Equidistribution of zeros of random polynomials

Abstract: We study the asymptotic distribution of zeros for the random polynomials $P_n(z) = \sum_{k=0}^n A_k B_k(z)$, where $\{A_k\}_{k=0}^{\infty}$ are non-trivial i.i.d. complex random variables. Polynomials $\{B_k\}_{k=0}^{\infty}$ are deterministic, and are selected from a standard basis such as Szegő, Bergman, or Faber polynomials associated with a Jordan domain $G$ bounded by an analytic curve. We show that the zero counting measures of $P_n$ converge almost surely to the equilibrium measure on the boundary of $G$ if and only if $\mathbb{E}[\log^+|A_0|]<\infty$.

\section{Introduction}

Zeros of polynomials of the form $P_n(z)=\sum_{k=0}^{n} A_k z^k,$ where $\{A_n\}_{k=0}^n$ are random coefficients,  have been studied by Bloch and P\'olya, Littlewood and Offord, Erd\H{o}s and Offord, Kac, Rice, Hammersley, Shparo and Shur, Arnold, and many other authors. The early history of the subject with numerous references is summarized in the books by Bharucha-Reid and Sambandham \cite{BR}, and by Farahmand \cite{Fa}. It is well known that, under mild conditions on the probability distribution of the coefficients, the majority of zeros of these polynomials accumulate near the unit circumference, being equidistributed in the angular sense.  Introducing modern terminology, we call a collection of random polynomials $P_n(z)=\sum_{k=0}^n A_k z^k,\ n\in{\mathbb N},$ the ensemble of \emph{Kac polynomials}.
Let $\{Z_k\}_{k=1}^n$ be the zeros of a polynomial $P_n$ of degree $n$, and define the \emph{zero counting measure}
\[
\tau_n=\frac{1}{n}\sum_{k=1}^n \delta_{Z_k}.
\]
The fact of equidistribution for the zeros of random polynomials can now be expressed via the weak convergence of $\tau_n$ to the normalized arclength measure $\mu_{{\mathbb T}}$ on the unit circumference ${\mathbb T}$, where $d\mu_{{\mathbb T}}(e^{it}):=dt/(2\pi).$ Namely, we have that $\tau_n \stackrel{w}{\rightarrow} \mu_{{\mathbb T}}$ with probability 1 (abbreviated as a.s. or almost surely). More recent work on the global distribution of zeros of Kac polynomials include papers of Ibragimov and Zaporozhets \cite{IZ}, Kabluchko and Zaporozhets \cite{KZ1,KZ2}, etc. In particular, Ibragimov and Zaporozhets \cite{IZ} proved that if the coefficients are independent and identically distributed non-trivial random variables, then the condition ${\mathbb E}[\log^+|A_0|]<\infty$ is necessary and sufficient for $\tau_n \stackrel{w}{\rightarrow} \mu_{{\mathbb T}}$ almost surely. Here, ${\mathbb E}[X]$ denotes the expectation of a random variable $X$, and $X$ is called non-trivial if ${\mathbb P}(X=0)<1$.

Asymptotic distribution of zeros for deterministic polynomials, and especially zeros of sections of a power series, has a long history that dates back to at least the work of Jentzsch and Szeg\H{o}, see e.g. Andrievskii and Blatt \cite{AB} for an overview. It is natural to use the wealth of accumulated results in the study of zeros for random power series. A number of authors followed this approach, and the recent paper of Fern\'andez \cite{Fe} deduces the above result of Ibragimov and Zaporozhets from the criterion of equidistribution of zeros of partial sums due to Carlson-Bourion and Erd\H{o}s-Fried. Fern\'andez shows that the gauge of a random power series satisfying the assumption of Ibragimov and Zaporozhets is equal to 1, so that the Carlson-Bourion characterization of zero equidistribution applies, see \cite{Fe} for details. We present a similar, and perhaps somewhat simpler argument that proves the result of Ibragimov and Zaporozhets. The assumption ${\mathbb E}[\log^+|A_0|]<\infty$ for a sequence of non-trivial i.i.d. complex random variables $\{A_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ is well known to be equivalent to
\begin{align*}
\limsup_{n\to\infty} |A_n|^{1/n} = 1 \quad\mbox{ a.s.},
\end{align*}
while ${\mathbb E}[\log^+|A_0|]=\infty$ holds if and only if the above $\limsup$ is infinite with probability one, see Arnold \cite{Ar}, Ibragimov and Zaporozhets \cite{IZ}, etc. Thus the radius of convergence for the random power series $\sum_{k=0}^\infty A_k z^k$ is either 1 or 0 almost surely. In particular, this series converges in the unit disk a.s. under the assumption ${\mathbb E}[\log^+|A_0|]<\infty$, which immediately gives that no point inside ${\mathbb D}$ can be a point of accumulation for the zeros of partial sums $P_n$ by Hurwitz's theorem. Moreover, the results of Jentzsch and Szeg\H{o} provide us a subsequence of partial sums with equidistributed zeros according to the measure $\mu_{\mathbb T}.$ If the counting measures $\tau_n$ fail to converge to $\mu_{\mathbb T}$ along a subsequence $n_k,\ k\in{\mathbb N},$ then we show that for some $c,q\in(0,1)$ the coefficients satisfy
\begin{align*}
|A_n| \le q^n,\quad c n_k\le n\le n_k \quad\mbox{ a.s.}
\end{align*}
The above behavior of the coefficient sequence is often referred to as Hadamard-Ostrowski gaps. On the other hand, we prove that for any sequence of non-trivial i.i.d. random coefficients there is $b>0$ such that
\begin{align*}
\liminf_{n\to\infty} \left(\max_{n-b\log{n}<k\le n} |A_k|\right)^{1/n} \ge 1 \quad\mbox{ a.s.}
\end{align*}
Since this is clearly incompatible with Hadamard-Ostrowski gaps, we conclude that the whole sequence of the counting measures $\tau_n$ for the partial sums $P_n$ must converge to $\mu_{\mathbb T}$ with probability one.
If ${\mathbb E}[\log^+|A_0|]=\infty$ then the radius of convergence for our random power series is 0 almost surely. A result of Rosenbloom \cite{Ro} now gives that there is a subsequence of partial sums with all zeros accumulating at the origin. In fact, his Theorem XVIII on pages 40--41 of \cite{Ro} gives more precise information about zeros.

We apply essentially the same approach to prove a generalization of zero equidisribution criterion for sums of random power series spanned by various bases, e.g., by orthogonal polynomials. Sufficient conditions for almost sure equidistribution of zeros of random orthogonal polynomials were considered by Shiffman and Zelditch \cite{SZ1} and \cite{SZ2}, Bloom \cite{Bl1} and \cite{Bl2}, Bloom and Shiffman \cite{BS}, Bloom and Levenberg \cite{BL}, Bayraktar \cite{Ba1} and \cite{Ba2}, and others. Pritsker \cite{Pr2} and \cite{Pr3} considered zero distribution for random polynomials spanned by general bases.

\section{Equidistribution of Zeros for Random Sums of Polynomials}

We now consider more general ensembles of random polynomials
$$P_n(z) = \sum_{k=0}^n A_k B_k(z)$$
spanned by various bases $\{B_k\}_{k=0}^{\infty}.$ Let $B_k(z)=\sum_{j=0}^k b_{j,k}z^j$, where $b_{j,k}\in{\mathbb C}$ for all $j$ and $k$, and $b_{k,k}\neq 0$ for all $k$, be a polynomial basis, so that $\text{deg}\  B_k=k$ for all $k\in{\mathbb N}\cup\{0\}.$ Given a compact set $E\subset{\mathbb C}$ of positive logarithmic capacity $\text{cap}(E)$, we denote the equilibrium measure of $E$ by $\mu_E$, which is a positive unit Borel measure supported on the outer boundary of $E$, see \cite{Ra} for background. It is known that under rather weak assumptions on the random coefficients $A_k$ and the basis polynomials $B_k$ associated with the set $E$, the zeros of random polynomials $P_n$ are almost surely equidistributed according to the measure $\mu_E$. This means that the counting measures $\tau_n$ in zeros of $P_n$ converge weakly to $\mu_E$ with probability one.

If $E$ is a finite union of rectifiable curves and arcs, we call the polynomials orthonormal with respect to the arclength measure $ds$ by Szeg\H{o} polynomials. When $E$ is a compact set of positive area, we call the polynomials orthonormal with respect to the area measure $dA$ on $E$ by Bergman polynomials. The basis of Faber polynomials is defined for any compact set $E$ with simply connected unbounded component $\Omega$ of the complement $\overline{{\mathbb C}}\setminus E.$ The $n$-th Faber polynomial is the polynomial part of Laurent expansion for $\Phi^n(z)$ at $\infty$, where $\Phi:\Omega\to\Delta$ is the canonical conformal mapping of $\Omega$ onto $\Delta:=\overline{{\mathbb C}}\setminus\overline{{\mathbb D}}$ normalized by $\Phi(\infty)=\infty$ and $\Phi'(\infty)>0.$

\begin{theorem} \label{thm2.1}
Suppose that $E$ is the closure of a Jordan domain $G$ with analytic boundary $L,$ and that the basis $\{B_k\}_{k=0}^{\infty}$ is given either by Szeg\H{o}, or by Bergman, or by Faber polynomials. Assume further that the random coefficients $\{A_k\}_{k=0}^{\infty}$ are non-trivial i.i.d. complex random variables. The zero counting measures of $P_n(z) = \sum_{k=0}^n A_k B_k(z)$ converge almost surely to $\mu_E$ if and only if ${\mathbb E}[\log^+|A_0|]<\infty$.
\end{theorem}

Our proofs show that the above result holds true for many other standard bases used to expand analytic functions, e.g. for Lagrange interpolation polynomial basis as well as for various extremal polynomials. In the case of the unit disk and the Faber basis, our result reduces to that of Ibragimov and Zaporozhets.

In the proof of Theorem \ref{thm2.1}, we obtain additional useful facts summarized below.

\begin{corollary} \label{cor2.2}
Suppose that $E$ is the closure of a Jordan domain $G$ with analytic boundary $L,$ and that the basis $\{B_k\}_{k=0}^{\infty}$ is given either by Szeg\H{o}, or by Bergman, or by Faber polynomials. If $\{A_k\}_{k=0}^{\infty}$ are non-trivial i.i.d. complex random variables such that ${\mathbb E}[\log^+|A_0|]<\infty$, then the random polynomials $P_n(z) = \sum_{k=0}^n A_k B_k(z)$ converge almost surely to a random analytic function $f$ that is not identically zero. Moreover,
\begin{align} \label{2.1}
\lim_{n\to\infty} |P_n(z)|^{1/n} = |\Phi(z)|, \quad z\in\Omega,
\end{align}
holds with probability one.
\end{corollary}
Note that \eqref{2.1} implies divergence of $P_n$ in $\Omega$ with probability one, so that $L=\partial G$ is the natural boundary for the random series $\sum_{k=0}^\infty A_k B_k(z)$. This phenomenon is well known in the case of standard power series, see \cite{Ka}, for which the circle of convergence is almost surely the natural boundary. More details and general results related to \eqref{2.1} may be found in \cite{BL}.

We know from the Ibragimov-Zaporozhets theorem and Theorem \ref{thm2.1} that if ${\mathbb E}[\log^+|A_0|] = \infty,$ then the equidistribution of zeros does not hold with probability one. Behavior of zeros for random power series in this case was studied in \cite{GZ} and \cite{KZ1}. However, it is possible to find a polynomial basis and i.i.d. coefficients for which there is still a subsequence of $\tau_n$ that converges to $\mu_{\mathbb{T}}$ a.s. We give such a construction below. Recall that a positive measurable function $L$ is called slowly varying (at infinity) if it is defined in a neighborhood of infinity, and if for every $t>0$ we have
$$\lim_{x\to\infty}\dfrac{L(tx)}{L(x)} = 1.$$
A random variable $X$ is said to have a slowly varying tail if $L(x) = \mathbb{P}\left(|X| > x\right)$ is a slowly varying function. For example, if  $\mathbb{P}\left(|X| > x\right) = h(x)/(\log{x})^\alpha$ for all large $x\in{\mathbb R}$, where $\alpha>0$ and $\lim_{x\to\infty} h(x) = c > 0$, then $X$ has a slowly varying tail. Note that in this example ${\mathbb E}[\log^+|X|]=\infty$ if and only if $\alpha\le 1.$

\begin{proposition} \label{prop2.3}
Let $\{A_k\}_{k=0}^\infty$ be a sequence of i.i.d. random variables with $A_0\geq 1$ almost surely. Consider the sequence of random polynomials $P_n(z) = \sum_{k=0}^{n}A_k(z^k-1),\ n\in{\mathbb N}.$\\
\textup{(i)} If ${\mathbb E}[\log A_0]<\infty$ then $\tau_n \stackrel{w}{\rightarrow} \mu_{\mathbb{T}}$ as $n\to\infty$ almost surely.\\
\textup{(ii)} If ${\mathbb E}[\log A_0]=\infty$ and $A_0$ has a slowly varying tail,  then there is a subsequence such that
$\tau_{n_k} \stackrel{w}{\rightarrow} \mu_{\mathbb{T}}$ a.s.
\end{proposition}

