CONSTANT ANGLE SURFACES IN PRODUCT SPACESThanks: This research was supported by Research Grant G.0432.07 of the Research Foundation-Flanders (FWO)
Abstract.
We classify all the surfaces in for which the tangent space makes constant angles with (or equivalently with for every point of . Here and are -dimensional space forms, not both flat. As a corollary we give a classification of all the totally geodesic surfaces in .
2000 Mathematics Subject Classification
53B251. Introduction
In recent years a lot of people started the study of submanifolds in product spaces, in particular surfaces in , where is a -dimensional space form of curvature . This was initiated by the study of minimal surfaces in the product space by Meeks and Rosenberg in [13] and by Rosenberg in [15]. In the papers [6] and [7] geometers began the study of constant angle surfaces in , i.e. surfaces for which the normal of the surface makes a constant angle with the vector field parallel to the second component of and hence also with the first component of . They proved that they can construct all the constant angle surfaces in starting from an arbitrary curve in and that these surfaces have constant Gaussian curvature. Here we would like to define and classify constant angle surfaces in a product space of two -dimensional space forms, not both flat. We show that these constant angle surfaces have necessarily constant Gaussian curvature. In the classification theorem we show that some of the constant angle surfaces can be constructed from curves in and . In other cases, the constant angle surfaces in will be constructed from a solution of a Sine-(or Sinh-)Gordon equation and its Bäcklund transformation.
2. Preliminaries
2.1. Surfaces in .
Let be the product of two -dimensional space forms of constant sectional curvature and with the standard product metric , with and not both . Denote by the Levi-Civita connection of and by the product structure of , see [16]. This is the -tensor of defined by
for any vector field , where and denote the parts of tangent to the first and second factors, respectively. By definition of the product structure , we see that is the projection of the vector field on the first component and that the -tensor has rank everywhere. Analogously we have that is the projection of the vector field on the second component and that the -tensor has rank everywhere. We note that the product structure has the following properties:
| (1) | |||
| (2) |
and
for any vector field and of . The Riemann-Christoffel curvature tensor of is given by
where associates to two tangent vectors the endomorphism defined by
for every .
Let us now consider a surface immersed in . We will denote by tangent vector fields and by vector fields normal to in . We can now let the product structure of act on a tangent vector field or on a normal vector field . We can consider the decomposition of and into a tangent component and a normal component as
where , , and are -tensors on . It can be easily deduced from equations and that
| (3) | |||
| (4) | |||
| (5) | |||
| (6) |
for every and every . If we denote by the Riemann-Christoffel curvature tensor of , then with the previous notations we obtain that Gauss, Codazzi and Ricci equations are written as follows in terms of and :
| (7) |
| (8) |
| (9) |
where and . Since is a surface immersed in , we have that equation (7) is equivalent to the fact that the Gaussian curvature is equal to
where is an orthonormal basis of . Moreover we have the following proposition that we can prove using the formulas of Gauss and Weingarten and the fact that .
Proposition 1.
For every and every , we have that
| (10) | |||
| (11) | |||
| (12) | |||
| (13) |
We remark that the -tensor is, in some sense, a kind of transpose of the -tensor , because of equation (5). We can easily see that equations (11) and (13) are equivalent because of equation (5). Analogously we can see that the two equations of (6) are equivalent.
The equations (7), (8), (9), (10), (11) and (12) are called the compatibility equations of surfaces in . The following theorems follow from more general results proven in [12].
Theorem 1.
Let be a simply connected Riemannian surface with Levi-Civita connection , a Riemannian vector bundle over of rank with metric , a connection on compatible with the metric , a symmetric tensor with values in . Let , and be -tensors over that satisfy equations (3), (4) and (6). Define by for , . Moreover and are bundle maps of rank defined such that and . Assume that the compatibility equations for are satisfied. Then there exists an isometric immersion such that is the second fundamental form, is isomorphic to the normal bundle of in by an isomorphism and such that
| (14) |
and
| (15) |
where is the product structure of .
Theorem 2.
Let , resp. , be isometric immersions, with corresponding second fundamental form , resp. , shape operator , resp. , normal space , resp. . Let and be -tensors on defined by (14) and and similarly for . Suppose that the following conditions hold:
- (1)
for every and .
