, ,

In [4] C. LeBrun explicitly constructed a family of self-dual metrics on

n C P^{2}

, the connected sum of

n

copies of complex projective planes, where

n

is an arbitrary positive integer. His construction starts from giving distinct

n

points on the upper half-space

ℌ^{3}

with the usual hyperbolic metric. Once these

n

points are given, everything proceed in a canonical way. Namely a principal

U (1)

-bundle over the punctured

ℌ^{3}

together with a connection is canonically constructed, and then on the total space of this

U (1)

-bundle a self-dual metric is naturally and explicitly introduced, for which the

U (1)

-action becomes isometric. Then finally by choosing an appropriate conformal gauge (which is also concretely given), the self-dual metric is shown to extend to a compactification, yielding desired self-dual metric on

n C P^{2}

. Thus LeBrun metrics on

n C P^{2}

are naturally parametrized by the set of different

n

points on

ℌ^{3}

If the

n

points are located in a general position, the corresponding LeBrun metric admits only a

U (1)

-isometry (coming from the principal bundle structure). However, when the

n

points are put in a collinear position, meaning that the

n

points lie on the same geodesic on the hyperbolic

ℌ^{3}

, then the rotations around the geodesic can be lifted to the total space and it gives another

U (1)

-isometries of the LeBrun metric. We call this kind of self-dual metrics on

n C P^{2}

LeBrun metric with torus action. By a characterization theorem of LeBrun [5] , being LeBrun metric with torus action is preserved under deformation keeping the torus action.

In this note, following a suggestion of LeBrun [5,p.123,Remark] , we investigate

U (1)

-isometric deformation of LeBrun metrics with torus action, where

U (1)

is a subgroup of the torus. In particular, we determine all

U (1)

-subgroups of the torus for which one can obtain

U (1)

-equivariant deformation such that not full torus symmetry survive. Note that on

2 C P^{2}

every self-dual metric of positive scalar curvature is LeBrun metric with torus action [8] and such a subgroup in problem cannot exist for

n = 2

(and also for

n = 1

). Of course, LeBrun's original

U (1)

-subgroup (coming from the principal bundle structure), which acts semi-freely on

n C P^{2}

, has the desired property for

n \geq 3

. We show that involving this subgroup, there are precisely

n

numbers of

U (1)

-subgroups for which there exists the required equivariant deformation. We concretely give these subgroups and observe that the remaining

(n - 1)

subgroups give non-LeBrun self-dual metric. Also, we count the dimension of the moduli space of the resulting family of self-dual metrics with a non-semi-free

U (1)

-isometries.

Finally, we discuss some examples.

2 Computation of the torus action on a cohomology group

(2.1) Our proof of the main result is via twistor space. So let

Z

be the twistor space of a LeBrun metric with torus action on

n C P^{2}

. In order to investigate

U (1)

-equivariant deformations of this metric, we calculate the torus action on the cohomology group

H^{1} (Θ_{Z})

which is relevant to deformation of complex structure of

Z

. In this subsection, to this end, we recall the explicit construction of

Z

due to LeBrun [4] . We need to be careful in resolving singularities of a projective model of the twistor space, since in [4] it is assumed that the semi-free

U (1)

-action does not extend to torus action, and since, under the existence of torus action, there are

n!

possible ways of (small) resolutions and most of them do not yield a twistor space First let

Q = C P^{1} \times C P^{1}

be a quadratic surface and

E \to Q

a rank-3 vector bundle

E = O (n - 1, 1) \oplus O (1, n - 1) \oplus O \to Q,

where

O (k, l)

denotes the line bundle over

Q

whose bidegree is

(k, l)

. Let

(ξ_{0}, ξ_{1})

(resp.

(η_{0}, η_{1})

) be a homogeneous coordinate on the first (resp. the second) factor of

Q

, and set

U_{0} = {(ξ_{0}, ξ_{1}) | ξ_{0} \neq 0}, V_{0} = {(η_{0}, η_{1}) | η_{0} \neq 0}

. On

U_{0}

(resp.

V_{0}

) we use a non-homogeneous coordinate

u = ξ_{1} / ξ_{0}

(resp.

v = η_{1} / η_{0}

). We choose a trivialization of

E

over

U_{0} \times V_{0} \subset Q

, and let

(x, y, z)

be the resulting fiber coordinate on

E |_{U_{0} \times V_{0}}

. Thus on the total space of

E |_{U_{0} \times V_{0}}

we can use

(u, v, x, y, z)

as a global coordinate. Then let

X

be a compact (or complete) algebraic variety in

P (E)

define by

\begin{matrix} x y = {z^{2}}^{n} \prod_{i = 1} (v - a_{i} u), \end{matrix}

(1)

where

a_{1}, a_{2}, \dots, a_{n}

are positive real numbers satisfying

a_{1} < a_{2} \dots < a_{n}

. (( 1 ) is an equation on

P (E |_{U_{0} \times V_{0}})

, but it can be naturally compactified in

P (E)

X

has an obvious conic bundle structure over

Q

whose discriminant locus is

C_{1} \cup C_{2} \cup \dots C_{n}

, where

C_{i}

is a

(1, 1)

-curve in

Q

defined by

v = a_{i} u

. Further, the point

(x, y, z) = (0, 0, 1) \in P (E)

lying over the fiber over the point

(u, v) = (0, 0)

is so called a compound

A_{n - 1}

-singularity of

X

Similarly, by the choice of the degree of the direct summand in

E

, the point

(0, 0, 1) \in P (E)

over

(u, v) = (\infty, \infty)

is also a compound

A_{n - 1}

-singularity of

X

. We denote these two singularities of

X

p_{0}

and

{\bar{p}}_{0}

. These are all the singularities of

X

We have to define a real structure. In terms of the above coordinate

(u, v, x, y, z)

