arXiv:1906.10108v4 [math.DG] 16 Aug 2021 pnrbnl n qaeroot square a and bundle spinor iebundle line a ei ag ed ..a i.e. field, gauge netic 2]i ocnie the consider to is [29] metric u isenfil qain for equations field Einstein uum h awl qainfor equation Maxwell the a o xs lblyon bun globally spinor exist standard not the structure, may spin a admit necessarily the ypetcgoer n oooyof topology and geometry symplectic oriented o pair a for spinor nainsof invariants Spin ups that Suppose Date Let h ebr–itneutos[8,[9,[0 r ata d partial are [40] [39], [38], equations Seiberg–Witten The 4 dmninlEnti edeutosfor equations field Einstein -dimensional uut1,2021. 17, August : ( c g φ ,g X, -structure osdrsltost h qain ntecs fSasaki of case the in equations the to solutions consider icebnlsoe K¨ahler–Einstein surfaces. over bundles circle o-iert nteKlz–li icebundle circle Kaluza–Klein the on non-linearity solutions irreducible to equivalent are structure Y lutions pnsrcueon structure spin a easre noaKlz–li metric Kaluza–Klein a into absorbed be nwse spinor untwisted n utbecrl bundle circle suitable a and A 4 ( ∈ BSTRACT ITO H EBR–ITNEUTOSTO EQUATIONS SEIBERG–WITTEN THE OF LIFT A -manifolds. on ,φ A, X L Γ( Y X ) oal h pnrbundle spinor the Locally . ( ) ,φ A, S easot,coe,oine,Riemannian oriented, closed, smooth, a be ossigo emta connection Hermitian a of consisting , hc sivratudrtecrl cin The action. circle the under invariant is which M X c hc aenmru plctost h ifrnilgeome differential the to applications numerous have which + ecnie Riemannian consider We . s ) ) X c sa is hs qain a eue odfieteSeiberg–Witten the define to used be can equations These . oteSiegWte qain on equations Seiberg–Witten the to 5 KALUZA–KLEIN on 1 ψ -manifold -form Y 4 on mnfl ihaLrnzmetric Lorentz a with -manifold ihrsett hs tutrsaspinor a structures these to respect With . X A X Y . ihascae pnrbundle spinor associated with However, . n a and A Y .I 1. L .J .HAMILTON D. J. M. ∈ g over Y 1 2 Y U(1) Ω ..atitdsio ude Since bundle. spinor twisted a i.e. , NTRODUCTION = ie aihn fteRcitno)te imply then tensor) Ricci the of vanishing (i.e. 1 X ( 4 M M guefield -gauge -manifolds. uhta the that such 4 1 -manifolds ) × Spin g h rgnlKlz–li naz[27], ansatz Kaluza–Klein original The . Y A 5 S S -MANIFOLDS on 1 X c g c n combine and M ψ Y srcue laseito closed, on exist always -structures satno rdc fastandard a of product tensor a is ( eso htirdcbeso- irreducible that show We . faDrceuto ihcubic with equation Dirac a of A ,g Y, ( iheetoantcsuc and source electromagnetic with Spin ( ,g X, ,g X, o the for Y A ) X c A sa plcto we application an As . X 5 srcueon -structure ) mnflswihare which -manifolds ) on o h given the for Spin iha with g 4 l n h qaeroot square the and dle φ M g mnfl.W choose We -manifold. S L M on X c c feeta equations ifferential srcuecan -structure n oiieWeyl positive a and n nelectromag- an and 5 Spin X and dmninlvac- -dimensional n characteristic and it oan to lifts X c A -structure Spin it to lifts oaLorentz a to X c - osnot does try, 2 M. J. D. HAMILTON

Let π : Y X be the principal circle bundle with Euler class e(Y ) = c1(L). → c sc For this choice of Euler class the Spin -structure X on X lifts to a spin struc- c ture sY on Y . For the associated spinor bundles, every spinor φ Γ(S ) has a ∈ X canonical lift to an untwisted spinor ψ = Q(φ) Γ(SY ). We can think of the connection A as a U(1)-connection∈ A Ω1(Y, iR) on the Y and define the Kaluza–Klein metric ∈ A ∗ gY = g = π gX A A Y − ⊗ on Y , which is a Riemannian metric, because A is assumed to be imaginary-valued. Theorem 1.1. We consider the Seiberg–Witten equations on X: X DA φ = 0 (1.1) + FA = σ(φ, φ). c+ Let φ Γ(SX ) be a positive Weyl spinor on X and ψ = Q(φ) Γ(SY ) the lift to Y . If (∈A, φ) is a solution to the Seiberg–Witten equations (1.1), then∈ ψ is a solution to the equation 1 1 DY ψ = ψ 2ψ ψ. (1.2) 8| | − 2 Y A Here D is the Dirac operator on SY for the Kaluza–Klein metric gY . If φ does not vanish identically on X, then the converse holds as well, i.e. if ψ = Q(φ) is a solution to equation (1.2), then (A, φ) is a solution to the Seiberg–Witten equations (1.1). Theorem 1.1 is a special case of the more general Theorem 7.5. In particular, the on Y in Theorem 1.1 is of odd type, cf. Section 4. If X is a spin manifold (i.e. admits a spin structure), we can choose the spin structure on Y to be even. We also consider the generalization to Kaluza–Klein circle bundles with fibres of length 2πr, where r can vary over the base manifold X, see Section 9. The overall sign on the right hand side of equation (1.2) depends on the relation between Clifford multiplication in dimensions 4 and 5, cf. Remark 7.9. Remark 1.2. Pairs (A, φ) and spinors ψ are called irreducible if φ and ψ are not identically zero on X and Y , respectively. The theorem implies that (A, φ) is an irreducible solution to the Seiberg–Witten equations (1.1) on (X, gX ) if and only if ψ = Q(φ) is an irreducible solution to equation (1.2) on the Kaluza–Klein circle A bundle (Y, gY ). Reducible solutions (A, 0) to the Seiberg–Witten equations are + given by connections A so that FA = 0. The trivial spinor ψ 0 is a solution to equation (1.2) without a condition on A. ≡ c sc s The pullback of a Spin -structure X to a spin structure Y on the circle bundle sc Y X defined by the characteristic line bundle of X has been discussed in [35]. The→ proof of Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 7.5 depends on a calculation in [3] of the Dirac operator DY on lifted spinors ψ = Q(φ), see Proposition 6.5. The implica- tion in the case φ 0 from equation (1.2) to the Seiberg–Witten equations (1.1) follows from the unique6≡ continuation property of Dirac operators, cf. Proposition 7.3. A LIFT OF THE SEIBERG–WITTEN EQUATIONS TO KALUZA–KLEIN 5-MANIFOLDS 3

Both Seiberg–Witten equations on X combine to a single equation on Y because the Dirac operator DY maps the lift of a positive Weyl spinor on X to the lift of a mixed spinor. Similarly the map (with Clifford multiplication in the second entry) f : Γ(Sc+) Γ(Sc−) Γ(Sc+) X −→ X ⊕ X φ DX φ, (F + σ(φ, φ)) φ , 7−→ A A − · has mixed image. Equation (1.2) is a lift of the equation f(φ) = 0. Note that the quadratic non-linearity σ(φ, φ) in the Seiberg–Witten equations becomes the non-linearity ψ 2. | | Remark 1.3. In Seiberg–Witten theory one often considers the space of all solutions c sc (A, φ) to equations (1.1) where the Spin -structure X and Riemannian metric gX are considered as fixed parameters. For the corresponding space of solutions ψ A A of equation (1.2) on Y the Riemannian metric gY varies, because gY depends on A. For a given metric gX , the Kaluza–Klein construction can be viewed as an embedding of the space of connections on Y into the space of Riemannian metrics on Y . Remark 1.4. The implications of the invariance of the Seiberg–Witten equations under gauge transformations and charge conjugation are discussed in Section 8.

Remark 1.5. Equation (1.2) makes sense for spinors ψ Γ(SY ) on any oriented ∈ Riemannian 5-manifold (Y, gY ) (or, more generally, an (n + 1)-manifold of ar- bitrary dimension n + 1) with a spin structure. The solutions of an equation of type DY ψ = κ ψ 2ψ + mψ − | | with constants κ, m R on (Y, gY ) arise as critical points of the functional (see [26]) ∈

S[ψ]= [ψ] dvolg L Y ZY for the quartic Lagrangian 1 [ψ]= ψ, DY ψ m ψ 2 + κ ψ 4. L h i− | | 2 | | This Lagrangian is related to the four-fermion interaction studied in the 2-dimensional Gross–Neveu model [22]. As an application we consider in Section 10 the Boothby-Wang construction of circle bundles over closed K¨ahler–Einstein surfaces (X, gX ,J,ω) with RicgX = c λgX and Einstein constant λ = 0. There are canonical Spin -structures on X with characteristic line bundles6 K and K−1, defined by the complex structure J. The (perturbed) Seiberg–Witten equations for both Spinc-structures have canonical solutions (A0, φ0) with φ0 const. In this situation the circle bundle (Y, gY ) is a Sasaki η-Einstein 5-manifold| | ≡ (if the S1-fibres have a suitable constant length, depending on λ ) and the spinors φ0 lift to eigenspinors ψ of the Dirac operator Y | | D . If the Einstein constant λ is negative and gX normalized so that λ = 4, the Y − spinors ψ are harmonic, i.e. in the kernel of D . If λ > 0 and gX normalized so 4 M. J. D. HAMILTON that λ = 6, the 5-manifold (Y, gY ) is Sasaki–Einstein and the spinors ψ are Killing spinors. Remark 1.6. Other generalizations of the Seiberg–Witten equations to 5-manifolds can be found in several references, including [14], [30], [36]. Convention. In the following all manifolds are smooth, non-empty, connected and oriented if not stated otherwise.