- (2)
There exists an isometric bundle map such that
and
for every , and .
Then there exists an isometry of such that and .
2.2. Curves in .
In this short subsection we will discuss curves in -dimensional space forms with . It is known that is isometric to the -dimensional sphere of radius if , i.e.
endowed with the induced metric of . The tangent space in every point is given by
Using the cross-product in , we define a complex structure on by
It is easy to see that if and , then is an orthonormal basis of .
We can define in a similar manner a complex structure when . It is known that is isometric to the hyperbolic plane if . We use here the Minkowski or the hyperboloid model of the hyperbolic plane. Denote by the Minkowski -space with standard coordinates and , endowed with the Lorentzian metric
The hyperbolic plane can be constructed as the upper sheet () of the hyperboloid
endowed with the induced metric of . The tangent space in every point is given by
Using the Lorentzian cross-product in (see for example [7]), we define a complex structure on by
It is easy to see that if and , then is an orthonormal basis of . In the following we will denote as the complex structure of .
Let be an arc-length parameterized curve in . Denote by the tangent unit vector and by the normal vector . By direct calculations, one can show that
where is the Levi-Civita connection of or of . We call the geodesic curvature of in . We will need the geodesic curvature of a curve in in order to state our classification results of constant angle surfaces.
3. Constant angle surfaces
Since is a symmetric -tensor on , there exist continuous functions on such that for every in and are eigenvalues of at . Moreover and are differentiable functions in points where and are different. Assume that , then one can show that the distributions and are differentiable. From equations (3) and (5) it is easy to deduce that for . Hence we have that for every point there exists a unique and in such that
We call and the angle functions of in . This definition is inspired by the definition of angles between -dimensional linear subspaces of the Euclidean space given in [14] or [8], where and are the angles between and , . Moreover this definition of angle for surfaces in coincides with the definition of angle for surfaces in .
For Lagrangian surfaces in , a similar notion for angle was introduced in [9]; since for Lagrangian surfaces , see below, there is only one angle function. Lagrangian surfaces in are also studied in [2].
Definition 1.
A surface in is a constant angle surface if and are constant.
This definition also makes sense for , but in this case it is better to call a surface in a constant angle surface if there is a fixed plane in such that makes constant angles with this plane. This will be studied in a separate paper. Under additional conditions, a classification of those surfaces independently have been classified in [1].
3.1. Complex structures
Let and be complex structures on defined by
and
respectively, where and denote the standard complex structures on and . We obtain the following connection between the angle functions and the complex structures and .
Proposition 2.
Consider a surface in with angle functions and , then
| (16) |
and
| (17) |
for all and and a suitable choice of volume form of .
Proof.
We only prove this proposition in the case that . The other cases can be proved analogously. Let us consider an orthonormal basis of that diagonalizes . Hence we have that for . Then
where . This proves the first equation in the proposition. The second equation can be proved similarly and the proof of the proposition is finished. ∎
By direct computations, one can now easily prove the following theorem.
Theorem 3.
A surface in is a complex surface with respect to or if and only if is proportional to the identity. is Lagrangian with respect to or if and only if the trace of vanishes.
3.2. Totally geodesic surfaces
We show now that totally geodesic surfaces in are constant angle surfaces in .
Proposition 3.
Suppose is a totally geodesic surface of , then is a constant angle surface in .
Proof.
As is a totally geodesic surface, we have that for any and hence the eigenvalues of are constant. We give also the explicit values of and , because we will need these values in the classification of totally geodesic surfaces. Let be an arbitrary point in and an orthonormal basis in such that and . Using the equation of Codazzi, we obtain
with and . Hence we obtain that with , , and with or and with and . These conditions are equivalent to
- (1)
with ,
- (2)
and ,
- (3)
and with , and
- (4)
and with or and with .
Since and are continuous, one of the above conditions must hold. Hence we obtain that totally geodesic surfaces of are constant angle surfaces, in which and have one of the above specific values. ∎
In this section we will give a local classification of totally geodesic surfaces for which with . The other cases will be treated in the next sections and will appear as special cases of constant angle surfaces. We classify the totally geodesic surfaces of in Theorem 7. Suppose that , the other case can be treated analogously and the result of the second case is stated together with the first case in Proposition 4.
