Negative curves on algebraic surfaces

Th. Bauer, B. Harbourne, A. L. Knutsen, A. Küronya,
S. Müller-Stach, T. Szemberg

Modified September 7, 2011; printed September 12, 2011

Alex Küronya was partially supported by the DFG-Forschergruppe 790 “Classification of Algebraic Surfaces and Compact Complex Manifolds”, and the OTKA Grants 77476, 77604, and 81203 by the Hungarian Academy of Sciences.

Abstract

We study curves of negative self-intersection on algebraic surfaces. Our main result shows there exist smooth complex projective surfaces X, related to Hilbert modular surfaces, such that X contains reduced, irreducible curves C of arbitrarily negative self-intersection C2. Previously the only known examples of surfaces for which C2 was not bounded below were in positive characteristic, and the general expectation was that no examples could arise over the complex numbers. Indeed, we show that the idea underlying the examples in positive characteristic cannot produce examples over the complex number field, and thus our complex examples require a different approach.

1 Introduction

In recent years there has been a lot of progress in understanding various notions and concepts of positivity [20]. In the present note we go in the opposite direction and study negative curves on complex algebraic surfaces. By a negative curve we will always mean a reduced, irreducible curve with negative self-intersection.

It has been known for a long time that there are algebraic surfaces with infinitely many negative curves, the simplest examples being the projective plane blown up in the base locus of a general elliptic pencil or certain elliptic K3 surfaces. In the first example all negative curves have self-intersection 1, in the second example the self-intersection is 2. In both cases negative curves are rational and there are no curves with lower self-intersection, i.e., the negativity is bounded from below.

It is natural to wonder whether these examples are indications of general phenomena. For example:

It is well-known [14, Exercise V.1.10] that the first question has a negative answer in positive characteristics; however, in the complex setting, a positive answer was expected. According to an old folklore conjecture (mentioned to the second author by M. Artin around 1980 and sometimes referred to as the Bounded Negativity Conjecture; see e.g. [13, Question p. 24], [12, Conjecture 1.2.1], [8]), the self-intersections of curves on complex surfaces should be bounded below; i.e., for any given surface X there should exist a number b(X) such that

C2 b(X)

for all reduced curves C on X. Our main result (see Theorem 2.8) shows surprisingly that this expectation was too optimistic.

Theorem A. There exists a smooth projective complex surface containing a sequence of negative curves whose self-intersections tend to .

In fact our results in Section 2 provide a whole series of such examples. With Proposition 2.1 we also show that the approach producing examples of surfaces in characteristic p > 0 does not work over the complex numbers.

It is important to point out that interesting special cases of the bounded negativity conjecture are still open. For example, one consequence of the Segre-Harbourne-Gimigliano-Hirschowitz Conjecture is that the only negative curves on a blow-up of the projective plane at a finite set of generic points are exceptional curves (i.e., smooth rational curves of self-intersection 1). Since our examples do not extend to such surfaces, the bounded negativity conjecture in the case of the projective plane blown up at a finite set of generic points remains open.

In Section 3 we address the second question above. We show:

Theorem B. For each integer m > 0 there is a smooth projective complex surface containing infinitely many smooth irreducible curves of self-intersection m. When m 2, the genus of the curves may be prescribed.

In view of Theorems A and B one may wonder if there are any circumstances at all for which some sort of boundedness of negativity holds. In Section 4 we finish the proof of Proposition 2.1 by showing bounded negativity for elliptic surfaces of Euler number 0. We also address question 3 by recalling a result showing that the self-intersections among negative curves of given genus on a surface is bounded below. Finally, in Section 5 we address question 4, by giving a sharp lower bound on the self-intersections of reduced curves, given that the self-intersections of negative curves is bounded below.

Acknowledgement. We would like to thank Jan Hendrik Bruinier, Lawrence Ein, Friedrich Hirzebruch, Annette Huber-Klawitter, Jun-Muk Hwang, Nick Shepherd-Barron and Kang Zuo for useful discussions. This collaboration grew out of interactions during the Oberwolfach mini-workshop “Linear Series on Algebraic Varieties”. We thank the MFO for excellent working conditions. We also thank SFB/TRR 45 for financial support for visits among some of us and for the 2009 summer school in Krakow, where some initial consideration of these problems occurred.

