GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf ·...

47
GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION OF THE FLOER HOMOLOGY GROUPS GUANGBO XU Abstract. We construct the vortex Floer homology group VHF (M,μ; H) for an aspherical Hamil- tonian G-manifold (M,ω) with moment map μ and a class of G-invariant Hamiltonian loop Ht , following the proposal of [3]. This is a substitute for the ordinary Hamiltonian Floer homology of the symplectic quotient of M. We achieve the transversality of the moduli space by the classical perturbation argument instead of the virtual technique, so the homology can be defined over Z or Z2. Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Basic setup and outline of the construction 7 3. Asymptotic behavior of the connecting orbits 14 4. Fredholm theory 21 5. Compactness of the moduli space 28 6. Floer homology 31 Appendix A. Transversality by perturbing the almost complex structure 37 References 46 1. Introduction 1.1. Background. Floer homology, introduced by Andreas Floer (see [8], [9]), has been a great triumph of J -holomorphic curve technique invented by Gromov [17] in many areas of mathemat- ics. Hamiltonian Floer homology gives new invariants of symplectic manifolds and its Lagrangian submanifolds and has been the most important approach towards the solution to the celebrated Arnold conjecture initiated in the theory of Hamiltonian dynamics; the Lagrangian intersection Floer homology is the basic language in defining the Fukaya category of a symplectic manifold and stating Kontsevich’s homological mirror symmetry conjecture; several Floer-type homology theory, including the instanton Floer homology ([7], [4]), Heegaard-Floer theory ([29]), Seiberg- Witten Floer homology ([22]), ECH theory ([20], [21]), has become tools of understanding lower dimensional topology. All these different types of Floer theory, are all certain infinite dimensional Morse theory, whose constructions essentially apply Witten’s point of view ([34]). Basically, if f : X R is certain Date : December 24, 2013. 1

Transcript of GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf ·...

Page 1: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I:

DEFINITION OF THE FLOER HOMOLOGY GROUPS

GUANGBO XU

Abstract. We construct the vortex Floer homology group V HF (M,µ;H) for an aspherical Hamil-

tonian G-manifold (M,ω) with moment map µ and a class of G-invariant Hamiltonian loop Ht,

following the proposal of [3]. This is a substitute for the ordinary Hamiltonian Floer homology of

the symplectic quotient of M . We achieve the transversality of the moduli space by the classical

perturbation argument instead of the virtual technique, so the homology can be defined over Z or

Z2.

Contents

1. Introduction 1

2. Basic setup and outline of the construction 7

3. Asymptotic behavior of the connecting orbits 14

4. Fredholm theory 21

5. Compactness of the moduli space 28

6. Floer homology 31

Appendix A. Transversality by perturbing the almost complex structure 37

References 46

1. Introduction

1.1. Background. Floer homology, introduced by Andreas Floer (see [8], [9]), has been a great

triumph of J-holomorphic curve technique invented by Gromov [17] in many areas of mathemat-

ics. Hamiltonian Floer homology gives new invariants of symplectic manifolds and its Lagrangian

submanifolds and has been the most important approach towards the solution to the celebrated

Arnold conjecture initiated in the theory of Hamiltonian dynamics; the Lagrangian intersection

Floer homology is the basic language in defining the Fukaya category of a symplectic manifold

and stating Kontsevich’s homological mirror symmetry conjecture; several Floer-type homology

theory, including the instanton Floer homology ([7], [4]), Heegaard-Floer theory ([29]), Seiberg-

Witten Floer homology ([22]), ECH theory ([20], [21]), has become tools of understanding lower

dimensional topology.

All these different types of Floer theory, are all certain infinite dimensional Morse theory, whose

constructions essentially apply Witten’s point of view ([34]). Basically, if f : X → R is certain

Date: December 24, 2013.

1

Page 2: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

2 GUANGBO XU

smooth functional on manifold X (which could be infinite dimensional), then with an appropriate

choice of metric on X, we can study the equation of negative gradient flow of f , of the form

x′(t) +∇f(x(t)) = 0, t ∈ (−∞,+∞). (1.1)

If some natural energy functional defined for maps from R to X is finite for a solution to the above

equation, then x(t) will converges to a critical point of f . Assuming that all critical points of f is

nondegenerate, then usually we can define a Morse-type index (or relative indices) λf : Critf →Z. Then for a given pair of critical points a−, a+ ∈ Critf , the moduli space of solutions to the

negative gradient flow equation which are asymptotic to a± as t → ±∞, denoted by M(a−, a+),

has dimension equal to λf (a−)−λf (a+), if f and the metric are perturbed generically. If λf (a−)−λf (a+) = 1, because of the translation invariance of (1.1), we expect to have only finitely many

geometrically different solutions connecting a− and a+. In many cases (which we call the oriented

case), we can also associate a sign to each such solutions.

On the other hand, we define a chain complex over Z2 (and over Z in the oriented case), spanned

by critical points of f and graded by the index λf ; the boundary operator ∂ is defined by the

(signed) counting of geometrically different trajectories of solutions to (1.1) connecting two critical

points with adjacent indices. We expect a nontrivial fact that ∂ ∂ = 0. So a homology group is

derived.

1.2. Hamiltonian Floer homology and the transversality issue. In Hamiltonian Floer the-

ory, we have a compact symplectic manifold (X,ω) and a time-dependent Hamiltonian Ht ∈C∞(X), t ∈ [0, 1]. We can define an action functional AH on a covering space LX of the con-

tractible loop space of X. The space LX consists of pairs (x,w) where x : S1 → X is a contractible

loop and w : D→ X with w|∂D = x; the action functional is defined as

AH(x,w) = −∫Dw∗ω −

∫S1

Ht(x(t))dt. (1.2)

The Hamiltonian Floer homology is formally the Morse homology of the pair(LX,AH

).

The critical points are pairs (x,w) where x : S1 → X satisfying x′(t) = XHt(x(t)), where XHt is

the Hamiltonian vector field associated to Ht; these loops are 1-periodic orbits of the Hamiltonian

isotopy generated by Ht. Then, choosing a smooth S1-family of ω-compatible almost complex

structures Jt on X which induces an L2-metric on the loop space of X, (1.1) is written as the Floer

equation for a map u from the infinite cylinder Θ = R× S1 to X, as

∂u

∂s+ Jt

(∂u

∂t−XHt(u)

)= 0. (1.3)

Here (s, t) is the standard coordinates on Θ. This is a perturbed Cauchy-Riemann equation, so

Gromov’s theory of pseudoholomorphic curves is adopted in Floer’s theory.

There is always an issue of perturbing the equation in order to make the moduli spaces transverse,

so that the ambiguity of counting of solutions doesn’t affect the resulting homology. Floer originally

defined the Floer homology in the monotone case, which was soon extended by Hofer-Salamon

([19]) and Ono ([28]) to the semi-positive case. Finally by applying the “virtual technique”, Floer

homology is defined for general compact symplectic manifold by Fukaya-Ono ([15]) and Liu-Tian

([23]).

Page 3: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3

1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged σ-model. In this paper, we consider a new type of

Floer homology theory proposed in [3] and motivated from Dostoglou-Salamon’s study of Atiyah-

Floer conjecture (see [6]). The main analytical object is the symplectic vortex equation, which was

also independently studied initially in [3] and by Ignasi Mundet in [25].

The symplectic vortex equation is a natural elliptic system appearing in the physics theory

“2-dimensional gauged σ-model”. Its basic setup contains the following ingredients:

(1) The target space is a triple (M,ω, µ), where (M,ω) is a symplectic manifold with a Hamil-

tonian G-action, and µ is a moment map of the action. We also choose a G-invariant,

ω-compatible almost complex structure J on M .

(2) The domain is a triple (P,Σ,Ω), where Σ is a Riemann surface, P → Σ is a smooth G-

bundle, and Ω is an area form on Σ.

(3) The “fields” are pairs (A, u), where A is a smooth G-connection on P , and u : Σ→ P ×GMis a smooth section of the associated bundle.

Then we can write the system of equation on (A, u):

∂Au = 0;

∗FA + µ(u) = 0.(1.4)

Here ∂Au is the (0, 1)-part of the covariant derivative of u with respect to A; FA is the curvature

2-form of A; ∗ is the Hodge star operator associated to the conformal metric on Σ with area form

Ω; µ(u) is the composition of µ with u, which, after choosing a biinvariant metric on g, is identified

with a section of adP → Σ. This equation contains a symmetry under gauge transformations on

P . Moreover, its solutions are minimizers of the Yang-Mills-Higgs functional:

YMH(A, u) :=1

2

(‖dAu‖2L2 + ‖FA‖2L2 + ‖µ(u)‖2L2

)(1.5)

which generalizes the Yang-Mills functional in gauge theory and the Dirichlet energy in harmonic

map theory.

Now, similar to Hamiltonian Floer theory, consider the following action functional on a covering

space of the space of contractible loops in M × g. Let H : M × S1 → R be an S1-family of G-

invariant Hamiltonians; for any contractible loop x := (x, f) : S1 → M × g with a homotopy class

of extensions of x : S1 →M , represented by w : D→M , the action functional (given first in [3]) is

AH(x, f, w) := −∫Dw∗ω +

∫S1

(µ(x(t)) · f(t)−Ht(x(t))) dt. (1.6)

The critical loops of AH corresponds to periodic orbits of the induced Hamiltonian on the symplectic

quotient M := µ−1(0)/G. The equation of negative gradient flows of AH , is just the symplectic

vortex equation on the trivial bundle G × Θ, with the standard area form Ω = ds ∧ dt, and the

connection A is in temporal gauge (i.e., A has no ds component). If choosing an S1-family of

G-invariant, ω-compatible almost complex structures Jt, then the equation is written as a system

Page 4: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

4 GUANGBO XU

of (u,Ψ) : Θ→M × g: ∂u

∂s+ Jt

(∂u

∂t+XΨ(u)− YHt

)= 0;

∂Ψ

∂s+ µ(u) = 0.

(1.7)

Solutions with finite energy are asymptotic to loops in CritAH . Then the moduli space of such

trajectories, especially those zero-dimensional ones, gives the definition of the boundary operator in

the Floer chain complex, and hence the Floer homology group. We call these homology theory the

vortex Floer homology. We have to use certain Novikov ring Λ, which will be defined in Section

2, as the coefficient ring, and the vortex Floer homology will be denoted by V HF (M,µ;H,J ; Λ).

The main part of this paper is devoted to the analysis about (1.7) and its moduli space, in order

to define V HF (M,µ;H,J ; Λ).

1.4. Lagrange multipliers. The action functional (1.6) seems to be already complicated, not to

mention its gradient flow equation (1.7). However, the action functional (1.6) is just a Lagrange

multiplier of the action functional (1.2). Indeed there is a much simpler situation in the case of

the Morse theory of a finite-dimensional Lagrange multiplier function, which is worth mentioning

in this introduction as a model.

Suppose X is a Riemannian manifold and µ : X → R is a smooth function, with 0 a regular

value. Then consider a function f : X → R whose restriction to X = µ−1(0) is Morse. Then

critical points of f |X are the same as critical points of the Lagrange multiplier F : X × R → Rdefined by F (x, η) = f(x) + ηµ(x), and the Morse index as a critical point of f |X is one less than

the index as a critical point of F . Then instead of considering the Morse-Smale-Witten complex

of f |X , we can consider that of F . In generic situation, these two chain complexes have the same

homology (with a grading shifting), and a concrete correspondence can be constructed through the

“adiabatic limit” (for details, see [33]).

Indeed, the vortex Floer homology proposed by Cieliebak-Gaio-Salamon and studied in this

paper is an infinite-dimensional and equivariant generalization of this Lagrange multiplier technique.

Therefore, the vortex Floer homology is expected to coincide with the ordinary Hamiltonian Floer

homology of the symplectic quotient (the proof of this correspondence will be treated in separate

work).

1.5. Advantage in achieving transversality. It seems that by considering the complicatd equa-

tion (1.7) and the moduli spaces we can only recover what we have known of the Hamiltonian Floer

theory of the symplectic quotient. But the trade-off is that the most crucial and sophisticated

step–transversality of the moduli space–can be achieved more easily. The advantage of lifting to

gauged σ-model is because, in many cases, M has simpler topology than M . So the issue caused by

spheres with negative Chern numbers is ruled out by topological reason. This phenomenon allows

us to achieve transversality of the moduli space by using the traditional “concrete perturbation” to

the equation. Moreover, when using virtual technique, the Floer homology group of the symplectic

quotient can only be defined over Q but here it can be defined over Z or Z2.

Page 5: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 5

1.6. Computation of the Floer homology group and adiabatic limits. The ordinary Hamil-

tonian Floer homology HF (M,H) of a compact symplectic manifold can be shown to be canon-

ically independent of the Hamiltonian H and to be isomorphic to the singular homology of M .

This correspondence plays significant role in proving the Arnold conjecture. To prove this isomor-

phism, basically two methods have been used. One is to use a time-independent Morse function

as the Hamiltonian, and try to prove that when the function is very small in C2-norm, there is no

“quantum contribution” when defining the boundary operator in the Floer chain complex; this was

also Floer’s original argument. Another is via the Piunikhin-Salamon-Schwarz (PSS) construction,

introduced in [30].

For the case of the vortex Floer homology, it has been well-expected to be isomorphic to the

singular homology of the symplectic quotient M . To prove this isomorphism we can try the similar

methods as for the ordinary Hamiltonian Floer homology (which we will discuss in Section 6.3), as

well as the adiabatic limit method, which we discuss here.

Indeed, for any λ > 0, we consider a variation of (1.7)∂u

∂s+ Jt

(∂u

∂t+XΨ(u)− YHt

)= 0;

∂Ψ

∂s+ λ2µ(u) = 0.

(1.8)

This can be viewed as the symplectic vortex equation over the cylinder R × S1 with area form

replaced by λ2dsdt. The moduli space of solutions to the above equation also defines a Floer

homology group, and by continuation method we can show that this homology is (canonically)

independent of λ.

Then we would like to let λ approach to ∞. By a simple energy estimate, solutions of (1.8) will

“sink” into the symplectic quotient M and become Floer trajectors of the induced pair (H, J); at

isolated points there will be energy blow up, and certain “affine vortices” will appear, which are

finite energy solutions to the symplectic vortex equation over the complex plane C. In the Gromov-

Witten setting, the work of Gaio-Salamon [16] shows that (in special cases), the Hamiltonian-

Gromov-Witten invariants with low degree insertions coincide with the Gromov-Witten invariants

of the symplectic quotient, via the Kirwan map κ : H∗G(M) → H∗(M). The high degree part

shall be corrected, by the contribution from the affine vortices. This leads to the definition of the

“quantum Kirwan map” (see [38], [35]).

In the case of vortex Floer homology, as long as we can carefully analyze the contribution of

affine vortices (maybe with similar restriction on M as in [16]), we could prove that V HF (M,µ;H)

is isomorphic to HF (M ;H), with appropriate changes of coefficients.

It is an interesting topic to consider the reversed limit λ→ 0, and it actually motivated the work

of the author with S. Schecter [33], where they considered the nonequivariant, finite dimensional

Morse homology. In [33] it was shown that, the Morse-Smale trajectories, as λ→ 0, will converge to

certain “fast-slow” trajectories, and the counting of such trajectories defines a new chain complex,

which also computes the same homology.

1.7. Gauged Floer theory for Lagrangian intersections. In Frauenfelder’s thesis and [12], he

used the symplectic vortex equation on the strip R× [0, 1] to define the “moment Floer homology”

Page 6: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

6 GUANGBO XU

for certain types of pairs of Lagrangians (L0, L1) in M . The Lagrangians are not G-invariant

in general, but their intersections with µ−1(0) reduce to a pair of Lagrangians (L0, L1) in the

symplectic quotient M . Then by the calculation in the Morse-Bott case, he managed to prove the

Arnold-Givental conjecture with certain topological assumption on M .

Woodward also defined a version of gauged Floer theory in [36], where he considered a pair of

Lagrangians L0, L1 in the symplectic quotient M . They lift to a pair of G-invariant Lagrangians

L0, L1 ⊂ µ−1(0) ⊂M . Then his equation for connecting orbits is the naive limit of the symplectic

vortex equation on the strip R × [0, 1], by setting the area form to be zero. Since the strip is

contractible, the equation is just the J-holomorphic equation on the strip, and two solutions are

regarded equivalent if they differ by a constant gauge transformation. Then he applied this Floer

theory to the fibres of the toric moment map for any toric orbifold and showed the relation between

the nondisplacibility of toric fibres and the Hori-Vafa potential, which reproduces and extends the

results of Fukaya et. al. [13] [14].

Both of the above take advantage of the simpler topology of M than the symplectic quotient, as

we mentioned above, to avoid certain virtual technique. Further work are expected to relate the

Hamiltonian gauged Floer theory we studied here and the Lagrangian versions, for example, by

constructing the so-called “open-close map”.

1.8. Organization and conventions of this paper. In Section 2 we give the basic setup, includ-

ing the action functional, the definition of the Floer chain complex and the equation of connecting

orbits. In Section 3 we proved that each finite energy solution is asymptotic to critical loops of the

action functional. In Section 4 we study the Fredholm theory of the equation of connecting orbits

(modulo gauge transformations); we show that the linearized operator is a Fredholm operator whose

index is equal to the difference of Conley-Zehnder indices of the two ends of the connecting orbit. In

Section 5 we prove that our moduli space is compact up to breaking, if assuming the nonexistence

of nontrivial holomorphic spheres. In Section 6 we summarize the previous constructions and give

the definition of the vortex Floer homology (where we postpone the proof of transversality). We

also prove the invariance of the homology group by using continuation method. In the final Section

we give some discussions on our further work along this line.