We can immerse as a submanifold of codimension in the Euclidean space . We also remark that we obtain, by using the equation of Gauss, that the surface has constant Gaussian curvature . So let be a totally geodesic surface in with . Let us fix a point in open set of and let be Fermi coordinates of in , there always exist such coordinates on an open set of a surface (see for example [11]). The metric of then has the form
on the open set of , with and for every , in terms of the Fermi coordinates . Since has constant Gaussian curvature, we have that is uniquely determined by the partial differential equation
So we find that is given by
| (18) |
because of the initial conditions and for every . Let us now consider as a surface of codimension immersed in . The formulas of Gauss are then given by
| (19) | |||
| (20) | |||
| (21) |
where is the position vector of in . Solving equations (19) and (20) we find that is locally given by
where and are constant vectors in . Moreover we have the following conditions
in which and . This conditions are equivalent to
From the above equations we can conclude that and are curves in and , respectively. Moreover we see that and are curves of speed and , respectively. The constant vector is perpendicular to the vectors and and the constant vector is perpendicular to the vectors and . Hence we obtain that and . Since and are constant vectors we obtain that the curves and are circles of radius and , respectively. We obtain the following proposition.
Proposition 4.
Let be a totally geodesic surface with , then is locally congruent to
| (22) |
where and are geodesic circles in and , respectively, of constant speed and if or to
| (23) |
where and are geodesic curves in and , respectively, of constant speed and if .
3.3. is proportional to the identity
Suppose now that , and that is a constant. Using equations (3) and (5) we see that for every . Moreover from equation (10) we immediately deduce that . Suppose first that and hence we obtain that or . In the first case this means that the tangent vector fields along are eigenvectors of with eigenvalue and that the normal vector fields along are eigenvectors of with eigenvalue . It can be shown then that is an open part of . Analogously we obtain that is an open part of if .
Let be now a constant in . Using the fact that for every , we deduce that is an eigenvector of with eigenvalue for every , i.e. . Take now an arbitrary orthonormal basis . Consider the shape operators and associated to and , respectively. We have then that and . Moreover we have that and hence we have that . We conclude that is a totally geodesic surface in , because is an orthogonal basis of and . Using the equation of Codazzi, we obtain that
Since and and are not both , we obtain that and . Hence we have that . Moreover we have that the Gaussian curvature of the surface equals . We summarize the previous in the following proposition.
3.4. is not proportional to the identity
We first consider the trivial case and . One can then easily prove that is an open part of a Riemannian product of a curve in and a curve of .
Suppose now that and is a constant in . Denote in the following by . Consider an adapted orthonormal frame such that and . Using equations (3), (5) and (6), we see that . We may suppose that . Moreover we can deduce from equations (3) and (5) that . Using equations (10), (11) and (12), we obtain that
| (24) | |||
| (25) | |||
| (26) |
From equations (24) and (25) we deduce that for every . Hence we obtain, using equations (24) and (26) and the fact that , that
where is the eigenvalue of and is the eigenvalue of . Since we know the shape-operators and and the symmetric operator , we can find the Gaussian curvature of . From the equation of Gauss we find that . From the equation of Ricci we obtain also easily that . We summarize the previous in the following proposition.
Proposition 6.
Let be a constant angle surface immersed in . Suppose that and is a constant in . Then we can find an adapted frame such that and , where and such that the shape operators and take the following form with respect to the orthonormal frame
| (27) |
for some functions and on . Moreover the Levi-Civita connection of and the normal connection of in are given by
| (28) | |||
| (29) |
The Gaussian curvature is given by
and the normal curvature is equal to .
We obtain a similar proposition if is a constant in and .
Proposition 7.
Let be a constant angle surface immersed in . Suppose that is a constant in and . Then we can find an adapted frame such that and , where and such that the shape operators and take the following form with respect to the orthonormal frame
for some functions and on . Moreover the Levi-Civita connection of and the normal connection of in are given by
| (30) | |||
| (31) |
The Gaussian curvature is given by
| (32) |
and the normal curvature is equal to .