2. KALUZA–KLEIN CIRCLE BUNDLES 4 Let (X , gX ) be a closed, oriented, Riemannian 4-manifold and π : Y 5 X4 −→ the oriented principal S1-bundle with Euler class e H2(X; Z) and group action S1 Y Y . We denote by K the vector field on Y∈along the fibres, given by the infinitesimal× → action of a fixed element in the Lie algebra u(1) of S1, normalized such that the flow of K has period 2π. We define a Riemannian metric gY on Y with the following Kaluza–Klein ansatz [11]: Let A Ω1(Y, iR) be a U(1)-connection on the principal bundle Y X. This means that∈ A is invariant under the circle action, →

LKA = 0, and normalized such that A(K) i. 2 ≡ The curvature 2-form FA Ω (X, iR) satisfies ∈ ∗ π FA = dA. Definition 2.1. The Riemannian metric A ∗ gY = g = π gX A A Y − ⊗ is called the Kaluza–Klein metric on Y . We call the principal circle bundle Y X → over a (X, gX ) together with the Kaluza–Klein metric gY for a connection A on Y a Kaluza–Klein circle bundle.

The metric gY has the following properties: The horizontal bundle H = ker A is orthogonal to the circle fibres. • ∗ gY H = π gX . • | gY (K, K) = 1, i.e. the circle fibres have length 2π. • K is a Killing vector field for gY , i.e. LK gY = 0. • The Kaluza–Klein metric gY on Y is completely characterized by these properties. Let E X be the complex line bundle (unique up to isomorphism) with → c1(E) = e. We can define E as the complex line bundle associated to Y via the standard representation of S1 on C. Then E has a Hermitian metric and Y can be thought of as the unit circle bundle in E. The connection A on Y induces a connection (covariant derivative) on E which is compatible with the Hermitian metric and vice versa. A LIFT OF THE SEIBERG–WITTEN EQUATIONS TO KALUZA–KLEIN 5-MANIFOLDS 5

Lemma 2.2. The kernel of π∗ : H2(X; Z) H2(Y ; Z) is Ze. −→ Proof. Recall from Convention 1 that X is assumed non-empty and connected, 0 Z Z hence H (X; ) ∼= . The claim is then equivalent to exactness of the Gysin sequence ∪e π∗ H0(X; Z) H2(X; Z) H2(Y ; Z) . . . −→ −→ −→ at H2(X; Z).  The lemma implies: Proposition 2.3. Let π : Y X be the principal circle bundle with Euler class e and L X a complex line→ bundle on X. Then π∗L is a trivial line bundle if and only if →c (L) Ze. 1 ∈ sc c Let X be a Spin -structure on X with characteristic line bundle L. The heuristic sc idea to define the lift of X to a spin structure on Y is to choose a Kaluza–Klein Z sc circle bundle Y X with Euler class e, so that c1(L) e. We can then lift X c → sc ∈ ∗ to a Spin -structure Y on Y with characteristic line bundle π L. Since this bundle is trivial, it corresponds to a spin structure sY on Y . The details will be worked out in Sections 3–5 below.

3. SPINSTRUCTURESAND Spinc-STRUCTURESONMANIFOLDS We collect some background material on spin and Spinc-structures (more details can be found, for example, in [12], [17], [33], [34]). Let (M, gM ) be an oriented Riemannian manifold of dimension n. 3.1. Existence and classification. We consider the double covering λ: Spin(n) SO(n), −→ which is the universal covering if n 3. With respect to the Riemannian metric gM ≥ the set of oriented orthonormal frames in T M forms a principal bundle PSO(M) over M with action P (M) SO(n) P (M). SO × −→ SO A spin structure on M is a principal bundle P (M) Spin(n) P (M) Spin × −→ Spin over M together with a smooth bundle map s: PSpin(M) PSO(M) which is equivariant with respect to the homomorphism λ, i.e. the following→ diagram com- mutes: P (M) Spin(n) P (M) Spin × Spin

s×λ s M

P (M) SO(n) P (M) SO × SO 6 M. J. D. HAMILTON

It follows that the spin structure s is a double covering which restricts on each fibre of the principal bundles to a double covering equivalent to λ. We denote by

κn : Spin(n) U(∆n) −→ the unitary complex (Dirac) spinor representation and by

SM = P (M) κ ∆n Spin × n the associated Hermitian (Dirac) spinor bundle of s. The spinor representation is the restriction of an irreducible representation of n the complex Clifford algebra Cl(n) on ∆n. The embedding R Cl(n) and the ∗Rn C C ⊂ isomorphism Λ ∼= l(n) yield bilinear, fibrewise Clifford multiplications ⊗

T M SM SM , (V, φ) γ(V )φ = V φ ∗ × −→ 7−→ · Λ T M SM SM , (τ, φ) γ(τ)φ = τ φ × −→ 7−→ · which are compatible with the Hermitian bundle metric on SM and extend via ∗ ∗ ∗ gM to the dual bundles T M and Λ T M and to the complexifications of these bundles. Clifford multiplication with tangent vectors V,W T M satisfies ∈ V W φ + W V φ = 2gM (V,W )φ φ SM . · · · · − ∀ ∈ The Levi–Civita connection of the Riemannian metric gM defines a Clifford con- M nection on SM . Together with Clifford multiplication by tangent vectors we get the Dirac∇ operator M D : Γ(SM ) Γ(SM ), −→ a first order linear differential operator. If n = dim M is even, there is a unique irreducible representation of Cl(n) on ∆n and the spinor representation of Spin(n) decomposes into the direct sum + − of two irreducible Weyl representations on subspaces ∆n , ∆n of half dimension. There is a corresponding decomposition of the spinor bundle + − SM = S S (3.1) M ⊕ M into Weyl spinor bundles. Clifford multiplication with a tangent vector and the Dirac operator map T M S± S∓ × M −→ M (3.2) DM : Γ(S± ) Γ(S∓ ). M −→ M If n = dim M is odd, there are two inequivalent irreducible representation of Cl(n) on ∆n and the restrictions to Spin(n) are equivalent and irreducible. In dimension 4 and 5, the cases we are most interested in, both ∆4 and ∆5 can C4 ± be identified as a complex vector space with ∆= . The Weyl spinor spaces ∆4 are given as the 1-eigenspaces of ± ωC = e e e e Cl(4) (3.3) − 1 2 3 4 ∈ A LIFT OF THE SEIBERG–WITTEN EQUATIONS TO KALUZA–KLEIN 5-MANIFOLDS 7

4 for an oriented orthonormal basis e1, e2, e3, e4 of R . Clifford multiplications 4 4 4 5 · and 5 on ∆ are related as follows: Identify R = 0 R R and let · 5 { } × ⊂ e0, e1, e2, e3, e4 be an orthonormal basis of R adapted to this embedding. Then

ek 5 φ = ek 4 φ · · (3.4) e φ = ie e e e φ 0 ·5 1 2 3 4 ·4 for k = 1, 2, 3, 4 and all φ ∆. This corresponds to the irreducible representation ∈ of Cl(5) where ωC = ie0e1e2e3e4 Cl(5) acts as +1 (in the other representation this element acts as −1, see [33, Ch.∈ I, Proposition 5.9]). Similarly, the Lie− group Spinc(n) is defined by Spinc(n) = (Spin(n) U(1))/Z , × 2 where the non-trivial element of Z2 acts as ( 1, 1). There are Lie group homo- morphisms − − λc : Spinc(n) SO(n), [g, z] λ(g) −→ 7−→ χ: Spinc(n) U(1), [g, z] z2. −→ 7−→ These homomorphisms together yield a double covering (λc,χ): Spinc(n) SO(n) U(1). −→ × A Spinc-structure on M is a principal bundle c P c (M) Spin (n) P c (M) Spin × −→ Spin c over M together with a smooth bundle map s : PSpinc (M) PSO(M), so that the following diagram commutes: →

c P c (M) Spin (n) P c (M) Spin × Spin

sc×λc sc M

P (M) SO(n) P (M) SO × SO For a Spinc-structure sc the homomorphism χ defines an associated principal U(1)- bundle

P (M)= P c (M) χ U(1) U(1) Spin × and with the standard representation of U(1) on C a complex line bundle

L = Lsc = P c (M) χ C Spin × with a Hermitian metric, called the characteristic line bundle of the Spinc-structure (in the case of dim M = 4, the complex line bundle L is sometimes called the determinant line bundle because it is isomorphic to the top exterior power of both Weyl spinor bundles). 8 M. J. D. HAMILTON

In the following we denote the projection of these principal bundles to M by πSO, πU(1), etc. It is sometimes useful to consider the SO(n) U(1)-principal bundle given by the fibre product × P (M)= (p,q) P (M) P (M) π (p)= π (q) . SO×U(1) { ∈ SO × U(1) | SO U(1) } c c A Spin -structure s with PU(1)(M) yields a double covering c ˜s : P c (M) P (M) Spin −→ SO×U(1) which restricts on each fibre to a double covering equivalent to (λc,χ) (see e.g. [33, Appendix D]). The spinor representation κn of Spin(n) together with the standard represen- c c tation of U(1) define the unitary (Dirac) spinor representation κn of Spin (n) on c the complex vector space ∆n.A Spin -structure defines an associated Hermitian (Dirac) spinor bundle c S = P c (M) κc ∆n M Spin × n with a Clifford multiplication. The Levi–Civita connection of the Riemannian met- ric gM together with the choice of a Hermitian connection A on L define a Clifford connection M on Sc . We get a Dirac operator ∇A M DM : Γ(Sc ) Γ(Sc ). A M −→ M c c+ c− In even dimension n = dim M there is a splitting SM = SM SM into Weyl spinor bundles so that the properties corresponding to (3.2) hold.⊕ Definition 3.1. Let (M) and c(M) denote the set of all isomorphism classes of spin structures and SpinS c-structuresS on M. We denote the isomorphism class of a spin structure s or a Spinc-structure sc by the same symbol. The structure of the sets (M) and c(M) is well-known. S S Proposition 3.2. The set (M) is non-empty if and only if the second Stiefel- S Whitney class of T M vanishes, w2(M) = 0. In this case (M) is a torsor (a set 1 S with a free and transitive action) over H (M; Z2). Proposition 3.3. The set c(M) is non-empty if and only if there exists an element 2 S c α H (M; Z) with w2(M) α mod 2. In this case (M) is a torsor over H2∈(M; Z) and ≡ S w (M) c (Lsc ) mod 2 2 ≡ 1 for every Spinc-structure sc. Denoting the action of an element α H2(X; Z) on a Spinc-structure by sc sc + α, the action on the associated Chern∈ class is 7→ given by c1(Lsc ) c1(Lsc ) + 2α. Moreover, for any oriented 4-manifold M the set c(M) is non-empty.7→ S 2 Remark 3.4. We can write the class α H (M; Z) as α = c1(E) for a complex ∈ c c line bundle E over M and then denote the action by s s E and Lsc ⊗2 7→ ⊗ 7→ Lsc E . ⊗ Definition 3.5. If the sets (M) or c(M) are non-empty, we say that M is a spin or Spinc-manifold, respectively.S S A LIFT OF THE SEIBERG–WITTEN EQUATIONS TO KALUZA–KLEIN 5-MANIFOLDS 9

