Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: @xmath3    after totally geodesic @xmath4-spheres , clifford tori represent the next simplest minimal embeddings of closed surfaces in the round unit @xmath1-sphere @xmath5 . in fact marques and neves @xcite , in their proof of the willmore conjecture , have identified clifford tori as the unique area minimizers among all embedded closed minimal surfaces of genus at least one , and brendle @xcite has shown they are the only embedded minimal tori , affirming a conjecture of lawson . the first examples of higher - genus minimal surfaces in @xmath5 were produced by lawson himself @xcite , and further examples were found later by karcher , pinkall , and sterling @xcite . both constructions proceed by solving plateau s problem for suitably chosen boundary and extending the solution to a closed surface by reflection .    in this article we carry out certain constructions by using gluing techniques by singular perturbation methods . one begins with a collection of known embedded minimal surfaces . these ingredients are then glued together to produce a new embedded surface , called the initial surface , having small but nonvanishing mean curvature introduced in gluing . the construction is successful when the initial surfaces are close to a singular limit . the construction is then completed by perturbing the surface to minimality without sacrificing embeddedness . of course the size of the mean curvature and the feasibility of perturbing the surface so as to eliminate it both depend crucially on the design of the initial surface . gluing methods have been applied extensively and with great success in gauge theories by donaldson , taubes , and others . in many geometric problems similar to the one studied in this article obstructions appear to solving the linearized equation . an extensive methodology has been developed to deal with this difficulty in a large class of geometric problems , starting with @xcite , @xcite and with further refinements in @xcite . we refer to @xcite for a general discussion of this gluing methodology and @xcite for a detailed general discussion of doubling and desingularization constructions for minimal surfaces . in this article , however , we limit ourselves to constructions of unusually high symmetry ( except in section [ further ] ) and this way we avoid these difficulties entirely . the first desingularization construction by gluing methods for minimal surfaces with intersection curves which are not straight lines was carried out in @xcite and serves as a prototype ( see for example @xcite ) for desingularizations of rotationally invariant surfaces with transverse intersections without triple or higher points . ( an independent construction by traizet @xcite has straight lines as intersections . ) for one earlier application of the gluing methodology in the context of minimal surfaces in @xmath5 see @xcite , where a `` doubling '' construction of the clifford torus is carried out ; this work has been extended in @xcite for `` stackings '' of the clifford torus and in @xcite for doublings of the equatorial two - sphere . the present construction also glues tori , but by desingularization rather than doubling . the idea of a desingularization construction for intersecting minimal surfaces in a riemannian three - manifold is to start with a collection of minimal surfaces intersecting along some curves and to produce a single embedded minimal surface by desingularizing the curves of intersection . assuming transverse intersection , this is accomplished , at the level of the initial surface , through the replacement of a tubular neighborhood of each component curve of the intersection set by a surface which on small scales approximates a minimal surface in euclidean space desingularizing the intersection of a collection of planes along a single line . in prior desingularization constructions the appropriate models for these desingularizing surfaces were furnished by the classical scherk towers of @xcite , which desingularize the intersection of two planes . one novelty of the present article is our use of the more general karcher - scherk towers , introduced in @xcite , which come in families desingularizing any number of intersecting planes and so accommodate curves of intersection whose complements , in small neighborhoods of the curves , contain more than four components . note that although having more than two minimal surfaces intersect along a curve is not a generic situation , it can happen in rotationally invariant cases as for example in the case of coaxial catenoids . extending the results of @xcite to such situations for example is an interesting but difficult problem because one would have to use the full family of karcher - scherk towers as studied in @xcite . a motivation for our construction is the observation ( * ? ? ? * section 2.7 ) that lawson s surfaces may be regarded as desingularizations of a collection of great @xmath4-spheres intersecting with maximal symmetry along a common equator . in this article we pursue analogous constructions with tori instead of spheres as proposed in ( * ? ? ? * section 4 , page 300 ) . pitts and rubinstein have described one class of surfaces ( item 10 on table 1 of @xcite ) , similar to some of our surfaces , to be obtained by min - max methods . recently choe and soret @xcite have produced examples by solving plateau s problem for a suitably selected boundary , in the spirit of @xcite . their examples resemble the simpler examples we construct . ( to prove they are the same one would have to prove that the solution of the plateau problem is unique ; see remark [ r : unique ] ) . our construction has been developed independently and is more general in ways we describe below , and our strategy is quite different , based as we already mentioned on gluing techniques by singular perturbation methods . on the other hand our methods work only for high - genus surfaces .    to outline , we construct two infinite families of embedded minimal surfaces in @xmath5 . the first family consists of desingularizations of a configuration @xmath6 ( see [ e : wk ] ) of @xmath7 clifford tori intersecting symmetrically along a pair of disjoint great circles @xmath8 and @xmath9 which lie on two orthogonal two - planes in @xmath10 . the second family consists of desingularizations of a configuration @xmath11 ( see [ e : wk ] ) which is the previous one augmented by the clifford torus which is equidistant from @xmath8 and @xmath9 . in both cases the construction is based on choosing `` scaffoldings '' , that is unions of great circles contained in the given configuration , and which we demand to be contained in the minimal surfaces we construct . moreover , reflections with respect to the great circles contained in the scaffoldings are required to be symmetries of our constructions . we denote the scaffoldings we choose by @xmath12 or @xmath13 ( see [ scaff ] ) .    to construct the initial surfaces we replace tubular neighborhoods of the intersection circles with surfaces modeled on appropriately scaled and truncated maximally symmetric karcher - scherk towers . towers with @xmath14 ends are used along @xmath8 and @xmath9 , while classical scherk towers with @xmath15 ends are used along other circles of intersection ( present only in @xmath11 ) . the replacements are made so that each initial surface is closed and embedded , contains the applicable scaffolding , and is invariant under reflection through every scaffold circle ( see definition [ initsdef ] ) . these initial surfaces are perturbed then to minimality in a way which respects the reflections , so the surfaces produced are closed embedded minimal and still contain the scaffolding ( see the main theorem [ mainthm ] ) . note that lawson s approach also makes use of a scaffolding . our approach , however , gives much more freedom in the number of handles we include in the fundamental domain , while in lawson s method the fundamental domain is a disc so that plateau s problem can be solved . this makes no difference when considering the original construction of lawson in @xcite : we expect that the construction with more handles in the fundamental domain will still produce a lawson surface even though it does not a priori impose all the symmetries of the surface . when there are more than two circles of intersection involved , however , we can choose different numbers of handles on each of them and this gives a plethora of new surfaces as in the present constructions ( see the main theorem [ mainthm ] ) . it seems also rather daunting to try to construct even the simplest of our surfaces desingularizing @xmath11 by lawson s method . the present constructions motivate two important new directions for further study . first , what other similar desingularization constructions can be carried out in cases where there are obstructions due to less symmetry ? one has to deal then with the obstructions in the usual way by introducing smooth families of initial surfaces with the parameters corresponding to the obstructions as in earlier work ( see @xcite ) . we discuss this question in section [ further ] and we provide some partial answers . second , as remarked in the end of ( * ? ? ? * section 4.2 ) , there are various natural questions about rigidity and uniqueness for the surfaces presently constructed which are similar to those asked ( * ? ? ? * questions 4.3 , 4.4 and 4.5 ) about the lawson surfaces . in particular we are currently working to prove that the surfaces desingularizing @xmath6 can not be smoothly deformed to surfaces desingularizing @xmath2 clifford tori still intersecting along @xmath8 and @xmath9 but with different angles ( that is they can not `` flap their wings '' ) . more precisely we hope to prove that even with reduced symmetries imposed so `` flapping the wings '' is allowed , there are no new jacobi fields on our surfaces . @xmath3    as we have already mentioned the main difficulty of this construction as compared to earlier results is proving that under the symmetries imposed there is no kernel on the karcher - scherk towers . as for the classical singly periodic scherk surfaces ( @xmath16 ) @xcite , this is achieved by subdividing the surface suitably and applying the montiel - ros approach @xcite . our approach is also somewhat different than usual in some other aspects and we employ the high symmetry we have available .      @xmath3    in section 2 we study in sufficient detail the maximally symmetric karcher - scherk towers using the enneper - weirstrass representation and following @xcite . in section 3 we study the geometry of the clifford tori and the initial configurations we will be using later , their symmetries , and the symmetries and scaffoldings we will impose in our constructions later . in section 4 we discuss in detail the construction of the initial surfaces and we study their geometry . in section 5 we provide estimates for the geometric quantities on the initial surfaces . in section 6 we study the linearized equation and estimate its solutions on the initial surfaces . we finally combine these results to establish the main theorem in section 7 . finally in section 8 we discuss further results using more technology . given an open set @xmath17 of a submanifold immersed in an ambient manifold endowed with metric @xmath18 , an exponent @xmath19 , and a tensor field @xmath20 on @xmath17 , possibly taking values in the normal bundle , we define the pointwise hlder seminorm @xmath21_\alpha(x ) = \sup_{y \in b_x }     \frac{{\left\lvertt(x)-\tau_{yx}t(y)\right\rvert}_g}{d(x , y)^\alpha},\ ] ] where @xmath22 denotes the open geodesic ball , with respect to @xmath18 , with center @xmath23 and radius the minimum of @xmath24 and the injectivity radius at @xmath23 ; @xmath25 denotes the pointwise norm induced by @xmath18 ; @xmath26 denotes parallel transport , also induced by @xmath18 , from @xmath27 to @xmath23 along the unique geodesic in @xmath22 joining @xmath27 and @xmath23 ; and @xmath28 denotes the distance between @xmath23 and @xmath27 .    given further a continuous positive function @xmath29 and a nonnegative integer @xmath30 , assuming that @xmath20 is a section of the bundle @xmath31 over @xmath17 all of whose order-@xmath30 partial derivatives ( with respect to any coordinate system ) exist and are continuous , we set @xmath32_\alpha(x)}{f(x)},\ ] ] where @xmath33 denotes the levi - civita connection determined by @xmath18 . in case @xmath31 is the trivial bundle @xmath34 , instead of @xmath35 we write @xmath36 . when @xmath37 , we write just @xmath38 , and when @xmath39 , we write just @xmath40 .    additionally , if @xmath41 is a group acting a on a set @xmath42 and if @xmath43 is a subset of @xmath42 , then we refer to the subgroup @xmath44 as the _ stabilizer _ of @xmath43 in @xmath41 . when @xmath43 is a subset of euclidean @xmath1-space ( or the round @xmath1-sphere ) , we will set @xmath45 where @xmath46 ( or @xmath47 ) . for a subset @xmath48 of euclidean space ( or the round @xmath1-sphere ) we define @xmath49 to be the group generated by reflections with respect to the lines ( or great circles ) contained in @xmath48 . here reflection through a great circle can be defined as the restriction to the @xmath1-sphere of reflection in @xmath10 through the @xmath4-plane containing the circle . if @xmath41 is a group of isometries of a riemannian manifold with a two - sided immersed submanifold @xmath50 , then we call @xmath51 _ even _ if @xmath52 preserves the sides of @xmath50 and _ odd _ if it exchanges them . in this two - sided case , sections of the normal bundle of @xmath50 may be represented by functions , on which @xmath53 then acts according to @xmath54 , where @xmath55 is defined to be @xmath24 for @xmath52 even and @xmath56 for @xmath52 odd . we append a subscript @xmath41 to the spaces of functions defined above to designate the subspace which is @xmath57-equivariant in this sense so that for instance @xmath58    finally , we make extensive use of cutoff functions , and for this reason we fix a smooth function @xmath59 $ ] with the following properties :    a.   @xmath60 is nondecreasing , b.   @xmath61 on @xmath62 $ ] and @xmath63 on @xmath64 $ ] , and c.   @xmath65 is an odd function .    given then @xmath66 with @xmath67 , we define a smooth function @xmath68:{\mathbb{r}}\to[0,1]$ ] by @xmath69=\psi\circ l_{a , b},\ ] ] where @xmath70 is the linear function defined by the requirements @xmath71 and @xmath72 . clearly then @xmath68 $ ] has the following properties :    a.   @xmath68 $ ] is weakly monotone , b.   @xmath68=1 $ ] on a neighborhood of @xmath73 and @xmath68=0 $ ] on a neighborhood of @xmath74 , and c.   @xmath68+\psi[b , a]=1 $ ] on @xmath75 . the authors would like to thank richard schoen for his continuous support and interest in the results of this article . was partially supported by nsf grants dms-1105371 and dms-1405537 . in @xcite karcher introduced generalizations of the classical singly periodic scherk surfaces , including the maximally symmetric karcher - scherk towers of order @xmath0 , which we will denote by @xmath76 . @xmath76 is a singly periodic , complete minimal surface embedded in euclidean @xmath1-space , asymptotic to @xmath2 planes intersecting at equal angles along a line . this line , which we call the axis of @xmath76 , is parallel to the direction of periodicity . the classical singly periodic scherk tower @xcite asymptotic to two orthogonal planes is recovered by taking @xmath16 . although in this article we will only use @xmath76 in our constructions , it is worth mentioning that there is a continuous family of singly periodic minimal surfaces with scherk - type ends which has been studied by prez and traizet in @xcite and in which family @xmath76 is the most symmetric member . we proceed to outline the construction of karcher @xcite . note that @xmath76 , which we will define in detail later , differs by a scaling and rotation from the surface described now . karcher considered the enneper - weierstrass data of @xmath77 on the closed unit disc in @xmath78 punctured at the @xmath14^th^ roots of @xmath56 . the embedding defined by the data maps the origin to a saddle point , the @xmath2 line segments joining opposite roots of @xmath56 to horizontal lines of symmetry intersecting at equal angles , the @xmath14 radii terminating at roots of unity to alternately ascending and descending curves of finite length lying in @xmath2 vertical planes of symmetry , and the @xmath14 circumferential arcs between consecutive roots of @xmath56 to curves of infinite length lying alternately in one of two horizontal planes of symmetry . the union of this region with its reflection through either horizontal plane of symmetry is a fundamental domain for the tower under periodic vertical translation . the images of small neighborhoods of the roots of @xmath56 are asymptotic to vertical half - planes , which bisect the vertical planes of symmetry .    for future reference the following proposition fills in the details of the above outline and summarizes the basic geometric properties of @xmath76 , including its symmetries and asymptotic behavior . to state the lemma we make a few preliminary definitions . first we define the sets @xmath79 , a union of horizontal planes , and @xmath80 , a union of vertical planes , by @xmath81 whose intersection is the union of horizontal lines @xmath82 we enumerate the connected components of the complement of @xmath83 by @xmath84 for each @xmath85 , and we also define a partition of @xmath86 into disjoint sets @xmath87 and @xmath88 given by @xmath89    to describe the symmetries of @xmath76 we write @xmath90 for reflection in @xmath91 through the plane @xmath92 , @xmath93 for translation in @xmath91 by @xmath74 units along the directed line @xmath30 , and @xmath94 for rotation in @xmath91 through angle @xmath95 about the directed line @xmath30 ( according to the usual orientation conventions ) . a horizontal bar over a subset of @xmath91 denotes its topological closure in @xmath91 , and angled brackets enclosing a list of elements ( or sets of elements ) of @xmath96 indicate the subgroup generated by all the elements listed or included in the sets mentioned . [ tower ] for every integer @xmath0 there is a complete embedded minimal surface @xmath97 such that    a.   @xmath98 , @xmath99 , and every straight line on @xmath76 is contained in @xmath100 ; b.   for any connected component @xmath42 of @xmath87 the intersection @xmath101 is an open disc with @xmath102 ( the union of four horizontal rays ) ; c.   for each non negative integer @xmath103 the quotient surface @xmath104 has @xmath14 ends and genus @xmath105 ; d.   @xmath106 ( recall [ gsym ] and [ grefl ] ) and @xmath107 acts transitively on the set of connected components of @xmath108 , the set of connected components of @xmath87 , and the set of connected components of @xmath88 ; e.   @xmath109 ; f.   @xmath110 ; g.   @xmath111 ; and h.   there exists @xmath112 so that @xmath113 has @xmath14 connected components , all isometric by the symmetries , exactly one of which lies in the region @xmath114 and the intersection of this component with @xmath115 is the graph @xmath116 over the @xmath117-plane of a function @xmath118 , which decays exponentially in the sense that @xmath119 we have @xmath120    the usual inner - weierstrass recipe ( see @xcite for example or any standard reference for the classical theory of minimal surfaces ) defines from the data [ weidata ] a minimal surface in @xmath91 parametrized by the closed unit disc in @xmath78 punctured at the @xmath121 roots of @xmath56 . requiring the parametrization to take the origin in @xmath78 to the origin in @xmath91 , it takes the form @xmath122 where @xmath123 is the @xmath124^th^ @xmath14^th^ root of @xmath56 and @xmath125 is the imaginary part of the branch of the logarithmic function cut along the ray from @xmath126 to @xmath127 and taking the value @xmath126 at @xmath24 . the symmetries can be read from the data by the following standard argument . looking at the expression for the metric @xmath128 in terms of the enneper - weierstrass data [ weidata ] , one identifies as intrinsic geodesics both circumferential arcs on the unit circle and diametric segments joining opposite @xmath129 roots of @xmath130 . looking next at the expression for the second fundamental form @xmath131\ ] ] in terms of the enneper - weierstrass data , it becomes apparent that the diametric segments joining opposite @xmath14^th^ roots of @xmath56 are extrinsic geodesics as well , which are therefore mapped to euclidean lines , while the diametric segments joining opposite @xmath14^th^ roots of unity along with the circumferential arcs are lines of curvature , which , being also intrinsic geodesics , are necessarily mapped to planar curves . consultation of [ weimap ] confirms that ( a ) the straight lines lie along the intersection of the single horizontal plane @xmath132 with the vertical planes of the form @xmath133 for @xmath134 , ( b ) the images of the circumferential arcs lie , alternatingly , in the two horizontal planes @xmath135 , and ( c ) the images of the remaining lines of curvature lie , consecutively , in the vertical planes of the form @xmath136 for @xmath134 .    below we will check that the parametrization [ weimap ] is in fact an embedding of the punctured unit disc . in fact we will show that the image of the punctured sector @xmath137 is embedded and intersects the planes @xmath132 , @xmath138 , @xmath139 , and @xmath140 only along the curves just mentioned . the reflection principle for harmonic functions then implies that this image may be extended to a complete embedded minimal surface @xmath141 , invariant under reflection through any line in @xmath142 and through any plane of the form @xmath143 or @xmath144 for @xmath145 . we define @xmath146 . items ( ii ) and ( iii ) and the first two claims of item ( i ) follow immediately , as do the containments @xmath147 , considering that item ( v ) and the equalities @xmath148 are clear from the definitions ( [ ck ] and [ ak ] ) of @xmath100 , @xmath87 , and @xmath149 alone . to see the containment @xmath150 note that any symmetry of the tower must permute the asymptotic planes , so must preserve their intersection , so must take any line in @xmath100 to a line orthogonally intersecting the @xmath151-axis ; we are assuming ( and confirm with the maximum - principle argument below ) that @xmath76 intersects the @xmath151-axis only where @xmath100 does , and from the expression ( [ tow2ff ] ) for the second fundamental form we know we have already accounted for all lines on @xmath76 through such points . the equalities @xmath152 are also immediate consequences of the definitions . in particular reflection through the @xmath132 plane preserves @xmath100 , but it does not preserve @xmath76 ( because , for example , the normal to @xmath76 is not constantly vertical along the lines @xmath153 ) , so @xmath154 . now , since @xmath155 has index @xmath4 in @xmath156 and @xmath157 , in fact @xmath158 .    thus we have checked items ( ii)-(vii ) , as well as the first two claims of ( i ) , and the transitivity claim in ( iv ) is now obvious . to verify the remaining claim in ( i ) , note that any straight line in @xmath76 , by virtue of the latter s minimality , is a line of reflectional symmetry . on the other hand reflection through a straight line in @xmath91 preserves @xmath87 only if the line is the @xmath151-axis ( and then only for @xmath2 even ) or if it is contained in @xmath100 or @xmath159 . it is easy to see , however , that of these lines only those contained in @xmath100 lie on the surface . ( for example [ weidata ] and [ weimap ] reveal that at easily identified points where any of the other lines do intersect the surface the normal to the surface there is parallel to the line . ) in addition to checking ( viii ) , it remains to show that the image of the region @xmath33 is embedded and intersects the planes @xmath132 , @xmath138 , @xmath139 , and @xmath140 as described above . that the tower is embedded may be established by recognizing the conjugate surface of the region between two consecutive horizontal planes of symmetry as a graph  specifically the solution to the jenkins - serrin problem @xcite on a regular @xmath14-gon  and then appealing to a theorem of krust . see @xcite for details on this approach . alternatively we show embeddedness more directly as follows and in the process identify the intersection of the image of @xmath33 with these four planes . recall that @xmath33 is the punctured sector @xmath160 . from [ weimap ] it is clear that @xmath161 is positive along the radial segment from the origin to @xmath24 and vanishes along both the radial segment from the origin to @xmath162 and the circular arc from @xmath24 to @xmath162 . a sufficiently small circular arc , centered at @xmath163 , which originates on the segment from @xmath126 to @xmath162 and terminates on the circumferential arc from @xmath162 to @xmath24 , can be seen from [ weimap ] to have height monotonically increasing from @xmath126 to @xmath164 . the maximum principle then implies that the image of @xmath33 is contained in the slab @xmath165 and intersects @xmath132 only along the ( straight , horizontal ) image of the radial segment to @xmath162 and @xmath138 only along the ( horizontal ) image of the circumferential arc . similarly , from [ weimap ] one may readily check monotonicity of @xmath166 , @xmath167 , and @xmath168 on the boundary curves of @xmath33 in order to establish that the boundary has image contained in the wedge @xmath169 . moreover , [ weimap ] reveals that in @xmath33 @xmath170 = 0,\end{aligned}\ ] ] so that another application of the maximum principle ( to the harmonic coordinate functions @xmath171 , @xmath172 , and @xmath173 , the last extended to the closure of @xmath33 ) establishes that the image of @xmath33 is contained in @xmath174 and intersects @xmath139 only along the image of the radial segment to @xmath24 and @xmath140 only along the image of the radial segment to @xmath162 .    because of the symmetries it therefore suffices to show that the enneper - weierstrass parametrization restricts to @xmath33 as an embedding . to this end observe first that each level curve of @xmath172 in @xmath33 is connected . indeed one can verify that @xmath167 vanishes nowhere on @xmath33 and has norm ( relative to @xmath175 ) tending to infinity at @xmath162 , so @xmath176 defines a smooth vector field on the closure of @xmath33 . the corresponding flow for time @xmath177 , when it exists , maps points ( other than the fixed point @xmath162 ) with @xmath178 to points with @xmath179 . examining the field at the boundary , one can check that the backward flow of a point in @xmath33 exits @xmath33 only after it reaches the segment joining @xmath126 and @xmath162 , while the forward flow leaves @xmath33 only through the real boundary segment . thus , if the flow for time @xmath180 of a point @xmath23 on the real segment from @xmath126 to @xmath24 lies in @xmath33 , then the flow for time @xmath177 of any real point to the right of @xmath23 will also lie in @xmath33 . now given @xmath181 with @xmath182 , the flow for time @xmath183 takes each point to a point on the real segment of @xmath33 ( since by the maximum principle and earlier monotonicity arguments this segment is the entirety of the @xmath184 curve in @xmath33 ) . by the previous considerations the flow for time @xmath185 exists for every point on the real segment joining these points , so , the flow for time @xmath185 being a continuous function of the initial point , we get a level @xmath178 path joining @xmath186 and @xmath187 . now suppose there exist points @xmath181 such that @xmath188 and @xmath189 . then there is a path contained in a single level curve of @xmath172 joining @xmath186 and @xmath187 , and , if @xmath186 and @xmath187 are distinct , by the mean value theorem there exists a third point @xmath190 between @xmath186 and @xmath187 on this path at which @xmath166 vanishes along the path . thus at @xmath190 the gradients @xmath191 and @xmath192 must be parallel . one finds from [ weimap ] that these gradients are parallel only on the circular boundary of @xmath33 , where they are tangential to the boundary , and therefore they are endpoints of level curves , so that we may assume @xmath190 is not such a point . thus we conclude that @xmath193 , showing not only that the enneper - weierstrass parametrization is an embedding but also that its image of the unit disc is actually a graph over a region in the @xmath132 plane . now we prove ( viii ) . it is clear from [ weimap ] that for @xmath194 sufficiently large the set of @xmath195 in the unit disc with @xmath196 has @xmath14 components , each containing exactly one of the @xmath14^th^ roots of @xmath56 . we define @xmath197 so that @xmath198 is the signed distance of the image of @xmath195 from the plane @xmath140 and @xmath199 the three terms on the right being pairwise orthogonal . we will show that for @xmath200 sufficiently large there is a correspondingly small neighborhood @xmath201 of @xmath162 in the closed unit disc such that the map @xmath202 defined by @xmath203 restricts to a diffeomorphism from @xmath201 onto the half - strip @xmath204 $ ] .    