Finally we consider the case for which and are constant, and . Let be an adapted frame such that and for . Using equations (10) and (12) and by similar reasoning as before, we obtain the next proposition.
Proposition 8.
Let be a surface immersed in . Suppose that and are constants in and . Then we can find an adapted orthonormal frame such that and , where for and such that the shape operators and take the following form with respect to the orthonormal frame :
for some functions and on . Moreover the Levi-Civita connection of and the normal connection of in are given by:
| (33) | |||
| (34) |
The Gaussian curvature is given by
| (35) |
and the normal curvature equals .
4. Existence results
We will need the following existence results in the next section.
Proposition 9.
Let , not both , with . Define constants and by
and
Let and be real-valued functions defined on a simply connected open subset of which satisfy
| (36) |
Then the Riemannian manifold with the Riemannian metric is a surface of constant curvature . Define now on the vector bundle a second metric by and denote this Riemannian vector bundle by . Let , , and be, respectively, -tensors over defined by
with respect to and , where and dual to the forms and . Finally define a symmetric tensor with values in and a connection on compatible with the metric by
| (37) |
where is the Levi-Civita connection of . Then satisfies the compatibility equations of and hence there exists an isometric immersion of in such that this surface is a constant angle surface and is unique up to isometries of .
Proof.
From (36) and a direct computation we know that the Riemannian metric has constant curvature and the Levi-Civita connection satisfies
We have already defined a second metric on the vector bundle , and denoted this Riemannian vector bundle by , together with a connection that is compatible with this metric. Let and be -tensors as defined above and the symmetric tensor defined by (37). By direct straightforward computations we can see that satisfies the compatibility equations for . Hence there exists an isometric immersion of into . Moreover, we can deduce from equation (14) that is a constant angle surface in . We can also conclude from Theorem that this immersion with the given second fundamental form and normal connection is unique up to rigid motions of . ∎
The next two propositions can be proven analogously as the previous one.
Proposition 10.
Let , not both , with . Define constants and as in Proposition 9. Moreover we suppose that . Let and be real-valued functions which satisfy
| (38) |
Then the Riemannian manifold with the Riemannian metric is a surface of constant curvature . Define now on the vector bundle a second metric by and denote this Riemannian vector bundle by . Let , , and be -tensors over as defined above in Proposition 9. Finally define a symmetric tensor with values in and a connection on compatible with the metric by
| (39) |
where is the Levi-Civita connection of . Then satisfies the compatibility equations of and hence there exists an isometric immersion of in such that this surface is a constant angle surface and is unique up to isometries of .
Proposition 11.
Let , not both , with . Define constants and as in Proposition 9. Moreover we suppose that . Let and be positive real-valued functions which satisfy
| (40) |
Then the Riemannian manifold with the Riemannian metric is a surface of constant curvature . Define now on the vector bundle a second metric by and denote this Riemannian vector bundle by . Let , , and be -tensors over as defined in Proposition 9. Finally define a symmetric tensor with values in and a connection on compatible with the metric by
where is the Levi-Civita connection of . Then satisfies the compatibility equations of and hence there exists an isometric immersion of in such that this surface is a constant angle surface and is unique up to isometries of .
4.1. Sine-Gordon and Sinh-Gordon equations
We would like to make some remarks on the equations (36). Suppose that . If we define functions such that , then the equations (36) are equivalent to
| (41) |
Differentiating the first equation with respect to and second equation with respect to gives us
| (42) | |||
| (43) |
The operations and yield
Hence we have found a correspondence between some constant angle surfaces in and the Sine-Gordon equation. We would like to remark that the equations (41) are the Bäcklund transformations for this Sine-Gordon equation. So we obtain a big range of surfaces with constant angle in .
With similar reasoning we find a correspondence with the Sinh-Gordon equation and some constant angle surfaces in if . We define functions , such that , then the equations (36) are equivalent to
Differentiating the first equation with respect to and second equation with respect to gives us
| (44) | |||
| (45) |
The operations and yield
| (46) | |||
| (47) |
Finally we suppose that and . We define functions , such that , and , such that , then the equations (36) are equivalent to
Differentiating the first equation with respect to and the second equation with respect to gives us
| (48) | |||
| (49) |
The operations and yield
5. Main Theorems
In this final section we will classify all the constant angle surfaces in . We split the classification in several subcases. Suppose first that and is a constant in . We will prove the following theorem.