In the appendices we provide detailed proof of several technical theorems. Most importantly,

we showed that by using concrete perturbation of the almost complex structure, we can achieve

transversality of the moduli space, which allows us to avoid the more sophisticated virtual technique.

We use Θ to denote the infinite cylinder R×S1, with the axial coordinate s and angular coordinate

t. We denote Θ+ = [0,+∞)× S1 and Θ− = (−∞, 0]× S1.

G is a connected compact Lie group, with Lie algebra g. Any G-bundle over Θ is trivial, and we

just consider the trivial bundle P = G×Θ. Any connection A can be written as a g-valued 1-form

on Θ. We always use Φ to denote its ds component and Ψ to denote its dt component.

There is a small ε > 0 such that for the ε-ball g∗ε ⊂ g∗ centered at the origin of g∗, Uε := µ−1(g∗ε )

can be identified with µ−1(0)× g∗ε . We denote by πµ : Uε → µ−1(0) the projection on the the first

component, and by πµ : Uε →M the composition with the projection µ−1(0)→M .

Page 7: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 7

1.9. Acknowledgments. The author would like to thank his PhD advisor Gang Tian for introduc-

ing him to this field and the support and encouragement. He would like to thank Urs Frauenfelder,

Kenji Fukaya, Chris Woodward, and Weiwei Wu for many helpful discussions and encouragement.

2. Basic setup and outline of the construction

Let (M,ω) be a symplectic manifold. We assume that it is aspherical, i.e., for any smooth map

f : S2 → M ,

∫S2

f∗ω = 0. This implies that for any ω-compatible almost complex structure J on

M , there is no nonconstant J-holomorphic spheres.

Let G be a connected compact Lie group which acts on M smoothly. The infinitesimal action g 3ξ 7→ Xξ ∈ Γ(TM) is an anti-homomorphism of Lie algebra. We assume the action is Hamiltonian,

which means that there exists a smooth function µ : M → g∗ satisfying

µ(gx) = µ(x) Ad−1g , ∀ξ ∈ g, d (µ · ξ) = ιXξω. (2.1)

Suppose we have a G-invariant, time-dependent Hamiltonian H ∈ C∞c(M × S1

)with compact

support. For each t ∈ S1, the associated Hamiltonian vector field YHt ∈ Γ(TM) is determined by

ω(YHt , ·) = dHt ∈ Ω1(M). (2.2)

The flow of YHt is a one-parameter family of diffeomorphisms

φHt : M →M,dφHt (x)

dt= YHt

(φHt (x)

)(2.3)

which we call a Hamiltonian path.

To achieve transversality, we put the following restriction on Ht. It will be used only in the

appendix.

Hypothesis 2.1. There exists a nonempty interval I ⊂ S1 such that Ht ≡ 0 for t ∈ I.

On the other hand, we need to put several assumptions to the given structures, which are still

general enough to include the most important cases (e.g., toric manifolds as symplectic quotients

of Euclidean spaces).

Hypothesis 2.2. We assume that µ : M → g∗ is proper, 0 ∈ g∗ is a regular value of µ and the

G-action restricted to µ−1(0) is free.

With this hypothesis, µ−1(0) is a smooth submanifold of M and the symplectic quotient M :=

µ−1(0)/G is a symplectic manifold, which has a canonically induced symplectic form ω. Also, the

Hamiltonian function Ht descends to a time-dependent Hamiltonian

Ht : M → R (2.4)

by the G-invariance of Ht. It is easy to check that YHt is tangent to µ−1(0) and the projection

µ−1(0)→M pushes YHt forward to YHt. Then we assume

Hypothesis 2.3. The induced Hamiltonian Ht : M → R is nondegenerate in the usual sense.

Finally, in the case when M is noncompact, we need the convexity assumption (cf. [2, Definition

2.6]).

Page 8: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

8 GUANGBO XU

Hypothesis 2.4. There exists a pair (f, J), where f : M → [0,+∞) is a G-invariant and proper

function, and J is a G-invariant, ω-compatible almost complex structure on M , such that there

exists a constant c0 > 0 with

f(x) ≥ c0 =⇒ 〈∇ξ∇f(x), ξ〉+ 〈∇Jξ∇f(x), Jξ〉 ≥ 0, df(x) · JXµ(x) ≥ 0, ∀ξ ∈ TxM. (2.5)

In this paper, to achieve transversality, we need to perturb J near µ−1(0) (see the appendix).

The above condition is only about the behavior “near infinity”, so such perturbations don’t break

the hypothesis.

2.1. Equivariant topology.

2.1.1. Equivariant spherical classes. Recall that the Borel construction of M acted by G is MG :=

EG ×G M , where EG → BG is a universal G-bundle over the classifying space BG. Then the

equivariant (co)homology of M is defined to be the ordinary (co)homology of MG, denoted by

HG∗ (M) for homology and H∗G(M) for cohomology.

On the other hand, for any smooth manifold N , we denote by S2(N) to be the image of the

Hurwitz map π2(N) → H2(N ;Z), and classes in S2(N) are called spherical classes. We define the

equivariant spherical homology of M to be SG2 (M) := S2(MG).

Geometrically, any generator of SG2 (M) can be represented by the following object: a smooth

principal G-bundle P → S2 and a smooth section φ : S2 → P ×GM . We denote the class of the

pair (P, φ) to be [P, φ] ∈ SG2 (M).

2.1.2. Equivariant symplectic form and equivariant Chern numbers. The equivariant cohomology

of M can also be computed using the equivariant de Rham complex(Ω∗(M)G, dG

). In Ω2(M)G,

there is a distinguished closed form ω−µ, called the equivariant symplectic form, which represents

an equivariant cohomology class.

We are interested in the pairing 〈[ω − µ], [P, u]〉 ∈ R. It can be computed in the following way.

Choose any smooth connection A on P . Then there exists an associated closed 2-form ωA on

P ×G M , called the minimal coupling form. If we trivialize P locally over a subset U ⊂ S2,

such that A = d+ α, α ∈ Ω1(U, g) with respect to this trivialization, then ωA can be written as

ωA = π∗ω − d(µ · α) ∈ Ω2(U ×M). (2.6)

Then we have

〈[ω − µ], [P, u]〉 =

∫S2

u∗ωA (2.7)

which is independent of the choice of A.

On the other hand, any G-invariant almost complex structure J on X makes TX an equivariant

complex vector bundle. So we have the equivariant first Chern class

cG1 := cG1 (TM) ∈ H2G(M ;Z). (2.8)

This is independent of the choice of J .

Page 9: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 9

2.1.3. Kirwan maps. The cohomological Kirwan map is a map

κ : H∗(M ;R)→ H∗(M ;R). (2.9)

Here we take R-coefficients for simplicity. It is easy to check that

κ([ω − µ]) = [ω] ∈ H2(M ;R), κ(cG1 ) = c1(TM) ∈ H2(M ;R). (2.10)

We define

NG2 (M) = ker[ω − µ] ∩ kercG1 ⊂ SG2 (M), N2(M) = ker[ω] ∩ kerc1(TM) ⊂ S2(M), (2.11)

and

Γ := SG2 (M)/NG2 (M). (2.12)

2.2. The spaces of loops and equivalence classes. Let P be the space of smooth contractible

parametrized loops in M × g and a general element of P is denoted by

x := (x, f) : S1 →M × g. (2.13)

Let P be a covering space of P, consisting of triples x := (x, f, [w]) where x = (x, f) ∈ P and

[w] is an equivalence class of smooth extensions of x to the disk D. The equivalence relation is

described as follows. For each pair w1, w2 : D → M both bounding x : S1 → M , we have the

continuous map

w12 := w1#(−w2) : S2 →M (2.14)

by gluing them along the boundary x. We define

w1 ∼ w2 ⇐⇒ [w12] = 0 ∈ SG2 (M). (2.15)

Denote by LG := L∞G := C∞(S1, G) the smooth free loop group of G. Then for any point

x0 ∈M , we have the homomorphism

l(x0) : π1(G)→ π1(M,x0) (2.16)

which is induced by mapping a loop t 7→ γ(t) ∈ G to a loop t 7→ γ(t)x0 ∈ M . For different

x1 ∈M and a homotopy class of paths connecting x0 and x1, we have an isomorphism π1(M,x0) 'π1(M,x1); it is easy to see that l(x0) and l(x1) are compatible with this isomorphism. This means

kerl(x0) ⊂ π1(G) is independent of x0. Then we define

LMG :=γ : S1 → G | [γ] ∈ kerl(x0) ⊂ π1(G)

. (2.17)

Let L0G ⊂ LMG be the subgroup of contractible loops in G.

It is easy to see that LMG acts on P (on the right) by

P × LMG → P((x, f), h) 7→ h∗(x, f)(t) =

(h(t)−1x(t),Ad−1

h(t)(f(t)) + h(t)−1∂th(t)).

(2.18)

Here the action on the second component can be viewed as the gauge transformation on the space

of G-connections on the trivial bundle S1×G. (For short, we denote by d log h the g-valued 1-form

h−1dh, which is the pull-back by h of the left-invariant Maurer-Cartan form on G.)

Page 10: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

10 GUANGBO XU

But LMG doesn’t act on P naturally; only the subgroup L0G does: for a contractible loop

h : S1 → G, extend h arbitrarily to h : D→ G. The homotopy class of extensions is unique because

π2(G) = 0 for any connected compact Lie group ([1]). Then the class of (h−1x, h∗f, [h−1w]) in P

is independent of the extension. It is easy to see that the covering map P→ P is equivariant with

respect to the inclusion L0G→ LMG. Hence it induces a covering

P/L0G→ P/LMG. (2.19)

2.3. The deck transformation and the action functional. We now define an action of SG2 (M)

on P/L0G. Take a class A ∈ SG2 (M) represented by a pair (P, u), where P → S2 is a principal

G-bundle and u : S2 → P ×GM is a section of the associated bundle.

Consider Un ' C∗ ∪ ∞ ⊂ S2 as the complement of the south pole 0 ∈ S2. Take an arbitrary

trivialization φ : P |Un → Un ×G, which induces a trivialization

φ : P ×GM |Un → Un ×M. (2.20)

Then φ u is a map from Un to M and there exists a loop h : S1 → G and x ∈M such that

limr→0

φ u(reiθ) = h(θ)x. (2.21)

Note that the homotopy class of h is independent of the trivialization φ and the choice of x.

Now, for any element (x, f, [w]) ∈ P, find a smooth path γ : [0, 1] → M such that γ(0) = w(0)

and γ(1) = x. Then define γh : S1 × [0, 1]→M by γ(θ, t) = h(θ)γ(t).

On the other hand, view D \ 0 ' (−∞, 0]× S1. Consider the map

wh(r, θ) = h(θ)w(r, θ)

and the “connected sum”:

u#w := (φ u) #γh#wh : D→M (2.22)

which extends the loop

xh(θ) = h(θ)x(θ). (2.23)

Denote fh := Adhf − ∂th · h−1. Then we define the action by

A#[x, f, [w]] =[xh, fh, [u#w],

], ∀A ∈ SG2 (M). (2.24)

On the other hand, there exists a morphism

SG2 (M)→ kerl(x0) ⊂ π1(G) (2.25)

which sends the homotopy class of [P, u] to the homotopy class of h : S1 → G where h is the one

in (2.21). Then it is easy to see the following.

Lemma 2.5. The action (2.24) is well-defined (i.e., independent of the representatives and choices)

and is the deck transformation of the covering P/L0G→ P/LMG.

Page 11: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 11

Now by this lemma, we denote P :=(P/L0G

)/NG

2 , which is again a covering of P := P/LMG,

with the group of deck transformations isomorphic to Γ. We will use x to denote an element in P

or P/L0G and use [x] an element in P.

We can define a 1-form BH on P by

T(x,f)P 3 (ξ, h) 7→∫S1

ω (x(t) +Xf − YHt , ξ(t)) + 〈µ(x(t)), h(t)〉 dt ∈ R. (2.26)

Its pull-back to P is exact and one of the primitives is the following action functional on P:

AH(x, f, [w]) := −∫Bw∗ω +

∫S1

(µ(x(t)) · f(t)−Ht(x(t))) dt. (2.27)

The zero set of the one-form BH consists of pairs (x, f) such that

µ(x(t)) ≡ 0, x(t) +Xf(t)(x(t))− YHt(x(t)) = 0. (2.28)

The critical point set of AH are just the preimage of ZeroBH under the covering P→ P.

Lemma 2.6. AH is L0G-invariant and BH is LMG-invariant.

Proof. Take any h : S1 → G, extend it smoothly to some h : D→ G. Then we see that

(h−1w)∗ω = ω(∂x(h−1w), ∂y(h

−1w))dxdy = w∗ω + d

(µ(h−1w) · d log h

). (2.29)

Also, we see that

µ(h−1(t)x(t)) ·(

Ad−1h(t)f(t) + h(t)−1h′(t)

)= µ(x(t)) · f(t) +

(µ(h−1w) · d log h

)∣∣∂D . (2.30)

By Stokes’ theorem and the G-invariance of Ht, we obtain the invariance of AH . The LMG-

invariance of BH follows from equivariance of the involved terms in a similar way.

So we have the induced action functional AH : P/L0G→ R and it satisfies the following.

Lemma 2.7. For any [x] = [x, f, [w]] ∈ P/L0G and any A ∈ SG2 (M), we have

AH (A#[x]) = AH ([x])− 〈[ω − µ], A〉. (2.31)

Proof. Use the same notation as we define the action A#[x], we see that∫D\0

w∗hω =

∫Dw∗ω +

∫ 0

−∞ds

∫S1

dtω (h∗∂sw, h∗X∂t log h(w))

=

∫Dw∗ω −

∫ 0

−∞

∫ 1

0d (µ(w) · d log h) =

∫Dw∗ω −

∫S1

(µ(x(t))− µ(w(0)))d log h. (2.32)

Also ∫S1×[0,1]

γ∗hω = −∫S1

(µ(w(0))− µ(x)) d log h. (2.33)

In the same way we can calculate∫S2\0

(φ u)∗ ω = 〈[ω − µ], [P, u]〉 −∫S1

µ(x)d log h. (2.34)

Page 12: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

12 GUANGBO XU

So we have

AH (A#[x]) = −∫D

(u#w

)∗ω +

∫S1

⟨µ(h(t)x(t)),Adh(t)f(t)− h′(t)h(t)−1

⟩−Ht(h(t)x(t))

dt

= −〈[ω − µ], A〉 −∫Dw∗ω +

∫S1

〈µ(x(t)), f(t)〉 −Ht(x(t))dt = −〈[ω − µ], A〉+ AH ([x]) (2.35)

This lemma implies that AH descends to a well-defined function

AH : P→ R. (2.36)

Our Floer theory will be formally a Morse theory of the pair (P,AH).

Before we move on to the chain complex, we see that AH is a Lagrange multiplier function

associated to the action functional AH of the induced Hamiltonian H on the symplectic quotient

M . Let PM be the space of contractible loops in M and let PM be pairs (x, [w]) where x ∈ PM

and w : D→M extends x; [w] = [w′] if (−w)#w′ is annihilated by both ω and c1(TM). Then for

any (x, [w]) ∈ PM , we can pull-back the principal G-bundle µ−1(0)→ M to D. Any trivialization

(or equivalently a section s) of this bundle over D induces a map ws : D→ µ−1(0) whose boundary

restriction, denoted by x : S1 → µ−1(0), lifts x. Now, if (x, [w]) ∈ CritAH , i.e.

0 = x′(t)− YHt(x(t)) = (πµ)∗

(x′(t)− YHt(x(t))

)(2.37)

there exists a smooth function, fs : S1 → g such that

x′(t) +Xfs(t)(x(t))− YHt(x(t)) = 0. (2.38)

Then this gives a map

ι : PM → P/L0G

(x, [w]) 7→ [xs, fs, [ws]](2.39)

By the correspondence of the symplectic forms and Chern classes between upstairs and downstairs,

we have

Proposition 2.8. The class [xs, fs, [ws]] is independent of the choice of the section s and only

depends on the homotopy class of w. Moreover, it induces a map

ι :(PM ,CritAH

)→ (P,CritAH) (2.40)

2.4. The Floer chain complex. For R = Z2, Z or Q, we consider the Novikov ring of formal

power series over a base ring R to be the downward completion of R[Γ]:

ΛR := Λ↓R :=

∑B∈Γ

λBqB

∣∣∣∣∣ ∀K > 0,# B ∈ Γ | 〈[ω − µ], B〉 > K, λB 6= 0 <∞

. (2.41)

We define the free ΛR-module generated by the set CritAH ⊂ P to be V CF (M,µ;H; ΛR). We

define an equivalence relation on V CF (M,µ;H; ΛR) by

[x] ∼ qB[x′]⇐⇒ B#

[x′]

= [x] ∈ P. (2.42)

Denote by V CF (M,µ;H; ΛR) the quotient ΛR-module by the above equivalence relation, which is

will be graded by a Conley-Zehnder type index which will be defined later in Section 4.

Page 13: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 13

2.5. Gradient flow and symplectic vortex equation. Now we choose an S1-family of G-

invariant, ω-compatible almost complex structures J on M , we assume that

f(x) ≥ c0 =⇒ Jt(x) = J(x) (2.43)

where (f, J) is the convex structure which we assume to exist in Hypothesis 2.4. Then ω and Jt

defines a Riemannian metric on M , which induces an L2-metric g on the loop space LM . On the

other hand, we fix a biinvariant metric on the Lie algebra g which induces a metric g2 on Lg; it

also identifies g with g∗ and we use this identification everywhere in this paper without mentioning

it. These choices induce a metric on P.