working from [ weimap ] we find @xmath205 @xmath206 and @xmath207 where @xmath208 and @xmath209 and @xmath210 are defined by the equalities where they are introduced . then @xmath211 , and for each nonnegative integer @xmath30 there exists a constant @xmath212 such that @xmath213    defining the map @xmath214 by @xmath215 we see that for @xmath194 sufficiently large the composite @xmath216 is well - defined ( identifying @xmath78 with @xmath217 as usual ) and @xmath218 so , since @xmath219 and @xmath220 for each integer @xmath221 , by taking @xmath194 large enough we can ensure that @xmath216 is a small perturbation of the identity and so a diffeomorphism with image containing the half - strip @xmath204 $ ] for some @xmath222 . thus @xmath223 itself restricts to a diffeomorphism from some region @xmath201 onto this half - strip , as asserted above , which shows that the image of @xmath201 under the enneper - weierstrass parametrization is the graph of @xmath224 over the half - strip @xmath225 . since @xmath226 is smooth on @xmath201 , @xmath227 , and @xmath228 , we finally obtain the estimates @xmath229    the union @xmath100 of all horizontal lines on @xmath76 can be regarded as a scaffolding for the tower , but we emphasize that a tower is not uniquely determined by a choice of scaffold :    [ towerremark ] ( i ) the surface @xmath230 satisfies all conditions in the lemma provided the roles of @xmath87 and @xmath88 are reversed in the statement , so in particular its intersection with @xmath79 is @xmath100 . \(ii ) for @xmath103 a positive integer the surface @xmath231 also has @xmath100 as its intersection with @xmath79 , but the quotient surface @xmath232 has genus @xmath233 instead of @xmath126 ( recall [ tower].iii ) . in this subsection we discuss the clifford tori and their geometry . we first introduce some helpful notation . given a great circle @xmath234 in @xmath5 we will write @xmath235 for the furthest great circle from it . ( note that the points of @xmath235 are at distance @xmath236 in @xmath5 from @xmath234 and any point of @xmath237 is at distance @xmath238 from @xmath234 ) . as viewed from @xmath10 , the planes containing @xmath234 and @xmath235 are orthogonal complements . on the other hand , @xmath234 and @xmath235 may be regarded as parallel in that the function on @xmath5 measuring distance from one of the circles is constant on the other . ( this relation of parallelism between two great circles in @xmath5 is not transitive . ) another useful characterization of @xmath235 identifies it as the set of poles of great two - spheres with equator @xmath234 . [ d : tori ] if @xmath234 and @xmath239 are as above , then we call them _ totally orthogonal . _ we define the clifford torus @xmath240 $ ] with `` axis - circles '' @xmath234 and @xmath235 to be the set of points in @xmath5 equidistant from @xmath234 and @xmath235 . @xmath240 $ ] can be alternatively defined as the set of points which are at a distance @xmath241 from @xmath234 , or equivalently at a distance @xmath241 from @xmath235 . clearly @xmath240={\mathbb{t}}[c^\perp]$ ] . the set of points at distance @xmath242 from @xmath240 $ ] is @xmath243 and the set of points at distance @xmath244 from @xmath240 $ ] is @xmath245 . @xmath240 $ ] is a flat , square , embedded torus , foliated by the circles , of radius @xmath246 in @xmath10 , where great two - spheres having @xmath234 as equator and poles on @xmath235 intersect @xmath247 , and also by the circles , orthogonally intersecting these , where great two - spheres having equator @xmath235 and poles on @xmath234 intersect @xmath247 in pairs on opposite sides of the equator . evidently any element of @xmath47 that preserves @xmath248 as a set is a symmetry of @xmath240 $ ] . the group of these symmetries includes arbitrary rotation or reflection in the two circles as well as orthogonal transformations exchanging the circles . to proceed further we have the following . [ d : rot ] given @xmath234 as above , @xmath249 , and assuming an orientation chosen on the totally orthogonal circle @xmath235 , we define @xmath250 , rotation about @xmath234 by angle @xmath95 , to be the element of @xmath251 preserving @xmath234 pointwise and rotating the totally orthogonal circle @xmath235 through an angle @xmath95 , according to the chosen orientation on @xmath235 . just as well @xmath250 may be called rotation in @xmath235 by angle @xmath95 . we assume now that orientations have been chosen for both @xmath234 and @xmath235 . ( of course , after orienting @xmath5 , an orientation on a circle @xmath234 determines an orientation on @xmath235 . ) we define then two @xmath252 subgroups of @xmath47 by @xmath253 each of whose elements rotates @xmath234 and @xmath235 simultaneously by a common angle , the two subgroups being distinguished by the relative sense of rotation in the circles . it is easy to see that any such one - parameter subgroup of @xmath47 , acting by common rotation in a pair of totally orthogonal circles , has only great circles as orbits . moreover by an easy calculation the orbits of @xmath254 intersect the orbits of @xmath255 at an angle equal to twice the distance from @xmath234 . consequently , @xmath240 $ ] itself is foliated by two such families of great circles , with the circles of one family intersecting the circles of the other orthogonally . more explicitly let @xmath256 $ ] be great circles through some given point @xmath257 $ ] with @xmath33 an orbit of @xmath254 and @xmath258 an orbit of @xmath255 . then one family consists of the images of @xmath33 under the action of @xmath255 and the other of the images of @xmath258 under the action of @xmath259 . reflection through @xmath33 ( that is @xmath260 ) preserves the great circles in @xmath240 $ ] which are orthogonal to @xmath33 . since these great circles foliate @xmath240 $ ] we conclude that the reflection @xmath260 is a symmetry of @xmath240 $ ] . it follows that any point of a clifford torus lies on a circle of reflection ( two in fact ) and this immediately implies the minimality of the torus ( since the symmetry allows the mean curvature nowhere to point ) . of course the two great circles through a point are asymptotic lines for the second fundamental form ; the short circles mentioned above  latitudes @xmath242 from the poles of great two - spheres with equator one of the axis - circles  bisect these and as such are circles of principal curvature . these circles have curvature @xmath261 in @xmath10 and @xmath24 in @xmath5 , showing that the second fundamental form of @xmath240 $ ] has constant norm @xmath261 . this also implies that there are no great circles on @xmath240 $ ] other than the orbits of @xmath262 as above , and therefore reflection through any great circle in @xmath240 $ ] is a symmetry of @xmath240 $ ] . given now @xmath33 and @xmath258 as above , @xmath263 rotates the points of @xmath33 to a parallel great circle along orthogonal geodesic segments parallel to @xmath258 . taking @xmath264 we conclude that @xmath265 , and similarly @xmath266 , are great circles which are parallel to @xmath33 and @xmath258 respectively on @xmath240 $ ] at distance @xmath236 . this implies that @xmath267 moreover , the elements of @xmath254 which were originally expressed as common rotations in @xmath234 and @xmath235 , are just as well common rotations in @xmath33 and @xmath268 ( since @xmath269 and @xmath270 obviously have the same action on @xmath33 and @xmath268 , which are orbits of @xmath271 and are the intersections with @xmath5 of two @xmath4-planes spanning @xmath10 ) and hence @xmath272 if we choose orientations on @xmath33 and @xmath268 appropriately ( or if we choose an orientation on @xmath5 ) . similarly @xmath273 ( since @xmath258 and @xmath274 are orbits of @xmath275 ) .    by the above @xmath240 $ ] is ruled by two families of great circles and any great circle on @xmath240 $ ] belongs to one of the two families . any two circles in a single family are thereby not only parallel in @xmath240 $ ] but also parallel in @xmath5 in the sense of distance as defined above . moreover @xmath240 $ ] is generated by twisting about any one of its great circles @xmath33 an orthogonally intersecting great circle @xmath258 , where the twisting is common rotation in @xmath33 and @xmath268 : traversing @xmath33 , the conormal co - rotates with the position vector , tracing out @xmath33 and @xmath268 at equal rates . in this sense the clifford torus resembles the helicoid , but the helicoid is just singly ruled , while all of the clifford torus great circles are on equal footing . additionally , while each helicoid is either right or left - handed , every clifford torus is ambidextrous , being right - handed along the circles of one foliation and left - handed along the others . more precisely , given an orientation on @xmath5 , a clifford torus @xmath240 $ ] , and a great circle @xmath276 $ ] , we call @xmath33 right - handed if @xmath277={\mathbb{t}}[c]$ ] and left - handed if @xmath278={\mathbb{t}}[c]$ ] .    furthermore , an element @xmath279 of @xmath47 fixing a great circle @xmath33 on @xmath240 $ ] pointwise but rotating @xmath268 along itself will of course preserve @xmath33 and @xmath268 as sets but rotate @xmath240 $ ] . such considerations reveal the existence of a one - parameter family @xmath280 \ , : \ , \phi \in { \mathbb{r}}\}$ ] of clifford tori , each intersecting @xmath240 $ ] transversely along @xmath33 and @xmath268 at a constant angle @xmath95 . since two great circles intersecting @xmath33 orthogonally can meet only on @xmath33 or @xmath268 ( unless they coincide everywhere ) , the ruling forbids distinct members of this family from intersecting anywhere else . more precisely for @xmath281 , @xmath282 = { \mathsf{r}}_d^{\phi_2}{\mathbb{t}}[c]$ ] when @xmath283 and @xmath282 \cap { \mathsf{r}}_d^{\phi_2}{\mathbb{t}}[c]= d\cup d^\perp$ ] otherwise . there is a second one - parameter family of clifford tori through @xmath33 and @xmath268 , having the opposite chirality along both , compared to the first family . this family can be obtained from the first by , for example , reflection through a great two - sphere containing @xmath33 ( or @xmath268 ) . a member of one family then intersects each member of the other family along two pairs of circles : @xmath33 and @xmath268 as well as two more circles , @xmath258 and @xmath274 , where @xmath33 and @xmath268 intersect @xmath258 and @xmath274 orthogonally . the angle of intersection varies ( from @xmath126 to @xmath284 ) along these circles , with tangency of the surfaces occurring at the eight points where the four circles intersect in pairs . note that by the above if @xmath33 is any great circle , then any clifford torus @xmath247 which contains @xmath33 contains also @xmath268 . moreover @xmath247 belongs to one of two families of clifford tori containing @xmath285 as described above . also for each point @xmath286 there is a unique torus in each family which contains it , and on that torus there is a unique great circle through @xmath287 parallel to @xmath33 and @xmath268 in the torus . additionally note that if @xmath288 $ ] , then , fixing a point @xmath289 , there is a point @xmath290 at distance @xmath242 from @xmath291 , and in fact @xmath287 must lie a distance @xmath242 from @xmath33 , since otherwise there would be a point on @xmath33 less than @xmath242 from @xmath234 , violating the definition of @xmath240 $ ] . on the other hand , @xmath33 is preserved by @xmath271 or @xmath275 while both subgroups act transitively on @xmath234 , so actually the distance from every point on @xmath234 to @xmath33 is @xmath242 . we conclude that whenever @xmath33 is a great circle on @xmath240 $ ] , @xmath234 is also a great circle on @xmath292 $ ] . now suppose two clifford tori @xmath240 $ ] and @xmath293 $ ] have intersection @xmath294 , where @xmath33 is a great circle . since @xmath276 $ ] and @xmath295 $ ] , it follows from the last observation in the previous paragraph that @xmath296 $ ] . moreover @xmath240 $ ] and @xmath293 $ ] must have the same chirality along @xmath33 ( since otherwise their intersection would be larger as above ) , so one torus can be obtained from the other by a rotation about @xmath33 , and therefore @xmath234 and @xmath297 ( and @xmath235 and @xmath298 ) must be parallel great circles on @xmath292 $ ] . conversely , if @xmath234 and @xmath297 are parallel great circles on @xmath292 $ ] , then @xmath297 can be obtained from @xmath234 by a rotation about @xmath33 , so @xmath293 $ ] is obtained from @xmath240 $ ] by the same rotation , and therefore @xmath240 $ ] and @xmath293 $ ] intersect along just @xmath33 and @xmath268 as described above . thus two clifford tori intersect along a single pair of totally orthogonal great circles precisely when all four of their axis - circles are parallel on the clifford torus equidistant from the intersection circles . moreover if @xmath240 $ ] and @xmath293 $ ] orthogonally intersect along great circles @xmath33 and @xmath268 , then each contains the axis - circles of the other : by definition of @xmath240 $ ] , geodesics emanating from @xmath247 orthogonally hit @xmath248 at distance @xmath242 from @xmath247 , but geodesics intersecting @xmath240 $ ] orthogonally at @xmath33 by assumption lie on @xmath293 $ ] . on the other hand two clifford tori @xmath240 $ ] and @xmath293 $ ] have intersection @xmath299 precisely when @xmath234 and @xmath297 intersect orthogonally , in which case @xmath235 and @xmath298 also intersect orthogonally and moreover @xmath300\cap{\mathbb{t}}[d']$ ] . indeed , suppose first that @xmath240 \cap { \mathbb{t}}[c']=d\cup d^\perp\cup d'\cup{d'}^\perp$ ] . since @xmath33 lies on @xmath301 $ ] and @xmath302 $ ] , @xmath234 and @xmath297 must be great circles on @xmath292 $ ] ; if @xmath234 and @xmath297 were parallel , then @xmath301 $ ] and @xmath302 $ ] would intersect transversely along @xmath33 and @xmath268 only , as in the preceding paragraph , so they must intersect orthogonally . by identical reasoning @xmath235 and @xmath298 must also intersect orthogonally and in fact all four axis - circles lie on @xmath303 $ ] as well as on @xmath292 $ ] , whose intersection is therefore precisely the union of these circles . conversely , if we assume @xmath234 and @xmath297 are two orthogonally intersecting great circles , then we can construct the two clifford tori @xmath247 and @xmath304 containing @xmath234 and @xmath297 ( so that @xmath305 ) and their corresponding axes @xmath294 and @xmath306 ; it follows from the previous three sentences ( exchanging the roles of all @xmath234 and @xmath33 circles ) that @xmath33 and @xmath258 as well as @xmath268 and @xmath274 intersect orthogonally and their union is all of @xmath301 \cap t[c']$ ] .    