Theorem 4.
A surface isometrically immersed in is a constant angle surface with angles and if and only if the immersion is locally given by
where is a curve in of constant speed and is a unit speed curve in ; by
where is a curve in of constant speed and is a unit speed curve in ,
| (50) |
where is a curve in of constant speed , and , where is a function on an interval .
Proof.
After a straight-forward computation, one can verify that the surfaces listed in the theorem are constant angle surfaces in with angles and .
Conversely, let be a constant angle surface, with and . Then Proposition (6) tells us that we can find an adapted orthonormal frame such that and and such that the shape operators associated to and with respect to and are given by
for some functions and on . Using (28) we obtain that the Levi-Civita connection satisfies
| (51) | |||
| (52) | |||
| (53) | |||
| (54) |
From equations (52) and (53) and the fact that , we can deduce that there exist locally coordinates on such that and with
| (55) |
Hence the metric takes the form
and the Levi-Civita connection is given by
We can also calculate the normal connection of using (29):
The Codazzi equation gives us now that
| (56) | |||
| (57) |
We immediately see that is a function that depends only on . We solve now equations (55) and (57). From equation (57) we see that must satisfy the following PDE:
By integration we obtain that must be equal to
where is some function depending on . Now, solving (55) we see that equals
where is some strictly positive function depending on .
We will only consider the case for which . The other cases can be treated analogously and the results of the other cases are stated in Theorem 4. So we can consider as a submanifold of or of codimension or and denote by the connection of or . Hence is an immersed surface in or . Remark now that , , which are tangent to , and are normals of in if and that and are normals of in or if . Moreover we have that and hence is parallel to the first component of . One can verify that we have for every ,
| (58) |
and
| (59) |
where is the product structure of . Moreover the formulas of Gauss and Weingarten give that:
| (60) | |||
| (61) | |||
| (62) |
In the following we will consider the case for which . The case for which can be treated analogously. Since we find using equation (58) that
and hence we obtain that for . Analogously we find that
We now use the formula of Gauss and the previous equations to find that
| (63) | |||
| (64) | |||
| (65) |
for . Integrating equation (64), we find that
and hence we obtain that
for and with and arbitrary functions. Moreover, using equation (65) we find that the functions must satisfy
where and are constant. We summarize the previous and see that our immersion is given by
We define now the functions
We use now some conditions to find a relation between and :
which are equivalent to
| (66) |
From the above equations we see that and are curves in . Moreover if we change the -coordinate such that is a unit speed curve, which corresponds to the fact that , we see then from the previous equations that is a curve in that is perpendicular to the vectors and . Hence we obtain that and we can choose that . The immersion is then given by
Let us remark that since , we obtain that and hence we have . Using equation (66), we obtain that . ∎
The case for which and can be treated analogously as the previous case. We summarize this case in the next theorem:
Theorem 5.
A surface isometrically immersed in is a constant angle surface with angles and if and only if the immersion is locally given by
where is a curve in of constant speed and is a unit speed curve in ; by
where is a curve in of constant speed and is a unit speed curve in ; or by
| (67) |
where is a curve in of constant speed , and , where is a function on an interval .
We consider now the case for which and and show the following theorem.
Theorem 6.
Let be a constant angle surface with . Then there are possibilities:
- (1)
is an open part of the surfaces parameterized by
where is equal to or and or is a real number in such that or is equal to and is a curve in of constant speed and geodesic curvature and is a curve in of constant speed and geodesic curvature , such that ,
- (2)
a constant angle surface in given by Proposition or 11.
Proof.
