## NON-EXISTENCE OF RIEMANNIAN METRIC SATISFYING YAMABE SOLITON

## ABSOS ALI SHAIKH , CHANDAN KUMAR MONDAL 1 2

Abstract. In this paper we have proved that a compact Riemannian manifold does not admit a metric with positive scalar curvature if there exists a real valued function in this manifold which is strictly positive along a geodesic ray satisfying expanding or steady Yamabe soliton. We have also deduced a relation between scalar curvature and surface area of a geodesic ball in a Riemannian manifold with a pole satisfying steady Yamabe soliton.

## 1. Introduction and preliminaries

One of the most central problem of Riemannian geometry is that: given any smooth real valued function on the manifold is there any Riemannian metric whose associated scalar curvature is that function? This is a very broad question and motivated an enormous amount of researchers over the years. In case of compact manifold, Kazdan and Warner [9] proved the existence of such a Riemannian metric when the function is negative. A good amount of research have been done by several authors when the manifold admits a positive scalar curvature, see [6, 14] and in case of negative scalar curvature, see [4, 10]. The conformal version of the above question is that: given a Riemannian manifold with Riemannian metric g and a smooth real valued function on the manifold, is there any Riemannian metric conformal to g whose scalar curvature is that function? When the manifold is compact and given function is negative or zero, Aubin [2] showed that there exists such a metric and when the function is positive somewhere then Berger [3] has given a solution.

The notion of Yamabe flow has been introduced by R. Hamilton [7] in which the metric is evolved accordingly as

$$\frac { \partial } { \partial t } g ( t ) = - R ( t ) g ( t ),$$

2010 Mathematics Subject Classification: 53C20; 53C21; 53C44.

Key words and phrases: Yamabe soliton, scalar curvature, Riemannian metric, Riemannian manifold.

$$2$$

where R t ( ) is the scalar curvature of then metric g t ( ). Aconnected Riemannian manifold ( M,g ) with n ≥ 2 is called Yamabe soliton if there exists a vector field such that

$$\frac { 1 } { 2 } \mathcal { L } _ { X } g = ( R - \rho ) g,$$

where £ X denotes the Lie derivative in the direction of X and ρ is a scalar. The Yamabe soliton is called expanding, steady and contracting if ρ &lt; 0, ρ = 0 and ρ &gt; 0 respectively. If there exists a function ϕ ∈ C ∞ ( M ) such that X = gradϕ , then it is called gradient Yamabe soliton and then equation (1) takes the form

$$\frac { 1 } { 2 } \nabla ^ { 2 } \varphi = ( R - \rho ) g,$$

where ∇ 2 is the Hessian operator. The concept of pole in a Riemannian manifold was introduced by Gromoll and Meyer [5]. A point p ∈ M of a Riemannian manifold is called a pole [5] if the tangent space T M p at the point p is diffeomorphic to M . A smooth function ϕ : M → R is said to be convex [13, 15] if for any p ∈ M and for any vector v ∈ T M p

$$\left \langle g r a d \varphi, v \right \rangle _ { p } \leq \varphi ( e x p _ { p } v ) - \varphi ( p ).$$

In section 2, we have proved that if there exists a strictly positive function along a geodesic ray in a compact Riemannian manifold, satisfying expanding or steady Yamabe soliton, then the manifold does not admit any Riemannian metric with positive scalar curvature. In the last section, we have deduced a relation between scalar curvature and surface area of geodesic ball in a complete Riemannian manifold with a pole satisfying steady gradient Yamabe soliton.

## 2. Riemannian metric and Yamabe soliton

The main result of this paper is the following:

Theorem 2.1. Let M be a compact Riemannian manifold of dimension n ≥ 3 and f ∈ C ∞ ( M )

.

Suppose there exists δ ∈ R such that f ≥ δ &gt; 0 along some geodesic ray satisfying the equation

$$\frac { 1 } { 2 } \mathcal { L } _ { X } g = ( f - \rho ) g, \text{ for } \rho \leq 0.$$

Then M does not admit any Riemannian metric with positive scalar curvature.

Theorem 2.2. [9] Let M be a compact Riemannian manifold of dimension n ≥ 3 . If f ∈ C ∞ ( M ) is negative somewhere, then there is a C ∞ Riemannian metric on M with f as its scalar curvature.

