Pome

17.5.16 Uniqueness by concentration of mass096A13B0C62E

We now show that the solution given by theorem 17.5.15 is unique up to an additive constant. The proof uses existence once more. If two solutions $u,v$ with $\mu _ u=\mu _ v=\mu $ do not differ by a constant $\mu $-almost everywhere, then, after a shift of $v$, the set $U=\{ u<v\} $ carries a proper fraction of the mass of $\mu $. We solve the equation whose right-hand side is $\mu $ restricted to $U$ and rescaled to total mass $m$. Mixing this auxiliary solution into $v$ raises the density of the Monge–Ampère measure on $U$ (corollary 13.5.11), in contradiction with the comparison principle. The domination principle then turns equality $\mu $-almost everywhere into equality everywhere.

Theorem 17.5.17.777B716B7208 Let $u,v\in \mathcal E(X,\theta ,\phi )$ satisfy $\mu _ u=\mu _ v$. Then there is a constant $C\in \mathbb R$ such that $u=v+C$ everywhere on $X$. Consequently, every non-pluripolar measure of mass $m$ is the Monge–Ampère measure $\mu _ u$ of exactly one $u\in \mathcal E(X,\theta ,\phi )$ with $\sup _ Xu=0$.

Proof. Put $\mu =\mu _ u=\mu _ v$. Since $u\in \mathcal E(X,\theta ,\phi )$, this is a finite measure of mass $\int _ X\langle \theta _ u^ n\rangle =\int _ X\langle \theta _\phi ^ n\rangle =m$, and it is non-pluripolar, because non-pluripolar products give no mass to pluripolar sets (lemma 13.2.2). Hence the pole sets of $u$ and $v$ are $\mu $-null, and $u-v$ is defined and finite $\mu $-almost everywhere. We first show that $u-v$ is constant $\mu $-almost everywhere.

Suppose not. Let $\lambda $ be the image of $\mu $ under $u-v$, a finite Borel measure on $\mathbb R$ of total mass $m>0$, and put

\[ c_-=\sup \{ c\in \mathbb R:\lambda ((-\infty ,c))=0\} ,\qquad c_+=\inf \{ c\in \mathbb R:\lambda ((c,\infty ))=0\} , \]

with $\sup \varnothing =-\infty $ and $\inf \varnothing =+\infty $. The sets $(-\infty ,c)$ increase to $\mathbb R$ as $c\to +\infty $, so $\lambda ((-\infty ,c))\to m>0$; hence $c_-<+\infty $, and similarly $c_+>-\infty $. If $c_->-\infty $, the $\lambda $-null sets $(-\infty ,c)$ with $c<c_-$ increase to $(-\infty ,c_-)$, so $\lambda ((-\infty ,c_-))=0$; similarly $\lambda ((c_+,\infty ))=0$ if $c_+<+\infty $. Hence $c_+<c_-$ is impossible, since $\mathbb R=(-\infty ,c_-)\cup (c_+,\infty )$ would then be $\lambda $-null. If $c_-=c_+$, then $\lambda $ is carried by the point $c_-$, that is, $u-v$ is constant $\mu $-almost everywhere, contrary to our assumption. Thus $c_-<c_+$, and every $c\in (c_-,c_+)$ satisfies $\lambda ((-\infty ,c))>0$ and $\lambda ((c,\infty ))>0$, that is,

\[ \mu (\{ u-v<c\} )>0,\qquad \mu (\{ u-v>c\} )>0. \]

The singletons $\{ c\} $ with $\lambda (\{ c\} )>0$ are pairwise disjoint sets of positive measure, so there are only countably many of them by lemma 2.2.5. Since the interval $(c_-,c_+)$ is uncountable, we may choose $c$ in it with $\mu (\{ u-v=c\} )=0$. Replacing $v$ by $v+c$ changes neither the class $\mathcal E(X,\theta ,\phi )$ nor the measure $\mu _ v$, so we may assume $c=0$. Then $\mu (\{ u<v\} )$ and $\mu (\{ u>v\} )$ are positive, and the set $U=\{ u<v\} $ satisfies

\[ 0<\mu (U)<m,\qquad \mu (\{ u=v\} )=0. \]

Set $q=(m/\mu (U))^{1/n}>1$. The measure $q^ n\mathbf1_ U\mu $ is non-pluripolar and has mass $m$, so theorem 17.5.15 gives $h\in \mathcal E(X,\theta ,\phi )$ with

\[ \mu _ h=q^ n\mathbf1_ U\mu . \]

For $0<t<1$ put $w_ t=(1-t)v+th$. By corollary 17.3.17, $w_ t\in \mathcal E(X,\theta ,\phi )$. Since $\theta _{w_ t}=(1-t)\theta _ v+t\theta _ h$, corollary 13.5.11, applied to the currents $\theta _ v,\theta _ h$, the common measure $\mu $ and the densities $1$ and $q^ n\mathbf1_ U$, gives

\[ \mu _{w_ t}\geq \big ((1-t)+tq\mathbf1_ U\big )^ n\mu . \]

Let $U_ t=\{ u<w_ t\} $, and put

\[ d_ t=(1-t)^ n,\qquad b_ t=(1-t+tq)^ n. \]

The comparison principle for relative full mass, proposition 16.25.4, applied to $u$ and $w_ t$, and the preceding lower bound give

\[ \mu (U_ t)=\mu _ u(U_ t)\geq \mu _{w_ t}(U_ t) \geq d_ t\mu (U_ t)+(b_ t-d_ t)\mu (U_ t\cap U). \]

Since $1-d_ t>0$, it follows that

EAFAB682B4E1 17.5.18
\begin{equation} \frac{b_ t-d_ t}{1-d_ t}\, \mu (U_ t\cap U)\leq \mu (U_ t). \end{equation}

We let $t\downarrow 0$. At every point where $u,v,h$ are finite and $u\neq v$, we have $w_ t=v+t(h-v)$, so $\mathbf1_{U_ t}\to \mathbf1_ U$ there. These points have full $\mu $-measure, because the three pole sets and the level set $\{ u=v\} $ are $\mu $-null. By dominated convergence,

\[ \mu (U_ t\cap U)\longrightarrow \mu (U),\qquad \mu (U_ t)\longrightarrow \mu (U). \]

Moreover $b_ t-d_ t=ntq+O(t^2)$ and $1-d_ t=nt+O(t^2)$, so $(b_ t-d_ t)/(1-d_ t)\to q$. Passing to the limit in (17.5.18) gives $q\mu (U)\leq \mu (U)$, which contradicts $q>1$ and $\mu (U)>0$.

Hence, for the original pair, there is a finite constant $C$ such that $u=v+C$ $\mu $-almost everywhere. Both $u$ and $v+C$ belong to $\mathcal E(X,\theta ,\phi )$, and their common measure $\mu $ gives zero mass to $\{ u<v+C\} $ and to $\{ v+C<u\} $. The domination principle (theorem 16.22.10), applied in both directions, gives $u=v+C$ everywhere, including at the common poles. This proves the first assertion.

For the second, theorem 17.5.15 provides a solution with supremum zero. If $u$ and $v$ are two such solutions, then $u=v+C$, and comparing suprema gives $C=0$. $\square$

Cite this page

Comments

Corrections, questions, and mathematical discussion are welcome. Sign in with GitHub to comment. Comments are public.