Dirichlet eigenfunctions on the cube, sharpening the Courant nodal inequality

Abstract: This paper is devoted to the refine analysis of Courant's theorem for the Dirichlet Laplacian. Many papers (and some of them quite recent) have investigated in which cases this inequality in Courant's theorem is an equality: Pleijel, Helffer--Hoffmann-Ostenhof--Terracini, Helffer--Hoffmann-Ostenhof, Bérard-Helffer, Helffer--Persson-Sundqvist,Léna, Leydold. All these results were devoted to $(2D)$-cases in open sets in $\mathbb R^2$ or in surfaces like $\mathbb S^2$ or $\mathbb T^2$.The aim of the current paper is to look for analogous results for domains in $\mathbb{R}^3$ and, as $Å.$Pleijel was suggesting in his 1956 founding paper, for the simplest case of the cube. More precisely, we will prove that the only eigenvalues of the Dirichlet Laplacian which are Courant sharp are the two first eigenvalues.

\section{Introduction and Main result}

Consider the Dirichlet eigenvalues of the Laplacian in the domain $\Omega$

\begin{equation}\label{E}
\left\{
\begin{array}{rll}
-\Delta u &= \lambda u & \text{ in } \Omega\\
u&=0& \text{ on } \partial\Omega.
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
We denote by $\{\lambda_k \}_{k\ge 1}=\{\lambda_k (\Omega)\}_{k\ge 1}$ the sequence of eigenvalues:
$$  \lambda_1 < \lambda_2 \leq \lambda_3 \leq ... \leq \lambda_k \leq ... $$
It is well known that the first eigenvalue is simple and the eigenfunction $u_1$ has a constant sign in $\Omega$. All the higher order eigenfunctions must change sign inside $\Omega$ and, consequently, must vanish inside $\Omega$.

We call nodal set of an eigenfunction $u_k$ associated with $\lambda_k$  the closure of the zero set of $u_k$,
$$\mathcal{N}(u_k)=\overline{\{x \in \Omega;\ u_k(x)=0\}}.$$ This nodal set cuts the domain $\Omega \setminus \mathcal{N}(u_k)$ into $\mu_k=\mu(u_k)$ connected components called ``nodal domains''.

The famous Courant nodal  theorem \cite{Cou} of 1923 states  that  $$\mu(u_k) \leq k.$$
We will say that an eigenvalue  $\lambda$ is Courant sharp  if $\lambda=\lambda_k$ and if  there exists an associate  eigenfunction with $k$ nodal domains. If it is always true in the case of dimension $1$ by the Sturm-Liouvillle theory, Pleijel's theorem \cite{Pl} asserts in 1956 that equality can only occur for a finite set of $k$'s, when the dimension is  at least two.\\

Since we know that the first eigenfunction does not vanish and that the second eigenfunction has exactly two nodal domains,  $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ are Courant sharp ($\mu_1=1$ and $\mu_2=2$). We are now interested in checking if  other eigenvalues are Courant sharp.

Many papers (and some of them quite recent)  have investigated in which cases this inequality is sharp:  Pleijel \cite{Pl}, Helffer--Hoffmann-Ostenhof--Terracini
 \cite{HHOT1,HHOT2}, Helffer--Hoffmann-Ostenhof \cite{HH1,HH2}, B\'erard-Helffer \cite{BeHe1,BeHe2,BeHe3}, Helffer--Persson-Sundqvist  \cite{HPS},
 L\'ena \cite{Len3}, Leydold \cite{Ley1,Ley2,Ley3}. All these results were devoted to $(2D)$-cases in open sets in $\mathbb R^2$ or in surfaces like $\mathbb S^2$ or $\mathbb T^2$.\\

The aim of the current paper is to look for analogous  results for domains in $\mathbb{R}^3$ and, as $\AA.$Pleijel was suggesting (see below for an historical discussion), for  the simplest case of the cube. More precisely, we  will prove:
\begin{theorem}
In the case of the cube $ (0,\pi)^3$ the only eigenvalues of the Dirichlet Laplacian  which are Courant sharp  are the two first eigenvalues: $\lambda_1=3$ and $\lambda_2=6$.
\end{theorem}

\section{Coming back to Pleijel's paper}

Outside the proof of Pleijel's theorem in $2D$,  Pleijel  \cite{Pl} (see also \cite{BeHe1} for a more detailed analysis) considers as an example the case of the square which reads
\begin{theorem}
In the case of the square the only eigenvalues which are Courant sharp for the Dirichlet Laplacian are the two first eigenvalues and the fourth one.
\end{theorem}
The proof was based on a first reduction to the analysis of the eigenvalues less than $68$ (the argument will be extended to the $(3D)$-case below and this is a quantitative version of the proof of Pleijel's theorem), then all the other eigenvalues were eliminated  using this time a more direct consequence of Faber-Krahn's inequality, except three remaining cases for which Pleijel was rather sketchy which have to be treated by hand.\\

At the end of his celebrated paper $\AA$. Pleijel wrote:\\
{\it " In order to treat, for instance the case of the free three-dimensional membrane $[0,\pi]^3$, it would be necessary to use, in a special case, the theorem quoted in \cite{CH}, p. 394\footnote{In the german version, this is p. 454 in the english version. }. This theorem which generalizes part of the Liouville-Rayleigh theorem for the string asserts that a linear combination, with constant coefficients, of the $n$ first eigenfunctions can have at most $n$ nodal domains. However, as far as I have been able to find there is no proof of this assertion in the literature."}\\
 $\AA$. Pleijel was indeed speaking of a result presented in \cite{CH} as being proved in the thesis defended in 1932 at the University of G\"ottingen  by Horst Herrmann (with R. Courant as advisor). This result was never published or confirmed
 and is now called the Courant-Herrmann conjecture \cite{GZ}. Actually, it is said in \cite{GZ} that the authors can not find any mention of the result in the thesis itself. This Courant-Herrmann conjecture was asserting that, for a given $k\in \mathbb N$,  Courant's theorem holds also for linear combinations of eigenfunctions associated with eigenvalues $\lambda_j$ with $j\leq k$. \\
  Pleijel is not  explicitly saying why he was needing this result but one could think that he is interested,  because  he speaks about the "free problem" (i.e.  the Neumann
  problem), in counting the number of components of the restriction of an eigenfunction to a face of the cube $(0,\pi)^3$.
  Looking for example to the zeroset of
 $$
(x,y,z) \mapsto a \cos x \cos y \cos n z + b \cos y \cos z \cos nx + c \cos z \cos x \cos n y\,,
$$
one gets for fixed $z=0$, a linear combination of the eigenfunctions of the square   $\cos x \cos y$, $\cos y\cos n x$ and $\cos x \cos n y$   corresponding to two different eigenspaces for the Neumann Laplacian in the square $(0,\pi)\times (0,\pi)$. We will not go further in this paper on the Neumann problem but similar questions could also occur in the Dirichlet problem and we typically meet below the eigenfunction $$
(x,y,z) \mapsto a \sin x \sin y \sin n z + b \sin y  \sin z \sin  nx + c \sin z \sin x \sin n y\,,
$$
and will be interested for example  in the intersection of its zero set with the hyperplace $\{z= \frac \pi 2\}$  inside the cube (in the case $n=3$).

\section{Reminder on Pleijel's theorem in $3D$}
Let us first prove that there are only a finite number of eigenvalues that satisfy $\mu_k:=\mu(u_k)=k$. This proof was given in dimension $n$ by B\'erard-Meyer \cite{BeMe}.

\begin{proposition}\label{lupbound}
If $\lambda_k$ is an eigenvalue of (\ref{E}) such that $\lambda_{k-1}< \lambda_k$, and $u_k$ is an associated eigenfunction then:
\begin{equation}\label{upbound}
\lambda_k^\frac 32 |\Omega| \geq \mu(u_k)   \frac 43 \pi^4\,.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}

\begin{proof}
Assume that the nodal set cuts the domain $\Omega$ in $\mu_k$ connected components and let us denote them by $\Omega_i, 1\leq i \leq \mu_k.$
 Since $u_k$ does not vanish inside $\Omega_i$, it is equal to its first eigenvalue and now using the $(3D)$-Faber-Krahn inequality on each component (see for example  B\'erard-Meyer \cite{BeMe}):
$$
\lambda_k^\frac 32 |\Omega_i| \geq  \frac 43 \pi^4\, \text{ for }  1\leq i \leq \mu_k \,.
$$

Adding together all  the equations we get (\ref{upbound}).
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
\begin{equation}\label{pl1}
 \lim\sup_{k\rightarrow +\infty} \frac{\mu_k}{k} \leq \frac{9}{2 \pi^2}< 1\,.
 \end{equation}
In particular, there exists only a finite number of eigenvalues satisfying $\mu_k=k$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We start from  the Weyl's asymptotics for the counting function
\begin{equation}\label{defNlambda}
N(\lambda):=\#\{ k \,, \, \lambda_k < \lambda\},
\end{equation}
which reads
\begin{equation}
N(\lambda) \sim \frac {1}{6 \pi^2}|\Omega|  \lambda^\frac 32 \,.
\end{equation}

For an eigenvalue $\lambda_k$ such that $\lambda_{k-1}<\lambda_k$, we have $N(\lambda_k)=k-1\,.$
Then  from
$$\lambda_k^\frac 32 \sim \frac {6 \pi^2}{|\Omega|} k  $$
together with (\ref{upbound}), we get \eqref{pl1}.
\end{proof}

\begin{remark}
It is clear from \eqref{pl1} that we cannot have an infinite number of eigenvalues satisfying $\mu_k=k$.
\end{remark}