After a straight-forward computation, one can deduce that the surfaces listed in the theorem are constant angle surfaces in . Conversely, let us assume that is a constant angle surface in with angles . Suppose first that . Then is a totally geodesic surface in and . Hence is locally congruent to (22) and (23). So we are in the special case of case of the theorem. Let us now suppose that . Then there is an adapted orthonormal frame such that and , where , for . Moreover we have that the shape operators and have the same form as (27) with respect to . Moreover the Levi-Civita connection is given by
| (68) | |||
| (69) | |||
| (70) | |||
| (71) |
We also know the normal connection of in :
Using the expressions for the Levi-Civita connection and the normal connection, we find that the Codazzi equations are given by
| (72) | |||
| (73) |
Case 1: . From the equations of Codazzi (72) and (73) we obtain that
, because and hence we obtain that with . Since by assumption, we have a contradiction.
Case 2: . As before, using the equation of Codazzi, we obtain that and hence we obtain that with . Denote in the following by . We will work out only the case for which and . The other case can be treated analogously. From the expressions for the Levi-Civita connection, we find that . Let us take now coordinates on with and . Using the condition and the expressions for the Levi-Civita connection we find that
| (74) | |||
| (75) |
Equation (75) implies that, after a change of the -coordinate, we can assume that and hence the metric takes the form
and so the Levi-Civita connection becomes:
The equation of Codazzi (73) can now be rewritten as
| (76) |
Integrating equations (74) and (76) we find
We consider now the surface as a codimension 4 immersed surface in the Euclidean space . By we will denote the Euclidean connection. We remark that and are normals of in . We still have that the equations (58) and (59) hold. Moreover the equations of Gauss and Weingarten are given by
Now applying the formula Gauss and the previous equations we find
| (77) | |||
| (78) | |||
| (79) |
where
Integrating the last two formulas of Gauss, i.e. (78) and (79), we obtain analogously as before that
where and and
for . Moreover we have the following equations
which are equivalent to
We obtain from the above equations that and are curves in , that and are curves in . If we change the -coordinate such that and have constant speed and , which corresponds to the fact that , we see then from the previous equations that and and we can choose and . From the last two equations we also deduce that and . This is equivalent to , where and are the geodesic curvatures of respectively and . So we obtain the first case of the theorem.
Case 3: . Let be coordinates on such that and . From the expression of the Levi-Civita connection, i.e. equation (68) and the condition , we obtain
| (80) | |||
| (81) |
where and are constants as in Proposition 9. Using the previous equations, we can rewrite the equations of Codazzi (72) and (73) as follows
where and are constants as in Proposition 9 and hence we obtain that and . We have to consider now several subcases.
Case 3.a.: , . After a transformation of the -coordinate and the -coordinate we can suppose that and . Substituting this in equations (80) and (81) we obtain equations (36). We can conclude that the isometric immersion is locally congruent to the surface of Proposition 9.
Case 3.b.: , . Since , we have that . So we have that , because . We conclude that and without loss of generalization we can suppose that . After a transformation of the -coordinate, we can suppose that . Substituting the last two equations into equations (80) and (81) we obtain equations (38). We can conclude that the isometric immersion is locally congruent to the surface of Proposition 10.
Case3.b.: . Analogously as before we conclude that is locally congruent to the surface of Proposition 11. ∎
We end this paper with a classification of the totally geodesic surfaces of . We have seen that a totally geodesic surface of is a constant angle surfaces of . We will use the classification of the constant angle surfaces to give the classification of the totally geodesic surfaces of .
Theorem 7.
Let be a totally geodesic surface of . Then there are four possibilities
- (1)
- (2)
is a product of two geodesic curves;
- (3)
is an open part of or ;
- (4)
Proof.
