Arxiv:1703.09367V2 [Math.DG] 28 Nov 2017 Iia Yesrae Ihfe Onayo H Tnadsp Standard General the a on Under Boundary Free Topology

Home , Richard Schoen

arXiv:1703.09367v2 [math.DG] 28 Nov 2017 iia yesrae ihfe onayo h tnadsp standard general the a on Under boundary free topology. with of hypersurfaces minimal independent is result this that Then sphere. unit standard the on boundary free Theorem is: Nitsche to due result ae ihfe onayi h ntbl.Atog hr sa is there Although ball. for unit problem the in boundary free with faces a includes that contribution, codimension. 6 influential arbitrary [4, recent to refer a we made selection [11] small a as results, excellent some 2]adShe-io 2]frfrhrcasclter)to theory) example. classical for boundary, further free for with [22] Schoen-Simon classi the and of [20] extension an including theory, Li-Z regularity and and submanifolds, minimal Mondi boundary boundary, free of free terisation with hypersurfaces minimal for [23 bounds con Smith-Stern-Tran-Zhou progress [3], Nevertheless, Carlotto-Sharp hypersurfaces. Ambrozio, to over techni carry analytical to complex powerful incredibly that is this eety iia ufcswt rebudr aereceive have boundary free with surfaces minimal Recently, nti oew td h ihrdmninlaaou fthis of analogue dimensional higher the study we note this In dir various in result this extending work analys much complex been via has differential There Hopf the exploits proof The :Crepnigauthor. Corresponding *: u rtcnrbto so h usino nqeeso min of uniqueness of question the on is contribution first Our 2000 e od n phrases. and words Key IIA YESRAE NTEBL IHFE BOUNDARY FREE WITH BALL THE IN HYPERSURFACES MINIMAL ahmtc ujc Classification. Subject Mathematics ik hsrsl sidpneto h oooyo ubror number or topology the of independent is result This disk. sads,w hwtespeu ftecrauesurdo the on squared curvature the of supremum the show we disk, a is pee is eso htif that show we First sphere. ie h nmmo h uvtr qae ntebudr.Th boundary. the on squared curvature the of infimum the times mrsino h uvtr fnnfltmnmlhprik w hyperdisks minimal non-flat of curvature the of impression eut nmnmlhypersurfaces minimal on results A Term1i [19]) in 1 (Theorem BSTRACT n 2 = nti oew s h togmxmmpicpeadintegra and principle maximum strong the use we note this In . ntehge iesoa aerslsaemc oescarce more much are results case dimensional higher the in , iia ufcs encraueflw rebudr condit boundary free flow, curvature mean surfaces, minimal LNWELRADVLNIAMR WHEELER VALENTINA-MIRA AND WHEELER GLEN . Let F sgahclwt epc oayKligfil,then field, Killing any to respect with graphical is F F 90 n 53A10. and 49Q05 .I 1. : : D M 2 NTRODUCTION n → → R 1 3 F R eapoe rnhdmnmlimrinwith immersion minimal branched proper a be n ( +1 D 2 ihfe onayo h tnadunit standard the on boundary free with ) safltdisk. flat a is usta pl o ufcsd o seem not do surfaces for apply that ques a rga fAmrn[,2 sePitts (see 2] [1, Almgren of program cal t reboundary. free ith ,1,1,1,1,2] Fraser-Schoen 26]. 17, 16, 13, 10, 9, , o 1,1]frfrrahn min-max far-reaching for 15] [14, hou onais eod if Second, boundaries. xeso fNtcesTermto Theorem Nitsche’s of extension n iust emd:seSret[21], Sargent see made: be to tinues n rn[5 o oenwindex new some for [25] Tran and ] elho nweg vial nthe on available knowledge of wealth sdgahclt odto,teonly the condition, graphicality ised s a ecmie h iean give the combined be may ese eeaefltdisks. flat are here h aeo iia hypersurfaces minimal of case the oSaao[8 o e charac- new a for [18] no-Spadaro neiri one eo by below bounded is interior is. cin.Ti ciiyhsyielded has activity This ections. uhatnin landmark A attention. much d rbe,frmnmlhypersur- minimal for problem, mlembedded imal siae rv two prove estimates l os emti analysis. geometric ions, ∗ F ( M M n n esnfor reason One . n ) saflat a is n = dss Note -disks. D n n ∗ 2 GLENWHEELERANDVALENTINA-MIRAWHEELER

Theorem 1.1 (Uniqueness of n-dimensional graphical disks). Let F : M n → Rn+1 be a smooth Killing-graphical minimal hypersurface with free boundaryon Sn ⊂ Rn+1. Then M n = Dn and M := F (M n) is a standard ﬂat disk.