\section{The case of the cube}
Let us consider  the cube $(0,\pi)\times(0,\pi)\times (0,\pi)$ for which an orthogonal basis of eigenfunctions for the Dirichlet problem is given by:
$$\left\{
\begin{array}{rl}
u_{\ell,m,n}(x,y,z)& =\sin(\ell x) \cdot  \sin(m y) \cdot \sin(n z)\,, \\
\lambda_{\ell,m,n}&=\ell^2+ m^2+n^2\,,
\end{array}
\right.
$$
 for $\ell, m,n \geq 1$.\\
Applying Proposition \ref{lupbound} for this domain, we get
\begin{proposition}\label{lupboundrect}
If $u_k$ is an eigenfunction associated with $\lambda_k$ such that $u_k$ has $k$ nodal domains and  if $\lambda_{k-1} < \lambda_k$ we have:
\begin{equation}\label{upbound2}
\frac{{\lambda_k}^{\frac 32}} k \geq \frac 43 \pi\,.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}

Here we will try to find a lower bound for the number $N(\lambda)$, since we know the $\lambda$'s are equal to $\ell^2+ m^2+n^2$ where  $\ell, m, n$ are integers, so we need to count the number of the lattice points of $\mathbb{R}^3$ inside the sphere of radius $\sqrt{\lambda}$.

\begin{lemma}\label{Lemmalau}
If $\lambda \geq 3$, then
\begin{equation}\label{lauzz}
N(\lambda) >   \frac \pi 6 \lambda^\frac 32 - \frac{3\pi}{4} \lambda + 3  \sqrt{\lambda -2} -1\,.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
The proof is given in the appendix.

\begin{lemma} If $u_k$ is an eigenfunction associated with $\lambda_k$ such that $u_k$ has $k$ nodal domains we have:
\begin{equation}
\left( \frac{3}{4\pi} - \frac\pi 6 \right) \lambda^{\frac 32} + \frac{3\pi}4\lambda- 3\sqrt{\lambda } +3 > 0\,.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First by Courant theorem, we have necessarily $\lambda_{k-1} < \lambda_k\,$. \\
Applying \eqref{lauzz}, we have
$$
k-1 = N(\lambda)>\frac\pi 6 \lambda^{\frac 32} -\frac{3\pi}4\lambda +3\sqrt{\lambda -2}-1\,.
$$
i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{minoration}
k >\frac\pi 6 \lambda^{\frac 32} -\frac{3\pi}4\lambda +3\sqrt{\lambda -2}\,.
\end{equation}
Together with (\ref{upbound2}), this implies:
\begin{equation*}
\left( \frac{3}{4\pi} - \frac\pi 6 \right) \lambda^{\frac 32} + \frac{3\pi}4\lambda > 3\sqrt{\lambda -2}\,.
\end{equation*}
One immediately sees that, for $\lambda \geq 3\,$,
 $$
 \sqrt{\lambda -2} -\sqrt{\lambda}= -\frac{2}{\sqrt{\lambda} +\sqrt{\lambda -2} }\geq -\frac{2}{1+\sqrt{3}}>-1\,.
 $$
\end{proof}
Now setting $\mu =\sqrt{\lambda}$ we get the third order inequation:
\begin{equation*}
\left( \frac{3}{4\pi} - \frac\pi 6 \right) \mu^3 + \frac{3\pi}4\mu^2- 3\mu +3 > 0\,.
\end{equation*}

Using a calculator we can see that the only real root of the equation
$\left( \frac{3}{4\pi} - \frac\pi 6 \right) \mu^3 + \frac{3\pi}4\mu^2- 3\mu +3 = 0$ is $\mu=6.97836\,$. This gives that the inequality is true only $0<\mu<6.97836\,,$ hence for $\lambda < 48.7\,.$
So we have finally proved:
\begin{proposition}
 If $u_k$ is an eigenfunction associated with $\lambda_k$ such that $u_k$ has $k$ nodal domains and  if $\lambda_{k-1} < \lambda_k$ , we have:
\begin{equation}
\lambda_k \leq 48\,.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}

\section{The list}

In this section, we establish the list of the eigenvalues which are less than $48$ and determine which of these eigenvalues satisfy the necessary condition \eqref{upbound2} for being Courant sharp.\\

\begin{tabular}{|p{10cm}|p{3cm}|p{1cm}|}
\hline
 k& $(\ell,m,n) $   & $\lambda_k$
\\
\hline
$\lambda_1$&(1,1,1)&3\\
\hline
$\lambda_2=\lambda_3=\lambda_4$& (1,1,2) &6\\
\hline
$\lambda_5=\lambda_6=\lambda_7$&$(1,2,2)$&9\\
\hline
$\lambda_8=\lambda_9=\lambda_{10}$&(1,1,3)&11\\
\hline
 $\lambda_{11}$&(2,2,2)&12\\
\hline
$\lambda_{12}=\lambda_{13}=\lambda_{14}=\lambda_{15}=\lambda_{16}=\lambda_{17}$&(1,2,3)&14\\
\hline
$\lambda_{18}=\lambda_{19}=\lambda_{20}$ &(2,2,3)&17\\
\hline
$\lambda_{21}=\lambda_{22}=\lambda_{23}$ &(1,1,4)&18\\
\hline
$\lambda_{24}=\lambda_{25}=\lambda_{26}$ &(1,3,3)&19\\
\hline
$\lambda_{27}=\lambda_{28}=\lambda_{29}=\lambda_{30}=\lambda_{31}=\lambda_{32} $&(1,2,4)&21\\
\hline
$\lambda_{33}=\lambda_{34}=\lambda_{35} $&(2,3,3)&22\\
\hline
$\lambda_{36}=\lambda_{37}=\lambda_{38}$&$(2,2,4)$&24\\
\hline
$\lambda_{39}=\lambda_{40}=\lambda_{41}=\lambda_{42}=\lambda_{43}=\lambda_{44}$&$(1,3,4)$&26\\
\hline
$\lambda_{45}=\lambda_{46}=\lambda_{47}=\lambda_{48}$&$(3,3,3)\ \&\ (1,1,5)$&27\\
\hline
$\lambda_{49}=\lambda_{50}=\lambda_{51}=\lambda_{52}=\lambda_{53}=\lambda_{54}$&$(2,3,4)$&29\\
\hline
$\lambda_{55}=\lambda_{56}=\lambda_{57}=\lambda_{58}=\lambda_{59}=\lambda_{60}$&$(1,2,5)$&30\\
\hline
$\lambda_{61}=\lambda_{62}=\lambda_{63}=\lambda_{64}=\lambda_{65}=\lambda_{66}$& $(1,4,4)\ \&\ (2,2,5)$&33\\
\hline
$\lambda_{67}=\lambda_{68}=\lambda_{69}$&$(3,3,4)$&34\\
\hline
$\lambda_{70}=\lambda_{71}=\lambda_{72}=\lambda_{73}=\lambda_{74}=\lambda_{75}$&$(1,3,5)$&35\\
\hline
$\lambda_{76}=\lambda_{77}=\lambda_{78} $ &$(2,4,4)$&36\\
\hline
$\lambda_{79}=\lambda_{80}=\lambda_{81}=\lambda_{82}=\lambda_{83}=\lambda_{84}=\lambda_{85}=\lambda_{86}=\lambda_{87}$&$(1,1,6)\ \&\ (2,3,5)$&38\\
\hline
$\lambda_{88}=\lambda_{89}=\lambda_{90}=\lambda_{91}=\lambda_{92}=\lambda_{93}=\lambda_{94}=\lambda_{95}=\lambda_{96}$&$(1,2,6)\ \&\ (3,4,4)$&41\\
\hline
 $\lambda_{97}=\lambda_{98}=\lambda_{99}=\lambda_{100}=\lambda_{101}=\lambda_{102}$ & $(1,4,5)$&42\\
\hline
$\lambda_{103}=\lambda_{104}=\lambda_{105}$& $(3,3,5)$&43\\
\hline
$\lambda_{106}=\lambda_{107}=\lambda_{108}$ & $(2,2,6)$&44\\
\hline
$\lambda_{109}=\lambda_{110}=\lambda_{111}=\lambda_{112}=\lambda_{113}=\lambda_{114}$&$(2,4,5)$&45\\
\hline
$\lambda_{115}=\lambda_{116}=\lambda_{117}=\lambda_{118}=\lambda_{119}=\lambda_{120}$& $(1,3,6)$&46\\
\hline
 $\lambda_{121}$&$(4,4,4)$&48\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\\~\\

Coming back to  the consequences of Faber-Krahn's inequality, one can check that among all the values on the table, the only eigenvalues that satisfy  inequality (\ref{upbound2}) and $\lambda_{k-1}<\lambda_k$ are $\lambda_1\,$, $\lambda_2\,$, $\lambda_5\,$, $\lambda_8\,$ and $\lambda_{12}\,$.
\begin{proposition}
The only eigenvalues which can be "Courant sharp" are the eigenvalues $\lambda_k$ with $k=1,2, 5, 8$ and $12$.
\end{proposition}
As $ \lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ are Courant sharp, the only remaining cases to analyze correspond to $k=5,8,12$.

In the next section we will by a finer analysis involving symmetries eliminate other cases.