starting with orthogonally intersecting axis - circles @xmath234 and @xmath297 as above , by varying the angle between @xmath234 and @xmath297 while fixing their two intersection points one obtains pairs of tori intersecting along ( noncircular ) curves with four points of tangency . the full space of intersections is two - dimensional , corresponding to the relative configuration of representative axis - circles . it can be parametrized by , for instance , the minimum and maximum distances from one of the axis - circles to points on the other . the case of tangency corresponds to the minimum vanishing , while the case of constant - angle intersection along a pair of orthogonal great circles corresponds to equality of the minimum and maximum . we remark finally that any two clifford tori necessarily intersect . this is a consequence of a general result of frankel @xcite , but for an elementary argument note that every single clifford torus divides @xmath5 into two connected components , which are open tubular neighborhoods of each axis - circle , so if two clifford tori failed to intersect , then one side of one of them would have to be properly contained in one side of the other , but the two sides have equal volume , precluding this situation . although in the previous subsection we discussed clifford tori in some generality , in this article we will only be concerned with finite maximally symmetric subcollections of a one - parameter family of tori intersecting along a pair of totally orthogonal great circles and the clifford torus equidistant from the circles of intersection . to fix the notation we start by taking @xmath5 to be the unit sphere in @xmath10 , to which we give its standard orientation and which we will routinely identify with @xmath307 via the map @xmath308 , so that @xmath309 . we write @xmath310 for the unit circles in the coordinate planes , oriented by increasing @xmath177 . as described in the previous subsection there is a unique clifford torus @xmath311={\mathbb{t}}[c_2 ]      = \left\ { \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(e^{i{\ensuremath{\mathrm{x } } } } , e^{i{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}}\right ) : { \ensuremath{\mathrm{x } } } , { \ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}\in { \mathbb{r}}\right\}\ ] ] equidistant from @xmath8 and @xmath9 . there is also a one - parameter family of clifford tori containing @xmath8 ( so also @xmath9 ) and right - handed along it ( so also along @xmath9 ) ; we distinguish the one @xmath312 that contains the great circle @xmath313 in the real plane @xmath314 in @xmath307 ( see [ e : cphph ] for the notation ) .    for each integer @xmath0 we intend to desingularize the configurations @xmath315 of @xmath2 and @xmath316 clifford tori respectively , where for each integer @xmath124 @xmath317 so that @xmath318 and @xmath319 for all @xmath145 . thus @xmath320 intersects @xmath321 at constant angle @xmath322 along @xmath8 and @xmath9 , while @xmath320 intersects @xmath304 orthogonally along the two totally orthogonal geodesics on @xmath320 equidistant to @xmath8 and @xmath9 . reflections through certain great circles will play an important role in the construction , so we name some of these circles now . first we define for each @xmath323 @xmath324 oriented by increasing @xmath151 . clearly for each @xmath325 @xmath326 so in total there are @xmath327 such great circles , pairwise disjoint ; @xmath328 consists of the @xmath14 great circles where @xmath304 intersects the other clifford tori in @xmath329 : @xmath330 and @xmath331 and @xmath332 are parallel on @xmath320 to @xmath8 and @xmath9 at a distance @xmath242 ; and for @xmath333 @xmath334 is the closer of two totally orthogonal great circles on @xmath304 equidistant from @xmath331 and @xmath335 . we also mention that @xmath336 = { \mathbb{t}}[c'_{j+3k/2}].\ ] ]    next for @xmath337 we label the great circle orthogonally intersecting @xmath8 at @xmath338 and @xmath9 at @xmath339 by @xmath340 thus @xmath341 and @xmath342 are disjoint unless @xmath343 or @xmath344 is an integral multiple of @xmath345 , in which case they intersect only at two antipodal points on @xmath8 ( when @xmath346 ) , only at two antipodal points on @xmath9 ( when @xmath347 ) , or they coincide ; in particular @xmath348 for all @xmath349 . note also that @xmath350 where the intersections at the four points are orthogonal , and that @xmath320 is foliated by the disjoint great circles @xmath341 satisfying @xmath351 for @xmath352 . last we define for each @xmath353 the great circle @xmath354 oriented by increasing @xmath151 . note that the clifford torus @xmath304 is foliated by the disjoint great circles @xmath355 with @xmath356 , @xmath357 and the parameter @xmath358 measures the angle at the point @xmath359 between @xmath247 and @xmath360 , which is a clifford torus through @xmath8 and @xmath9 but left - handed along both . note also that the circles @xmath355 and @xmath331 intersect orthogonally at two points given by @xmath361      for future reference we first note the identity @xmath362 for any two great circles @xmath234 and @xmath297 and angles @xmath363 , as well as the particular products @xmath364    we now describe the symmetry groups of the above configurations . [ configsym ] ( i ) for @xmath0 @xmath365 in particular this group contains reflection through @xmath341 whenever @xmath366 , through @xmath331 for all @xmath367 , and through @xmath355 for all @xmath353 . \(ii ) @xmath368 for @xmath369 . \(iii ) @xmath370 . first suppose @xmath0 . it is clear that @xmath371 contains the group on the right - hand side of equation [ gsymwk ] . a symmetry of @xmath6 will either exchange the intersection circles @xmath8 and @xmath9 or will preserve each as a set . in particular it will preserve @xmath372={\mathbb{t}}[c_2]$ ] , so @xmath373 . moreover , each element of @xmath47 is completely determined by its action on @xmath8 and @xmath9 . if a symmetry of @xmath6 preserves @xmath8 , then it also preserves @xmath9 and it must act by rotation or reflection in each circle . an orthogonal transformation reversing the orientation of one circle but preserving the orientation of the other can not be a symmetry of @xmath6 ( since @xmath8 and @xmath9 are right - handed in all of the tori of the configuration and a reflection in just one of them reverses chirality ) . a symmetry acting by a reflection in one circle must therefore act by reflection in both circles ; in other words such a symmetry must be a reflection through a geodesic of @xmath5 orthogonally intersecting @xmath8 and @xmath9 . reflection through a geodesic orthogonal to both @xmath8 and @xmath9 will preserve the configuration precisely when the geodesic lies in @xmath374 , meaning on one of the tori or halfway between two tori . reflections through these geodesics clearly belong to the group on the right - hand side of [ gsymwk ] . any rotation in each circle preserving @xmath6 can be composed with a symmetry of the form @xmath375 to produce a symmetry fixing @xmath8 pointwise and rotating @xmath9 . clearly any such symmetry likewise belongs to the group on the right - hand side of [ gsymwk ] , so we have now accounted for all symmetries of @xmath6 preserving @xmath8 and @xmath9 separately . any transformation exchanging the two circles is the product of a transformation preserving them with the reflection through a geodesic equidistant from @xmath8 and @xmath9 . these are the great circles on the torus @xmath304 , and reflection through such a circle is a symmetry of the configuration precisely when the geodesic either orthogonally intersects all the other tori or else lies on either one of the other tori or halfway between a consecutive pair of these . all these reflections belong to the right - hand side of [ gsymwk ] too , so we have finished checking ( i ) .    if @xmath369 , then any element of @xmath329 must permute the intersection circles @xmath8 and @xmath9 ( and can not exchange them with any intersection circles on @xmath304 ) and therefore must preserve @xmath6 , confirming ( ii ) . in the case @xmath16 , however , the three tori @xmath376 , @xmath377 , and @xmath304 are all equivalent under the symmetries , as are all six intersection circles @xmath8 , @xmath9 , @xmath378 , @xmath379 , @xmath380 , and @xmath381 . in particular @xmath382 belongs to @xmath383 and exchanges @xmath376 and @xmath304 . any symmetry of @xmath384 exchanging @xmath304 with either of the other clifford tori can be composed with @xmath382 and ( possibly ) an element of @xmath385 to obtain an element of @xmath385 , completing the proof of ( iii ) . the choices we are about to make to desingularize the initial configurations will break many of the symmetries just described , including in particular the continuous symmetries . nevertheless , to simplify the construction we will insist on retaining reflections through a collection of great circles which will be included in their entirety on the surfaces we construct and which serve as a sort of scaffolding for the construction . more precisely for any integers @xmath0 and @xmath386 we introduce the scaffoldings @xmath387 and corresponding groups @xmath388 motivation for the choice of scaffolds and corresponding symmetries can be found in the next section . for any integers @xmath0 and @xmath386    a.   @xmath389 is the union of @xmath390 great circles , of which the @xmath391 circles @xmath392 with @xmath393 are parallel on @xmath321 ; b.   @xmath394 is the union of @xmath395 great circles , of which the @xmath396 circles @xmath397 with @xmath398 are parallel on @xmath321 and the @xmath396 circles @xmath399 with @xmath398 are parallel on @xmath304 ; c.   @xmath389 intersects each of @xmath8 and @xmath9 at the @xmath400 roots of unity , at each of which points exactly @xmath2 great circles in @xmath389 intersect , one on each @xmath321 ; d.   @xmath394 intersects each of @xmath8 and @xmath9 at the @xmath401 roots of unity , at each of which points exactly @xmath2 great circles in @xmath394 intersect , one on each @xmath321 ; e.   @xmath394 intersects each @xmath402 with @xmath403 at the @xmath404 points @xmath405 , with @xmath406 , at each of which exactly two great circles in @xmath394 intersect , namely @xmath407 on @xmath321 and @xmath408 on @xmath304 ; f.   @xmath409 ; and g.   @xmath410 . items ( i)-(v ) follow immediately from the definitions , as do the containments in the last two items . referring to [ symcomp ] , we observe @xmath411 completing the proof . we define @xmath412 by @xmath413 observe that @xmath414 takes planes of constant @xmath415 to clifford tori through @xmath8 and @xmath9 , cylinders of constant @xmath416 to constant - mean - curvature tori ( degenerating to @xmath8 or @xmath9 when @xmath416 is respectively an even or odd multiple of @xmath236 ) with axis - circles @xmath8 and @xmath9 , horizontal planes to great two - spheres with equator @xmath9 , and radial and vertical lines to great circles . in particular @xmath417 , @xmath418 , @xmath419 , @xmath420 , and @xmath421 . on the other hand the clifford torus left - handed along @xmath8 and containing the circle @xmath422 is the image under @xmath414 of the helicoid @xmath423 , and @xmath355 and @xmath424 are the images of the two helices where this helicoid intersects the cylinder @xmath425 . in particular @xmath426 . though great spheres do not play an important role in the construction , to aid understanding of the geometry of @xmath414 we also mention that the great sphere with equator @xmath8 and poles @xmath427 is the image of the helicoid @xmath428 . moreover , the open solid torus @xmath429 is mapped diffeomorphically by @xmath414 onto the open solid torus of points within @xmath430 of @xmath8the @xmath8 side of @xmath304and @xmath414 is an approximate isometry for small @xmath416 . more precisely , writing @xmath431 for the round metric on @xmath5 and @xmath432 for the euclidean metric on @xmath91 , we have @xmath433 we also note that @xmath414 intertwines some symmetries of interest : for every @xmath434 @xmath435      since @xmath414 maps the asymptotic planes of the karcher - scherk towers to clifford tori , we can smoothly glue the towers imported by @xmath414 to the tori of our configurations by straightening the wings to exact half - planes before applying @xmath414 . we accomplish this transition using the cut - off functions defined in [ epsiab ] . specifically , given integers @xmath0 and @xmath386 , we set @xmath436 and we define the map @xmath437 by modifying the inclusion map @xmath438 ( recall [ tower ] ) as follows . we will specify @xmath439 on the wedge @xmath440 and complete its global definition by requiring it to commute with all elements of @xmath107 . we assume that @xmath103 is large enough so that @xmath441 . the new map @xmath439 agrees with @xmath442 on @xmath443 . we recall from [ tower ] that the complement @xmath444 is the graph @xmath445 of the function @xmath446 over the half - plane @xmath447 and further that this graph misses the boundary of the wedge . we decree that @xmath448}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}})w_k({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}}),{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}})\ ] ] for each point @xmath449 in this region . imposing the symmetries as just described completes the definition of @xmath450 , and we also define its truncated image @xmath451 for any @xmath452 controlling the truncation . each initial surface @xmath453 desingularizing @xmath6 is specified by a quintuple of data @xmath454 , and each initial surface @xmath455 desingularizing @xmath11 is specified by a septuple @xmath456 , where @xmath0 and @xmath457 are integers and @xmath458 . the role of @xmath2 in the definition of the initial configurations is already clear : it is the number of clifford tori intersecting along @xmath8 and @xmath9 . along with @xmath103 it determines the scaffolding ( @xmath389 or @xmath394 ) according to [ scaff ] . we have also used @xmath103 in [ adef ] to set the distance from a tower s axis at which its wings are straightened . together with @xmath2 and @xmath103 the remaining positive integers ( either @xmath459 , @xmath460 , and @xmath461 or @xmath462 and @xmath463 ) specify the number of fundamental periods , or equivalently the scale , of the towers along each circle of intersection . finally , the relative alignment of towers along the various circles is prescribed by either @xmath464 or @xmath465 