P (E |_{U_{0} \times V_{0}})

it is defined by

\begin{matrix} σ : (u, v; x, y, z) \mapsto (\frac{1}{\bar{v}}, \frac{1}{\bar{u}}; \frac{\bar{y}}{{\bar{u}}^{n - 1} \bar{v}}, \frac{\bar{x}}{\bar{u} {\bar{v}}^{n - 1}}, \bar{z}), \end{matrix}

(2)

which preserves

X

, and interchanges the two singular points

p_{0}

and

{\bar{p}}_{0}

X

Next we give a small resolution of

p_{0}

. To give it explicitly we write

\tilde{x} = x / z

and

\tilde{y} = y / z

Then in an affine neighborhood of

p_{0}

P (E)

X

is defined by

\tilde{x} \tilde{y} = \prod_{i = 1}^{n} (v - a_{i} u)

. The small resolution of

p_{0}

is a composition of

(n - 1)

blowing-ups, where the center is 2-dimensional in each steps; As the first step we take a blow-up of

X

along

\tilde{x} = v - a_{1} u = 0

, yielding a new space

X_{1}

and a morphism

X_{1} \to X

. Since this center is contained in

X

, the exceptional locus

E_{1}

arises only over

p_{0}

and it is isomorphic to

C P^{1}

. Introducing a new coordinate

{\tilde{x}}_{1}

\tilde{x} = {\tilde{x}}_{1} (v - a_{_{1}} u)

E_{1}

, the new space

X_{1}

is locally defined by

{\tilde{x}}_{1} \tilde{y} = \prod_{i \geq 2} (v - a_{i} u)

, so that having a compound

A_{n - 2}

-singularity at the origin. The second step is to blow-up

X_{1}

along

{\tilde{x}}_{1} = v - a_{2} u = 0

, giving a new space

X_{2}

with a compound

A_{n - 3}

-singularity at the new origin. After repeating this process

(n - 1)

times, the singularity

p_{0}

is resolved, and the exceptional locus is a string of

(n - 1)

smooth rational curves. This is how to obtain a small resolution of

p_{0}

. Once a resolution of

p_{0}

is given, another singularity

{\bar{p}}_{0}

is naturally resolved by reality. Let

Y \to X

be the small resolution of

p_{0}

and

{\bar{p}}_{0}

obtained in this way.

(

Y

is non-singular.) Obviously, other small resolutions of

p_{0}

can be obtained for each permutation of

n

letters

{1, 2, \dots, n}

. But keeping in mind that we have assumed

a_{1} < a_{2} < \dots < a_{n}

and that the curve

x = y = v - a_{i} u

(

1 \leq i \leq n

), which is over a discriminant locus

C_{i} \subset Q

, has to be a twistor line over the isolated fixed point of the torus action on

n C P^{2}

, it is easily seen that if we take the resolution associated to a permutation other than

{1, 2, \dots, n - 1, n}

(giving the small resolution above) and

{n, n - 1, \dots, 2, 1}

, then the resulting space does not become a twistor space even after the blowing-down process which will explained next.

Next we explain the final step for obtaining the twistor space. The conic bundle

X \to Q

has two distinct sections

E = {x = z = 0}

and

\bar{E} = {y = z = 0}

, which are conjugate of each other. These sections are disjoint from

p_{0}

and

{\bar{p}}_{0}

and their normal bundles in

X

are

O (- 1, 1 - n)

and

O (1 - n, - 1)

respectively. Clearly the small resolution

Y \to X

does not have any effect around

E

and

\bar{E}

, so that it does not change the normal bundles. Hence (if

n > 2

) both

E

and

\bar{E}

(considered as divisors on

Y

) can be naturally contracted to

C P^{1}

along mutually different directions. Let

μ : Y \to Z

be this contraction and put

C_{0} = μ (E)

{\bar{C}}_{0} = μ (\bar{E})

. Then the normal bundle of

C_{0}

and

{\bar{C}}_{0}

Z

O (1 - n)^{\oplus 2}

. This

Z

is the twistor space of a LeBrun metric with torus action.

Finally a

C^{*} \times C^{*}

-action on the twistor space

Z

has to be introduced. On

P (E)

it is explicitly given by

\begin{matrix} (u, v, x, y, z) \mapsto (s u, s v, t x, s^{n} t^{- 1} y, z), (s, t) \in C^{*} \times C^{*}, \end{matrix}

(3)

which preserves

X

and fixes

p_{0}

and

{\bar{p}}_{0}

. When restricted to

U (1) \times U (1)

this action commutes with the real structure ( 2 ).