\section{Courant theorem with symmetry}
We first recall some generalities which come back to Leydold \cite{Ley1}, and were used in various contexts \cite{Ley2,Ley3, HPS,HHOT2}. Suppose that there exists an isometry $g$ such that $g (\Omega) = \Omega$ and $g^2 = {\sf Id}\,$. Then $g$ acts naturally on $L^2(\Omega)$ by $gu ({\bf x}) = u(g^{-1} {\bf x})\,,\, \forall {\bf x} \in \Omega\,,$ and one can naturally define an orthogonal decomposition of $L^2(\Omega)$
$$ L^2(\Omega)= L^2_{\sf odd} \oplus L^2_{\sf even}\,,$$
where by definition $L^2_{\sf odd}= \{u\in L^2 \,,\, gu =-u\}$, resp. $L^2_{\sf even}= \{u\in L^2 \,,\, gu =u\}$. These two spaces are left invariant by the Laplacian and one can consider separately the spectrum of the two restrictions. Let us explain for the ``odd case'' what could be a Courant theorem with symmetry. If $u$ is an eigenfunction in $L^2_{\sf odd}$ associated with $\lambda$, we see immediately that the nodal domains appear by pairs (exchanged by $g$) and following the proof of the standard Courant theorem we see that if $\lambda = \lambda^{\sf odd}_j$ for some $j$ (that is the $j$-th eigenvalue in the odd space), then the number $\mu(u)$ of nodal domains of $u$ satisfies $\mu(u) \leq j$.\\
We get a similar result for the "even" case (but in this case a nodal domain $D$ is either $g$-invariant or $g(D)$ is a distinct nodal domain).\\
These remarks may lead to improvements when each eigenspace has a specific symmetry. As we shall see, this will be the case  for the cube with the map $(x,y,z)\mapsto (\pi-x,\pi -y,\pi-z)$.\\
We observe indeed  that
$$
u_{\ell,m,n}(\pi -x,\pi -y,\pi -z) =  (-1)^{\ell + m + n +1} u_{\ell,m,n} (x,y)\,,
$$
and that
$$
\ell^2 +m^2 + n^2 \equiv \ell + m+ n \, ({\rm mod}. 2)\,.
$$
Hence, for a given eigenvalue the whole eigenspace is  even if $\ell +m+n$ is odd and  odd if $\ell+m+n$ is even. Equivalently, the whole eigenspace is  even if the eigenvalue is odd and even if the eigenvalue
 is odd.\\

{\bf Application.}\\
{\bf  $\lambda_5$ is not Courant sharp.}  The eigenspace  associated with $\lambda_5=9$ is even. This is the second one (in this even space). Hence it should have less than four nodal domains by Courant's theorem with symmetry and has labelling $5$.\\

{\bf  $\lambda_{12}$ is not Courant sharp.}

 $\lambda_{12}=14$ is the fifth eigenvalue in the odd space with respect to $\sigma$. It should has less than $10$ nodal domains  and has labelling $12$.

\section{The remaining value: $k=8$}
\subsection{Main result}
The proof of our main theorem relies now on the analysis of the last case which is the object of the next proposition.
\begin{proposition}
In the eigenspace associated with $\lambda_8$ the eigenfunctions have either $2$, $3$ or $4$ nodal domains. In particular $\lambda_8$ cannot be Courant sharp.
\end{proposition}

\subsection{Preliminaries}~\\
For the value $\lambda_8 =11$ we have to analyze the zeroset of
$$
\Phi_{a,b,c} (x,y,z):=a \sin x \sin y \sin 3z + b \sin y \sin z \sin 3x + c \sin z \sin x \sin 3y\,,
$$
for $(a,b,c) \neq (0,0,0)$\,.\\

This looks nice because we can divide by $\sin x \sin y \sin z$ and by making the  change of coordinates $u=\cos x$, $v=\cos y$, $w=\cos z$, we get for the zero set of $\Phi_{a,b,c}$  in the new coordinates
 a quadric surface $\mathcal{Q}_{a,b,c}$ to analyze in the cube  $\mathcal{C}=(-1,1)^3\,$, whose equation is
\begin{equation*}
( \mathcal{Q}_{a,b,c})  \quad 4 \, (a u^2+ b v^2 + c w^2) - (a+b+c) =0\,,
 \end{equation*}
for $(a,b,c) \neq (0,0,0)$\,.\\

When $a+b+c \neq 0$, we immediately see that there are no critical points inside the cube, so the nodal set is simply an hypersurface (cylinder, ellipsoid or hyperboloid with one or two sheets). In this case, this is  the analysis at the six faces of the cube  which will be decisive for analyzing possible changes  in the number of connected components.
 In the case when $a+b+c =0$, we have a double cone with a unique critical point at $(0,0,0)$. \\
 In the next subsections, we discuss the different cases.\\

\subsection{Cylinder}~\\
This corresponds to the case  $abc=0\,$. We can use the (2D)- analysis as done in \cite{BeHe1}. It is known that the number of nodal domains can only be 2,3 or 4 (See Section 3.1 and  figure 2.1 there). See figure \ref{fig:cyl}.\\

\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{subfigure}{.3\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=.8\linewidth]{C1}
\caption{\small ~\\ $(a,b,c)=(1,1,0)$}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.3\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=.8\linewidth]{C2}
\caption{\small ~\\ $(a,b,c)=(1,-1,0)$}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.3\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=.8\linewidth]{C3}
\caption{\small ~\\ $(a,b,c) =(1,0,0)$}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Cylinders}
\label{fig:cyl}
\end{figure}

\subsection{Double cone}~\\
 This corresponds to $abc \neq 0$ and $a+b+c=0\,$. The equation of $\mathcal{Q}_{a,b,c}$ is: $$au^2+bv^2=-cw^2\,.$$
  One can verify that the intersection of this cone with each horizontal side $w=\pm 1$ is exactly at the vertices of the cube $u^2=v^2=1$, and that the intersection with each vertical face is a hyperbola. Therefore there are three connected components of $\mathcal{C}\setminus \mathcal{Q}_{a,b,c}$. See figure \ref{fig:cone}.\\

\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=.3\linewidth]{DC}
\caption{Double cones. \small{$(a,b,c)=(0.2,0.2,-0.4)$}}
\label{fig:cone}
\end{figure}

 \subsection{Ellipsoid}~\\
This corresponds to $abc \neq  0$, with  a, b, c of the same sign.
Without loss of generality, we can assume   that $0< a\leq b\leq c$ and
that  $a+b+c=1$. We note that this implies $\frac 32 (a+b) \leq a + 2b \leq 1$.
\begin{equation}\label{abc}
a u^2+ b v^2 + (1-a-b)w^2 =\frac 1 4\,.
\end{equation}
We denote by $\Omega_{a,b,c}$ the open full ellipsoid delimited by $\mathcal Q_{a,b,c}$.\\
Let us look at the intersection of $\mathcal Q_{a,b,c}$ with the horizontal faces. We have
$$
a u^2 + b v^2 \leq -\frac 34 + \frac 23< 0\,.
$$
We deduce that in this case there are no possible intersections with the horizontal faces, and therefore two subcases can occur depending on the intersection of $\mathcal Q_{a,b,c}$ with the vertical edges. This set is determined by
\begin{equation}\label{abw=1}
 (1-a-b)w^2 =\frac 1 4 - (a+b)\,,\, w \in (-1,+1)\,.
\end{equation}
See figure \ref{fig:ell}.\\
{\bf Subcase} $(a+b) > \frac 14\,$. \\  The ellipsoid $\mathcal{Q}_{a,b,c}$ does not touch the vertical edges and in this case  $\mathcal{C} \cap   \overline{\Omega_{a,b,c} }^{\,c} $  is connected and $\mathcal{C}\setminus \mathcal{Q}_{a,b,c}$ has exactly  two connected components.\\
{\bf Subcase} $(a+b) \leq \frac 14\,.$ \\ $\mathcal{Q}_{a,b,c}$ cuts each vertical edge along a segment $[-w_0,+w_0]$ with  $w_0 = \sqrt{\left( \frac 1 4 - (a+b)\right) / (1-a-b)}$.  The intersection of $\mathcal{Q}_{a,b,c}$ with each vertical face of the cube is the union of two arcs of an ellipse.
 In this case it is clear that $\mathcal{C} \setminus \mathcal{Q}_{a,b,c}$ has three connected components. \\

\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{subfigure}{.3\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=.8\linewidth]{E11}
\caption{\small $(a,b,c)\\= (0.3,0.3,0.4)$}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.3\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=.8\linewidth]{E12}
\caption{\small $(a,b,c)\\= (0.2,0.2,0.6)$}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.3\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=.8\linewidth]{E2}
\caption{\small $(a,b,c)\\=(0.1,0.1,0.8)$}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Ellipsoids}
\label{fig:ell}
\end{figure}

\subsection{One sheet hyperboloid }~\\
This corresponds to $abc\neq 0$, a,b,c not of the same sign and $(abc) (a+b+c) < 0\,$.
Without loss of generality, we can assume that $b \geq a  >0$,  $c <0$ and $a+b+c=1\,$.
We note that this implies that $\mathcal Q_{a,b,c}\cap \{w=0\}$ is an ellipse contained in the cube.\\

The equation of $\mathcal{Q}_{a,b,c}$ can be written as: $$ au^2+bv^2=\frac 14 -cw^2\,.$$
$\mathcal Q_{a,b,c}$ cuts $\mathbb R^3$ into two components   $\Omega_{a,b,c}^+$ and $\Omega_{a,b,c}^-$ where $\Omega_{a,b,c}^+$ contains $(0,0,0)$. But we have to look inside the cube.\\

  We first observe that $\mathcal Q_{a,b,c}$ has empty intersection the vertical edges. We have indeed
$$
a + b = 1-c > \frac 14 - c \geq \frac 14 - c w^2\,.
$$
We now look at the intersection with $w=0$. We get an ellipse \break $\mathcal E^0_{a,b,c}:= \mathcal Q_{a,b,c} \cap \{ w=0\}$, whose equation is
$$
au^2 + b v^2 = \frac 14\,.
$$
We observe that this ellipse could be included in the cube, if $a > \frac 14$ or not if $a \leq \frac 14$.