and @xmath466 . we will now explain the roles of the data in slightly more detail and simultaneously offer some brief motivation for the definitions of the scaffoldings ( [ scaff ] above ) and the initial surfaces ( [ initsdef ] below ) . the initial surfaces are to be constructed from the initial configurations they are intended to desingularize by replacing a tubular neighborhood of each intersection circle @xmath234 with a truncated karcher - scherk tower with straightened wings , scaled in @xmath91 by some factor @xmath467 , mapped into @xmath5 by @xmath414 , and then positioned as desired along @xmath234 by a rotation @xmath468 \in o(4)$ ] : @xmath469\phi      \left (        { m_{_c}}^{-1 }        \widetilde{\mathcal{s}}_{{k_{_c}},m}\left({m_{_c}}s_{_c}\right )      \right),\ ] ] where @xmath470 is the number ( either @xmath2 or @xmath4 ) of clifford tori intersecting along @xmath234 in the corresponding initial configuration and where @xmath471 is picked , somewhat arbitrarily , to ensure each tower is truncated well away from towers on neighboring circles . since @xmath76 has fundamental period @xmath472 and @xmath414 is periodic in @xmath151 with period @xmath472 ( each circle of intersection having length @xmath472 ) , obviously @xmath473 must be an integer in order for the initial surface to be embedded . further constraints on each @xmath473 are placed by the following symmetry requirements which we make of the initial surface to simplify the analysis of the linearized operator on the towers in section [ linear ] . [ sa ] let @xmath50 be an initial surface . we require @xmath474 and @xmath475 , and for each intersection circle @xmath234 in the corresponding initial configuration we require @xmath476 . the assumption ensures triviality of the kernel of each tower s jacobi operator restricted to the space of deformations respecting @xmath477 ; we do not claim that these conditions are necessary , but they are natural and sufficient . it is not hard to check ( using [ tower ] and [ symcomp ] for instance ) that imposing [ sa ] is equivalent to demanding @xmath478 and @xmath479 ( when @xmath50 desingularizes @xmath6 ) or @xmath480 and @xmath481 ( when @xmath50 desingularizes @xmath11 ) for some integer @xmath386 . in particular each tower @xmath482 must itself contain the appropriate scaffolding , forcing @xmath473 to divide @xmath391 ( when @xmath478 ) or @xmath396 ( when @xmath483 . since @xmath484 includes no symmetries exchanging @xmath8 and @xmath9 , the quotients @xmath485 and @xmath486 are independent and are given by @xmath460 and @xmath461 . on the other hand modulo @xmath487 @xmath8 and @xmath9 are equivalent to one another but to no other intersection circles , while for every @xmath145 the circles @xmath331 and @xmath488 are equivalent but @xmath331 and @xmath335 are inequivalent . thus only @xmath489 , @xmath490 , and @xmath491 can be independently prescribed as @xmath459 , @xmath462 , and @xmath463 respectively . the data so far described completely determine the periods and sizes of the towers replacing the circles of intersection , but this information and the particular scaffolding do not quite fix the initial surface @xmath50 , even up to congruence . ( we call two initial surfaces @xmath492 and @xmath493 _ congruent _ in @xmath5 if there exists @xmath494 such that @xmath495 . ) specifically there is some not entirely inconsequential freedom in the choice of @xmath468 $ ] in [ sigmac ] : it may be replaced by @xmath496 $ ] ; equivalently we could replace the tower @xmath76 defining @xmath497 by its `` dual '' tower mentioned in remark [ towerremark ] and having the same scaffolding and symmetry group as @xmath76 but occupying @xmath88 instead of @xmath87 .    accordingly we allow the values of @xmath464 to make a choice of one model tower or the other along @xmath9 for initial surfaces desingularizing @xmath6 and we use @xmath465 and @xmath466 for identical purposes along the towers @xmath331 with @xmath124 odd and even respectively for initial surfaces desingularizing @xmath11 . thus these data control the _ alignment _ of the towers . it is not necessary to allow for the two possibilities on every ( inequivalent ) intersection circle , since up to congruence it is only the relative alignment that matters . in fact , even allowing realignment on just the circles mentioned , we still sometimes produce congruent initial surfaces with different values of @xmath464 ( or @xmath465 and @xmath466 ) , depending on the parities of the other data . for example , assuming @xmath460 and @xmath461 relatively prime ( since we may absorb a common divisor into @xmath103 ) , the surfaces @xmath498 and @xmath499 ( formally defined in [ initsdef ] below ) desingularizing @xmath6 are congruent precisely when either @xmath103 or exactly one @xmath500 is odd . indeed , if @xmath501 is odd , then @xmath502 if @xmath460 is even but @xmath461 odd , then @xmath503 and if @xmath460 is odd but @xmath103 and @xmath461 even , then @xmath504    to see that @xmath505 and @xmath506 are not congruent when @xmath103 is even and both @xmath460 and @xmath461 are odd , recall that each initial surface will be defined to include the scaffold circles whose union is @xmath507 , which orthogonally intersect @xmath8 and @xmath9 at the @xmath400 roots of unity on each . choosing the global normal which at @xmath359 points in the positive direction of @xmath8 then determines the direction of that normal at all @xmath400 roots of unity on @xmath8 and @xmath9 . we call the unit normal at such a point positive if it points in the positive direction of the circle on which it lies and we call it negative otherwise . then , given two such points joined by an arc of a great circle in @xmath389 , we say that the two normals there are aligned if they are either both positive or both negative and otherwise say that they are antialigned . the parities assumed for the data imply that , for a given initial surface with that data , this alignment does not depend on the pair of chosen points and therefore defines a property of the initial surface which is invariant under congruences that preserve @xmath389 , but it is reversed by altering the value of @xmath464 . this shows that @xmath505 is not congruent to @xmath506 . similar considerations apply to surfaces desingularizing @xmath11 , but to avoid complicating the definition of the initial surfaces we do not make a systematic effort to eliminate completely duplication of congruence classes within the collection of initial surfaces .      with the foregoing in mind we define the initial surfaces as follows , recalling [ adef ] and [ stildekm ] . [ initsdef ] given integers @xmath0 , @xmath386 , and relatively prime @xmath508 , as well as @xmath509 , set @xmath510    given instead integers @xmath0 , @xmath511 , and relatively prime @xmath512 , as well as @xmath513 , set @xmath514 \right )   \right ) \\    & \;\;\ ; \cup \bigcup_{j=0}^{2k-1 } { \mathsf{r}}_{c_1}^{j\pi / k }      \left({\mathsf{r}}_{c_1}^{\pi / kmn'_{(-1)^j } }        { \mathsf{r}}_{c_2}^{\pi / kmn'_{(-1)^j}}\right )        ^{\sigma'_{(-1)^j } }      { \mathsf{r}}_{c_{0,0}^{\pi/4}{\mathsf{r}}_{c_{\frac{\pi}{2},\frac{\pi}{2}}}^{\pi/4}}\phi      \left(\frac{1}{2kmn'_{(-1)^j } }       \widetilde{\mathcal{s}}_{2,m } \left(2kmn'_{(-1)^j}\frac{\pi}{4k}\right ) \right ) . \end{aligned}\ ] ]    we will abbreviate the initial surfaces @xmath515 and @xmath516 by @xmath453 and @xmath455 respectively or sometimes indiscriminately by @xmath50 , when context permits .    the divisibility assumptions are made to avoid listing a single initial surface multiple times under different labels , but as already acknowledged some redundancy persists in the list in that certain items are congruent to others . in such cases the resulting minimal surfaces ultimately produced will also be congruent . we next collect some basic properties of the initial surfaces . [ initsprop ] for every choice of data , assuming @xmath517 , the initial surfaces @xmath515 and @xmath518 are closed , smooth surfaces embedded in @xmath5 . moreover    a.   @xmath453 has genus @xmath519 ; b.   @xmath455 has genus @xmath520 ; c.   @xmath521 and @xmath522 ; and d.   @xmath523 and @xmath524 . the closedness , smoothness , and embeddedness of the initial surfaces are clear from the definition and preceding discussion . for ( i ) , the components of @xmath525 may be grouped into pairs of consecutive ( in the sense of rotations about either circle ) components , and the two members of each pair may then be glued to each other along @xmath8 and @xmath9 to form @xmath2 new ( topological ) tori . we get the connected sum of these tori , a surface of genus @xmath2 , at the cost of one fundamental period of a tower along @xmath8 ( or @xmath9 ) . each additional fundamental period , of the towers along @xmath8 and @xmath9 , then contributes @xmath526 handles to the resulting surface . the genus of @xmath455 is similarly calculated . each portion of @xmath304 between two consecutive circles of intersection is glued to two portions of tori , both from alternately the @xmath8 or the @xmath9 side , orthogonally intersecting it , where these latter two are themselves glued along the circle where they intersect ( so either @xmath8 or @xmath9 ) . in this way we obtain @xmath14 topological tori , whose connected sum we take at the cost of one fundamental period for all but one tower on @xmath304 . each additional period of each of these towers contributes one handle to the resulting surface , while each period of each of the remaining two towers contributes @xmath526 handles . the great circles in the scaffoldings pass uninterrupted through the desingularized circles of intersection by virtue of the positioning and scaling in [ initsdef ] and the fact that @xmath414 maps the horizontal lines on the euclidean towers to great circles . that reflections through these geodesics belong to the stabilizers of the initial surfaces follows from the intertwining [ phintertwine ] by @xmath414 of symmetries of @xmath76 ( [ tower ] ) with symmetries of the configurations ( [ configsym ] ) to be desingularized . [ unitnormal ] since each initial surface is embedded in @xmath5 , it is also orientable and therefore possesses a unique global unit normal , henceforth denoted @xmath527 , which points in the positive direction ( meaning toward @xmath528 ) along @xmath8 at @xmath529 . we will write @xmath18 for the metric on each initial surface induced by its defining embedding in @xmath530 , @xmath43 for its @xmath527-directed scalar - valued second fundamental form , and @xmath531 for its @xmath527-directed scalar - valued mean curvature .      before proceeding with the construction , we pause to elaborate briefly on the symmetry groups , that is the full stabilizers in @xmath47 , of the initial surfaces , in one particular class of highly symmetric cases . the groups presented in the above proposition are the minimum symmetry groups enforced throughout the construction , but in general each such group will be properly contained in the symmetry group of a given initial surface ( consistent with that group ) as well as of the corresponding final minimal surface . to illustrate , consider the initial surfaces @xmath532 of type @xmath453 with @xmath533 . whatever the values of @xmath2 , @xmath103 , and @xmath464 , the full symmetry group here will always contain reflection through not just @xmath534 for all @xmath535 ( already represented in @xmath484 ) but also @xmath536 for @xmath537 odd . when @xmath103 is odd , @xmath538 and @xmath539 are equivalent under ambient isometries ( as discussed in the alignment subsection immediately preceding [ initsdef ] ) , so we may assume @xmath540 . the full symmetry group then admits @xmath541 , excluded from @xmath484 , and therefore also @xmath542 for every odd @xmath124 , because ( see [ symcomp ] ) for every integer @xmath124 the product @xmath543 . ( when @xmath544 , one has instead reflection through @xmath331 for each even @xmath124 , because @xmath545 and by assumption @xmath546 is an odd multiple of @xmath547 ) . in this case there are no other circles of reflection on @xmath304 that are parallel to @xmath8 and @xmath9 through tori right - handed along them . indeed the only such circles through which reflection preserves @xmath6 are the @xmath548 for @xmath549 . that even values of @xmath124 are inadmissible follows from the last parenthetical remark . that half - integer values are inadmissible follows also from [ symcomp ] since @xmath550 takes for example @xmath551 to @xmath552 , since @xmath553 is a nonintegral multiple of the half - period @xmath554 when @xmath103 is odd there are , however , also circles of reflection orthogonal to the @xmath331 : since @xmath313 and @xmath555 are circles of reflection of @xmath538 ( for @xmath103 odd still ) , by [ symcomp ] @xmath556 is also a circle reflection , so by [ symcomp ] again @xmath557 is too for every @xmath145 .    when @xmath103 is even , @xmath538 and @xmath539 are inequivalent . the first ( @xmath540 ) surface has reflectional symmetry through @xmath331 for every integer @xmath124 ( since @xmath558 , @xmath103 is even , and @xmath559 ) . again one also has @xmath557 as a circle of reflection for every @xmath145 . because @xmath550 preserves the initial surface if and only if @xmath553 is an odd number of half - periods , one has as well reflectional symmetry through @xmath331 for every half - integer @xmath124 precisely when @xmath103 is not divisible by @xmath15 .    