Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 49 references

On the Parallels Between Minimal Surfaces and Einstein Four-Manifolds

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that every locally irreducible Einstein four-manifold is locally symmetric and, when compact, admits a minimal isometric immersion into a Euclidean sphere, with CP2 in S7 as the guiding example.

desk verdict The central theorem is false — Derdzinski's hypotheses are dropped and the Page metric is a counterexample — but the expository survey chapters are readable and well-cited. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.14972 v3 pith:4MJ3K3Z3 submitted 2025-06-17 math.DG

Mia Beard This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.DG MSC 53-0253A1053C2153C25
keywords MinimalsurfacesEinsteinmanifoldsDifferentialgeometryGeometricanalysisimmersionVeroneseembeddingLocallysymmetricspacesTakahashi'stheorem
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper argues that minimal surface theory and Einstein four-manifold geometry are not merely analogous but can be literally linked: under a symmetry condition (local irreducibility), an Einstein four-manifold should become a locally symmetric space and, if compact, should admit a minimal isometric immersion into a Euclidean sphere. The author builds the case by tracing parallel variational, analytic, and decomposition frameworks in both subjects, then fuses them with two classical rigidity results: Derdzinski's theorem (which forces local symmetry from self-duality and irreducibility) and Takahashi's theorem (which gives minimal sphere immersions for compact symmetric spaces). The concrete anchor is the Veronese embedding, which realises CP2 with the Fubini–Study metric as a minimal submanifold of S7. If the central claim holds, it would give a new extrinsic viewpoint on Einstein four-manifolds, letting one study their curvature through the geometry of minimal submanifolds in spheres.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the combination of two classical results. Derdzinski's rigidity theorem — here stated in the paper as applying to compact, oriented, self-dual, locally irreducible Einstein four-manifolds with non-zero scalar curvature — forces local symmetry (∇R = 0) except for two explicit Kähler–Einstein metrics (the Page metric on CP2#CP2 and the Chen–LeBrun–Weber metric on CP2#2CP2). Takahashi's theorem then turns local symmetry into extrinsic geometry: every irreducible compact symmetric space admits a minimal isometric immersion into a round sphere, constructed from a non-trivial eigenspace of the Laplace–Beltrami operator. The Veronese embedding of CP2 into CP5, lifted to S11 and projected through the Hopf fibration, provides the explicit immersion into S7. Together these steps carry the argument from an intrinsic curvature condition to an extrinsic minimal-submanifold realisation.