Then, it is easy to see that formally, the equation for the negative gradient flow line of AH is

the following equation for a pair (u,Ψ) : Θ→M × g∂u

∂s+ Jt

(∂u

∂t+XΨ − YHt

)= 0,

∂Ψ

∂s+ µ(u) = 0.

(2.44)

The equation is invariant under the action of LG. The action is defined by

LG×Map (Θ,M × g) → Map (Θ,M × g)

g∗(u,Ψ)(s, t) =(g(t)−1u(s, t),Ad−1

g(t)Ψ(s, t) + g(t)−1∂tg(t)) (2.45)

Definition 2.9. The energy for a flow line u (or its Yang-Mills-Higgs functional) is defined to be

E (u) := E (u,Ψ) :=1

2‖du+ (XΨ − YHt)⊗ dt‖

2L2 +

1

2

∥∥∥∥∂Ψ

∂s

∥∥∥∥2

L2

+1

2‖µ(u)‖2L2 . (2.46)

The second equation of (2.44) is actually the symplectic vortex equation on the triple (P, u,Ψdt),

where P → Θ is the trivial G-bundle, u is a section of P×GM and Ψdt corresponds to the covariant

derivative d+ Ψdt. (For a detailed introduction to the symplectic vortex equation, see [3] or [25]).

This is why we name our theory the vortex Floer homology.

The connection d+ Ψdt has already been put in the temporal gauge, i.e., it has no ds compo-

nent. A more general equation on pairs (u, α), with α = Φds+ Ψdt ∈ Ω1(Θ)⊗ g is∂u

∂s+XΦ + Jt

(∂u

∂t+XΨ − YHt

)= 0,

∂Ψ

∂s− ∂Φ

∂t+ [Φ,Ψ] + µ(u) = 0.

(2.47)

We write the object (u, α) in the form of a triple u = (u,Φ,Ψ). The above equation is invariant

under the action by GΘ := C∞ (Θ, G), which is defined by

GΘ ×Map (Θ,M × g× g) → Map (Θ,M × g× g)

g∗

u

Φ

Ψ

(s, t) =

g(s, t)−1u(s, t)

Ad−1g(s,t)Φ(s, t) + g(s, t)−1∂sg(s, t)

Ad−1g(s,t)Ψ(s, t) + g(s, t)−1∂tg(s, t)

(2.48)

Page 14: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

14 GUANGBO XU

A solution u = (u,Φ,Ψ) to (2.47) is called a generalized flow line. The energy of a generalized

flow line is

E(u,Φ,Ψ) =1

2‖du+XΦ ⊗ ds+ (XΨ − YHt)⊗ dt‖L2 +

1

2‖µ(u)‖2L2 +

1

2‖∂sΨ− ∂tΦ + [Φ,Ψ]‖2L2 .

(2.49)

It is easy to see that any smooth generalized flow line is gauge equivalent via a gauge transformation

in GΘ to a smooth flow line in temporal gauge; and the energy is gauge independent.

2.6. Moduli space and the formal definition of the vortex Floer homology. We focus on

solutions to (2.47) with finite energy. In Section 3 we will show that, any such solution is gauge

equivalent to a solution u = (u,Φ,Ψ) such that there exists a pair x± = (x±, f±) ∈ ZeroBH with

lims→±∞

Φ(s, t) = 0, lims→±∞

(u(s, ·),Ψ(s, ·)) = x±. (2.50)

Hence for any pair [x±] ∈ CritAH , we can consider solutions which “connect” them. We denote by

M ([x−], [x+]; J,H) (2.51)

the moduli space of all such solutions, modulo gauge transformation.

In the appendix we will show that, if we assume that Ht vanishes for t in a nonempty open

subset I ⊂ S1, and J a generic, “admissible” family of almost complex structures, then the space

M ([x−], [x+]; J,H) is a smooth manifold, whose dimension is equal to the difference of the Conley-

Zehnder indices of [x±]. Moreover, assuming that the manifold M cannot have any nonconstant

pseudoholomorphic spheres, we show thatM ([x−], [x+]; J,H) is compact modulo breakings. Finally,

there exist coherent orientations on different moduli spaces, which is similar to the case of ordinary

Hamiltonian Floer theory (see [10]). Then, the signed counting of isolated gauged equivalence

classes of trajectories in our case has exactly the same nature as in finite-dimensional Morse-Smale-

Witten theory, which defines a boundary operator

δJ : V CF∗(M,µ;H; ΛZ)→ V CF∗−1(M,µ;H; ΛZ). (2.52)

The vortex Floer homology is then defined

V HF∗ (M,µ; J,H; ΛZ) = H (V CF∗(M,µ;H; ΛZ), δJ) . (2.53)

Moreover, for a different choice of the pair (J ′, H ′), we can use continuation principle to prove

that the chain complex (V CF∗(M,µ;H ′; ΛZ), δJ ′) is chain homotopic to (V CF∗(M,µ;H; ΛZ); δJ).

There is a canonical isomorphism between the homologies, and we denote the common homology

group by V HF∗(M,µ; ΛZ). The details are given in Section 6 and the appendix.

3. Asymptotic behavior of the connecting orbits

In this section we analyze the asymptotic behavior of solutions u = (u,Φ,Ψ) to (2.47) which has

finite energy and for which u(Θ) has compact closure in M . We call such a solution a bounded

solution. We denote the space of bounded solutions by MbΘ. We can also consider the equation

on the half cylinder Θ+ or Θ− and denote the spaces of bounded solutions over Θ± by MbΘ±

.

The main theorem of this section is

Page 15: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 15

Theorem 3.1. (1) Any (u,Φ,Ψ) ∈ MbΘ±

is gauge equivalent (via a smooth gauge transforma-

tion g : Θ± → G) to a solution (u′,Φ′,Ψ′) ∈ MbΘ±

such that there exist x± = (x±, f±) ∈ZeroBH and

lims→±∞

(u′(s, ·),Ψ′(s, ·)

)= x±, lim

s→±∞Φ(s, ·) = 0 (3.1)

uniformly for t ∈ S1.

(2) There exists a compact subset KH ⊂M such that for any (u,Φ,Ψ) ∈ MbΘ, we have u(Θ) ⊂

KH .

We will prove (1) for u ∈ MbΘ+

in temporal gauge, i.e., Φ ≡ 0 and the case for Θ− is the same.

Then (2) follows from a maximum principle argument, given at the end of this section. The proof

is based on estimates on the energy density, which has been given by others in several different

settings (see [2], [16]). The only possibly new ingredient is that we have a nonzero Hamiltonian

here.

3.1. Covariant derivatives. The S1-family of metrics gt := ω(·, Jt·) induces a metric connection

∇ on the bundle u∗TM . Moreover, we define

∇A,sξ = ∇sξ +∇ξXΦ, ∇A,tξ = ∇tξ +∇ξXΨ. (3.2)

Also, on the trivial bundle Θ× g, define the covariant derivative

∇A,sθ = ∇sθ + [Φ, θ], ∇A,tθ = ∇tθ + [Ψ, θ]. (3.3)

We denote by ∇A the direct sum connection on u∗TM × g. Note that it is compatible with respect

to the natural metric on this bundle.

Define the g-valued 2-form ρt on M by

〈ρ(ξ1, ξ2), η〉t = 〈∇ξ1Xη, ξ2〉t = −〈∇ξ2Xη, ξ1〉t, ξi ∈ TM, η ∈ g. (3.4)

We list several useful identities of this covariant derivative. The reader may refer to [16] for

details.

Lemma 3.2. For u in temporal gauge, we have the following equalities

∇A,sXη −X∇A,sη = ∇∂suXη, ∇A,tXη −X∇A,tη = ∇∂tu+XΨXη. (3.5)

∇A,s (∂tu+XΨ)−∇A,t∂su = X∂tΨ. (3.6)

∇A,s (dµ · Jξ)− dµ · J (∇A,sξ) = ρ(∂su, ξ), ∇A,t (dµ · Jξ)− dµ · J (∇A,tξ) = ρ(∂tu+XΨ, ξ).

(3.7)

On the other hand, since our equation is perturbed by a Hamiltonian H, we consider another

covariant derivative which takes H into account. Let φtH be the Hamiltonian isotopy defined by Ht

and

JHt :=(dφtH

)−1 Jt dφtH , t ∈ R

be the 1-parameter family of almost complex structures. They are still compatible with ω and

hence defines a family of metric gHt , with induced inner product denoted by 〈·, ·〉H,t. We denote

the induced metric connection on u∗TM by ∇H .

Page 16: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

16 GUANGBO XU

We think (u,Ψ) as a map from R× R→M × g, periodic in the second variable. Then we have

a well-defined connection D on u∗TM → R× R, given by

(Dsξ) (s, t) =(∇Hs ξ

)(s, t), (Dtξ) (s, t) = ∇Ht ξ +∇Hξ XΨ −∇Hξ YHt . (3.8)

Lemma 3.3. D is compatible with the inner product 〈·, ·〉H,t on u∗TM .

Proof. By direct calculation, we see for ξ, η ∈ Γ(u∗TM),

∂s〈ξ, η〉H,t = 〈Dsξ, η〉H,t + 〈ξ,Dsη〉H,t,

∂t〈ξ, η〉H,t =dgtdt

(ξ, η) +⟨∇gtt ξ +∇gtξ XF , η

⟩H,t

+⟨ξ,∇gtt η +∇gtη XF

⟩Ht

= −(LYHtgt

)(ξ, η) +

⟨∇gtt ξ +∇gtξ XF , η

⟩H,t

+⟨ξ,∇gtt η +∇gtη XF

⟩Ht

= 〈Dtξ, η〉H,t + 〈ξ,Dtη〉H,t .

3.2. Estimate of the energy density.

Lemma 3.4. There exist positive constants c1 and c2 depending only on (X,ω, J, µ,Ht) and the

subset Ku, such that for any flow line (u, 0,Ψ) in temporal gauge, we have

∆(|∂su|2H,t

)≥ −c1|∂su|4H,t − c2. (3.9)

Proof. First we see that

1

2∆ |∂su|2H,t =

(∂2s + ∂2

t

)|∂su|2H,t = ∂s 〈Ds∂su, ∂su〉H,t + ∂t〈Dt∂su, ∂su〉H,t

= |Ds∂su|2H,t + |Dt∂su|2H,t +⟨(D2s +D2

t

)∂su, ∂su

⟩H,t

.(3.10)

We denote vs = ∂su ∈ Γ(R2, u∗TM) and vt = ∂tu+XΨ − YHt ∈ Γ(R2, u∗TM). Hence vs = −Jtvt.Then we have the following computation

Dsvt −Dtvs

=∇Hs (∂tu+XΨ − YHt)−∇Ht ∂su+∇H∂su (−XΨ + YHt) = X∂sΨ = −Xµ(u).(3.11)

Dsvs +Dtvt

=Ds(−Jtvt) +Dt(Jtvs)

=−∇Hs (Jtvt) +∇Ht (Jtvs) +∇HJvs(XΨ − YHt)

=−∇Hs (Jtvt) +∇Ht (Jtvs) + [Jtvs, XΨ − YHt ] +∇HXΨ−YHt(Jtvs)

=−∇Hs (Jvt) +∇Hvt(Jtvs) + Jtvs + [Jtvs, XΨ − YHt ]

=− (∇HvsJt)vt − Jt∇Hs vt + (∇HvtJt)vs + Jt∇Hvtvs + Jtvs + Jt [vs, XΨ] + [YHt , Jtvs]

=− (∇HvsJt)vt + (∇HvtJt)vs − Jt[vs, vt]− JX∂sΨ + Jtvs + Jt[vs, XΨ] + Jt [YHt , vs] + (LYHtJt)vs=− (∇HvsJt)vt + (∇HvtJt)vs + (LYHtJt)vs + JtXµ + Jtvs.

(3.12)

Page 17: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 17

On the other hand, for any (s, t) ∈ Σ, any ξ ∈ Tu(s,t)M , we extend ξ and vs(s, t) to be G-invariant

vector fields locally. Then for the Riemann curvature tensor associated to JHt , we have

RH(vs, XΨ)ξ = ∇Hvs∇HXΨξ −∇HXΨ

∇Hvsξ −∇H[vs,XΨ]ξ = ∇Hvs∇

Hξ XΨ −∇H∇HvsξXΨ. (3.13)

Hence

(DsDt −DtDs) ξ

= ∇Hs(∇Ht ξ +∇Hξ (XΨ − YHt)

)−∇Ht (∇Hs ξ)−∇H∇Hs ξ(XΨ − YHt)

= RH(vs, ∂tu)ξ +∇Hs ∇Hξ (XΨ − YHt)−∇H∇Hs ξ(XΨ − YHt)−(d

dt∇Hs)ξ

= RH(vs, ∂tu+XΨ)ξ −∇Hs ∇Hξ YHt +∇H∇Hs ξYHt +∇Hξ X∂sΨ −(d

dt∇Hs)ξ

= RH(vs, vt + YHt)ξ −∇Hs ∇Hξ YHt +∇H∇Hs ξYHt −∇Hξ Xµ −

(d

dt∇Hs)ξ. (3.14)

The third equality above uses (3.13).

Then we denote

D2svs +D2

t vs = Ds (Dsvs +Dtvt) + (DtDs −DsDt) vt −Dt (Dsvt −Dtvs) =: Q1 +Q2 +Q3.

By (3.12),

〈Q1, vs〉H,t =⟨∇Hs

(−(∇HvsJt

)vt +

(∇HvtJt

)vs +

(LYHtJt

)vs + JtXµ + Jtvs

), vs

⟩H,t

≥ −C1

(|vs|3H,t + |vs|2H,t + |vs|4H,t + |vs|2H,t

∣∣∇Hs vs∣∣H,t + |vs|H,t∣∣∇Hs vs∣∣H,t) (3.15)

for some C1 > 0. Here we used the fact that µ and dµ are uniformly bounded because u(Θ+) has

compact closure.

By (3.14), for some C2 > 0, we have

〈Q2, vs〉Ht =

⟨−RH(vs, vt + YH,t)vt +∇Hs ∇HvtYHt −∇

H∇Hs vt

YHt +∇HvtXµ +

(d

dt∇Hs)vt, vs

⟩H,t

≥ −C2

(|vs|4H,t + |vs|3H,t + |vs|2H,t + |vs|H,t

∣∣∇Hs vs∣∣H,t) . (3.16)

By (3.11), for some C3 > 0, we have

〈Q3, vs〉H,t= 〈DtXµ, vs〉H,t

=⟨∇Ht Xµ +∇HXµ(XΨ − YHt), vs

⟩H,t

=⟨Xdµ·∂tu +∇HvtXµ + [Xµ, XΨ − YHt ], vs

⟩=⟨Xdµ·∂tu +∇HvtXµ −X[µ,Ψ], vs

⟩=⟨Xdµ·vt −Xdµ·XΨ

+∇HvtXµ −X[µ,Ψ], vs⟩H,t

=〈Xdµ·vt +∇HvtXµ, vs〉H,t ≥ −C3|vs|2H,t.

(3.17)

Page 18: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

18 GUANGBO XU

Hence for some C4 > 0 and c1, c2 > 0, we have

1

2∆|vs|2H = |Dsvs|2H + |Dtvt|2H + 〈Q1 +Q2 +Q3, vs〉H ≥ |∇gts vs|2H + 〈Q1 +Q2 +Q3, vs〉H

≥ |∇gts vs|2H − C4

(4∑i=2

|vs|iH +

2∑i=1

|vs|iH |∇gts vs|H

)≥ −c1|vs|4H − c2. (3.18)

Now we consider the other part of the energy density. We have the following calculation:

1

2∆ |µ(u)|2 = |∇A,sµ|2 + |∇A,tµ|2 + 〈∇A,s∇A,sµ+∇A,t∇A,tµ, µ〉. (3.19)

And (see [16, Lemma C.2])

∇A,s∇A,sµ(u) +∇A,t∇A,tµ(u)

=∇A,sdµ · vs +∇A,tdµ · vt = ∇A,t (dµ · Jvs)−∇A,s (dµ · Jvt)

=− 2ρ(vs, vt) + dµ · Jt (∇A,tvs −∇A,svt) + dµ(Jtvs

)=dµ ·

(JtXµ + Jtvs

)− 2ρ(vs, vt).

(3.20)

Since u(Θ) has compact closure, we may assume that supu(Θ) |ρ| ≤ cu. Hence there exists c3, c4 > 0

such that

∆ |µ(u)|2 ≥ −c3 − c4 |vs|4 . (3.21)

3.3. Decay of energy density. To proceed, we quote the following lemma (cf. [32, Page 12]).

Lemma 3.5. Let Ω ⊂ R2 be an open subset containing the origin and e is defined over Ω. Suppose

it satisfies

∆e ≥ −A−Be2,

then ∫Br(0)

e ≤ π

16B=⇒ e(0) ≤ 8

πr2

∫Br(0)

e+Ar2

4. (3.22)

Apply the above lemma to the function |vs|2H,t+|µ(u)|2 and note that different norms are actually

equivalent, we see

Proposition 3.6. If (u,Ψ) satisfies the equation (2.44) such that u(Θ) has compact closure and

E(u,Ψ) <∞, then the energy density ∣∣∣∣∂u∂s∣∣∣∣2 +

∣∣∣∣∂Ψ

∂s

∣∣∣∣2converges to 0 as s→ ±∞, uniformly in t.

