifiable. Now we conclude from (30) that $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}},\mu ^{\mathrm{}})`$ is $`^2`$-rectifiable. Q.E.D.

## 4 Holomorphicity of the $`\lambda `$ tangent cones

In this section, we shall first show that the $`\lambda `$ tangent cone $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ is stationary and then prove that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ is a complex subvariety in $`𝐑^4`$. This result allows us to assert that the set of singular points of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ consists of discrete points.

A $`k`$-varifold is a Radon measure on $`G^k(M)`$, where $`G^k(M)`$ is the Grassmann bundle of all $`k`$-planes tangent to $`M`$. Allard’s compactness theorem for rectifiable varifolds (6.4 in \[A\], also see 1.9 in \[I2\] and Theorem 42.7 in \[Si1\]) can be stated as follows.

###### Theorem 4.1

(Allard’s compactness theorem) Let $`(V_i,\mu _i)`$ be a sequence of rectifiable $`k`$-varifolds in $`M`$ with

$$\underset{i1}{sup}(\mu _i(U)+|\delta V_i|(U))<\mathrm{}\mathrm{for}\mathrm{each}UM.$$

Then there is a varifold $`(V,\mu )`$ of locally bounded first variation and a subsequence, which we also denote by $`(V_i,\mu _i)`$, such that

(i) Convergence of measures: $`\mu _i\mu `$ as Radon measures on $`M`$,

(ii) Convergence of tangent planes: $`V_iV`$ as Radon measures on $`G^k(M)`$,

(iii) Convergence of first variations: $`\delta V_i\delta V`$ as $`TM`$-valued Radon measures,

(iv) Lower semicontinuity of total first variations: $`|\delta V|lim\; inf_i\mathrm{}|\delta V_i|`$ as Radon measures.

We first show that the $`\lambda `$ tangent cone is stationary.

###### Proposition 4.2

Let $`M`$ be a compact Kähler-Einstein surface. If the initial compact surface is symplectic, then the $`\lambda `$ tangent cone $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ is stationary.

Proof: Let $`V_t^k`$ be the varifold defined by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k`$. By the definition of varifolds, we have

$$V_t^k(\psi )=_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k}\psi (x,T\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k)𝑑\mu _t^k$$

for any $`\psi C_0^0(G^2(𝐑^4),R)`$, where $`G^2(𝐑^4)`$ is the Grassmanian bundle of all 2-planes tangent to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ in $`𝐑^4`$. For each smooth surface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k`$, the first variation $`\delta V_t^k`$ of $`V_t^k`$ (cf. \[A\], (39.4) in \[Si1\] and (1.7) in I2\]) is

$$\delta V_t^k=\mu _t^k𝐇_k.$$

By Proposition 2.2, we have that $`\delta V_t^k0`$ at $`t`$ as $`k\mathrm{}`$.

By (iii) in Theorem 4.1, we have that

$$\mu ^{\mathrm{}}𝐇_{\mathrm{}}=\delta V^{\mathrm{}}=\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim}\delta V_t^k=0.$$

Therefore $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ is stationary. Q.E.D.

###### Theorem 4.3

Let $`M`$ be a compact Kähler-Einstein surface. If the initial compact surface is symplectic and $`T>0`$ is the first blow-up time of the mean curvature flow, then the $`\lambda `$ tangent cone $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ of the mean curvature flow at $`(X_0,T)`$ is a holomorphic subvariety of complex dimension one in some complex structure on $`𝐑^4`$, with multiplicity more than one in $`𝐑^4`$.

Proof: For a smoothly immersed real surface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ in a Kähler manifold $`(M,\omega )`$ of complex dimension two, we may choose a local orthogonal frame $`\{e_1,e_2,e_3,e_4\}`$ on $`M`$ along $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ with $`e_1,e_2`$ tangent to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, so that along $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ the Kähler form $`\omega `$ has the expression (cf. \[CT1, CW\]):

$$\omega =\mathrm{cos}\alpha (e_1^{}e_2^{}+e_3^{}e_4^{})+\mathrm{sin}\alpha (e_1^{}e_3^{}e_2^{}e_4^{}),$$

where $`e_j^{}`$ is the dual of $`e_j`$ for $`j=1,2,3,4`$.

Along each surface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k`$, we have

$`\omega `$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{cos}\alpha _t^k(e_1^{}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k)e_2^{}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k)+e_3^{}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k)e_4^{}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k))`$
$`+\mathrm{sin}\alpha _t^k(e_1^{}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k)e_3^{}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k)e_2^{}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k)e_4^{}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k)),`$
and

$$\omega |_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k}=\mathrm{cos}\alpha _kd\mu _t^k=\mathrm{cos}\alpha _ke_1^{}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k)e_2^{}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k).$$

Since $`\mathrm{cos}\alpha _k>c>0`$ along the flow, the compactness theorem for Radon measures (cf. Theorem 4.4 in \[Si\]) implies that the bounded positive measures $`\mathrm{cos}\alpha _kd\mu _t^k`$ and $`d\mu _t^k`$ converge to nonnegative measures $`\theta _0d\mu ^{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`d\mu ^{\mathrm{}}`$ respectively on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ in the sense of measures, for some measurable function $`\theta _0`$ on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ with $`0<\theta _01`$. Here we take a subsequence if necessary.

In the scaling process on a small neighborhood of the singular point $`X_0`$ in $`M`$, the Riemannian metric $`g^k`$ tends to the flat metric on $`𝐑^4`$ as $`k\mathrm{}`$, equivalently, the Kähler form $`\omega ^k`$ converges to a self-dual, positive definite, constant 2-form $`\omega _0`$ on $`𝐑^4`$ with $`\omega _0(0)=\omega (X_0)`$, where $`0`$ is the origin of $`𝐑^4`$.