2 Hilbert modular surfaces and unbounded negativity

In positive characteristic there exist surfaces carrying a sequence of irreducible curves with self-intersection tending to negative infinity (see [14, Exercise V.1.10]). These curves are constructed by taking iterative images of a negative curve under a surjective endomorphism of the surface.

In more detail, the construction goes as follows. Let C be a curve of genus g 2 defined over an algebraically closed field k of characteristic p, let X = C × C be the product surface with Δ X the diagonal. Furthermore let F : C C be the Frobenius homomorphism, defined by taking coordinates of a point on C to their p-th powers. Then G = id × F is a surjective endomorphism of X. The self-intersections in the sequence of irreducible curves Δ,G(Δ),G2(Δ), tend to negative infinity.

We start by showing that, by contrast, in characteristic zero it is not possible to construct a sequence of curves with unbounded negativity using endomorphisms as above. In fact we prove an even stronger statement: the existence of a non-trivial surjective endomorphism implies bounded negativity.

Proposition 2.1. Let X a smooth projective complex surface admitting a surjective endomorphism that is not an isomorphism. Then X has bounded negativity, i.e., there is a bound b(X) such that

C2 b(X)

for every reduced irreducible curve C X.

Proof. It is a result of Fujimoto and Nakayama ([10] and [24]) that a surface X satisfying our hypothesis is of one of the following types:

In cases (1) and (2) the assertion is clear as X then carries only finitely many negative curves. In case (3) bounded negativity follows from the adjunction formula (cf. [4, Prop. 3.3.2]). Finally, bounded negativity for elliptic surfaces with Euler number zero will be established in Proposition 4.1. □

Note, however, that there cannot be a uniform bound b(X) for surfaces as in the proposition: For every integer N there is a toric surface carrying a curve of self-intersection less than N. (The surface can be realized as a successive blow-up of 2 at infinitely near points.). Of course the same holds for 1-bundles.

The above theorem shows that endomorphisms can never lead to infinitely many negative curves. The key idea in the construction of the example whose existence is postulated in Theorem A, is to replace endomorphisms by correspondences. We start towards the proof of Theorem A with some preliminary remarks on Hilbert modular surfaces.

In what follows we adopt the notation from [17] and [16] with the exception that we write K instead of 𝒪 for the ring of integers of a quadratic real field K.

Let p be a prime number such that p 1mod4. Consider the quadratic real number field K = (p) with ring of integers K = + 1+p 2 . Let σ Gal(K) be the nontrivial element (i.e. the conjugation σ(x + yp) = x yp). The group SL2(K) operates on 2 (the second cartesian power of the upper half plane) by

αβγ δ (z1,z2) = α z1 + β γ z1 + δ , σ(α) z2 + σ(β) σ(γ) z2 + σ(δ) .

The Hilbert modular group G = SL2(K)(±1) operates effectively. The quotient

X(p) := G2

is called a Hilbert modular surface. This surface is not compact, however, it can be compactified by adding finitely many points, called cusps. The resulting surface X̃(p) has finitely many quotient singularities outside of the cusps, coming from points in 2 in which the modular group G has a non-trivial isotropy subgroup. The singularities arising from the cusps can be resolved by cycles of rational curves, giving a different compactification of X(p). Of course, when computing intersections of compact curves not meeting the cusps, as we will do below, it does not matter which compactification one chooses.

On X(p) we consider a series of divisors T1,T2, defined as follows: Given a positive integer N, we consider the equation

apz1z2 + λz2 σ(λ)z1 + bp = 0 (1)

in variables (z1,z2) 2 with fixed a,b and λ K satisfying

λσ(λ) + abp = N.

The set of solutions of equation (1) is SL2(K)-invariant. We denote its image in X(p) by TN. It is either empty or a divisor in X(p). More precisely, we have the following property [17, p. 58].