Hence our notion of spin and Spinc-manifold signifies only the existence of such a structure and not that a specific one has been chosen. 3.2. Relation between spin and Spinc-structures. Our goal in this section is to understand the correspondence between spin structures and Spinc-structures with vanishing first Chern class. Definition 3.6. We define the set c c c (M)= s (M) c (Lsc ) = 0 . S0 { ∈ S | 1 } Consider the Bockstein sequence ·2 mod 2 β ·2 H1(M; Z) H1(M; Z) H1(M; Z ) H2(M; Z) H2(M; Z). −→ −→ 2 −→ −→ associated to the short exact sequence ·2 mod 2 0 Z Z Z 0. −→ −→ −→ 2 −→ We have 1 Z 1 Z Z b1(M) ker β ∼= H (M; )/2H (M; ) ∼= ( 2) 2 im β = Tor2(H (M; Z)), where Tor2 denotes the elements of order 2. The following lemma follows imme- diately from Proposition 3.3. Lemma 3.7. If the set c(M) is non-empty, then it is a torsor over the group im β. S0 The following theorem shows that spin structures induce Spinc-structures. The first part of this theorem was proved in [20, p. 49-50]. The second part on isomor- phisms is a direct consequence. Theorem 3.8. Let M be a spin manifold. Then there exists a surjective map Θ: (M) c(M) S −→ S0 1 which is equivariant with respect to the Bockstein epimorphism β : H (M; Z2) im β. It descends to an isomorphism of torsors → ∼ Θ:¯ (M)/ker β = c(M) S −→ S0 1 Z with respect to the induced group isomorphism H (M; 2)/ker β ∼= im β. In particular, (M) decomposes into im β subsets, each of which contains ker β isomorphismS classes of spin structures| that| map to the same isomorphism class| of| Spinc-structures. sc s c Definition 3.9. We denote by 0 = Θ( ) the Spin -structure induced by the spin structure s. Definition 3.10. Let s be a spin structure and sc a Spinc-structure on M with characteristic line bundle L. By Proposition 3.3 and Remark 3.4 there exists a 1 1 2 sc sc 2 unique complex line bundle L on M, up to isomorphism, so that = 0 L . 1 ⊗2 ⊗ This line bundle satisfies (L 2 ) ∼= L and is called the square root of L determined by s. 10 M. J. D. HAMILTON

A right inverse to the map Θ can be constructed as follows. c c Proposition 3.11. A Spin -structure s on M with c1(Lsc ) = 0 together with a trivialization of Lsc determines a unique isomorphism class s of spin structures on M so that Θ(s)= sc. Proof. We first give an explicit construction of the map Θ, cf. [33, Example D.5]. c Given a spin structure s: PSpin(M) PSO(M) we define the Spin (n)-principal bundle → (P (M) U(1))/Z , Spin × 2 where the non-trivial element of Z acts as ( 1, 1). We then get a Spinc-structure 2 − − Θ(s): (P (M) U(1))/Z P (M), [p, z] s(p). Spin × 2 −→ SO 7−→ Conversely, consider a Spinc-structure sc with trivialized bundle P (M)= M U(1). U(1) × There exists a bundle isomorphism ∼ P (M) U(1) = P (M) SO × −→ SO×U(1) (p, z) (p, (π (p), z)). 7−→ SO The Spinc-structure defines a double covering c ˜s : P c (M) P (M) U(1) Spin −→ SO × which is equivariant with respect to the homomorphism (λc,χ). The double cover- c ing ˜s restricted to the preimage PSpin(M) of PSO(M) 1 together with the s × { } action of ker χ ∼= Spin(n) defines a spin structure on M. By construction P (M) P c (M). The bundle isomorphism Spin ⊂ Spin (P (M) U(1))/Z P c (M), [p, z] pz Spin × 2 −→ Spin 7−→ shows that the spin structure s satisfies Θ(s)= sc.  Remark 3.12. The construction of the spin structure from the Spinc-structure is from [35, Lemma 3.1]. In this reference, however, the dependence on the trivial- ization of Lsc is not stated explicitly.

4. SPINAND Spinc-STRUCTURESON KALUZA–KLEIN CIRCLE BUNDLES Lemma 4.1. Let X be an oriented manifold and π : Y X the principal circle bundle with Euler class e H2(X; Z). Then Y is spin→ if and only if one of the following conditions holds:∈ (1) X is spin (2) w (X) e mod 2 2 ≡ Proof. We follow the proof in [23]. The manifold Y is spin if and only if w2(Y )= 0. Applying the Whitney sum formula to the decomposition TY = π∗T X R, ∗ ⊕ where R is the trivial vertical line bundle, shows that w2(Y )= π w2(X). Similar to the proof of Lemma 2.2 exactness of the long exact Z2-Gysin sequence ∪e mod 2 π∗ H0(X; Z ) H2(X; Z ) H2(Y ; Z ) . . . 2 −→ 2 −→ 2 −→ A LIFT OF THE SEIBERG–WITTEN EQUATIONS TO KALUZA–KLEIN 5-MANIFOLDS 11

0 Z Z ∗ together with H (X; 2) ∼= 2 by Convention 1 imply that the kernel of π on H2(X; Z ) is equal to 0, e mod 2 .  2 { } Spin structures on the total space of a principal circle bundle can be either even or odd with respect to the circle action [5, 10, 1, 37]. Let (X, gX ) be an oriented Riemannian n-manifold and Y X the Kaluza–Klein circle bundle with Rie- A → 1 mannian metric gY and free, isometric S -action denoted by Φ: S1 Y Y, (eit,y) eity. × −→ 7→ 1 The induced free action of S on PSO(Y ), given by the differential, commutes with the SO(n + 1)-action and defines a smooth family of diffeomorphisms α: [0, 2π] P (Y ) P (Y ). × SO −→ SO Suppose that Y is spin and sY : PSpin(Y ) PSO(Y ) a spin structure on Y . The family α then lifts to a smooth family of diffeomorphisms→ α˜ : [0, 2π] P (Y ) P (Y ) × Spin −→ Spin because the manifold PSpin(Y ) is a double covering of PSO(Y ). We have α0 = Id and specify the lift α˜ uniquely by α˜0 = Id. Since α2π = Id and the bundles are connected manifolds by Convention 1, there are two possibilities: 1 1 1 α˜2π = Id: the S -action on Y then lifts to a free S -action S PSpin(Y ) • 1 × → PSpin(Y ). The S -action commutes with the Spin(n + 1)-action and the projection P (Y ) P (Y ) is S1-equivariant. In this case the spin Spin → SO structure sY is called even (or projectable). 1 α˜2π is multiplication with 1 Spin(n + 1) in each fibre: the S -action • − ∈1 on Y then does not lift to an S -action on PSpin(Y ). In this case the spin structure sY is called odd (or non-projectable). Remark 4.2. In the case of an even spin structure on Y we get a free action of 1 Spin(n + 1) S on PSpin(Y ). In the case of an odd spin structure on Y the (non-free) action× Φ:ˆ S1 Y Y, (eit,y) e2ity × −→ 7−→ c does lift to an action on PSpin(Y ), which induces a free action of Spin (n +1) = 1 (Spin(n + 1) S )/Z2 on PSpin(Y ). The fibres of× the principal bundle P (Y ) Y X are principal Spin(n + Spin → → 1)-bundles over S1. These fibres are diffeomorphic to Spin(n + 1) S1 in the even case (with sections of the Spin(n + 1)-bundles over S1 defined by× the lift α˜) and to Spinc(n + 1) in the odd case. Definition 4.3. For a Kaluza–Klein circle bundle Y X we denote the sets → of isomorphism classes of even and odd spin structures on Y by even(Y ) and (Y ). S Sodd Definition 4.4. For a class δ H2(X; Z) define ∈ c c c (X)= s (X) c (Lsc )= δ . Sδ { ∈ S | 1 } 12 M. J. D. HAMILTON

Theorem 4.5. Let π : Y X be the Kaluza–Klein circle bundle with Euler class 2 Z → A e H (X; ) and Riemannian metric gY . Assume that Y is spin. Then there exists∈ a map Ξ: (Y ) (X) c(X) S −→ S ∐ Se with the following properties: =∼ (1) The restriction of Ξ to even(Y ) is a bijection Ξeven : even(Y ) (X). (2) The restriction of Ξ to S (Y ) is a surjection Ξ : S (Y ) −→։ Sc(X). Sodd odd Sodd − Se Proof. For a proof in the case of even spin structures on Y see [3, p. 236–237] and [10, Proposition 2.2]. For the construction of Ξodd see [3, p. 242] and [10, Proposition 2.3]. For both cases, see also [37, p. 24, 27–29], which refers to [3] and [35]. c In [35, Proposition 3.1] it is shown that every element of e(X) lifts to an el- ement of (Y ). However, it is not immediately clear thatS this right inverse to S Ξodd can be assumed to have image in the odd spin structures. We therefore prove sc c this fact (compare with Proposition 3.11). Let X be a Spin -structure on X with sc . We first construct a spin structure on the -principal bundle c1(L X ) = e SO(n) ∗ π PSO(X) over Y : The double covering c ˜s : P c (X) P (X) X Spin −→ SO×U(1) is equivariant with respect to the homomorphism (λc,χ). We restrict the Spinc(n)- c sc action on PSpin (X) to a free action of Spin(n) ∼= ker χ. The double covering ˜X is then equivariant with respect to

(λc, 1) : Spin(n) SO(n) 1 = SO(n). (4.1) |ker χ −→ × { } ∼ We consider the pullback bundles

∗ π P c (X)= (y,q) Y P c (X) π(y)= π c (q) Spin { ∈ × Spin | Spin } π∗P (X)= (y, p, w) Y P (X) P (X) π(y)= π (p)= π (w) . SO×U(1) { ∈ × SO × U(1) | SO U(1) } There is an induced, equivariant double covering