By (ii) in Theorem 4.1, along $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k`$,

$$\omega ^k|_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k}\omega _0|_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}=\theta _0e_1^{}(\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}})e_2^{}(\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}),$$

as measures. Note that Allard’s compactness theorem only provides convergence of tangent planes to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k`$ so the other components in $`\omega ^k`$ may not converge to those in $`\omega _0`$. Nevertheless, we have

$$\theta _0d\mu ^{\mathrm{}}=\theta _0e_1^{}(\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}})e_2^{}(\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}})=\omega _0|_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}.$$

Next, we shall show that $`\theta _0`$ is constant $`^2`$ a.e. on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$. To do so, we claim that for any $`r>0`$, $`\xi _1,\xi _2\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^kB_{R/2}(0)`$ the following holds

$$\left|\frac{1}{\mathrm{Vol}(B_r(\xi _1)\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k)}_{B_r(\xi _1)\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k}\mathrm{cos}\alpha _kd\mu _t^k\frac{1}{\mathrm{Vol}(B_r(\xi _2)\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k)}_{B_r(\xi _2)\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k}\mathrm{cos}\alpha _kd\mu _t^k\right|$$

$$\frac{C_1(r)}{\mathrm{Vol}(B_r(\xi _1)\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k)}\frac{C_2(r)}{\mathrm{Vol}(B_r(\xi _2)\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k)}_{B_R(0)\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k}\left|\mathrm{cos}\alpha _k\right|𝑑\mu _t^k,$$
(31)
where $`B_r(\xi _i)`$, $`i=1,2`$, are the 4-dimensional balls in $`M`$. To prove (31), let us first recall the isoperimetric inequality on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k`$ (c.f. \[HSp\] and \[MS\]): let $`B_\rho ^k(p)`$ be the geodesic ball in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k`$, with radius $`\rho `$ and center $`p`$, then

$`\mathrm{Vol}(B_\rho ^k(p))`$ $``$ $`C\left(\mathrm{length}((B_\rho ^k(p)))+{\displaystyle _{B_\rho ^k(p)}}|𝐇_k|𝑑\mu _t^k\right)^2`$
$``$ $`C\left(\mathrm{length}((B_\rho ^k(p)))+\left({\displaystyle _{B_\rho ^k(p)}}|𝐇_k|^2𝑑\mu _t^k\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{Vol}^{1/2}(B_\rho ^k(p))\right)^2,`$
for any $`p\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k`$, and any $`\rho >0`$, where $`C`$ does not depend on $`k`$, $`\rho `$, and $`p`$. By Proposition 2.2, we have

$$_{B_\rho ^k(p)}|𝐇_k|^2𝑑\mu _t^k0\mathrm{as}k\mathrm{}.$$

So, for $`k`$ sufficiently large, we obtain:

$$\mathrm{Vol}(B_\rho ^k(p))C\left(\mathrm{length}((B_\rho ^k(p)))\right)^2.$$

In particular, for $`k`$ sufficiently large, the isoperimetric inequality implies

$$\mathrm{Vol}(B_\rho ^k(p))C\rho ^2,$$
(32)
where $`C`$ is a positive constant independent of $`k,\rho `$ and $`p`$.

Suppose that the diameter of $`B_r(\xi )\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k`$ is $`d_k(\xi )`$. Then

$`Cr^2`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle _{B_r(\xi )\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k}}𝑑\mu _t^k\mathrm{by}(\text{22})`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{d_k(\xi )/2}}{\displaystyle _{B_\rho ^k(p)}}𝑑\sigma 𝑑\rho \mathrm{for}\mathrm{some}p\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k`$
$``$ $`c{\displaystyle _0^{d_k(\xi )/2}}\mathrm{Vol}^{1/2}(B_\rho ^k(p))𝑑\rho +o(1),o(1)0\mathrm{as}k\mathrm{}`$
$``$ $`c{\displaystyle _0^{d_k(\xi )/2}}C\rho 𝑑\rho +o(1)\mathrm{by}(\text{32})`$
$``$ $`cd_k(\xi )^2+o(1).`$
We therefore have, for any $`\xi `$,

$$d_k(\xi )Cr+o(1)$$
(33)
where the constant $`C`$ is independent of $`\xi `$ and $`k`$.

For any fixed $`\eta B_r(\xi _2)\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k`$ and any $`\xi B_r(\xi _1)\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k`$, we choose a geodesic $`l_{\eta \xi }`$ connecting $`\eta `$ and $`\xi `$, call it a ray from $`\eta `$ to $`\xi `$. Take an open tubular neighborhood $`U(l_{\eta \xi })`$ of $`l_{\eta \xi }`$ in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k`$. Within this neighborhood $`U(l_{\eta \xi })`$, we call the line in the normal direction of the ray $`l_{\eta \xi }`$ the normal line which we denote by $`n(l_{\eta \xi })`$. It is clear that

$$\mathrm{cos}\alpha _k(\xi )\mathrm{cos}\alpha _k(\eta )=_{l_{\eta \xi }}_l\mathrm{cos}\alpha _kdl$$
(34)
where $`dl`$ is the arc-length element of $`l_{\eta \xi }`$. Choose $`r`$ small enough so that $`B_r(\xi _1)\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k`$ is contained in $`U(l_{\eta \xi _1})`$. Keeping $`\eta `$ fixed and integrating (34) with respect to the variable $`\xi `$, first along the normal direction $`n(l_{\eta \xi _1})`$ and then on the ray direction $`l_{\eta \xi _1}`$, we have