Theorem 2.3. [9] Let M be a compact Riemannian manifold of dimension n ≥ 3 . If M admits a metric whose scalar curvature is positive, then any f ∈ C ∞ ( M ) is the scalar curvature of some Riemannian metric on M .

Proof of Theorem 2.1: Let γ : [0 , ∞ → ) M be a geodesic ray emanating from p ∈ M and parametrized by arc length t such that f ≥ δ &gt; 0 along γ . Suppose M admits a Riemannian metric with positive scalar curvature. Then from Theorem 2.3, there exists a Riemannian metric g with f as its scalar curvature R satisfying the equation (3) for ρ ≤ 0. Then along γ we have

$$\frac { 1 } { 2 } \mathcal { L } _ { X } g ( \gamma ^ { \prime }, \gamma ^ { \prime } ) = g ( \nabla _ { \gamma ^ { \prime } } X, \gamma ^ { \prime } ) = \frac { d } { d t } [ g ( X, \gamma ^ { \prime } ) ].$$

Thus from (3) the above equation implies

$$\int _ { 0 } ^ { t _ { 0 } } ( R - \rho ) _ { \gamma } g ( \gamma ^ { \prime }, \gamma ^ { \prime } ) d t = \int _ { 0 } ^ { t _ { 0 } } \frac { d } { d t } [ g ( X, \gamma ^ { \prime } ) ] d t = g ( X _ { \gamma ( t _ { 0 } ) }, \gamma ^ { \prime } ( t _ { 0 } ) ) - g ( X _ { p }, \gamma ^ { \prime } ( 0 ) ).$$

Now using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, we get

$$\int _ { 0 } ^ { t _ { 0 } } R _ { \gamma } d t \leq \| X _ { \gamma ( t _ { 0 } ) } \| - g ( X _ { p }, \gamma ^ { \prime } ( 0 ) ) + \rho t _ { 0 }.$$

Since M is compact, there exists a scalar K such that ‖ X ‖ ≤ K . Hence, the above equation yields

$$\int _ { 0 } ^ { t _ { 0 } } R _ { \gamma } d t \leq K - g ( X _ { p }, \gamma ^ { \prime } ( 0 ) ) + \rho t _ { 0 }.$$

Again taking limit on both side, we obtain

$$\lim _ { t _ { 0 } \rightarrow \infty } \int _ { 0 } ^ { t _ { 0 } } R _ { \gamma } d t \leq K - g ( X _ { p }, \gamma ^ { \prime } ( 0 ) ) + \lim _ { t _ { 0 } \rightarrow \infty } \rho t _ { 0 }.$$

Now ρ ≤ 0 implies that lim t 0 →∞ ρt 0 ≤ 0. Thus, we have

$$\lim _ { t _ { 0 } \to \infty } \int _ { 0 } ^ { t _ { 0 } } R _ { \gamma } d t \leq C ( p ),$$

where C p ( ) is a constant depends on p . But from the given condition, we get

$$\lim _ { t _ { 0 } \rightarrow \infty } \int _ { 0 } ^ { t _ { 0 } } R _ { \gamma } d t \geq \lim _ { t _ { 0 } \rightarrow \infty } \int _ { 0 } ^ { t _ { 0 } } \delta d t = + \infty,$$

which contradicts the equation (4). Therefore, M does not admit any Riemannian metric with positive scalar curvature. /square

Corollary 2.3.1. Let ( M,g ) be a compact Riemannian manifold of dimension n ≥ 3 with the Riemannian metric g whose scalar curvature is positive. Then there doest not exist any function f ∈ C ∞ ( M ) such that f ≥ δ &gt; 0 on M and f satisfies (3).

Proposition 2.4. Let M be a compact Riemannian manifold of dimension n ≥ 3 . If f ∈ C ∞ ( M ) is negative somewhere and satisfies the equation (3), then f is non-positive along each geodesic ray.

Proof. Since f is negative somewhere, by the Theorem 2.2, there is a Riemannian metric whose scalar curvature R is f . Again f satisfies the equation (3), so by using (4), the result easily follows. /square

Theorem 2.5. [8] Let ( M,g ) be an n -dimensional compact Riemannian manifold satisfying Yamabe gradient soliton with n ≥ 3 . Then ( M,g ) is of constant scalar curvature.