\medskip
If the random coefficients satisfy mild assumptions such as in Theorem \ref{thm2.1}, then the zero counting measures of random polynomials $P_n(z) = \sum_{k=0}^n A_k B_k(z)$ converge almost surely to $\mu_E$ for very general sets $E$ and associated bases $\{B_k\}_{k=0}^\infty.$ We direct the reader to the recent papers \cite{BL}, \cite{Ba1,Ba2} and \cite{Pr2,Pr3}, and to references found therein. However, the necessity part of Theorem \ref{thm2.1} seems to be open in such general setting. We end this section with conjectures related to this matter. We assume here that $G$ is an arbitrary Jordan domain, and $E=\overline{G}.$

\begin{conjecture} \label{con2.4} It is possible to construct sets $E\subset{\mathbb C}$ with non-analytic boundary, and sequences of i.i.d. random variables $\{A_k\}_{k=0}^\infty$ with ${\mathbb E}[\log^+|A_0|]=\infty$, such that for each
basis of Szeg\H{o}, Bergman, or Faber polynomials there is a subsequence of zero counting measures for $P_n(z) = \sum_{k=0}^n A_k B_k(z)$ satisfying $\tau_{n_k} \stackrel{w}{\rightarrow} \mu_E$ a.s.
\end{conjecture}

Our next conjecture is motivated by Proposition \ref{prop2.3}.

\begin{conjecture} \label{con2.5} It is possible to construct a weight function $w\ge 0$ on ${\mathbb T}$, and a sequence of i.i.d. random variables $\{A_k\}_{k=0}^\infty$ with ${\mathbb E}[\log^+|A_0|]=\infty$, such that for the basis of orthonormal on ${\mathbb T}$ polynomials with respect to this weight, we have a subsequence of zero counting measures for $P_n(z) = \sum_{k=0}^n A_k B_k(z)$ satisfying $\tau_{n_k} \stackrel{w}{\rightarrow} \mu_{\mathbb{T}}$ a.s.

An analogous construction should also exist for area orthonormal polynomials with respect to an appropriate weight function $w\ge 0$ on ${\mathbb D}.$
\end{conjecture}

\section{Proofs} \label{secP}

We start with auxiliary results on random coefficients. The first lemma is well known, but we prove it for the convenience of the reader.

\begin{lemma}\label{lem3.1}
If $\{A_k\}_{k=0}^{\infty}$ are non-trivial, independent and identically distributed complex random variables that satisfy ${\mathbb E}[\log^+|A_0|]<\infty$, then
\begin{align} \label{3.1}
\limsup_{n\to\infty} |A_n|^{1/n}= 1 \quad\mbox{ a.s.},
\end{align}
and
\begin{align} \label{3.2}
\limsup_{n\to\infty} \left(\max_{0\le k\le n} |A_k| \right)^{1/n} = 1 \quad\mbox{ a.s.}
\end{align}
\end{lemma}

This follows from the Borel-Cantelli Lemmas stated below (see, e.g., \cite[p. 96]{Gut}) in a standard way.

\medskip
\noindent\textbf{Borel-Cantelli Lemmas.} \textit{Let $\{\mathcal{E}_n\}_{n=1}^{\infty}$ be a sequence of arbitrary events.}\\
(i) \textit{If $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} {\mathbb P}(\mathcal{E}_n) < \infty$ then ${\mathbb P}(\mathcal{E}_n \mbox{ occurs infinitely often})=0.$}\\
(ii) \textit{If events $\{\mathcal{E}_n\}_{n=1}^{\infty}$ are independent and $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} {\mathbb P}(\mathcal{E}_n) = \infty$, then ${\mathbb P}(\mathcal{E}_n \textup{ i.o.})=1.$}

\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lem3.1}]
For any fixed $\varepsilon>0$, define events $\mathcal{E}_n=\{|A_n| \ge e^{\varepsilon n}\}, \ n\in{\mathbb N}.$ Then
\begin{align*}
\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} {\mathbb P}(\mathcal{E}_n) &= \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} {\mathbb P}(\{\log^+|A_n| \ge \varepsilon n\}) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} {\mathbb P}\left(\left\{\frac{1}{\varepsilon}\log^+|A_0| \ge n\right\}\right) \\ &\le \frac{1}{\varepsilon} {\mathbb E}[\log^+|A_0|]<\infty.
\end{align*}
Hence ${\mathbb P}(\mathcal{E}_n \mbox{ occurs infinitely often})=0$ by the first Borel-Cantelli Lemma, so that the complementary event $\mathcal{E}_n^c$ must happen for all large $n$ with probability 1. This means that $|A_n|^{1/n} \le e^{\varepsilon}$ for all sufficiently large $n\in{\mathbb N}$ almost surely.  We obtain that
\[
\limsup_{n\to\infty} |A_n|^{1/n} \le e^{\varepsilon} \quad\mbox{a.s.},
\]
and since $\varepsilon>0$ was arbitary, this shows that
\begin{equation}\label{limsup}
\limsup_{n\to\infty} |A_n|^{1/n}\leq 1 \quad\mbox{ a.s.}
\end{equation}

On the other hand, $A_0$ is non-trivial, so there exists $c>0$ such that ${\mathbb P}(|A_0| > c) >0.$ Therefore since $A_n$ are i.i.d,
\begin{equation}
\sum_{n=1}^\infty \mathbb{P}(|A_n|> c) = \infty.
\end{equation}
Using the second Borel-Cantelli Lemma, it follows that with probability one, there exist infinitely many $n$ such that $|A_n| > c.$ Combining this with  \eqref{limsup}, we obtain \eqref{3.1}. An elementary argument shows that \eqref{3.2} is a consequence of \eqref{3.1}.
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma}\label{lem3.2}
If $\{A_k\}_{k=0}^{\infty}$ are non-trivial i.i.d. complex random variables, then
there is $b>0$ such that
\begin{align} \label{3.3}
\liminf_{n\to\infty} \left(\max_{n-b\log{n}<k\le n} |A_k|\right)^{1/n} \ge 1 \quad\mbox{ a.s.}
\end{align}
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
We use a modified idea of Fern\'andez \cite{Fe} in this proof. Let $\alpha_n\le n,\ n\in{\mathbb N},$ be a sequence of natural numbers that will be specified later. Consider
\begin{align*}
M_n:=\max_{n-\alpha_n<k\le n} |A_k|.
\end{align*}
The statement
\begin{align*}
\liminf_{n\to\infty} \left(M_n\right)^{1/n} \ge 1 \quad\mbox{ a.s.}
\end{align*}
is equivalent to
\begin{align*}
{\mathbb P}(\{M_n \le \lambda^n \mbox{ i.o.}\}) = 0
\end{align*}
for all positive $\lambda<1.$ The latter would follow from the first Borel-Cantelli Lemma if we show that
\begin{align*}
\sum_{n=1}^\infty {\mathbb P}(\{M_n \le \lambda^n\}) < \infty
\end{align*}
for all positive $\lambda<1.$
Since our variables $\{A_k\}_{k=0}^{\infty}$ are i.i.d., we have
\begin{align*}
{\mathbb P}(\{M_n \le \lambda^n\}) = {\mathbb P}(\{|A_0| \le \lambda^n\})^{\alpha_n}.
\end{align*}
As $A_0$ is non-trivial, we can find $c>0$ and $p\in(0,1)$ such that ${\mathbb P}(\{|A_0| \le c\})\le p$. Hence for any $\lambda<1$ there is $N=N(p,\lambda)\in{\mathbb N}$ such that ${\mathbb P}(\{|A_0| \le \lambda^n\})\le p$ for all $n\ge N.$ This gives
\begin{align*}
\sum_{n=1}^\infty {\mathbb P}(\{M_n \le \lambda^n\}) \le \sum_{n=1}^\infty p^{\alpha_n} < \infty,
\end{align*}
provided $p^{\alpha_n} \le 1/n^2$ for large $n$. It suffices to take $\alpha_n \ge (-2/\log{p})\log{n}$ to satisfy the latter condition.
\end{proof}

\medskip
We use the following result of Grothmann \cite{Gr} on the distribution of zeros of polynomials. More details and applications of this result may be found in \cite{AB}.
Let $E\subset{\mathbb C}$ be a compact set of positive capacity such that $\Omega=\overline{{\mathbb C}} \setminus E$ is connected and regular. The Green function of $\Omega$ with pole at $\infty$ is denoted by $g_\Omega(z,\infty)$. We use $\|\cdot\|_K$ for the supremum norm on a compact set $K$.

\noindent
{\bf Theorem G.} {\em If a sequence of polynomials $P_n(z),\ \deg(P_n)\le n\in{\mathbb N},$ satisfies
\begin{align} \label{3.4}
\limsup_{n\to\infty} \|P_n\|_E^{1/n} \le 1,
\end{align}
for any closed set $K\subset E^\circ$
\begin{align} \label{3.5}
\lim_{n\to\infty} \tau_n(K) = 0,
\end{align}
and there is a compact set $S\subset\Omega$ such that
\begin{align} \label{3.6}
\liminf_{n\to\infty} \max_{z\in S} \left(\frac{1}{n} \log|P_n(z)| - g_\Omega(z,\infty) \right) \ge 0,
\end{align}
then the zero counting measures $\tau_n$ of $P_n$ converge weakly to $\mu_E$ as $n\to\infty.$}

We first give a short proof of the Ibragimov-Zaporozhets equidistribution criterion for the zeros of partial sums $P_n(z)=\sum_{k=0}^{n} A_k z^k$ of a random power series with non-trivial i.i.d. complex random coefficients $\{A_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$. If ${\mathbb E}[\log^+|A_0|]<\infty$ then the radius of convergence of our random series is almost surely 1 by Lemma \ref{lem3.1}. On this event, the series converges almost surely in the unit disk to a not identically zero analytic function, so that \eqref{3.5} holds for any compact $K\subset{\mathbb D}$ by Hurwitz's theorem. Moreover, \eqref{3.4} is also satisfied almost surely for $E=\overline{{\mathbb D}}$ by \eqref{3.2} and the estimate $\|P_n\|_{\mathbb T} \le (n+1) \max_{0\le k\le n} |A_k|.$ If $\tau_n$ do not converge to $\mu_{\mathbb T}$, then \eqref{3.6} does not hold with probability one for any compact set  $S$ in $\Delta=\overline{{\mathbb C}}\setminus\overline{{\mathbb D}}.$ In particular, for $S=\{|z|=R,\ R>1\}$ and a subsequence $n_m,\ m\in{\mathbb N},$ we have with positive probability that
\[
\limsup_{m\to\infty} \|P_{n_m}\|_S^{1/n_m} < R,
\]
as $g_\Delta(z,\infty)=\log|z|.$ Hence, with positive probability,
\[
|A_n| \le \frac{1}{2\pi} \int_{|z|=R} \frac{|P_{n_m}(z)|\,|dz|}{R^{n+1}} \le q^n, \quad c n_m \le n\le n_m.
\]
for some $c,q\in(0,1)$. Existence of such Hadamard-Ostrowski gaps contradicts \eqref{3.3} of Lemma \ref{lem3.2}. We conclude that $\tau_n$ must converge to $\mu_{\mathbb T}$ with probability one. If ${\mathbb E}[\log^+|A_0|]=\infty$ then the radius of convergence of the random power series is 0 almost surely. On this event, Theorem XVIII of Rosenbloom \cite[pp. 40--41]{Ro} gives a subsequence of $P_n$ whose zeros are equidistributed near the circles $|z|=|A_n|^{-1/n}.$ In particular, all zeros of this subsequence tend to the origin as $n\to\infty.$