$`\left|{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{Vol}(B_r(\xi _1)\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k)}}{\displaystyle _{B_r(\xi _1)\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k}}\mathrm{cos}\alpha _k(\xi )𝑑\mu _t^k\mathrm{cos}\alpha _k(\eta )\right|`$ (35)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{Vol}(B_r(\xi _1)\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k)}}{\displaystyle _0^{d_k(\xi _1)}}{\displaystyle _{n(l_{\eta \xi _1})}}{\displaystyle _{l_{\eta \xi }}}\left|\mathrm{cos}\alpha _k\right|𝑑l𝑑n(\xi )𝑑\rho `$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{Vol}(B_r(\xi _1)\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k)}}{\displaystyle _0^{d_k(\xi _1)}}{\displaystyle _{B_R(0)}}\left|\mathrm{cos}\alpha _k\right|𝑑\mu _t^k𝑑\rho `$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{Cr}{\mathrm{Vol}(B_r(\xi _1)\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k)}}{\displaystyle _{B_R(0)}}\left|\mathrm{cos}\alpha _k\right|𝑑\mu _t^k,`$
here in the last step we have used (33). From (35), integrating with respect to $`\eta `$ in $`B_r(\xi _2)\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k`$ and dividing by $`\mathrm{Vol}(B_r(\xi _2)\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k)`$, we get the desired inequality (31).

For $`i=1,2`$ Hölder’s inequality and (22) lead to

$$_{B_r(\xi _i)\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k}\left|\mathrm{cos}\alpha _k\right|𝑑\mu _t^kCr\left(_{B_r(\xi _i)\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k}\left|\mathrm{cos}\alpha _k\right|^2𝑑\mu _t^k\right)^{1/2}.$$

The triangle inequality implies $`B_r^k(\xi _i)B_r(\xi _i)\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k`$ for $`i=1,2`$; therefore by (32)

$$\mathrm{Vol}(B_r(\xi _i)\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k)\mathrm{Vol}(B_r^k(\xi _i))Cr^2.$$

Now first letting $`k\mathrm{}`$ in (31) and using that the right hand side of (31) tends to 0 by Proposition 2.2, and then letting $`r0`$, we conclude that $`\theta `$ is constant $`^2`$ a.e. on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$.

We choose a new complex structure on $`𝐑^4`$ so that with respect to the corresponding Kähler form $`\omega _1`$ we have

$$\omega _1|_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}=\theta _1d\mu ^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{and}\theta _1=1\mathrm{at}\mathrm{one}\mathrm{point}x\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}.$$

It is clear that, in the new complex structure on $`𝐑^4`$, Proposition 2.2 remains true. Therefore, by the same argument as above for $`\theta `$, we conclude that $`\theta _11`$ and accordingly

$$\omega _1|_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}d\mu ^{\mathrm{}}.$$
(36)
In other words, we have shown that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ is calibrated by the closed 2-form $`\omega _1`$. Applying Theorem 2.1 in \[HS\], we see that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ is a holomorphic subvariety, in the chosen complex structure, of complex dimension one. More precisely, Harvey-Shiffman’s theorem says that, if $`T`$ is a locally rectifiable $`(k,k)`$ type current and the $`(2k+1)`$-dim measure of $`\mathrm{supp}(T)=0`$, then $`T`$ is a holomorphic $`k`$-chain, i.e., away from the support of its boundary $`T`$ is a locally finite sum: $`T=_jn_j[V_j]`$, where $`n_j`$ are positive integers and $`V_j`$ are pure $`1`$-dimensional complex subvarieties (cf. \[HS\], \[HL\]) . We proved that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ is $`^2`$-rectifiable (see Proposition 3.1) and it is stationary (see Lemma 4.2), which implies that the $`3`$-dimensional measure of $`\mathrm{supp}(\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}})=0`$ (cf. Remark. after theorem 2.1 in \[HS\]). By (36), we can see that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ is a bidegree $`(1,1)`$ current, hence a holomorphic curve according to Harvey-Shiffman’s theorem.

We are left to show that the holomorphic curve has multiplicity more than 1. Otherwise, we would have

$$\underset{\rho 0}{lim}\frac{1}{\pi \rho ^2}\mu ^{\mathrm{}}(B_\rho (0))=1.$$

It then follows from (24) that for any $`ϵ>0`$, there are $`\delta >0`$ and $`k_0>0`$ such that for any $`0<\rho <2\delta `$ and $`k>k_0`$,

$$\rho ^2\mu _{r^2}^k(B_\rho (\xi ))<\pi (1+ϵ)$$
(37)
for any fixed $`r>0`$. The choice of $`r`$ will be based on the following observation

$`\mathrm{\Phi }(F_k,0,0,0r^2)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi r^2}}{\displaystyle _0^\delta }{\displaystyle _{B_\rho (0)\mathrm{\Sigma }_{0r^2}^k}}e^{\frac{\rho ^2}{4r^2}}𝑑\mu _{0r^2}^k`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi r^2}}{\displaystyle _\delta ^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle _{B_\rho (0)\mathrm{\Sigma }_{0r^2}^k}}e^{\frac{\rho ^2}{4r^2}}𝑑\mu _{0r^2}^k`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi r^2}}{\displaystyle _0^\delta }e^{\frac{\rho ^2}{4r^2}}{\displaystyle _{B_\rho (0)\mathrm{\Sigma }_{0r^2}^k}}𝑑\mu _{0r^2}^k`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi r^2}}{\displaystyle _\delta ^{\mathrm{}}}e^{\frac{\rho ^2}{4r^2}}{\displaystyle _{B_\rho (0)\mathrm{\Sigma }_{0r^2}^k}}𝑑\mu _{0r^2}^k`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi r^2}}{\displaystyle _0^\delta }e^{\frac{\rho ^2}{4r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{2r^2}}\mathrm{Vol}(B_\rho (0)\mathrm{\Sigma }_{0r^2}^k)𝑑\rho `$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi r^2}}{\displaystyle _\delta ^{\mathrm{}}}e^{\frac{\rho ^2}{4r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{2r^2}}\mathrm{Vol}(B_\rho (0)\mathrm{\Sigma }_{0r^2}^k)𝑑\rho `$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi r^2}}{\displaystyle _0^\delta }e^{\frac{\rho ^2}{4r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho ^3}{2r^2}}𝑑\rho +ϵ+o(r)\mathrm{by}(\text{37})\mathrm{and}(\text{22})`$
$``$ $`1+o(r).`$
Choosing $`r>0`$ sufficiently small, we therefore have