Page 19: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 19

3.4. Approaching to periodic orbits.

Proposition 3.7. Any (u, 0,Ψ) ∈ MbΘ+

is gauge equivalent to a solution to (2.47) (v,Φ,Ψ) on

Θ+ with the following properties

(1) (v,Ψ)|s×S1 converges in C0 to an element of ZeroBH as s→ +∞;

(2) lims→+∞

Φ(s, ·) = 0 uniformly in t.

Proof. By the above proposition, we know that finite energy implies that µ(u(s, ·))→ 0 as s→ +∞.

Let g∗ε ⊂ g∗ be the ε-open ball of the origin. Then there is an equivariant symplectic diffeomorphism

Uε := µ−1(g∗ε )→ µ−1(0)× g∗ε . (3.23)

Then µ|Uε is just the projection of the right hand side of (3.23) onto the second factor (see for

example [18]). Let πµ be the projection on to the first factor, then we define the almost complex

structure

J0,t := π∗µ(Jt∣∣µ−1(0)

)and the vector field

Y0,Ht := π∗µ(YHt

∣∣µ−1(0)

).

Then there exists K1 > 0 depending on (M,ω, J, µ,Ht) such that

‖J0,t(x)− Jt(x)‖ ≤ K1|µ(x)|, ‖Y0,Ht(x)− YHt(x)‖ ≤ K1|µ(x)|, ∀x ∈ Uε.

We denote πµ : µ−1(g∗ε ) → M the composition of πµ with the projection µ−1(0) → M . For

(u, 0,Ψ) ∈ MbΘ+

, we have proved that µ(u) converges to 0 uniformly as s → +∞. Hence for

N := N(ε) sufficiently large, u(s, ·) maps ΘN+ := [N,+∞)× S1 into Uε. So on ΘN

+ , we have

∂su+ J0,t (∂tu+XΨ(u)− Y0,Ht(u)) = (J0,t − Jt) (∂tu+XΨ(u)− Y0,Ht) + Jt (YHt − Y0,Ht) .

(3.24)

Denoting u := πµ u : ΘN+ →M and applying (πµ)∗ to the above equality, we see on ΘN

+ ,∥∥∂su+ J t(∂tu− YHt

(u))∥∥ ≤ K2ε (3.25)

for some constant K2. Here J t is the induced almost complex structure on M . Hence for s ≥ N ,

the family of loops u(s, ·) in the quotient will be close (in C0) to some 1-periodic orbits γ : S1 →M

of YHt.

We take a lift p ∈ µ−1(0) with ππµ(p) = γ(0). We see that there exists a unique gp ∈ G such

that

φ1Hp = gpp. (3.26)

Suppose gp = exp ξp, ξp ∈ g. It is easy to see that the loop

(x(t), f(t)) :=(exp(−tξp)φtH(p), ξp

)(3.27)

is an element of ZeroBH . We will construct a gauge transformation g on Θ+ and show that

g∗(u, 0,Ψ) satisfies the condition stated in this proposition.

Page 20: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

20 GUANGBO XU

Take a local slice of the G-action near p. That is, an embedding i : B2n−2kδ → µ−1(0) where

B2n−2kδ is the δ-ball in R2n−2k such that i(0) = p and (y, g) 7→ g(i(y)) is a diffeomorphism from

B2n−2kδ ×G onto its image.

Denote u(s, t) = (v(s, t), ξ(s, t)) ∈ µ−1(0) × g∗ with respect to the decomposition (3.23). Then

for s large enough, there exists a unique g(s) ∈ G such that

g(s)v(s, 0) ∈ i(B2n−2kδ

), g(s)v(s, 0)→ p. (3.28)

Moreover, by the fact that |∂su| converges to zero, we see

lims→+∞

∣∣g(s)−1g(s)∣∣ = 0. (3.29)

Define hs(t) ∈ G by

hs(0) = 1, hs(t)−1∂hs(t)

∂t= Ψ(s, t).

Then by the fact that lims→+∞ |∂sΨ| = 0 we see that

lims→∞

|∂s log hs(t)| = 0. (3.30)

Thus we have

d(gpp, g(s)hs(1)g(s)−1p

)≤ d

(gpp, φ

1Hg(s)v(s, 0)

)+ d

(φ1Hg(s)v(s, 0), g(s)hs(1)v(s, 0)

)+ d

(g(s)hs(1)v(s, 0), g(s)hs(1)g(s)−1p

)= d

(gpp, φ

1Hg(s)v(s, 0)

)+ d

(φ1Hv(s, 0), hs(1)v(s, 0)

)+ d (g(s)v(s, 0), p)

=: d1(s) + d2(s) + d3(s).

(3.31)

Here d is the G-invariant distance function induced by an invariant Riemannian metric. By (3.26)

and (3.28), we have d1(s) + d3(s)→ 0. By the decay of energy density, i.e.,

lims→+∞

supt|∂tu+XΨ − YHt | = 0,

we have d2(s)→ 0. Hence we have

lims→+∞

d(gpp, g(s)hs(1)g(s)−1p

)= 0. (3.32)

Since the G-action on µ−1(0) is free, we have

lims→+∞

g(s)hs(1)g(s)−1 = gp (3.33)

Then by (3.33), there exists a continuous curve ξ(s) ∈ g defined for large s, such that

g(s)hs(1)g(s)−1 = exp ξ(s), lims→+∞

ξ(s) = ξp. (3.34)

Then apply the gauge transformation

g(s, t) = hs(t)−1g(s)−1 exp(tξ(s)) (3.35)

to the pair (u, 0,Ψ), we see

(g∗u) (s, 0) = g(s, 0)−1(u(s, 0)) = g(s)u(s, 0)→ p, g∗ (Ψdt) = ξ(s)dt+ η(s, t)ds (3.36)

Page 21: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 21

where

η = ∂s log g = g−1∂g

∂s.

The fact that lims→+∞ ‖η‖ = 0 follows from (3.29) and (3.30).

Hence

lims→+∞

(g∗u)|s×S1 =(exp(−tξp)φtHp, ξp

)∈ ZeroBH .

Definition 3.8. Let x± := (x±, f±) ∈ ZeroBH . We denote

M (x−, x+) := M (x−, x+; J,H) :=

(u,Φ,Ψ) ∈ Mb

Θ | lims→±∞

(u,Φ,Ψ)|s×S1 = (x±, 0)

. (3.37)

For x± = (x±, [w±]) ∈ CritAH which projects to x± via CritAH → ZeroBH , we define

M (x−, x+) := M (x−, x+; J,H) :=

(u,Φ,Ψ) ∈ M(x−, x+) | [u#w−] = [w+]. (3.38)

Then it is easy to deduce the following energy identity for which we omit the proof.

Proposition 3.9. Let x± ∈ CritAH . Then for any (u,Φ,Ψ) ∈ M (x−, x+), we have

E (u,Φ,Ψ) = AH (x−)− AH (x+) . (3.39)

3.5. Convexity and uniform bound on flow lines. We will show in this subsection the following

Proposition 3.10. There exists a compact subset KH ⊂ M such that for any (u,Φ,Ψ) ∈ MbΘ,

u(Θ) ⊂ KH .

Proof. The proof is to use maximum principle as in [2, Subsection 2.5]. We claim this proposition

is true for

KH = SuppH ∪ f−1 ([0, c1])

where

c1 = max

c0, sup|µ(x)|≤1

f(x)

(3.40)

where c0 is the one in Hypothesis 2.4.

Suppose the statement is not true. Then there exists a solution u = (u,Φ,Ψ) ∈ MbΘ which

violates this condition and (s0, t0) ∈ Θ such that u(s0, t0) /∈ SuppH and f(u(s0, t0)) > c1. On

the other hand, by the previous results, we know that lims→±∞

µ(u(s, t)) = 0 so lims→±∞

f(u(s, t)) ≤ c1.

Hence f(u) achieves its maximum at some point of Θ. As in the proof of [2, Lemma 2.7], we see that

f(u) is subharmonic on u−1 (M \KH) and hence f(u) must be constant. However, this contradicts

with the fact that lims→±∞

f(u(s, t)) ≤ c1.

4. Fredholm theory

In this section we investigate the infinitesimal deformation theory of solutions to our equation

(modulo gauge). For a similar treatment of a relevant situation, the reader may refer to [4].

Page 22: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

22 GUANGBO XU

4.1. Banach manifolds, bundles, and local slices. First we fix two loops x± ∈ ZeroBH . For

any k ≥ 1, p > 2, we consider the space of W k,ploc -maps u := (u,Φ,Ψ) : Θ → M × g × g, such that

Φ ∈ W k,p (Θ, g) and (u,Ψ) is asymptotic to x± = (x±, f±) at ±∞ in W k,p-sense. Then this is a

Banach manifold, denoted by

Bk,p := Bk,p(x−, x+). (4.1)

The tangent space at any element u ∈ Bk,p is the Sobolev space

TuBk,p = W k,p (Θ, u∗TM ⊕ g⊕ g) . (4.2)

We denote by expt the exponential map of M×g×g, where the Riemannian metric on M is ω(·, Jt·)which is t-dependent. Then the map ξ 7→ exptuξ is a local diffeomorphism from a neighborhood of

0 ∈ TuBk,p and a neighborhood of u in Bk,p.Then consider a pair x± = (x±, f±, [w±]) ∈ CritAH with x± = (x±, f±) ∈ ZeroBH . We define

Bk,p(x−, x+) :=u = (u,Φ,Ψ) ∈ Bk,p(x−, x+) | [w−#u] = [w+]

. (4.3)

Let Gk+1,p0 be the space of W k+1,p

loc -maps g : Θ → G which is asymptotic to the identity of G at

±∞. Then this is a Banach Lie group. The gauge transformation extends to a free Gk+1,p0 -action

on Bk,p(x−, x+) (resp. Bk,p(x−, x+)), because the symplectic quotient M is a free quotient. Then

this makes the quotient

Bk,p(x−, x+) := Bk,p(x−, x+)/Gk+1,p(

resp. Bk,p(x−, x+) := Bk,p(x−, x+)/Gk+1,p0

)(4.4)

a Banach manifold. Indeed, to see this we have to construct local slices of the Gk+1,p-action. For

any u ∈ Bk,p (whose image in Bk,p is denoted by [u]), consider the operator

d∗0 : TuBk,p → W k−1,p (Θ, g)

(ξ, φ, ψ) 7→ −dµ(Jtξ)− ∂sφ− [Φ, φ]− ∂tψ − [Ψ, ψ],(4.5)

which is the formal adjoint of the infinitesimal Gk+1,p-action. Then as in gauge theory, we have a

natural identification

T[u]Bk,p ' kerd∗0 (4.6)

(where the orthogonal complement is taken with respect to the L2-inner product) and the expo-

nential map expt induces a local diffeomorphism

kerd∗0 3 ξ 7→[exptuξ

]∈ Bk,p. (4.7)

If we have g± ∈ L0G, and x′± = g∗±x± ∈ CritAH , then the pair (g−, g+) extends to a smooth

gauge transformation on Θ which identifies Bk,p(x−, x+) with Bk,p(x′−, x′+). Then, with abuse of

notation, if x± ∈ CritAH/L0G, then we can denote by Bk,p(x−, x+) to be the common quotient

space. Finally, for two pairs [x±] ∈ CritAH , we define

Bk,p([x−], [x+]) :=⋃

y±∈CritAH/L0G, [y±]=[x±]

Bk,p(y−, y+), (4.8)

which is a discrete union of Banach manifolds.

Page 23: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 23

Over Bk,p(x−, x+), we have the smooth Banach space bundle Ek−1,p(x−, x+), whose fibre over u is

the Sobolev space

Ek−1,pu := W k−1,p (u∗TM ⊕ g) . (4.9)

The Gk+1,p0 -action makes Ek−1,p an equivariant bundle, hence descends to a Banach space bundle

Ek−1,p(x−, x+)→ Bk,p(x−, x+)(

or Ek−1,p ([x−], [x+])→ Bk,p ([x−], [x+])). (4.10)

Moreover, the H-perturbed vortex equation (2.47) gives a section

F : Bk,p (x−, x+)→ Ek−1,p(x−, x+) (4.11)

which is Gk+1,p-equivariant. So it descends to a section

F : Bk,p ([x−], [x+])→ Ek−1,p ([x−], [x+]) .

Then we see that M (x−, x+; J,H) is the intersection of F−1(0) with smooth objects. We define

M ([x−], [x+]; J,H) = F−1(0), (4.12)

whose elements, by the standard regularity theory about symplectic vortex equation (see [2, The-

orem 3.1]), all have smooth representatives. Therefore M ([x−], [x+]; J,H) is independent of k, p.

The linearization of F at u is

Du := dFu : (ξ, φ, ψ) 7→

(∇A,sξ + (∇ξJt) (∂tu+XΨ − YHt) + Jt (∇A,tξ −∇ξYHt) +Xφ + JXψ

∂sψ + [Φ, ψ]− ∂tφ− [Ψ, φ] + dµ(ξ)

)(4.13)

Hence the linearization of F , under the isomorphism (4.6), is the restriction of Du to (kerd∗0)⊥.

We define the augmented linearized operator

Du := Du ⊕ d∗0 : TuBk,p → Ek−1,pu ⊕W k−1,p (Θ, g) . (4.14)

It is a standard result that the Fredholm property of dF[u] is equivalent to that of Du for any

representative u. Hence in the remaining of the section we will study the Fredholm property of the

augmented operator.

4.2. Asymptotic behavior of Du. Up to an L0G-action we can choose representatives x± =

(x±, f±, [w±]) such that f± are constants θ± ∈ g. Take any u = (u,Φ,Ψ) ∈ Bk,p(x−, x+).

For ξ := (ξ, ψ, φ) ∈ TuBk,p(x−, x+), define J(ξ, ψ, φ) = (Jξ,−φ, ψ). Here ψ is the variation of Ψ

and φ is the variation of Φ. Then

Du

ξ

ψ

φ

= ∇A,s

ξ

ψ

φ

+J

∇A,tξ −∇ξYH,t∇A,tψ∇A,tφ

+

0 JLu Lu

dµ 0 0

L∗u 0 0

ξ

ψ

φ

+q(s, t)

ξ

ψ

φ

=:

∇s∂s

∂s

+ J

∇t∂t∂t

+R(s, t) + q(s, t)

ξ

ψ

φ

. (4.15)

Page 24: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

24 GUANGBO XU

Here q(s, t) is a linear operator such that lims→±∞

q(s, t) = 0; and

Rx±(t) := lims→±∞

R(s, t) =

Jt∇(Xθ± − YHt) JtLu Lu

dµ 0 −adθ±

L∗u adθ± 0

. (4.16)

Here Lu : g→ u∗TM is the infinitesimal action along the image of u and L∗u is its dual.

The following result is implied by Hypothesis 2.3.

Proposition 4.1. x := (x, θ) ∈ ZeroBH , then for all t-dependent, G-invariant, ω-compatible almost

complex structure Jt, the self-adjoint operator

L2(S1, x∗TM ⊕ g⊕ g

)→ L2

(S1, x∗TM ⊕ g⊕ g

) ξ

ψ

φ

7→

J ∇t∂t

∂t

+Rx(t)

ξ

ψ

φ

.(4.17)

has zero kernel.

Proof. Suppose (ξ, ψ, φ)T is in the kernel, which means

Jt∇tξ + Jt∇ξ (Xθ − YHt) +Xφ + JtXψ = 0, (4.18)

−dφdt

+ dµ(ξ)− [θ, φ] = 0, (4.19)

dt+ dµ(Jtξ) + [θ, ψ] = 0. (4.20)

Apply dµ Jt to (4.18), we get

dµ(JtXφ) = dµ(∇tξ +∇ξ(Xθ − YHt)).

Hence for any η ∈ g,

d

dt〈dµ(ξ), η〉g =

d

dtω(Xη, ξ)

=ω([YHt −Xθ, Xη], ξ) + ω(Xη,∇tξ −∇ξ(YHt −Xθ))

=ω(X[θ,η], ξ) + 〈dµ(JXφ), η〉g=〈dµ(ξ), [θ, η]〉g + 〈dµ(JXφ), η〉g=〈dµ(JXφ)− [θ, dµ(ξ)], η〉g.

(4.21)

Therefore,

d

dtdµ(ξ) = dµ(JXφ)− [θ, dµ(ξ)]. (4.22)

Then by (4.19),

dµ(JtXφ)

=d

dtdµ(ξ) + [θ, dµ(ξ)]

=d

dt

(dφ

dt+ [θ, φ]

)+

[θ,dφ

dt+ [θ, φ]

]=φ′′ + 2

[θ, φ′

]+ [θ, [θ, φ]].

(4.23)

Page 25: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 25

Suppose ‖φ‖ takes its maximum at t = t0 ∈ S1. Then for t ∈ (t0 − ε, t0 + ε), define φ(t) =

Ade(t−t0)θφ(t). Then the right hand side of (4.23) is equal to Ade(t0−t)θ φ′′(t). Hence at t = t0,

0 ≥1

2

d2

dt2‖φ‖2 =

1

2

d2

dt2

∥∥∥φ∥∥∥2=⟨φ′′, φ

⟩+∥∥∥φ′∥∥∥2

g

=⟨dµ(JtXφ(t0)), φ(t0)

⟩+∥∥∥φ′(t0)

∥∥∥2=∥∥Xφ(t0)

∥∥2+∥∥∥φ′(t0)

∥∥∥2.

(4.24)

Hence Xφ ≡ 0, which implies φ ≡ 0 and by (4.19), ξ is tangent to µ−1(0).