(2.2) In the sequel we write

G = C^{*} \times C^{*} = {(s, t)}

for simplicity. To calculate

G

-action on

H^{1} (Θ_{Z})

, we introduce various

G

-equivariant exact sequences related to this cohomology group. Our calculation in this subsection is similar to that of LeBrun in [6] with some simplifications. We note that the dimensions of the cohomology groups

H^{i} (Θ_{Z})

are different from LeBrun's case in [6] for

i = 0, 1

Let

π : Y \to Q

be the projection which is the composition of the small resolution

Y \to X

and the projection

X \to Q

. We have the following exact sequence of sheaves of

O_{Y}

-modules

\begin{matrix} 0 ⟶ Θ_{Y / Q} ⟶ Θ_{Y} ⟶ π^{*} Θ_{Q} ⟶ G ⟶ 0, \end{matrix}

(4)

where

Θ_{Y / Q}

and

G

denote the kernel and the cokernel of the natural homomorphism

Θ_{Y} ⟶ π^{*} Θ_{Q}

respectively. We decompose 4 into the following two short exact sequences:

\begin{matrix} 0 ⟶ Θ_{Y / Q} ⟶ Θ_{Y} ⟶ F ⟶ 0, \end{matrix}

(5)

\begin{matrix} 0 ⟶ F ⟶ π^{*} Θ_{Q} ⟶ G ⟶ 0, \end{matrix}

(6)

where

F

denotes the image sheaf of

Θ_{Y} ⟶ π^{*} Θ_{Q}

. On the other hand we have a natural isomorphism

Θ_{Y / Q} ≃ O_{Y} (E + \bar{E})

and an exact sequence

\begin{matrix} 0 ⟶ O_{Y} ⟶ O_{Y} (E + \bar{E}) ⟶ O_{E} (E) \oplus O_{\bar{E}} (\bar{E}) ⟶ 0 . \end{matrix}

(7)

As are already explained we have

O_{E} (E) ≃ O_{E} (- 1, 1 - n)

and

O_{\bar{E}} (\bar{E}) ≃ O_{\bar{E}} (1 - n, - 1)

By taking the direct image of 7 , we obtain an exact sequence

\begin{matrix} 0 ⟶ O_{Q} ⟶ π_{*} O_{Y} (E + \bar{E}) ⟶ O_{Q} (- 1, 1 - n) \oplus O_{Q} (1 - n, - 1) ⟶ 0, \end{matrix}

(8)

since

R^{1} π_{*} O_{Y} = 0

. Because the relevant extension group

H^{1} (O_{Q} (1, n - 1) \oplus O_{Q} (n - 1, 1))

vanishes, 8 splits and we get

π_{*} O_{Y} (E + \bar{E}) ≃ O_{Q} \oplus O_{Q} (- 1, 1 - n) \oplus O_{Q} (1 - n, - 1)

. From this we obtain

H^{i} (Θ_{Y / Q}) ≃ H^{i} (π_{*} O_{Y} (E + \bar{E})) ≃ H^{i} (O_{Q} \oplus O_{Q} (- 1, 1 - n) \oplus O_{Q} (1 - n, - 1))

, which vanishes if

i \geq 1

. Therefore by 5 we obtain

\begin{matrix} H^{i} (Θ_{Y}) ≃ H^{i} (F) for i \geq 1 . \end{matrix}

(9)

On the other hand we have

H^{i} (Y, G) ≃ \oplus_{i = 1}^{n} H^{i} (C_{i}, N_{C_{i} / Q}) ≃ \oplus_{i = 1}^{n} H^{i} (O_{C_{i}} (2))

for any

i \geq 0

. Thus we obtain from ( 6 ) an exact sequence

\begin{matrix} 0 ⟶ H^{0} (F) ⟶ H^{0} (Θ_{Q}) ⟶ \oplus_{i = 1}^{n} H^{0} (N_{C_{i} / Q}) ⟶ H^{1} (F) ⟶ 0 \end{matrix}

(10)

and

H^{i} (F) ≃ H^{i} (π^{*} Θ_{Q}) ≃ H^{i} (Θ_{Q}) = 0

for

i \geq 2

. In particular, by ( 9 ), we obtain

\begin{matrix} H^{i} (Θ_{Y}) = 0 for i \geq 2 . \end{matrix}

(11)

Since any

C_{i}

is a member of the pencil of

G

-invariant

(1, 1)

-curves on

Q

, the image of the map

H^{0} (Θ_{Q}) ⟶ \oplus_{i = 1}^{n} H^{0} (N_{C_{i} / Q})

in 10 is

6 - 1 = 5

-dimensional. (This is more concretely shown in the proof of Proposition 2.1 below.) It follows that

H^{1} (Θ_{Y})

(3 n - 5)

-dimensional.

Associated to the blowing-down map

μ : Y \to Z

we have a natural isomorphism

Θ_{Y, E + \bar{E}} ≃ μ^{*} Θ_{Z, C_{0} + {\bar{C}}_{0}},

where for a complex manifold

A

and its complex submanifold

B

Θ_{A, B}

denotes the sheaf of holomorphic vector fields on

A

which are tangent to

B

in general. On the other hand we readily have

H^{i} (Θ_{Y, E + \bar{E}}) ≃ H^{i} (Θ_{Y})

for any

i \geq 0

and

H^{i} (μ^{*} Θ_{Z, C_{0} + {\bar{C}}_{0}}) ≃ H^{i} (Θ_{Z, C_{0} + {\bar{C}}_{0}})

for any

i \geq 0

. Consequently we obtain a natural isomorphism

\begin{matrix} H^{i} (Θ_{Y}) ≃ H^{i} (Θ_{Z, C_{0} + {\bar{C}}_{0}}) for any i \geq 0 . \end{matrix}

(12)

Hence by 11 we obtain

H^{i} (Θ_{Z, C_{0} + {\bar{C}}_{0}}) = 0

for

i \geq 2

. Therefore by an obvious exact sequence

\begin{matrix} 0 ⟶ Θ_{Z, C_{0} + {\bar{C}}_{0}} ⟶ Θ_{Z} ⟶ N_{C_{0} / Z} \oplus N_{{\bar{C}}_{0} / Z} ⟶ 0 \end{matrix}