∗ ∗ c ˜t: π P c (X) π P (X), (y,q) (y, ˜s (q)). Spin −→ SO×U(1) 7−→ X The assumption on the first Chern class of sc implies that , hence L X PU(1)(X) = Y ∗ ∼ π PU(1)(X) is tautologically trivial and there is an isomorphism

∼ π∗P (X) U(1) = π∗P (X), (y,p,z) (y,p,zy). SO × −→ SO×U(1) 7−→ ∗ The restriction of ˜t to the preimage PSpin(n)(Y ) of π PSO(X) 1 is equivariant × { }∗ with respect to the homomorphism (4.1), i.e. a spin structure on π PSO(X). We then get a spin structure sY on Y by extending the fibres via

∗ P (Y )= P (Y ) j Spin(n+1), P (Y ) = (π P (X)) i SO(n+1) Spin Spin(n) × SO ∼ SO × A LIFT OF THE SEIBERG–WITTEN EQUATIONS TO KALUZA–KLEIN 5-MANIFOLDS 13 with respect to compatible embeddings

j Spin(n) Spin(n + 1)

λ λ SO(n) SO(n + 1) i

It remains to show that sY is odd. The preimage of x X under the composition P (Y ) Y X is ∈ Spin(n) → → −1 −1 c (y,q) π (x) π c (x) pr ˜s (q)= y { ∈ × Spin | 2 ◦ X } where Y = PU(1)(X). Hence we can identify this preimage with (α, g) S1 Spinc(n) χ(g)= α = graph(χ) = Spinc(n). { ∈ × | } ∼ It follows that the preimage of x under P (Y ) Y X is diffeomorphic to Spin → → c c Spin (n) j Spin(n + 1) = Spin (n + 1). × ∼ This implies the claim by Remark 4.2. 

The following corollary will be used in Definition 5.1 to fix the choice of Kaluza– Klein circle bundles and construct the lift of spinors.

Corollary 4.6. Let (X, gX ) be an oriented Riemannian manifold. c sc c (1) If X is Spin , let X be a Spin -structure on X with characteristic line bundle L and Y X the Kaluza–Klein circle bundle with Euler class → A e = c1(L) and Riemannian metric gY . Then there exists an odd spin s sc s structure Y on Y such that X = Ξ( Y ). (2) If X is spin, let sX be a spin structure on X and Y X the Kaluza–Klein → A circle bundle with arbitrary Euler class e and Riemannian metric gY . Then there exists an even spin structure sY on Y such that sX = Ξ(sY ). Proof. In both situations the manifold Y is spin by Lemma 4.1, because e = c1(L) w2(X) mod 2 in the first case and w2(X) = 0 in the second case. The claims≡ are thus direct consequences of the surjectivity of the map Ξ in Theorem 4.5. 

5. SPINORSON KALUZA–KLEINCIRCLEBUNDLESOVER 4-MANIFOLDS

Let (X, gX ) be a closed, oriented, Riemannian 4-manifold. Our goal is to lift spinors for a given Spinc-structure on X to spinors for a spin structure on a suitable Kaluza–Klein circle bundle Y . It turns out that we can lift sections for a Z-family of Spinc-spinor bundles on X to the same spinor bundle on Y . Let Y 5 X4 → A be the Kaluza–Klein circle bundle with Euler class e and Riemannian metric gY and E X the complex line bundle with c1(E) = e, unique up to isomorphism. According→ to [3], [1], [2] there are two cases: 14 M. J. D. HAMILTON

TABLE 1. Kaluza–Klein circle bundles Y 5 X4 and spinor bun- c,n → dles SX of charge q

s c,n X e(Y ) A Y SX Ln n q

c ⊗n ⊗(1+2n) Z 1 spin or non-spin c1(L) L odd SX ⊗ L L n ∈ 2 + n 1 1 1 2 2 c 2 ⊗n ⊗(1+n) spin c1(L ) L even SX ⊗ (L ) L n ∈ Z \ {−1} 1+ n

s sc s (1) Let Y be an odd spin structure on Y and X = Ξ( Y ) with characteristic c line bundle E. Let SY and SX denote the corresponding spinor bundles. Then sections of the spinor bundles Sc E⊗n can be lifted to sections of X ⊗ SY for all n Z. ∈ (2) Let sY be an even spin structure on Y and sX = Ξ(sY ). Consider the as- c sc sociated Spin -structure X0 and denote the corresponding spinor bundles c c ⊗n by SY and S . Then sections of the spinor bundles S E can be X0 X0 ⊗ lifted to sections of SY for all n Z. ∈ Together with Corollary 4.6 this leads to the following construction:

4 Definition 5.1 (Choice of Kaluza–Klein circle bundles). Let (X , gX ) be a closed, sc c oriented, Riemannian 4-manifold and X a Spin -structure on X with characteris- c tic line bundle L and spinor bundle SX . We consider two choices for the Kaluza– 5 4 A ∗ Klein circle bundle Y X with Riemannian metric gY = gY = π gX A A, depending on whether the→ spin structure on Y should be even or odd (see− Table⊗ 1): (1) Odd spin structure on Y : For this case the manifold X can be spin or non-spin. Let π : Y X be the Kaluza–Klein circle bundle with Euler → class e(Y ) = c1(L), A a Hermitian connection on L and sY an odd spin sc s structure on Y with spinor bundle SY such that X = Ξ( Y ). (2) Even spin structure on Y : For this case the manifold X has to be spin. 1 Let sX be one of the spin structures on X and L 2 the square root of L determined by sX . Let π : Y X be the Kaluza–Klein circle bundle with 1 → 1 Euler class e(Y ) = c1(L 2 ), A a Hermitian connection on L 2 and sY an even spin structure on Y with spinor bundle SY such that sX = Ξ(sY ). s c sc In both cases we call the spin structure Y on Y a lift of the Spin -structure X (the isomorphism class of the lift sY is not necessarily uniquely determined by sc c c,n X ). Sections of the Spin -spinor bundles SX , with characteristic line bundles Ln, lift to sections of the spinor bundle SY (see Remark 5.5 below). s sc c Remark 5.2. Suppose that X is spin, X one of the spin structures and X a Spin - structure with characteristic line bundle L. Then c c 1 S = S L 2 . X X0 ⊗ This is the reason for choosing the circle bundle Y X with Euler class e = 1 → c1(L 2 ) in the second case of Definition 5.1. A LIFT OF THE SEIBERG–WITTEN EQUATIONS TO KALUZA–KLEIN 5-MANIFOLDS 15

1 Z s Z s Remark 5.3. The numbers q 2 + (if Y is odd) and q (if Y is even) can ∈ c,n∈ be thought of as the U(1)-charges of the spinor bundle SX if the bundles L and 1 c,n c ⊗q L 2 , respectively, correspond to charge 1. This follows because SX = SX0 L c,n 1 ⊗ c 2 ⊗q s in the first case and SX = SX0 (L ) in the second case if a spin structure X exists on X (which is always the⊗ case locally) (cf. [40]). Remark 5.4. In the case of an even spin structure on Y we exclude the case n = 1, corresponding to q = 0, for reasons explained in Remark 7.8. − Remark 5.5. A more precise statement concerning the lifts of spinors is the follow- ing [3], [1], [2]: For both the case of an odd and even spin structure sY on Y , the S1-action on Y defines a Lie derivative of the Killing vector field K on sections of the spinor bundle SY , denoted by

LK : Γ(SY ) Γ(SY ). −→ 2 2 The space L (SY ) of L -sections can be decomposed into eigenspaces of LK : (1) In the case of an odd spin structure sY there is a decomposition 2 L (SY )= V 1 , k+ 2 Z Mk∈ 2 1 where Vk+ 1 L (SY ) is the eigenspace of LK with eigenvalue i(k + 2 ). 2 ⊂ (2) In the case of an even spin structure sY there is a decomposition 2 L (SY )= Vk, Z Mk∈ 2 where Vk L (SY ) is the eigenspace of LK for the eigenvalue ik. ⊂ c,n Note that by our assumption that dim X = 4 is even, the bundles SY and SX have the same complex rank 4. For both cases in Definition 5.1 there exists a canonical bundle map c,n Π−q : SY S −→ X that covers the projection π : Y X and is fibrewise an isomorphism. It induces an isomorphism of Hilbert spaces→ 2 c,n 2 Q−q : L (S ) V−q L (SY ), X −→ ⊂ so that the following diagram commutes for each spinor φ Γ(Sc,n): ∈ X Q−q(φ) Y SY

π Π−q φ c,n X SX

The map Q−q commutes with Clifford multiplication: ∗ Q−q(V φ)= V Q−q(φ) (5.1) · · c,n X ∗ X for all φ Γ(SX ) and V (X) with horizontal lift V (Y ) with respect to ∈ A∈ ∈ the Kaluza–Klein metric gY . 16 M. J. D. HAMILTON

Definition 5.6. We call the spinor Q−q(φ) Γ(SY ) the lift of the spinor φ c,n ∈ ∈ Γ(SX ). We denote Q−q often by Q.