Now x∗Tµ−1(0) = Et⊕Lxg, where Et = (Lxg)⊥ ∩x∗Tµ−1(0) and the orthogonal complement is

taken with respect to the Riemannian metric g = ω(·, Jt·). Then with respect to this (G-invariant)

decomposition, write

ξ = ξ⊥(t) +Xη(t).

Then take the Et-component of (4.18), and use the nondegeneracy assumption on the induced

Hamiltonian Ht on the symplectic quotient, we see that ξ⊥ ≡ 0. The only equations left is ∇tXη(t) +∇Xη(t)(Xθ − YHt) +Xψ = 0,

ψ′ + [θ, ψ] + dµ(JXη) = 0.

The first equation is equivalent to

η′ + [θ, η(t)] + ψ = 0.

Hence

η′′(t) + 2[θ, η′(t)

]+ [θ, [θ, η]] = dµ(JtXη).

This can be treated similarly as (4.23), using maximum principle, which shows that η ≡ 0 and

hence ψ ≡ 0.

Corollary 4.2. Under Hypothesis 2.3, for any x± ∈ ZeroBH and any u ∈ Bk,p (x−, x+), the

augmented linearized operator Du is Fredholm for any k ≥ 1, p ≥ 2.

Corollary 4.3. There exists δ = δ(x±) > 0 such that, for any u = (u,Φ,Ψ) ∈ M (x−, x+; J,H)

and any ξ ∈ kerDu, there exists c > 0 such that∣∣∣ξ(s, t)∣∣∣ ≤ ce−δ|s|. (4.25)

In particular, if (u, 0,Ψ) ∈ MbΘ, then |∂su| and |∂sΨ| decay exponentially.

Proof. The first part is standard, see for example [32, Lemma 2.11]. For a solution u = (u, 0,Ψ)

in temporal gauge, by the translation invariance of the equation (2.44), we see that ξ = (∂su, βs =

0, βt = ∂sF ) ∈ kerdFu. Moreover,

−d∗0ξ =− d∗0(∂su, 0, ∂sΨ) = ∂t∂sΨ + L∗u(∂su) + [Ψ, ∂sΨ]

=− ∂t(µ(u)) + dµ(Jt∂su) + [Ψ, ∂sΨ]

=− dµ(∂tu) + dµ(Jt∂su) + [Ψ, ∂sΨ]

= dµ (XΨ − YHt)− [Ψ, µ] = 0.

(4.26)

This implies that ξ ∈ kerDu. Choose a smooth gauge transformation g : Θ → G such that

g∗u satisfies the asymptotic condition of Proposition 3.7. Then g∗ξ ∈ kerDg∗u, which decays

exponentially. So does ξ.

Page 26: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

26 GUANGBO XU

4.3. The Conley-Zehnder indices. In this subsection we define a grading on the set CritAH ,

which is analogous to the Conley-Zehnder index in usual Hamiltonian Floer theory, and we will

call it the same name.

For the induced Hamiltonian system on the symplectic quotient M , we have the usual Conley-

Zehnder index

CZ : CritAH → Z. (4.27)

We prove the following theorem

Theorem 4.4. There exists a function

CZ : CritAH → Z (4.28)

satisfying the following properties

(1) For the embedding ι : CritAH → CritAH , we have

CZ ι = CZ; (4.29)

(2) For any B ∈ Γ and [x] ∈ CritAH we have

CZ (B# [x]) = CZ ([x])− 2cG1 (B). (4.30)

(3) For [x±] = [x±, f±, [w±]] ∈ CritAH and [u] ∈ Bk,p ([x−], [x+]) with [u#w−] = [w+], we have

ind(dF[u]

)= CZ ([x−])− CZ ([x+]) . (4.31)

We first review the notion of Conley-Zehnder index in Hamiltonian Floer homology. Let A :

[0, 1]→ Sp(2n) be a continuous path of symplectic matrices such that

A(0) = I2n, det (A(1)− I2n) 6= 0. (4.32)

We can associate an integer CZ(A) to A, called the Conley-Zehnder index. We list some properties

of the Conley-Zehnder index below which will be used here (see for example [31]).

(1) For any path B : [0, 1]→ Sp(2n), we have CZ(BAB−1) = CZ(A);

(2) CZ is homotopy invariant;

(3) If for t > 0, A(t) has no eigenvalue on the unit circle, then CZ(A) = 0;

(4) If Ai : [0, 1]→ Sp(2ni) for n = 1, 2, then CZ(A1 ⊕A2) = CZ(A1) + CZ(A2);

(5) If Φ : [0, 1]→ Sp(2n) is a loop with Φ(0) = Φ(1) = Id, then

CZ(ΦA) = CZ(A) + 2µM (Φ) (4.33)

where µM (Φ) is the Maslov index of the loop Φ.

With this algebraic notion, in the usual Hamiltonian Floer theory one can define the Conley-

Zehnder indices for nondegenerate Hamiltonian periodic orbits. In our case, the induced Hamil-

tonian Ht : M → R has the usual Conley-Zehnder index

CZ : CritAH → Z. (4.34)

Then, for each x = (x, f, [w]) ∈ CritAH , the homotopy class of extensions [w] induces a homotopy

class of trivializations of x∗TM over S1. With respect to this class of trivialization, the operator

(4.17) is equivalent to an operator J0∂t + A(t), which defines a symplectic path. We define the

Page 27: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 27

Conley-Zehnder index of x to be the Conley-Zehnder index of this symplectic path. By the second

and fifth axioms listed above, this index induces a well-defined function

CZ : CritAH → Z (4.35)

which satisfies (2) and (3) of Theorem 4.4.

Now we prove (1). For any contractible periodic orbits x : S1 → M of YHtand any extension

w : D→M of x, we can lift the pair (x,w) to a tuple x = (x, f, [w]) ∈ CritAH .

Proposition 4.5. If ι : CritAH → CritAH is the inclusion we described in Proposition 2.8, then

CZ ι = CZ. (4.36)

Proof. Since the Conley-Zehnder index is homotopy invariant, and the space of G-invariant ω-

compatible almost complex structures is connected, we will compute the Conley-Zehnder index

using a special type of almost complex structures, and modify the Hamiltonian H.

Starting with any almost complex structure J on M and a G-connection on µ−1(0)→M , J lifts

to the horizontal distribution defined by the connection. On the other hand, the biinvariant metric

on g gives an identification g ' g∗. We denote by η∗ ∈ g∗ the metric dual of η ∈ g. Recall that we

have a symplectomorphism

µ−1 (g∗ε ) ' µ−1(0)× g∗ε . (4.37)

For η ∈ g, we define JXη = η∗ ∈ g∗, as a vector field on µ−1(0)× g∗. Then this gives a G-invariant

almost complex structure on TM |µ−1(0), compatible with ω. Then we pullback J by the projection

µ−1(0)× g∗ε → µ−1(0) and denote the pullback by J .

We also modify Ht by requiring that Ht(x, η) = Ht(x) for (x, η) ∈ µ−1(0)×g∗ε . Then the modified

Ht can be continuously deformed to the original one, and it doesn’t change H hence doesn’t change

CritAH . Moreover, it is easy to check that for the modified pair (J,H),(LYHtJ

)Xη =

[LYHt , JXη

]= 0. (4.38)

Now for any (x,w) ∈ CritAH , we lift it to (x, f, [w]) ∈ CritAH with w : D → µ−1(0) and f

being a constant θ ∈ g. Then any symplectic trivialization of x∗TM → S1 induces a symplectic

trivialization

φ : x∗TM ' S1 ×[R2n−2k ⊕ (g⊕ g)

](4.39)

such that φ(Xη, JXζ) = (0, η, ζ). Then we see, with respect to φ, the operator (4.17) restricted to

g4 is η1

ψ

η2

φ

7→ Jd

dt

η1

ψ

η2

φ

+

φ− [θ, η2]

η2 − [θ, φ]

ψ + [θ, η1]

η1 + [θ, ψ]

=:

(Jd

dt+ S

)η1

ψ

η2

φ

. (4.40)

Here we used the property (4.38) and

J :=

[0 −Idg⊕g

Idg⊕g 0

], S =

[0 Idg⊕g − adθ

Idg⊕g + adθ 0

](4.41)

Page 28: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

28 GUANGBO XU

Moreover, the operator (4.17) respect the decomposition in (4.39). Hence by the fourth axiom of

Conley-Zehnder indices we listed above, we have

CZ (x, θ, [w]) = CZ(x,w) + CZ(eJSt

). (4.42)

As we have shown in the proof of Proposition 4.1 that for any θ the operator (4.17) is an isomor-

phism, we can deform θ to zero and compute instead CZ(eJS0t) for

S0 =

[0 Idg⊕g

Idg⊕g 0

], (4.43)

thanks to the homotopy invariance property. Then we see that

eJS0t =

[e−t 0

0 et

](4.44)

which has no eigenvalue on the unit circle for t > 0. Therefore by the third axiom, CZ(eJS0t) =

0.

5. Compactness of the moduli space

For a general Hamiltonian G-manifold, the failure of compactness of the moduli space of con-

necting orbits comes from two phenomenon. The first is the breaking of connecting orbits, which is

essentially the same thing happened in finite dimensional Morse-Smale-Witten theory. The second

is the blow-up of the energy density, which results in sphere bubbling. Since here we have assumed

that there exists no nontrivial holomorphic sphere in M , so we only have to consider the breakings.

5.1. Moduli space of stable connecting orbits and its topology. Let’s fix a pair [x±] ∈CritAH . Denote by M([x−], [x+]) := M([x−], [x+]; J,H) =M([x−], [x+]; J,H)/R the quotient of the

moduli space by the translation in the s-direction. We denote by u the R-orbit in M([x−], [x+])

of [u] ∈M([x−], [x+]; J,H) and call it a trajectory from [x−] to [x+].

Definition 5.1. A broken trajectory from [x−] to [x+] is a collection

u :=(u(α)

)α=1,...,m

:=(u(α),Φ(α),Ψ(α)

)α=1,...,m

(5.1)

where for each α,u(α)

∈ M ([xα−1] , [xα]) and E(u(α)) 6= 0. Here [xα]α=0,...,m is a sequence of

critical points of AH and

[x0] = [x−] , [xm] = [x+] .

We regard the domain of u as the disjoint union

∪mα=1Θ

and let Θ(α) ⊂ ∪mα=1Θ the α-th cylinder.

We denote by

M ([x−] , [x+]) (5.2)

the space of all broken trajectories from [x−] to [x+]. Then naturally we have inclusion

M ([x−] , [x+])→M ([x−] , [x+]) . (5.3)

Page 29: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 29

Definition 5.2. We say that a sequence of trajectories ui = ui,Φi,Ψi ∈ M ([x−] , [x+]) from

[x−] to [x+] converges to a broken trajectory

u :=(u(α)

)α=1,...,m

if: for each i, there exists sequences of numbers s(1)i < s

(2)i < · · · < s

(m)i and gauge transformations

g(α)i ∈ GΘ such that for each α (

g(α)i

)∗ (s

(α)i

)∗(ui,Φi,Ψi) (5.4)

converges to(u(α),Φ(α),Ψ(α)

)on any compact subset of Θ and such that for any sequence of (si, ti)

with

limi→∞|si − s(α)

i | =∞, ∀α

we have

limi→∞

e (ui) (si, ti) = 0.

It is easy to see that this convergence is well-defined and independent of the choices of represen-

tatives of the trajectories. We can also extend this notion to sequences of broken connecting orbits.

We omit that for simplicity.

The main theorem of this section is

Theorem 5.3 (Compactness of the moduli space of stable connecting orbits). The space

M ([x−] , [x+]) is a compact Hausdorff space with respect to the topology defined in Definition 5.2.

Indeed the proof is routine and it has been carried out in many literature for general symplectic

vortex equations, for example [25], [2], [26], [37]. Since bubbling is ruled out, the proof is almost the

same as that for finite dimensional Morse theory, while the gauge symmetry is the only additional

ingredient.

5.2. Local compactness with uniform bounded energy density. For any compact subset

K ⊂ Θ, consider a sequence of solutions ui := (ui,Φi,Ψi) such that the image of ui is contained in

the compact subset KH ⊂M and such that

lim supi→∞

E(ui) <∞.

We have

Proposition 5.4. There exists a subsequence (still indexed by i), a sequence of smooth gauge

transformation gi : K → G and a solution u∞ = (u∞,Φ∞,Ψ∞) : K → M × g× g to (2.44) on K,

such that the sequence g∗i ui converges to u∞ uniformly with all derivatives on K.

Proof. By the fact that ui is contained in the compact subset KH , and the assumption that there

exists no nontrivial holomorphic spheres in M , we have

supz∈K,i

eui(z) <∞. (5.5)

Then this proposition can be proved in the standard way, as did in [2] or [26], using Uhlenbeck’s

compactness theorem.

Page 30: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

30 GUANGBO XU

5.3. Energy quantization. To prove the compactness of the moduli space, we need the following

energy quantization property.

Proposition 5.5. There exists ε0 := ε0(J,H) > 0, such that for any connecting orbit u ∈ MbΘ, we

have E(u) ≥ ε0.

Proof. Suppose it is not true. Then there exists a sequence of connecting orbits, represented by

solutions in temporal gauge vi := (vi, 0,Ψi) ∈ MbΘ, such that

E(vi) > 0, limi→∞

E(vi) = 0. (5.6)

We first know that there is a compact subset KH ⊂ M such that for every i, the image vi(Θ) is

contained in KH . Then we must have

limi→∞

supΘ

(|∂svi|+ |µ(vi)|) = 0. (5.7)

Indeed, if the equality doesn’t hold, then we can find a subsequence which either bubbles off a

nonconstant holomorphic sphere at some point z ∈ Θ (if the above limit is∞), or (after a sequence

of proper translation in s-direction) converges to a solution (with positive energy) on compact

subsets (if the above limit is positive and finite). Either case contradicts the assumption. Therefore

we conclude that for any ε > 0, the image of vi lies in Uε := µ−1(g∗ε ) for i sufficiently large.

Recall that we have projections πµ : Uε → µ−1(0) and πµ : Uε → M . Then for all large i and

any s, πµ(vi(s, ·)) is C0-close to a periodic orbit of H in M . Since those orbits are discrete (in

C0-topology, for example), we may fix one such orbit γ ∈ ZeroBH and choose a subsequence (still

indexed by i) such that

lim supi→∞

sup(s,t)∈Θ

d (πµ(vi(s, t)), γ(t)) = 0. (5.8)

Then, use a fixed Riemannian metric on M with its exponential map exp, we can write

πµ(vi(s, t)) = expγ(t)ξi(s, t)

where ξi ∈ Γ(S1, γ∗TM

). Let Bε(γ

∗TM) be the ε-disk of γ∗TM . Then expγ pulls back µ−1(0)→M to a G-bundle Q→ Bε(γ

∗TM), together with a bundle map γ : Q→ µ−1(0). We can trivialize

Q by some

φ : Q→ G×Bε(γ∗TM).

Now we take a lift x := (x, f) ∈ ZeroBH of γ. Then we can write

φ(γ−1(x(t))

)= (g0(t), γ(t)). (5.9)

On the other hand, we write

φ(γ−1πµ(vi(s, t))

)= (gi(s, t), ξi(s, t)). (5.10)

Take the gauge transformation gi(s, t) = gi(s, t)g0(t)−1. Then write

v′i := (v′i,Φ′i,Ψ′i) := g∗i vi. (5.11)

Page 31: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 31

Then by the exponential convergence of vi as s→ ±∞, we see that ∂sgi(s, t) decays exponentially

and hence Φ′i converges to zero as s→ ±∞. On the other hand, we see that

φ(γ−1πµ(v′i(s, t))

)= (g0(t), ξi(s, t)). (5.12)

Therefore

v′i ∈ M(x, x). (5.13)

But it is also easy to see that the homotopy class of v′i is trivial. Because the energy of connecting

orbits only depends on its homotopy class, we see that the energy of v′i, and hence the energy of vi

is actually equal to zero, which contradicts with the hypothesis.

5.4. Proof of the compactness theorem. It suffices to prove, without essential loss of gener-

ality, that for any sequence [ui] ∈ M ([x−], [x+]; J,H) represented by unbroken connecting orbits

(ui,Φi,Ψi) ∈ M (x−, x+), there exists a convergent subsequence. By the assumption that there

exists no nontrivial holomorphic sphere in M , we have

supi,Θ|∂sui +XΦi(ui)| < +∞. (5.14)

Then the limit (broken) connecting orbits can be constructed by induction and the energy quan-

tization property (Proposition 5.5) guarantees that the induction stops at finite time. The details

are standard and left to the reader.

6. Floer homology

In this section we use the moduli spacesM ([x−], [x+]; J,H) to define the vortex Floer homology

group V HF∗ (M,µ;H). We also discuss further works and related problems in the last three

subsections.