We also look at the intersection with the upper horizontal face.  We note that the ellipse  $\mathcal E^1_{a,b,c}:= \mathcal Q_{a,b,c} \cap \{w=1\}$  has always  a non empty intersection with this face. \\

Four  subcases appear (See figure \ref{fig:hyp}):\\

\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{subfigure}{.25\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=.9\linewidth]{H1}
\caption{\small $(a,b,c)\\= (0.2, 0.9, 0.1)$}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.25\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=.9\linewidth]{H2}
\caption{\small $(a,b,c)\\ =(0.5,0.6,-0.1)$}
\end{subfigure}
\\
\begin{subfigure}{.25\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=.9\linewidth]{H3}
\caption{\small $(a,b,c)\\=(0.5, 0.8,-0.3)$}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.25\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=.9\linewidth]{H4}
\caption{\small $(a,b,c)\\ =(0.8,0.8, -0.6)$}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{One Sheet Hyperboloid}
\label{fig:hyp}
\end{figure}

{
\bf Subcase $a \leq \frac 14$}\\
Under this condition  $\mathcal Q_{a,b,c}\cap \{v=0\}\cap \mathcal C$ is empty. Hence  $ \{v=0\}\cap \mathcal C$  is contained in one nodal domain which is invariant by $v\mapsto -v$. The other nodal domains are exchanged by this symmetry. This gives an odd number of nodal domains and this can not be Courant sharp because the labelling is $8$. More precisely the two curves in $\mathcal C$ defined by:
$$
v = \pm  \sqrt{\frac{\frac 14 - a u^2 - c w^2}{b}}
$$
cut the cube in three components. \\

The three last subcases are under the condition that $a >\frac 14$. We note that this condition implies that $\mathcal E^0_{a,b,c}$ is strictly included in the square $(-1,+1)\times (-1,+1)$ and the discussion continues according to the position of $\mathcal E^1_{a,b,c}$ in the horizontal face.\\

{\bf Subcase $\frac 14 <a \leq b<\frac 34$} \\
$\mathcal E^1_{a,b,c}$ is contained in the horizontal face and $\mathcal Q_{a,b,c}$ cuts the cube in two connected domains. \\

{\bf Subcase $\frac 14 < a < \frac 34 \leq b$} \\
$\mathcal E^1_{a,b,c} \cap \partial \mathcal C$ consists of two curves but $\mathcal Q_{a,b,c}$  continue to cut the cube in two domains. For joining two points of $\Omega^-_{a,b,c} \cap \partial \mathcal C$ one can always go to a point in $\{w=0\}$ outside of $\mathcal E^0_{a,b,c}$ and use the connexity (inside the square $\mathcal C$  $\cap$ $\{w=0\}$) of the complementary of the full ellipse.\\

  {\bf Subcase $\frac 34 \leq a$} \\
  $\mathcal E^1_{a,b,c} \cap \mathcal C$ consists of four  curves.  $\mathcal Q_{a,b,c}$  continue to cut the cube in two domains.\\

\subsection{Two sheets hyperboloid}~\\
This corresponds to  $abc\neq 0$, a,b,c not of the same sign and   $(abc) (a+b+c) >0$\,.\\
We can assume $b \geq a  >0$,  $c <0$ and $a+b+c=-1\,.$
The equation of $\mathcal{Q}_{a,b,c}$ can be written as: $$au^2+bv^2= -\frac 14 -cw^2\,.$$
The hyperplane $\{w=0\}$ is contained in one connected component. Hence looking at the symmetry $w \mapsto -w$, we get that necessarily an odd number ($\geq 3$) of nodal domains and $\leq 8$ by Courant's theorem. Hence we know that it cannot be Courant sharp.\\
More precisely, $\mathcal{Q}_{a,b,c}$  meets the hyperplane $\{w=1\}$ along the ellipse $\mathcal E_{a,b,c}$ which this time contains the horizontal upper face of the cube. The analysis of the intersection along each of the vertical faces
 (two symmetric curves by $w\mapsto -w$) shows
 that we always have exactly three connected components.
See figure \ref{fig:2hyp}.

\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=.3\linewidth]{2H}
\caption{Two Sheets Hyperboloid. \small $(a,b,c)=(0.8,0.8,=-2.6)$}
\label{fig:2hyp}
\end{figure}

\section{Conclusion}
In this paper we have analyzed the problem in the simplest example proposed by $\AA$. Pleijel.
 One can of course ask for similar questions for other geometries starting with the parallelepipeds, the ball, the flat tori... The situation for
  $(0,\alpha\pi) \times([0,\beta \pi)\times (0,\gamma \pi)$ is in principle easier in the "irrational" case when
  $\alpha \ell^2 + \beta m^2 + \gamma n^2 = \alpha \ell_1^2 + \beta m_1^2 + \gamma_1 n_1^2$ implies $(\ell,m,n) = (\ell_1,m_1,n_1)$. Each eigenvalue $\alpha \ell^2+\beta m^2 + \gamma n^2$
   is indeed of multiplicity $1$ and the corresponding eigenfunction has $\ell m n$ nodal domains.\\
  One can also think of analyzing  "thin structures" (for example $\gamma$ small or $\beta+\gamma$ small, where previous results in lower dimension can probably be used) in the spirit of \cite{HH1}
  and get partial results. Another interesting question would be to analyze the Neumann problem for the cube in the spirit of \cite{HPS}.\\

{\bf Acknowledgements}\\
The pictures were obtained by using the programme MATLAB.
This paper was achieved when the two authors were invited at  the Isaac Newton Institute for mathematical sciences in Cambridge. Moreover the first author was supported there as  Simons foundation visiting fellow.
\bibliographystyle{plain}


On the cardinality of sets in ${\bf R}^d$ obeying a slightly obtuse angle bound

Abstract: In this paper we explicitly estimate the number of points in a subset $A \subset \R^{d}$ as a function of the maximum angle $\angle A$ that any three of these points form, provided $\angle A < \theta_d := \arccos(-\frac 1 {d}) \in (\pi/2,\pi)$. We also show $\angle A < \theta_d$ ensures that $A$ coincides with the vertex set of a convex polytope. This study is motivated by a question of Paul Erdős and indirectly by a conjecture of László Fejes Tóth.

\section{Introduction}

Let us begin with a simple definition.
\begin{definition}[Angle bound] For $A \subset {\mathbf R}^{d}$ let $\angle A$ denote the smallest value of $\theta \in [0, \pi]$,
such that no triple of points $x,y,z \in A$ determine an angle  $\angle xyz$ greater than $\theta$, i.e.
$\frac{x-y}{|x-y|} \cdot \frac{z-y}{|z-y|} \ge \cos \theta$ for all $x,y,z \in A$.
\end{definition}

For a set $A$, we denote by $|A| \in \{0,1,..., \infty\}$ its cardinality.
In the 1950s, Paul Erd\H{o}s raised the following conjecture
\cite{Erdos57}:

\medskip

{\bf Conjecture:} If $A \subset {\mathbf R}^{d}$ satisfies $\angle A \le \pi/2$, then $|A| \le 2^{d}$.
\medskip

The conjectured bound $2^{d}$ is obviously sharp, being achieved by the vertices of the
hypercube in ${\mathbf R}^d$.
For $d=3$ he had advertised the problem a decade earlier \cite{Erdos48},  which he claimed \cite{Erdos57} lead to an unpublished
solution by Kuiper and Boerdijk.
For $d \ge 3$ the conjecture was resolved affirmatively by Danzer and Gr{\"u}nbaum \cite{DG62}, who
established it through a chain of remarkable inequalities reproduced in \cite{AZ18}.
They also asked the following natural question: if the angle bound $\theta$ is acute, i.e. $\theta \in [0, \frac\pi 2]$, what would be the optimal upper bound for $|A|$ subject to
 the strict inequality $\angle A < \theta$? Danzer and Gr{\"u}nbaum had raised a conjecture on this question which was disproved two decades later by Erd\H{o}s and F{\"u}redi \cite{EF83}. Since then the question has remained both interesting and challenging, as e.g. Gerencs{\'e}r and Harangi \cite{GH19}, \cite{GH19-2} and
Aigner and Ziegler \cite{AZ18} discuss; a significant stream of research has focused on how large a set $A$ can be while satisfying the strictly acute bound  $\angle A < \frac\pi 2$.\\

Now what if the angle bound $\theta$ is obtuse, i.e. $\theta \in (\pi/2, \pi)$? {In this case much less appears to be known. It is known however that the set $A \subset {\mathbf R}^d$ subject to $\angle A \le \theta$ must be finite; see e.g. Otsetarova \cite{O17}.
In the plane, the number of obtuse angles determined by a set is known to grow as a cubic function of its cardinality \cite{CCEG79} \cite{F-MHT14}.
Here we address the following natural question:

\begin{question}\label{Q:N}
Given $\theta \in (\pi/2, \pi)$, estimate the smallest  $N=N(\theta, d) \in {\bf N}$
(if any exists) such that for all $A \subset {\mathbf R}^{d}$ satisfying $\angle A \le \theta$, we have $|A| \le N$?
\end{question}

Since $N(\pi,d)=+\infty$,  it is not obvious that $\theta<\pi$ makes $N(\theta,d)$ finite;
we describe in an appendix below how this fact can be inferred by refinining the conclusion of Erd\H{o}s and F\"uredi \cite[Theorem 4.3]{EF83},
who used sphere packing and covering asymptotics to derive
two-sided bounds on $N(\theta,d)$ for $\theta$ near $\pi$;
their statement is predicated on the unstated requirement that our $N$ (their $n$) be sufficiently large; we clarify how large in Theorem \ref{T:E-F}.
After the current manuscript was first posted to the arXiv,
we also learned that Kupavskii and Zakharov \cite{KupavskiiZakharov20} had used  a method inspired by Erd\"os and F\"uredi's to show for each
$\frac\pi2 <\theta < \pi$ the growth of $N(\theta,d)$ to be {\em doubly} exponential in $d$, but with $\theta$ dependent rates which are not estimated explicitly.
In this paper, we use an entirely different approach to give the first explicit upper bound for $N(\theta,d)$ in the region $\theta<\theta_d$, when
\begin{equation}\label{thetad}
\theta_d := \arccos\Big(-\frac{1}{d}\Big) \quad \in \quad (\frac\pi 2,\pi)
\end{equation}
shrinks to $\pi/2$ as $d \to \infty$.
 Instead of relying on the sphere packing and covering arguments (see Appendix A for more details),  we observe that $\theta:=\angle A < \theta_d$
implies the points of $A$ form the vertices of a convex polytope.  Our bound for the number of vertices of this polytope in terms of $\theta$ and $d$ then
follows from the Gauss-Bonnet theorem. This argument is a higher dimensional version of the planar statement that: if all angles of a convex polygon are at most $2\pi/3$, then the polygon has at
most six vertices.