(13)

and 12 and

N_{C_{0} / Z} ≃ O (1 - n)^{\oplus 2} ≃ N_{{\bar{C}}_{0} / Z}

, we get an exact sequence

\begin{matrix} 0 ⟶ H^{1} (Θ_{Y}) ⟶ H^{1} (Θ_{Z}) ⟶ H^{1} (N_{C_{0} / Z}) \oplus H^{1} (N_{{\bar{C}}_{0} / Z}) ⟶ 0 . \end{matrix}

(14)

It follows that the dimension of

H^{1} (Θ_{Z})

(3 n - 5) + 2 \cdot 2 (n - 2) = 7 n - 13

. Also we obtain from the long exact sequence and 11 that

H^{2} (Θ_{Z}) = 0

(2.3) Now we have finished preliminaries for calculating the torus action on the cohomology group. By the exact sequence ( 14 ) which is obviously

G

-equivariant, it suffices to calculate

G

-actions on

H^{1} (Θ_{Y})

and

H^{1} (N_{C_{0} / Z}) \oplus H^{1} (N_{{\bar{C}}_{0} / Z})

respectively. To put the result in simple form, we use the following notation for expressing torus actions: if a complex vector space

V

of finite dimension

k

is acted by the torus

G = C^{*} \times C^{*} = {(s, t)}

V

can be decomposed essentially in a unique way into the direct sum of 1-dimensional

G

-invariant subspaces

V_{i}

1 \leq i \leq k

. For each

V_{i}

G

-action on

V_{i}

takes the form

v_{i} \mapsto s^{m_{i}} t^{n_{i}} v_{i}

for some integers

m_{i}

and

n_{i}

. Under this situation we write the

G

-action on

V

{(m_{1}, n_{1}), (m_{2}, n_{2}), \dots, (m_{k}, n_{k})}

Then our result is as follows:

Proposition 2.1. Let

Z

be the twistor space of a LeBrun metric with torus action on

n C P^{2}

n \geq 3

. Then the natural action of the torus on the cohomology group

H^{1} (Z, Θ_{Z}) ≃ C^{7 n - 13}

is the direct sum of the following three representations of the torus:

\begin{matrix} {{\underset{︸}{(0, 0), \dots, (0, 0)}}_{n - 1}, {\underset{︸}{(1, 0), \dots, (1, 0)}}_{n - 2}, {\underset{︸}{(- 1, 0), \dots, (- 1, 0)}}_{n - 2}} \end{matrix}

(15)

H^{1} (Θ_{Y}) ≃ C^{3 n - 5}

, and

\begin{matrix} {{\underset{︸}{(1 - n, 1), (2 - n, 1), \dots, (- 2, 1)}}_{n - 2}, {\underset{︸}{(2 - n, 1), (3 - n, 1), \dots, (- 1, 1)}}_{n - 2}} \end{matrix}

(16)

H^{1} (N_{C_{0} / Z}) ≃ C^{2 n - 4}

, and

\begin{matrix} {{\underset{︸}{(n - 1, - 1), (n - 2, - 1), \dots, (2, - 1)}}_{n - 2}, {\underset{︸}{(n - 2, - 1), (n - 3, - 1), \dots, (1, - 1)}}_{n - 2}} \end{matrix}

(17)

H^{1} (N_{{\bar{C}}_{0} / Z}) ≃ C^{2 n - 4}

Proof. First we prove that the torus action on

H^{1} (Θ_{Y})

is as in 15 . We use the exact sequence 10 which is also torus-equivariant sequence. We first determine the image of the homomorphism

α : H^{0} (Θ_{Q}) \to \oplus_{i = 1}^{n} H^{0} (N_{i})

in 10 , where we write

N_{i} = N_{C_{i} / Q}

for simplicity. Viewing

H^{0} (Θ_{Q})

as the Lie algebra of

A u t_{0} (Q) ≃ P S L (2, C) \times P S L (2, C)

α

can be concretely given as follow: for any

X \in s l (2, C) \oplus s l (2, C)

, let

{A (t) | t \in C}

be the 1-parameter subgroup in

P S L (2, C) \times P S L (2, C)

generated by

X

. For any point

q \in C_{i}

, we associate the tangent vector at

q

of the

A (t)

-orbit through

q

. Consequently we obtain a tangent vector along

C_{i}

, which is a holomorphic section of

Θ_{Q} |_{C_{i}}

. Then projecting this onto

N_{i}

, we obtain an element of

H^{0} (N_{i})

. This is

α (X)

. In the sequel we choose a basis of

s l (2, C) \oplus s l (2, C)

and for each member of the basis we calculate their images under

α

Before concretely calculating the image of

α

, we give, for each

C_{i}

(

1 \leq i \leq n)

, a direct sum decomposition

Θ_{Q} |_{C_{i}} ≃ Θ_{C_{i}} \oplus N_{i}

(namely, a splitting of

0 ⟶ Θ_{C_{i}} ⟶ Θ_{Q} |_{C_{i}} ⟶ N_{i} ⟶ 0

). For this, let

(u, v)

be a non-homogeneous coordinate on

Q

as in (2.1), and

τ_{i} \in H^{0} (Θ_{C_{i}})

and

ν_{i} \in H^{0} (Θ_{Q} |_{C_{i}})

holomorphic vector fields defined by

τ_{i} = \frac{\partial}{\partial u} + a_{i} \frac{\partial}{\partial v}, ν_{i} = a_{i} \frac{\partial}{\partial u} - \frac{\partial}{\partial v} .