\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm2.1} and of Corollary \ref{cor2.2}]
We have that $E$ is the closure of a Jordan domain $G$ bounded by an analytic curve $L$ with exterior $\Omega.$ It is well known that the conformal mapping $\Phi:\Omega\to\Delta,\ \Phi(\infty)=\infty,\ \Phi'(\infty)>0,$ extends through $L$ into $G$, so that $\Phi$ maps a domain $\Omega_r$ containing $\overline{\Omega}$ conformally onto $\{|z|>r\}$ for some $r\in(0,1).$ In particular, the level curves of $\Phi$ denoted by $L_\rho$ are contained in $G$ for all $\rho\in(r,1)$, $L_1=L$ and $L_\rho\subset\Omega$ for $\rho>1.$ Since $g_\Omega(z,\infty)=\log|\Phi(z)|$, $L_\rho$ are also the level curves of the Green function. It is also known that in all three cases of polynomial bases we consider in this theorem, we have that
\begin{align} \label{3.7}
\lim_{n\to\infty} |B_n(z)|^{1/n} = |\Phi(z)|
\end{align}
holds uniformly on compact subsets of $\Omega_r.$ Hence for any compact set $K\subset G$, we have (cf. \cite[pp. 290 and 338]{SL} and \cite[Section 2.3]{Su}) that
\[
\limsup_{n\to\infty} \|B_n\|_K^{1/n} < 1.
\]
If the assumption ${\mathbb E}[\log^+|A_0|]<\infty$ is satisfied, then the random series must converge on compact subsets of $G$ almost surely by \eqref{3.1} of Lemma \ref{lem3.1}. Furthermore, its limit is (almost surely) an analytic function that cannot vanish identically because of \eqref{3.1} and uniqueness of series expansions in Szeg\H{o}, Bergman and Faber polynomials (see \cite[pp. 293 and 340]{SL} and Section 6.3 of \cite{Su} for these facts). This proves the corresponding part of Corollary \ref{cor2.2}. We also conclude that \eqref{3.5} holds for any compact $K\subset G$ by Hurwitz's theorem. Note that \eqref{3.4} is also satisfied for $E$ almost surely by \eqref{3.2}, \eqref{3.7} and the estimate
\[
\|P_n\|_E \le \sum_{k=0}^n |A_k| \|B_k\|_E \le (n+1) \max_{0\le k\le n} |A_k| \, \max_{0\le k\le n} \|B_k\|_E,
\]
as
\[
\limsup_{n\to\infty} \left(\max_{0\le k\le n} \|B_k\|_E\right)^{1/n} \le 1.
\]
If $\tau_n$ do not converge to $\mu_E$ a.s., then \eqref{3.6} cannot hold a.s. for any compact set  $S$ in $\Omega.$ We choose $S=L_R,$ with $R>1$, and find a subsequence $n_m,\ m\in{\mathbb N},$ such that
\begin{align} \label{3.8}
\limsup_{m\to\infty} \|P_{n_m}\|_{L_R}^{1/n_m} < R,
\end{align}
holds with positive probability. Note that all zeros of $B_n$ are contained outside $\Omega_r$ and hence inside $L_R$ for all large $n$ by \eqref{3.7}. This allows us to write an integral representation
\begin{align} \label{3.9}
A_n = \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{L_R} \frac{P_n(z)\,dz}{z B_n(z)},
\end{align}
which is valid for all large $n\in{\mathbb N}$ because $P_n(z)/(z B_n(z)) = A_n/z + O(1/z^2)$ for $z\to\infty.$ We now need more precise estimates for $B_n$ that follow from known asymptotic relations in $\Omega_r$. In the case of Bergman polynomials, Carleman's asymptotic \cite[p. 12]{Ga} implies that there are positive constants $c_1$ and $c_2$ that do not depend on $n$ and $z$, such that
\begin{align} \label{3.10}
c_2 \sqrt{n}\, \rho^n \le |B_n(z)| \le c_1 \sqrt{n}\, \rho^n, \quad z\in L_{\rho},\ \rho>r,\ n\in{\mathbb N}.
\end{align}
Similar estimates, but without the factor $\sqrt{n}$ on both sides are true for Szeg\H{o} and Faber polynomials (see \cite{SL} and \cite{Su}), so that the following proof remains essentially the same for those bases. We estimate from \eqref{3.9} and \eqref{3.10} with $\rho=R$ that
\[
|A_n| \le \frac{|L_R|}{2\pi d} \frac{\|P_n\|_{L_R}}{c_2 \sqrt{n}\, R^n},
\]
where $|L_R|$ is the length of $L_R$ and $d:=\min_{z\in L_R} |z|.$ It follows that
\[
\|P_{n-1}\|_{L_R} \le \|P_n\|_{L_R} + |A_n| \|B_n\|_{L_R} \le \|P_n\|_{L_R} \left(1 + \frac{|L_R|}{2\pi d} \frac{c_1}{c_2} \right) =: C\, \|P_n\|_{L_R}, \quad n\in{\mathbb N}.
\]
Applying this estimate repeatedly, we obtain that
\[
\|P_{n-k}\|_{L_R} \le  C^k\, \|P_n\|_{L_R}, \quad k\le n,
\]
so that \eqref{3.9} yields
\[
|A_{n-k}| \le \frac{|L_R|}{2\pi d} \frac{\|P_{n-k}\|_{L_R}}{c_2 \sqrt{n-k}\, R^{n-k}} \le \frac{|L_R|}{2\pi d} \frac{C^k\, \|P_n\|_{L_R}}{c_2 \sqrt{n-k}\, R^{n-k}}.
\]
Choosing sufficiently small $\varepsilon>0$ and using \eqref{3.8}, we deduce from previous inequality that
\[
|A_{n_m-k}| \le q^{n_m}, \quad 0\le k\le \varepsilon n_m,
\]
for some $q\in(0,1)$ and all sufficiently large $n_m$, with positive probability. The latter estimate clearly contradicts \eqref{3.3} of Lemma \ref{lem3.2}. Hence \eqref{3.6} holds for $S=L_R,$ with any $R>1$, and $\tau_n$ converge weakly to $\mu_E$ with probability one. Note that \eqref{3.6} for $S=L_R,$ with $R>1$, is equivalent to \eqref{2.1}. Indeed, we have equality in \eqref{3.6}, with $\lim$ instead of $\liminf$, by Bernstein-Walsh inequality and \eqref{3.4}, see Remark 1.2 of \cite[p. 51]{AB} for more details. This concludes the proof of sufficiency part for Theorem \ref{thm2.1} as well as the proof of Corollary \ref{cor2.2}.

Now we prove the necessity part of Theorem \ref{thm2.1}. Let us assume that ${\mathbb E}[\log^+|A_0|] =\infty.$ Recall the bounds of \eqref{3.10} for Bergman polynomials, and recall that similar bounds without the factor $\sqrt{n}$ are true for the Szeg\H{o} and the Faber polynomial bases. It follows that for $n$ large enough, $B_n$ has all its zeros lying inside $L_{\rho}.$ We show below that for infinitely many $n,$ the zeros of $P_n$ all lie inside $L_{\rho}$ where $\rho\in (r, 1).$ Hence the counting measures $\tau_n$ do not converge to $\mu_E.$

For the proof, we follow a technique from \cite{IZ}. Let us fix $\rho,$ where $r < \rho < 1.$ To begin with, we note that since $A_k$ are i.i.d. random variables satisfying ${\mathbb E}[\log^+|A_0|]= \infty,$ an application of the Borel-Cantelli lemma gives us that
$$\limsup_{k\to\infty} |A_k|^{1/k} = \infty \quad\mbox{a.s.}\hspace{0.05in}$$
This means that with probability one, for infinitely many values of $n,$ all three of the following estimates hold:

\begin{equation}\label{E1}
|A_n|^{1/n}\geq \max_{1\leq k\leq n-1}|A_k|^{1/k},
\end{equation}

\begin{equation}\label{E2}
 |A_n|^{1/n}\geq\dfrac{c_2 + 2c_1}{c_2\rho},
\end{equation}

\begin{equation}\label{E3}
|A_0| < \frac{\sqrt{n}}{2}\dfrac{c_2}{c_1}\left(\dfrac{c_2 + 2c_1}{c_2}\right)^n.
\end{equation}

\noindent Fix a large $n$ for which \eqref{E1}, \eqref{E2} and \eqref{E3} hold. Let $z$ be in $L_{\rho}$ and $1\leq k\leq n-1.$ Using inequality \eqref{3.10} and the bound \eqref{E1}, we estimate

\begin{eqnarray}\label{basic}
|A_kB_k(z)|& \le & |A_k|c_1\sqrt{k}\rho^k \nonumber\\
          & \le & c_1\sqrt{n}|A_n|^{k/n}\rho^k \nonumber\\
          & = & c_1\sqrt{n} |A_n\rho^n|^{k/n}.
\end{eqnarray}
Furthermore, \eqref{basic} and \eqref{E3} imply that with probability one,

\begin{align*}\label{chain}
&|A_0B_0 + A_1B_1(z) +...+ A_{n-1}B_{n-1}(z)| \leq |A_0B_0| + ...+ |A_{n-1}B_{n-1}(z)| \\
&\leq \frac{\sqrt{n}}{2} c_2 \left(\frac{c_2 + 2c_1}{c_2}\right)^n + c_1\sqrt{n}|A_n\rho^n|^{\frac{1}{n}} + c_1\sqrt{n}|A_n\rho^n|^{\frac{2}{n}}+...+ c_1\sqrt{n}|A_n\rho^n|^{\frac{n-1}{n}} \\
&\leq \frac{\sqrt{n}}{2} c_2 \left(\frac{c_2 + 2c_1}{c_2}\right)^n - c_1\sqrt{n} + c_1\sqrt{n}\left(\dfrac{|A_n\rho^n| - 1}{|A_n\rho^n|^{\frac{1}{n}}- 1}\right) \\
&\leq \frac{\sqrt{n}}{2} c_2|A_n\rho^n| + c_1\sqrt{n}\left(\dfrac{|A_n\rho^n| - 1}{\frac{c_2+2c_1}{c_2\rho}\rho - 1}\right) - c_1\sqrt{n}\\
&< \frac{\sqrt{n}}{2} c_2|A_n\rho^n| + \frac{c_2\sqrt{n}}{2}(|A_n\rho^n| - 1) \\
&< c_2\sqrt{n} |A_n\rho^n|\leq |A_nB_n(z)|.
\end{align*}
We remark that in the above chain of inequalities, we used \eqref{E2} to go from the the fourth line to the fifth line and \eqref{3.10} in the last line. Having established the estimate $|A_0B_0 + A_1B_1(z) +...+ A_{n-1}B_{n-1}(z)|< |A_nB_n(z)|$ on $L_{\rho}$, Rouche's theorem now implies that $P_n$ has the same number of zeros as $B_n$ inside $L_{\rho}.$ In other words, all the zeros of $P_n$ are inside $L_{\rho}.$ Since this is true for infinitely many $n,$ and remembering that $\mu_E$ is supported on $L_1 = \partial E,$ we conclude that with probability one, the measures $\tau_n$ do not converge to $\mu_E.$

\end{proof}

\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{prop2.3}]
\textup{(i)} Since ${\mathbb E}[\log^+|A_0|]< \infty,$ Lemma \ref{3.1} gives that $\limsup_{n\to\infty} |A_n|^{1/n} = 1$ a.s. Coupled with our assumption that $A_n\geq 1$ this gives

\begin{equation}\label{limit}
\lim_{n\to\infty} |A_n|^{1/n} = 1 \hspace{0.1in}\mbox{ a.s.}\hspace{0.1in}
\end{equation}
Next, note that  $P_n(z) = A_nz^n + A_{n-1}z^{n-1}+...+ A_1z -(A_1 + A_2 +... + A_n)$. Dividing out by $A_n$, we have that the zeros of $P_n$ coincide with those of $$Q_n(z) = z^n + \dfrac{A_{n-1}}{A_n}z^{n-1} + ... + \dfrac{A_1}{A_n}z - \dfrac{A_1 + A_2 +... + A_n}{A_n}.$$
We now use the following theorem from \cite{BSS} to study the limiting behavior of the zeros of $Q_n.$

\vspace{0.1in}

\noindent

\textbf{Theorem BSS.} {\em Let $E\subset{\mathbb C}$ be a compact set, $\textup{cap}(E)>0$.  If a sequence of polynomials $P_n(z) = \sum_{k=0}^n c_{k,n} z^k$ satisfy
\begin{align} \label{4.7}
\limsup_{n\to\infty} \|P_n\|_E^{1/n} \le 1 \quad \mbox{and} \quad \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} |c_{n,n}|^{1/n}=1/\textup{cap}(E),
\end{align}
and for any closed set $A$ in the bounded components of ${\mathbb C}\setminus \textup{supp}\,\mu_E$ we have
\begin{align} \label{4.8}
\lim_{n\to\infty} \tau_n(A) = 0,
\end{align}
then the zero counting measures $\tau_n$ converge weakly to $\mu_E$ as $n\to\infty.$}

It is known that \eqref{4.8} holds if every bounded component of ${\mathbb C}\setminus \textup{supp}\,\mu_E$ contains a compact set $K$ such that
\begin{align} \label{4.9}
\liminf_{n\to\infty} \|P_n\|_K^{1/n} \ge 1,
\end{align}
see Bloom \cite[p. 1706]{Bl1}.

Continuing with our proof, we observe that $$\|Q_n\|_{\mathbb {T}} \leq\dfrac{2 (A_1 + A_2 + .. + A_n)}{A_n}\leq\dfrac{2n\max_{1\leq i\leq n}{A_i}}{A_n}.$$
Using \eqref{3.2} and \eqref{limit}, we obtain $\limsup_{n\to\infty}\|Q_n\|_{\mathbb {T}}^{1/n}\le 1$ a.s. Since $Q_n$ is monic, the condition on the leading coefficient is trivially satisfied and hence \eqref{4.7} holds a.s. in our case. All that remains to check is \eqref{4.8}, which in turn will follow from \eqref{4.9}.  By taking $K =\{0\},$ and using that our random variables are positive, we have
$$|Q_n(0)|^{1/n} = \left(\dfrac{A_1 + A_2 + .. + A_n}{A_n}\right)^{1/n}\geq 1\hspace{0.05in}\mbox{a.s.}\hspace{0.05in}$$
Hence \eqref{4.9} holds a.s., and Theorem BSS now yields that $\tau_n \stackrel{w}{\rightarrow}\mu_{\mathbb{T}}$ a.s.