What would settle it

Take the Page metric on CP2#CP2: it is a compact, locally irreducible Einstein four-manifold. If it is not locally symmetric, then Theorem 9's assertion that every locally irreducible Einstein four-manifold is locally symmetric is false, and the minimal-immersion conclusion for it is the testable remainder.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery, stated as Theorem 9, is that every locally irreducible Einstein four-manifold (M4, g) is locally symmetric, by Derdzinski's rigidity theorem, and that every compact such manifold admits a minimal isometric immersion into a Euclidean sphere, by Takahashi's theorem. The proof chain runs: Jensen's theorem converts local homogeneity to local symmetry; Derdzinski broadens this to self-dual, locally irreducible Einstein metrics with non-zero scalar curvature, up to two explicit Kähler–Einstein exceptions; Takahashi then supplies the immersion for irreducible compact symmetric spaces via eigenfunctions of the Laplacian. The paper presents the Fubini–Study metric on CP2 as the model example, showing through the second Veronese embedding and the Hopf fibration that CP2 sits minimally inside S7 ⊂ R8. This is offered as evidence that the two theories 'coalesce' rather than merely rhyme.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes that Derdzinski's rigidity theorem applies to every locally irreducible Einstein four-manifold, even though the theorem as stated in the paper requires self-duality, local irreducibility, and nonzero scalar curvature, and even then has two exceptional Kähler–Einstein metrics.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Every compact locally irreducible Einstein four-manifold would be locally symmetric, and hence would admit a minimal isometric immersion into a Euclidean sphere.
  • The Fubini–Study metric on CP2 is realised as a minimal submanifold of S7, making CP2 a concrete instance where Einstein and minimal-surface geometry coincide.
  • The eigenspace construction underlying Takahashi's theorem would give a systematic way to generate minimal immersions from Einstein four-manifolds.
  • The synthesis suggests that compactness, monotonicity, and epsilon-regularity tools from minimal surface theory could be imported into the study of Einstein four-manifolds.
  • The sheeted/non-sheeted decomposition of minimal surfaces finds a direct counterpart in the thick/thin decomposition of Einstein manifolds, reinforcing the structural parallel.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper's Theorem 9 is stated without the hypotheses of Derdzinski's theorem; a careful reading suggests the conclusion should be restricted to compact, self-dual, locally irreducible Einstein four-manifolds with non-zero scalar curvature, with the Page and Chen–LeBrun–Weber metrics as possible exceptions.
  • If the rigidity step fails outside the self-dual class, the minimal-immersion conclusion may hold only for a narrow subclass of Einstein four-manifolds, so the 'bridge' might be a one-way street rather than a full equivalence.
  • The Veronese construction generalises naturally to CPn via higher-degree Veronese embeddings, suggesting that other projective spaces or homogeneous spaces could be minimally immersed into spheres in an analogous way.
  • The parallels drawn with Yang–Mills and constant scalar curvature metrics, mentioned in the paper as future directions, suggest the same variational-plus-rigidity template could apply to other elliptic systems.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript is an expository survey that draws structural parallels between minimal surfaces in three-manifolds and Einstein four-manifolds, covering variational formulations, second variation, monotonicity, epsilon-regularity, compactness, and thick/thin decompositions. Its final section aims to convert these parallels into a concrete bridge: Theorem 9 asserts that every locally irreducible Einstein four-manifold is locally symmetric by Derdzinski's theorem, and that every compact such manifold admits a minimal isometric immersion into a Euclidean sphere by Takahashi's theorem. The paper also presents a Veronese-based construction of CP^2 as a minimal submanifold of S^7.

Significance. If Theorem 9 were correct, it would be a striking rigidity statement, effectively forcing all locally irreducible Einstein four-manifolds into the symmetric realm and equipping them with universal minimal sphere immersions. The paper does collect and organize a useful set of known analogies and correctly cites the standard Takahashi construction, and the concrete example of CP^2 in S^7 is classical. However, the central original claim is false as stated, and the provided example does not support it in the manner claimed. The survey content does not offset this load-bearing error.

major comments (3)
  1. [§8.2, Theorem 9] The first bullet of Theorem 9, that every locally irreducible Einstein four-manifold is locally symmetric by Derdzinski's theorem, is false. Theorem 6, which is the cited Derdzinski rigidity statement, requires self-duality, local irreducibility, and nonzero scalar curvature, and even under those hypotheses it explicitly excludes the two cases in (45), namely the Page metric on CP^2#CP^2 and the Chen–LeBrun–Weber metric on CP^2#2\bar{CP}^2. The Page metric is a locally irreducible Einstein four-manifold with nonzero scalar curvature but is not locally symmetric, so it is a direct counterexample to the universal statement. The proof of Theorem 9 simply cites Derdzinski's theorem without addressing the dropped hypotheses or the exceptions.
  2. [§8.2, Theorem 9, second bullet] Even if local symmetry were established, the second bullet does not follow from Takahashi's theorem as stated. Theorem 8 is stated for irreducible compact symmetric spaces, not for all compact locally symmetric Einstein four-manifolds; a compact locally symmetric space is a quotient of a symmetric space by a discrete group and need not itself be a symmetric space in the required sense. The paper supplies no argument that such a quotient inherits an irreducible symmetric-space structure or that the minimal immersion from the universal cover descends to the quotient, so the inference to a minimal Euclidean-sphere immersion is unsupported.
  3. [§8.3.4, Proposition 2] The proof that CP^2 admits a minimal isometric immersion into S^7 is not valid as written. The lifted Veronese map takes values in S^11 ⊂ C^6 ≅ R^12, and the claim that the real and imaginary parts of the six complex coordinates span an 8-dimensional real linear subspace of R^12 is false; the image of the lift does not lie in a fixed R^8. The classical minimal immersion of CP^2 into S^7 is constructed from the first nontrivial eigenspace of the Laplacian, not by restricting the S^11 Veronese lift, so the presented derivation does not prove Proposition 2.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§8.1, Theorem 6] The statement of Derdzinski's theorem describes the two exceptional metrics as Kähler–Einstein cases, but the Page metric on CP^2#\bar{CP}^2 is not Kähler–Einstein; the description should be corrected or replaced by the standard 'conformally Kähler' or 'self-dual Einstein' classification language.
  2. [§5.1] In the proof sketch of Theorem 3, the sentence after Eq. (26) says that outside the unstable balls the surface is unstable; this should read 'stable', since the argument uses stability away from the finite unstable regions.
  3. [§4.1] The proof sketch of the Choi–Schoen theorem contains a notational confusion in Eq. (19)–(20): the integral bound is written with |A|^2 while the pointwise conclusion is stated for |A|^2, and the final 'choosing ε < 1/C' step does not track constants consistently.
  4. [§6.1] Definition 9 and the preceding paragraph give slightly different thresholds for the regularity scale r_ε(p), with the text using strict inequality and the definition using ≤; this should be harmonized.
  5. [Throughout] There are numerous typographical errors, including 'murkey', 'eigemvalues', 'bootrastrapping', 'susbets', 'occus', 'behabiour', and 'an isometric an isometric'; these should be corrected throughout.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: all load-bearing steps are imports of external theorems or classical constructions.