Proposition 3 tells us that a totally geodesic surface of is a constant angle surface. Moreover in the proof of Proposition 3, we have seen that there are four possible situations. In the first case we have seen that the angle functions and are equal and have value , in which , and . We have classified these totally geodesic surfaces in Proposition 4 and showed that they are locally congruent to (22) if or to (23) if . The second case says that the angle functions are equal to . If the angle functions have opposite sign then one can easily show that the surface is a Riemannian product of curves of and and that this surface is totally geodesic if and only if both curves are geodesic curves of and . If both angle functions have the same sign then one can easily deduce that the surface is an open part of if the angle functions are equal to or an open part of if the angle functions are equal to . The third case in the proof tells us that one of the angle functions is and the other angle function is equal to . We show that in this case there exist only totally geodesic surfaces in the case that or . Suppose therefore that and . Remark that , because and . In Propositions 6 and 7 we have showed that the curvature of the surface is if one of the angle functions is or if one of the angle functions is . So if the other angle function is equal to , then we obtain that in both cases the curvature is equal to . But the surface is totally geodesic and hence we obtain form equations (28) and (30) that the surface is flat. Finally we obtain that and hence or . This is of course a contradiction, because we have assumed that and . Hence we obtain that in the third case or and so the angle functions in this case are . This brings us back to the second case and hence we are finished. In the fourth case we have that one of the angle functions is equal to and the other angle function is a constant in if or that one of the angle functions is equal to and the other angle functions is a constant in if . We can suppose that the other angle function is a constant in . We can easily deduce from the classification theorems 4 and 5, that is indeed locally congruent to the first immersion of (50), in which the curve is a geodesic curve of if , or to the first immersion of (67), in which the curve is a totally geodesic curve of if . ∎
Remark.
The special case when of Theorem 7 was also considered in the paper [3] where totally geodesic surfaces in (in particular, in ) were classified. In particular, they proved that a totally geodesic surface of is one of the following three kinds:
- (1)
a totally geodesic totally real surface,
- (2)
a totally geodesic complex surface,
- (3)
a totally geodesic surface of curvature 1/5 in which is neither totally real nor complex. This case occurs only when .
Since the third case doesn’t occur for , this is consistent with our results. It is interesting to remark that the third case was missing in [4] and [5]. This was remarked by S. Klein in [10], who didn’t notice that the missing case did occur in the earlier paper [3]. The authors would like to thank B.-Y. Chen for drawing our attention to [3].
References
- [1] P. Bayard, A. Di Scala, G. Ruiz-Hernandez, O. Osuna Castro, Surfaces in with constant principal angles with respect to a plane, preprint 2011.
- [2] I. Castro, F. Urbano, Minimal Lagrangian surfaces in , Comm. Anal. Geom. 15 (2007), 217–248.
- [3] B.-Y. Chen and H.-S. Lue, Differential geometry of , I, Geom. Dedicata 4 (1975), 253-261.
- [4] B.-Y. Chen and T. Nagano, Totally geodesic submanifolds of symmetric spaces, I, Duke Math. J. 44 (1977), no. 4, 745–755.
- [5] B.-Y. Chen and T. Nagano, Totally geodesic submanifolds of symmetric spaces, II, Duke Math. J. 45 (1978), 405–425.
- [6] F. Dillen, J. Fastenakels, J. Van der Veken and L. Vrancken, Constant Angle Surfaces in , Monaths. Math., 152(2) (2007), 89–96.
- [7] F. Dillen, M.I. Munteanu, Constant angle surfaces in , Bull. Braz. Math. Soc. (N.S.), 40(1) (2009), 85–97.
- [8] C. Jordan, Essais sur la géométrie à dimensions, Bull. Soc. Math. France 3 (1875), 103-174
- [9] M. Kimura and K.Suizu, Fundamental theorems of Lagrangian surfaces in , Osaka J. Math. 44 (2007), 829–850.
- [10] S. Klein, Totally geodesic submanifolds of the complex quadric, Differential Geom. Appl. 26 (2008), 79–96.
- [11] W. Kühnel, Differential geometry. Curves—surfaces—manifolds, Student Mathematical Library, 16. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2002.
- [12] D. Kowalczyk, Isometric immersions into product of space forms, Geom. Dedicata, 151 (2011), 1-8.
- [13] W. Meeks, H. Rosenberg, Stable minimal surfaces in , J. Differential Geom., 68 (2004), 515-534.
- [14] Y.C. Wong, Linear geometry in Euclidean 4-space, SEAMS Monograph, No. 1. Southeast Asian Mathematical Society, Singapore, 1977.
- [15] H. Rosenberg, Minimal surfaces in , Illinois J. Math., 46 (2002), 1177-1195.
- [16] K. Yano and M. Kon, Structures on manifolds, Series in Pure Mathematics, 3. World Scientific Publishing Co.