\textup{(ii)} Let $M_n = \max_{1\leq i\leq n} A_i,$ then since $A_0$ has a slowly varying tail, c.f. \cite{D},
\begin{equation}\label{slowv}
\dfrac{A_1 + A_2 +...+ A_n}{M_n}\hspace{0.1in}\xrightarrow[]{P}\hspace{0.05in} 1.
\end{equation}
We also have that ${\mathbb E}[\log^+|A_0|] = \infty,$ which implies that $\limsup_{k\to\infty} A_k^{1/k} = \infty$ a.s. As before, it follows that for some subsequence $\mathcal{N},$
\begin{equation}
A_n^{1/n}\geq \max_{1\leq k\leq n-1}A_k^{1/k},\quad n\in\mathcal{N}.
\end{equation}
Since $A_k\geq 1$ a.s., this means that along this subsequence $A_n = M_n.$ Now using \eqref{slowv}, and choosing a further subsequence which we continue to call $\mathcal{N},$ we have that along the subsequence $\mathcal{N}$
\begin{equation}\label{converge}
\dfrac{A_1 + A_2 +...+ A_n}{A_n}\to 1\hspace{0.05in}\hspace{0.1in}\mbox{a.s.}
\end{equation}
As in the proof of part (i), it is enough to study the zeros of
$$Q_n(z) = z^n + \dfrac{A_{n-1}}{A_n}z^{n-1} + ... + \dfrac{A_1}{A_n}z - \dfrac{A_1 + A_2 +... + A_n}{A_n}.$$
We once again use Theorem BSS to study the limiting behavior of the zeros of $Q_n,$ $n\in\mathcal{N}.$ To begin with, we have
$$\|Q_n\|_{\mathbb {T}} \leq\dfrac{2 (A_1 + A_2 + .. + A_n)}{A_n}.$$
Now using \eqref{converge}, we see that along $\mathcal{N},$ $\limsup_{n\to\infty}\|Q_n\|_{\mathbb {T}}^{1/n}\le 1.$ Since $Q_n$ is monic, the condition on the leading coefficient is trivially satisfied. We show that \eqref{4.9} holds for $K =\{0\}$. Indeed, we have
$$|Q_n(0)|^{1/n} = \left(\dfrac{A_1 + A_2 + .. + A_n}{A_n}\right)^{1/n},$$
so that \eqref{4.9} holds a.s. by \eqref{converge}. Therefore along the subsequence $\mathcal N$ we have $\tau_n \stackrel{w}{\rightarrow}\mu_{\mathbb{T}}$ a.s.

\end{proof}

\textbf{Acknowledgement.} Research of the first author was partially supported by the National Security Agency (grant H98230-15-1-0229) and by the American Institute of Mathematics.

Complex Variables (math.CV); Probability (math.PR)


Geodesic equivalence and integrability

Abstract: We suggest a construction that, given a trajectorial diffeomorphism between two Hamiltonian systems, produces integrals of them.As the main example we treat geodesic equivalence of metrics.We show that the existence of a non-trivially geodesically equivalent metric leads to Liouville integrability, and present explicit formulae for integrals.

\section{Introduction}
Integrals of a system are closely  related  to symmetries.
A classical example is   Noether's theorem:
if  a vector field $X$ on a manifold  $M$  preserves a
Lagrangian $L:{\cal   T}M\to R$
, then the function
$I_X\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}\frac{\partial L}{\partial{\dot x}}(x,\dot x)X(x)$ is a first
integral of the corresponding Lagrangian system.

There are many generalizations of Noether's  theorem,
we recall the following two.
In the paper \cite{Koz-Bol} it was shown  that the  existence of
a vector field  on ${\cal T}^*M$ which  commutes  with
a Hamiltonian vector field
 allows one  to construct a (multi-valued) integral of the
Hamiltonian system. In the paper \cite{TensInv} the result of
\cite{Koz-Bol}  was generalized to
tensor fields. It was shown that if a Hamiltonian flow
 preserves  a tensor field on   ${\cal T}^*M$, then  there  exists  an
(also multi-valued) integral of the Hamiltonian system.

In our   paper we,   following ideas of \cite{TensInv},
 present a construction  which,
given
   a  diffeomorphism between two Hamiltonian systems
   that
   takes the  trajectories  and the isoenergy surfaces
  of the first Hamiltonian system
 to the trajectories and  the  isoenergy surfaces of
the second one, produces  $n$ integrals
of the first system, where $n$ is the number of
the degrees of freedom of the system.

The construction is applied to geodesically equivalent metrics.
Let $g=(g_{ij})$ and  $\bar g=(\bar g_{ij})$ be  smooth
metrics on the  same manifold $M^n$.
\begin{Def}\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .}  The
metrics $g$  and $\bar g$
are {\em geodesically equivalent},
if they have  the same geodesics  (considered as unparameterized curves).
\end{Def}

 This is  rather classical material. In  1869 Dini \cite{Dini} formulated the problem of
local  classification of geodesically equivalent metrics, and solved it for
 dimension two.
 In 1896 Levi-Civita \cite{Levi-Civita}
 got a  local description of geodesically
equivalent metrics on manifolds of arbitrary dimension.
In the paper \cite{Mikes} a family of (non-trivial) examples of geodesically
equivalent metrics on closed manifolds was constructed.

For geodesically equivalent metrics, a
trajectorial diffeomorphism
 $\Phi$ is given by
$\Phi(x,\xi)=(x, \frac{\|\xi\|_g}{\|\xi\|_{\bar g}}\xi)$.
Here $(x,\xi)\in {\cal T}M^n$, $x$ is a point  of $M^n$ and $\xi\in {\cal T}_xM^n$.

\begin{Th}\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .} \label{Main_Topalov}
Let metrics  $g$ and $\bar g$ on $M^n$
be geodesically equivalent.
Denote by $G$ the linear operator $g^{-1}\bar g=(g^{i\alpha}\bar g_{\alpha j})$. Consider the characteristic polynomial
$det(G- \mu E)=c_0\mu^n+c_1\mu^{n-1} + ... + c_n$. The
coefficients $c_1, .. , c_n$ are smooth functions on the
manifold $M^n$, and $c_0\equiv (-1)^n$.
Then
the functions
$I_k=\left(\frac{det(g)}{det(\bar g)}\right)^{\frac{k+2}{n+1}}\bar g(S_k
\xi,\xi)$, $k=0, ... , n-1$, where $S_k\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}\sum_{i=0}^kc_i G^{k-i}
$, are
 integrals of the geodesic flow of the metric $g$
and pairwise  commute.
\end{Th}

\begin{Rem}\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .}   The integral $I_0=\left(\frac{det(g)}{det(\bar g)}\right)^{\frac{2}{n+1}}\bar g(\xi, \xi)$  was obtained by
Painlev\'e, see \cite{Levi-Civita}. The integral
 $I_{n-1}$  is  the energy integral (multiplied by minus two).
\end{Rem}
The integrals $I_1, I_{2},...,I_{n-2}$  seem to be new, although
 in each Levi-Civita chart the integrals are linear combinations
of  Levi-Civita integrals
(see Section~\ref{LCtheorem} for definitions).
We touch on
the connection between the integrals $I_0,..., I_{n-1}$
  and Levi-Civita integrals
in Section \ref{LiouvIntegr}.

 Metrics $g, \bar g$ on $M^n$
are {\em strictly non-proportional} at  a point $x\in M^n$, if
the characteristic polynomial
$\frac{1}{det(g)}det(\bar g-tg))_{|x}$
has no multiple  root.

\begin{Cor}\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .} \label{T} Let $M^n$ be a closed real-analytic
manifold supplied with
  two real-analytic metrics $g,\bar g$ such that the metrics $g,\bar g$ are
 geodesically equivalent and
                 strictly non-proportional at  least at one point.
Then  the fundamental group
$\pi_1(M^n)$ of the manifold $M^n$ contains  a commutative   subgroup of finite
index, and the dimension of the homology  group $H_1(M^n; {\bf Q})$  is
 no greater than $n$.
\end{Cor}

For dimension two the  converse of Theorem~\ref{Main_Topalov} is also true,
and  the condition
of Corollary~\ref{T} can be weakened.

\begin{Cor}\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .} \label{dim2}
Metrics  $g$ and $\bar g$ on a surface $M^2$  are geodesically equivalent,
if and only if the function $\left(\frac{det(g)}{det(\bar g)}\right)^{\frac{2}{3}}\bar g(\xi, \xi) $ is an integral of the geodesic flow of the metric
$g$.
\end{Cor}

\begin{Cor}\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .}{\label{Kol}} Let metrics $g, \bar g$ on a closed
surface of
negative Euler characteristic be
geodesically equivalent.
 Then $g=C  \bar g$, where $C$ is a constant.
\end{Cor}

\begin{Cor}\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .}
\label{torus}
Let metrics $g, \bar g$
  on the torus $T^2$
 be geodesically equivalent.
If they  are proportional at
a point $x\in T^2$, then $g=C  \bar g$, where $C$ is a positive constant.
\end{Cor}

\begin{Cor}\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .}\label{sphere}
Let metrics $g$,
$\bar g$ on the sphere $S^2$  be geodesically equivalent.
Then there are three possibilities.
\begin{itemize}
\item[1.] The metrics are proportional  at   exactly   two points.
\item[2.] The metrics are proportional  at  exactly   four points.
\item[3.] The metrics are completely proportional, i.e. $g=C  \bar g$,
 where $C$ is a positive constant.
\end{itemize}
In the first case the  metrics admit a Killing vector field.
\end{Cor}

Recall that a vector field on $M^n$  is
{\it Killing} (with respect to a metric),
 if the flow of the field
 preserves the metric.

\begin{Cor}\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .}\label{nontrivial}
Let  metrics $g, \bar g$  on a surface $M^2$ be geodesically equivalent.
If the metrics are proportional at each point of an open non-empty
domain $U\subset M^2$, then  $g=C  \bar g$, where $C$ is a positive constant.   \end{Cor}

\begin{Cor}\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .}\label{killing}
If metrics $g,\bar g$ on a manifold  $M^n$ are geodesically equivalent, and if
 the
metric $g$ admits  a non-trivial  Killing vector field, then the metric $\bar g$ also admits a non-trivial Killing vector
field.
\end{Cor}

One of the most famous integrable geodesic flows on closed surfaces
is the geodesic flow of the metric on ellipsoid (see \cite{Moser}).
Consider the ellipsoid \newline $\sum_{i=1}^n\frac{(x^i)^2}{a_i}=1$, where $a_i>0$, $i=1,...,n$.
\begin{Th}\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .}\label{ellipsoid}
The restriction of the metric $\sum_{i=1}^n(dx^i)^2$ to
the ellipsoid
 \newline $\sum_{i=1}^n\frac{(x^i)^2}{a_i}=1$ is geodesically equivalent to
the restriction of the metric
$$
 \frac{1}{\sum_{i=1}^{n}\left(\frac{x^i}{a_i}\right)^2}\left(\sum_{i=1}^n\frac{(dx^i)^2}{a_i}\right)
$$
to the ellipsoid.
\end{Th}

The paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{Theory} we present the
announced construction. Theorem \ref{MainTh} there gives an explicit
formula for  a
one-parameter family of first integrals,  if a trajectorial
diffeomorphism between two Hamiltonian systems is given.

In Section \ref{LCtheorem}, for use in Sections \ref{GeodEqInt},
\ref{LiouvIntegr}, \ref{Ellipsoid}
we formulate
 Levi-Civita and Painlev\'e  results about a local form
of geodesically equivalent  metrics.

In Section  \ref{GeodEqInt}
we apply the construction
 to   geodesically equivalent
metrics, and prove   that the functions  $I_0, ..., I_{n-1}$  from
  Theorem \ref{Main_Topalov} are integrals of the geodesic flow of the metric $g$.

In Section \ref{LiouvIntegr} we prove that the integrals  $I_0, ..., I_{n-1}$
are in involution.

In Section \ref{Obstructions} we prove
Corollaries \ref{T}, \ref{dim2},  \ref{Kol}, \ref{torus}, \ref{sphere}, \ref{nontrivial},  \ref{killing}.

In Section \ref{Ellipsoid} we prove Theorem~\ref{ellipsoid}.

The authors are grateful to
A.~V.~Bolsinov, A.~T.~Fomenko,
V.~V.~Kozlov  and
I.~A.~Taimanov  for useful discussions. The main   results of the paper
were
obtained during a 4-week visit of P.~Topalov to Bremen University.
 The authors are
grateful to the Institute of Theoretical  Physics of  Bremen University
 for its  hospitality and to
 the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft for  partial financial support.