Remark 5.7. It follows that Q−q is a correspondence between spinors on X of U(1)-charge q and spinors on Y of eigenvalue iq under LK. − Remark 5.8. The decomposition

Sc = Sc+ Sc− X X ⊕ X into positive and negative Weyl spinor bundles extends to all twisted spinor bundles c,n SX . Via Q−q we get corresponding decompositions + − V−q = V V −q ⊕ −q of spinors in Γ(SY ). c,n Lemma 5.9. Clifford multiplication on the spinor bundles SX and SY is related by

V ∗ Q(φ)= Q(V φ) · · K Q(φ)= Q(idvolg φ) · X · π∗κ Q(φ)= Q(κ φ), · · for all φ Γ(Sc,n), where the vector field V ∗ X(Y ) is the horizontal lift (with ∈ X ∈ respect to the metric gY ) of a vector field V X(X), K is the vertical unit Killing 1 ∈ ∗ vector field along the S -fibres, dvolgX denotes the volume form and κ Ω (X). ∗ ± ∈ In particular, Clifford multiplication with V exchanges V−q and with K preserves ± V−q. This follows from equations (3.4) and (5.1) where the orientation of TY is de- fined by K followed by the orientation of π∗T X. Remark 5.10. Analogous equations can be found in [35, eqns. (10), (11)], however, in this reference K Q(φ)= Q(idvolg φ), corresponding to the representation · − X · of Cl(5) where ωC acts as 1. − C4 C Remark 5.11. We choose the invariant scalar products on ∆4 ∼= ∆5 ∼= and such that the bundle maps Π−q in Remark 5.5 are isometries on each fibre with respect to the induced bundle metrics. For spinors φ and ψ = Q−q(φ), this implies

ψ 2 = φ 2 π. | | | | ◦

6. DIRAC OPERATORS 4 c Let (X , gX ) be a closed, oriented, Riemannian 4-manifold with Spin -structure sc X and π : Y X one of the two Kaluza–Klein circle bundles given by Definition 5.1. → A LIFT OF THE SEIBERG–WITTEN EQUATIONS TO KALUZA–KLEIN 5-MANIFOLDS 17

6.1. Clifford identities. We collect some identities involving Clifford multiplica- 2 C tion. Let Ω±(X, ) denote the self-dual and anti-self-dual 2-forms on X, satisfy- ing 2 ω± = ω±, ω± Ω (X), ∗ ± ∀ ∈ ± where is the Hodge star operator. ∗ Lemma 6.1. The following identities for Clifford multiplication γ hold: n,c± (1) For φ± Γ(SX ) we have dvolgX φ± = φ±. ∈ 2 · ∓ (2) For ω± Ω (X, C) we have dvolg ω± = ω± and ∈ ± X · ∓ n,c± γ(ω±) Γ(End (S )), ∈ 0 X n,c± where End0(SX ) denotes the bundle of trace-free endomorphisms of n,c± SX . In particular, n,c+ γ(ω−) 0 on Γ(S ). ≡ X Proof. These identities can be found in references on Seiberg–Witten theory, e.g. [34]. The Weyl spinor bundles are defined by ωC in equation (3.3).  This implies together with Lemma 5.9: Proposition 6.2. Let φ Γ(Sn,c+) be a positive Weyl spinor, ψ = Q(φ) and ∈ X ω Ω2(X, C) with self-dual part ω . Then ∈ + K ψ = iψ · − K π∗ω ψ = iQ(ω φ). · · − + · 6.2. Relation between Dirac operators on X and Y . Let A be a Hermitian con- 1 nection on the Hermitian complex line bundle L or L 2 according to Table 1.

Definition 6.3. We denote by An = 2qA the Hermitian connection on the line bundle Ln induced from A.

Together with the Levi–Civita connection of gX this defines the Dirac operator DX : Γ(Sc,n±) Γ(Sc,n∓). An X −→ X The connection A and Riemannian metric gX define the Kaluza–Klein metric gY = A gY on Y , that yields the Dirac operator Y D : Γ(SY ) Γ(SY ). −→ 2 ∗ The curvature FA Ω (X, iR) satisfies π FA = dA. According to Remark 5.5 there is an isometry∈ 2 c,n 2 Q = Q−q : L (S ) V−q L (SY ). X −→ ⊂ c,n Lemma 6.4. The covariant derivatives on the spinor bundles SX and SY are related by:

Y X 1 ∗ ∗ Q(φ)= Q( φ) iγ(K)γ(π (iV FA))Q(φ) ∇V ∇AnV − 4 Y 1 ∗ Q(φ)= LK Q(φ) iγ(π FA)Q(φ), ∇K − 4 18 M. J. D. HAMILTON where V T X with horizontal lift V ∗ TY . This implies for the Dirac operator DY the formula∈ ∈ 1 DY Q(φ)= Q(DX φ)+ γ(K)L Q(φ)+ iγ(K)γ(π∗F )Q(φ). An K 4 A For a proof of these formulas see [3, Lemma 4.3, Lemma 4.4 and the proof of Theorem 4.1]. The claim for the Dirac operator follows from the formula

4

γ(el)γ(iel FA) = 2γ(FA), Xl=1 4 where el l=1 is a local orthonormal frame on X. The formula for the covariant { } 1 derivative on SY in the case of q = 2 has also been proved in [35, Proposition 3.2]. Recall that spinors ψ V−q satisfy LKψ = qiψ. This implies (for the second statement we use Proposition∈ 6.2): − Proposition 6.5. The restriction Y D : V−q V−q −→ is given by

Y X −1 1 ∗ D = Q D Q iγ(K) q γ(π FA) . ◦ An ◦ − − 4   Using FA = 2qFA and setting m = q the restriction n − Y + D : V V−q −q −→ for all q = 0 is given by 6 1 DY = Q DX + m γ(F + ) Q−1. ◦ An − 8m An ◦   Remark 6.6. The number m can be interpreted as the mass of the lifted spinor ψ = Q(φ), cf. Remark 9.2.

7. LIFT OF THE SEIBERG–WITTEN EQUATIONS 4 7.1. The Seiberg–Witten equations. Let (X , gX ) be a closed, oriented, Rie- c sc mannian 4-manifold with a Spin -structure X and characteristic line bundle L. c+ We consider in this subsection a spinor φ Γ(SX ) and a Hermitian connection A on L. The Seiberg–Witten equations [40]∈ for (A, φ) are X DA φ = 0 + FA = σ(φ, φ). We follow the notation in [31]. Here σ(φ, φ) is the imaginary-valued self-dual 2 R 2-form in Ω+(X, i ) which under the fibrewise isomorphism γ : Λ2 T ∗X C End (Sc+) (7.1) + ⊗ −→ 0 X A LIFT OF THE SEIBERG–WITTEN EQUATIONS TO KALUZA–KLEIN 5-MANIFOLDS 19 corresponds to the trace-free endomorphism 1 γ(σ(φ, φ)) = (φ φ†) = φ φ† Tr(φ φ†)Id. ⊗ 0 ⊗ − 2 ⊗ Using an explicit representation of the spinor space ∆4 as a module over the Clif- C 2 R ford algebra l(4) it can be shown [34] that γ maps the real forms Ω+(X, ) c+ isomorphically onto the skew-Hermitian trace-free endomorphisms of SX . The 2 R imaginary-valued forms Ω+(X, i ) thus map isomorphically onto the Hermitian c+ 2 R trace-free endomorphisms of SX . Hence σ(φ, φ) is indeed a form in Ω+(X, i ). We also get: 2 ∗ c+ Lemma 7.1. Let p X, τp iΛ T X and φp S . Then the following holds: ∈ ∈ + p ∈ Xp γ(τp)φp = 0 τp = 0 or φp = 0. ⇔ Proof. This follows from the formula 2 γ(τp)γ(τp)φp = 2 τp φp, | | that holds for all τp, φp as in the statement of the lemma.  Lemma 7.2. For φ Γ(Sc+) we have ∈ X γ(σ(φ, φ))φ = 1 φ 2φ. 2 | | c+ Proof. With respect to a local orthonormal frame for SX we can write (see [31]) α 1 ( α 2 β 2) αβ¯ φ = C2, γ(σ(φ, φ)) = 2 | | − | | , (7.2) β ∈ αβ¯ 1 ( β 2 α 2)    2 | | − | |  hence the action of σ(φ, φ) on φ is given by 1 ( α 2 β 2) αβ¯ α γ(σ(φ, φ))φ = 2 | | − | | αβ¯ 1 ( β 2 α 2) β  2 | | − | |   α = 1 ( α 2 + β 2) . 2 | | | | β    One often considers the more general Seiberg–Witten equations X DA φ = 0 + FA = σ(φ, φ)+ µ, where µ Ω2 (X, iR) is an arbitrary perturbation. ∈ + Proposition 7.3. If (A, φ) satisfy + FA = σ(φ, φ)+ µ, (7.3) then γ(F +)φ = 1 φ 2 + γ(µ) φ. (7.4) A 2 | | Conversely suppose that satisfy equation (7.4) and (A, φ)  X DA φ = 0. If φ does not vanish identically on X, then (A, φ) satisfy equation (7.3). 20 M. J. D. HAMILTON

Proof. The first claim is immediate by Lemma 7.2. For the converse, equation (7.4) implies γ(F + σ(φ, φ) µ)φ = 0. A − − Lemma 7.1 implies that equation (7.3) holds in all points p X where φp is non- + ∈ zero. Suppose that FA σ(φ, φ) µ is non-zero in some point p X. Then by continuity it is non-zero− also in a small− open neighbourhood U of p∈. Hence φ has X to vanish on U. Since φ is in the kernel of DA , the unique continuation property of Dirac operators [4, 9, 7] and the assumption that X is connected by Convention 1 imply that φ vanishes identically on X, contradicting the assumption. Therefore equation (7.3) holds in all points of X. 

Recall that a pair (A, φ) is called irreducible if the spinor φ does not vanish identically on X. Similarly we define for the Kaluza–Klein circle bundle Y X: → Definition 7.4. A spinor ψ Γ(SY ) is called irreducible if ψ does not vanish identically on Y . ∈ 7.2. Main theorem. We can now state our main theorem. 4 sc Theorem 7.5. Let (X , gX ) be a closed, oriented, Riemannian 4-manifold and X a Spinc-structure on X with characteristic line bundle L. With the notations from Definition 5.1 let π : Y X be one of the two principal circle bundles with Euler s → sc class e(Y ) and Y a lift of X to a spin structure on Y . We define a map

π∗ A ∗ (An, φ, gX ,µ) (ψ, g ,π µ) 7−→ Y c,n+ for a positive Weyl spinor φ Γ(S ), Hermitian connection An on Ln and ∈ X perturbation µ Ω2 (X, iR) as follows: ∈ + ψ = Q−q(φ) Γ(SY ) is the lift of φ • A ∈ gY is the Kaluza–Klein metric on Y determined by gX and the connection • 1 A = 2q An on Y according to Definition 2.1. A ∗ ∗ Let m = q = 0. Then the following holds for (ψ, g ,π µ)= π (An, φ, gX ,µ): − 6 Y (1) If (An, φ) is a solution of the Seiberg–Witten equations DX φ = 0 An (7.5) + FAn = σ(φ, φ)+ µ

for parameters (gX ,µ), then ψ is a solution of the equation 1 1 DY ψ = ψ 2ψ + mψ γ(π∗µ)ψ (7.6) −16m| | − 8m A ∗ for parameters (gY ,π µ). (2) Conversely, if ψ is an irreducible solution of equation (7.6) for parameters A ∗ (gY ,π µ), then (An, φ) is an irreducible solution of equations (7.5) for parameters (gX ,µ). A LIFT OF THE SEIBERG–WITTEN EQUATIONS TO KALUZA–KLEIN 5-MANIFOLDS 21