From the above Theorem, we can state the following result:

Proposition 2.6. Let M be a compact n -dimensional Riemannian manifold with n ≥ 3 and f ∈ C ∞ ( M ) . If there exists a Riemannian metric g whose scalar curvature is f and which satisfies the gradient Yamabe soliton (2), then f must be constant.

## 3. Upper bound of scalar curvature

In this section we have given a relation between the scalar curvature and volume and surface area of a geodesic ball. Let M be a Riemannian manifold with a pole p . Then by the notation x →∞ we mean the limit d p, x ( ) →∞ for x ∈ M .

Theorem 3.1. [11] Let ( M,g ) be a complete and non-compact gradient Yamabe soliton with ρ ≥ 0 with scalar curvature R and lim x →∞ R x ( ) ≥ 0 . Then the scalar curvature R of ( M,g ) is non-negative.

Theorem 3.2. [12] Let B R ( p ) be a geodesic ball in a complete Riemannian manifold M . Suppose that the sectional curvature K M ≤ k for some constant k and R &lt; inj M,g ( ) . Then for any real valued smooth function f with ∆ f ≥ 0 and f ≥ 0 on M ,

$$f ( p ) \leq \frac { 1 } { V _ { k } ( R ) } \int _ { B _ { R } ( p ) } f d V,$$

where V k ( R ) = Vol ( B ,g R k ) is the volume of a ball of radius R in the space form of constant curvature k , dV is the volume form and inj M, g ( ) is the injective radius of M .

Theorem 3.3. Let ( M,p ) be a complete non-compact Riemannian manifold with a pole p and the sectional curvature K M ≤ k for some constant k with scalar curvature R satisfying ∆ R ≥ 0 . If the Riemannian metric g satisfies the steady gradient Yamabe soliton

$$\frac { 1 } { 2 } \nabla ^ { 2 } \varphi = R g,$$

where ϕ ∈ C 2 ( M ) is a convex function, then

$$2 R ( p ) \leq \varphi ( x ^ { \prime \prime } ) \frac { V o l ( \partial B _ { p } ( R ^ { \prime } ) ) } { V o l _ { k } ( B _ { p } ( R ) ) } - \varphi ( x _ { 0 } ) \frac { V o l ( \partial B _ { p } ( R ) ) } { V o l _ { k } ( B _ { p } ( R ) ) },$$

where R &lt; R ′ , x ′′ ∈ V ol ( ∂B p ( R ′ )) , x 0 ∈ V ol ( ∂B p ( R )) and B R ( p ) is a geodesic ball with center at p and radius R .

Proof. Taking trace in both sides of (6), we get

$$\frac { 1 } { 2 } \Delta \varphi = R n.$$

Now taking η as the unit outward normal vector along ∂B p ( R ) and integrating in B p ( R ) an then using divergence theorem and applying convexity property of ϕ , we have

$$\text{divergence theorem and applying convexity property of $\varphi$, we have} \\ \int _ { B _ { p } ( R ) } R d V \ & = \ \frac { 1 } { 2 } \int _ { B _ { p } ( R ) } \Delta \varphi d V \\ & = \ \frac { 1 } { 2 } \int _ { \partial B _ { p } ( R ) } \langle X, \eta \rangle \, d S \\ & \leq \ \frac { 1 } { 2 } \int _ { \partial B _ { p } ( R ) } \{ \varphi ( e x p _ { x } \eta ) - \varphi ( x ) \} d S \\ & \leq \ \frac { 1 } { 2 } \{ \varphi ( e x p _ { x ^ { \prime } } \eta ) - \varphi ( x _ { 0 } ) \} V o l ( \partial B _ { p } ( R ) ),$$

where ϕ x ( 0 ) = inf { ϕ x ( ) : x ∈ ∂B p ( R ) } and ϕ exp ( x ′ η ) = sup { ϕ exp η ( x ) : x ∈ ∂B p ( R ) } . Since η is the unit outward normal along ∂B p ( R ), the set { exp η x : x ∈ ∂B p ( R ) } = ∂B p ( R ′ ) for some R &gt; R ′ . Also, V ol ( ∂B p ( R )) ≤ V ol ( ∂B p ( R ′ )). So the above equation reduces to

$$2 \int _ { B _ { p } ( R ) } R d V \leq \varphi ( x ^ { \prime \prime } ) V o l ( \partial B _ { p } ( R ^ { \prime } ) ) - \varphi ( x _ { 0 } ) V o l ( \partial B _ { p } ( R ) ),$$

where x ′′ = exp x ′ η . Since lim x →∞ R x ( ) ≥ 0, it implies that R ≥ 0 by using Theorem 3.1. Now using Theorem 3.2, we get

$$2 V o l _ { k } ( B _ { p } ( R ) ) R ( p ) \leq \varphi ( x ^ { \prime \prime } ) V o l ( \partial B _ { p } ( R ^ { \prime } ) ) - \varphi ( x _ { 0 } ) V o l ( \partial B _ { p } ( R ) ).$$