Fact 2.2. If N is not a norm of an ideal in K and if N p = 1 (i.e., if N is a quadratic residue modulo p), then TN is non-empty and all components of TN are compact.

Thus, if N satisfies the arithmetic assumptions in the above statement, then TN is non-empty and does not pass through any cusp of the surface X̃(p).

If we consider equation (1) under the additional assumption that the triple

(a,b,λ) × × K is primitive, 

i.e., not divisible by any integer > 1, then the set of solutions is denoted by FN. We have the following characterization due to Franke [9], see also [16, Satz 1, p. 105].

Proposition 2.3. Let N be an integer that is a quadratic residue modulo N or divisible by p. Then the divisor FN is reduced and irreducible provided N is not divisible by p2, and it has exactly two components if p2 divides N.

If N does not satisfy the conditions in the Proposition, then FN is empty.

The relation between the TN’s and FN’s is given by the following fundamental equality, see [17, p. 60]:

TN = n2|NFNn2. (2)

The following arithmetic function is relevant for computing self-intersections of the curves FN, see [17, p. 83 (49)]

Hp(n) := H 4n x2 p , (3)

where the sum is taken over all integers x such that x2 4n and x2 4n is divisible by p. The function H(m) appearing in (3) is in turn defined as

H(m) := d2|mhn d2 , (4)

see [17, p. 69 (15)], where h is the class number function modified by the following convention:

h(3) = 1 3,h(4) = 1 2.

Furthermore, we follow Hirzebruch and set

H(0) = 1 12.

Combining Proposition 2.3, equation (2) and Fact 2.2 we have the following result which is crucial for further considerations.

Proposition 2.4. Assume that N is not a norm of an ideal in K and that it is a quadratic residue modulo p which is square-free (in particular not divisible by p2), then the curve FN is compact and irreducible in X(p), hence also in X̃(p), and we have

FN2 = 1 2 d|Nd d p + Nd p Hp N2 d2 . (5)

Proof. N being square-free implies via the decomposition (2) that FN = TN. The asserted self-intersection formula follows from the intersection formula on [17, p. 83 (50)] together with [17, Theorem 4, p. 87] taking into account that FN does not pass through any of the cusps. □

Next, we want to show that on X(p) (whence on X̃(p) as well) there exists an irreducible curve FN not passing through any of the cusps with negative self-intersection. To this end we prove first the following purely arithmetic fact.

Lemma 2.5. Let p be a large prime. Assuming the Generalized Riemann Hypothesis (GRH) for Dirichlet L–functions, there exist two prime numbers q1 and q2 such that

Proof. Property (a) follows unconditionally from the Chebotarev Density Theorem, stating, as a consequence, that the primes q that are not quadratic residues modulo p have Dirichlet density 12.

Assuming GRH, property (b) follows from a result of Montgomery [21, Theorem 13.2], since the least primes q satisfying (a) are of size 𝒪(2log(p)2). □

We use the primes q1 and q2 in order to show the existence of a negative compact curve on X(p).

Lemma 2.6. Let p,q1,q2 be as in Lemma 2.5. We set N = q1 q2. Then the curve FN is a negative compact curve on X(p).

Proof. According to formula (5) we have

FN2 = 1 2 1 1 p + N p Hp(N2) + q 1 q1 p + q2 p Hp(q22)

+ q2 q2 p + q1 p Hp(q12) + N N p + 1 p Hp(1).

Thanks to Lemma 2.5 and the definition of the function Hp in (3), this simplifies to

FN2 = 1 6(1 q1 q2 + q1q2),

which is certainly negative. □

Remark 2.7. Of course, in order to prove Theorem A, we do not need to invoke GRH, as it is enough to construct a single example of a surface with an unbounded sequence of negative curves. To this end we take p = 593, q1 = 3 and q2 = 5. Then N = 15 and FN2 = 4 3. Moreover in this case X̃(p) is of general type and this is the case for all primes larger than 569, see [15, p. 76].