By Corollary A.12, we can choose a generic S1-family of “admissible” almost complex structures

J ∈ J regH which is regular with respect to H. Such an object is a smooth t-dependent family of

almost complex structures Jt, such that for each t, Jt is G-invariant, ω-compatible, and outside a

neighborhood U of µ−1(0), Jt ≡ J; inside U , Jt preserves a distribution gCU . Being regular implies

that for all pairs [x±] ∈ CritAH , the moduli space M ([x−], [x+]; J,H) is a smooth manifold with

dimM ([x−], [x+]; J,H) = CZ([x−])− CZ([x+]). (6.1)

Moreover, there is free R-action on M ([x−], [x+]; J,H) by time translation, whose orbit space is

denoted by M([x−], [x+]; J,H). Combining the compactness theorem, we have

Proposition 6.1. If J ∈ J regH , then

CZ([x−])− CZ([x+]) ≤ 0 =⇒M ([x−], [x+]; J,H) = ∅; (6.2)

CZ([x−])− CZ([x+]) = 1 =⇒ #M ([x−], [x+]; J,H) <∞. (6.3)

Page 32: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

32 GUANGBO XU

6.1. The gluing map and coherent orientation. The boundary operator of the Floer chain

complex is defined by the (signed) counting of M([x−], [x+]; J,H). If we want to define the Floer

homology over Z2, then we don’t need to orient the moduli space; otherwise, the orientation of

M([x−], [x+]; J,H) can be treated in the same way as the usual Hamiltonian Floer theory, since

the augmented linearized operator Du (whose determinant is canonically isomorphic to the deter-

minant of the actual linearization dF[u]), is of the same type of Fredholm operators considered in

the abstract setting of [10]. We first give the gluing construction and then discuss the coherent

orientations of the moduli spaces.

In this subsection we construct the gluing map for broken trajectories with only one breaking.

The general case is similar. This construction is, in principle, the same as the standard construction

in various types of Morse-Floer theory (see [32] [10]), with a gauge-theoretic flavor. The gauge

symmetry makes the construction a bit more complex, since we always glue representatives, and

we want to show that the gluing map is independent of the choice of the representatives.

In this subsection, we fix the choice of the admissible family J ∈ J regH and omit the dependence

of the moduli spaces on J and H.

For any pair x± ∈ CritAH , we say that a solution u ∈ M (x−, x+) is in r-temporal gauge, if its

restrictions to [r,+∞)× S1 and (−∞, r]× S1 are in temporal gauge, for some r > 0. Now we fix a

number r = r0 and only consider solutions in r0-temporal gauge.

Now we take three elements x, y, z ∈ CritAH with

CZ(x)− 1 = CZ(y) = CZ(z) + 1. (6.4)

Assume y = (y, η) : S1 →M × g. We would like to construct, for a large R0 > 0, the gluing map

glue : M ([x], [y])× (R0,+∞)× M ([y], [z])→ M ([x], [z]) . (6.5)

Now consider two trajectories [u±] = [u±,Φ±,Ψ±], [u−] ∈ M ([x], [y]), [u+] ∈ M ([y], [z]) with

their representatives both in r0-temporal gauge and u± are asymptotic to y as s → ∓∞. Then

there exists R1 > 0 such that

±s ≥ R1 =⇒ u∓(s, t) = expy(t) ξ∓(s, t). (6.6)

Here Θ+R1

= [R1,+∞)× S1 and Θ−R1= (−∞,−R1]× S1 and ξ± ∈W k,p

(Θ∓R1

, y∗TM)

.

Next, we take a cut-off function ρ such that s ≥ 1 =⇒ ρ(s) = 1, s ≤ 0 =⇒ ρ(s) = 0. For each

R >> r0, denote ρR(s) = ρ(s−R). We construct the “connected sum”

uR(s, t) =

u−(s+R, t), s ≤ −R

2 − 1

expy(t)

(ρR

2(−s)ξ−(s+R, t) + ρR

2(s)ξ+(s−R, t)

)s ∈

[−R

2 − 1, R2 + 1]

u+(s−R, t), s ≥ R2 + 1

(6.7)

(ΦR,ΨR) (s, t) =

(Φ−(s+R, t),Ψ−(s+R, t)) , s ≤ −R

2 − 1(0, ρR

2(−s)Ψ−(s+R, t) + ρR

2(s)Ψ+(s−R, t)

), s ∈

[−R

2 − 1, R2 + 1]

(Φ+(s−R, t),Ψ+(s−R, t)) . s ≥ R2 + 1

(6.8)

Now it is easy to see that, if we change the choice of representatives u± which are also in r0-temporal

gauge, the connected sum uR := (uR,ΦR,ΨR) doesn’t change for s ∈ [−R2 − 1, R2 + 1] and hence

Page 33: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 33

we obtain a gauge equivalent connected sum. Moreover, if we change y by y′ which represent the

same [y] ∈ CritAH , then we can obtain

u′− ∈ M(x, y′

), u′+ ∈ M

(y′, z

)(6.9)

which are also in r0-temporal gauge, and we obtain a connected sum u′R which is gauge equivalent

to uR.

Now we consider the augmented linearized operator DR := DuR .

Lemma 6.2. There exists c > 0 and R0 > 0 such that for every R ≥ R0 and η ∈ E2,puR⊕W 2,p (Θ, g),

we have

‖D∗Rη‖W 1,p ≤ c ‖DRD∗Rη‖Lp . (6.10)

Proof. Same as the proof of [32, Proposition 3.9]

Hence we can construct a right inverse

QR := D∗R (DRD∗R)−1 : E0,p

uR⊕ Lp (Θ, g)→ TuRB

1,p (6.11)

with

‖QR‖ ≤ c. (6.12)

Now we write QR := (QR,AR) with QR : E0,puR→ TuRB1,p (x, z). Then actually the image of QR

lies in the kernel of d∗0 and therefore QR is a right inverse to dFuR |kerd∗0. Because our construction

is natural with respect to gauge transformations, we see that QR induces an injection

QR : E0,p[uR] → T[uR]B1,p (6.13)

which is a right inverse to the linearized operator dF[uR] and which is bounded by c. By the implicit

function theorem, we have

Proposition 6.3. There exists R1 > 0, δ1 > 0 such that for each R ≥ R1, there exists a unique

ξ ∈ ImQR = kerd∗0 ⊂ TuRB1,p,∥∥∥ξ∥∥∥

W 1,p≤ δ1 such that

F(

expuR ξ)

= 0,∥∥∥ξ∥∥∥

W 1,p≤ 2c

∥∥∥F(uR)∥∥∥Lp. (6.14)

Therefore, the gluing map can be defined as

glue ([u−], R, [u+]) =[expuR ξ

]∈ M ([x], [z]; J,H) . (6.15)

On the other hand, it is easy to see that the augmented linearized operators Du for all con-

necting orbits u is of “class Σ” considered in [10]. Therefore, by the main theorem of [10], there

exists a “coherent orientation” with respect to the gluing construction. Choosing such a coher-

ent orientation, then to each zero-dimensional moduli space M([x], [y]; J,H), we can associate the

counting χJ([x], [y]) ∈ Z, where each trajectory [u] contributes to 1 (resp. -1) if the orientation of

[u] coincides (resp. differ from) the “flow orientation” of the solution. Then we define

δJ : V CFk (M,µ;H; ΛZ) → V CFk−1 (M,µ;H; ΛZ)

[x] 7→∑

[y]∈CritAH

χJ([x], [y])[y](6.16)

Page 34: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

34 GUANGBO XU

As in the usual Floer theory, we have

Theorem 6.4. For each choice of the coherent orientation on the moduli spaces M([x], [y]; J,H),

the operator δJ in (6.16) defines a morphism of ΛZ-modules satisfying δJ δJ = 0.

This makes (V CF∗(M,µ;H; ΛZ), δJ) a chain complex of ΛZ-modules, to which will be generally

referred as the vortex Floer chain complex. Therefore the vortex Floer homology group is defined

as the ΛZ-module

V HFk (M,µ; J,H; ΛZ) :=ker (δJ : V CFk (M,µ;H; ΛZ)→ V CFk−1 (M,µ;H; ΛZ))

im (δJ : V CFk+1 (M,µ;H; ΛZ)→ V CFk (M,µ;H; ΛZ))(6.17)

6.2. The continuation map. Now we prove that the vortex Floer homology group defined above is

independent of the choice of admissible family of almost complex structures and the time-dependent

Hamiltonians, and, if we use the moduli space of (1.8) instead of (1.7) to define the Floer homol-

ogy, independent of the parameter λ > 0. So far the argument has been standard, by using the

continuation principle.

Let (Jα, Hα, λα) and(Jβ, Hβ, λβ

)be two triples where λα, λβ > 0, Hα, Hβ are G-invariant

Hamiltonians satisfy Hypothesis 2.1 and 2.3, and Jα ∈ J regHα,λα , Jβ ∈ J regHβ ,λβ

(for notations refer to

the appendix).

We choose a cut-off function ρ : R → [0, 1] with s ≤ −1 =⇒ ρ(s) = 1 and s ≥ 1 =⇒ ρ(s) = 0.

Then we define

Hs,t = ρ(s)Hαt + (1− ρ(s))Hβ

t , λs = ρ(s)λα + (1− ρ(s))λβ. (6.18)

We denote this family of Hamiltonians by H . Now, as in the appendix, we consider the space of

families of admissible almost complex structures J(Jα, Jβ

)consisting of smooth families of almost

complex structures J = (Js,t)(s,t)∈Θ, such that for each l ≥ 1,∣∣∣e|s|Js,t − Jαt ∣∣∣Cl(Θ−×M)

<∞,∣∣∣e|s|Js,t − Jβt ∣∣∣

Cl(Θ+×M)<∞. (6.19)

This is a Frechet manifold. For any J ∈ J(Jα, Jβ

), we consider the following equation on

u = (u,Φ,Ψ) ∂u

∂s+XΦ(u) + Js,t

(∂u

∂t+XΨ(u)− YHs,t(u)

)= 0;

∂Ψ

∂s− ∂Φ

∂t+ [Φ,Ψ] + λ2

sµ(u) = 0.

(6.20)

For the same reason as in Section 3, any finite energy solution whose image in M has compact

closure is gauge equivalent to a solution which is asymptotic to xα ∈ CritAHα (resp. xβ ∈ CritAHβ )

as s → −∞ (resp. s → +∞). Hence for any [xα] ∈ CritAHα and [xβ] ∈ CritAHβ , we can consider

the moduli space of solutions

N(

[xα], [xβ]; J ,H , λs

). (6.21)

Page 35: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 35

One thing to check in defining the continuation map is the energy bound of solutions, which

implies the compactness of the moduli space. We define the energy to be

E(u) = E(u,Φ,Ψ)

=1

2

(|∂su+XΦ(u)|2L2 +

∣∣∂tu+XΨ(u)− YHs,t(u)∣∣2L2 +

∣∣λ−1s (∂sΨ− ∂tΦ + [Φ,Ψ])

∣∣2L2 + |λsµ(u)|2L2

)= |∂su+XΦ(u)|2L2 + |λsµ(u)|L2 (6.22)

where, the last equality holds only for u a solution to (6.20). Then we have

Proposition 6.5. For any solution u to (6.20) whose energy is finite and whose image in M has

compact closure, we have

E (u) = AHα([xα])−AHβ ([xβ])−∫

Θ

∂Hs,t

∂s(u)dsdt. (6.23)

Proof. We can transform the solution u into temporal gauge. Then the energy density is

|∂su|2 + |λsµ(u)|2 =ω(∂su, ∂tu+XΨ − YHs,t(u)

)− µ(u) · ∂Ψ

∂s

=ω(∂su, ∂tu)− ∂

∂s(µ(u) ·Ψ) +

∂s(Hs,t(u))− ∂Hs,t

∂s(u).

(6.24)

Then integrating over Θ, we obtain (6.23).

Theorem 6.6. There exists a Baire subset J regH ,λs

(Jα, Jβ

)⊂ J

(Jα, Jβ

), such that for any J ∈

J regH ,λs

(Jα, Jβ

), the moduli space N ([xα], [xβ]; J ,H , λs) is a smooth oriented manifold with

dimN(

[xα], [xβ]; J ,H , λs

)= CZ([xα])− CZ([xβ]). (6.25)

So in particular, when CZ(xα) = CZ(xβ), N is of zero dimension. The algebraic count of N gives

an integer χ([xα], [xβ]

). Then we define the continuation map

contβα : V CF∗ (M,µ; Jα, Hα, λα; ΛZ) → V CF∗(M,µ; Jβ, Hβ, λβ; ΛZ

)[xα] 7→

∑[xβ ]∈CritA

χ(

[xα], [xβ])

[xβ]. (6.26)

Now we have the similar results as in ordinary Hamiltonian Floer theory.

Theorem 6.7. The map contβα is a chain map. The induced map on the vortex Floer homology

groups is independent of the choice of the homotopy H , the family J of almost complex structures,

the cut-off function ρ. In particular, contβα is a chain homotopy equivalence. If (Jγ , Hγ) is another

admissible pair and λγ > 0, then in the level of homology

contγβ contβα = contγα.

Proof. The proof is essentially based on the construction of various gluing maps and the compact-

ness results about N([xα], [xβ]; J ,H , λs

)when CZ([xα]) − CZ([xβ]) = 1. As in the gluing map

constructed in proving the property δ2J = 0, we need to specify a gauge to construct the approxi-

mate solutions. We can still use solutions in r-temporal gauge, which is a notion independent of

the equation. We omit the details.

Page 36: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

36 GUANGBO XU

6.3. Computation and Morse homology. In this subsection we discuss the computation of

the vortex Floer homology group. Before we proceed let us recall how to show that the ordinary

Hamiltonian Floer homology is isomorphic to the Morse homology.

On a compact symplectic manifold M we take the Hamiltonian to be the t-independent function

εf , where ε is small and f is a Morse function on the manifold M . Then periodic orbits of εf

corresponds to critical points of f (which are denoted by z1, . . . , zk), and the Conley-Zehnder index

and the Morse index are related by

CZ(zi) = n− Ind(zi)

where 2n = dimM . Then the Floer chain complex is generated by (zi, wi), where wi is a spherical

class. Then we want to show that when

CZ(zi, wi)− CZ(zj , wj) = 0, 1 (6.27)

by taking a generic t-independent almost complex structure J on M , all Floer trajectories connect-

ing (zi, wi) and (zj , wj) are t-independent, i.e., corresponds to Morse-Smale trajectories of εf with

respect to the metric ω(·, J ·). Hence the boundary operators in the Floer chain complex and the

Morse-Smale-Witten chain complex coincide. So that

HF∗(M, εf ; Λ) ' HM2n−∗(M, εf ;Z)⊗ Λ (6.28)

The main difficulty to carry out the above argument is, when J is t-independent, one cannot

easily achieve the transversality of the moduli space of Floer trajectories. Here the cylinder Θ may

have a finite cover over itself

πk(s, t) = (ks, kt) (6.29)

and there might exist Floer trajectories which are multiple covers of other trajectories (when J

is allowed to vary with t, such objects don’t exist generically). The multiple covers might have

higher dimensional moduli than expected, which is similar to the problem caused by the negatively

covered spheres in Gromov-Witten theory. Hence to overcome this difficulty, one has to either put

topological restrictions (such as semi-positivity in [28], [19]), or to use virtual technique, to say

that, though the negative multiple covers have higher dimensional moduli, they contributes to zero

in defining the boundary operator (see [15], [23])

Now back to the case of vortex Floer homology. We choose a Morse function f : M → R so that

the induced Hamiltonian Ht := εf has its periodic orbits corresponding to the critical points of f .

Then we lift f to a function f : M → R and consider the vortex Floer homology defined for the

Hamiltonian εf . To show that the resulting homology group is isomorphic to H∗(M ; ΛQ), we have

to show that for ε small enough, the counting of Floer trajectories corresponds to the counting of

negative gradient flow trajectories of a Lagrange multiplier function associated to εf .

If we choose to put topological restrictions to avoid virtual technique, then one difficulty is the

following. To achieve transversality, we assumed that Ht vanishes for certain t ∈ S1 in the appendix.

This condition doesn’t hold for εf , which is independent of t. And this time the transversality

much be achieved by only using a t-independent almost complex structure J . So virtual technique

is probably unavoidable in this approach.

Page 37: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 37

In ordinary Hamiltonian Floer homology, another way to prove the isomorphism is the so-called

Piunikhin-Salamon-Schwarz (PSS) construction, introduced in [30]. It is to consider the moduli

space of “spiked disks”, which is an object interpolating between Floer trajectories and Morse tra-

jectories. The counting of spiked disks defines a pair of chain maps between the Floer chain complex

and the Morse-Smale-Witten chain complex, and using various gluing/stretching constructions one

can prove that the two chain maps are homotopy inverses to each other. In the second paper of this

series, we will give a PSS type construction to prove the isomorphism between V HF∗(M,µ; ΛZ)

and the Morse homology of the symplectic quotient M .

Appendix A. Transversality by perturbing the almost complex structure

In this appendix, we treat the transversality of our moduli space of connecting orbits. For general

symplectic manifold, connecting orbits may develop sphere bubbles, while the expected dimension

of the moduli space of such sphere bubbles may be even larger than the expected dimension of the

moduli space of connecting orbits. In this case one must use the virtual technique to say something

of the structure of the compactified moduli space of connecting orbits. The boundary operator is

defined by the virtual count of the number of trajectories, therefore the Floer homology is only

defined over Q in general. Instead, in this section we restrict to the case where the virtual technique

is not necessary. We remark that this special case covers most interesting examples to which we

will apply our results (for example, toric manifolds as symplectic quotient of vector spaces).

First we recall the important assumption on the Hamiltonian Ht.

Hypothesis A.1. There exists a nonempty open subset I ⊂ S1 such that Ht(x) = 0 for t ∈ I.

Indeed, for any G-invariant Hamiltonian diffeomorphism of M , if it is given by the time-1 map

of some Hamiltonian path, then we can reparametrize the Hamiltonian path to make it vanish

for t lying in a small interval, while the time-1 map of the reparametrized path is the original

Hamiltonian diffeomorphism. Hence this hypothesis is not an essential restriction.