In the first circulated draft of our companion work \cite{LM20_2}, we exploited the present result to attack a conjecture of Fejes T\'oth,
concerning the placement of a large number of lines through the origin so as to maximize the
expected acute angle between them.  There instead we were interested in maximizing a power $\alpha>1$ of the (renormalized) angle between each pair of lines.
Having already established the analogous conjecture in the limiting case $\alpha=\infty$ \cite{LM21},  we used the present results to extend this conclusion to large finite values of $\alpha$.
In subsequent drafts of \cite{LM20_2} however, this argument has been replaced by a different approach (based in part on an appendix authored by Bilyk, Glazyrin, Matzke, Park and Vlasiuk) which allows us to extend our conclusion to the larger range $\alpha>\alpha_{\Delta^d}$, where $\alpha_{\Delta^d}<2$ in certain cases.

Changing the ambient space from ${\mathbf R}^d$ to ${\mathbf R}^{d+1}$ hereafter, let $\mathcal H^{d}$ be the area measure on ${\bf S}^{d}=\{x \in {\mathbf R}^{d+1} \ | \ |x|=1\}$,
and let  $\omega_{d}=\mathcal H^{d}({\bf S}^{d})$ denote the total area of ${\bf S}^{d}$, e.g. $\omega_1=2\pi$, $ \omega_2=4\pi$. For $\eta \in (0,\frac{\pi}{2})$,  let $f_{d}(\eta)$
denote the fraction of ${\bf S}^{d}$ covered by generalized normals to the cone
\begin{equation}\label{ueta cone}
C_{u, \eta} :=\{x \in {\mathbf R}^{d+1} \ | \ u \cdot x \ge |u| |x|\cos \eta \}
\end{equation}
of half-angle $\eta$ around $0\ne u \in{\mathbf R}^{d+1}$, so that
\begin{align}
f_{d}(\eta)
&:= \frac1{\omega_{d}} \mathcal H^{d} (  \{x \in {\bf S}^{d} \ | \ x \cdot z \le 0 \, \mbox{ for every }  z \in C_{u,\eta}\} )
\nonumber \\ &= \frac{\omega_{d-1}}{\omega_{d}} \int_0^{\frac\pi 2-\eta} \sin^{d-1}(t) dt
\label{cone curvature} \\
\nonumber &= \Big( \int_0^{\pi} \sin^{d-1}(t) dt\Big)^{-1} \int_0^{\frac\pi 2-\eta} \sin^{d-1}(t) dt.
\end{align}
Equivalently, $f_{d}(\eta)$ is the zeroth curvature measure that the cone $C_{u,\eta}$ assigns to its vertex,
in the terminology of Federer \cite{Federer59} \cite{Schneider78}.

Our result  is the following.
\begin{theorem}[Cardinality under possibly obtuse angle bound]
\label{boundby91}
Fix $d \ge 1$ and $ 0<\theta <\theta_{d+1}$ and
$\eta_{d}(\theta):= \arcsin \Big(\frac{\sin(\theta/2)}{\sin(\theta_{d}/2)} \Big) \in (0,\frac\pi 2)$.
If $A \subset {\mathbf R}^{d+1}$ satisfies $\angle A \le \theta$, then \eqref{thetad} and \eqref{cone curvature} yield
\begin{equation}\label{cardinality bound}
|A|      \le   \frac{1}{f_{d}(\eta_{d}(\theta))}.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}

\begin{remark}[Dimensional monotonicity]\label{R:estimates}
For fixed $\theta$,  our cardinality bound $1/f_{d}(\eta_{d}(\theta))$ increases with dimension since
 $f_{d}(\eta)$ is monotone decreasing with respect to both $\eta$ and $d$:  indeed the difference of
averages
 \begin{align*}
 \frac{\partial \log f_{d}(\eta)}{\partial d}
 =&
 \Big( \int_0^{\frac \pi 2 -\eta} \sin^{d-1}(t) dt\Big)^{-1} \int_0^{\frac\pi 2-\eta} ( \log \sin t) \sin^{d-1}(t) dt
\\ &-  \Big( \int_0^{\pi} \sin^{d-1}(t) dt\Big)^{-1} \int_0^{\pi} (\log \sin t)\sin^{d-1}(t) dt
 \end{align*}
 is negative since $t \in [0, \pi] \mapsto \log\sin t $ is symmetric about $\pi/2$ and increasing on $[0, \pi/2]$.
\end{remark}

\begin{example}[Explicit bounds in low dimensions]
If $d=1$ then $\eta_1(\theta)=\frac\theta{2}$ and $f_1(\eta)=\frac12-\frac\eta\pi$ so $f_1(\eta_1(\theta))^{-1}= \frac{2\pi}{\pi-\theta}$ yields the known sharp values $\{2,3,4,\infty\}$ corresponding to $\theta \in \{0,\frac\pi 3, \frac \pi 2, \pi\}$.
However $f_2(\eta) =\frac12(1-\cos(\frac\pi 2 - \eta))$
yields a bound $f_2(\eta_2(\frac\pi 2))^{-1} \approx 10.9$
worse than the sharp value $8$ attained by the vertices of the cube in ${\mathbf R}^3$.
\end{example}

For non-obtuse sets, the bound \eqref{cardinality bound} becomes less and less accurate with increasing dimension,
growing slightly faster than exponentially:

\begin{claim}[Asymptotic bounds as dimension increases]
\label{claim}
\[
\ f_d(\eta_d(\frac\pi 2))^{-1}
<2 (\frac \pi 2)^{2d-1}e^{(d\log d)/2}[1 + O(d^{-1})].
\]
\end{claim}

This growth, while faster than the known sharp value of $2^{d+1}$, is slow
compared to the doubly exponential growth of $N(\theta,d)$ observed for each fixed
$\theta \in (\frac\pi2,\pi)$ in
\cite{KupavskiiZakharov20}, suggesting a rich range of intermediate asymptotic behaviour
in the narrowing region $\frac\pi 2< \theta < \theta_d$ of the $(\theta,d)$ plane.
It is also smaller that the doubly exponential upper bound obtained in Appendix \ref{S:Refined}
using Erd\H{o}s-F\"uredi's sphere-covering arguments (with ${C_d}$ independent of $d$),  which confirms that our bounds represent a significant improvement on the
state of the the art at least in their limited range of validity.

\bigskip
\noindent{{\bf Proof of Claim \ref{claim}.} From the identity
\[
\sin(\theta_d/2) :=   \sqrt{\frac{d+1}{2d}}
\]
which follows from \eqref{thetad} (and which is reasserted below in Theorem~\ref{T:Dekster}) we derive

\begin{align*}
\eta_{d}(\frac\pi2)
&=  \arcsin \Big(\sqrt{1 - \frac1{d+1}}\Big)
\\ & <  \frac\pi 2 -\sqrt{2(1-\sqrt{1-(d+1)^{-1}})}
\\& = \frac\pi 2 -d^{-1/2}(1+O(d^{-1}))
\end{align*}
where $\arcsin(t) < \frac\pi 2 -\sqrt{2-2t}$ has been used.  Estimating \eqref{cone curvature}
using $\frac2\pi  < t^{-1}\sin(t) < 1$
on $t \in (0,\frac\pi 2)$ yields
\begin{align*}
f_{d}(\eta)
& >  \Big( 2\int_0^{\pi/2} t^{d-1} dt\Big)^{-1} \int_0^{\frac\pi 2-\eta} (\frac{2}{\pi} t)^{d-1} dt
\end{align*}
whence
\begin{align*}
 f_d(\eta_d(\frac\pi 2))^{-1}
 &< 2 (\frac \pi 2)^{2d-1}d^{d/2}[1 + O(d^{-1})]
\end{align*}
as desired.
\QED

In the next section we will prove Theorem \ref{boundby91} using two propositions
which may have independent interest.
Proposition \ref{simplexbound} shows that the strict inequality $\angle A <\theta_{d}$ cannot hold unless no point in
$A\subset {\mathbf R}^{d}$ is a convex combination of $d+1$ others.  On the other hand,  if no point in $A$ is a
 convex combination of other points,  then $A$ consists precisely of the vertices of a convex polytope.
 Proposition \ref{polytopebound} combines a spherical diameter-to-radius inequality \cite{D95} with the generalized Gauss-Bonnet
 theorem to estimate $|A|$ in terms of the angle bound $\angle A \le \theta$ in this case.
 {In an appendix we review the sphere-packing and covering arguments of Erd\H{o}s and F\"uredi for comparison,  and show how they can be extended
 to sets which need not be too large.}

\section{Proofs}
 Let $\conv(A)$ denote the convex hull and $\mathop{\rm int}(A)$ the interior of any
 subset $A\subset {\mathbf R}^d$.