\section{Trajectorial diffeomorphisms  and integrals}\label{Theory}

\noindent Let  $v$ and $\bar v$ be Hamiltonian systems
 on
 symplectic manifolds $(M,\omega)$ and $(\bar M,\bar\omega)$
 with Hamiltonians $H$ and
$\bar H$ respectively.
Consider the
isoenergy surfaces
$$
Q\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}\left\{x\in M: H(x)=h\right\}, \ \
\bar Q\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}\left\{x\in \bar  M: \bar H(x)=\bar h\right\},
$$
\noindent where $h$ and $\bar h$ are regular values of the functions
$H$, $\bar H$ respectively.
Let $U(Q)\subset M$ and  $U(\bar Q)\subset \bar M$
be neighborhoods of the isoenergy surfaces $Q$ and $\bar Q$.

\begin{Def}\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .}\label{TrAutDef}
A diffeomorphism $\Phi : U(Q)\longrightarrow U(\bar Q)$, $\Phi(Q)=\bar Q$,
 is said to be  {\em
trajectorial on $Q$},
 if the restriction $\Phi|_Q$
 takes the trajectories of the system $v$ to
the trajectories of the system $\bar v$.
\end{Def}

Denote the restriction $\Phi|_Q$ by $\phi$. Since $\phi$ takes
the trajectories of $v$ to the trajectories of $\bar v$, it takes
the vector field $v$ to the vector field that is proportional to
$\bar v$. Denote by $a_1:Q\to R$
the coefficient of proportionality, i.e. $\phi_*(v)=a_1\bar v$.
Since $\Phi$ takes
 $Q$ to  $\bar Q$,
it takes
the differential  $\mbox{\rm d} H$
to a form  that is proportional
 to
$d\bar H$. Denote by $a_2:Q\to R$
the coefficient of proportionality, i.e. $\phi_* \mbox{\rm d} H=a_2\mbox{\rm d} \bar H$.
By $a$ we denote the product  $a_1a_2$.
We denote the Pfaffian of a skew-symmetric matrix $X$ by Pf($X$).

\begin{Th}\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .}\label{MainTh}
Let a diffeomorphism
$\Phi:{U}(Q)\to{U}(\bar Q)$, $\Phi(Q)=\bar Q$,
 be trajectorial on $Q$.
 Then for each value of the parameter $t$
 the polynomial
\begin{equation}\nonumber
{\cal P}^{n-1}(t)\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}
\frac{\mathop{\rm Pf}\left(\Phi^{*}\bar\omega-t\omega\right)}
{\mathop{\rm Pf}\left(\omega\right)(t-a)}
\end{equation}
is an integral of the system $v$ on $Q$.
 In particular, all the
coefficients of the polynomial ${\cal P}^{n-1}(t)$  are
 integrals.
\end{Th}

\noindent {\bf Proof.}
Denote by $\sigma$, $ \bar \sigma$
the restrictions of the forms $\omega, \bar \omega$  to $Q$, $\bar Q$
respectively.
Consider the form $\phi^*\bar \sigma$ on $Q$.

\begin{Lemma}[Topalov, \cite{TensInv}]\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .}\label{TensInv}
The flow  $v$ preserves the
 form  $\phi^{*}\bar\sigma$.
\end{Lemma}

\noindent {\bf Proof of Lemma \ref{TensInv}.}
The  Lie derivative $L_v$ of the form $\phi^*\bar \sigma$ along the vector field $v$ satisfies
$$
L_v\phi^{*}\bar\sigma=\mbox{\rm d}\left[{\imath}_v\phi^{*}\bar\sigma\right]+{\imath}_v
\mbox{\rm d}\left[\phi^{*}\bar\sigma\right].
$$
On the right side  both terms vanish.
More precisely, for an arbitrary  vector
$u\in {\cal T}_xQ$ at an arbitrary point $x\in Q$
we have
$$
\begin{array}{rcl}
{\imath}_{v}\phi^{*}\bar\sigma(u)&= \ \bar\sigma(\phi_{*}(v),\phi_{*}(u)) & =\\
                     &= \ \bar\sigma(a_1\bar v,\phi_{*}(u)) & =\\
                     &= \  -a_1\mbox{\rm d}\bar{\it H}(\phi_{*}(u)) & =0.
\end{array}
$$
\noindent Since the form $\bar\omega$ is closed, the form $\bar \sigma$ is also closed and
$\mbox{\rm d}\left[\phi^{*}\bar\sigma\right]=\phi^{*}(\mbox{\rm d}\bar\sigma)=0$, q.~e.~d.

It is obvious  that the kernels of the forms $\sigma$ and
$\phi^{*}\bar\sigma$ coincide (in the space ${\cal T}_xQ$ at each point $x\in Q$)
with the linear  span of
the  vector  $v$. Therefore these forms induce two
non-degenerate
tensor fields on the quotient bundle
${\cal T}Q/\langle v\rangle$. We shall
denote the corresponding forms on ${\cal T}Q/\langle v\rangle$ also by the  letters $\sigma, \bar\sigma$.

\begin{Lemma}\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .}\label{Din}
The characteristic polynomial of the operator
$(\sigma)^{-1}(\phi^{*}\bar\sigma)$ on ${\cal T}Q/\langle v\rangle$
is preserved by the flow $v$.
\end{Lemma}

\noindent{\bf Proof of Lemma~\ref{Din}.} Since
 the flow $v$ preserves the
Hamiltonian  $H$ and the form $\omega$,
the flow $v$ preserves
the form $\sigma$.
Since the  flow  $v$ preserves
both forms, it preserves
the  characteristic
polynomial of the  operator
$(\sigma)^{-1}({\phi^{*}\bar\sigma})$, q.~e.~d.

Since both forms are skew-symmetric, each root of the  characteristic
 polynomial
of  the operator
$(\sigma)^{-1}(\Phi^{*}\bar\sigma)$ has an even multiplicity. Then  the characteristic
 polynomial   is the  square of a polynomial
$\delta^{n-1}(t)$ of degree $n-1$. Hence
the polynomial $\delta^{n-1}(t)$ is also preserved by the flow $v$.
It is obvious  that
\begin{equation}\nonumber
\delta^{n-1}(t)=(-1)^{n-1}
\frac{\mathop{\rm Pf}\left(\phi^{*}\bar\sigma-t\sigma\right)}
{\mathop{\rm Pf}\left(\sigma\right)}.
\end{equation}

The last step of the  proof is to verify
that
$$(t-a)\delta^{n-1}=\frac{\mathop{\rm Pf}\left(\Phi^{*}\bar\omega-t\omega\right)}
{\mathop{\rm Pf}\left(\omega\right)}\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}\Delta^n.$$ Take an arbitrary point $x\in Q$.
Consider the  form $\Phi^*\bar\omega-a\omega$ on
${\cal T}_xM$.
The form $\imath_v(\Phi^*\bar\omega-a\omega)$ equals zero.
More precisely,
 for  any  vector  $u\in{\cal T}_xM$  we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\imath_{v}(\Phi^{*}\bar\omega-a\omega)&=&\bar\omega(\Phi_*(v),\Phi_*(u))-a\omega(v,u)=\\
                                 &=&\bar\omega(a_1v, \Phi_*(u))-a\omega(v,u)=\\
                                 &=&-a_1\mbox{\rm d}\bar H(\Phi_*(u))+adH=\\
                                 &=&-a\mbox{\rm d} H+adH=0.
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent  There exists a vector $A\in {\cal T}_xM$ such that
$\omega(A,v)\ne 0$ and the restriction
of the form $\imath_A(\Phi^*\bar\omega-a\omega)$ to the space   ${\cal T}_xM$
 equals zero.
More precisely, since the forms
 $\Phi^*\bar\omega$, $\omega$ are skew-symmetric, then the kernel
$K_{\Phi^*\bar\omega-a\omega}$ of the form
$\Phi^*\bar\omega-a\omega$ has an even dimension, and the
kernel
of the restriction of the form $\Phi^*\bar\omega-a\omega$ to
${\cal T}_xQ$ has an odd dimension.
Thus  the intersection
 $ K_{\Phi^*\bar\omega-a\omega}\cap ({\cal T}_xM\setminus {\cal T}_xQ)$
is not empty. For
 each vector $A$ from the intersection  we obviously have
$\omega(A,v)\ne 0$ and $\imath_A(\Phi^*\bar\omega-a\omega)=0$.
Without loss of generality
 we can   assume   $\omega(A,v)=1$.

 Consider   a basis $(v,e_1,...,e_{2n-2})$ for  the space
${\cal T}_xQ$.
The set  $(A,v,e_1,...,e_{2n-2})$ is a basis
 for  the space
${\cal T}_xM$. In this basis we have
$$
\begin{array}{rcl}
\det(\Phi^{*}\bar\omega-t\omega)&=&
\det\left|
\begin{array}{cc|c}
0&a-t&(*)\\
-(a-t)&0&0\cdots 0\\
\hline

-(*)&0&(\Phi^{*}\bar\omega-t\omega)_{\langle e_1,...,e_{2n-2}\rangle}\\
\end{array}
\right|\\ & & \\
&=&(a-t)^2\det((\Phi^{*}\bar\omega-t\omega)_{\langle e_1,...,e_{2n-2}\rangle})\\
&=&(a-t)^2\det(\phi^*\bar\sigma-t\sigma),
\end{array}
$$
\noindent where
$(\Phi^{*}\bar\omega-t\omega)_{\langle e_1,...,e_{2n-2}\rangle}$  is
 the
matrix of the form $\Phi^{*}\bar\omega-t\omega$ in the basis
$(e_1,...e_{2n-2})$. Finally,   $\delta^{n-1}= {\cal P}^{n-1
}$,  q.~e.~d .

\section{Levi-Civita theorem}\label{LCtheorem}

\noindent Let $g$ and $\bar g$ be smooth metrics  on a manifold $M^{n}$.
Recall that the  common eigenvalues
of the metrics $g,\ \bar g$ at a
point $x\in M$ are roots of the
characteristic polynomial $P_x(t)={\rm  det}\left(G-tE\right)_{|x}$, where
$G\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}\left(g^{i\alpha }\bar g_{\alpha j}\right)$.
Suppose that
 at every   point of
 an open domain ${\cal D}\subset M^n$
 the common eigenvalues of the metrics $g, \ \bar g$ assume
 $m$ distinct  values
$\rho^1,\rho^2,...,\rho^m$ \  $(1\le m\le n)$  with  multiplicities
 $k_1,k_2,...,k_m,$
respectively.

In the  paper \cite{Levi-Civita},
 Levi-Civita
 proved
that for every point
$P\in{\cal D}$ there is
 an open neighborhood ${\cal U}(P)\subset{\cal D}$ and
a coordinate system
$\bar x=(\bar x_1,...,\bar x_m)$
(in ${\cal U}(P)$), where $\bar x_i=(x_i^1,...,x_i^{k_i})$,
$(1\le i\le m)$, such that the quadratic  forms  of the
metrics $g$ and $\bar g$ have the following form:
\begin{eqnarray}
g(\dot{\bar x}, \dot{\bar x})&=&\ \Pi_1(\bar x)A_1(\bar x_1,\dot{\bar x}_1)+
\ \Pi_2(\bar x)A_2(\bar x_2,\dot{\bar x}_2)+\cdots+\nonumber\\
&+&\ \Pi_m(\bar x)A_m(\bar x_m,\dot{\bar x}_m),\label{Canon_g}\\
\bar g(\dot{\bar x}, \dot{\bar x})&=&\rho^1\Pi_1(\bar x)A_1(\bar x_1,\dot{\bar x}_1)+
\rho^2\Pi_2(\bar x)A_2(\bar x_2,\dot{\bar x}_2)+\cdots+\nonumber\\
&+&\rho^m\Pi_m(\bar x)A_m(\bar x_m,\dot{\bar x}_m)\label{Canon_bg},
\end{eqnarray}

\noindent where $A_i(\bar x_i, \dot{\bar x}_i)$ are
 positive-definite quadratic forms  in  the velocities $\dot{\bar x}_i$
with coefficients depending  on $\bar x_i$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\Pi_i&\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}&(\phi_i-\phi_1)\cdots(\phi_{i}-\phi_{i-1})(\phi_{i+1}-\phi_i)\cdots
(\phi_m-\phi_i)
\end{eqnarray}
and  $\phi_1,\phi_2,..., \phi_m$, $0<\phi_1<\phi_2<...<\phi_m$,  are smooth functions such that
$$
\phi_i=\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
\phi_i(\bar x_i),\mbox{\quad if}\quad k_i=1\\
{\rm constant},\quad\mbox{else}.
\end{array}
\right.
$$
It is easy to see that the functions $\rho^i$ as functions of $\phi_i$
and the function $\phi_i$ as  functions of $\rho^i$   are
given by
\begin{eqnarray}
  \rho^i  & = & \frac{1}{\phi_1...\phi_m}\frac{1}{\phi_i} \nonumber \\
  \phi_i  & = & \frac{1}{\rho^i}(\rho^1\rho^2...\rho^m)^{\frac{1}{m+1}}
   \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}

\begin{Def}\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .}\label{LCmetrics}
Let  metrics $g$ and $\bar g$ be
 given by formulae (\ref{Canon_g}) and
(\ref{Canon_bg}) in a coordinate chart ${\cal U}$. Then we say that the metrics
$g$ and $\bar g$ have {\em Levi-Civita local form
(of type m)}, and the coordinate    chart $\cal U$ is {\em a Levi-Civita}
coordinate chart (with respect to the  metrics).
\end{Def}
Levi-Civita proved that the metrics $g$ and $\bar g$  given by formulae
(\ref{Canon_g}) and (\ref{Canon_bg}) are geodesically equivalent.
If we replace
$\phi_i$ by $\phi_i+c$, \  $ i=1,...,m$, where
$c$ is a (positive for simplicity) constant,
 in (\ref{Canon_g}) and (\ref{Canon_bg}), we  obtain
the following  one-parameter family of metrics,
geodesically equivalent to $g$:
\begin{equation} \nonumber
g_c(\dot{\bar x}, \dot{\bar x})=\frac{1}{(\phi_1+c)\cdots(\phi_m+c)}
\left\{\frac{1}{\phi_1+c}\Pi_1A_1+\cdots+\frac{1}{\phi_m+c}\Pi_mA_m\right\}.
\end{equation}