full rationale

The paper's central claim (Theorem 9, §8.2) is built by chaining two external theorems, Theorem 6 (Derdziński rigidity) and Theorem 8 (Takahashi), neither of which is authored by the paper's author nor defined in terms of the paper's conclusion. Section 8.3's CP2-in-S7 minimal immersion is a classical Veronese construction verified via the horizontal Hopf lift and the first eigenspace of the Laplacian, and it does not depend on Theorem 9. No parameter is fitted and no predicted quantity is read off from an input datum. The issue with Theorem 9 is mathematical overreach: Derdziński's theorem as stated requires self-duality, compactness, orientation, nonzero scalar curvature, and carries two Kähler–Einstein exceptions, all omitted in the theorem's hypotheses. However, overreach is a correctness defect, not a circularity. There are no self-citations by the sole author and no uniqueness claim or ansatz is smuggled in through a self-citation chain. Thus the derivation chain is not circular, and the paper is best assessed on correctness grounds rather than circularity grounds.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No numerical fitting. The paper's claim rests on an overextension of two cited theorems, with hypotheses weakened without justification.

assumptions (3)
  • ad hoc to paper Derdzinski's rigidity theorem applies to every locally irreducible Einstein four-manifold.
    Theorem 9 uses this to conclude local symmetry, but Theorem 6 in the paper requires self-duality, local irreducibility, and nonzero scalar curvature; the extra conditions are dropped without comment.
  • ad hoc to paper Takahashi's theorem applies to compact locally symmetric Einstein four-manifolds.
    Local symmetry does not imply global homogeneity; Takahashi requires a compact homogeneous Riemannian manifold with irreducible isotropy representation. This is not established.
  • ad hoc to paper Jensen's theorem for locally homogeneous Einstein four-manifolds implies local symmetry for locally irreducible ones.
    The paper conflates local homogeneity with local irreducibility in the path from Jensen to Derdzinski.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On the Parallels Between Minimal Surfaces and Einstein Four-Manifolds." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4MJ3K3Z3

@misc{pith2026250614972,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On the Parallels Between Minimal Surfaces and Einstein Four-Manifolds},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4MJ3K3Z3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.14972}
}
abstract

Minimal surfaces and Einstein manifolds are among the most natural structures in differential geometry. Whilst minimal surfaces are well understood, Einstein manifolds remain far less so. This exposition synthesises together a set of parallels between minimal surfaces embedded in an ambient three-manifold, and Einstein four-manifolds. These parallels include variational formulations, topological constraints, monotonicity formulae, compactness and epsilon-regularity theorems, and decompositions such as thick/thin and sheeted/non-sheeted structures. Though distinct in nature, the striking analogies between them raises a profound question: might there exist circumstances in which these objects are, in essence, manifestations of the same underlying geometry? Drawing on foundational results such as Jensen's theorem, Takahashi's theorem, and a conjecture of Song, this work suggests a bridge between the two structures. In particular, it shows that certain Einstein four-manifolds admit a minimal immersion into a higher-dimensional sphere. A key example of this is the embedding of $\mathbb{CP}^{2}$ into $S^{7}$ via the Veronese map, where it arises as a minimal submanifold.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.14972 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A selection of classical minimal surfaces: the catenoid (top left), the Enneper [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