the second ( @xmath544 ) surface has symmetry group including @xmath560 and excluding @xmath542 for every integer @xmath124 . thus @xmath556 is not a circle of reflection , but instead @xmath561 is for every @xmath562 . when @xmath103 is divisible by @xmath15 the symmetry group also includes reflection through @xmath331 for every half - integer @xmath124 ( but for no integer @xmath124 ) , but when @xmath103 is not divisible by @xmath15 there are no circles of reflection on @xmath304 parallel to @xmath8 and @xmath9 through tori right - handed along them . note that this description of the initial surfaces @xmath532 with @xmath103 even is consistent with the properties of the surfaces constructed by choe and soret in @xcite ; specifically the genus and symmetries of the @xmath540 and @xmath544 surfaces match those of , respectively , the _ odd _ and _ even _ surfaces in @xcite . [ r : unique ] note that to prove that the surfaces we construct in [ mainthm ] of type @xmath453 with @xmath103 even and @xmath533 are the same surfaces found in @xcite , it is enough to prove the uniqueness of the solutions to the plateau problems in @xcite . although this seems very likely to be true , we do not have a proof at the moment . note also that in @xcite lawson claims uniqueness for the solution to his plateau problem . every initial surface is covered by certain open sets , which we call _ extended standard regions _ , of two types . regions of the first type are indexed by the circles of intersection . given a particular initial surface @xmath50 , for any circle @xmath234 of intersection in the corresponding initial configuration we define @xmath473 ( suppressing dependence on the given initial surface ) to be the number of fundamental periods of the tower in @xmath50 wrapped around @xmath234 , so that ( recall [ initsdef ] ) @xmath473 is the product of @xmath103 with the appropriate factor involving @xmath2 or @xmath4 as well as @xmath459 , @xmath460 , or @xmath461 , depending on @xmath50 and @xmath234 : @xmath563 we similarly define @xmath564    then , recalling [ adef ] , we let @xmath565:=\left\{p \in \sigma : d_{{g_{_s}}}(p , c ) < \frac{a}{{m_{_c}}}\right\},\ ] ] where @xmath566 denotes the distance in @xmath5 between @xmath287 and @xmath234 . this region is naturally identified with a truncated karcher - scherk tower @xmath567 via the map @xmath568 \phi \left(\frac{({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}})}{{m_{_c}}}\right),\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath468 $ ] is an element of @xmath251 chosen so that @xmath569 = \varphi_{c , m } \left ( { \mathcal{s}_{{k_{_c}}}}(a ) \right)$ ] . sometimes we may suppress the dependence on @xmath103 , writing simply @xmath570 . in turn we define @xmath571 $ ] by @xmath572    a new constant @xmath573 , to be determined later , dictates the extent of the second type of region . it will be chosen independently of @xmath103 but large enough so that each such region closely approximates a clifford torus . regions of the second type in an initial surface @xmath50 are indexed by the connected components of the complement of the circles of intersection in the initial configuration that @xmath50 desingularizes . given such a component @xmath20 , with boundary @xmath574 , we may assume  if necessary by redefining @xmath575 by precomposition with a symmetry of @xmath576 and @xmath577 by precomposition with a symmetry of @xmath578that @xmath20 has inward unit conormals @xmath579 and @xmath580 along @xmath234 and @xmath33 . then , recalling [ tower ] and for any integer @xmath581 setting @xmath582}w_j({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}}),{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } )       \in { \mathbb{r}}^3 : { \ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}}\in ( b , a+1 ] , \ , { \ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}}\in { \mathbb{r}}\},\ ] ] we define @xmath583 : = { \phi_{_c}}\left(h_{{k_{_c}}}\right ) \cup \phi_{_d}\left(h_{k_{_d}}\right )      \cup ( \sigma \cap t \cap \{d_{{g_{_s}}}(\cdot , c)>b/{m_{_c}}\ } \cap d_{{g_{_s}}}(\cdot , d)>b / m_{_d}\}).\ ] ] this region is naturally identified with @xmath584 via the map @xmath585 \to t_b , \text { defined by } \\ & \varpi_{_{t , m}}(p ) = \begin{cases } { \phi_{_c}}\circ \pi_{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } } \circ { \phi_{_c}}^{-1}(p ) \text { if } p \in { \phi_{_c}}\left(h_{{k_{_c}}}\right )   \\ \phi_{_d } \circ \pi_{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } } \circ \phi_{_d}^{-1}(p ) \text { if } p \in \phi_{_d } \left(h_{k_{_d}}\right )   \\ p \text { otherwise } , \end{cases}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath586 is euclidean orthogonal projection onto the @xmath117-plane . it is immediate that @xmath587 is well - defined and smooth .    given an initial surface @xmath50 , we write @xmath588 for the collection of circles of intersection in the corresponding initial configuration and @xmath589 for the collection of components of the complement of @xmath590 in the initial configuration . then @xmath591     \cup \bigcup_{t \in { \mathcal{t}}(\sigma ) } s[t]$ ] , the members of @xmath592 : c \in { \mathcal{c}}(x)\}$ ] are pairwise disjoint , the members of @xmath593 : t \in { \mathcal{t}}(\sigma)\}$ ] are pairwise disjoint , and @xmath569 \cap s[t ] = \emptyset$ ] unless @xmath594 .        using the diffeomorphisms just defined , the next two propositions compare the extended standard regions , as embeddings in @xmath595 , to standard karcher - scherk towers and planes in euclidean space . [ stdtor ] let @xmath50 be an initial surface and @xmath596 a toral component . write @xmath597 for the flat metric on @xmath20 , and for each point @xmath598 let @xmath599 denote the distance from @xmath287 to the boundary circles of @xmath600 . then for every nonnegative integer @xmath30 there exists a constant @xmath601independent of @xmath103such that    a.   @xmath602^{\otimes 2},\ ; m^2\varpi_t^*g_{_t},\ ;         e^{-m\varpi_t^*d_{{g_{_s}}}(\partial t_b,\cdot ) }        \right)\right\| } \leq c(\ell)$ ] ; b.   @xmath603,\ ; m^2\varpi_t^*g_{_t},\ ;        e^{-m\varpi_t^*d_{{g_{_s}}}(\partial t_b,\cdot ) }        \right)\right\| } \leq c(\ell)m^{-1}$ ] ; and c.   @xmath604,\ ; m^2\varpi_t^*g_{_t},\ ;        e^{-m\varpi_t^*d_{{g_{_s}}}(\partial t_b,\cdot ) }        \right)\right\| } \leq c(\ell)m^{-1}$ ] . we select a boundary circle @xmath234 of @xmath20 and a rotation @xmath468 \in so(4)$ ] so that @xmath605 \phi(\{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}=0,\;x > 0\})$ ] . it suffices to establish the estimates within @xmath606 . using [ phullback ] we find @xmath607^*{g_{_s}}= & d{\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}}^2 + d{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}^2 + d{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}}^2        + \frac{\sin^2 { \ensuremath{\mathrm{r}}}- { \ensuremath{\mathrm{r}}}^2}{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{r}}}^4 }         \left (          { \ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}^2\ , d{\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}}^2 + { \ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}}^2\,d{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}^2 - 2{\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}\,d{\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}}\,d{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}\right ) \\        & + 2\frac{\sin^2 { \ensuremath{\mathrm{r}}}}{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{r}}}^2 }        \left (          { \ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}}\,d{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}\,d{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}}- { \ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}\,d{\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}}\,d{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}}\right ) ,      \end{aligned}\ ] ] whose components and whose inverse s components have ( coordinate ) derivatives of all orders bounded on @xmath608^{-1}\mathcal{u } \subset \{\sqrt{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}}^2+{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}^2}<\pi/4\ } \subset { \mathbb{r}}^3 $ ] . moreover @xmath609 identifies @xmath610 $ ] as a graph over @xmath20 so that @xmath611 \cap \mathcal{u } =          { \mathsf{r}}[c]\phi\{({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},f({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}}),{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } ) \ ; : \ ;           { \mathsf{r}}[c]\phi({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},0,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } ) \in \varpi_t^{-1}\left(s[t ] \cap \mathcal{u}\right)\ } ,          \mbox { where } \\        & f({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } ) = { m_{_c}}^{-1}w_{{k_{_c}}}({m_{_c}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{m_{_c}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } )          { \psi\left [ a+1,a \right]}({m_{_c}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{x } } } ) ,      \end{aligned}\ ] ] recalling @xmath612 from [ tower ] . from [ towerdecay ] we have for any nonnegative integers @xmath124 and @xmath30 the existence of a constant @xmath613 ensuring the estimate @xmath614 for any @xmath615 $ ] . now , via @xmath468\phi$ ] , the coordinates @xmath616 on @xmath91 transfer to @xmath617 and the functions @xmath618 restrict to coordinates on @xmath20 , so that @xmath619 and @xmath620_{ij}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } ) =        & \left[{g_{_s}}\right]_{ij}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},f({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}}),{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } )        + f_{,i}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}})\left[{g_{_s}}\right]_{i{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},f({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}}),{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } ) \\        & + f_{,j}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}})\left[{g_{_s}}\right]_{j{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},f({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}}),{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } )        + f_{,i}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}})f_{,j}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}})\left[{g_{_s}}\right]_{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},f({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}}),{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } ) ,      \end{aligned}\ ] ] whence follows the estimate ( i ) for the metric , in light of [ fest ] and the boundedness of all ( coordinate ) derivatives of all components of @xmath431 and its inverse with respect to the @xmath616 coordinate system as established in [ gsph ] .    assuming the normal @xmath527 on @xmath610 $ ] has positive inner product with @xmath621 , we calculate also @xmath622^{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},f({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}}),{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } )        - f_{,k}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}})\left[{g_{_s}}\right]^{k { \ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},f({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}}),{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } )        + f_{,k}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}})f_{,\ell}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}})\left[{g_{_s}}\right]^{k \ell}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},f({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}}),{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } )        \right)^{-\frac{1}{2 } } \cdot \\        & [        \gamma_{ij}^{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},f({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}}),{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } )        + f_{,ij}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } )        + f_{,j}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}})\gamma_{i{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}}^{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},f({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}}),{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } ) \\        & + f_{,i}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}})\gamma_{j{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}}^{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},f({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}}),{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } )        + f_{,i}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}})f_{,j}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}})\gamma_{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}}^{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},f({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}}),{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } ) \\        & - f_{,k}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}})\gamma_{ij}^k({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},f({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}}),{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } )        - f_{,k}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}})f_{,j}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}})\gamma_{i{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}}^k({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},f({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}}),{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } ) \\        & - f_{,k}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}})f_{,i}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}})\gamma_{j{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}}^k({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},f({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}}),{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } )        - f_{,k}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}})f_{,i}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}})f_{,j}({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } )          \gamma_{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{y}}}}^k({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},f({\ensuremath{\mathrm{x}}},{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z}}}),{\ensuremath{\mathrm{z } } } )        ] ,      \end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath623 and each instance of @xmath624 is a christoffel symbol of @xmath431 in the @xmath616 coordinate system . noting that the squared norm of the second fundamental form of @xmath20 is simply @xmath4 and that @xmath20 is minimal , we obtain ( ii ) and ( iii ) , using again the estimates [ fest ] and the boundedness exhibited by [ gsph ] .    [ stdtow ] let @xmath50 be an initial surface and @xmath625 an intersection circle . write @xmath626 for the second fundamental form of the inclusion @xmath627 relative to the rescaled euclidean metric @xmath628 and the unit normal whose pushforward by @xmath629 has positive @xmath431 inner product with @xmath527 , and set @xmath630 . then for each nonnegative integer @xmath30 there exists a constant @xmath601independent of @xmath103such that    a.   @xmath631^{\otimes 2},\ ; m^2g\right)\right\| }        \leq c(\ell)m^{-1/2}$ ] ; b.   @xmath632 , \ ; m^2g)\right\| }        \leq c(\ell)m^{-1/2}$ ] ; and c.   @xmath633 .    