The next theorem is essentially due to Painlev\'e, see \cite{Levi-Civita}.
\begin{Th}\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .}
If the metrics $g$ and $\bar g$ are geodesically equivalent,
 then the function
\begin{equation}\label{9}
I_0\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}\left(\frac{{\rm det} (g)}{\det(\bar g)}\right)^{\frac{2}{n+1}}\bar g(\dot{\bar  x},\dot{\bar x}),
\end{equation}
is an integral of the geodesic flow of the
metric $g$.
\end{Th}

\noindent Substituting $g_c$ instead of $\bar g$ in (\ref{9}),
 we
obtain the following
 one-parameter
family of  integrals
\begin{eqnarray}
I_c&\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}&\left(\frac{{\rm det}(g)}{{\rm det}(g_c)}\right)^{\frac{2}{n+1}}g_c(\dot{\bar x}, \dot{\bar x})=\nonumber\\
&=&C[(\phi_1+c)\cdots(\phi_m+c)]
\left\{\frac{1}{\phi_1+c}\Pi_1A_1+\cdots+\frac{1}{\phi_m+c}\Pi_mA_m\right\}\nonumber\\
&=&C\{L_1c^{m-1}+L_2c^{m-2}+\cdots+L_m\},\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent where
\begin{eqnarray*}
L_1&=&\Pi_1A_1+\cdots+\Pi_mA_m,\;\mbox{ which is  twice the
 energy integral},\\
L_2&=&\sigma_1(\phi_2,...,\phi_m)\Pi_1A_1+\cdots+\sigma_1(\phi_1,...,\phi_{m-1})\Pi_mA_m,\\
L_3&=&\sigma_2(\phi_2,...,\phi_m)\Pi_1A_1+\cdots+\sigma_2(\phi_1,...,\phi_{m-1})\Pi_mA_m,\\
\vdots&&\\
L_m&=&(\phi_2...\phi_m)\Pi_1A_1+\cdots+(\phi_1...\phi_{m-1})\Pi_mA_m,
\end{eqnarray*}
 $\sigma_k$ denotes the elementary symmetric polynomial of degree $k$,
and \\
$
C\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}\left[(\phi_1+c)^{k_1-1}\cdots(\phi_m+c)^{k_m-1}\right]^{\frac{2}{n+1}}
$
is a constant. Therefore
the functions $L_k$,
$k=1,...,m,$ are integrals of the geodesic flows of the metric $g$.
We
call these integrals  {\it Levi-Civita integrals}.

From the results of  \cite{Pain} it follows
 that Levi-Civita
integrals are in involution.  More precisely, let $D=(d_j^i) $
be an  $m\times m$ matrix.
Suppose that for any $i,j$ the element  $d_j^i$ depends only on
the variables $\bar x_j$. Denote by $\Delta$ the determinant of the
matrix $D$ and  by $\Delta_j^i$ the minor of the element $d_j^i$.
In the paper \cite{Pain} it was  shown that,
for arbitrary  functions
$A_i(\bar x_i, \dot{\bar x}_i)$,  quadratic in velocities $\dot{\bar x}_i$,
 the Lagrangian system with Lagrangian
$$
T_1=\Delta\left( \frac{A_1(\bar x_1, \dot{\bar x}_1)}{\Delta_1^1 }+\frac{A_2(\bar x_2, \dot{\bar x}_2)}{\Delta^1_2 } + ... +\frac{A_m(\bar x_m, \dot{\bar x}_m)}{\Delta^1_m } \right)
$$ admits $(m-1)$ integrals
$$
T_i=\Delta\left( A_1(\bar x_1, \dot{\bar x}_1)\frac{\Delta_1^i}{{(\Delta_1^1)^2} }+A_2(\bar x_2, \dot{\bar x}_2)\frac{\Delta^i_2}{(\Delta^1_2)^2 } + ... +A_m(\bar x_m, \dot{\bar x}_m)\frac{\Delta^i_m}{(\Delta^1_m)^2
} \right),$$  where $i=2,...,m$, and if we identify
 the tangent and cotangent bundles  the Lagrangian $T_1$
and consider the standard symplectic form on the cotangent bundle,
  then  the integrals are in involution.

If we take $d_j^i=(\phi_j)^{m-i}$, then $\Delta$ and $\Delta_j^i$ are given by
$$ \Delta^{i}_j= (-1)^{m-1}\sigma^{i-1}(\phi_1,\phi_2,...,\phi_{j-1}, \phi_{j+1},..., \phi_{m})\prod_{\alpha>\beta\ge 1,
 \alpha\ne j, \beta\ne j }(\phi_\alpha-\phi_\beta),$$
$$ \Delta= (-1)^{m}\prod_{\alpha>\beta\ge 1}(\phi_\alpha-\phi_\beta).$$
Therefore, $$\frac{\Delta\Delta_j^i}{(\Delta_j^1)^2}= \sigma^{i-1}(\phi_1,\phi_2,...,\phi_{j-1}, \phi_{j+1},..., \phi_{m}) \Pi_j,$$ so  $T_i=-L_i$ and
thus the integrals $L_i$ are in involution, q.~e.~d.

\section{Geodesic equivalence and  corresponding integrals}
\label{GeodEqInt} Let the
metrics $g$ and $\bar g$ on a
 manifold $M$ (of dimension n)  be  geodesically
equivalent.

\noindent Define
$$
U_g^rM\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}\left\{(x, \xi)\in{\cal T}M:\quad ||\xi||_g=r\right\},
$$
\noindent where
$x\in M$,   $\xi\in {\cal T}_xM$
and $||\xi||_g\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}\sqrt{g(\xi,\xi)}=\sqrt{g_{ij}\xi^i\xi^j}$ is  the norm of the vector $\xi$
in the metric $g$.

By the geodesic flow of the metric $g$ we mean the Lagrangian
system of differential equations
$\frac{d}{dt}\left(\frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot x}\right)-\frac{\partial L}{\partial x}=0$
on ${\cal T}M$ with Lagrangian
$L\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}\frac{1}{2}g_{ij}\dot x^i\dot x^j$.
Because of the
Legendre transformation,    the geodesic
 flow could be considered
as a Hamiltonian system on ${\cal T}M$ (as a
 symplectic
form we take $\omega_g\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}\mbox{\rm d}[g_{ij}\xi^jdx^i]$) with the Hamiltonian
$H_g\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}\frac{1}{2}g_{ij}\xi^i\xi^j$.

 Since the metrics $g, \bar g$ are geodesically  equivalent,
the mapping
$\Phi:{\cal T}M\to {\cal T}M$,
$\Phi(x,\xi)=\left(x, \xi\frac{||\xi||_g}{||\xi||_{\bar g}}\right)$,
takes the trajectories of the geodesic flow of the metric $g$ to the trajectories of the geodesic flow of the metric $\bar g$.
This mapping  is a diffeomorphism
(for $r\ne 0$),  takes $U_{g}^rM$ to $U_{\bar g}^rM$ and is
trajectorial on  $U_{g}^rM$. Obviously the surfaces $U_g^r$, $U_{\bar g}^r$ are
regular isoenergy surfaces $\{ H_g=\frac{r}{2}\}$,
$\{  H_{\bar g}=\frac{r}{2}\}$.

By Theorem~\ref{MainTh},  in order to obtain   a
family of
first integrals
we have to find  the polynomial
$\Delta^n(t)$ and divide
it by $(t-a)$. In our case
 $H_g=H_{\bar g}\circ\Phi$. Therefore  the  function $a$ from
Theorem \ref{MainTh}  equals to $\frac{||\xi||_{\bar g}}{||\xi||_g}$.

\noindent In coordinates we have
$$
\omega_g=\mbox{\rm d}[g_{ij}\xi^jdx^i]
$$
and
$$
\omega_{\bar g}=\mbox{\rm d}[{\bar g}_{ij}\xi^jdx^i].
$$
Therefore,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\Phi^{*}\omega_{\bar g}&=&\mbox{\rm d}\left[\frac{||\xi||_g}{||\xi||_{\bar g}}\bar g_{ij}\xi^jdx^i\right]=\\
                 &=&\frac{\partial}{\partial x^k}
          \left[\frac{||\xi||_g}{||\xi||_{\bar g}}\bar g_{ij}\xi^j\right]dx^k\wedge dx^i-\\
                 &-&\frac{\partial}{\partial \xi^k}
          \left[\frac{||\xi||_g}{||\xi||_{\bar g}}\bar g_{ij}\xi^j\right]dx^i\wedge d\xi^k.\\
 \end{eqnarray*}
It is easy to see that at a point  $\xi\in{\cal T}_xM$ the quantities
$$
A_{ik}\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}-\frac{\partial}{\partial \xi^k}
          \left[\frac{||\xi||_g}{||\xi||_{\bar g}}\bar g_{ij}\xi^j\right]
$$
form an element of ${\cal T}_xM\otimes{\cal T}_xM$.
Without loss of generality we can assume that in  the space ${\cal T}_xM$ the metrics  $g$ and $\bar g$ are given in principal axes. Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
A_{ij}&\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}&-\rho^{i}(x)\frac{\partial}{\partial \xi^j}
\left(
\xi^i\frac{\sqrt{{\xi^1}^2+...+{\xi^n}^2}}{\sqrt{\rho^1{\xi^1}^2+...+\rho^n{\xi^n}^2}}
\right)=\\
             &=&\rho^i\delta^i_j
\frac{||\xi||_g}{||\xi||_{\bar g}}
              -\rho^i\xi^i\left(
   \frac{\frac{||\xi||_{\bar g}}{||\xi||_g}-\rho^j\frac{||\xi||_g}{||\xi||_{\bar g}}}
        {||\xi||_{\bar g}^2}\xi^j\right)=\\
             &=&{\rm diag}(\mu_1,...,\mu_n)-A\otimes B.
\end{eqnarray*}
Here $\rho^i, i=1,...,n$ are common eigenvalues (here we allow $\rho^i$ to be equal to $\rho^j$  for some $i,j$) of the  metrics $g$ and $\bar g$,
  $\mu_i\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}-\rho^i\frac{||\xi||_g}{||\xi||_{\bar g}}$, $A_i\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=} \rho^i\xi^i$
and $$B_i\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}\frac{\frac{||\xi||_{\bar g}}{||\xi||_g}-\rho^i\frac{||\xi||_g}{||\xi||_{\bar g}}}
        {||\xi||_{\bar g}^2}\xi^i.$$

\noindent We have
$$
\begin{array}{rcl}
{\rm det}(\Phi^{*}\omega_{\bar g}-t\omega_g)&={\rm det}&\left|
\begin{array}{c|c}
(*)&(A_{ij}+t\delta_{ij})\\
\hline
-(A_{ij}+t\delta_{ij})&0\
\end{array}
\right|\\
            &=&\det(A_{ij}+t\delta_{ij})^2.
\end{array}
$$
\noindent Therefore,
\begin{equation}\nonumber
\Delta^n(t)=\det\left({\rm diag}(t+\mu_1,...,t+\mu_n)-a\otimes b\right).
\end{equation}

\begin{Lemma}\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .}\label{De} The following relation holds:
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta^n(t)&=&(t+\mu_1)\cdots(t+\mu_n)-(a_1b_1)(t+\mu_2)\cdots(t+\mu_n)-\ldots\nonumber\\
           &-&(t+\mu_1)\cdots(t+\mu_{n-1})(a_nb_n).
\end{eqnarray}
\end{Lemma}

\noindent The lemma follows from induction considerations.