\begin{proposition}[Angle estimates from an interior point of a simplex]
\label{simplexbound}
Let $d \ge 2$ and let $\{v_0,...,v_d\} \subset {\mathbf R}^d \setminus \{0\}$ be vertices of a $d$-dimensional simplex containing the origin. Let $w_i=  \frac{v_i}{|v_i|}$. Then
\begin{equation} \label{dotbound}
\min_{0 \le i < j \le d} w_i \cdot w_j \le -\frac{1}{d}
\end{equation}
and equality holds if and only if $\conv\{w_0,...,w_d\}$ is a regular simplex.
\end{proposition}
\noindent{\bf Proof.} The proposition clearly holds for $d=2$:
since at least one of the three angles at the origin
must exceed $2\pi/3$ unless $\{w_0,w_1,w_2\}$ is equilateral. We will proceed by an induction on dimension $d$.
Let $V= \{v_0,...,v_d\}$, so that $\conv (V)$ is the $d$-dimensional simplex. If the origin lies on the boundary of $\conv (V)$, then the induction hypothesis yields $\min_{i \ne j} w_i \cdot w_j \le -\frac{1}{d-1}$. So let us assume $0 \in {\rm int} (\conv (V))$. Let $w_i = \frac{v_i}{|v_i|}$. We claim $W= \{w_0,...,w_d\}$ also forms vertices of a $d$-dimensional simplex containing the origin in its interior. To see this, observe
\begin{align*}
&0 \in {\rm int}( \conv (V)) \\
&\iff \text{for every } i, \ v_i = - \sum_{j \ne i} \lambda_j v_j \text{ for some } \lambda_j >0  \\
& \iff  \text{for every } i, \ w_i = - \sum_{j \ne i} \lambda_j w_j \text{ for some } \lambda_j >0 \\
&  \iff 0 \in {\rm int} (\conv (W))
\end{align*}
which proves the claim, and gives $a_i >0$ such that $\sum_{i=0}^d a_i w_i =0$.
Without loss of generality assume $a_0 = \min_i \{a_i\}$, $a_1= \max_i\{a_i\}$. Set $b_i=\frac{a_i}{a_0}$, so that $w_0 = -\sum_{i=1}^d b_iw_i$. Now we claim:
\begin{equation}
\min_{1 \le i < j \le d} w_i \cdot w_j \ge -\frac{1}{d} \ \text{ implies } \ w_0 \cdot w_1 \le -\frac{1}{d}. \nonumber
\end{equation}
To see this, observe
\begin{align*}
w_0 \cdot w_1 &=  -\sum_{i=1}^d b_i w_1 \cdot w_i  \\
& \le -b_1 + \frac{1}{d}  \sum_{i=2}^d b_i  \\
&\le -b_1+ \frac{1}{d}  \sum_{i=2}^d b_1 =   -\frac{b_1}{d} \\
& \le -\frac{1}{d}
\end{align*}
since $b_1 \ge 1$. We have shown \eqref{dotbound}, and in view of the above inequalities, we see that equality holds in \eqref{dotbound} if and only if $w_i \cdot w_j =-\frac{1}{d}$ for all $1 \le i < j \le d$ and $b_1=1$, that is $\sum_{i=0}^d w_i=0$. By taking dot product with $w_j$, $j \ne 0$ on the last identity, we conclude that equality holds in \eqref{dotbound} if and only if $w_i \cdot w_j =-\frac{1}{d}$ for all $0 \le i < j \le d$, that is, $\conv\{w_0,...,w_d\}$ forms a regular $d$-dimensional simplex.
\QED

\begin{corollary}[Deciding when points lie in convex position]
\label{coro}
Let $d \ge 2$ and $A \subset {\mathbf R}^d$. If $\angle A < \theta_d := \arccos(-\frac1 d)$, then $A$ consists of the vertices of a convex polytope (not necessarily $d$-dimensional).
\end{corollary}

\noindent{\bf Proof.} If not, there exist $v \in A$ and $\{v_0,...,v_k\} \subset A \setminus \{v\}$ which forms vertices of a $k$-dimensional simplex such that $v \in \conv\{v_0,...,v_k\}$ by Carath{\`e}odory's theorem. Proposition \ref{simplexbound}
then yields $i,j$ such that $\angle (v_i,v,v_j) \ge \theta_k \ge\theta_d$, a contradiction. \QED
\\

To derive the desired cardinality bound for convex polytopes,  we use the following spherical
 version of Jung's Theorem \cite{ Jung01}
relating diameter to radius bounds in flat space, established on the unit sphere ${\bf S}^{d}$ equipped with its standard round metric
by Dekster   \cite[Theorem 2]{D95}:

\begin{theorem}[Dekster, 1995]\label{T:Dekster}
Let $R \in (0, \frac{\pi}{2})$. If $H \subset {\bf S}^{d}$ satisfies $\diam H \le 2\arcsin\big(\sin(\theta_{d}/2) \sin R \big) \in (0,\pi)$, then $H$ can be contained in a closed ball of radius $R$ in ${\bf S}^{d}$.
Here $\sin(\theta_{d}/2) = \sqrt{\frac{d+1}{2d}}$ from \eqref{thetad}.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proposition}[Cardinality bound for convex polytopes]
\label{polytopebound} Let $d \ge 1$ and $0<\theta <  \theta_{d}$. If  $V=\{v_1,...,v_n\}$ consists of the vertices of a convex polytope $\conv(V) \subset {\mathbf R}^{d+1}$ with non-empty interior and satisfies  $\angle V \le \theta$,  then $n \le  \frac{1}{f_{d}(\eta)} $ with $\eta= \eta_{d}(\theta)=\arcsin\Big( \frac{\sin (\theta/2)}{\sin(\theta_{d}/2)}\Big) \in (0,\frac\pi 2)$.
\end{proposition}

\noindent{\bf Proof.}
\noindent For $\kappa \in (0, \frac{\pi}{2})$ and $u,v \in {\mathbf R}^{d+1}$,
use \eqref{ueta cone} to
define a family of cones $v+C_{u,\kappa} \subset {\mathbf R}^{d+1}$ with vertex $v$, direction $u \ne 0$, and half-angle $\kappa$.
 Now consider any of the given vertices $v_i$; by translating the polytope we may assume $v_i=0$. By dilating $\lambda V$ with sufficiently large $\lambda >0$ we also assume that only those edges emanating from $v_i=0$ meet ${\bf S}^{d}$,
 and set $H \subset {\bf S}^{d}$ to be the intersection points of those edges with ${\bf S}^{d}$. Notice $\angle V \le \theta$ implies $ \diam H \le \theta$, hence Dekster's theorem implies, with $\eta$ in place of $R$, that $H$ (and hence $V$) is contained in the cone $v_i+C_{u_i,\eta}$ for some unit vector $u_i$. Since the conclusion is invariant under translations and dilations, we deduce there exists unit vectors $u_1,...,u_n$ such that
\begin{equation}
\label{covering}
\conv V \subset \bigcap_{i=1}^n v_i+C_{u_i, \eta}.
\end{equation}
Let $f_i$ denote the fraction of ${\bf S}^{d}$ occupied by the generalized normals to $\conv(V)$ at $v_i$:
$$
f_i := \frac1{\omega_{d}}\mathcal H^{d} ( \{x \in {\bf S}^{d} \ | \ (x-v_i) \cdot (z-v_i) \le 0 \, \mbox{ for every }  z \in \conv V \} ).
$$
Then
$$
\sum f_i =1,
$$
an intuitive fact which can also be seen as a consequence of, e.g., Federer's generalization of the Gauss-Bonnet formula,
which asserts that for any convex body the zeroth curvature measure of the entire convex body is unity,
coinciding with its Euler-Poincar\'e characteristic  \cite{Federer59};
in the case of a convex polytope $\conv(V)$,
the zeroth curvature measure vanishes except at the vertices of the body,  and assigns mass $f_i$ to $v_i$.

Now by the covering property \eqref{covering}, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{curvature1}
1=\sum_{i=1}^n f_i \ge \sum_{i=1}^n f_{d}(\eta) = n f_{d}(\eta),
\end{equation}
whence $n \le 1 / f_{d}(\eta)$.
\QED
\\

\noindent{\bf Proof of Theorem \ref{boundby91}.} Let $A \subset {\mathbf R}^{d+1}$ satisfy $\angle A \le \theta <  \theta_{d+1}$. We may assume that $A$ is not contained in any $d$-dimensional hyperplane, since otherwise we may apply an induction on dimension
using the monotonicity of $d \mapsto f_{d}(\eta_{d}(\theta))$ established in Remark \ref{R:estimates}. Then by Corollary \ref{coro}, $A$ is the set of vertices of a $(d+1)$-dimensional convex polytope, and the theorem follows from Proposition \ref{polytopebound} and $\theta_{d+1}<\theta_d$.
\QED

Metric Geometry (math.MG); Combinatorics (math.CO); Optimization and Control (math.OC)


Abstract: In characteristic zero, semistable principal bundles on a nonsingular projective curve with a semisimple structure group form a bounded family, as shown by Ramanathan in 1970's using the Narasimhan-Seshadri theorem. This was the first step in his construction of moduli for principal bundles. In this paper we prove boundedness in finite characteristics (other than characteristic 2), when the structure group is a semisimple, simply connected algebraic group of classical type. The main ingredient is an analogue of the Mukai-Sakai theorem (which says that any vector bundle admits a proper subbundle whose degree is `not too small') in the present situation.

\subsection*{\hbox{}\hfill{\normalsize\sl #1}\hfill\hbox{}}}
\textheight 23truecm
\textwidth 15truecm
\addtolength{\oddsidemargin}{-1.05truecm}
\addtolength{\topmargin}{-3truecm}
\makeatletter \def\l@section{\@dottedtocline{1}{0em}{1.2em}} \makeatother

\begin{document}

\title{Boundedness of semistable principal bundles on a curve,
with classical semisimple structure groups}
\author{Nitin Nitsure}
\date{18 February 1998}
\maketitle

\setcounter{section}{-1}
\section{Introduction}
Let $k$ be an algebraically closed field of characteristic $\ne 2$.
Let $G$ be a semisimple, simply connected algebraic group over $k$
which is of classical type, that is, $G$ is special linear,
special orthogonal, or symplectic.
Let $X$ be a nonsingular irreducible projective curve over $k$.
We consider \'etale locally trivial
principal $G$-bundles on $X$ which are semistable.
The main result in this paper is the following:

{\bf Theorem 1 } {\sl
If $G$ is a semisimple, simply connected algebraic group of
classical type then semistable principal $G$-bundles
on $X$ form a bounded family.
}

In other words, we prove that there exists a family of principal
$G$-bundles on $X$ parametrized by a scheme $T$ of finite type
over $k$ such that every semistable $G$-bundle on $X$ is isomorphic
to the restriction of this family to $\{t\}\times_k X$ for
some closed point $t$ of $T$.

In characteristic zero, the theorem follows from the
Narasimhan-Seshadri theorem, and $G$
can be any semisimple group, not necessarily of classical type
(see Ramanathan [R]).
The proof given below is characteristic free,
but needs restriction to classical type.

The theorem is already known when
$G$ is a special linear group $SL_n$,
as in that case a semistable principal
$G$-bundle on $X$ `is the same as' a semistable vector bundle
on $X$ whose rank is $n$ and determinant is trivial.
We therefore have to prove the theorem only when $G$ is special
orthogonal group $SO_n$ or symplectic group $Sp_{2n}$.
This is done as follows.