49 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Statique expérimentale et théorique des liquides soumis aux seules forces moléculaires

    Joseph Plateau. Statique expérimentale et théorique des liquides soumis aux seules forces moléculaires. Gauthier-Villars, 1873

    work page

  2. [2]

    Callens and Amir A

    Sebastien J.P. Callens and Amir A. Zadpoor. From flat sheets to curved geometries: Origami and kirigami approaches. Materials Today, 21 0 (3): 0 241–264, Apr 2018. doi:10.1016/j.mattod.2017.10.004

    doi:10.1016/j.mattod.2017.10.004 2018

  3. [3]

    Riemannian geometry

    Manfredo Perdigao do Carmo. Riemannian geometry. Birkh \"a user, 1993

    work page 1993

  4. [4]

    Arthur L. Besse. Einstein Manifolds, volume 10 of Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete (Results in Mathematics and Related Areas). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1987. ISBN 978-3-540-15279-5. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-74311-8

    doi:10.1007/978-3-540-74311-8 1987

  5. [5]

    Thurston

    William P. Thurston. Three-Dimensional Manifolds, Kleinian Groups and Hyperbolic Geometry, volume 6. American Mathematical Society, 1982. doi:10.1090/S0273-0979-1982-15003-0

    doi:10.1090/s0273-0979-1982-15003-0 1982

  6. [6]

    The entropy formula for the ricci flow and its geometric applications, 2002

    Grigori Perelman. The entropy formula for the ricci flow and its geometric applications, 2002. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0211159

    arXiv 2002

  7. [7]

    Finite extinction time for the solutions to the ricci flow on certain three-manifolds, 2003 a

    Grigori Perelman. Finite extinction time for the solutions to the ricci flow on certain three-manifolds, 2003 a . URL https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0307245

    arXiv 2003

  8. [8]

    Ricci flow with surgery on three-manifolds, 2003 b

    Grigori Perelman. Ricci flow with surgery on three-manifolds, 2003 b . URL https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0303109

    arXiv 2003

Show all 49 references
  1. [9]

    Some remarks on the gauss-bonnet integral

    John A Thorpe. Some remarks on the gauss-bonnet integral. Journal of Mathematics and Mechanics, 18 0 (8): 0 779--786, 1969. ISSN 00959057, 19435274. URL http://www.jstor.org/stable/24893137

    1969

  2. [10]

    Compact four-dimensional einstein manifolds

    Nigel Hitchin. Compact four-dimensional einstein manifolds. Journal of Differential Geometry, 9 0 (3): 0 435--441, 1974

    1974

  3. [11]

    Algebraic Topology

    Allen Hatcher. Algebraic Topology. Cambridge University Press, 2002. See Chapter 2 on homology and Euler characteristic

    2002

  4. [12]

    Stasheff

    John Milnor and James D. Stasheff. Characteristic Classes, volume 76 of Annals of Mathematics Studies. Princeton University Press, 1974

    1974

  5. [13]

    Topological Methods in Algebraic Geometry

    Friedrich Hirzebruch. Topological Methods in Algebraic Geometry. Springer-Verlag, 1995. Especially Chapter 1 on the signature theorem

    1995

  6. [14]

    Atiyah and Isadore M

    Michael F. Atiyah and Isadore M. Singer. The index of elliptic operators: I. Annals of Mathematics, 87 0 (3): 0 484--530, 1968

    1968

  7. [15]

    Riemannian manifolds with positive mean curvature

    Sumner Byron Myers. Riemannian manifolds with positive mean curvature. Duke Mathematical Journal, 8 0 (2), Jun 1941. doi:10.1215/s0012-7094-41-00832-3

    1941 doi

  8. [16]

    On a deformation of riemannian structures on compact manifolds

    Hidehiko Yamabe. On a deformation of riemannian structures on compact manifolds. Osaka Mathematics Journal, 1960

    1960

  9. [17]

    From minimal surfaces to einstein 4-manifolds and back

    Antoine Song. From minimal surfaces to einstein 4-manifolds and back. In Stanford University Mathematic Department Seminars, 2021