To divide the polynomial by  $(t-a)$ we shall use the
Horner scheme. Suppose
that
$\Delta^n(t)=t^n+a_{n-1}t^{n-1}+\cdots+a_0$
and
$\delta^{n-1}(t)=t^{n-1}+b_{n-2}t^{n-2}+\cdots+b_0$.
Then we have
\begin{eqnarray}
&&b_{n-1}=a_n=1,\\
&&b_{n-2}=a_{n-1}+a\label{n-2},\\
&&\cdots\nonumber\\
&&b_{k}=a_{k+1}+ab_{k+1},\\
&&\cdots\nonumber\\
&&0=a_0+ab_0\label{-1}.
\end{eqnarray}
It follows from lemma \ref{De} that
\begin{eqnarray*}
a_0&=&(\mu_1...\mu_n)-(A_1B_1)(\mu_2...\mu_n)-\cdots
-(\mu_1...\mu_{n-1})A_nB_n=\\
   &=&(-1)^n\left(\frac{||\xi||_g}{||\xi||_{\bar g}}\right)^n(\rho^1\cdots\rho^n).
\end{eqnarray*}
 Combining   with (\ref{-1}) we get
$$
b_0=-\frac{a_0}{a}=
(-1)^{n+1}\left(\frac{||\xi||_g}{||\xi||_{\bar g}}\right)^{n+1}(\rho^1\cdots\rho^n).
$$
\noindent Since $\frac{1}{2}g_{ij}\xi^i\xi^j$ is  an integral of the geodesic flow of the metric $g$, the function
\begin{equation}\label{PainInt}
I_0\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}(\rho^1\cdots\rho^n)^{-\frac{2}{n+1}}\bar g(\xi,\xi)
\end{equation}
\noindent is also an integral of the geodesic flow of the metric $g$.
Using  Lemma \ref{De} we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
a_{n-1}&=&(\mu_1+...+\mu_n)-(A_1B_1+...+A_nB_n)=\\
       &=&\frac{||\xi||_g}{||\xi||_{\bar g}^3}\left\{({\rho^1}^2{\xi^1}^2+...+{\rho^n}^2{\xi^n}^2)-\right.\\
       &-&\left.(\rho^1+...+\rho^n)(\rho^1{\xi^1}^2+...+\rho^n{\xi^n}^2)\right\}-
\frac{||\xi||_{\bar g}}{||\xi||_g}.
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent Using (\ref{n-2}) we get
\begin{eqnarray*}
b_{n-2}&=&a_{n-2}+a=\\
       &=&\frac{||\xi||_g}{||\xi||_{\bar g}^3}\left\{({\rho^1}^2{\xi^1}^2+...+{\rho^n}^2{\xi^n}^2)-\right.\\
       &-&\left.(\rho^1+...+\rho^n)(\rho^1{\xi^1}^2+...+\rho^n{\xi^n}^2)\}\right.\\
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent Therefore, the function
\begin{eqnarray*}
I_1&\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}&(\rho^1\cdots\rho^n)^{-\frac{3}{n+1}}
\left\{({\rho^1}^2{\xi^1}^2+...+{\rho^n}^2{\xi^n}^2)-\right.\\
&-&\left.(\rho^1+...+\rho^n)(\rho^1{\xi^1}^2+...+\rho^n{\xi^n}^2)\right\}
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent is an integral. (It is easy to see  that
$
\frac{||\xi||^2_g}{||\xi||^2_{\bar g}}=(\rho^1\cdots\rho^n)^{-\frac{2}{n+1}}
\frac{||\xi||_g^2}{I_0}.)$

Arguing as above, we see that the functions
\begin{eqnarray*}
I_k&\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}&(\rho^1\cdots\rho^n)^{-\frac{k+2}{n+1}}
\left\{({\rho^1}^{k+1}{\xi^1}^2+...+{\rho^n}^{k+1}{\xi^n}^2)-\right.\\
&-&(\rho^1+...+\rho^n)({\rho^1}^k{\xi^1}^2+...+{\rho^n}^k{\xi^n}^2)+\cdots\\
&+&\left.(-1)^k\sigma_k(\rho^1,...,\rho^n)(\rho^1{\xi^1}^2+...+\rho^n{\xi^n}^2)\right\},
\end{eqnarray*}
are  integrals of the geodesic flow of the metric $g$,
where by $\sigma_k$ we denote the elementary
symmetric polynomial of degree $k$.
It is obvious that $(-1)^k\sigma_k=c_k$ from Theorem \ref{Main_Topalov},
and therefore
$I_k=\left(\frac{{\rm det}(g)}{{\rm det}(\bar g)}\right)^{\frac{k+2}{n+1}}\bar g(S_k\xi,\xi)$. Thus $I_k$, $k=0,..., n-1$,  are integrals of the geodesic flow of the metric
$g$, q.~e.~d.

\section{Liouville integrability\label{LiouvIntegr}}
\noindent
The last step of  the proof of Theorem \ref{Main_Topalov}
is to
verify  that the integrals  $I_0,...,I_{n-1}$  are in involution.
We proceed along  the following plan.
First we show that it is sufficient to
prove the involutivity in each Levi-Civita chart. Then we prove that in each Levi-Civita chart the integrals $I_0,..., I_{n-1}$
are linear combinations of Levi-Civita integrals, and therefore commute.

Let $g, \bar g$ be metrics on $M$.
A point $x\in M$ is called {\it stable},
if in
 a neighborhood
of $x$ the number
of different   eigenvalues of the metrics
$g, \bar g$ is   independent  of the  point.

Denote by ${\cal M}$ the set of stable
 points of $M$.  The set ${\cal M}$ is an open subset of $M$.
Obviously
\begin{equation}\label{LCDecomp}
{\cal M}=\bigsqcup_{1\le q\le n}{\cal M}^q,
\end{equation}
where ${\cal M}^q$ denotes the set of stable
 points
whose  number of distinct  common eigenvalues
equals  $q$.
  Points $x\in M\setminus  {\cal M} $
are called  {\it  points of bifurcation}.

\begin{Lemma}\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .}\label{PolBifur}
The set ${\cal M}$ is everywhere dense in $M$.
\end{Lemma}

{\bf Proof of Lemma \ref{PolBifur}.}
Denote by $N(x)$ the number of  distinct  common eigenvalues
of the metrics $g,\bar g$ at a  point $x$.
Recall that the  common eigenvalues
of the metrics $g,\ \bar g$ at a
point $x\in M$ are roots of the
characteristic polynomial $P_x(t)={\rm  det}\left(G-tE\right)_{|x}$, where
$G=\left(g^{i\alpha }\bar g_{\alpha j}\right)$.
In particular, all roots of $P_x(t)$ are real.

Let us prove that,
 for a sufficiently small neighborhood of an arbitrary point
$x\in M$,   for any $y$ from the neighborhood
the number $N(x)$ is no greater  than  $N(y)$.
Take a small $\epsilon>0$ and an arbitrary root $\rho$ of $P_x(t)$.
Let us prove that for a sufficiently small neighborhood $U(x)\subset M$,
for any $y\in U(x)$
there is a root $\rho_y$, $\rho-\epsilon <\rho_y<\rho+\epsilon$,
 of the polynomial $P_y(t)$.
If $\epsilon$ is  small,  then for a sufficiently small
neighborhood  $U(x)$ of the point $x$,
 for any $y\in U(x)$
the numbers $\rho+\epsilon$ and $\rho -\epsilon$ are not roots of $P_y(t)$.
Consider the circle $S_\epsilon\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=} \{z\in C:\quad  |z-\rho|=\epsilon\}$ on the complex plane $C$.  Clearly the number of roots (with multiplicities)
of the polynomial $P_y$ inside the circle is equal to
$$\frac{1}{2\pi i}\int_{S_\epsilon}\frac{P_y'(z)}{P_y(z)}dz.$$
Since for any $y\in U(x)$ there are no roots of $P_y$ on the circle $S_\epsilon$,
then the function
$$\frac{1}{2\pi i}\int_{S_\epsilon}\frac{P_y'(z)}{P_y(z)}dz
$$  continuously depends on  $y\in U(x)$, and therefore is a constant.
Clearly it is positive.
Thus for any $y\in U(x) $ there is  at least one  root of $P_y$ that lies
 between
$\rho+\epsilon$ and $\rho -\epsilon$. Then for any $y$ from a sufficiently
 small neighborhood of $x$ we have
$N(y)\ge N(x)$.

Now let us prove the lemma. Evidently the set ${\cal M}$
 is an open subset of $M$. Then it is sufficient to prove that for any
open  subset $U\subset  M$  there is a stable point $x\in U$. Suppose otherwise,
 i.e.
let all the points of  $U$ be  points of bifurcation.
Take a point $y\in M$ with maximal value of the function $N$ on   it.
 We have that in a  neighborhood $U(y)$  of the point $y$ the function
$N$ is constant and equals  $N(y)$. Then  the point $y$ is a stable point,
and  we get
a contradiction,  q.~e.~d.

Now let the metrics $g , \bar g$ be geodesically equivalent.
Since the set of points of
bifurcation is nowhere dense, it is sufficient to prove the involutivity
in each Levi-Civita  chart.
Let the metrics $g$ and $\bar g$ be given by
\begin{eqnarray}
g(\dot{\bar x}, \dot{\bar x})  &=&\Pi_1(\bar x)A_1(\bar x_1,\dot{\bar x}_1)+
\Pi_2(\bar x)A_2(\bar x_2,\dot{\bar x}_2)+\cdots+\nonumber\\
&+&\Pi_m(\bar x)A_m(\bar x_m,\dot{\bar x}_m),\\
\bar g(\dot{\bar x}, \dot{\bar x}) &=&\rho^1\Pi_1(\bar x)A_1(\bar x_1,\dot{\bar x}_1)+
\rho^2\Pi_2(\bar x)A_2(\bar x_2,\dot{\bar x}_2)+\cdots\nonumber\\
&+&\rho^m\Pi_m(\bar x)A_m(\bar x_m,\dot{\bar x}_m).
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent We show that the integrals $I_k$ are linear combinations of the
Levi-Civita integrals.
  We have
\begin{equation}
\bar G={\rm diag}(\underbrace{\rho^1,...,\rho^1}_{k_1},...,
\underbrace{\rho^m,...,\rho^m}_{k_m}),
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\rho^k=\frac{1}{(\phi_1...\phi_m)}\frac{1}{\phi_k}$.
It is easy to check that
\begin{equation}
S_k=(-1)^k{\rm diag}(\underbrace{\sigma_k^1,...,\sigma_k^1}_{k_1},...,
\underbrace{\sigma_k^m,...,\sigma_k^m}_{k_m}),
\end{equation}
\noindent where
\begin{equation}
\sigma_k^l\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}\sigma_k(\underbrace{\rho^1,...,\rho^1}_{k_1},...,
\underbrace{\rho^l,...,\rho^l}_{k_l-1},...,
\underbrace{\rho^m,...,\rho^m}_{k_m}).
\end{equation}
We have
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma_k^1&=&\frac{1}{(\phi_1...\phi_m)^k}
\sigma_k\Bigl(\underbrace{\frac{1}{\phi_1},...,\frac{1}{\phi_1}}_{k_1-1},...,
\underbrace{\frac{1}{\phi_m},...,\frac{1}{\phi_m}}_{k_m}\Bigr)=\\
&=&\frac{1}{(\phi_1...\phi_m)^k}\sum_{|\alpha|=k}
{k_1-1\choose\alpha_1}{k_2\choose\alpha_2}\cdots{k_m\choose\alpha_m}
\frac{1}{\phi_1^{\alpha_1}}\frac{1}{\phi_2^{\alpha_2}}\cdots\frac{1}{\phi_m^{\alpha_m}},\\
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent where $|\alpha|\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}\alpha_1+\cdots+\alpha_m$ and $\alpha_i\ge 0$.
Substituting   ${k_l-1\choose\alpha_l}+{k_l-1\choose\alpha_l-1}$ for
  ${k_l\choose\alpha_l}$
 (we assume that
${k\choose 0}=1$, ${k\choose -1}=0$, $k\ge 0$)
for $2\le l\le m$ we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sigma_k^1&=&\frac{1}{(\phi_1...\phi_m)^k}\left(B_k+
B_{k-1}\sigma_1\Bigl(\frac{1}{\phi_2},...,\frac{1}{\phi_m}\Bigr)+\cdots+\right.\\
&+&\left.B_{k-m+1}\sigma_{m-1}\Bigl(\frac{1}{\phi_2},...,\frac{1}{\phi_m}\Bigr)
\right),
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent where
\begin{equation}
B_k\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}\sum_{|\alpha|=k}{k_1-1\choose\alpha_1}\cdots{k_m-1\choose\alpha_m}
\frac{1}{\phi_1^{\alpha_1}}\cdots\frac{1}{\phi_m^{\alpha_m}}.\\
\end{equation}
\noindent Note that
\begin{equation}
\left(\frac{{\rm det} (g)}{{\rm det} (\bar g)}\right)^{\frac{k+2}{n+1}}=C_k(\phi_1...\phi_m)^{k+2},
\end{equation}
\noindent where
$C_k=[\phi_1^{k_1-1}...\phi_m^{k_m-1}]^{\frac{k+2}{n+1}}$.
\noindent Therefore,
\begin{eqnarray}
I_k&\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}&\left(\frac{{\rm det}(g)}{{\rm det}(\bar g)}\right)^{\frac{k+2}{n+1}}\bar g(S_k\dot{\bar x},\dot{\bar x})=\nonumber\\
&=&(-1)^kC_k(\phi_1...\phi_m)^{k+2}\left\{\rho^1\sigma_k^1\Pi_1A_1+\cdots+\rho^m\sigma_k^m
\Pi_m A_m\right\}=\nonumber\\
&=&(-1)^kC_k(\phi_1...\phi_m)^{k+2}
\left\{\frac{1}{\phi_1...\phi_m}\frac{1}{\phi_1}\left\{
\frac{1}{(\phi_1...\phi_m)^k}\left(B_k+\right.\right.\right.\nonumber\\
&+&\left.\left.\left.\cdots+B_{k-m+1}\sigma_{m-1}\Bigl(\frac{1}{\phi_2},...,\frac{1}{\phi_m}\Bigr)
\right)\right\}\Pi_1A_1+\cdots\right\}=\nonumber\\
&=&(-1)^kC_k\left\{B_kL_m+B_{k-1}L_{m-1}+\cdots+B_{k-m+1}L_1\right\},\label{Decomp}
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent where $L_i$ are Levi-Civita integrals.