A principal $G$-bundle in these cases is `the same as' a pair
$(V,b)$ where $V$ is a vector bundle on $X$ with trivial determinant
and $b:V\otimes_{\O_X}V\to \O_X$ is a non-degenerate bilinear form,
which is either symmetric or skew-symmetric.
Let $F\subset V$ be a totally
isotropic vector subbundle of the maximal possible rank $r$
(isotropic means the restriction
$b:F\otimes_{\O_X}F\to \O_X$ is identically zero,
and the maximal possible rank is the rank of $G$).
The crucial step is to show that
the maximal possible degree of such subbundles
is bounded below, where the bound depends only on $X$ and $G$.
This we do by a generalization of the
Mukai-Sakai theorem (see [M-S])
for vector bundles to the present situation.
On the other hand, if the principal $G$-bundle corresponding
to $(V,b)$ is semistable, then an elementary calculation shows that
the degree of any isotropic subbundle is less than or equal to zero.

It follows that the set of all isotropic subbundles $F$
of maximal rank and maximal degrees of all possible
$(V,b)$ corresponding to semistable $G$-bundles (where $G$ is fixed)
constitutes a bounded family of vector bundles. From this we
can deduce that the semistable $G$-bundles
form a bounded family.

The arrangement of this paper is as follows. In section 1 we recall
the basic definitions, and prove that a pair $(V,b)$ is semistable
(if and) only if every isotropic subbundle
of $(V,b)$ has degree $\le 0$.
In section 2, we prove an analogue of the Mukai-Sakai theorem,
showing that the maximal possible degree of isotropic subbundles
is not too small. In section 3 we complete the proof of theorem 1.

{\bf Acknowledgements } I thank M.\,S.\,Narasimhan for bringing the
boundedness problem to my (and general) attention.
I thank M.\,S.\,Raghunathan for sharing his
view that a solution lay in the direction of parabolic reductions; this
view is vindicated by the proof presented here.
I thank T.\,N.\,Venkataramana for answering my questions on the subject
of semisimple groups.

\section{Semistability and isotropic subbundles}

Let $E$ be a principal $G$-bundle, and $P\subset G$ a maximal
parabolic subgroup. Let $\sigma:X\to E/P$ be a section, which is
the same as a reduction of the structure group to $P$.
Let $T_{\pi}$ be the relative tangent bundle to the projection
$\pi :E/P \to X$. Recall (see Ramanathan [R]) that the bundle
$E$ is said to be {\bf semistable} if for every maximal parabolic
$P\subset G$ and every reduction $\sigma:X\to E/P$, the
following inequality holds:
\refstepcounter{theorem}\paragraph{ (\thetheorem)} $~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
\deg (\sigma^*(T_{\pi})) \ge 0 $

\medskip

If $G=SL_n$, then the principal bundle $E$ corresponds to
vector bundle $V$ with trivial determinant. A reduction to a
maximal parabolic corresponds to giving a vector subbundle
$F\subset V$, and the above inequality is then equivalent
to the usual definition of semistability for vector bundles.
Next we consider the case when $G$ is a special orthogonal
or symplectic group. Let $W$ be the vector space $k^{2n}$
(or $k^{2n+1}$), with standard basis $(e_i)$. We put
$u_i=e_i$ and $v_i=e_{i+n}$ for $1\le i\le n$
(and $w=e_{2n+1}$). Consider the
bilinear form $b$ defined in one of the following ways.

For the group $SO_{2n+1}$, we put
\refstepcounter{theorem}\paragraph{ (\thetheorem)} $~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
b(u_i,v_i)=b(v_i,u_i)=b(w,w)=1$ for $1\le i\le n$,

\medskip

while all other pairings of basis vectors are zero.

For the group $Sp_{2n}$, we put
\refstepcounter{theorem}\paragraph{ (\thetheorem)} $~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
b(u_i,v_i)= - b(v_i,u_i)=1$ for $1\le i\le n$,

\medskip

while all other pairings of basis vectors are zero.

For the group $SO_{2n}$, we put
\refstepcounter{theorem}\paragraph{ (\thetheorem)} $~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
b(u_i,v_i)=b(v_i,u_i)=1$ for $1\le i\le n$,

\medskip

while all other pairings of basis vectors are zero.

Let $G\subset SL(W)$ be the subgroup preserving $b$.
Let $P_r\subset G$ be the subgroup which carries the $r$-dimensional
linear subspace $W_r = <u_1,\ldots,u_r>$ into itself.
Then $P_r$ is a maximal parabolic subgroup of $G$. Let $T\subset G$
be the standard maximal torus, consisting of matrices of the form
$$diag(a_1,\ldots, a_n,a_1^{-1},\ldots, a_n^{-1})$$
when $W$ is even dimensional (that is, $G$ is $SO_{2n}$ or $Sp_{2n}$),
and of the form
$$diag(a_1,\ldots, a_n,a_1^{-1},\ldots, a_n^{-1}, 1)$$
when $W$ is odd dimensional (that is, $G$ is $SO_{2n+1}$).
Let for $1\le i \le n$, the multiplicative character
$$\lambda_i :T\to {\bf G}_m$$
be defined to take the value $a_i$ on the above diagonal matrices.

Let ${\bf g}$ and ${\bf p}_r$ be the Lie algebras of
$G$ and $P_r$ respectively.
Then $T$ acts by adjoint action on the quotient ${\bf g}/{\bf p}_r$, and
$T$ acts on $W_r$ by restriction of the defining representation
of $G$ on $W$.

The following lemma can be proved by an elementary calculation,
which we omit.
\begin{lemma}\label{C(n,r)}
(i) The torus $T$ acts on $\det(W_r)$ by the character
$\alpha_r =\lambda_1 + \ldots +\lambda_r$.

(ii) The torus $T$ acts on $\det({\bf g}/{\bf p}_r)$ by the
character $\chi_r$, given case by case as follows.
$$ \chi_r =  \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
-(2n-r)\alpha_r & \mbox{if $G=SO_{2n+1}$} \\
 -(2n-r+1)\alpha_r & \mbox{if $G=Sp_{2n}$} \\
-(2n-r-1)\alpha_r & \mbox{if $G=SO_{2n}$ }
\end{array}\right. $$

(iii) In particular, in each case $\chi_r$ is a negative
multiple of the character $\alpha_r$ on $\det(W_r)$,
which we write as

\centerline{$\chi_r = - C(n,r)\alpha_r$}

where $C(n,r)>0$ is an integer given as above.
\end{lemma}

Now let $E$ be a principal $G$-bundle, where $G$ is as above.
Let $(V,b)$ be the associated vector bundle together with
a bilinear form $b$. Then for any isotropic subbundle
$F_r\subset V$ of rank $r$, we get a reduction of structure
group to (upto isomorphism) the parabolic subgroup $P_r$.
If the transition functions are contained in the torus $T$,
then it follows from the above lemma that the associated
${\bf g}/{\bf p}_r$-bundle $\F_r$ has degree equal to the strictly negative
multiple
\refstepcounter{theorem}\paragraph{ (\thetheorem)}\label{multiple}
$~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\deg(\F_r) = -C(n,r)\deg(F_r)$

\medskip

of the degree of $F_r$. The above relation (\ref{multiple})
holds even if the structure group is not reduced to $T$,
as we can have a flat deformation which reduces the
structure group to $T$, and such a deformation does not
affect the degrees.

Note that the bundle $\F_r$ is canonically isomorphis to
the pullback $\sigma^*(T_{\pi})$ of the relative tangent bundle
of $\pi :E/P \to X$ by the parabolic reduction $\sigma$.
Hence if $E$ is semistable, we must have $\deg(\F_r)\ge 0$.
Hence the equation (\ref{multiple}) now completes
the proof of the `only if' part of the following proposition.

\begin{proposition}\label{negative}
The principal bundle corresponding to a pair $(V,b)$
is semistable if and only if $\deg(F)\le 0$
for any isotropic subbundle $F$ of $(V,b)$.
\end{proposition}

For the `if' part, just observe that any maximal parabolic
subgroup of $G$ is conjugate to one of the subgroups $P_r$
that we have explicitly described.

\refstepcounter{theorem}\paragraph{Remark \thetheorem} In particular, if $E$ is semistable, then any
subbundle of an isotropic subbundle $F$ of $(V,b)$
has non-positive degree, so the Harder-Narasimhan type
of $F$ is bounded above.

\section{Isotropic subbundles of maximal degrees}

In this section, we generalize the result of Mukai-Sakai [M-S]
to isotropic subbundles of $(V,b)$. The method is a
straightforward generalization of [M-S].
In this section, we do not assume that $(V,b)$ is stable.

We continue to use the same notation as the previous section.
Let $(V,b)$ correspond to a principal $G$-bundle as above.
Let $F_r\subset V$ be an isotropic subbundle of rank $r$
such that $F_r$ has the maximum possible degree (say $d$)
amongst isotropic subbundles of $V$ having the same rank $r$.
Note that by Riemann-Roch theorem for the curve $X$,
the Hilbert polynomial of $V/F_r$ is
$$h(t) = -d + (n-r)(1-g_X) + (n-r)t$$
where $g_X$ denotes the genus of $X$.
Let $Q$ be the quot scheme parametrizing all equivalence
classes of quotients
$$q: V \to \E$$
where $\E$ is a coherent sheaf with Hilbert polynomial
$h(t)$. Then on $X\times _k Q$ we have a universal
quotient
$$q: p_1^*V {\longrightarrow} \G$$
Then $Q$ is projective over $k$.
By pulling back $b$ under $X\times _kQ {\longrightarrow} X$, we
get a bilinear form $p_1^*(b)$ on $p_1^*V$.
Let $Q^{iso}\subset Q$ be the closed subscheme where the
kernel of $q: p_1^*V {\longrightarrow} \E$ is isotropic. Let
$Q_0^{iso}$ be an irreducible component of $Q^{iso}$
which contains the quotient $V{\longrightarrow} V/F_r$ that we started with.

\begin{lemma} If $F_r$ has maximal degree amongst all rank $r$
isotropic subbundles in $V$, then the restriction
$$\G | X\times _k Q_0^{iso}$$
of the universal quotient $\G$ to any irreducible component
$Q_0^{iso}$ containing $V{\longrightarrow} V/F_r$ is a locally free sheaf
on $X\times _k Q_0^{iso}$.
\end{lemma}

\paragraph{Proof} Suppose not, then there exists a closed point
$t\in Q_0^{iso}$ such that the restriction
$\G_t \,=\,\G | X\times _k \{ t\}$
is not locally free. Let $F$ be the kernel of $V{\longrightarrow} \G_t$.
Let $F'$ be the $\O_X$-saturation of $F$. Then $F'$ is
generically equal to $F$, so $F'$ is isotropic and of the
same rank $r$. But as $\deg(F') > \deg(F)$, this contradicts
the maximality of the degree of $F_r$ as $\deg(F)=\deg(F_r)$.