Because

a_{i}

is real,

τ_{i}

and

ν_{i}

cannot be parallel and

ν_{i}

can be regarded as a (holomorphic) non-zero section of

ν_{i}

. Then we obtain a direct sum decomposition

Θ_{Q} |_{C_{i}} ≃ Θ_{C_{i}} \oplus N_{i}

Explicitly, if

γ = g (\partial / \partial u) + h (\partial / \partial v)

is a holomorphic section of

Θ_{Q} |_{C_{i}}

, we have

\begin{matrix} γ = α τ_{i} + β ν_{i}; α = \frac{g + a_{i} h}{1 + a_{i}^{2}}, β = \frac{a_{i} g - h}{1 + a_{i}^{2}} . \end{matrix}

(18)

Moreover, we can take

{ν_{i}, u ν_{i}, u^{2} ν_{i}}

as a basis of

H^{0} (N_{i})

As a basis of

s l (2, C)

we choose

A = (\begin{matrix} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & - 1 \end{matrix}), B = (\begin{matrix} 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 \end{matrix}), C = (\begin{matrix} 0 & 0 \\ 1 & 0 \end{matrix}) .

Corresponding 1-parameter subgroups are

(\begin{matrix} e^{t} & 0 \\ 0 & e^{- t} \end{matrix}), (\begin{matrix} 1 & t \\ 0 & 1 \end{matrix}), (\begin{matrix} 1 & 0 \\ t & 1 \end{matrix})

respectively, where

t \in C

. Then if we choose as a basis of

s l (2, C) \oplus s l (2, C)

\begin{matrix} (A, O), (B, O), (C, O), (O, A), (O, B), (O, C), \end{matrix}

(19)

where

O

is the zero matrix, and if

γ_{i 1}, γ_{i 2}, \dots, γ_{i 6} \in H^{0} (N_{i})

denotes the image of the above 6 generators of

s l (2, C) \oplus s l (2, C) ≃ H^{0} (Θ_{Q})

by the homomorphism

H^{0} (Θ_{Q}) \to H^{0} (N_{i})

respectively, then we obtain by using 18

(20) γ i 1 = a i 1 + a i 2 u ν i , γ i 2 = − a i 1 + a i 2 u 2 ν i , γ i 3 = a i 1 + a i 2 ν i , γ i 4 = − a i 1 + a i 2 u ν i , γ i 5 = a i 2 1 + a i 2 u 2 ν i , γ i 6 = − 1 1 + a i 2 ν i .

Thus the image of each member of 19 by

α

γ_{k} : = \sum_{i = 1}^{n} γ_{i k} \in \oplus_{i = 1}^{n} H^{0} (N_{i}), 1 \leq k \leq 6

respectively. Obviously

γ_{1} = - γ_{4}

and it is easily verified that

γ_{2}, γ_{3}, γ_{4}, γ_{5}, γ_{6}

are linearly independent (in

\oplus H^{0} (N_{i})

). Thus we have obtained

\begin{matrix} I m a g e (α) = 〈 γ_{2}, γ_{3}, γ_{4}, γ_{5}, γ_{6} 〉 \subset \oplus_{i = 1}^{n} H^{0} (N_{i}) . \end{matrix}

(21)

Now we are able to calculate

G

-action on

H^{0} (N_{i})

. Recall that by 3 we have

(u, v) \mapsto (s u, s v)

for

(u, v) \in Q

. (In particular a subgroup

{(s, t) \in G | s = 1}

acts trivially on

Q

.) It follows that

\begin{matrix} ν_{i} \mapsto s ν_{i}, u ν_{i} \mapsto u ν_{i}, u^{2} ν_{i} \mapsto s^{- 1} u^{2} ν_{i} for s \in C^{*} \end{matrix}

(22)

for each of the basis of

H^{0} (N_{i})

. The

G

-action on

\oplus H^{0} (N_{i})

is the direct sum of these

n

representations. Needless to say,

{ν_{i}, u ν_{i}, u^{2} ν_{i} | 1 \leq i \leq n}

is a basis of

\oplus_{i = 1}^{n} H^{0} (N_{i})

Instead of this basis, it is easily seen by carefully looking 20 that we can take, as a basis of

\oplus_{i = 1}^{n} H^{0} (N_{i})

{γ_{i}, ν_{j}, u ν_{k}, u^{2} ν_{l} | 2 \leq i \leq 6, 3 \leq j \leq n, 2 \leq k \leq n, 3 \leq l \leq n} .

Combining this with 21 , we obtain

(23) ( ⊕ i = 1 n H 0 ( N i ) ) / I m a g e { α : H 0 ( Θ Q ) → ⊕ i = 1 n H 0 ( N i ) } ≃ { ν j , u ν k , u 2 ν l | 3 ≤ j ≤ n , 2 ≤ k ≤ n , 3 ≤ l ≤ n } .

Hence by 14 we have obtained that the

G

-action on

H^{1} (F) ≃ H^{1} (Θ_{Y})

is given by ( 15 ).