    2021

  10. [18]

    A surface useful for illustrating the implicit function theorem

    Jeffrey Nunemacher. A surface useful for illustrating the implicit function theorem. The College Mathematics Journal, 34 0 (4): 0 324--326, 2003

    2003

  11. [19]

    The ricci flow: an introduction

    Bennett Chow and Dan Knopf. The ricci flow: an introduction. Mathematical surveys and monographs, 110, 2011

    2011

  12. [20]

    Ricci flow and the sphere theorem, volume 111

    Simon Brendle. Ricci flow and the sphere theorem, volume 111. American Mathematical Soc., 2010

    2010

  13. [21]

    The structure of complete stable minimal surfaces in 3-manifolds of non-negative scalar curvature

    Doris Fischer-Colbrie and Richard Schoen. The structure of complete stable minimal surfaces in 3-manifolds of non-negative scalar curvature. Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics, 33 0 (2): 0 199--211, 1980. doi:10.1002/cpa.3160330206

    1980 doi

  14. [22]

    Topology from the differentiable viewpoint, volume 21

    John Willard Milnor and David W Weaver. Topology from the differentiable viewpoint, volume 21. Princeton university press, 1997

    1997

  15. [23]

    Galloway

    Gregory J. Galloway. The lichnerowicz laplacian and the second variation of the einstein-hilbert action. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 117 0 (4): 0 571--583, 1988. doi:10.1007/BF01218272

    1988 doi

  16. [24]

    A survey on classical minimal surface theory, volume 60

    William Meeks and Joaqu \' n P \'e rez. A survey on classical minimal surface theory, volume 60. American Mathematical Soc., 2012

    2012

  17. [25]

    Minimal hypersurfaces and geometric inequalities

    Simon Brendle. Minimal hypersurfaces and geometric inequalities. Annales de la Facult \'e des sciences de Toulouse: Math \'e matiques , 32 0 (1): 0 179--201, 2023

    2023

  18. [26]

    Lectures on minimal surface theory, 2016

    Brian White. Lectures on minimal surface theory, 2016. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1308.3325

    2016 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Tricks wiki: Give yourself an epsilon of room, Apr 2009

    Terence Tao. Tricks wiki: Give yourself an epsilon of room, Apr 2009. URL https://terrytao.wordpress.com/2009/02/28/tricks-wiki-give-yourself-an-epsilon-of-room/

    2009

  20. [28]

    Lectures on mean curvature flow of surfaces, 2024

    Robert Haslhofer. Lectures on mean curvature flow of surfaces, 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2105.10485

    2024 arXiv

  21. [29]

    The space of minimal embeddings of a surface into a three-dimensional manifold of positive ricci curvature

    Hyeong In Choi and Richard Schoen. The space of minimal embeddings of a surface into a three-dimensional manifold of positive ricci curvature. Inventiones mathematicae, 81: 0 387–394, 1985. doi:10.1007/BF01388577

    1985 doi

  22. [30]

    Total Mean Curvature and Submanifolds of Finite Type, volume 1 of Series in Pure Mathematics

    Bang-Yen Chen. Total Mean Curvature and Submanifolds of Finite Type, volume 1 of Series in Pure Mathematics. World Scientific, Singapore, 1984. ISBN 9789971978414

    1984

  23. [31]

    Lectures on Geometric Measure Theory, volume 3 of Proceedings of the Centre for Mathematical Analysis

    Simon Leon. Lectures on Geometric Measure Theory, volume 3 of Proceedings of the Centre for Mathematical Analysis. Australian National University, Centre for Mathematical Analysis, Canberra, Australia, 1983. ISBN 0-86784-429-9

    1983

  24. [32]

    Anderson

    Michael T. Anderson. Ricci curvature bounds and einstein metrics on compact manifolds. Journal of the American Mathematical Society, 2 0 (3): 0 455--490, 1989. ISSN 08940347, 10886834. URL http://www.jstor.org/stable/1990939

    1989

  25. [33]

    Curvature and injectivity radius estimates for einstein 4-manifolds

    Jeff Cheeger p and Gang Tian. Curvature and injectivity radius estimates for einstein 4-manifolds. Journal of the American Mathematical Society, 19 0 (2): 0 487--525, 2006. ISSN 0894-0347. doi:10.1090/S0894-0347-05-00511-4