In the above statement, we use Killing-graphical to mean that the function sV : M → R given by M (1) sV (x) := ν (x), V (x) , where νM : M → Rn+1 is a unit normal vector field along F (M n), and V : Rn+1 → Rn+1 is a Killing field, is strictly positive. n One may rephraseTheorem 1.1 as: If sV > 0, then F (M ) is a flat disk. We note that applying Theorem 1.1 with V a translation yields Theorem 1.1 as a corollary. Theorem 1.1 is proved in Section 4. Remark. Since one of the conclusions of Theorem 1.1 (and not one of the hypotheses) is topological, that is, that M n = Dn, we are able to use this theorem in the contrapositive to obtain interesting topological lemmata. The most general form of this is the following: Corollary 1.2. Suppose M n is not a disk. Consider a smooth minimal hypersurface F : M n → Rn+1 with free boundary on Sn ⊂ Rn+1. Then for every Killing field V : Rn+1 → Rn+1, there exists a point x ∈ M such that ν(x) ⊥ V (x). For example, this implies that on any free boundary minimal surface in the topological class of R3 the catenoid in , the functions sVi , i =1,..., 6, attain at least one zero. These kinds of results may be useful in understanding questions such as the Fraser-Schoen conjecture. 2 The main result of Ambrozio-Nunes [4] is that if M n = Dn and |A|2 F,νM ≤ 2, then F (Dn) is flat. If we allow more freedom in the domain of F , the only other possibility is that at 2 some point |A|2 F,νM = 2 and F (S × (a,b)) is a critical catenoid. This result is special to the case of surfaces, but does indicate a kind of ‘curvature gap’ phenomenonat work. Our second result moves also in this direction. Theorem 1.3 (Curvature gap). Let F : Dn → Rn+1 be a smooth minimal immersed n-disk with free boundary on Sn ⊂ Rn+1. Suppose that M := F (Dn) is not a standard flat disk. Then 2 sup |A|2 >n inf |A|2 . M ∂M

Remark. One has automatically that sup |A|2 ≥ inf |A|2, and so our estimate above gives new M ∂M information only when inf |A|2 ∈ (0, 4] for n = 2 and ∈ (0, 2] for n > 2. We are not restricted ∂M here by dimension but we do require that the minimal hypersurface is topologically a disk. This restriction is made clear in the proof. Finally, we wish to note that minimal hypersurfaces with free boundaryon Sn achieve equality in the isoperimetric inequality. The general result, completed by Federer in [8], says that the area of an n dimensional minimal surface (any dimension) inside the unit sphere equals 1/n times the integral over the boundary of the cosine of the angle it makes with the radial direction. We would like to thank Professor Frank Morgan for helping us locate the most general result of this kind. Similar results have been obtained in Hanes [12] and Brendle [5]. MINIMALHYPERSURFACESINTHEBALLWITHFREEBOUNDARY 3

Proposition 1.4 (Isoperimetric equality, special case of Proposition 5.4.3(i) in [8]). Let F : M n → Rn+1 be a smooth minimal immersed hypersurface with free boundary on Sn ⊂ Rn+1. Then n|M| = |∂M|, where |M| and |∂M| are the volume of the hypersurface and the volume of its boundary respec- tively.

2. SETTING Consider the standard unit sphere in Euclidean space Sn = {x ∈ Rn+1 : |x| = 1}⊂ Rn+1. n We use νS : Sn → Rn+1 to denote its outer normal vectorﬁeld. Let M n be a smooth, orientable n-dimensional Hausdorff paracompact manifold with boundary ∂M n. Let g be a Riemannian metric on M n. Set M := F (M n) ⊂ Rn+1 where F : M n → Rn+1 is a smooth isometric immersion satisfying ∂M ≡ F (∂M n) = M ∩ Sn, Sn (2) νM ,ν (F (p)) = 0, ∀p ∈ ∂M n. D E Since F is isometric, the Riemannian structure induced by the embedding F is the same as that given by g, that is (M n,g) = (M n, F ∗δ), where δ is the standard metric on Rn. Let us denote by A : TM × TM → R the second fundamental form of M with components given by hij where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ n where hij = A(τi, τj ) for two sections τi and τj in TM. For Sn Sn Sn Sn R Sn we have A : T × T → the second fundamental form with components hij for 1 ≤ i, j ≤ n.