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(F,X_0,T,T\lambda _k^2r^2)=\mathrm{\Phi }(F_k,0,0,0r^2)1+ϵ.$$

Now by White’s local regularity theorem (\[Wh1\] Theorem 3.1 and Theorem 4.1, also see \[E2\]), $`(X_0,T)`$ could not be a singular point of the mean curvature flow. This is a contradiction. Now the proof of Theorem 4.3 is complete. Q.E.D.

## 5 Flatness of the $`\lambda `$ tangent cones

In this section, we prove that the $`\lambda `$ tangent cones are flat.

###### Theorem 5.1

Let $`M`$ be a compact Kähler-Einstein surface. If the initial compact surface is symplectic and $`T>0`$ is the first blow-up time of the mean curvature flow, then the $`\lambda `$ tangent cone $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ of the mean curvature flow at $`(X_0,T)`$ consists of a finite union of more than one 2-planes which are complex in a complex structure on $`𝐑^4`$ .

Proof: Without loss of any generality, we may assume $`0\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ where $`0`$ is the origin of $`𝐑^4`$. In fact, if not, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ would move to infinity, then we would have

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(F,X_0,T,T\lambda _k^2r^2)=\mathrm{\Phi }(F_k,0,0,0r^2)0\mathrm{as}k\mathrm{}.$$

But White’s regularity theorem then implies that $`(X_0,T)`$ is a regular point. This is impossible.

There is a sequence of points $`X_k\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k`$ satisfying $`X_k0`$ as $`k\mathrm{}`$. By Proposition 2.2, for any $`s_1`$ and $`s_2`$ with $`\mathrm{}<s_1<s_2<0`$ and any $`R>0`$, we have

$$_{s_1}^{s_2}_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^kB_R(0)}\left|F_k^{}\right|^2𝑑\mu _t^k𝑑t0\mathrm{as}k\mathrm{}.$$

Thus, by (22)

$`\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim}{\displaystyle _{s_1}^{s_2}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^kB_R(0)}}\left|(F_kX_k)^{}\right|^2𝑑\mu _t^k𝑑t`$
$``$ $`2\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim}{\displaystyle _{s_1}^{s_2}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^kB_R(0)}}\left|F_k^{}\right|^2𝑑\mu _t^k𝑑t+C(s_2s_1)R^2\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim}|X_k|^2`$
$`=`$ $`0.`$
Let us denote the tangent spaces of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k`$ at the point $`F_k(x,t)`$ and of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ at the point $`F^{\mathrm{}}(x,t)`$ by $`T\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k`$ and $`T\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ respectively. It is clear that

$$(F_kX_k)^{}=\mathrm{dist}(X_k,T\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k),$$

and

$$(F_{\mathrm{}})^{}=\mathrm{dist}(0,T\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}).$$

By Allard’s compactness theorem, i.e. Theorem 4.1 (ii), we have

$`{\displaystyle _{s_1}^{s_2}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}B_R(0)}}\left|(F_{\mathrm{}})^{}\right|^2𝑑\mu ^{\mathrm{}}𝑑t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{s_1}^{s_2}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}B_R(0)}}\left|\mathrm{dist}(0,T\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}})\right|^2𝑑\mu ^{\mathrm{}}𝑑t`$
$`=`$ $`\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim}{\displaystyle _{s_1}^{s_2}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^kB_R(0)}}\left|\mathrm{dist}(X_k,T\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^k)\right|^2𝑑\mu _t^k𝑑t`$
$`=`$ $`\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim}{\displaystyle _{s_1}^{s_2}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t^kB_R(0)}}\left|(F_kX_k)^{}\right|^2𝑑\mu _t^k𝑑t`$
$`=`$ $`0.`$
By Theorem 4.3, we know that each sheet of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ is smooth outside a discrete set of points $`𝒮`$. So outside $`𝒮`$, we have

$$F_{\mathrm{}},v_\alpha =0.$$

Note that the above inner product is taken in $`𝐑^4`$, and differentiating in $`𝐑^4`$ then yields

$$0=_iF_{\mathrm{}},v_\alpha +F_{\mathrm{}},_iv_\alpha =F_{\mathrm{}},_iv_\alpha .$$

Because $`_iF_{\mathrm{}}`$ is tangential to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$, by Weingarten’s equation we observe

$$(h_{\mathrm{}})_{ij}^\alpha F_{\mathrm{}},e_j=0\mathrm{for}\mathrm{all}\alpha ,i=1,2.$$

So for $`\alpha =1,2`$, we have

$$det((h_{\mathrm{}})_{ij}^\alpha )=0.$$

Since $`𝐇=0`$, for $`\alpha =1,2`$ we also have

$$tr((h_{\mathrm{}})_{ij}^\alpha )=0.$$

It then follows immediately that the symmetric matrix $`((h_{\mathrm{}})_{ij}^\alpha )`$ is in fact the zero matrix, for all $`i,j,\alpha =1,2`$, which obviously yields $`|𝐀_{\mathrm{}}|0`$.