Our next task is to calculate

G

-action on

H^{0} (N_{C_{0} / Z}

). For this, we first consider the following two divisors

D_{0} : = {u = 0} \cap X \subset P (E), D_{\infty} = {u = \infty} \cap X \subset P (E)

X

, which are clearly

G

-invariant. Obviously

D_{0}

and

D_{\infty}

are disjoint. If we use the same symbols to denote the corresponding

G

-invariant divisors in

Y

and

Z

D_{0} \subset Z

and

D_{\infty} \subset Z

intersect transversally along

C_{0}

. (Note that by the blowing-down

μ : Y \to Z

the divisor

E

is blown-down along fibers of the projection to the second factor of

E ≃ Q ≃ C P^{1} \times C P^{1}

On the other hand we do not need to be careful for the small resolution

Y \to X

since

E

and

\bar{E}

are disjoint from the singular points of

X

.) Therefore by setting

Γ_{0} = D_{0} \cap E \subset X

and

Γ_{\infty} = D_{\infty} \cap E \subset X

, we have

\begin{matrix} N_{C_{0} / Z} ≃ N_{C_{0} / D_{0}} \oplus N_{C_{0} / D_{\infty}} ≃ N_{Γ_{0} / D_{0}} \oplus N_{Γ_{\infty} / D_{\infty}} . \end{matrix}

(24)

Moreover we have

N_{Γ_{0} / D_{0}} ≃ O (1 - n) ≃ N_{Γ_{\infty} / D_{\infty}}

since

N_{E / X} ≃ O (- 1, 1 - n)

. Thus it suffices to determine

G

-actions on

H^{1} (N_{Γ_{0} / D_{0}})

and

H^{1} (N_{Γ_{\infty} / D_{\infty}})

respectively. For these, we use Čech representation of elements of

H^{1} (O (1 - n))

. First we calculate

G

-action on

H^{1} (N_{Γ_{0} / D_{0}})

. The point

(u, v, x, y, z) = (0, 0, 0, 1, 0) \in P (E)

lies on

Γ_{0}

and is a

G

-fixed point. We use

v

as a non-homogeneous coordinate on

Γ_{0}

. Then over

C \subset Γ_{0}

on which

v

is valid, one can use

z / y

as a fiber coordinate of

N_{Γ_{0} / D_{0}}

. Then by 3

G

-action on the total space of

N_{Γ_{0} / D_{0}}

is given by

(v, (z / y)) \mapsto (s v, s^{- n} t (z / y)), (s, t) \in G .

On the other hand, any element of

H^{1} (O (1 - n))

is represented by a linear combination of the following

n - 2

sections of

O (1 - n)

over

C^{*}

;

ζ_{k} : v \mapsto v^{- k}, v \in C^{*}; 1 \leq k \leq n - 2 .

Then since

s^{- n} t \cdot v^{- k} = s^{k - n} t \cdot (s v)^{- k}

ζ_{k}

is mapped to

s^{k - n} t \cdot ζ_{k}

(s, t) \in G

. Thus in the notation we have introduced before Proposition 2.1 , we obtain that the

G

-action on

H^{1} (N_{C_{0} / D_{0}}) ≃ H^{1} (N_{Γ_{0} / D_{0}})

is given by

\begin{matrix} {(k - n, 1) | k = 1, 2, \dots, n - 2} . \end{matrix}

(25)

Next we calculate

G

-action on

H^{1} (N_{Γ_{\infty} / D_{\infty}})

in a similar way. As a

G

-fixed point on

Γ_{\infty}

we choose a point

(u, v, x, y, z) = (\infty, 0, 0, 1, 0)

and again use

v

as a non-homogeneous coordinate on

Γ_{\infty}

. Then as a fiber coordinate of

N_{Γ_{\infty} / D_{\infty}}

we can use

z / (u^{- 1} y)

. (The multiplication of

u^{- 1}

comes from

y \in O (1, n - 1)

.) Again by 3 , in this coordinate the

G

-action on the total space of

N_{Γ_{\infty} / D_{\infty}}

is given by

(v, z / (u^{- 1} y)) \mapsto (s v, s^{1 - n} t \cdot (z / (u^{- 1} y))) .

Since

s^{1 - n} t \cdot u^{- k} = s^{k - n + 1} t \cdot (s u)^{- k}

this time, we have that

ζ_{k}

is multiplied by

s^{k - n + 1} t

(s, t) \in G

. It follows that

G

-action on

H^{1} (N_{C_{\infty} / D_{\infty}}) ≃ H^{1} (N_{Γ_{\infty} / D_{\infty}})

is given by

\begin{matrix} {(k - n + 1, 1) | k = 1, 2, \dots, n - 2} . \end{matrix}

(26)

By 25 and 26 , we obtain that the

G

-action on

H^{1} (N_{C_{0} / Z})

is as in 16 .

Finally, the

G

-action on

H^{1} (N_{C_{\infty} / Z})

is known to be given by 17 by taking

{\bar{D}}_{0} = {v = 0} \cap X

and

{\bar{D}}_{\infty} = {v = \infty} \cap X

instead of

D_{0}

and

D_{\infty}

in the above argument.

□

The statement of Proposition 2.1 and its proof perfectly work also for the case

n = 1

and

n = 2

but in these cases it brings not much informations.

3 Equivariant deformations of the metric and examples

(3.1) Proposition 2.1 is not so useful in itself. In this subsection, by using Proposition 2.1 , we give a geometric characterization of

U (1)

-subgroups for which there exists a

U (1)

-equivariant deformation which does not preserve full torus symmetry. Let

E_{1} + E_{2} + \dots + E_{n - 1} \subset Y

be the exceptional curve of the small resolution of

p_{0} \in X

given in (2.1), where

E_{i} ≃ C P^{1}

is the exceptional curve obtained in the

i

-th blow-up (along the 2-dimensional center we have explicitly given), so that

E_{i}

and

E_{j}

(i \neq j)

intersect and iff

| i - j | = 1

. Because any

E_{i}

is not affected by the blowing-down

μ : Y \to Z

we use the same notation to represent the corresponding rational curves in

Z

. Clearly

C_{0}

and

{\bar{C}}_{0}

are disjoint from

E_{1} + \dots + E_{n - 1} \subset Z

The curve

{y = u = v = 0}

X

connects

p_{0}

and

\bar{E}

. Let

B_{0} \subset Z

be the strict transform of this curve.