Rearranging the above inequality, we get

$$2 R ( p ) \leq \varphi ( x ^ { \prime \prime } ) \frac { V o l ( \partial B _ { p } ( R ^ { \prime } ) ) } { V o l _ { k } ( B _ { p } ( R ) ) } - \varphi ( x _ { 0 } ) \frac { V o l ( \partial B _ { p } ( R ) ) } { V o l _ { k } ( B _ { p } ( R ) ) }.$$

Hence, we get the required inequality.

## References

- [1] Aubin, T., Some nonlinear problems in Riemannian geometry , Springer, 2013.
- [2] Aubin, T., M´ etriques Riemanniennes et courbure , J. Diff. Geom., 4 (1970), 383-424.
- [3] Berger, M. S., Riemannian structures of prescribed Gaussian curvature for compact 2-manifolds , J. Diff. Geom., 5 (1971), 325-332.
- [4] Bland, J. and Kalka, M., Negative scalar curvature metrics on noncompact manifolds , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 316(2) (1989), 433-446.
- [5] Gromoll, D. and Meyer, W., On complete open manifolds of positive curvature , Ann. Math., 90(1) (1969), 75-90.
- [6] Gromov, M. and Lawson Jr, H. B., The classification of simply connected manifolds of positive scalar curvature , Ann. Math., 111(3) (1980), 423-434.
- [7] Hamilton, R. S., The Ricci flow on surfaces , Mathematics and general relativity (Santa Cruz, CA, 1986), Contemp. Math., 71 (1988), 237-262.
- [8] Hsu, S-Y., A note on compact gradient Yamabe solitons , J. Math. Ann. Appl. 388 (2012), 725-726.
- [9] Kazdan, J. L. and Warner, F. W., Scalar curvature and conformal deformation of Riemannian structure , J. Diff. Geom., 10(1) (1975), 113-134.
- [10] Lohkamp, J., The space of negative scalar curvature metrics , Invent. Math., 110(1) (1992), 57-95.
- [11] Ma, L. and Miquel, V., Remarks on scalar curvature of Yamabe solitons , Ann. Glob. Anal. Geom., 42 (2012), 195-205.

/square

- [12] Schoen, R., Yau, S.T.: Lectures on differential geometry. Conference Proceedings and Lecture Notes in Geometry and Topology , I. International Press, Cambridge, MA, (1994)
- [13] Shaikh, A. A, Mondal, C. K. and Ahmad, I., Non-existence of certain type of convex functions on a Riemannian manifold with a pole , J. Geom. Phys, 140 (2019), 104-110.
- [14] Stolz S., Simply connected manifolds of positive scalar curvature , Ann. Math., 136 (1992), 511-540.
- [15] Yau, S.T., Non-existence of continuous convex functions on certain Riemannian manifolds . Math. Ann. 207 (1974), 269-270.

1 Department of Mathematics,

University of Burdwan, Golapbag,

Burdwan-713104,

West Bengal, India

E-mail address : aask2003@yahoo.co.in, aashaikh@math.buruniv.ac.in

2 School of sciences,

Netaji Subhas Open University, Durgapur-713214,

West Bengal, India

E-mail address : chan.alge@gmail.com
Absos Ali Shaikh Chandan Kumar Mondal
Non-existence of Riemannian metric satisfying Yamabe soliton
In this paper we have proved that a compact Riemannian manifold does not
admit a metric with positive scalar curvature if there exists a real valued
function in this manifold which is strictly positive along a geodesic ray
satisfying expanding or steady Yamabe soliton. We have also deduced a relation
between scalar curvature and surface area of a geodesic ball in a Riemannian
manifold with a pole satisfying steady Yamabe soliton.