A.1. Admissible family of almost complex structures. We know that for any ε > 0 small

enough, there exists a symplectomorphism U = Uε := µ−1 (g∗ε ) ' µ−1(0) × g∗ε . Hence we have a

natural projection πµ : U → M . There is a natural foliation on U , whose leaves are Gx× g∗ε with

x ∈ µ−1(0), with dimension equal to 2dimG. The tangent planes of this foliation is a G-invariant

distribution on U , denoted by gCU .

Recall that we are also given an almost complex structure J in Hypothesis 2.4. Now we will

perturb J in a specific way. This approach was similar to that in Woodward’s erratum for [36], but

here we don’t have a Lagrangian submanifold.

Definition A.2. An admissible almost complex structure on M is a G-invariant, ω-compatible

almost complex structure J which preserves the distribution gCU on U , and coincides with J outside

U . The set of all admissible almost complex structures is denoted by J (M,U, J). We denote

by J (M,U, J) the space of smooth S1-families of admissible almost complex structures, and define

J l(M,U, J) and J l(M,U, J) the corresponding objects in the C l-category, for l ≥ 1. We abbreviate

them by J l, J l because M,U, J are all fixed.

Page 38: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

38 GUANGBO XU

ω and any J ∈ J l induces a G-invariant Riemannian metric gJ on M . We denote by T JM

the

orthogonal complement of gCU with respect to the metric gJ . Then T JM

is isomorphic to π∗µTM , and

we have the orthogonal splitting:

TU ' π∗µTM ⊕ gCU =: T JM⊕ gCU . (A.1)

Now by the integrability of gCU , we see that for any a, b ∈ g and any J ∈ J l, we have

[JXa, JXb] ∈ gCU . (A.2)

Lemma A.3. For l ≥ 1, the space J l is a smooth Banach manifold. For any J = Jtt∈S1 ∈ J l,the tangent space TJ J l is naturally identified with the space of G-invariant sections E : S1×M →EndRTM (of class C l), supported in the closure of U , and for each t ∈ S1 satisfying

i. JtEt + EtJt = 0;

ii. ω(·, Et·) is a symmetric tensor;

iii. gCU is invariant under Et.

Now we consider the following equation for u := (u,Φ,Ψ) ∈ W k,ploc (Θ,M × g× g) with Ht satis-

fying Hypothesis (A.1) and J ∈ J l: ∂su+XΦ(u) + Jt (∂tu+XΨ(u)− YHt(u)) = 0;

∂sΨ− ∂tΦ + [Φ,Ψ] + µ(u) = 0.(A.3)

We consider only finite energy solutions and for any pair x± ∈ CritAH , denote by M (x±; J,H) the

space of all solutions which are asymptotic to x±.

We can also identify any solution u with an object v := (v,Φ,Ψ) ∈ W k,ploc

(R2,M × g× g

)by

v(s, t) = ϕHt (u(s, t)), and Φ, Ψ lifts periodically in t ∈ R. It satisfies ∂sv +XΦ(v) + JHt (∂tv +XΨ(v)) = 0;

∂sΨ− ∂tΦ + [Φ,Ψ] + µ(u) = 0;(A.4)

Here JHt =(φHt)∗ Jt for t ∈ R.

For C l almost complex structures, we have the following regularity theorem:

Theorem A.4. [2, Theorem 3.1] For any l ≥ 1 and any solution u ∈W 1,ploc (Θ,M × g× g) to (A.3)

with J ∈ J l, there exists a gauge transformation g ∈ G2,ploc (Θ, G) such that g∗u ∈ W l+1,p

loc (Θ,M ×g× g).

A.2. Existence of injective points. In this subsection we prove an important technical result,

showing that for any admissible family of complex structures J ∈ J l and any nontrivial connecting

orbit, there exist “injective” points and they form a rather large subset of Θ. We fix l ≥ 1 and J

in this subsection.

We first generalize the notion of injective points in [11]. For any C1-map u : Θ → X with

lims→±∞ u(s, t) = x±(t), we define

ΘU (u) := u−1(U), ΘUI (u) := ΘU (u) ∩ (R× I); (A.5)

CI (u) =

(s, t) ∈ ΘUI (u) | ∂su(s, t) ∈ gCU

; (A.6)

Page 39: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 39

RI (u) =

(s, t) ∈ ΘUI (u) \ C (u) | u(s, t) /∈ Gu ((R \ s)× t) , u(s, t) /∈ Gx±(t)

. (A.7)

Note that the above sets are unchanged if we apply to u a gauge transformation.

Lemma A.5. For any nontrivial connecting orbit u = (u,Φ,Ψ) ∈ M (x±; J,H), the set CI(u) is

discrete in ΘUI (u).

Proof. We can assume that u is in temporal gauge, i.e., Φ ≡ 0. Denote ξ = ∂su. The vector

ξ = (ξ, 0, ∂sΨ) lies in the kernel of the linearized operator. So in particular, over R× I,

∇sξ + (∇ξJt) (∂tu+XΨ) + Jt (∇tξ +∇ξXΨ) = −JtX∂sΨ. (A.8)

The family Jt induces a family of metrics on M , and hence a decomposition

u∗TM ' u∗T JtM⊕ gCU (A.9)

over ΘU (u). Suppose ξ = ξ + Xa + JtXb for two functions a, b : ΘU (u) → g and ξ(t) ∈Γ(

ΘU (u), u∗T JtM

). Denote σ = a+

√−1b ∈ gC and Xa + JtXb = Xσ. Then over ΘU

I (u),

∇sξ =∇sξ +X∂sσ +∇ξXσ +∇XσXσ ≡ ∇sξ +∇ξXσ +∇XσXσ mod gCU ;

(∇ξJt) (Jtξ) =(∇ξJt)(Jtξ) + (∇XσJt)(Jtξ) + (∇XσJt)(JtXσ);

Jt (∇tξ +∇ξXΨ) =Jt

((∂tJt)Xb +∇tξ +X∂tσ +∇Jtξ+JtXσ−XΨ

Xσ +∇ξXΨ +∇XσXΨ

)≡Jt∇tξ + Jt∇JtXσXσ + Jt∇JξXσ + Jt∇ξXΨ mod gCU .

(A.10)

(Note that (∂tJt)Xb ∈ gCU .) Therefore we have

0 ≡ ∇sξ + Jt∇tξ +∇XσXσ + Jt∇JtXσXσ + (∇XσJt)(JtXσ)

+(∇ξXσ + (∇ξJt)(Jtξ) + (∇XσJt)Jtξ + Jt∇JtξXσ + Jt∇ξXΨ

)= ∇0,1

ξ + C(z)ξ + Jt[JtXσ, Xσ]

≡ ∇0,1ξ + C(z)ξ mod gCU .

(A.11)

Here ∇ is the connection on u∗T JtM

induced from the Levi-Civita connection for gt = ω(·, Jt·) by

orthogonal projection, and C(z) is a zero-order operator and the last congruence follows from the

integrability of gCU . Hence the section ξ satisfies the Cauchy-Riemann equation

∇0,1ξ + C(z)ξ = 0. (A.12)

Here by ∇ is the connection on u∗T JtM

induced from ∇ by the splitting (A.1).

Now we apply the Carleman similarity principle of [11]. We see that the vanishing set of ξ is

discrete or ξ ≡ 0 on ΘUI (u). If the latter happens, then it is easy to see that u is a trivial connecting

orbit.

Lemma A.6. Suppose we have (ui,Φi,Ψi) ∈W 1,ploc (Θ,M × g× g), i = 1, 2, satisfying

∂sui +XΦi(ui) + Jt (∂tui +XΨi(ui)) = 0 (A.13)

on an open subset V ⊂ Θ with ui(V ) ⊂ U , such that there exists g ∈ W 2,ploc (V,G) with g(z)u2(z) =

u1(z) for z ∈ V . Then g∗(u1,Φ1,Ψ1) = (u2,Φ2,Ψ2) on V .

Page 40: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

40 GUANGBO XU

Proof. We assume that g ≡ 1. Then u1 ≡ u2 ≡ u. By the equation

∂su+XΦi(u) + Jt (∂tu+XΨi − YHt) = 0, (A.14)

we see that XΦ1(u) = XΦ2(u), XΨ1(u) = XΨ2(u). Since u(V ) ⊂ U we see that Φ1 ≡ Φ2, Ψ1 ≡Ψ2.

Proposition A.7. Let ui = (ui,Φi,Ψi) ∈ M1,p (x±; J,H), i = 1, 2 be solutions to (A.3) on Θ

for some J ∈ J 1, such that they coincide on a small disk Bε ⊂ Θ. Then there exists a gauge

transformation g ∈ G2,p such that g∗u2 = u1.

Proof. We apply the approach in [5, Section 4.3.4] using the unique continuation results of [27].

I. We identify ui with two solutions vi := (vi,Φi,Ψi) to (A.4) over R2. By definition of vi and

the hypothesis, v1 and v2 coincide on a small disk in R2. We will first prove that for all z0 ∈ Θ,

there exists an open disk Bρ(z0) centered at z0 on which v1 and v2 are gauge equivalent. In fact,

all such points in R2 form a nonempty open subset Ω. If Ω 6= R2, choose the largest ρ0 > 0 such

that Bρ0 = Bρ0(0) ⊂ Ω. Then we can patch gauge transformations together to obtain a global

gauge transformation g : R2 → G such that g∗v1 = v2 over the closure of Bρ0 (since Bρ0 is simply

connected). So without loss of generality, we assume that v1 and v2 coincide over the closure of

Bρ0 .

Then we want to show that indeed every z1 ∈ ∂Bρ0 also lies in Ω. Take a small disk Bρ1(z1) ⊂ R2

centered at z1 such that both v1 and v2 map Bρ1(z1) into a coordinate chart V ⊂ M , and with

respect this coordinate chart, the almost complex structure Jz(vi(z)) : Cn → Cn satisfies

‖Id + Jz(vi(z))I0‖ ≤1

2(A.15)

where I0 is the standard complex structure on Cn.

Then we can find z2 ∈ Bρ0 which is on the line segment between 0 and z1 satisfying the following

conditions.

(1) There exists ρ2 > 0 such that z1 ∈ Bρ2(z2) ⊂ Bρ1(z1);

(2) The gauge transformations gi : Bρ2(z2)→ G defined by parallel transport along the radial

direction with respect to the connection Ai satisfies

gi(w′)−1vi(w

′) ∈ V. (A.16)

(This is because ρ2 is so small so gi is very close to the identity of G.

Now we will show that v1 and v2 are gauge equivalent over Bρ2(z2). We regard v1 and v2 are

maps into V ⊂ Cn and by (A.16), we may assume that the connections are in radial gauge, i.e.,

the connection forms are fidθ, i = 1, 2. Then Xfi is a vector field on V . Then we have

∂vi∂r

+ Jz(vi(z))

(∂vi∂θ

+Xfi(z)(vi(z))

)= 0. (A.17)

Page 41: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 41

Subtract one from another (using the linear structure of V ), denoting ξ(z) = v2(z) − v1(z) and

h(z) = f2(z)− f1(z), we obtain

∂ξ

∂r+ Jz(v1(z))

∂ξ

∂θ

=− (Jz(v2)− Jz(v1))∂v2

∂θ− Jz(v2)Xf2(v2) + Jz(v1)Xf1(v1)

= (Jz(v1)− Jz(v2))∂v2

∂θ− Jz(v1)Xh(v1)− (Jz(v2)− Jz(v1))Xf2 − Jz(v2)(Xf2(v2)−Xf2(v1))

= : R1(v1, v2, f1, f2).

(A.18)

Similarly, the difference between the vortex equations in the radial gauge gives

∂h

∂r= −r(µ(v2)− µ(v1)) =: R2(v1, v2, f1, f2). (A.19)

It is easy to see that there exists a constant K > 0 such that

|Rj(v1, v2, f1, f2)(r, θ)| ≤ K (|ξ|+ |h|) , j = 1, 2. (A.20)

Hence we have a differential inequality∣∣∣∣∣ ∂∂r(ξ

h

)+

(Jz(v1)∂ξ∂θ

0

)∣∣∣∣∣ ≤ K |(ξ, h)| . (A.21)

We replace ξ by ζ(z) := (Id− I0Jz(v1(z)))ξ(z) and obtain

∂ζ

∂r+ I0

∂ζ

∂θ

=−(I0∂Jz(v1)

∂r− ∂Jz(v1)

∂θ

)ξ + (Id− Jz(v1)I0)

∂ξ

∂r+ (I0 + Jz(v1))

∂ξ

∂θ

=−(I0∂Jz(v1)

∂r− ∂Jz(v1)

∂θ

)ξ + (Id− Jz(v1)I0)

(∂ξ

∂r+ Jz(v1)

∂ξ

∂θ

).

(A.22)

If we denote by P (ζ, h) =(I0∂ζ∂θ , 0

), then P is an self-adjoint differential operator on the circle S1.

Then we have the differential inequality for some K ′ > 0∥∥∥∥ ddr (ζ, h) + P (ξ, h)

∥∥∥∥L2(S1)

≤ K ′ ‖(ζ, h)‖L2(S1) . (A.23)

This is in the form considered in [27]. Since (ζ, h) vanishes for r small, (ζ, h) ≡ 0 for r ≤ ρ2.

This implies that in radial gauge, the two solutions coincide on Bρ2(z2), which contains z1. Hence

∂Bρ0 ⊂ Ω. By the compactness of ∂Bρ0 , we obtain a disk strictly larger than Bρ0 which is also

contained in Ω. This contradicts with the definition of ρ0. Therefore Ω = R2.

II. Now we prove that there exists a global gauge transformation g : Θ→ G such that g∗u2 = u1.

Indeed, there exists S > 0 such that

(−∞,−S]× S1 ⊂ ΘU (u1) ∩ΘU (u2). (A.24)

By the property of U , we see that the local gauge transformations around each point z ∈ (−∞,−S]×R appeared in I. are unique. Hence we can patch them to obtain a global gauge transformation

g : (−∞,−S]×S1 → G such that g∗u2 = u1. But it is easy to see that we can extend g to a longer

Page 42: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

42 GUANGBO XU

cylinder (−∞,−S + ε0]× S1 with ε0 independent of S (we omit the details). Hence there exists a

global gauge transformation which identifies u1 with u2.

Lemma A.8. Suppose we have two solutions (ui,Φi,Ψi) ∈ W 2,p(Bri ,M × g× g) on Bri ⊂ R× I,

i = 1, 2 to (A.3), for some J ∈ J l, l ≥ 2, satisfying the following conditions:

(1) ui(Bri) ⊂ U, u1(0) = u2(0);

(2) ui(Bri) is an embedded surface which intersects each leaf of gCU cleanly at at most one point;

(3) For each (s, t) ∈ Br1, there exists g ∈ G and (s′, t) ∈ Br2 such that u1(s, t) = gu2(s′, t).

Then r1 ≤ r2 and there exists a gauge transformation g : Br1 → G such that g∗(u1,Φ1,Ψ1) =

(u2,Φ2,Ψ2) over Br1.

Proof. We can find an embedded submanifold S ⊂ U of codimension dimG, transverse to G-orbits,

such that u2(Br2) ⊂ S. Then we can construct a smooth map π : G ·S → Br2 such that π v = Id.

The hypothesis implies that u1(Br1) ⊂ Gu2(Br2). Then the map π u1 must take the form

(s, t) 7→ (φ(s, t), t), and there exists a unique g(s, t) ∈ G such that

u1(s, t) = g(s, t)u2(φ(s, t), t). (A.25)

Now since ui is a solution to the vortex equation, we see on Br1 ,

0 = ∂su1 +XΦ1(u1) + Jt(∂tu1 +XΨ1(u1)) ≡ (∂su2) ∂sφ+ Jt (∂tu2 + (∂su1) ∂tφ)

≡ (∂su2) (∂sφ− 1) + (∂tu2) ∂tφ(

mod gCU

).

(A.26)

But since u2 intersects with leaves of gCU cleanly, we see that the above congruence holds if and

only if ∂sφ ≡ 1 and ∂tφ ≡ 0. Hence there exists s0 ∈ R such that u1(s, t) = g(s, t)u2(s + s0, t) for

each (s, t) ∈ Br1 . Since u1(0, 0) = u2(0, 0) and the second hypothesis, s0 = 0. Hence r1 ≤ r2 and

by Lemma A.6, the restriction of u2 to Br1 is gauge equivalent to u1.

Proposition A.9. For any J ∈ J l (l ≥ 2), and any u = (u,Φ,Ψ) ∈ M (x±; J,H) a nontrivial

connecting orbit, the set RI (u) is open and dense in ΘUI (u).

Proof. I. We first prove that RI(u) is open. If it is not the case, then there exists (s0, t0) ∈ RI(u)

and a sequence (si, ti) ∈ ΘUI (u) \ RI(u) such that limi→+∞(si, ti) = (s0, t0). By the definition of

RI(u), we must have that for each i large enough, there exists gi ∈ G and s′i ∈ R \ si such that

u(si, ti) = giu(s′i, ti). (A.27)

If s′i is unbounded, then we have that (for a subsequence) u(s′i, ti) → x±(t0) as i → +∞. This

contradicts with the condition that u(s0, t0) /∈ Gx±(t0). Hence s′i must be bounded. So we may

assume that s′i → s′0 ∈ R. This implies that u(s0, t0) = g0u(s′0, t0) for some g0 ∈ G. By the

definition of RI(u), we must have s′0 = s0. Hence the two different sequences (si, ti) and (s′i, ti)

both converges to (s0, t0). Then (A.27) implies that ∂su(s0, t0) ∈ gU ⊂ gCU , which contradicts with

the fact that (s0, t0) ∈ RI(u).

II. Now we prove that RI(u) is dense. Since we know that the subset CI(u) is discrete in ΘUI (u),

we only have to show that every point in ΘUI (u) \ CI(u) can be approximated by points in RI(u).