B_{0}

connects

{\bar{C}}_{0}

and

E_{1}

. Similarly the rational curve

{x = u = v = 0} \subset X

connects

p_{0}

and

E

, and its strict transform in

Z

is denoted by

B_{n}

which connects

E_{n - 1}

and

C_{0}

. In this way we obtain a string of

(n + 3)

smooth rational curves

\begin{matrix} {\bar{C}}_{0} + B_{0} + E_{1} + E_{2} + \dots + E_{n - 1} + B_{n} + C_{0}, \end{matrix}

(27)

where only adjacent two curves intersect. Adding the conjugate curves

{\bar{B}}_{0} + {\bar{E}}_{1} + \dots + {\bar{E}}_{n - 1} + {\bar{B}}_{n}

to 27 , we obtain a cycle of

(2 n + 4)

rational curves in

Z

. Obviously this cycle of rational curves are

G

-invariant and the intersection points of the irreducible components are (isolated)

G

-fixed points of

Z

. Moreover, this cycle is the basel locus of the pencil of

G

-invariant divisors in

| (- 1 / 2) K_{Z} |

. Note that the image of this cycle onto

n C P^{2}

by the twistor fibration is a cycle of torus invariant

(n + 2)

spheres, on which some of

U (1)

-subgroup of the torus acts trivially.

Elements of the torus

U (1) \times U (1) \subset G

fixing any point of

C_{0}

form a

U (1)

-subgroup, which we denote by

K_{0}

. By reality,

K_{0}

automatically fixes any point of

{\bar{C}}_{0}

. Similarly let

K_{i} \subset U (1) \times U (1)

1 \leq i \leq n - 1

, be the

U (1)

-subgroup fixing any point of

E_{i}

(and hence

{\bar{E}}_{i}

). In this way we have obtained

n

numbers of

U (1)

-subgroups in the torus (so that in particular we do not consider

U (1)

-subgroup fixing

B_{0}

and

B_{n}

among the cycle above).

Proposition 3.1. Let

K

be any

U (1)

-subgroup in the torus. Then LeBrun's metric with torus action on

n C P^{2}

n \geq 3

, can be

K

-equivariantly deformed into self-dual metric with only

K

-isometry if and only if

K = K_{i}

for some

i

0 \leq i \leq n - 1

. Moreover, the dimension of the moduli spaces of resulting self-dual metrics with just

U (1)

-isometry obtained in this way become as follows:

$∙$ $(3 n - 6)$ -dimensional for $K_{0}$ -equivariant deformations ,
$∙$ $n$ -dimensional for $K_{i}$ -equivariant deformations for $i = 1$ or $n - 1$ ,
$∙$ $(n + 2)$ -dimensional for $K_{i}$ -equivariant deformations for $2 \leq i \leq n - 2$ .

Furthermore, in the second and the third cases, the self-dual metric is not conformally isometric to LeBrun metric. (Note that if

n = 3

the third item does not occur.)

Proof. The

G

-action on

C_{0}

and the exceptional curves

E_{i}

(1 \leq i \leq n - 1)

can be readily computed by using 3 and explicit small resolution given in (2.1). Consequently we obtain that the subgroups

K_{i}

are explicitly given by

K_{0} = {(s, t) \in U (1) \times U (1) | s = 1},

K_{i} = {(s, t) \in U (1) \times U (1) | t = s^{i}}, 1 \leq i \leq n - 1 .

Then comparing these with the result in Proposition 2.1 , we obtain that for a

U (1)

-subgroup

K \subset U (1) \times U (1)

, the

K

-fixed subspace

H^{1} (Θ_{Z})^{K}

contains

H^{1} (Θ_{Z})^{U (1) \times U (1)}

as a proper subspace if and only if

K = K_{i}

for some

i

0 \leq i \leq n - 1

. Noting that

H^{1} (Θ_{Z})^{K}

is the tangent space of the Kuranishi family of

K

-equivariant deformations of

Z

(since

H^{2} (Θ_{Z}) = 0

), it follows that

Z

admits a

K

-equivariant deformation which does not preserve the full torus symmetry if and only if

K = K_{i}

for some

i

0 \leq i \leq n - 1

. Since the

U (1) \times U (1)

-action on

H^{1} (Θ_{Z})

commutes with the natural real structure induced by that on

Z

, the situation remains unchanged even after restricting to the real part of

H^{1} (Θ_{Z})

; namely

Z

admits a

K

-equivariant deformation which preserves the real structure but does not preserve the full torus symmetry if and only if

K = K_{i}

for some

i

0 \leq i \leq n - 1

. This implies that LeBrun's twistor space admits a non-torus equivariant,

K

-equivariant deformation as a twistor space if and only if

K = K_{i}

for some

0 \leq i \leq n - 1

. Going down on

n C P^{2}

, we obtain the first claim of the proposition.

Next we compute the dimension of the moduli space by using Proposition 2.1 . For

K_{0}

-equivariant deformation, we obtain from 15 – 17 that

H^{1} (Θ_{Z})^{K_{0}}

is just

H^{1} (F)

that is

(3 n - 5)

-dimensional. On this subspace the quotient torus

(U (1) \times U (1)) / K_{0}

acts non-trivially and its orbit space is just the (local) moduli space of

K_{0}

-equivariant self-dual metrics on

n C P^{2}

. In particular its dimension is

(3 n - 5) - 1 = 3 n - 6

. For

K_{1}

and

K_{n - 1}

-equivariant deformations, the fixed subspace

H^{1} (Θ_{Z})^{K_{i}}

is (

(n - 1) + 2 = n + 1

)-dimensional. Therefore the moduli space is

n

-dimensional. For other equivariant deformations, we have

H^{1} (Θ_{Z})^{K_{i}}

2 \leq i \leq n - 2

, is (

(n - 1) + 2 \cdot 2 = n + 3)

-dimensional and the moduli space becomes

(n + 2)

-dimensional.