Finally, since the integrals $I_0,..., I_{n-1}$ are linear combinations of
Levi-Civita integrals with constant coefficients,
 and since Levi-Civita
integrals commute, then the integrals $I_0,..., I_{n-1}$ also commute, q.~e.~d.

\begin{Rem}\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .}\label{rank}
Let $m$ be the number of distinct common
eigenvalues of  geodesically equivalent metrics $g, \bar g$ at
  a point $x$. Then in a neighborhood $U$ of  the point
 $x$  the number of functionally independent almost everywhere
  Levi-Civita integrals is  no less than  $m$. Therefore the dimension of the space
generated by the differentials
$(dI_0, dI_1,..., dI_{n-1})$ no less than  $m$ at
almost all points    of ${\cal T}U$.
\end{Rem}

\section{Topological obstructions}\label{Obstructions}
 Corollary \ref{T} follows immediately  from  the following theorem.
Recall that a  group  $G$ is {\it almost commutative}, if there exists
 a commutative subgroup $P\subset G$ of finite index.

\begin{Th}[Taimanov, \cite{Taiman}]\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .} \label{Taim}
If  a real-analytic closed manifold $M^n$ with a real-analytic
metric satisfies at least one of the conditions:
\begin{itemize}
\item[a)] $\pi_1(M^n)$ is not almost commutative
\item[b)] $dim H_1(M^n;{\bf Q})>dim M^n$,
\end{itemize}
then the geodesic flow on $M^n$ is not analytically integrable.
\end{Th}

\noindent{\bf Proof of Corollary \ref{T}.}
If metrics $g, \bar g$ are real-analytic  and geodesically equivalent,
then the integrals $I_0,...,I_{n-1}$ are also real-analytic.
If the
metrics are strictly non-proportional at least at   one point
of $M^n$, then
the integrals  are functionally independent almost everywhere in a neighborhood of that
 point. Since the integrals are real-analytic,  then
they are functionally independent almost everywhere  and
  we can apply Theorem~\ref{Taim}, q.~e.~d.

\vspace{.2cm}

\noindent{\bf Proof of Corollary \ref{dim2}.} Let metrics $g,\bar g$ on a surface $M^2$ be geodesically equivalent. Using Theorem~\ref{Main_Topalov} we have that the function
 $I_0=\left(\frac{{\rm det}(g)}{{\rm det}(\bar g)}\right)^{\frac{2}{n+1}}\bar g(\xi, \xi)$ is an integral of the geodesic flow of the metric $g$. In one direction Corollary~\ref{dim2}
is proved. In other direction the statement of Corollary~\ref{dim2}
can be verified by direct calculation,
 and it was done in \cite{Whi}.

\vspace{2mm}
 \noindent{\bf Proof of Corollaries \ref{Kol}, \ref{torus}, \ref{sphere}, \ref{nontrivial}.}  Let $g$ be
a metric on a surface $M^2$.
The following lemma is essentially due to \cite{Birkhoff}, see also \cite{Kol}.
For simplicity assume that the surface $M^2$  is oriented, otherwise
finitely cover the surface by an
 oriented one.
Consider the complex structure on $M^2$ corresponding to the metric $g$.
Let $z$ be a complex coordinate in a open domain $U\subset M^2$.
Consider the complex momentum $p$.  We shall denote by $\bar z$ and
$\bar p$ the
complex conjugation of $z$ and  $p$ respectively.
In complex variables the Hamiltonian $H:{\cal T}^*M^2\to R$
of the geodesic flow of the metric $g$ reads $\frac{p\bar p}{\lambda(z)}$,
where $\lambda $ is a real-valued function.
 Suppose that the
real-valued  function
$$
  F=A(z)p^2+B(z)p\bar p+\bar A(z)\bar p^2
$$
is an integral of the geodesic flow of the metric $g$.

\begin{Lemma}\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .}\label{Birkhoff}
The form $\frac{1}{A(z)}dzdz$ is meromorphic.
\end{Lemma}

\begin{Rem}\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .}
If  the Hamiltonian and  the integral are proportional at  each point of $M^2$, i.e. if $F\equiv \alpha(z)H$, where $\alpha:M^2\to R$,
  then by definition
put
$\frac{1}{A(z)}dzdz$ equal  zero.
\end{Rem}

\noindent {\bf Proof of Lemma~\ref{Birkhoff}}.
Since $F$ is an integral of the Hamiltonian system with the Hamiltonian
$H$, the  Poisson bracket $\{H, F\}$ equals zero. We have
\begin{equation}\label{zero}
\{H, F\}= H_pF_z-H_zF_p+ H_{\bar p}F_{\bar z}-H_{\bar z}F_{\bar p}=0
\end{equation}
\noindent On the right side  of (\ref{zero}) each term is
a polynomial of third degree in  momenta. Then the bracket is also a
polynomial of third degree in momenta. In order for  a
polynomial  to equal zero,
all coefficients must be zero,
in particular the coefficient of  $p^3$.
Thus $\frac{A_{\bar z}}{\lambda}$ equals zero,
and $A$ is holomorphic. Then $\frac{1}{A(z)}$ is meromorphic, q.~e.~d.

Let $g, \bar g$ be geodesically equivalent
 metrics
on a closed surface $M^2$ of Euler characteristic $\chi(M^2)$. Then the function
$I_0=\left(\frac{{\rm det}(g)}{{\rm det}(\bar g)}\right)^{\frac{2}{n+1}}\bar g(\xi, \xi)$
is an integral of the geodesic flow of the metric $g$,
and is quadratic in momenta (if we identify with the help of the metric $g$
 the tangent and  cotangent bundles  of  $M^2$).
 Consider the form
$\frac{1}{A(z)}dzdz$ corresponding to the integral $I_0$.
Suppose that the form is not identical zero.
 For a meromorphic  2-form on a closed Riemann surface, the  number
of poles $P$   minus the number of zeros $Z$
is equal to  twice the   Euler characteristic.
It is easy to
see that  the form $\frac{1}{A(z)}dzdz$
has
no zeros  (otherwise the metric $\bar g$ has singularities).
Then  $P=2\chi(M^2)$,
and the Euler characteristic $\chi(M^2)$ can not
be negative, q.~e.~d.
Now assume the metrics are proportional at each point of an open subset $U\subset M^2$. Since the form is meromorphic, it must be zero.  Thus
$\bar g=\alpha(z)g$, where
$\alpha$ is a function on $M^2$. Let us   show
 that  the function $\alpha$ is constant. Actually,
 $I_0=2\left(\frac{1}{\alpha}\right)^{\frac{1}{3}}H$
(here we identify ${\cal T}^*M$ and ${\cal T}M$ with the help of the metric $g$). We have
$$\{H,I_0\}=\{H, 2\left(\frac{1}{\alpha}\right)^{\frac{1}{3}}H\}=
\{H, H\}2\left(\frac{1}{\alpha}\right)^{\frac{1}{3}}+ 2H\{\left(\frac{1}{\alpha}\right)^{\frac{1}{3}},H\}.
$$
Since $\{ H, H\}$ equals zero,
we have that
$\{\left(\frac{1}{\alpha}\right)^{\frac{1}{3}},H\}$
 equals zero and the function $\alpha$ is constant.
 This proves Corollaries~\ref{Kol},\ref{nontrivial}.

\begin{Rem}\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .}
For non-orientable surfaces the sign of the Euler characteristic
coincides with the sign of the Euler characteristic
  of the oriented covering.
Therefore Corollary~\ref{Kol} is true also for
   non-orientable surfaces.
\end{Rem}

It is easy to
see that  the form $\frac{1}{A(z)}dzdz$
 has poles precisely  at
 points,  where the metrics are proportional.
If the surface $M^2$ is the torus,
then $\chi(M^2)=0$
and  either the metrics $g, \bar g$ are  proportional
at  every point, or there are no points of proportionality of the
 metrics. This proves Corollary~\ref{torus}.

The following lemma is essentially due to Kolokol'tzov
\cite{Kol}. It completes the proof of Corollary~\ref{sphere}.

\begin{Lemma}\hspace{-2mm}{\bf .}
On the sphere $S^2$ there are  the following
three possibilities for the form $\frac{1}{A(z)}dzdz$.
\begin{itemize}
\item[1.] The form $\frac{1}{A(z)}dzdz $ is identical zero.
\item[2.] The form  $\frac{1}{A(z)}dzdz $ has exactly two zeros (both zeros are of multiplicity two).
\item[3.] The form  $\frac{1}{A(z)}dzdz $ has exactly four zeros.
 \end{itemize}
In the second case the  metric $g$ admits a non-trivial
Killing vector field.
\end{Lemma}

\noindent {\bf Proof of Corollary~\ref{killing}.}
Because of  Noether's  theorem,
if a metric admits a (non-trivial) Killing
vector field,
then the geodesic flow of the metric admits a (non-trivial)
 integral, linear in velocities,  and vice versa.

Suppose the
 function
$$F_1=\sum^n_{i=1}a_i(x)\xi^i$$
is constant on
the trajectories of the geodesic flow of the metric
$\bar g$. Then  the function
$$\Phi^*F_1=
\frac{||\xi||_{g}}{||\xi||_{\bar g}}\sum^n_{i=1}a_i(x)\xi^i$$ is
constant on the trajectories of the geodesic flow of the metric $g$. Since the function
$
I_0=\left(\frac{{\rm det}(g)}{{\rm det}(\bar g)}\right)^{\frac{2}{n+1}}\bar g(\xi, \xi)
$
is an integral  of the geodesic flow of the metric $g$, and since the function
$||\xi||_{g}=\sqrt{g(\xi,\xi)}$ is also an integral
of the geodesic flow of the metric $g$, then the
function
$$\frac{\sqrt{g(\xi,\xi)}}{\sqrt{I_0}}\Phi^*F_1=
\left(\frac{{\rm det}(g)}{{\rm det}(\bar g)}\right)^{\frac{1}{n+1}}\sum^n_{i=1}a_i(x)\xi^i,
$$ linear in velocities,
is also an integral
of the geodesic flow of the metric $g$, q.~e.~d.

\section{Geodesically equivalent metrics on the ellipsoid.   }\label{Ellipsoid}
{\bf Proof of Theorem~\ref{ellipsoid}. }
We show that in the elliptic  coordinate system the restriction of
the metrics
$$
ds^2\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}\sum_{i=1}^n(dx^i)^2 \ {\rm  and} \  \ dr^2\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}\frac{1}{\sum_{i=1}^{n} \left(\frac{x^i}{a_i}\right)^2}\left(\sum_{i=1}^n\frac{(dx^i)^2}{a_i}\right)
$$
to
the ellipsoid
  $\sum_{i=1}^n\frac{(x^i)^2}{a_i}=1$ have Levi-Civita local form, and therefore are geodesically equivalent.
More precisely,
consider elliptic coordinates $\nu^1, ..., \nu^n$.
Without loss of generality we can assume that $a^1<a^2<...<a^n$. Then
the relation between
the elliptic
 coordinates  $\bar\nu$ and  the Cartesian coordinates $\bar x$ is
given by
\begin{equation}\nonumber
x^i=\sqrt{\frac{\prod_{j=1}^n(a^i-\nu^j)}{\prod_{j=1, j\ne i}^n(a^i-a^j)}} .
\end{equation}
Recall that the elliptic coordinates are non-degenerate almost everywhere,
and the set $$\{\nu^1=0, a_1<\nu^2<a_2, a_2<\nu^3<a_3,..., a_{n-1}<\nu^{n}<a^n\}$$
is the part of the ellipsoid,  lying in the
 quadrant $\{x^1>0, x^2>0, ... , x^n>0\}$.
Since for any $i$ the symmetry $x^i\to -x^i$
takes the ellipsoid to the ellipsoid and preserves  the metrics $ds^2$ and  $dr^2$, it is sufficent to check the statement of the theorem only in  the   quadrant $\{x^1>0, x^2>0, ... , x^n>0\}$.

In the elliptic coordinates
 the restriction of the metric $ds^2$ to the ellipsoid
has the following form
\begin{equation}\nonumber
\sum_{i=1}^n\Pi_iA_i(d\nu^i)^2,
\end{equation}
where $\Pi_i\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}\prod_{j=1, j\ne i}^n(\nu^i-\nu^j)$,
 and $A_i\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=}\frac{\nu^i}{\prod_{j=1}^n(a^j-\nu^i) }$.
The restriction of the metric $dr^2$ to the ellipsoid
is
\begin{equation}\nonumber
(a^1a^2...a^n)\sum_{i=1}^n\rho^i\Pi_iA_i(d\nu^i)^2,
\end{equation}
where $\rho^i\stackrel{{\rm def}}{=} \frac{1}{\nu^i(\nu^1\nu^2...\nu^n)}.$
We see that the metrics $ds^2$,
$dr^2$ have Levi-Civita local form, and therefore are geodesically
equivalent, q.~e.~d.

Differential Geometry (math.DG); Symplectic Geometry (math.SG); Exactly Solvable and Integrable Systems (nlin.SI)

Geodesic equivalence and integrability