Since the second fundamental form $`𝐀_{\mathrm{}}`$ of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ is identically zero on the smooth locus of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ whose multiplicity is finite but bigger than 1, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ is a finite union of more than one 2-planes. Moreover, if any two of these 2-planes meet at two distinct points they would intersect along a line containing these two points; but this contradicts to that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{}}`$ is a holomorphic subvariety.

This completes the proof of Theorem 5.1. Q.E.D.

## 6 Tangent cones from time dependent scaling

In this section, we consider the tangent cones which arise from the rescaled surface $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_s`$ defined by

$$\stackrel{~}{F}(,s)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2(Tt)}}F(,t),$$
(38)
where $`s=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}(Tt)`$, $`c_0s<\mathrm{}`$. Here we choose the coordinates so that $`X_0=0`$. Rescaling of this type was used by Huisken \[H2\] to distinguish Type I and Type II singularities for mean curvature flows. Denote the rescaled surface by $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_s`$. From the evolution equation of $`F`$ we derive the flow equation for $`\stackrel{~}{F}`$

$$\frac{}{s}\stackrel{~}{F}(x,s)=\stackrel{~}{𝐇}(x,s)+\stackrel{~}{F}(x,s).$$
(39)
It is clear that

$`\mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }(x,s)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{cos}\alpha (x,s),`$
$`|\stackrel{~}{𝐀}|^2(x,s)`$ $`=`$ $`2(Tt)|𝐀|^2(x,t).`$
Recall that we set, in section 2, $`v(x,t)=e^{R_0t}\mathrm{cos}\alpha (x,t)`$ where $`R_0=\mathrm{max}\{0,R\}`$ and $`R`$ is the scalar curvature of $`M`$. The function $`v(x,t)`$ satisfies

$$\left(\frac{}{t}\mathrm{\Delta }\right)v(x,t)\left|\overline{}J_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}\right|^2v(x,t).$$

The corresponding version of this evolution inequality for the scaled flow is in the following lemma.

###### Lemma 6.1

Assume that $`M`$ is a Kähler-Einstein surface with scalar curvature $`R`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ evolves by a mean curvature flow in $`M`$ with the initial surface being compact and symplectic. Let $`\stackrel{~}{v}(x,s)=e^{R_0(Te^{2s})}\mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }(x,s)`$ where $`R_0=\mathrm{max}\{0,R\}`$. Then

$$\left(\frac{}{s}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\right)\stackrel{~}{v}(x,s)|\overline{}J_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_s}|^2\stackrel{~}{v}(x,s).$$
(40)
Proof: One can check directly that

$$\left(\frac{}{s}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\right)\mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }(x,s)=2(Tt)\left(\frac{}{t}\mathrm{\Delta }\right)\mathrm{cos}\alpha (x,t).$$

It follows that

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{}{s}}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\right)\stackrel{~}{v}(x,s)`$ $`=`$ $`2(Tt)({\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}\mathrm{\Delta })v(x,t)`$
$``$ $`2(Tt)\left|\overline{}J_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}\right|^2v(x,t)`$
$`=`$ $`|\overline{}J_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_s}|^2\stackrel{~}{v}(x,s).`$
This proves the lemma. Q.E.D.

Next, we shall derive the corresponding weighted monotonicity formula for the scaled flow. By (40), we have

$$\left(\frac{}{s}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\right)\frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{v}}|\overline{}J_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}}|^2\frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{v}}\frac{2}{\stackrel{~}{v}^3}|\stackrel{~}{}\stackrel{~}{v}|^2.$$

Let

$$\stackrel{~}{\rho }(X)=\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{1}{2}|X|^2\right),$$

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(s)=_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_s}\frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{v}}\varphi \stackrel{~}{\rho }(\stackrel{~}{F})𝑑\stackrel{~}{\mu }_s.$$

###### Lemma 6.2

There are positive constants $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$ which depend on $`M`$, $`F_0`$ and $`r`$ which is the constant in the definition of $`\varphi `$, so that the following monotonicity formula holds

$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{s}}\mathrm{exp}(c_1e^s)\mathrm{\Psi }(s)`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{exp}(c_1e^s)\left({\displaystyle _{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_s}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{v}}}\varphi \stackrel{~}{\rho }(\stackrel{~}{F})\right|\stackrel{~}{𝐇}+\stackrel{~}{F}^{}|^2d\stackrel{~}{\mu }_s`$ (41)
$`+{\displaystyle _{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_s}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{v}}}\varphi \stackrel{~}{\rho }(\stackrel{~}{F})|\overline{}J_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_s}|^2d\stackrel{~}{\mu }_s+{\displaystyle _{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_s}}{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\stackrel{~}{v}^3}}|\stackrel{~}{}\stackrel{~}{v}|^2\varphi \stackrel{~}{\rho }(\stackrel{~}{F})d\stackrel{~}{\mu }_s)`$
$`+c_2e^{2s}.`$
Proof: Note that

$`\stackrel{~}{F}(x,s)={\displaystyle \frac{F(x,t)}{\sqrt{2(Tt)}}},`$
$`\stackrel{~}{𝐇}(x,s)=\sqrt{2(Tt)}𝐇(x,t),`$
$`|\overline{}J_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_s}|^2(x,s)=2(Tt)|\overline{}J_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}|^2(x,t),`$
$`|\stackrel{~}{}\stackrel{~}{v}|^2(x,s)=2(Tt)|v|^2(x,t).`$
By the chain rule

$$\frac{}{s}=2e^{2s}\frac{}{t}$$

and the monotonicity inequality (10) for the unscaled surface, we obtain the desired inequality. Q.E.D.

