Topics on Geometric Analysis
Shing-Tung Yau
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4310/sdg.2012.v17.n1.a11
2012-01-01
Surveys in Differential Geometry
Abstract:I recall that about twenty years ago, Peter Li told me that the National Science Foundation has a program called geometric analysis. I was curious about what that was until Peter explained to me. I believe this is a real contribution of NSF to mathematics, on top of the funding that we have enjoyed all these years. Just like any subject in mathematics, the roots of geometric analysis dates to ancient times and also to the not so ancient contributions of many modern mathematicians. And as many scientists like to say, we stood on the shoulders of giants, who laid down the basic tools and concepts and made important progress. But I believe only starting in the 1970s, did we see a systematic development based on analysis and nonlinear differential equations to solve important problems in geometry and topology. This development is vigorous and it has had strong feedback to the development of differential equations and analysis in general. I remember that as a graduate student, I read a great deal of Russian literature on surface theory based on the Alexandrov school and works of Pogorelov. I also noticed the great works of Morrey, Nash, Nirenberg, de Giorgi and others. But they were more interested in analysis than geometry. Problems in geometry are good testing grounds for developments of partial differential equations. This is still so. But we started to develop into other directions. When I entered the subject, it seemed to me that Riemannian geometry could benefit from the introduction of techniques beyond the geodesic methods which were almost exclusively used at that time. Indeed, the great power of the Atiyah-Singer Index Theorem had shown prevailing influence in the subject of geometry, topology and algebraic geometry already. On the other direction, the deep insights offered by integration by part and