from [ gsph ] @xmath634 since the second fundamental form of @xmath76 is bounded , as is each of its covariant derivatives , we obtain @xmath635 , \ , m^2 g , \ , m^{-1}+d_{{g_{_s}}}(c,\cdot ) )          \right\| } \leq c(\ell ) , \\        & { \left\|          m^{-2}{\left\lverta\right\rvert}^2 - { { x_{_c}}^{-1}}^*{\left\lvert{{\widehat{a}}}_{_c}\right\rvert}^2 :          c^\ell(s[c ] , \ , m^2 g , \ , m^{-1}+d_{{g_{_s}}}(c,\cdot ) )        \right\| } \leq c(\ell ) , \mbox { and }   \\        & { \left\|          m^{-1}h : c^\ell(s[c ] , \ , m^2 g , \ , m^{-1}+d_{{g_{_s}}}(c,\cdot ) )          \right\| } \leq c(\ell ) ,      \end{aligned}\ ] ] establishing the estimates of the proposition on the subset of @xmath569 $ ] within the tubular neighborhood of center @xmath234 and @xmath431-radius @xmath636 . by assuming @xmath637 , we ensure that the complement of this subset falls under the regime of the preceding proposition , which in conjunction with the asymptotic geometry of @xmath576 itself completes the proof , under the further assumption that @xmath638 . given an initial surface @xmath50 , embedded in @xmath5 by @xmath639 , along with a function @xmath640 with sufficiently small @xmath641 norm , and recalling ( [ unitnormal ] ) the choice @xmath642 of global unit normal , we define the immersion @xmath643 where @xmath644 is the exponential map on @xmath530 . write @xmath645 for the global unit normal on @xmath646 which has nonnegative inner product with the velocity field for the geodesics generated by @xmath527 and write @xmath647 $ ] for the scalar mean curvature of @xmath646 relative to @xmath645 . write @xmath41 for ( recalling [ symm ] ) @xmath484 when @xmath50 is type @xmath453 and for @xmath487 when @xmath50 is type @xmath455 . the main theorem will be proven by selecting a solution @xmath648 ( the space of smooth @xmath41-odd functions on @xmath50recall [ invfun ] ) to @xmath647=0 $ ] , small enough that @xmath646 is an embedding .    to that end we next study the linearization @xmath649 at @xmath126 of @xmath650 , given by @xmath651       = \left(\delta + { \left\lverta\right\rvert}^2 + 2\right)u,\ ] ] where the constant term @xmath4 arises as the ricci curvature of @xmath431 contracted twice with @xmath527 . actually , to secure bounds uniform in @xmath103 and to facilitate the comparison of this operator on the extended standard regions to certain limit operators , we focus on @xmath652 in view of the estimates of the second fundamental form contained in [ stdtor ] and [ stdtow ] , this operator is bounded for any @xmath653 . the present section is devoted to obtaining a bounded inverse by first analyzing the operator `` semilocally''meaning when restricted to spaces of functions defined on each of the various extended standard regions  and by afterward applying an iteration scheme to piece together a global solution . we first solve the jacobi equation for the inclusion map @xmath438 of the exact karcher - scherk towers of standard size , given data with sufficiently small support . to avoid the introduction of substitute kernel needed in more complicated gluing constructions , we impose the symmetries @xmath41 induces on the limit tower . specifically , set @xmath654 , write @xmath655 for the second fundamental form of @xmath438 , and for each positive integer @xmath459 let @xmath656 then the jacobi operator @xmath657 defines a bounded linear map @xmath658 for any @xmath653 and integers @xmath0 and @xmath659 . given @xmath660 we recall that @xmath661 and we set @xmath662    [ towsol ] fix @xmath653 , @xmath660 , and integers @xmath0 and @xmath659 . then there exists a linear map @xmath663 and there exists a constant @xmath234depending on just @xmath664 , @xmath73 , @xmath2 , and @xmath459such that for any @xmath223 in the domain of @xmath665 we have @xmath666 and @xmath667    the proof will be completed by ( i ) introducing a conformal metric @xmath668 , ( ii ) establishing that the schrdinger operator @xmath669 acting between sobolev spaces defined with respect to this metric has discrete spectrum omitting @xmath126 , ( iii ) extracting a @xmath641 bound for solutions , and finally ( iv ) applying schauder estimates . for @xmath369 the tower @xmath76 has umbilic points where the gauss map takes vertical values , so the pullback @xmath670 of the round spherical metric @xmath431 by the gauss map , as applied in @xcite and other constructions , degenerates there . instead we will pull back the spherical metric by a different map . recall that above we studied the enneper - weierstrass representation [ weimap ] on the unit disc , which , after a similarity transformation , parametrized a half - period of @xmath76 . in fact we observe that [ weimap ] extends to a diffeomorphism @xmath671 from the extended complex plane @xmath672 punctured at the @xmath14 roots of @xmath56 to the corresponding tower modulo vertical translation by @xmath673 . moreover , the inverse extends to a covering map @xmath674 of the punctured extended plane by the full tower . by composing with the appropriate rotation , scaling , and the inverse of stereographic projection @xmath675 , we obtain a smooth covering @xmath676 ( the gauss map @xmath677 is then just @xmath678 . ) referring further to the enneper - weierstrass data [ weidata ] we deduce ( see for example @xcite or any standard reference for the classical theory of minimal surfaces ) @xmath679 so since @xmath680 we find @xmath681 so that the conformal factor @xmath682 in front of @xmath683 in [ eta ] and its reciprocal @xmath684 are bounded on the inverse image under @xmath685 of every compact subset of @xmath686 . also from [ weidata ] we find @xmath687 whence @xmath688 so that the potential term of @xmath669 is a smooth function with absolute value bounded on all @xmath76 . note that pullback @xmath689 of the conformal factor in [ eta ] is even under reflection through every line through opposite @xmath14^th^ roots of @xmath56 ; therefore ( recall the discussion of the symmetries in the proof of [ tower ] ) @xmath682 itself is in particular @xmath690-even , and so @xmath691 , like @xmath692 , takes @xmath690-odd functions to @xmath690-odd functions .    for each nonnegative integer @xmath30 write @xmath693 for the sobolev space consisting of all @xmath690-odd ( in the distributional sense ) measurable functions whose weak covariant derivatives up to order @xmath30 , with respect to @xmath694 , have squared norms with finite integrals on the quotient @xmath695 ; define the @xmath693 norm of such a function to be the square root of the sum , from order @xmath126 to order @xmath30 , of these integrals . although @xmath76 is not compact ( nor is the quotient @xmath696 ) , @xmath697 is nevertheless a union of closed round hemispheres punctured on their equators : @xmath698 where the overline indicates topological closure in @xmath76 and @xmath699 is the open region on @xmath76 between two consecutive horizontal planes of symmetry ; each @xmath700 is isometric to an open round hemisphere of radius @xmath24 . thus , from a sequence bounded in @xmath701 , by applying the rellich - kondrashov lemma successively to @xmath702 contiguous such hemispheres and bearing in mind the @xmath690 equivariance , we can extract a subsequence converging in @xmath703 . using also the boundedness of @xmath704 and a standard application of the riesz representation theorem for hilbert spaces , we conclude that @xmath691 has discrete spectrum . in proposition [ nokernel ] below we show moreover that @xmath691 has trivial kernel . now , given @xmath705 , we have @xmath706 with @xmath707 , so by proposition [ nokernel ] there exists @xmath708 weakly solving @xmath709 and satisfying the estimate @xmath710 . by standard elliptic regularity theory and the bounded geometry of @xmath711 in fact @xmath712 with @xmath713 for each @xmath714 , where @xmath715 is the open ball with center @xmath287 and @xmath683 radius @xmath716 . next , from the bochner formula together with the divergence theorem , the recognition that the compactly supported smooth functions are dense in @xmath701 , and the equality @xmath717 , one secures the further estimate @xmath718 now , given @xmath719 and @xmath714 , there is a sector @xmath720 of a spherical cap ( relative to @xmath694 ) , with center @xmath287 , vertex angle @xmath242 , and radius @xmath721 , entirely contained in @xmath76 ( so missing the roots of unity at the equator ) . then , writing @xmath722 for the @xmath694 geodesic through @xmath287 , parametrized by arc length @xmath723 from @xmath287 , and with initial angle @xmath415 measured from one edge of @xmath724 to the other , we have @xmath725}(\gamma_\theta(s))v(\gamma_\theta(s ) ) ) \ , ds = \int_0^{1/4 } s\frac{d^2}{ds^2}({\psi\left [ 1/4,1/8 \right]}(\gamma_\theta(s))v(\gamma_\theta(s ) ) ) \ , ds , $ ] using the fundamental theorem of calculus and integrating by parts . integrating in @xmath415 from @xmath126 to @xmath242 and applying the cauchy - schwarz inequality yields the simple morrey - sobolev inequality @xmath726 this estimate , in conjunction with [ h2est ] and [ schauder ] , completes the proof . [ nokernel ] the operator @xmath691 acting on @xmath727 , as defined in the proof of proposition [ towsol ] , has trivial kernel .    to show that @xmath691 has trivial @xmath727 kernel we will first count its nullity on the somewhat larger domain @xmath728 , where @xmath729 is the subgroup of @xmath690 having the same generators save the reflections through lines , which are excluded this count is performed by adapting the variational proofs given by montiel and ros for lemma 12 and lemma 13 in @xcite . there they calculate the multiplicity of the eigenvalues of the laplacian on the round sphere as eigenvalues of the laplacian on certain coverings of the sphere . here we are interested in the multiplicity of @xmath126 only , for the more complicated operator @xmath691 .    recalling [ omegadef ] we see that @xmath730 . write @xmath731 for the space of restrictions to @xmath732 of elements of @xmath733 and write @xmath734 for the closure in @xmath733 of the space of smooth functions compactly supported in @xmath732 and invariant under the ( rotational ) symmetries of @xmath735 that preserve @xmath732 . we define the bilinear form @xmath736 on @xmath737 @xmath738      : =      -(du , dv)_{l^2(\eta)}+\left(e^{-2\phi}{\left\lvert{{\widehat{a}}}\right\rvert}^2u , v\right)_{l^2(\eta)}.\ ] ] then mimicking @xcite , we define the subspace @xmath739 of @xmath733 by @xmath740            = \lambda ( u , v)_{l^2(\eta ) }            \right\rangle \\            & \,\,\ , \oplus \ ,            \bigoplus_{j=2}^{2n } \left\langle \left . h^1_{0 , { { \widehat{\mathscr{h}}}}}(\omega_j,\eta ) \ ; \right| \ ;            \exists \lambda \geq 0 \;\ ; \forall v \in h^1_{0,{{\widehat{\mathscr{h}}}}}(\omega_j,\eta ) \;\ ;            b_{{{\widehat{l}}}_\eta,\omega_j}[u , v ]            = \lambda ( u , v)_{l^2(\eta ) }            \right\rangle ,      \end{aligned}\ ] ] and the vector space @xmath741 by @xmath742            = \lambda ( u , v)_{l^2(\eta ) }          \right\rangle \\          & \,\,\ , \oplus \ , \bigoplus_{j=2}^{2n } \left\langle \left . h^1_{{{\widehat{\mathscr{h}}}}}(\omega_j,\eta ) \ ; \right| \ ;            \exists \lambda>0 \;\ ; \forall v \in h^1_{{{\widehat{\mathscr{h}}}}}(\omega_j,\eta ) \;\ ;            b_{{{\widehat{l}}}_\eta,\omega_j}[u , v ]            = \lambda ( u , v)_{l^2(\eta ) }          \right\rangle ,      \end{aligned}\ ] ] where in the first equation we take the direct sum within @xmath733 , while in the second we use the abstract direct sum , and in both equations angled brackets indicate the linear span in @xmath733 .    using the variational characterization of eigenvalues and the unique - continuation principle we find as in @xcite that ( i ) orthogonal projection in @xmath733 onto the subspace spanned by the @xmath743 eigenfunctions with strictly negative eigenvalues has injective restriction to @xmath739 and ( ii ) orthogonal projection in @xmath744 onto @xmath741 has injective restriction ( after precomposition with the obvious inclusion ) to the subspace of @xmath733 spanned by @xmath743 eigenfunctions with nonpositive eigenvalues according to lemma [ hemisphere ] below @xmath743 on @xmath745 ( with dirichlet condition ) has one - dimensional kernel and no strictly negative eigenvalues , so from ( i ) in the preceding paragraph we deduce that @xmath743 on @xmath733 has at least @xmath746 strictly negative eigenvalues , counted with multiplicity . on the other hand lemma [ hemisphere ] also states that @xmath743 on @xmath731 with neumann condition has trivial kernel and precisely one simple negative eigenvalue , so from ( ii ) in the preceding paragraph we deduce that @xmath743 on @xmath733 has no more than @xmath702 nonnegative eigenvalues , counted with multiplicity . thus @xmath691 has nullity at most one on @xmath733 . since the vertical component of the gauss map is a jacobi field for @xmath76 and is @xmath735 but not @xmath690 equivariant , we see that the @xmath701 kernel of @xmath691 is indeed trivial . [ hemisphere ] for each @xmath145 , with notation as in [ omegadef ] and the proof of proposition [ nokernel ] ,    a.   @xmath743 on @xmath734 ( with dirichlet boundary condition ) has @xmath24-dimensional kernel and no strictly negative eignevalues , and b.   @xmath743 on @xmath731 with neumann boundary condition has trivial kernel and exactly one simple negative eigenvalue .    the hemisphere @xmath700 with its pole deleted is conformal , via stereographic projection ( from the antipodal pole ) and a logarithm , to the standard half - cylinder with flat metric . concretely , using polar coordinates on the unit disc pulled back by the same stereographic projection to @xmath732 , we have @xmath747 we find ( recall [ potential ] ) that for the corresponding operator @xmath748 we have @xmath749    evidently @xmath750 , so whenever @xmath195 is an eigenfunction of the flat laplacian @xmath751 , @xmath752 is an eigenfunction ( when nonzero ) of @xmath753 with the same eigenvalue . moreover @xmath754 and @xmath755 are linearly independent for every real @xmath756 except @xmath757 and obviously @xmath758 . corresponding to the latter exception we have for @xmath759 the linearly independent eigenfunctions @xmath760 and @xmath761 with eigenvalue @xmath126 . as for the former exception , noting that we have already accounted for the eigenfunction @xmath762 of @xmath759 with eigenvalue @xmath763 and that @xmath764 , we find that nonzero @xmath195 solving @xmath765 is another , independent such eigenfunction .    