Proof. If (An, φ) satisfy the Seiberg–Witten equations (7.5), then by Proposition 7.3 1 γ(F + )φ = φ 2 + γ(µ) φ. An 2| |   Hence by Proposition 6.5 and Remark 5.11 1 DY ψ = Q DX + m γ(F + ) φ ◦ An − 8m An   (7.7) 1 1 = mψ ψ 2ψ γ(π∗µ)ψ. − 16m| | − 8m The converse follows, because the term in the second line of equation (7.7) is an c,n+ element of Q(Γ(SX )), hence together with 1 DX φ Γ(Sc,n−) and m γ(F + ) φ Γ(Sc,n+) An ∈ X − 8m An ∈ X   we get X DAn φ = 0 1 γ(F + )φ = φ 2 + γ(µ) φ. An 2| |   Under the assumption that φ = 0 somewhere on X, Proposition 7.3 implies the Seiberg–Witten equations (7.5).6  Remark 7.6. The spinor ψ 0 is always a solution of equation (7.6). The corre- sponding pair is a solution≡ of equations (7.5) only if + . (An, 0) FAn = µ Remark 7.7. Theorem 1.1 is the special case of Theorem 7.5 for odd spin structure s 1 Y on Y , q = 2 and µ = 0. Remark 7.8. Equation (7.6) does not make sense if m = q = 0, hence we exclude − the case n = 1 for an even spin structure sY on Y . − Remark 7.9. Equation (7.6) depends on the relation between Clifford multiplica- tion on X and Y , cf. equation (3.4) and Lemma 5.9. If the other choice with

K Q(φ) = Q(idvolgX φ) is made, then all terms on the right hand side of equation· (7.6)− change sign: · 1 1 DY ψ = ψ 2ψ mψ + γ(π∗µ)ψ. 16m| | − 8m

8. INVARIANCE UNDER GAUGE TRANSFORMATIONS AND CHARGE CONJUGATION 8.1. Gauge transformations. For a smooth function h: X S1 let → −1 1 dθh = h dh Ω (X, iR). · ∈ h h Consider the gauge transformation (An, φ) (A , φ ) given by Table 2. In the 7→ n situation of Theorem 7.5, if (An, φ) is a solution to the Seiberg–Witten equations (7.5), then so is (Ah, φh) for every smooth map h: X S1. n → 22 M. J. D. HAMILTON

TABLE 2. Gauge transformations defined by h: X S1 →

c,n h h h X ASX Ln A An φ q

c ⊗n ⊗(1+2n) ∗ h −2q 1 spin or non-spin L SX ⊗ L L A + 2π dθh 2qA h φ 2 + n 1 1 2 c 2 ⊗n ⊗(1+n) ∗ h −q spin L SX ⊗ (L ) L A + π dθh 2qA h φ 1+ n

On the principal circle bundle π : Y X define → h ∗ h h g = π gX A A Y − ⊗ h h ψ = Q−q(φ ) Y,h and the Dirac operator D associated to the spin structure sY and Riemannian h metric gY . We get: Proposition 8.1. With the notation from Theorem 7.5 let ∗ ∗ (ψ, gY ,π µ)= π (An, φ, gX ,µ) h h ∗ ∗ h h (ψ , gY ,π µ)= π (An, φ , gX ,µ) and m = q. If ψ is a solution to the equation − 1 1 DY ψ = ψ 2ψ + mψ γ(π∗µ)ψ −16m| | − 8m ∗ h with parameters (gY ,π µ), then ψ is a solution to the equation 1 1 DY,hψh = ψh 2ψh + mψh γ(π∗µ)ψh −16m| | − 8m with parameters (gh ,π∗µ) for every smooth map h: X S1. Y → Proof. If ψ 0, the statement is clear. If ψ does not vanish identically on Y ≡ we first apply the reverse implication of Theorem 7.5 to show that (An, φ) is a solution of the Seiberg–Witten equations for parameters (gX ,µ). Applying the gauge transformation and again Theorem 7.5 the claim follows.  sc sc 8.2. Charge conjugation. Charge conjugation is an involution X ¯X that acts on the spinor bundle by complex conjugation, 7→ Sc,n± S¯c,n±, φ φ,¯ X 7−→ X 7−→ which is a complex anti-linear isomorphism of Clifford modules. It also maps −1 Ln L¯n = L 7−→ n An A¯n = An 7−→ − FAn FA¯n = FAn µ 7−→ µ¯ = −µ. 7−→ − The corresponding map on the charge q is given by q q, 1 7−→ − where the bundles L and L 2 , respectively, still have charge 1, cf. Remark 5.3. A LIFT OF THE SEIBERG–WITTEN EQUATIONS TO KALUZA–KLEIN 5-MANIFOLDS 23

For the lift of the charge conjugated pair (A¯n, φ¯) the data for the Kaluza–Klein circle bundle (Y, A, gY , sY ) stay the same and

ψ = Q−q(φ) V−q ψ¯ = Qq(φ¯) Vq ∈ π∗µ 7−→ π∗µ¯ ∈ m 7−→ m. 7−→ − Charge conjugation maps solutions (An, φ) to the Seiberg–Witten equations with parameters (gX ,µ) to solutions (A¯n, φ¯) with parameters (gX , µ¯). This implies: Proposition 8.2. With the notation from Theorem 7.5 let A ∗ ∗ (ψ, gY ,π µ)= π (An, φ, gX ,µ) ¯ A ∗ ∗ ¯ ¯ (ψ, gY ,π µ¯)= π (An, φ, gX , µ¯) and m = q. If ψ is a solution to the equation − 1 1 DY ψ = ψ 2ψ + mψ γ(π∗µ)ψ −16m| | − 8m A ∗ ¯ with parameters (gY ,π µ), then ψ is a solution to the equation 1 1 DY ψ¯ = ψ¯ 2ψ¯ mψ¯ + γ(π∗µ¯)ψ¯ 16m| | − 8m A ∗ with parameters (gY ,π µ¯).

9. KALUZA–KLEINCIRCLEBUNDLESWITHFIBRESOFLENGTH 2πr The Kaluza–Klein metric can be generalized as follows: Let r : X R+ be a smooth positive function on X and rˆ = r π. Then → ◦ ∗ 2 gY = π gX rˆ A A (9.1) − ⊗ is again a Riemannian metric on Y . The only difference to the original metric is that 2 gY (K, K) =r ˆ , i.e. the circle fibres over a point x X have length 2πr(x). In the physics literature r is written as r = eϕ and the scalar∈ field ϕ: X R is sometimes called the dilaton. → 1 The vector field rˆK has unit length, hence the relation in Lemma 5.9 between Clifford multiplication on the spinor bundles is given by V ∗ Q(φ)= Q(V φ) · · 1 K Q(φ)= Q(idvolg φ). rˆ · X · The formulas in Proposition 6.2 change accordingly to 1 K ψ = iψ rˆ · − 1 K π∗ω ψ = iQ(ω φ). rˆ · · − + · 24 M. J. D. HAMILTON

The formula in Proposition 6.5 for the Dirac operator DY then becomes (see [3] for the case of constant r and [1] for the general case)

Y X −1 1 1 1 ∗ D = Q D Q iγ K q rγˆ (π FA) ◦ An ◦ − rˆ rˆ − 4 1 1 = Q DX q + rγˆ (F+ ) Q−1,  ◦ An − rˆ 8q An ◦   with q as before. We then get:

Corollary 9.1. Consider the Kaluza–Klein metric given by equation (9.1) with a smooth positive function r : X R and rˆ = r π. Define a function mr : Y R q → ◦ → by mr = rˆ, where q is the U(1)-charge as before. Then mr is nowhere zero on X (since q−= 0 by assumption) and the statements in Theorem 7.5 and equation 6 (7.6) continue to hold with m replaced by mr:

Y 1 2 1 ∗ D ψ = ψ ψ + mrψ γ(π µ)ψ. (9.2) −16mr | | − 8mr Remark 9.2. Suppose that µ = 0 and the circle radius r is constant. Then equation (9.2)

Y 1 2 D ψ = ψ ψ + mrψ −16mr | | is the field equation of a 5-dimensional Gross–Neveu model [22] (in Euclidean sig- nature) with mass m and coupling constant g2 = 1 , given by the Lagrangian r 16mr

Y 2 1 4 [ψ]= ψ, D ψ mr ψ + ψ , (9.3) L h i− | | 32mr | |

2 where , is the Hermitian bundle metric on SY . Note that mr < 0 and g < 0 if q > 0.h· (The·i spinor φ on X has charge q and mass zero and the spinor ψ on Y has q mass mr = and charge zero. If r q , then the absolute value mr of the − r ≪ | | | | mass of ψ is large, and if r q , then mr is small. The interaction described by the term 1 ψ 4 behaves≫ in the | | opposite| way.)| 32mr | | Remark 9.3. In Section 10 we need the following formulas: Suppose that r > 0 is constant and gY the Kaluza–Klein metric (9.1). Then the circle fibres of π : Y 2 → X are totally geodesic. For the curvature 2-form FA Ω (X, iR) and vectors V,W T X define (see [8, Chapter 9]) ∈ ∈ ∗ i V ∗ W = FA(V,W )K A 2 4 1 2 ( V ∗ , W ∗ )= r FA(V, ej )FA(W, ej ) A A −4 j X=1 1 1 1 2 2 ( K, K)= r FA(ei, ej) , A r A r −2 i