The following proposition generalizes the theorem of Mukai-Sakai
to isotropic subbundles.

\begin{proposition}\label{nottoosmall}
Let $F_r$ be an isotropic subbundle of rank $r$ in $(V,b)$
such that the degree of $F_r$ is maximal amongst such subbundles.
Then the following inequality holds
$$\deg(F_r) \ge { -g_X \,\cdot\,{\rm dim}(G/P_r)  \over C(n,r)}$$
where $C(n,r)$ is the positive integer given by lemma \ref{C(n,r)}
and $G/P_r$ is the quotient of $G$ by the maximal parabolic $P_r$,
and $g_X$ is the genus of $X$.
\end{proposition}

\paragraph{Proof} As $G$ acts on the left on $G/P_r$, the principal $G$-bundle
$E$ has an associated bundle $Y_r {\longrightarrow} X$ with fiber $G/P_r$.
Note that $Y_r$ is the same as the closed subscheme, defined
by the condition of isotropy, of the Grassman bundle of
rank $r$ subspaces of the fibers of $V$.

Let $Q_0^{iso}$ be an irreducible component of $Q^{iso}$ containing
$V{\longrightarrow} V/F_r$. Then by the above lemma, we have a short
exact sequence of vector bundles
$$0 {\longrightarrow} F \to p_1^*V {\longrightarrow} \G {\longrightarrow} 0$$
on $X\times _k Q_0^{iso}$. Hence we get a morphism
$$\varphi : X\times_k Q_0^{iso} {\longrightarrow}  Y_r$$
over $X$, which is the classifying morphism for the isotropic
subbundle $F \subset p_1^*V$.

Note that as both sides are projective, the morphism
$\varphi$ is proper. We claim that in fact $\varphi$ is finite.
For, as in the corresponding argument of Mukai-Sakai,
otherwise there will exist a complete curve $B\subset Q_0^{iso}$
and a closed point $x\in X$ such that $\{ x \} \times_k B$
lies in a fiber of $\varphi$. Then by rigidity,
the restricted morphism
$$\varphi : X \times_k B {\longrightarrow} Y_r$$
will factor through the projection $X \times_k B {\longrightarrow} B$,
giving a contradiction, as $\varphi$ is over $X$.
This shows that $\varphi$ is finite, hence
\refstepcounter{theorem}\paragraph{ (\thetheorem)}\label{half}$~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
{\rm dim} (Q_0^{iso}) \le {\rm dim} (G/P_r)$

\medskip

Note that each $S$-valued point of $Q_0^{iso}$, where $S$ is a
$k$-scheme, can be regarded as a section $\sigma : X\times_kS
{\longrightarrow} Y_r\times _kS$. For any $k$-scheme $S$ and any section $s$ of
$Y_r\times_kS{\longrightarrow} X\times_kS$, we
get an isotropic subbundle of the pullback of $V$ to $X\times_kS$.
This gives a morphism $U {\longrightarrow} Q_0^{iso}$
where $U$ is the scheme of sections of $Y_r\to X$, which
is clearly injective on $k$-valued points.
It follows that the dimension of
$Q_0^{iso}$ is greater than or equal to the maximum of the
dimensions of irreducible components $U_0$ of $U$ which contain
the section $\sigma_r :X{\longrightarrow} Y_r$ which corresponds to the
subbundle $F_r\subset V$.

We now quote the following proposition, due to Mori.

\begin{proposition}\label{Mori}
Let $\pi: Y{\longrightarrow} X$ be a projective morphism, and let $U$ be the
scheme of all sections of $Y{\longrightarrow} X$. Let $T_{\pi}$ be the
relative tangent bundle to $\pi:Y{\longrightarrow} X$, and let
$\sigma : X {\longrightarrow} Y$ be a closed point of $U$.
Let $U_0$ be an irreducible component of $U$ of maximal
dimension which contains $\sigma$.
Then the following inequality holds.
$${\rm dim}(U_0) \ge {\rm dim} H^0(X, \sigma^*(T_{\pi})) -
{\rm dim} H^1(X, \sigma^*(T_{\pi}))$$
\end{proposition}

\paragraph{Proof} This follows from proposition 3 of Mori [M], by
taking $Z$ to be empty in the notation of [M], and observing
that $U$ is an open subscheme of the scheme
$\underline{Hom}(X,Y)$.

We now apply this to the present case, by taking $X$
to be our curve $X$, $Y$ to be $Y_r$, and $\sigma$ to be
the section $\sigma_r$ corresponding to the maximal
degree isotropic subbundle $F_r$. Then
$\sigma^*(T_{\pi})$ equals the associated ${\bf g}/{\bf p}_r$
bundle $\F_r$ in the notation of section 1.
By equation \ref{multiple},
we have $\deg(\F_r) = -C(n,r) \cdot d$
Hence by Riemann-Roch for the curve $X$ we get
$${\rm dim} H^0(X, \sigma^*(T_{\pi})) -
{\rm dim} H^1(X, \sigma^*(T_{\pi})) =
-C(n,r)\cdot d + {\rm dim}(G/P_r)(1-g_X)$$
Combining the above equation with proposition \ref{Mori},
we get
$$-C(n,r) \cdot d\, +  {\rm dim}(G/P_r)(1-g_X) \le {\rm dim}(U_0)$$
Now, $U_0$ embeds in $Q_0^{iso}$, hence combining the above
with equation \ref{half}, we finally have
$$-C(n,r) \cdot d + {\rm dim}(G/P_r)(1-g_X) \le {\rm dim}(G/P_r)$$
Solving this for $d$
completes the proof of the proposition \ref{nottoosmall}.

\section{Proof of theorem 1}

We first recall the following standard fact.

\refstepcounter{theorem}\paragraph{Remark \thetheorem}\label{ext} Let ${\cal A}$ be a set of isomorphism classses
of vector bundles on $X$. We say that ${\cal A}$ is {\bf bounded}
if there exists
a finite type scheme $T$ over $k$ and vector bundles
$\E$ on $X\times_k T$ such that given any element $a\in {\cal A}$, there
exists a closed point $t\in T$ such that the restriction
$\E|(X \times_k \{ t\})$ represents $a$. Suppose ${\cal A}$ and ${\cal B}$
are two sets of isomorphism classes of vector
bundles on $X$. Let $\Cc$ be the set of all isomorphism
classes of vector bundles ${\cal V}$ which fit in a short exact
sequence
$$0 {\longrightarrow} \E {\longrightarrow} {\cal V} {\longrightarrow} \F {\longrightarrow} 0$$
where $[\E]\in {\cal A}$ and $[\F]\in {\cal B}$. Then it is known that
if ${\cal A}$ and ${\cal B}$ are bounded sets, then $\Cc$ is also a bounded
set.

With this, we are ready to prove theorem 1.

\paragraph{Proof} The above remark implies that the set of all
isomorphism classes of rank $n$ vector bundles $F$ on $X$ which
occur as a maximal degree isotropic vector subbundle of $(V,b)$
where $(V,b)$ corresponds to a semistable principal
$G$-bundle on $X$ (where $G$ is one of $SO_{2n+1}$, $Sp_{2n}$,
$SO_{2n}$) is bounded, as the degrees of such $F$ are
bounded below by proposition \ref{nottoosmall},
and their Harder-Narasimhan
types are bounded above by proposition \ref{negative}.
Note that as $F$ is isotropic of the maximal possible rank $n$,
the bilinear form $b$ induces an isomorphism $F^* \cong V/F$.
The remark \ref{ext} implies that the set of isomorphism classes
of extensions of the type
$$0 {\longrightarrow} F {\longrightarrow} \E {\longrightarrow} F^* {\longrightarrow} 0$$
form a bounded set. This shows that the isomorphism classes of the
underlying vector bundles $V$ of semistable
pairs $(V,b)$ form a bounded set.

Let $S$ be a finite type scheme over $k$ and
${\cal V}$ a vector bundle on $X\times S$ in which all
such $[V]$ occur. Hence there is a linear scheme
$T$ over $S$ which parametrizes the
pairs $(V,b)$ where $b$ is a bilinear form on $V$.
Then $T$ has a locally closed subscheme where $b$ is
non-degenerate, and symmetric (or skew symmetric).
This completes the proof that the isomorphism classes
of semistable $(V,b)$ form a bounded set.

\section*{References} \addcontentsline{toc}{section}{References}

[M] S.\,Mori : Projective manifolds with ample tangent bundles.
Ann. of Math. {\bf 110} (1979) 593-606.

[M-S] S.\,Mukai and F.\,Sakai : Maximal subbundles of vector bundles
on a curve. \hfill\\
Manuscripta math. {\bf 52} (1985) 251-256.

[R] A.\,Ramanathan : Stable principal bundles on a compact
Riemann surface. \hfill\\
Math. Annln. {\bf 213} (1975) 129-152.

\bigskip
Address:

School of Mathematics, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research,
Homi Bhabha Road, Mumbai 400 005, India. e-mail:
nitsure@math.tifr.res.in

\end{document}