###### Lemma 6.3

Let $`M`$ be a compact Kähler-Einstein surface. If the initial compact surface is symplectic, then there is a sequence $`s_k\mathrm{}`$ such that, for any $`R>0`$,

$$_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{s_k}B_R(0)}|\overline{}J_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}}|^2𝑑\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{s_k}0\mathrm{as}k\mathrm{},$$
(42)
$$_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{s_k}B_R(0)}|\mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }|^2𝑑\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{s_k}0\mathrm{as}k\mathrm{},$$
(43)
$$_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{s_k}B_R(0)}|\stackrel{~}{𝐇}|^2𝑑\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{s_k}0\mathrm{as}k\mathrm{},$$
(44)
and

$$_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{s_k}B_R(0)}|\stackrel{~}{F}^{}|^2𝑑\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{s_k}0\mathrm{as}k\mathrm{}.$$
(45)
Proof: By (41), we have

$`\mathrm{}`$ $`>`$ $`{\displaystyle _{s_0}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle _{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_s}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{v}}}\varphi \stackrel{~}{\rho }(\stackrel{~}{F})\left|\stackrel{~}{𝐇}+\stackrel{~}{F}^{}\right|^2𝑑\stackrel{~}{\mu }_s𝑑s`$
$`+{\displaystyle _{s_0}^{\mathrm{}}}\left({\displaystyle _{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_s}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{v}}}\varphi \stackrel{~}{\rho }(\stackrel{~}{F})|\overline{}J_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_s}|^2𝑑\stackrel{~}{\mu }_s+{\displaystyle _{\stackrel{~}{\mu }_s}}{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\stackrel{~}{v}^3}}|\stackrel{~}{}\stackrel{~}{v}|^2\varphi \stackrel{~}{\rho }(\stackrel{~}{F})𝑑\stackrel{~}{\mu }_s\right)𝑑s.`$
Hence there is a sequence $`s_k\mathrm{}`$, such that as $`k\mathrm{}`$

$$_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{s_k}}\frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{v}}\varphi \stackrel{~}{\rho }(\stackrel{~}{F})|\overline{}J_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{s_k}}|^2𝑑\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{s_k}0$$

and

$$_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{s_k}}\frac{2}{\stackrel{~}{v}^3}|\stackrel{~}{}\stackrel{~}{v}|^2\varphi \stackrel{~}{\rho }(\stackrel{~}{F})𝑑\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{s_k}0,$$

which yields (42) and (43), and

$$_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{s_k}}\frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{v}}\varphi \stackrel{~}{\rho }(\stackrel{~}{F})\left|\stackrel{~}{𝐇}+\stackrel{~}{F}^{}\right|^2𝑑\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{s_k}0.$$
(46)
By (4) and (42) we see that (44) holds. By (44) and (46) we get (45). This proves the proposition. Q.E.D.

The proof of the following lemma is essentially the same as the one for Proposition 3.1, except there are two parameters $`\lambda ,t`$ for the $`\lambda `$ tagent cones but only one parameter $`t`$ for the time dependent tangent cones. For the sake of completeness, we shall provide a proof.

###### Lemma 6.4

There is a subsequence of $`s_k`$, which we also denote by $`s_k`$, such that $`(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{s_k},d\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{s_k})(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{\mathrm{}},d\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{\mathrm{}})`$ in the sense of measures. And $`(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{\mathrm{}},d\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{\mathrm{}})`$ is $`^2`$-rectifiable.

Proof: To show the subconvergence, it suffices to show that, for any $`R>0`$,

$$\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{s_k}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{s_k}B_R(0))CR^2,$$
(47)
where $`B_R(0)`$ is a metric ball in $`𝐑^4`$, $`C>0`$ is independent of $`k`$. Direct calculation leads to

$`\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{s_k}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{s_k}B_R(0))`$ $`=`$ $`(2(Tt))^1{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_{Te^{2s_k}}B_{\sqrt{2(Tt)}R}(0)}}𝑑\mu _t`$
$`=`$ $`R^2\left(\sqrt{2}e^sR\right)^2{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_{Te^{2s_k}}B_{\sqrt{2}e^sR}(0)}}𝑑\mu _t`$
$``$ $`CR^2\mathrm{\Phi }(0,T+(\sqrt{2}e^sR)^2e^{2s_k},Te^{2s_k})`$
By the monotonicity inequality (6), we have

$`\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{s_k}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{s_k}B_R(0))`$ $``$ $`CR^2\left(\mathrm{\Phi }(0,T+(\sqrt{2}e^sR)^2e^{2s_k},T/2)+C\right)`$
$``$ $`C{\displaystyle \frac{R^2}{T}}\left(\mu _{T/2}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{T/2})+C\right).`$
Since

$$\frac{}{t}\mu _t(\mathrm{\Sigma }_t)=_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}|𝐇|^2𝑑\mu _t,$$

we have

$$\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{s_k}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{s_k}B_R(0))CR^2.$$

We now prove that $`(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{\mathrm{}},d\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{\mathrm{}})`$ is $`^2`$-rectifiable. For any $`\xi \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{\mathrm{}}`$, choose $`\xi _k\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{s_k}`$ with $`\xi _k\xi `$ as $`k\mathrm{}`$. By the monotonicity identity (17.4) in \[Si1\], we have