3. AUXILIARY EQUATIONS Let us deﬁne the quantities we use in the proof of the uniqueness theorem. Recall the function sV : M → R deﬁned in (1) above. When V is a translation, following [7] we term sV the graph quantity. If, up to reparametrisation,

F (p) = (p,u(p)) = piei + u(p)V, then one can relate the gradient of the associated scalar function u to the reciprocal of the graph quantity sV . This implies that a lower bound on s is equivalent to a gradient bound for u. Throughout this section we assume that F : M n → Rn+1 is a smooth minimal immersed hypersurface.

Lemma 3.1. The quantity sV : M → R satisfies M 2 ∆ sV = −|A| sV . where ∆M is the Laplace-Beltrami operator on M. 2 1 The squared reciprocal of sV denoted by v = 2 also satisfies an elliptic equation (see [7]): V sV 2 R Lemma 3.2. The quantity vV : M → satisfies M 2 2 2 2 ∆ vV =2|A| vV +6|∇vV | . ∗ 4 GLENWHEELERANDVALENTINA-MIRAWHEELER

The support function is defined as u : M → R: u(x):= x, νM (x) . It is strictly positive for convex bodies (that contain the o rigin) and vanishes on linear subspaces of Rn+1. On a minimal hypersurface, it satisfies the following equation: Lemma 3.3. The quantity u2 : M → R satisfies ∆M u2 = −2|A|2u2 +2|∇u|2 .

2 2 We also require the following evolution equation for the product of vV and u . 2 2 R Lemma 3.4. The quantity Q = u vV : M → satisﬁes ∇v ∆M Q ≥ 2 V ∇Q. vV

Proof. We compute using Lemmata 3.2 and 3.3 M 2 M 2 2 M 2 2 2 ∆ Q = vV ∆ u + u ∆ vV +2∇vV ∇u 2 2 2 2 2 2 =2vV |∇u| +6u |∇vV | +2∇vV ∇u . Separately we can transform the mixed gradient term into a gradient of the Q quantity and extra terms as follows: 2 2 2 2 ∇vV 2 2 2∇vV ∇u = ∇vV ∇u +4uvV ∇vV ∇u =2 ∇Q − 4|∇vV | u +4uvV ∇vV ∇u . vV Replacing into the above completes the proof:

M ∇vV 2 2 2 2 2 2 ∆ Q =2 ∇Q +2vV |∇u| +6u |∇vV | − 4|∇vV | u +4uvV ∇vV ∇u vV ∇vV 2 2 2 2 =2 ∇Q +2vV |∇u| +2u |∇vV | +4uvV ∇vV ∇u vV ∇v ≥ 2 V ∇Q. vV

The following calculation is standard. Lemma 3.5 (Simon’s Equation). The square of the second fundamental form satisﬁes the equation 1 ∆M |A|2 = |∇A|2 − |A|4 . 2

We also require the boundary derivative of the second fundamental form. For any boundary point x ∈ ∂M the Neumann boundary condition allows us to chose a basis {τ1,...,τn} of the n Sn tangent space TxM such that τi ∈ T∂M ∩ T S for all i ∈{1,...,n − 1} and τn = ν at x. Note that for any choice of orthonormalbasis of the tangent space of Sn the second fundamental form of Sn is diagonal. It was shown by Stahl [24] that on the boundary we have Sn hin = hin =0 for all i =1,...,n − 1. MINIMALHYPERSURFACESINTHEBALLWITHFREEBOUNDARY 5

Since n − 1 of the tangent vectors are on the closed submanifold ∂M ⊂ Sn we can choose our basis above such that on the boundary Sn hij =0 if i 6= j , and hij = δij if i 6= j. We also need the following boundary relations, again due to Stahl [24, Theorem 2.4]. For the remainder of this section we additionally assume that F has free boundary on Sn ⊂ Rn+1. Lemma 3.6 (Normal derivatives). Along the boundary in an orthonormal basis as described above the following hold:

∇nH = H,

∇nhii = (hnn − hii) for all i =1,...,n − 1.