We would like to work on a smooth, projective surface. One possibility would be to resolve the singularities of X̃(p) by blowing them up. However, we prefer a different approach: instead of blowing up the quotient singularities, we pass to the quotient of an arithmetic subgroup of finite index of G, thus obtaining a new, smooth Hilbert modular surface and a finite covering X0(p) X(p), and then we compactify X0(p) and resolve singularities by cycles of rational curves, called the cusp divisor.

This way we obtain a smooth, projective compactification Y 0(p) of a new Hilbert modular surface together with a generically finite, proper, surjective morphism π : Y 0(p) X̃(p). The idea is then to use Hecke correspondences to produce an infinite and unbounded sequence of negative curves on Y 0(p) out of the curve FN.

In the following we use the convention that a Shimura curve is a compact curve FN in X(p) (equivalently, in X̃(p) staying outside the cusps), or its inverse image in X0(p) (equivalently, in Y 0(p), where it does not intersect the cusp divisor).

Theorem 2.8. There exist smooth, projective models Y 0(p) of compactified Hilbert modular surfaces together with infinitely many proper smooth Shimura curves Cn such that the self-intersection number Cn2 tends to as n becomes large. Equivalently, the genus g(Cn) goes to infinity.

Proof. Take p and N as in Lemma 2.6. We first pass to a finite covering X0(p) X(p) which is defined replacing the group G by a torsion free subgroup G0 G of finite index, see [2, Sect. 10]. It corresponds to a quotient X0(p) = G0 × of the product of two upper-half-planes by the group G0. In particular, X0(p) is smooth, since G0 is torsion free.

The non-compact surface X0(p) can be compactified by the method of Baily–Borel [2] using the finite set of cusps. However, the Baily–Borel compactification would still be singular at the cusps. More preferable is to use a toroidal compactification Y 0(p) of X0(p), i.e., a smooth, projective model, where the cusps of X0(p) are resolved by cycles of rational curves [11, Chap. II].

We denote by S Y 0(p) the cusp divisor of Y 0(p), i.e., the inverse image of the set of cusps under the resolution. There is an induced generically finite morphism π : Y 0(p) X̃(p). By Lemma 2.6, for suitable p and N, there exist proper Shimura curves FN inside X(p) not intersecting the cusps, and such that the self-intersection FN2 is negative. Pulling back the curves FN via π, we obtain negative curves (FN)0 = π(FN) on Y 0(p), which still have negative self-intersection and do not intersect S.

We claim that we may assume that each such curve C := (FN)0 is smooth. This follows at least after replacing G0 by yet another smaller finite index subgroup. The reason is that C is the quotient of a geodesic curve × by an arithmetic subgroup G1 of SL2(). If we replace G0 by a finite index subgroup, then also G1 will be replaced by an induced subgroup. Hence, by choosing G0 small enough we can arrange that G1 becomes torsion free, and thus the inverse image of C is a smooth Shimura curve. One can find smooth Shimura curves C on Y 0(p) with negative self-intersection in this way.

By [2] and [23, Sect. 3-4] one may assume that the line bundle L := KY 0(p) + S is nef and big on the whole of Y 0(p) and even ample in the interior X0(p) = Y 0(p) S = G0 × . Therefore

KY 0(p) C = (KY 0(p) + S) C 1

for all compact curves C X0(p).

In the following argument we will need that any other smooth Shimura curve in X0(p) also has negative self-intersection. This follows from KY 0(p) C 1 and S C = 0 together with Hirzebruch’s proportionality principle (cf. [22, Theorems 0.1 and 0.2 combined]), which states the equality

(KY 0(p) + S) C + 2C2 = 0

for every smooth Shimura curve C (more generally, it holds for every smooth compactification of a modular curve intersecting S transversally).

Now we look at the Hecke algebra acting on X0(p). It consists of infinitely many correspondences T X0(p) × X0(p) such that the images T(C) of any Shimura curve inside X0(p) consist of unions of other Shimura curves [1, Sect. I.1]. The Hecke correspondences are induced by étale maps [1, Sect. I.1], hence irreducible components of Hecke translates of smooth Shimura curves remain smooth. It is known that the Hecke algebra produces a Zariski dense set T T(C) of curves from a single C, as the action of Hecke operators T on a single CM-point is dense in X0(p) [1, Sect. III (d)], and every Shimura curve contains infinitely many CM-points.