We take a point (s0, t0) ∈ ΘUI (u) \CI(u). We may also assume that u(s0, t0) /∈ Gx±(t0); otherwise,

for any other s close to s0, (s, t0) satisfies this condition.

Page 43: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 43

Now we assume that (s0, t0) is not in the closure of RI(u). Then there exists ε0 > 0 and a

nonempty open subset I0 ⊂ I with

Bε0 (s0, t0) ⊂ ΘUI0(u) \RI0(u). (A.28)

We may choose ε0 small enough and S large enough so that

(1) For any |s| ≥ S, |t− t0| ≤ ε0, u(s, t) /∈ Gu (Bε0(s0, t0));

(2) For |t− t0| ≤ ε0, u ([s0 − ε0, s0 + ε0]× t) is embedded and intersects with each G-orbit at

at most one point.

(3) Gu (Bε0(s0, t0)) ∩G(CI(u) ∩ [−S, S]× I0

)= ∅.

Now the condition (A.28) implies that for all (s, t) ∈ Bε0(s0, t0), there exists s′ ∈ R \ s such

that u(s, t) ∈ Gu(s′, t).

II.a) We claim that for each (s, t), there exists only finitely many such s′. Indeed, the first condi-

tion above implies that, if there are infinitely many such s′, then they must have an accumulation

point in [−S, S], and at the accumulation point ∂su lies in gCU . This contradicts with the third

condition. So the claim is true.

II. b) For any (s, t) ∈ Bε0(s0, t0), define

KS((s, t)) :=

(s′, t) ∈ [−S, S]× I | s′ 6= s, u(s, t) ∈ Gu(s′, t)

(A.29)

and

N := min(s,t)∈Bε0 (s0,t0)

#KS((s, t)) ≥ 1. (A.30)

We claim that there exists (s∗, t∗) ∈ Bε0(s0, t0) and ε1 > 0 such that Bε1(s∗, t∗) ⊂ Bε0(s0, t0), and

(s, t) ∈ Bε1(s∗, t∗) =⇒ #KS((s, t)) = N. (A.31)

Moreover, for any (sν , tν)→ (s∗, t∗), we have that the sequenceKS((sν , tν)) converges toKS((s∗, t∗))

as subsets.

Indeed, find any (s∗, t∗) ∈ Bε0(s0, t0) which realizes the lower bound N . If not the case, then

there exists a sequence (sν , tν) converging to (s∗, t∗) but #KS(sν , tν) > N . If the sequence of points

KS(sν , tν) have accumulations, then it will contradict with (3); if they don’t accumulate, then by

choosing a subsequence, we see that #KS(s∗, t∗) ≥ N + 1 which contradicts with the choice of

(s∗, t∗).

II. c) Hence we can actually assume that (s0, t0) = (s∗, t∗) and ε1 = ε0. In particular, we take

s1, s2, . . . , sN ∈ [−T, T ] be all numbers such that

u(s0, t0) ∈ Gu(si, t0), i = 1, . . . , N.

We claim that (which is similar to that in [11, Page 262]) there exists δ > 0 and r > 0 such that

u (B2δ(s0, t0)) ⊂ G(∪Nj=1u(Br(sj , t0))

), j 6= j′ =⇒ Br(sj , t0) ∩Br(sj′ , t0) = ∅. (A.32)

Then we define

Σj :=

(s, t) ∈ Bδ(s0, t0) | u(s, t) ∈ Gcl(u(Br(sj , t))). (A.33)

These are closed sets and Bδ(s0, t0) = Σ1∪· · ·∪ΣN . Then there exists j0 such that (s0, t0) ∈ IntΣj0 .

Then we take a small ρ > 0 such that Bρ(s0, t0) ⊂ IntΣj0 and Bρ(s0, t0) ∩Br(s1, t0) = ∅.

Page 44: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

44 GUANGBO XU

II. d) For every (s, t) ∈ Bρ(s0, t0), we see that KS((s, t)) ∩ Br(sj0 , t0) contains a unique element

(s′, t). By Lemma A.8 we see that for ρ ≤ r and the two objects u(s0 + ·, t0 + ·) and u(sj0 + ·, t0 + ·)are gauge equivalent over Bρ(0). Then by Proposition A.7, there exists a gauge transformation

g : Θ→ G such that

g∗u = u(sj0 − s0 + ·, ·).

Let δs = sj0 − s0 6= 0. Then we see that u and u(kδs + ·, ·) are gauge equivalent for all k ∈ Z.

This implies that u(s0, t) ∈ Gx±(t) by the asymptotic behavior of finite energy solutions. This

contradicts with our choice of (s0, t0), which means that RI(u) is indeed dense in ΘUI (u).

A.3. The universal moduli space over the space of admissible almost complex struc-

tures. For l ≥ k ≥ 2, p > 2, we denote

Mk,p(

[x±]; J l, H)

:=

([u], J) | J ∈ J l, [u] = [u,Φ,Ψ] ∈Mk,p ([x±]; J,H). (A.34)

Proposition A.10. For any l ≥ k, k ≥ 1, the universal moduli space is a C l−k-Banach submanifold

of Bk,p × J l.

Proof. We just need to prove that the linearized operator

D : T[u]Bk,p × TJ J l → Ek−1,p[u] (A.35)

is surjective. It is equivalent to consider the augmented one, for any representative u ∈ M (x±; J,H),

which is

D : TuBk,p × TJ J l → Ek−1,pu ⊕W k−1,p (Θ, g) . (A.36)

Now, because the restriction of D to the first component, which is the augmented linearized

operator Du, is already Fredholm, we only need to prove that D has dense range. If not the

case, then there exists a nonzero vector η = (η, ϑ1, ϑ2) ∈ Ek−1,pu ⊕W k−1,p (Θ, g) which lies in the

L2-orthogonal complement of the image of D; therefore η also lies in the orthogonal complement

of the image of Du. Hence η ∈ kerD∗u. By elliptic regularity associated to D∗u, we see that η is

continuous. We will show that η vanishes on an nonempty open subset of RI(u), which, by the

unique continuation property of D∗u, contradicts with the fact that η 6= 0.

Indeed, on RI(u), we decompose η = η′ + η′′ with respect to the splitting (A.1) (which also

depends on t). However, it is easy to find E′, E′′ ∈ TJ J l, supported near the G-orbit of u(z) for

any z ∈ RI(u), such that E′(s, t) is zero on gCU , E′′(s, t) is zero on T JtM

, and such that D(0, E′)

(resp. D(0, E′′)) has positive L2-pairing with η′ (resp. η′′) (the concrete way of constructing E′

and E′′ are similar to that in [24]). Then this shows that η vanishes on RI(u).

Then, looking at the first component of 0 = D∗u (η, ϑ1, ϑ2), we see on RI(u),

JtXϑ1 −Xϑ2 = 0. (A.37)

By the definition of RI(u), we see that ϑ1|RI(u) = ϑ2|RI(u) = 0. This finishes our proof.

Now the projection

M(

[x±]; J l, H)→ J l (A.38)

is a Fredholm map of class C l−k. Then by Sard-Smale theorem, we obtain

Page 45: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 45

Theorem A.11. For any pair [x±] ∈ CritAH , there exists l0 = l0(k, [x±]) ∈ Z+ such that for any

l ≥ l0, there exists a Baire subset J l;regH ⊂ J l, such that for any J ∈ J l;regH and any [u] = [u,Φ,Ψ] ∈M ([x±]; J,H), the linearized operator

DJ,H[u] : T[u]Bk,p → Ek−1,p[u] (A.39)

is surjective.

Using Taubes’ trick (see [24, Page 52]), we obtain

Corollary A.12. There exists a Baire subset J regH ⊂ J such that for any J ∈ J regH , the moduli

space M ([x±]; J,H) is a smooth submanifold of Bk,p([x±]) for any k ≥ 1 and p > 2.

A.4. Transversality for continuation map. It is easier to achieve transversality for the moduli

space defining the continuation map, because we are allowed to have objects which depend both

on s and t. We briefly sketch the method. Suppose we have a given homotopy Hs,t of compactly

supported Hamiltonians for (s, t) ∈ Θ such that Hs,t = Hαt for s << 0 and Hs,t = Hβ

t for s >> 0.

Now we are given two regular families of almost complex structures

Jα ∈ JHα(M,U, J)reg, Jβ ∈ JHβ (M,U, J)reg. (A.40)

Moreover, suppose we have two possibly different constants λα, λβ > 0, with a homotopy λs with

λs = λα for s << 0 and λs = λβ for s >> 0. We want to show that, for a “generic” homotopy

from Jα to Jβ (denoted by a family of almost complex structures Js,t, with Js,· ∈ J (M,U, J)), for

each pair [xα] ∈ CritAHα , [xβ] ∈ CritAHβ , the moduli space of solutions to the following equation∂u

∂s+XΦ(u) + Js,t

(∂u

∂t+XΨ(u)− YHs,t(u)

)= 0;

∂Ψ

∂s− ∂Φ

∂t+ [Φ,Ψ] + λ2

sµ(u) = 0

(A.41)

satisfying the conditions that u = (u,Φ,Ψ) is asymptotic to xα (resp. xβ) as s → −∞ (resp.

s→ +∞), is transverse.

Now take the function V (s, t) = e|s| which diverges exponentially as s→ ±∞. For l ∈ Z+∪∞,consider the space

J l(Jα, Jβ

)(A.42)

consisting of C l-family of admissible almost complex structures Js,t (with respect to the same U

and J as before) parametrized by (s, t) ∈ Θ, such that

|V (s, t)(Js,t − Jαt )|Cl(Θ−×M) <∞, |V (s, t)(Js,t − Jβt )|Cl(Θ+×M) <∞. (A.43)

Those J ’s are homotopies that are asymptotic to Jα (resp. Jβ) exponentially with their derivatives

up to order l.

Then, for each J ∈ J l(Jα, Jβ), consider the moduli space

N(

[xα], [xβ]; J ,H , λs

)⊂ Bk,p

([xα], [xβ]

)(A.44)

of solutions to (A.41). Since all element [u] ∈ M([xα], [xβ]; J ,H , λs

)will go into U as |s| →

∞, this implies that every such [u] is “irreducible” in the sense of [2]. Hence we can prove the

Page 46: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

46 GUANGBO XU

transversality of the universal moduli space over J l(Jα, Jβ

)in the same way as in [2], because

now the perturbation could be dependent on both s and t. Then using the implicit function theorem

and Taubes’ trick, it is easy to prove the following proposition.

Proposition A.13. There exists a Baire subset J regH ,λs

(Jα, Jβ

)⊂ J

(Jα, Jβ

)such that for ev-

ery J ∈ J regH ,λs

(Jα, Jβ

)and every pair [xα] ∈ CritAHα, [xβ] ∈ CritAHβ , the moduli space

N([xα], [xβ]; J ,H , λs

)is a smooth manifold of dimension CZ([xα])− CZ([xβ]).

References

[1] Elie Cartan, La topologie des espaces representatifs des groupes de Lie, L’Enseignement Mathematique 35 (1936),

177–200.

[2] Kai Cieliebak, Ana Rita Pires Gaio, Ignasi Mundet i Riera, and Dietmar Salamon, The symplectic vortex equa-

tions and invariants of Hamiltonian group actions, Journal of Symplectic Geometry 1 (2002), no. 3, 543–645.

[3] Kai Cieliebak, Ana Rita Pires Gaio, and Dietmar Salamon, J-holomorphic curves, moment maps, and invariants

of Hamiltonian group actions, International Mathematical Research Notices 16 (2000), 831–882.

[4] Simon Donaldson, Floer homology groups in Yang-Mills theory, Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics, vol. 147,

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002.

[5] Simon Donaldson and Peter Kronheimer, The geometry of four-manifolds, Oxford Mathematical Monographs,

Clarendon Press · Oxford, 1990.

[6] Stamatis Dostoglou and Dietmar Salamon, Self-dual instantons and holomorphic curves, Annals of Mathematics

139 (1994), no. 3, 581–640.

[7] Andreas Floer, An instanton-invariant for 3-manifolds, Communications in Mathematical Physics 118 (1988),

no. 2, 215–240.

[8] , Morse theory for Lagrangian intersections, Journal of Differential Geometry 28 (1988), 513–547.

[9] , Symplectic fixed points and holomorphic spheres, Communications of Mathematical Physics 120 (1989),

575–611.

[10] Andreas Floer and Helmut Hofer, Coherent orientations for periodic orbit problems in symplectic geometry,

Mathematische Zeitschrift 212 (1993), no. 1, 13–38.

[11] Andreas Floer, Helmut Hofer, and Dietmar Salamon, Transversality in elliptic Morse theory for the symplectic

action, Duke Mathematical Journal 80 (1995), no. 1, 251–292.

[12] Urs Frauenfelder, Floer homology of symplectic quotients and the Arnold-Givental conjecture, International Math-

ematics Research Notices 2004 (2004), no. 42, 2179–2269.

[13] Kenji Fukaya, Yong-Geun Oh, Hiroshi Ohta, and Kaoru Ono, Lagrangian Floer theory on compact toric mani-

folds. I., Duke Mathematical Journal 151 (2010), no. 1, 23–174.

[14] , Lagrangian Floer theory on compact toric manifolds II: bulk deformations, Selecta Mathematica 17

(2011), no. 3, 609–711.

[15] Kenji Fukaya and Kauro Ono, Arnold conjecture and Gromov-Witten invariants for general symplectic manifolds,

Topology 38 (1999), 933–1048.

[16] Ana Rita Pires Gaio and Dietmar Salamon, Gromov-Witten invariants of symplectic quotients and adiabatic

limits, Journal of Symplectic Geometry 3 (2005), no. 1, 55–159.

[17] Mikhael Gromov, Pseudoholomorphic curves in symplectic manifolds, Inventiones Mathematicae 82 (1985), no. 2,

307–347.

[18] Victor Guillemin and Steven Sternberg, Symplectic techniques in physics, Cambridge University Press, Cam-

bridge, 1984.

[19] Helmut Hofer and Dietmar Salamon, Floer homology and Novikov rings, The Floer Memorial Volume, Birkhauser,

1995, pp. 483–524.

[20] Michael Hutchings and Michael Sullivan, Rounding corners of polygons and the embedded contact homology of

T 3, Geometry & Topology 10 (2006), 169–266.

Page 47: GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY FOR HAMILTONIAN ISOTOPIES I: DEFINITION …guangbox/VHF1.pdf · 2013-12-25 · GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 3 1.3. Hamiltonian Floer theory in gauged ˙-model. In this

GAUGED FLOER HOMOLOGY 47

[21] Michael Hutchings and Clifford Taubes, Gluing pseudoholomorphic curves along branched covered cylinders. i.,

Journal of Symplectic Geometry 5 (2007), no. 1, 43–137.

[22] Peter Kronheimer and Tomasz Mrowka, Monopoles and three-manifolds, New Mathematical Monographs, 10,

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007.

[23] Gang Liu and Gang Tian, Floer homology and Arnold conjecture, Journal of Differential Geometry 49 (1998),

1–74.

[24] Dusa McDuff and Dietmar Salamon, J-holomorphic curves and symplectic topology, Colloquium Publications,

vol. 52, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2004.

[25] Ignasi Mundet i Riera, Hamiltonian Gromov-Witten invariants, Topology 43 (2003), no. 3, 525–553.

[26] Ignasi Mundet i Riera and Gang Tian, A compactification of the moduli space of twisted holomorphic maps,

Advances in Mathematics 222 (2009), 1117–1196.

[27] Louis Nirenberg and Shmuel Agmon, Lower bounds and uniqueness theorems for solutions of differential equations

in a Hilbert space, Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics 20 (1967), 207–229.

[28] Kauro Ono, The Arnold conjecture for weakly monotone symplectic manifolds, Inventionne Mathematicae 119

(1995), 519–537.

[29] Peter Ozsvath and Zoltan Szabo, Holomorphic disks and topological invariants for closed three-manifolds, Annals

of Mathematics 159 (2004), no. 3, 1027–1158.

[30] Sergey Piunikhin, Dietmar Salamon, and Matthias Schwarz, Symplectic Floer-Donaldson theory and quantum

cohomology, Contact and Symplectic Geometry, Publications of the Newton Institute, Cambridge University

Press, Cambridge, 1996.

[31] Joel Robbin and Dietmar Salamon, The Maslov index for paths, Topology 32 (1993), no. 4, 827–844.

[32] Dietmar Salamon, Lectures on Floer homology, Symplectic geometry and topology, American Mathematical

Society, Providence, RI, 1997.

[33] Stephen Schecter and Guangbo Xu, Morse theory for Lagrange multipliers and adiabatic limits, http://arxiv.

org/abs/1211.3028, 2012.

[34] Edward Witten, Supersymmetry and Morse theory, Journal of Differential Geometry 17 (1982), no. 4, 661–692.

[35] Chris Woodward, Quantum Kirwan morphism and Gromov-Witten invariants of quotients, arXiv: 1204.1765.

[36] , Gauged Floer theory for toric moment fibers, Geometric and Functional Analysis 21 (2011), 680–749,

arxiv.1004.2841.

[37] Guangbo Xu, Moduli space of twisted holomorphic maps with Lagrangian boundary condition: compactness,

Advances in Mathematics 242 (2013), 1–49.

[38] Fabian Ziltener, A quantum Kirwan map: bubbling and Fredholm theory, To appear in Memoirs of the American

Mathematical Society, 2012.

Department of Mathematics, 410N Rowland Hall, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA 92697

USA

E-mail address: [email protected]