$`\sigma ^2\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{s_k}(B_\sigma (\xi _k))`$ $`=`$ $`\rho ^2\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{s_k}(B_\rho (\xi _k)){\displaystyle _{B_\rho (\xi _k)B_\sigma (\xi _k)}}{\displaystyle \frac{|D^{}r|^2}{r^2}}𝑑\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{s_k}`$ (48)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _{B_\rho (\xi _k)}}(x\xi _k)\stackrel{~}{𝐇_k}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{r_\sigma ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho ^2}}\right)𝑑\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{s_k},`$
for all $`0<\sigma \rho `$, where $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{s_k}(B_\sigma (\xi _k))`$ is the area of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{s_k}B_\sigma (\xi _k)`$, $`r_\sigma =\mathrm{max}\{r,\sigma \}`$ and $`D^{}r`$ denotes the orthogonal projection of $`Dr`$ (which is a vector of length 1) onto $`(T_{\xi _k}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{s_k})^{}`$. Letting $`k\mathrm{}`$, by Lemma 6.3, we have

$$\sigma ^2\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{\mathrm{}}(B_\sigma (\xi ))\rho ^2\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{\mathrm{}}(B_\rho (\xi )),$$

for all $`0<\sigma \rho `$. Therefore, $`lim_{\rho 0}\rho ^2\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{\mathrm{}}(B_\rho (\xi ))`$ exists. By (47) we know that $`lim_{\rho 0}\rho ^2\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{\mathrm{}}(B_\rho (\xi ))`$ is finite; and we now show that it has a positive lower bound.

By the isoperimetric inequality on $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{s_k}`$ (c.f. \[HSp\] and \[MS\]), we have

$`\mathrm{Vol}(B_\rho ^k(\xi _k))`$ $``$ $`C\left(\mathrm{length}((B_\rho ^k(\xi _k)))+{\displaystyle _{B_\rho ^k(\xi _k)}}|\stackrel{~}{𝐇}|𝑑\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{s_k}\right)^2`$
$``$ $`C\left(\mathrm{length}((B_\rho ^k(\xi _k)))+\left({\displaystyle _{B_\rho ^k(\xi _k)}}|\stackrel{~}{𝐇}|^2𝑑\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{s_k}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{Vol}^{1/2}(B_\rho ^k(\xi _k))\right)^2,`$
for any $`\rho >0`$, where $`B_\rho ^k(\xi _k)`$ is the geodesic ball in $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{s_k}`$, with radius $`\rho `$ and center $`\xi _k`$, $`C`$ does not depend on $`k`$, $`\rho `$. By Lemma 6.3, we have

$$_{B_\rho ^k(\xi _k)}|\stackrel{~}{𝐇}|^2𝑑\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{s_k}0\mathrm{as}k\mathrm{}.$$

Hence, for $`k`$ sufficiently large, we have

$$\mathrm{Vol}(B_\rho ^k(\xi _k))C\rho ^2,$$
(49)
where $`C`$ is a positive constant independent of $`k`$, $`\rho `$.

The triangle inequality implies $`B_r^k(\xi _k)B_r(\xi _k)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{s_k}`$ for $`k=1,2,\mathrm{}`$, therefore by (49)

$$\mathrm{Vol}(B_r(\xi _k)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{s_k})\mathrm{Vol}(B_r^k(\xi _k))Cr^2.$$

It concludes that $`lim_{\rho 0}\rho ^2\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{\mathrm{}}(B_\rho (\xi ))`$ exists and for $`^2`$ almost all $`\xi \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{\mathrm{}}`$,

$$0<C\underset{\rho 0}{lim}\rho ^2\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{\mathrm{}}(B_\rho (\xi ))<\mathrm{}.$$
(50)
By Priess’s theorem in \[P\] we can see from (50) that, $`(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{\mathrm{}},d\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{\mathrm{}})`$ is $`^2`$-rectifiable. This proves the lemma. Q.E.D.

###### Definition 6.5

Let $`(X_0,T)`$ be a singular point of the mean curvature flow of a closed symplectic surface in a compact Kähler-Einstein surface $`M`$. We call $`(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{\mathrm{}},d\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{\mathrm{}})`$ obtained in the last lemma a tangent cone of the mean curvature flow $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ at $`(X_0,T)`$ in the time dependent scaling.

With the lemmas established in this section, we can derive, by using arguments completely similar to those for the $`\lambda `$ tangent cones in section 4 and section 5, holomorphicity and flatness of the tangent cones coming from time dependent scaling.

###### Theorem 6.6

Let $`M`$ be a compact Kähler-Einstein surface. If the initial compact surface is symplectic and $`T>0`$ is the first blow-up time of the mean curvature flow, then the tangent cone $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{\mathrm{}}`$ of the mean curvature flow at $`(X_0,T)`$ coming from time dependent scaling consists of a finite union of more than one 2-planes in $`𝐑^4`$ which are complex in a complex structure on $`𝐑^4`$.

Finally, we give two remarks.

###### Remark 6.7

Let $`M`$ be a compact Kähler-Einstein surface. Assume that the initial surface is symplectic. If $`(X_0,T)`$ is the Type I singularity for the mean curvature flow, then

$$0<c(Tt)|𝐀|^2C<\mathrm{},$$

and consequently, $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{s_k}`$ converges strongly to $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{\mathrm{}}`$ with

$$0<c|\stackrel{~}{𝐀}_{\mathrm{}}|^2C<\mathrm{}.$$

However, by Theorem 6.6, we have $`\stackrel{~}{𝐀}_{\mathrm{}}0`$. This contradiction shows that there is no Type I singularity for mean curvature flow of symplectic surface in K-E surfaces. This result was proved in \[CL\] and \[W1\].