4 where ei i=1 is an orthonormal frame in TpX. The Ricci curvature of gY then satisfies{ } 1 1 1 1 RicgY ( r K, r K) = ( r K, r K) ∗ ∗ A A Ricg (V ,W ) = Ricg (V,W ) 2( V ∗ , W ∗ ), V,W T X. Y X − A A ∀ ∈ If FA is coclosed and thus harmonic, we have in addition 1 ∗ Ricg ( K,V ) = 0 V T X. Y r ∀ ∈ 10. KAHLER¨ –EINSTEIN 4-MANIFOLDSANDEIGENSPINORSON SASAKI 5-MANIFOLDS Spinors ψ = Q(φ) of constant length are an interesting case of equation (9.2), e.g. for constant radius r and perturbation µ = 0: ψ 2 a2, with a> 0 | | ≡ Y 1 2 D ψ = a + mr ψ. −16m  r  Hence ψ is an eigenspinor of DY . Y Remark 10.1. In the special case that a = 4 mr , the spinor ψ is harmonic, D ψ = | | 0. The points x = 4 mr are the non-zero extrema of the potential ± | | 2 1 4 V (x)= mrx + x − 32mr appearing in the Gross–Neveu Lagrangian (9.3) (which are minima for mr > 0 and maxima for mr < 0). c+ Suppose that φ Γ(SX ) is an arbitrary spinor and ψ = Q(φ). Then ψ a is equivalent to φ∈ a. Positive Weyl spinors φ of constant length are| related| ≡ | | ≡ to almost complex structures on X: Suppose that J is a gX -compatible almost complex structure on X, so that

gX (JV,JW )= gX (V,W ) V,W T X. ∀ ∈ 2 Then (gX ,J,ω), with self-dual fundamental 2-form ω Ω (X) defined by ∈ + ω(V,W )= gX (JV,W ) V,W T X, ∀ ∈ is an almost Hermitian structure on X. There exists a canonical Spinc-structure sc Xcan on X with spinor bundles Sc+ = Λ0,0 Λ0,2 Xcan ⊕ c− 0,1 SXcan = Λ . c+ C −1 We can write SXcan = K , where the canonical and anti-canonical line bundles are ⊕ K = Λ2,0, K−1 = Λ0,2 (we use the same symbol K for the canonical bundle as for the unit Killing vector field in Section 2; the meaning should be clear from the context). The characteristic line bundle of sc is L = K−1. The spinor φ = (1, 0) Sc+ has constant Xcan ∈ Xcan 26 M. J. D. HAMILTON length φ 1. Conversely, every Spinc-structure sc with a positive spinor φ of | | ≡ X constant length 1 arises in this way for a gX -orthogonal almost complex structure J (see [32], [21]).

Lemma 10.2. Let J be a gX -compatible almost complex structure on X. The Spinc-structures sc and sc K have positive Weyl spinor bundles Xcan Xcan ⊗ Sc+ = C K−1 Xcan ⊕ Sc+ K = K C Xcan ⊗ ⊕ with characteristic line bundles K−1 and K, respectively. The Spinc-structure sc K is the charge conjugate of sc , Xcan ⊗ Xcan Sc K = S¯c . Xcan ⊗ Xcan c+ Clifford multiplication of the fundamental 2-form ω on SXcan is given by α 1 0 α γ(ω) = 2i (α, β) C K−1. (10.1) β − 0 1 β ∀ ∈ ⊕    −   For the expression for γ(ω) see e.g. [34, p. 112]. We consider the particular case [40], [15], [34] where (X, gX ,J,ω) is a K¨ahler surface with integrable complex structure J, K¨ahler form ω (which is a self-dual, harmonic 2-form) and compatible Riemannian metric gX . In this situation explicit solutions to the Seiberg–Witten equations, with spinors of constant length, can be found. The following lemma summarizes some well-known facts about K¨ahler–Einstein manifolds, see e.g. [8].

Lemma 10.3. Let (X, gX ,J,ω) beaKahler¨ manifold. The Levi–Civita connection −1 −1 of gX defines Hermitian connections AgX on K and AgX on K . If the metric gX is Einstein with Einstein constant λ, i.e.

RicgX = λgX , or equivalently ρ = λω with the Ricci form ρ, then the curvature 2-forms of these connections are self-dual and given by

FAg = iλω and FA−1 = iλω. X gX − We have i λ −1 c1(K)= [FA ]= [ω]= c1(K ). 2π gX −2π −

Proposition 10.4. Let (X, gX ,J,ω) be a closed Kahler–Einstein¨ surface with Ein- stein constant λ. We consider the Seiberg–Witten equations DX φ = 0 A (10.2) + FA = σ(φ, φ)+ itω with perturbation µ = itω, where t R. ∈ For the c-structure sc , the connection −1 on −1 and the (1) Spin Xcan A0 = AgX K spinor φ = (2√ λ t, 0) Γ(C K−1) 0 − − ∈ ⊕ A LIFT OF THE SEIBERG–WITTEN EQUATIONS TO KALUZA–KLEIN 5-MANIFOLDS 27

are a solution to the perturbed Seiberg–Witten equations (10.2) for all t< λ. We have γ(µ)φ0 = 2tφ0. − c sc (2) For the Spin -structure Xcan K, the connection A0 = AgX on K and the spinor ⊗ φ = (0, 2√ λ + t) Γ(K C) 0 − ∈ ⊕ are a solution to the perturbed Seiberg–Witten equations (10.2) for all t> λ. We have γ(µ)φ = 2tφ . 0 − 0 c sc Proof. We first consider the case with Spin -structure Xcan. For a general K¨ahler surface, the Dirac operator on c+ associated to the connection −1 Γ(SXcan) A0 = AgX on K−1 is given by [25] DX (α, β)= √2(∂α¯ + ∂¯∗β) (α, β) Γ(C K−1). A0 ∀ ∈ ⊕ For a spinor φ = (α, 0) Γ(C K−1) we have by equation (7.2) 0 ∈ ⊕ 1 1 0 γ(σ(φ , φ )) = α 2 . 0 0 2| | 0 1  −  If (X,J,ω,gX ) is K¨ahler–Einstein with Einstein constant λ, then by equation (10.1) and Lemma 10.3 1 0 1 0 γ(itω) = 2t , γ(F + )= 2λ . 0 1 A0 − 0 1  −   −  If α R is a constant, the first equation in (10.2) is satisfied and the second ∈ 1 2 equation reduces to 2λ = 2 α + 2t. This implies the claim in the first case. c − sc For the Spin -structure Xcan K with connection A0 = AgX on K and spinor φ = (0, β) Γ(K C) it follows⊗ analogously that 0 ∈ ⊕ 1 2 1 0 γ(σ(φ0, φ0)) = β − 2| | 0 1   1 0 1 0 γ(itω) = 2t , γ(F + ) = 2λ , 0 1 A0 0 1  −   −  where the third equation holds in the K¨ahler–Einstein case. If β R is a constant, the first equation in (10.2) is satisfied and the second equation∈ reduces to 2λ = 1 β2 + 2t. This implies the claim in the second case.  − 2 Remark 10.5. In particular, if λ 0, then the perturbation itω has to be chosen non-zero. ≥ The following Boothby-Wang construction of Sasaki structures on principal cir- cle bundles over K¨ahler manifolds, whose K¨ahler form represents an integral class up to a real multiple, is well-known [24].

1 Lemma 10.6. Suppose that (X, gX ,J,ω) isaKahler¨ manifold so that πr [ω] lies in the image of H2(X; Z) in H2 (X) for some r R+. Let π : Y X be the dR ∈ → principal circle bundle with Euler class e(Y ) = 1 [ω] and A a connection on ± πr 28 M. J. D. HAMILTON

TABLE 3. Kaluza–Klein circle bundle π : Y 5 X4 over K¨ahler– Einstein surface X →

s c,n X e(Y ) A r Y SX Ln q mr

−1 −1 2 c c −1 1 1 1 1 spin or non-spin c1(K ) AgX |λ| odd SXcan, SXcan ⊗ K K , K 2 , − 2 − 4 |λ|, 4 |λ| 1 − 2 1 −1 4 c c −1 1 1 spin c1(K ) 2 AgX |λ| even SXcan, SXcan ⊗ K K , K 1, −1 − 4 |λ|, 4 |λ|

i 1 Y with curvature 2-form satisfying 2π FA = πr ω. Then η = irA satisfies dη = 2π∗ω and together with the Kaluza–Klein± metric ± ∗ 2 ∗ gY = π gX r A A = π gX + η η − ⊗ ⊗ defines a Sasaki structure on Y . λ We apply this construction in the case of K¨ahler–Einstein surfaces, where 2π ω represents an integral cohomology class.

Proposition 10.7. Suppose that (X, gX ,J,ω) is a closed Kahler–Einstein¨ surface with Einstein constant λ = 0. Let π : Y X be one of the two Kaluza–Klein circle bundles with Euler class6 e(Y ), connection→ A, constant radius r and Kaluza– Klein metric ∗ 2 gY = π gX r A A − ⊗ chosen as in Table 3. A Sasaki structure on Y is defined by gY and the 1-form 2 −1 on , satisfying η = λ iAgX Y ∗ ∗ gY = π gX + η η, dη = 2π ω. ⊗ Then Ricg = (λ 2)gY + (6 λ)η η, scalg = 4(λ 1), Y − − ⊗ Y − hence the Sasaki structure is Sasaki η-Einstein. Furthermore, the 5-manifold Y is s c sc spin and a lift Y of the Spin -structure Xcan is chosen as in Definition 5.1. Proof. See [13], [19] for the definition of Sasaki η-Einstein structures. Note that in both cases η = irA, depending on whether the sign of λ is . The formula for the Ricci curvature± follows from Remark 9.3, because the K¨ahler± form ω is harmonic and ω 2 = 2, hence for both cases | | 1 1 ( K, K) = 4, ( V ∗ , W ∗ )= gX (V,W ). A r A r A A 

′ Remark 10.8. Suppose that the Einstein constant λ is positive and define gX = cgX for a constant c R+. Then g′ is K¨ahler–Einstein with λ′ = 1 λ. In particular, ∈ X c gX can be normalized such that λ =6=dim X +2. Then gY is a Sasaki–Einstein metric with RicgY = 4gY .