Finally it is easily seen that the action of

K_{i} = {(s, t) | t = s^{i}}

1 \leq i \leq n - 1

, on the torus-invariant rational curve

B_{0}

is explicitly given by

\tilde{x} \mapsto s^{i} \tilde{x}

for an affine coordinate

\tilde{x}

B_{0}

. This means that if

i \geq 2

then

K_{i}

contains non-trivial isotropy along

B_{0}

Therefore by a theorem of LeBrun [5] characterizing LeBrun metric by semi-freeness of the

U (1)

-action, we conclude that self-dual metric obtained by

K_{i}

-equivariant, non-torus equivariant deformation is not conformally isometric to LeBrun metric. For the remaining

K_{1}

-equivariant deformation, it suffices to consider

B_{n}

instead of

B_{0}

□

(3.2) Finally we discuss some examples.

Example 3.2. First we consider torus equivariant deformation of LeBrun's metric with torus action on

n C P^{2}

. By Proposition 2.1 the subspace of

H^{1} (Θ_{Z})

consisting of vectors which are torus-invariant is

(n - 1)

-dimensional. This is consistent with the fact that the moduli space of LeBrun's metrics with torus action (or more generally, Joyce's metric with torus action [3] ) is

(n - 1)

-dimensional. See also a work of Pedersen-Poon [7] , where the dimension of the moduli space is calculated via a construction of Donaldson and Friedman.

Example 3.3. Consider

K_{0}

-equivariant deformation of LeBrun's metric with torus action. By definition

K_{0}

fixes any point of

C_{0}

and

{\bar{C}}_{0}

and acts semi-freely on

n C P^{2}

. By Proposition 3.1 the moduli space of self-dual metrics on

n C P^{2}

obtained by

K_{0}

-equivariant deformation is

(3 n - 6)

-dimensional. Of course this coincides with the moduli number obtained by LeBrun [4, 6] . (LeBrun's result is much stronger in that his construction makes it possible to determine the global structure of the moduli space.)

Example 3.4. Let

n = 3

and consider

K_{1}

-equivariant deformation of LeBrun's metric with torus action on

3 C P^{2}

. By Proposition 3.1 the moduli space of self-dual metrics on

3 C P^{2}

obtained by

K_{1}

-equivariant deformation of LeBrun metrics with torus action is

3

-dimensional. Since

K_{1}

does not act semi-freely on

3 C P^{2}

, these self-dual metrics are not conformally isometric to the LeBrun metric (obtained by so called hyperbolic ansatz). In a recent paper [2] the author determined a global structure of this moduli space. In particular, the moduli space is connected and

3

-dimensional, which is equal to the dimension obtained in Proposition 3.1 . We note that the situation for

K_{2}

-equivariant deformations is completely the same, since

K_{1}

-action and

K_{2}

-action are interchanged by a diffeomorphism of

3 C P^{2}

This is always true for

K_{1}

-action and

K_{n - 1}

-action for any

n (\geq 3)

. It is also possible to show that the twistor space obtained by

K_{1}

-equivariant deformations of LeBrun metric with torus action on

n C P^{2}

is, at least for small deformations, always Moishezon.

Example 3.5. In [1] it was prove that being Moishezon twistor space is not preserved under

C^{*}

-equivariant small deformations as a twistor space. This is obtained by letting

n = 4

and considering

K_{2}

-equivariant small deformations of LeBrun twistor spaces with torus action. This in particular implies that if one drops the assumption of the semi-freeness of

U (1)

-isometry, then the twistor space is not Moishezon in general.

References

N. Honda, Equivariant deformations of meromorphic actions on compact complex manifolds, Math. Ann. 319 (2001), 469–481.
N. Honda, Self-dual metrics and twenty-eight bitangents, preprint (2004).
D. Joyce, Explicit construction of self-dual 4-manifolds, Duke Math. J. 77 (1995), 519–552.
C. LeBrun, Explicit self-dual metrics on $C P^{2} # \dots # C P^{2}$ , J. Diff. Geom. 34 (1991), 223–253.
C. LeBrun, Self-dual manifolds and hyperbolic geometry, Einstein metrics and Yang-Mills connections (Sanda, 1990), Lecture Notes in Pure and Appl. Math. 145 (1993), 99-131.
C. LeBrun, Twistors, Kähler manifolds and bimeromorphic geometry. I, J. Amer. Math.Soc. 5 (1992), 289–316.
H. Pedersen, Y. S. Poon, Equivariant connected sums of compact self-dual manifolds, Math. Ann. 301 (1995), 717–749.
Y. S. Poon, Compact self-dual manifolds of positive scalar curvature, J. Diff. Geom. 24 (1986), 97–132.

\begin{matrix} Department of Mathematics \end{matrix}

\begin{matrix} Graduate School of Science and Engineering \end{matrix}

\begin{matrix} Tokyo Institute of Technology \end{matrix}

\begin{matrix} 2-12-1, O-okayama, Meguro, 152-8551, JAPAN \end{matrix}

\begin{matrix} honda@math.titech.ac.jp \end{matrix}

Nobuhiro Honda