Assume that the irreducible components Cn of all components Cn of all Hecke translates T(C) of a given Shimura curve C have self-intersection numbers bounded from below. As each Cn is smooth, its self-intersection is a negative multiple of L Cn by Hirzebruch’s relative proportionality principle. Therefore L Cn – and by adjunction the genus g(Cn) – stays bounded when n goes to infinity.

We conclude that the set of all such curves Cn forms a bounded family. However, none of the curves Cn deform since they are all defined over a number field (alternatively, since they have negative self-intersection). Hence the well-known boundedness principle implies that the set of all these Cn is finite. But this contradicts the density of the union of all Hecke translates of C, as a finite set of curves is never Zariski dense. □

3 Surfaces with infinitely many negative curves of fixed self-intersection

The well-known example of 2 blown-up at nine points shows that there are surfaces containing infinitely many (1)-curves. Along similar lines, we point out here that one can exhibit surfaces with infinitely many negative curves of any given (fixed) negative self-intersection and thus prove Theorem B.

Theorem 3.1. For every integer m > 0 there are smooth projective complex surfaces containing infinitely many smooth irreducible curves of self-intersection m.

Proof. Let E be an elliptic curve without complex multiplication, and let A be the abelian surface E × E. We denote by F1 and F2 the fibers of the projections and by Δ the diagonal in A. It is shown in [6, Proposition 2.3] that every elliptic curve on A that is not a translate of F1,F2 or Δ has numerical equivalence class of the form

Ec,d := c(c + d)F1 + d(c + d)F2 cdΔ,

where c and d are suitable coprime integers, and conversely, that every such numerical class corresponds to an elliptic curve Ec,d on A. In our construction we will make use of a sequence (En) of such curves, for instance taking En = En,1 for n 2. No two of the curves En are then translates of each other.

Fix a positive integer t such that t2 m. For each of the elliptic curves En, the number of t-division points on En is t2, and these points are among the t-division points of A. (Actually, the latter is only true if En is a subgroup of A, but this can be achieved by using a translate of En passing through the origin.) Since the number of t-division points on A is finite – there are exactly t4 of them – there must exist a subsequence of (En) having the property that all curves En in the subsequence have the same set of t-division points, say {e1,,et2}.

Consider now the blow-up f : X A at the set {e1,,em}. The proper transform Cn of En is then a smooth irreducible curve on X with

Cn2 = E n2 m = m,

as claimed. □

Remark 3.2. Note that the proof yields a one-dimensional family of surfaces, and that the constructed surfaces are of Picard number m + 3.

For each m 1, the proof above gives a surface X with infinitely many curves of genus 1 of self-intersection m. This raises the question of whether for each m 1 and each g 0 there is a surface X with infinitely many curves of genus g of self-intersection m. We now show that the answer is yes at least for m > 1:

Theorem 3.3. For each m > 1 and each g 0 there exists a smooth projective complex surface containing infinitely many smooth irreducible curves of self-intersection m and genus g.

Proof. Let f : X B be a smooth complex projective minimal elliptic surface with section, fibered over a smooth base curve B of genus g(B). Then X can have no multiple fibers, so that by Kodaira’s well-known result (cf. [3, V,Corollary 12.3]), KX is a sum of a specific choice of 2g(B) 2 + χ(𝒪X) fibers of the elliptic fibration. Let C be any section of the elliptic fibration f. By adjunction, C2 = χ(𝒪X).

Take X to be rational and f to have infinitely many sections; for example, blow up the base points of a general pencil of plane cubics. Then χ(𝒪X) = 1, so that C2 = 1 for any section C.