Theorem 10.9. Let (X, gX ,J,ω) be a closed Kahler–Einstein¨ surface with Ein- stein constant λ = 0 and π : Y X one of the two Kaluza–Klein circle bundles 6 → with Sasaki η-Einstein structure and spin structure sY given by Proposition 10.7. A LIFT OF THE SEIBERG–WITTEN EQUATIONS TO KALUZA–KLEIN 5-MANIFOLDS 29

Consider the solutions (A0, φ0), with φ0 const., of the Seiberg–Witten equa- tions on X with perturbation itω (for a| suitable|≡ t R) given by Proposition 10.4. Define ∈ 1 1 4 λ + 1 if λ< 0 νλ = λ sgn(λ)= − | | − 4 | |− 1 λ 1 if λ> 0 (− 4 − c+ (1) For the solution φ0 Γ(SXcan) the lifted spinor ψ = Q(φ0) Γ(SY ) satisfies ∈ ∈ ψ 2 4( λ t) | | ≡ − − Y D ψ = νλψ. c+ (2) For the solution φ0 Γ(SXcan K) the lifted spinor ψ = Q(φ0) Γ(SY ) satisfies ∈ ⊗ ∈ ψ 2 4( λ + t) | | ≡ − Y D ψ = νλψ. − Proof. This follows from

2 2 Y 1 2 1 ∗ ψ a and D ψ = a + mr γ(π µ) ψ | | ≡ −16m − 8m  r r  with a and γ(µ)φ0 from Proposition 10.4 and mr from Table 3. 

Remark 10.10. The eigenvalues can also be written as νλ = mr sgn(λ) in the − first case and νλ = mr + sgn(λ) in the second case, which relates them to the − mass mr of the spinor ψ.

Remark 10.11. If λ < 0 and gX is normalized such that λ = 4, the spinor ψ is harmonic in both cases, DY ψ = 0. −

Remark 10.12. Suppose that λ> 1. Then the scalg = 4(λ 1) Y − of (Y, gY ) is positive and the lifted spinors ψ Γ(SY ) are eigenspinors of the Dirac operator DY with eigenvalue ∈ 1 ν± = λ + 1 . ± 4   According to a theorem of Friedrich [16] the eigenvalues ν± have to satisfy

2 dim Y ν scalg (10.3) ± ≥ 4(dim Y 1) Y − i.e. in our situation 1 2 5 λ + 1 (λ 1) 0. 4 − 4 − ≥   This inequality holds, because the left-hand side is equal to the square 1 (λ 6)2. 16 − Equality in (10.3) holds if and only if λ = 6, i.e. (Y, gY ) is a Sasaki–Einstein 30 M. J. D. HAMILTON

5 manifold by Remark 10.8. In this case the eigenvalues are ν± = 2 and by [16] the spinors ψ are Killing spinors, ± 1 Y ψ = V ψ V T Y. ∇V ∓2 · ∀ ∈ The existence of two linearly independent Killing spinors on complete, simply connected Sasaki–Einstein 5-manifolds is well-known [18], [6] (by the Bonnet– Myers Theorem the fundamental group of any complete Sasaki–Einstein manifold is finite). Lower bounds on the eigenvalues of DY have also been proved in [28, Theorem 6.1] for the case of scalg > 4, i.e. Einstein constant λ > 0, which for certain Y − values of λ are improvements of the estimate (10.3). It can be checked that ν± = 1 λ + 1 satisfy these bounds as well. ± 4  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank the anonymous referee for a number of comments and corrections that helped to improve the quality of the paper. I would also like to thank Bernd Ammann and Uwe Semmelmann for discussions on a preprint version.

REFERENCES [1] Bernd Ammann. The Dirac operator on collapsing S1-bundles. In S´eminaire de Th´eorie Spec- trale et G´eom´etrie, Vol. 16, Ann´ee 1997–1998, volume 16 of S´emin. Th´eor. Spectr. G´eom., pages 33–42. Univ. Grenoble I, Saint-Martin-d’H`eres, 1998. [2] Bernd Ammann. Spin-Strukturen und das Spektrum des Dirac-Operators. PhD thesis, Univer- sity of Freiburg, 1998. [3] Bernd Ammann and Christian B¨ar. The Dirac operator on nilmanifolds and collapsing circle bundles. Ann. Global Anal. Geom., 16(3):221–253, 1998. [4] N. Aronszajn. A unique continuation theorem for solutions of elliptic partial differential equa- tions or inequalities of second order. J. Math. Pures Appl. (9), 36:235–249, 1957. [5] Michael Atiyah and Friedrich Hirzebruch. Spin-manifolds and group actions. In Essays on Topology and Related Topics (M´emoires d´edi´es `aGeorges de Rham), pages 18–28. Springer, New York, 1970. [6] Christian B¨ar. Real Killing spinors and holonomy. Comm. Math. Phys., 154(3):509–521, 1993. [7] Christian B¨ar. On nodal sets for Dirac and Laplace operators. Comm. Math. Phys., 188(3):709– 721, 1997. [8] Arthur L. Besse. Einstein manifolds, volume 10 of Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Gren- zgebiete (3) [Results in Mathematics and Related Areas (3)]. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1987. [9] Bernhelm Booß Bavnbek and Krzysztof P. Wojciechowski. Elliptic boundary problems for Dirac operators. Mathematics: Theory & Applications. Birkh¨auser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 1993. [10] Luc´ılia Daruiz Borsari. Bordism of semifree circle actions on Spin manifolds. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 301(2):479–487, 1987. [11] Jean-Pierre Bourguignon. A mathematician’s visit to Kaluza-Klein theory. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Politec. Torino, (Special Issue):143–163 (1990), 1989. Conference on Partial Differential Equations and Geometry (Torino, 1988). [12] Jean-Pierre Bourguignon, Oussama Hijazi, Jean-Louis Milhorat, Andrei Moroianu, and Sergiu Moroianu. A spinorial approach to Riemannian and conformal geometry. EMS Monographs in Mathematics. European Mathematical Society (EMS), Z¨urich, 2015. [13] Charles P. Boyer, Krzysztof Galicki, and Paola Matzeu. On eta-Einstein Sasakian geometry. Comm. Math. Phys., 262(1):177–208, 2006. A LIFT OF THE SEIBERG–WITTEN EQUATIONS TO KALUZA–KLEIN 5-MANIFOLDS 31

[14] Nedim De˘girmenci and Senay Bulut. Seiberg-Witten-like equations on 5-dimensional contact metric manifolds. Turkish J. Math., 38(5):812–818, 2014. [15] S. K. Donaldson. The Seiberg-Witten equations and 4-manifold topology. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. (N.S.), 33(1):45–70, 1996. [16] Thomas Friedrich. Der erste Eigenwert des Dirac-Operators einer kompakten, Riemannschen Mannigfaltigkeit nichtnegativer Skalarkr¨ummung. Math. Nachr., 97:117–146, 1980. [17] Thomas Friedrich. Dirac operators in Riemannian geometry, volume 25 of Graduate Studies in Mathematics. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2000. [18] Thomas Friedrich and Ines Kath. Einstein manifolds of dimension five with small first eigen- value of the Dirac operator. J. Differential Geom., 29(2):263–279, 1989. [19] Akito Futaki, Hajime Ono, and Guofang Wang. Transverse K¨ahler geometry of Sasaki mani- folds and toric Sasaki-Einstein manifolds. J. Differential Geom., 83(3):585–635, 2009. [20] Robert E. Gompf. Spinc-structures and homotopy equivalences. Geom. Topol., 1:41–50, 1997. [21] Robert E. Gompf and Andr´as I. Stipsicz. 4-manifolds and Kirby calculus, volume 20 of Grad- uate Studies in Mathematics. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1999. [22] David J. Gross and Andre Neveu. Dynamical Symmetry Breaking in Asymptotically Free Field Theories. Phys. Rev., D10:3235, 1974. [23] Mark J. D. Hamilton. On symplectic 4-manifolds and contact 5-manifolds. PhD thesis, LMU Munich, 2008. [24] Yoji Hatakeyama. Some notes on differentiable manifolds with almost contact structures. Tˆohoku Math. J. (2), 15:176–181, 1963. [25] Nigel Hitchin. Harmonic spinors. Advances in Math., 14:1–55, 1974. [26] Takeshi Isobe. Existence results for solutions to nonlinear Dirac equations on compact spin manifolds. Manuscripta Math., 135(3-4):329–360, 2011. [27] Th. Kaluza. Zum Unit¨atsproblem der Physik. Sitzungsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin (Math. Phys.), 1921:966–972, 1921. [28] Eui Chul Kim. Eigenvalue estimates for generalized dirac operators on sasakian manifolds. Ann. Global Anal. Geom., 45(1):67–93, 2014. [29] O. Klein. Quantentheorie und f¨unfdimensionale Relativit¨atstheorie. Z. Phys., 37:895–906, 1926. [30] Yuri Kordyukov, Mehdi Lejmi, and Patrick Weber. Seiberg-Witten invariants on manifolds with Riemannian foliations of codimension 4. J. Geom. Phys., 107:114–135, 2016. [31] Dieter Kotschick. The Seiberg-Witten invariants of symplectic four-manifolds (after C. H. Taubes). Ast´erisque, (241), 1997. S´eminaire Bourbaki, Vol. 1995/96. [32] P. B. Kronheimer and T. S. Mrowka. Monopoles and contact structures. Invent. Math., 130(2):209–255, 1997. [33] H. Blaine Lawson, Jr. and Marie-Louise Michelsohn. Spin geometry, volume 38 of Princeton Mathematical Series. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1989. [34] John W. Morgan. The Seiberg-Witten equations and applications to the topology of smooth four-manifolds, volume 44 of Mathematical Notes. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1996. [35] Andrei Moroianu. Spinc manifolds and complex contact structures. Comm. Math. Phys., 193(3):661–674, 1998. [36] Yiwen Pan. 5d Higgs Branch Localization, Seiberg-Witten Equations and Contact Geometry. JHEP, 01:145, 2015. [37] Hisham Sati. Geometry of Spin and Spinc structures in the M-theory partition function. Rev. Math. Phys., 24(3):1250005, 112, 2012. [38] N. Seiberg and E. Witten. Electric-magnetic duality, monopole condensation, and confinement in N = 2 supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory. Nuclear Phys. B, 426(1):19–52, 1994. [39] N. Seiberg and E. Witten. Monopoles, duality and chiral symmetry breaking in N = 2 super- symmetric QCD. Nuclear Phys. B, 431(3):484–550, 1994. [40] Edward Witten. Monopoles and four-manifolds. Math. Res. Lett., 1(6):769–796, 1994. 32 M. J. D. HAMILTON

FACHBEREICH MATHEMATIK, UNIVERSITAT¨ STUTTGART,PFAFFENWALDRING 57, 70569 STUTTGART,GERMANY Email address: [email protected]