We are now ready to state our result about the boundary derivative of the second fundamental form squared. Proposition 3.7 (Normal derivative of |A|2). Along the boundary in an orthonormal basis as described above the following hold: 2 2 2 ∇n|A| = −2|A| − 2nhnn .

Proof. The result follows by using Lemma 3.6 and

n−1 ∇nhnn = ∇nH − ∇nhii . Xi=1

4. MINIMAL GRAPHICAL HYPERSURFACES WITH FREE BOUNDARY ARE FLAT DISKS Now assume that

(3) sV > 0 . We shall prove Theorem 1.1.

Proof. Apply the elliptic maximum principle to the evolution of Q ≥ 0 to see that there is no n interior maxima. On the boundary we note that Q = u = 0 using F = νS and the Neumann boundary condition. 2 2 Therefore Q = u vV = 0 everywhere on M. By hypothesis vV 6= 0 and so the support function vanishes on M. Using now the smoothness assumption, non-ﬂat cones are ruled out, leaving only the possibility that M is a ﬂat disk.

Remark. It is only necessary to assume that sV > 0 on the interior, it may a-priori assume zeroes on the boundary. Remark. The bounded curvature and graphicality condition are required to bound the coefﬁcient of the gradient term in the evolution of Q. ∗ 6 GLENWHEELERANDVALENTINA-MIRAWHEELER

5. CURVATURE GAP We require the isoperimetric equality stated in our introduction so we derive it here. Proof of Proposition 1.4. This is a simple computation using the divergencetheorem. We include it here for completeness while noting that more general proofs and applications can be found in [5, 8, 12]. We calculate

M 2 0= −Hν , F dµ = h∆F, F i dµ = − |∇F | + h∇ Sn F, F i dS , Z Z Z Z ν M M M ∂M where we have used minimality in the ﬁrst equality, the evolution of the position vector in the n second and the divergencetheorem in the last. We denote the unit outer normal to Sn by νS . Due n to the perpendicular boundary condition of the minimal hypersurface we also have νS = ν∂M . n S n 2 n Note that ν = F on ∂M ⊂ S , |∇F | = n, and that ∇νS F |∂M n = F giving us that n n h∇νS F, F i =1 on ∂M ⊂ S . This completes our proof. We are now ready to prove Theorem 1.3. Proof of Theorem 1.3. We will use the divergence theorem, this time on the second fundamental form squared. Assume for the moment that 2 (4) sup |A|2 ≤ n inf |A|2 . M ∂M Now compute

2 n 2 2 2 ∆|A| dµ = ∇νS |A| dS = − 2|A| dS − 2nhnndS , ZM Z∂M Z∂M Z∂M 2 2 where we have used Proposition 3.7 in the last equality. If n = 2 then 2nhnn = n|A| and we ﬁnd ∆|A|2dµ = −4 |A|2dS . ZM Z∂M If n> 2, we are unable to use the last term at all since nothing is preventing hnn from vanishing even though the full |A|2 does not. In this case we ﬁnd

∆|A|2dµ ≤−2 |A|2dS . ZM Z∂M In either case, Lemma 3.5 implies 1 |∇A|2dµ = |A|4dµ + ∆|A|2dµ ZM ZM 2 ZM 2 ≤ |A|4dµ − |A|2dS ≤ |M| sup |A|2 − |∂M| inf |A|2 . ZM Z∂M M ∂M Now (4) combined with Proposition 1.4 yields

|∇A|2dµ ≤ 0 . ZM This gives us that |∇A|2 ≡ 0 everywhere on M, implying that all principal curvatures of F are constant. This implies the second fundamental form squared is constant and using the boundary derivative from Proposition 3.7 we see that |A|2 ≡ 0. Thus M is a part of a plane. The only plane with perpendicular boundary condition are equatorial disks. But this is a contradiction with our hypothesis that M is not a standard ﬂat disk. MINIMALHYPERSURFACESINTHEBALLWITHFREEBOUNDARY 7

Therefore the assumption (4) is false, and we conclude the result of the theorem.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors would like to thank Frank Morgan for his interest in this small contribution and for helping point out the correct references. The second author is supported by ARC grant Discovery grant DP150100375 at the University of Wollongong.