Pick any g 0 and any m 2. Then, as is well-known [18], there is a smooth projective curve C of genus g and a finite morphism h : C B of degree m that is not ramified over points of B over which the fibers of f are singular. Let Y = X ×BC be the fiber product. Then the projection p : Y C makes Y into a minimal elliptic surface, and each section of f induces a section of p. By the property of the ramification of h, the surface Y is smooth and each singular fiber of f pulls back to m isomorphic singular fibers of p. Since e(Y ) is the sum of the Euler characteristics of the singular fibers of p (cf. e.g. [3, III, Proposition 11.4]), we obtain from Noether’s formula that χ(𝒪Y ) = e(Y )12 = me(X)12 = mχ(𝒪X) = m. Therefore, for any section D of p, we have D2 = m; i.e., Y has infinitely many smooth irreducible curves of genus g and self-intersection m. □

Question 3.4. Is there for each g > 1 a surface with infinitely many (1)-curves of genus g?

4 Bounding negativity

It is natural to ask for suitable geometric hypotheses that ensure bounded negativity. We start with a result on elliptic surfaces, needed to finish the proof of Proposition 2.1.

Proposition 4.1. Let X be a smooth projective complex elliptic surface with e(X) = 0. Then there are no negative curves on X.

Proof. Let π : X B be an elliptic fibration, where B is a smooth curve, and let F be the class of a fiber of π. By the properties of e(X) of a fibered surface (cf. [3, III, Proposition 11.4 and Remark 11.5]), the only singular fibers of X are possibly multiple fibers, and the reduced fibers are always smooth elliptic curves. In particular, X must be minimal and its fibers do not contain negative curves.

Aiming at a contradiction, assume that C X is a negative curve. Then, by the above, the intersection number n := C F is positive. This means that π restricts to a map C B of degree n. Taking an embedded resolution f : X̃ X of C, we get a smooth curve C̃ = fC Γ, where the divisor Γ is supported on the exceptional locus of f. The Hurwitz formula, applied to the induced covering C̃ B, yields

2g(C̃) 2 = n (2g(B) 2) + degR, (6)

where R is the ramification divisor.

Let m1F1,,mkFk denote the multiple fibers of π. The assumption e(X) = 0 implies via Noether’s formula that KX num (2g(B) 2)F + (mi 1)Fi. Hence

KX C = n(2g(B) 2) + (mi 1)Fi C = n(2g(B) 2) + (mi 1)fF i fC = n(2g(B) 2) + (mi 1)fF i C̃ n(2g(B) 2) + degR.

On the other hand,

2g(C̃) 2 = C̃2 + K X̃ C̃ = (fC Γ)2 + (fK X + KX̃X)(fC Γ) = C2 + Γ2 + K X C KX̃X Γ.

Consequently, using (6), we obtain

C2 K X̃X Γ Γ2.

The subsequent lemma yields the contradiction C2 0. □

Lemma 4.2. Let f : Z X be a birational morphism of smooth projective surfaces, and let C X be any curve, with proper transform C̃ = fC ΓZX on Z. Then

KZX ΓZX ΓZX2 0.

Proof. As f is a finite composition of blow-ups, this can be seen by an elementary inductive argument. For the convenience of the reader we briefly indicate it. Suppose that f consists of k successive blow-ups. For k = 1 the assertion is clear, since then KZX is the exceptional divisor E, and Γ is the divisor mE, where m is the multiplicity of C at the blown-up point. For k > 1 we may decompose f into two maps

ZgY hX.

One has proper transforms

C = hC Γ YXandC̃ = gC Γ ZY = fC Γ ZX.

The equalities

KZX = KZY + gK YX ΓZX = ΓZY + gΓ YX

then imply

KZX ΓZX ΓZX2 = (K ZY + gK YX)(ΓZY + gΓ YX) (ΓZY + gΓ YX)2 = (KZY ΓZY ΓZY 2) + (K YX ΓYX ΓYX2),

and the assertion follows by induction. □

In view of Theorems A and B it is not clear if one can reach some sort of boundedness when making additional assumptions on negative curves and on the global geometry of the surface X. The first general result of this kind known to us is due to Bogomolov. It says that on a surface X of general type with c12(X) > c2(X) curves of a fixed geometric genus lie in a bounded family. This implies of course that their numeric invariants, in particular their self-intersection, are bounded. An effective version of Bogomolov’s result was obtained by Lu and Miyaoka [19, Theorem 1 (1)]. We recall here a statement which is numerically slightly weaker than the result of Lu and Miyaoka but which has a simpler proof (the result is obtained by applying a logarithmic version of the Miyaoka-Yau inequality proved in [4, Appendix]).