    2006 doi

  26. [34]

    Compactness of the moduli space of self-dual connections on 4-manifolds

    Hiraku Nakajima. Compactness of the moduli space of self-dual connections on 4-manifolds. Journal of the Mathematical Society of Japan, 40 0 (3): 0 383--392, 1988

    1988

  27. [35]

    Einstein metrics

    Zhiyong Gao. Einstein metrics. Journal of Differential Geometry, 32 0 (1): 0 155--183, 1990

    1990

  28. [36]

    On a construction of coordinates at infinity on manifolds with fast curvature decay and maximal volume growth

    Shigetoshi Bando, Atsushi Kasue, and Hiraku Nakajima. On a construction of coordinates at infinity on manifolds with fast curvature decay and maximal volume growth. Inventiones mathematicae, 97 0 (2): 0 313--349, 1989

    1989

  29. [37]

    Trudinger

    David Gilbarg and Neil S. Trudinger. Elliptic Partial Differential Equations of Second Order. Classics in Mathematics. Springer, 2nd edition, 2001

    2001

  30. [38]

    Minimal hypersurfaces with bounded index

    Otis Chodosh, Daniel Ketover, and Davi Maximo. Minimal hypersurfaces with bounded index. Inventiones mathematicae, 209 0 (3): 0 617–664, 2017. ISSN 1432-1297. doi:10.1007/s00222-017-0717-5. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00222-017-0717-5

    2017 doi

  31. [39]

    Morse index, betti numbers and singular set of bounded area minimal hypersurfaces, 2022

    Antoine Song. Morse index, betti numbers and singular set of bounded area minimal hypersurfaces, 2022. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1911.09166

    2022 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Homogeneous einstein spaces of dimension four

    Gary Jensen. Homogeneous einstein spaces of dimension four. Journal of Differential Geometry - J DIFFEREN GEOM, 3, 01 1969. doi:10.4310/jdg/1214429056

    1969

  33. [41]

    Handbook of Differential Geometry, volume 1

    Andrzej Derdzinski. Handbook of Differential Geometry, volume 1. Elsiever, 2000. ISBN 9780444822406. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S1874-5741(00)80007-2

    2000 doi

  34. [42]

    Minimal immersions of riemannian manifolds

    Tsunero Takahashi. Minimal immersions of riemannian manifolds. Journal of the Mathematical Society of Japan, 18 0 (4): 0 380--385, 1966

    1966

  35. [43]

    Einstein 4-manifolds and minimal surfaces, 2024

    Antoine Song. Einstein 4-manifolds and minimal surfaces, 2024. Email correspondence with the author, December 20, 2024. Professor at Caltech

    2024

  36. [44]

    Algebraic Geometry: A First Course, volume 133 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics

    Joe Harris. Algebraic Geometry: A First Course, volume 133 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, 1992. ISBN 978-0-387-97716-4. doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-2189-8. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-2189-8

    1992 doi

  37. [45]

    Takeuchi's equality for the levi form of the fubini--study distance to complex submanifolds in complex projective spaces

    Kazuki Matsumoto. Takeuchi's equality for the levi form of the fubini--study distance to complex submanifolds in complex projective spaces. Kyushu Journal of Mathematics, 72 0 (1): 0 107--119, 2018. doi:10.2206/kyushujm.72.107. URL https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kyushujm...

    2018 doi

  38. [46]

    Basic algebraic geometry, volume 2

    Igor Rostislavovich Shafarevich and Miles Reid. Basic algebraic geometry, volume 2. Springer, 1994

    1994

  39. [47]

    The Geometry of Physics: An Introduction

    Theodore Frankel. The Geometry of Physics: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press, 2011

    2011

  40. [48]

    Foundations of Differential Geometry, Vol

    Shoshichi Kobayashi and Katsumi Nomizu. Foundations of Differential Geometry, Vol. II. Wiley, 1969

    1969

  41. [49]

    do Carmo and Nolan R

    Manfredo P. do Carmo and Nolan R. Wallach. Minimal immersions of spheres into spheres. Annals of Mathematics, 93 0 (1): 0 43--62, 1971. doi:10.2307/1970778

    1971 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.