###### Remark 6.8

When one considers the singularity of holomorphic curves, using the monotonicity identities (24) and (1.2) in \[Si2\], by an argument similar to the one used in the present paper, one can show that the bubbles are two-dimensional planes which are complex under some complex structure on $`𝐑^4`$ (also see \[M\]). In fact, in \[M\], Morgan obtained more general results, in particular, he proved that any tangent cone to a two-dimensional oriented area minimizing surface in $`𝐑^4`$ consists of such planes.

REFERENCES

W. Allard, First variation of a varifold, Annals of Math. 95 (1972), 419-491.

C. Arezzo, Minimal surfaces and deformations of holomorphic curves in Kähler-Einstein manifolds, Ann. Scuola Norm. Sup. Pisa Cl. Sci. (4) 29 (2000), no. 2, 473–481.

K. Brakke, The motion of a surface by its mean curvature, Princeton Univ. Press, 1978.

J. Chen and J. Li, Mean curvature flow of surface in 4-manifolds, Adv. Math. 163 (2001), 287-309.

J. Chen, J. Li and G. Tian, Two-dimensional graphs moving by mean curvature flow, Acta Math. Sinica, English Series Vol.18, No.2 (2002), 209-224.

J. Chen and G. Tian, Minimal surfaces in Riemannian 4-manifolds, GAFA, 7 (1997), 873-916.

J. Chen and G. Tian, Moving symplectic curves in Kähler-Einstein surfaces, Acta Math. Sinica, English Series, 16 (4), (2000), 541-548.

S.S. Chern and R. Wolfson, Minimal surfaces by moving frames, Ann. of Math. 105 (1983), 59-83.

K. Ecker, On regularity for mean curvature flow of hypersurfaces, Calc. Var. 3(1995), 107-126.

K. Ecker, A local monotonicity formula for mean curvature flow, Ann. Math., 154(2001), 503-525.

K. Ecker, Lectures on regularity for mean curvature flow, preprint (2002).

R. Harvey and H.B. Lawson, Calibrated geometries, Acta Math. 148 (1982), 47-157.

R. Harvey and B. Shiffman, A characterization of holomorphic chains, Acta Math. 148 (1982), 47–157.

D. Hoffman and J. Spruck, Sobolev and isoperimetric inequalities for Riemannian submanifolds, Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 27 (1974), 715-727.

G. Huisken, Asymptotic behavior for singularities of the mean curvature flow, J. Diff. Geom. 31 (1990), 285-299.

G. Huisken, Flow by mean curvature of convex surfaces into spheres, J. Diff. Geom. 20 (1984), 237-266.

G. Huisken, Contracting convex hypersurfaces in Riemannian manifolds by their mean curvature, Invent. math. 84 (1986), 463-480.

G. Huisken and C. Sinestrari, Convexity estimates for mean curvature flow and singularities of mean convex surfaces. Acta Math. 183 (1999), no. 1, 45-70.

G. Huisken and C. Sinestrari, Mean curvature flow singularities for mean convex surfaces. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 8 (1999), no. 1, 1-14.

T. Ilmanen, Singularity of mean curvature flow of surfaces, preprint.

T. Ilmanen, Elliptic Regularization and Partial Regularity for Motion by Mean Curvature, Memoirs of the Amer. Math. Soc., 520, 1994.

F. Morgan, On the singular structure of two-dimensional area minimizing surfaces in $`𝐑^n`$, Math. Ann. 261(1982), 101-110.

J.H. Michael and L. Simon, Sobolev and mean-valued inequalities on generalized submanifolds of $`R^n`$, Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 26 (1973), 361-379.

M. Micaleff and B. White, The structure of branch points in minimal surfaces and in pseudo-holomorphic curves, Ann. of Math., 141 (1995), 35-85.

D. Priess, Geometry of measures in $`R^n`$; Distribution, rectifiability, and densities; Ann. of Math., 125 (1987), 537-643.

V. Shevchishin, Pseudo-holomorphic curves and the symplectic isotopy problem, preprint.

L. Simon, Lectures on Geometric Measure Theory, Proc. Center Math. Anal. 3 (1983), Australian National Univ. Press.

L. Simon, Existence of surfaces minimizing the Willmore functional, Comm. Anal. Geom. 1 (1993), 281-326.

K. Smoczyk, Der Lagrangesche mittlere Kruemmungsfluss. Univ. Leipzig (Habil.-Schr.), 102 S. 2000.

K. Smoczyk, Harnack inequality for the Lagrangian mean curvature flow. Calc. Var. PDE, 8 (1999), 247-258.

K. Smoczyk, Angle theorems for the Lagrangian mean curvature flow, preprint 2001.

M. Spivak, A Comprehensive Introduction to Differential Geometry,Volume 4, Second Edition, Publish or Perish, Inc. Berkeley, 1979.

B. Siebert and G. Tian, Holomorphy of genus two Lefschetz fibration, preprint.

G. Tian, Symplectic isotopy in four dimension, First International Congress of Chinese Mathematicians (Beijing, 1998), 143-147, AMS/IP Stud. Adv. Math., 20, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2001.

M.-T. Wang, Mean curvature flow of surfaces in Einstein four manifolds, J. Diff. Geom. 57 (2001), 301-338.

M.-T. Wang, Long-time existence and convergence of graphic mean curvature flow in arbitrary codimension, preprint.

M.-T. Wang, Deforming area preserving diffeomorphism of surfaces by mean curvature flow, Math. Res. Lett. 8, no. 5-6 (2001), 651-661.

B. White, A local regularity theorem for classical mean curvature flow, preprint (2000).

B. White, The size of the singular set in mean curvature flow of mean-convex sets, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 13, no.3 (2000), 665–695.