Theorem 4.3 (Proposition 3.5.3 of [4]). Let X be a smooth projective complex surface with κ(X) 0. Then for every reduced, irreducible curve C X of geometric genus g(C) we have

C2 c 12(X) 3c 2(X) + 2 2g(C). (7)

5 Negativity of reducible curves

When asking for bounded negativity of curves, it is necessary to restrict attention to reduced curves. Irreducibility, however, is not an essential hypothesis, since by [4, Proposition 3.8.2], bounded negativity holds for the set of reduced, irreducible curves on a surface X if and only if it holds for the set of reduced curves on X. Here we improve this result by obtaining a sharp bound on the negativity for reducible curves, given a bound on the negativity for reduced, irreducible curves.

Proposition 5.1. Let X be a smooth projective surface (over an arbitrary algebraically closed ground field) for which there is a constant b(X) such that C2 b(X) for every reduced, irreducible curve C X. Then

C2 (ρ(X) 1) b(X)

for every reduced curve C X, where ρ(X) is the Picard number of X.

Proof. Consider the Zariski decomposition C = P + N of the reduced divisor C. Then C2 = P2 + N2 N2, as P is nef and P and N are orthogonal. So the issue is to bound N2. The negative part N is of the form N = a1C1 + + arCr, where the curves Ci are among the components of C and the coefficients ai are positive rational numbers. Note that ai 1 for all i, because C is reduced. Since the intersection matrix of N is negative definite, we have r ρ(X) 1. Thus

C2 N2 a 12C 12 + + a r2C r2 r b(X) (ρ(X) 1) b(X),

as claimed. □

Example 5.2. Here is an example of a surface of higher Picard number, for which equality holds in the inequality C2 (ρ(X) 1) b(X) that was established above. Consider a smooth Kummer surface X 3 with 16 disjoint lines (or with 16 disjoint smooth rational curves of some degree) as in [7] or in [5]. The generic such surface has ρ(X) = 17, we have b(X) = 2, and if C is the union of the 16 disjoint curves, then C2 = 16 (2).

Example 5.3. A more elementary example is given by the blow up X of 2 at n 8 general points, so ρ(X) = n + 1. Since KX is ample, it follows by adjunction for any reduced, irreducible curve C that C2 1, so b(X) = 1. But if E is the union of the exceptional curves of the n blown up points, then E2 = n = (ρ(X) 1) b(X).

References

[1]   André, Y.: Lectures on Shimura varieties (2001). Available online at the webpage http://math.cts.nthu.edu.tw/Mathematics/lecnotes/andre2001all.ps

[2]   Baily, W. L., Jr., Borel, A.: Compactification of arithmetic quotients of bounded symmetric domains. Ann. of Math. 84, 442–528 (1966).

[3]   Barth, W. P., Hulek, K., Peters, C. A. M., Van de Ven, A.: Compact complex surfaces. Second edition. Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete. 3. Folge. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2004.

[4]   Bauer, Th., et al.: Recent developments and open problems in linear series. To appear in “Contributions to Algebraic Geometry”, Impanga Lecture Notes Series. arXiv:1101.4363.

[5]   Bauer, Th.: Smooth Kummer surfaces in projective three-space. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 125, 2537–2541 (1997).

[6]   Bauer, Th., Schulz, C.: Seshadri constants on the self-product of an elliptic curve. Journal of Algebra 320, 2981–3005 (2008).

[7]   Barth, W., Nieto, I.: Abelian surfaces of type (1, 3) and quartic surfaces with 16 skew lines. J. Algebraic Geometry 3, 173–222 (1994).