REFERENCES [1] Frederick J Almgren. The homotopy groups of the integral cycle groups. Topology, 1(4):257–299, 1962. [2] Frederick J Almgren. The theory of varifolds. Mimeographed notes, Princeton, 1965. [3] Lucas Ambrozio, Alessandro Carlotto, and Ben Sharp. Index estimates for free boundary minimal hypersurfaces. Mathematische Annalen, pages 1–16, 2016. [4] Lucas Ambrozio and Ivaldo Nunes. A gap theorem for free boundary minimal surfaces in the three-ball. arXiv preprint arXiv:1608.05689, 2016. [5] Simon Brendle. A sharp bound for the area of minimal surfaces in the unit ball. Geometric and Functional Analysis, 22(3):621–626, 2012. [6] Jaigyoung Choe and Sung-Ho Park. Capillary surfaces in a convex cone. Mathematische Zeitschrift, 267(3-4):875– 886, 2011. [7] Klaus Ecker and Gerhard Huisken. Mean curvature evolution of entire graphs. Annals of Mathematics, 130(2):453– 471, 1989. [8] Herbert Federer. Geometric measure theory. Springer, 2014. [9] Ailana Fraser and Richard Schoen. The first steklov eigenvalue, conformal geometry, and minimal surfaces. Ad- vances in Mathematics, 226(5):4011–4030, 2011. [10] Ailana Fraser and Richard Schoen. Sharp eigenvalue bounds and minimal surfaces in the ball. Inventiones mathe- maticae, pages 1–68, 2012. [11] Ailana Fraser and Richard Schoen. Uniqueness theorems for free boundary minimal disks in space forms. Interna- tional Mathematics Research Notices, 2015(17), 2015. [12] Kit Hanes. Isoperimetric inequalities for manifolds with boundary. Journal of Differential Geometry, 7(3-4):525– 534, 1972. [13] Haizhong Li and Changwei Xiong. A gap theorem for free boundary minimal surfaces in geodesic balls of hyperbolic space and hemisphere. arXiv preprint arXiv:1701.04981, 2017. [14] Martin Li and Xin Zhou. Curvature estimates for stable free boundary minimal hypersurfaces. arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.02605, 2016. [15] Martin Li and Xin Zhou. Min-max theory for free boundary minimal hypersurfaces i-regularity theory. arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.02612, 2016. [16] Rafael López and Juncheol Pyo. Capillary surfaces in a cone. Journal of Geometry and Physics, 76:256–262, 2014. [17] Rafael López and Juncheol Pyo. Capillary surfaces of constant mean curvature in a right solid cylinder. Mathema- tische Nachrichten, 287(11-12):1312–1319, 2014. [18] Andrea Mondino and Emanuele Spadaro. On an isoperimetric-isodiametric inequality. Analysis & PDE, 10(1):95– 126, 2017. [19] Johannes C C Nitsche. Stationary partitioning of convex bodies. Archive for rational mechanics and analysis, 89(1):1–19, 1985. [20] Jon T Pitts. Existence and Regularity of Minimal Surfaces on Riemannian Manifolds, volume 27 of Mathematical Notes. Princeton University Press, 1981. [21] Pam Sargent. Index bounds for free boundary minimal surfaces of convex bodies. arXiv preprint arXiv:1605.09143, 2016. [22] Richard Schoen and Leon Simon. Regularity of stable minimal hypersurfaces. Communications in Pure and Applied Mathematics, 34(6):741–797, 1981. [23] Graham Smith, Ari Stern, Hung Tran, and Detang Zhou. On the morse index of higher-dimensional free boundary minimal catenoids. arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.00977, 2017. [24] Axel Stahl. Convergence of solutions to the mean curvature flow with a neumann boundary condition. Calculus of Variations and Partial Differential Equations, 4(5):421–441, 1996. [25] Hung Tran. Index characterization for free boundary minimal surfaces. arXiv preprint arXiv:1609.01651, 2016. ∗ 8 GLENWHEELERANDVALENTINA-MIRAWHEELER

[26] Thomas Vogel. Uniqueness for certain surfaces of prescribed mean curvature. Paciﬁc Journal of Mathematics, 134(1):197–207, 1988.

GLEN WHEELER, INSTITUTE FOR MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, UNIVERSITYOF WOLLONGONG, NORTHFIELDS AVENUE,WOLLONGONG, NSW, 2522, AUSTRALIA, EMAIL: [email protected]

VALENTINA-MIRA WHEELER, INSTITUTE FOR MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS,UNIVERSITYOF WOL- LONGONG,NORTHFIELDS AVENUE,WOLLONGONG, NSW, 2522, AUSTRALIA, EMAIL: [email protected]