[8]   Fontanari, C.: Towards bounded negativity of self-intersection on general blown-up projective planes. arXiv:1012.4989v2 [math.AG]

[9]   Franke, H. G.: Kurven in Hilbertschen Modulflächen und Humbertsche Flächen im Siegel-Raum. Bonner Math. Schr. 104 (1978)

[10]   Fujimoto, Y.: Endomorphisms of smooth projective 3-folds with non-negative Kodaira dimension. Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 38 (2002), 33–92

[11]   van der Geer, G.: Hilbert modular surfaces. Ergebnisse der Mathematik, Band 16, Springer Verlag (1987).

[12]   Harbourne, B.: Global aspects of the geometry of surfaces. Ann. Univ. Pedagog. Crac. Stud. Math. 11 (2010), 5–41.

[13]   Harris, J.: The interpolation problem. Talk delivered at the workshop Classical Algebraic Geometry Today, MSRI, Berkeley, January 26-30, 2009. Available online at the webpage http://jessica2.msri.org/attachments/13549/13549.pdf.

[14]   Hartshorne, R.: Algebraic Geometry. Graduate texts in mathematics (52), New York, Springer-Verlag 1977.

[15]   Hirzebruch, F,: Kurven auf den Hilbertschen Modulflächen und Klassenzahlrelationen. in Classification of Algebraic Varieties and Compact Complex Manifolds, Lecture Notes in Mathematics 412, 1974, 75–93.

[16]   Hirzebruch, F.: Modulflächen und Modulkurven zur symmetrischen Hilbertschen Modulgruppe. Ann. Sci. Ecole Norm. Sup. (4) 11 (1978), 101–165.

[17]   Hirzebruch, F., Zagier, D.: Intersection numbers of curves on Hilbert modular surfaces and modular forms of Nebentypus. Invent. Math. 36 (1976), 57–113.

[18]   Hurwitz, A.: Über Riemannsche Flächen mit gegebenen Verzweigungspunkten. Math. Ann. 103 (1891), 1–60.

[19]   Lu, S.-S., Miyaoka, Y.: Bounding curves in algebraic surfaces by genus and Chern numbers. Math. Res. Lett. 2 (1995), 663–676.

[20]   Lazarsfeld, R.: Positivity in Algebraic Geometry. I.-II. Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete, Vols. 48–49., Springer Verlag, Berlin, 2004.

[21]   Montgomery, H. L.: Topics in multiplicative number theory. Springer LNM 227 (1971).

[22]   Müller-Stach, S., Viehweg, E., Zuo, K.: Relative Proportionality for subvarieties of moduli spaces of K3 and abelian surfaces. Pure and Applied Mathematics Quarterly, Vol 5, Nr. 3, Special Issue: In honor of Friedrich Hirzebruch (2009), 1161–1199.

[23]   Mumford, D.: Hirzebruch’s proportionality theorem in the non-compact case. Invent. Math. 42 (1977), 239–272.

[24]   Nakayama, N.: Ruled surfaces with non-trivial surjective endomorphisms. Kyushu J. Math. 56 (2002), 433–446.

Thomas Bauer, Fachbereich Mathematik und Informatik, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Hans-Meerwein-Straße, D-35032 Marburg, Germany.

E-mail address: tbauer@mathematik.uni-marburg.de

Brian Harbourne, Department of Mathematics, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68588-0130, USA.

E-mail address: bharbour@math.unl.edu

Andreas Leopold Knutsen, Department of Mathematics, University of Bergen, Johs. Brunsgt. 12, N-5008 Bergen, Norway.

E-mail address: andreas.knutsen@math.uib.no

Alex Küronya, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Mathematical Institute, Department of Algebra, Pf. 91, H-1521 Budapest, Hungary.

E-mail address: alex.kuronya@math.bme.hu

Current address: Alex Küronya, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg, Mathematisches Institut, Eckerstraße 1, D-79104 Freiburg, Germany.

Stefan Müller-Stach, Institut für Mathematik (Fachbereich 08) Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz Staudingerweg 9 55099 Mainz, Germany.

E-mail address: stach@uni-mainz.de

Tomasz Szemberg, Instytut Matematyki UP, Podchora̧żych 2, PL-30-084 Kraków, Poland.

E-mail address: tomasz.szemberg@uni-due.de