thus we deduce that an eigenfunction for @xmath766 of the form @xmath767 with eigenvalue @xmath768 has radial factor @xmath769 a linear combination of @xmath770 and @xmath771 given by @xmath772 or a linear combination of @xmath773 and @xmath774 in case @xmath775 or a linear combination of @xmath776 and @xmath777 in case @xmath778 .    separating variables , we need only consider eigenfunctions of the above form , and , because of the rotational symmetries imposed , @xmath30 must take values in @xmath779 . now suppose @xmath780 on @xmath732 . then @xmath781 as well , on @xmath732 punctured at its pole @xmath782 , so @xmath783 and @xmath784 for some constants @xmath785 and @xmath786 , unless @xmath787 , in which case @xmath788 . ( the other exceptional case of @xmath757 is excluded by the symmetries . )    if we impose dirichlet conditions , we find @xmath789 when @xmath790 , but then @xmath791 is singular at @xmath792 unless @xmath793 , which must therefore hold , since @xmath767 is an eigenfunction on all @xmath732 . on the other hand @xmath794 while @xmath795 , so @xmath796 when @xmath758 . thus dirichlet @xmath691 has kernel spanned by @xmath797 , confirming the nullity asserted in ( i ) . if we instead impose neumann conditions , since @xmath798 ( again @xmath757 is excluded by the symmetries ) , we find @xmath799 when @xmath790 , so again we need @xmath793 to avoid a singularity at @xmath792 . on the other hand @xmath800 while @xmath801 , so in this case @xmath802 , but @xmath803 is also singular at @xmath792 . thus neumann @xmath691 indeed has trivial kernel , as claimed in ( ii ) .    for @xmath804 one can not expect agreement of solutions to @xmath805 and to @xmath806 , but the variational characterization of eigenvalues reveals that the number ( counting multiplicity ) of strictly negative ( dirichlet or neumann ) eigenvalues will agree for the two operators , at least on compact subsets of @xmath807 , where the conformal factor is bounded with bounded inverse . furthermore , again using the variational characterization of eigenvalues one sees that for @xmath808 sufficiently small , the number ( counted with multiplicity ) of strictly negative eigenvalues for @xmath691 on @xmath732 with dirichlet condition on the equator is the same as the number of strictly negative eigenvalues of @xmath691 on @xmath732 less a spherical cap @xmath809 with radius @xmath810 and center the pole @xmath126 , imposing dirichlet conditions on both the equator and boundary of the cap . ( to show the former number is at least the latter extend test functions vanishing on @xmath811 to test functions vanishing on @xmath809 ; for the reverse inequality use a logarithmic cut - off , identically @xmath126 on @xmath809 and identically @xmath24 on @xmath812 . ) likewise , assuming @xmath810 small enough , the number of strictly negative eigenvalues of @xmath691 on @xmath732 with neumann condition on the equator is the same as the number of strictly negative eigenvalues of @xmath691 on @xmath813 with neumann condition on the equator and dirichlet condition on @xmath811 . now suppose @xmath814 is an eigenfunction of @xmath691 on @xmath813 with strictly negative eigenvalue , imposing either of the above boundary conditions . then @xmath815 , so in particular @xmath804 . if @xmath816 , then @xmath817 . if we impose the dirichlet condition on the equatorial circle @xmath818 , then , since @xmath819 and @xmath820 , we must have @xmath802 , but @xmath821 , so the dirichlet condition on @xmath822 means @xmath796 as well . thus there are no such dirichlet eigenfunctions . if instead we impose the neumann condition on @xmath818 , then , since @xmath823 and @xmath824 , we need @xmath796 , but @xmath825 vanishes only at @xmath792 , so the dirichlet condition on @xmath822 means @xmath802 too . thus there are no such neumann eigenfunctions either . now assume @xmath826 . then @xmath827 . as when studying the kernel above , imposition of the dirichlet condition @xmath818 forces @xmath789 , but a quick calculation shows that imposition of the dirichlet condition on @xmath822 then requires @xmath828 = ( k-1 ) \tanh [ ( k-1 ) \ln \epsilon]$ ] . since for every real @xmath829 the function @xmath830 is even and on @xmath831 strictly monotonic , this last condition implies @xmath757 , contradicting the initial assumption of the paragraph and completing the proof of ( i ) . imposing instead the neumann condition on @xmath818 forces @xmath799 , so the dirichlet condition on @xmath822 now demands @xmath832 = ( k-1 ) \tanh [ ( k-1 ) \ln \epsilon]$ ] . for any @xmath808 the function on the left is even in @xmath833 , strictly monotonic in @xmath833 on @xmath831 , and has limit @xmath834 as @xmath833 goes to @xmath126 ; moreover , as @xmath810 tends to @xmath126 , the right - hand side goes to @xmath835 . thus this equation has exactly one solution , completing the proof of ( ii ) . [ r : nk ] a simpler proof of [ hemisphere ] is also possible using the @xmath836 metric instead of the @xmath694 metric and without reference to the @xmath837 operators . [ towsol ] can also be proved without using the @xmath694 metric . now we state some estimates for solutions to the poisson equation @xmath838 on the euclidean strip @xmath839 of given width @xmath840 , with @xmath841 subject to dirichlet data and @xmath223 odd under reflection through the horizontal line @xmath842 for given @xmath843 and every @xmath145 . we set @xmath844    in the applications to follow , @xmath845 will tend to infinity with @xmath103 , while @xmath846 will be bounded independently of @xmath103 , so it is important that the estimates here do not depend on @xmath845 . the additional decay estimate included in the proposition will be necessary to guarantee convergence of the iterative scheme used to construct global solutions on the initial surfaces . [ torsol ] with notation as in the preceding paragraph , given @xmath847 and @xmath653 , there exists a linear map @xmath848 and there exists a constant @xmath849depending on @xmath664 and @xmath846 but not on @xmath845such that if @xmath850 and @xmath851 , then @xmath852 , @xmath841 vanishes on @xmath853 , and @xmath854 moreover , if @xmath223 vanishes outside @xmath855 \times { \mathbb{r}}$ ] for @xmath856 , then @xmath857 where @xmath23 is the coordinate on the @xmath858 $ ] factor of @xmath859 .    define @xmath860 to be the dirichlet solution @xmath841 to the poisson equation @xmath861 . then @xmath862 and for each @xmath863 @xmath864 where @xmath715 is the intersection with @xmath859 of the euclidean disc with center @xmath287 and radius @xmath716 . defining @xmath865 for each positive integer @xmath459 we have @xmath866 for which equation one finds dirichlet green s function @xmath867    since @xmath868 we have @xmath869 ) } \leq \frac{y^2}{n^2}{\left\|f_n\right\|}_{c^0([0,x\pi ] ) }      \leq \frac{\sqrt{2y^5\pi}}{n^2}{\left\|f\right\|}_{c^0(t_x}),\ ] ] and so @xmath870 which upgrades the local schauder estimates above to the first inequality asserted in the proposition . if moreover @xmath223 vanishes outside @xmath855 \times { \mathbb{r}}$ ] , then @xmath871}(x ) = \frac{u_n(a ) \sinh \frac{nx}{y}}{\sinh \frac{na}{y } } \mbox { and } \\        & u_n|_{[b , x\pi]}(x ) =           \frac{u_n(b ) \sinh \frac{n(x\pi - x)}{y}}{\sinh \frac{n(x\pi - b)}{y } } ,      \end{aligned}\ ] ] establishing in conjunction with [ modest ] the decay estimates . the final task of this section is to apply propositions [ towsol ] and [ torsol ] iteratively on the extended standard regions to prove existence and obtain estimates of global solutions to the equation @xmath872 on each initial surface . [ rcal ] fix @xmath653 and data @xmath873 or @xmath874 for an initial surface . there is a positive integer @xmath875 such that for every @xmath876 and for every initial surface @xmath50 defined by the corresponding data there exists a linear map @xmath877 and there exists a constant @xmath849independent of @xmath103such that if @xmath878 , then @xmath879 and @xmath880    for @xmath596 with boundary circles @xmath881 , set @xmath882 and define the diffeomorphism ( recalling definitions [ stdef ] and [ txdef ] ) @xmath883,\ ] ]    the cutoff function @xmath884)$ ] , and the linear map @xmath885,m^2 g ) \to c_{{\mathscr{g}}}^{2,\beta}(s[t],m^2g)\ ] ] by @xmath886 } \circ x          + { \psi\left [ a_t , a_t-1 \right ] } \circ x \right ) , \mbox { and } \\        & x_{_t } : = \varpi_t^{-1 } \circ \kappa ,      \end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath887 is any isometry mapping @xmath888 to a scaffold circle on the torus containing @xmath600 .    for @xmath625 recall the diffeomorphism @xmath889\ ] ] and define the cutoff function @xmath890)$ ] and the linear map @xmath891,m^2g)\ ] ] by @xmath892 } \circ { \ensuremath{\mathrm{r}}}\right ) . \end{aligned}\ ] ]    next , given @xmath893 , let @xmath894{\mathcal{r}}_tf|_{s[t ] } , \\ & f_2 : = \sum_{c \in { \mathcal{c}}(\sigma ) } [ \psi_{_c},m^{-2}{\mathcal{l } } ]          { \mathcal{r}}_cf_1|_{s[c ] } , \mbox { and } \\        & \widetilde{{\mathcal{r } } } f : = \sum_{t \in { \mathcal{t}}(\sigma ) } \psi_t{\mathcal{r}}_t ( f+f_2)|_{s[t ] }          + \sum_{c \in { \mathcal{c}}(\sigma ) } \psi_c{\mathcal{r}}_c f_1|_{s[c]}.      \end{aligned}\ ] ]    the idea behind the definition of @xmath895 is as follows . first we construct approximate solutions on each toral region ( the @xmath896}$ ] terms ) and cut them off smoothly . these solutions are only approximate since we have obtained them by applying the solution operator for the model problem on the euclidean strip , and the resulting error is controlled by the deviation of the initial surface s geometry from the model geometry . additional error , supported in the tower regions , is created by cutting off the approximate solution with @xmath897 . we know only that its size is controlled by that of the original @xmath223 , and we account for it in @xmath898 along with the restriction of the original @xmath223 to the tower regions , where we next construct and cut off approximate solutions in a similar fashion . again there is error controlled by the geometry and also cutoff error , for which we have no better bound than the norm of @xmath223 but which is supported inside the toral regions far from their boundary , so we can construct an approximate solution to correct for them and apply the decay estimate in [ towsol ] . more precisely we now check that @xmath899 } \\        & + \sum_{t \in { \mathcal{t}}(\sigma ) }          \left ( { x_{_t}^*}^{-1}\delta_{{g_{_e}}}x_t^*-m^{-2}{\mathcal{l}}\right )          { \mathcal{r}}_t          \left(f+f_2\right)|_{s[t ] } \\        & + \sum_{t \in { \mathcal{t}}(\sigma ) }          \left [ \psi_{_t } , m^{-2}{\mathcal{l}}\right ] { \mathcal{r}}_t          f_2|_{s[t ] } ,      \end{aligned}\ ] ] so , noting that @xmath900}$ ] is supported far away from @xmath901 $ ] , we find from [ stdtor ] , [ stdtow ] , [ towsol ] , and [ torsol ] @xmath902 where @xmath903 is a constant depending on @xmath73 but not on @xmath103 and where @xmath234 is a constant depending on neither @xmath73 nor @xmath103 . thus we may at this stage fix @xmath73 ( finally determining the extent of the toral regions ) sufficiently large in terms of @xmath234 and then take @xmath103 sufficiently large in terms of @xmath903 so as to ensure that @xmath904 is invertible . the proof is then concluded by taking @xmath905 . recall that given an initial surface @xmath50 with defining embedding @xmath639 and a function @xmath906 , we have defined the map @xmath907 by @xmath908 , @xmath909 being the exponential map on @xmath5 and @xmath527 a global unit normal for the initial surface . for @xmath910 sufficiently small @xmath646 is an immersion with well - defined mean curvature @xmath647 $ ] relative to the global unit normal @xmath645 having positive inner product with the parallel translates of @xmath527 along the geodesics it generates . we now prove the main theorem by solving @xmath647=0 $ ] . [ mainthm ] given data ( a ) @xmath873 or ( b ) @xmath874 for an initial surface ( recalling [ initsdef ] ) , there exist @xmath911 and @xmath849 such that whenever @xmath912 , the initial embedding @xmath639 corresponding to the data can be perturbed to a minimal embedding @xmath907 by a function @xmath648 ( depending on @xmath103 ) that satisfies the estimate @xmath913 . here @xmath41 is either ( a ) @xmath484 or ( b ) @xmath487 ( recalling [ symm ] ) . in particular @xmath914 has the same genus as @xmath50 ( see [ initsprop ] ) , is invariant under @xmath41 , and contains the scaffolding ( a ) @xmath389 or ( b ) @xmath394 ( recalling [ scaff ] ) . moreover , in the complement in @xmath5 of any tubular neighborhood of the circles of intersection of the initial configuration ( a ) @xmath6 or ( b ) @xmath11 , for @xmath103 sufficiently large @xmath914 is the graph over some subset of the initial configuration of a smooth function converging smoothly to @xmath126 as @xmath915 . fix @xmath916 . by [ stdtor ] and [ stdtow ] the initial mean curvature satisfies @xmath917 : c^{2,2\beta}(\sigma , m^2g)\right\| } \leq cm^{-3/2}\ ] ] for a constant @xmath234 independent of @xmath103 . setting @xmath918,\ ] ] then [ rcal ] implies that @xmath919 for a ( possibly different ) constant @xmath234 independent of @xmath103 . the function @xmath920 represents the first - order correction to the initial surface . to complete the perturbation we need to estimate the nonlinear part of @xmath650 near @xmath126 , defined by @xmath921 : = { \mathcal{h}}[u ] - { \mathcal{h}}[0 ] - { \mathcal{l}}u.\ ] ]    to proceed efficiently we consider the blown - up metric @xmath922 on @xmath5 . given @xmath906 we can define @xmath923 by @xmath924 , where @xmath925 is the exponential map on @xmath595 and @xmath926 is the @xmath922 unit normal for @xmath50 parallel to @xmath527 ; of course @xmath927 , @xmath928 , and @xmath929 . for @xmath930 sufficiently small we can define also @xmath931 $ ] to be the mean curvature of @xmath932 relative to @xmath922 ( and @xmath933 ) . obviously @xmath934 = m{\mathcal{h}}_{m^2{g_{_s}}}[mu],\ ] ] so @xmath935      =      m^{-2}\int_0 ^ 1 \int_0^t \frac{d^2}{ds^2}{\mathcal{h}}[su ] \ , ds \ , dt      = m^{-1 } \int_0 ^ 1 \int_0^t \frac{d^2}{ds^2}{\mathcal{h}}_{m^2g_s}[smu ] \ , ds \ , dt.\ ] ] now , if @xmath936 is sufficiently small in terms of the riemannian curvature of @xmath595 and the second fundamental form of @xmath845 relative to @xmath922 , then @xmath646 will be an immersion , @xmath647 $ ] will be well - defined , and moreover @xmath937 } { \left\|\frac{d^2}{ds^2}{\mathcal{h}}_{m^2g_s}[smu ] :        c^{0,2\beta}(\sigma , m^2g)\right\| }      \leq c{\left\|mu : c^{2,2\beta}(\sigma , m^2g)\right\|}^2,\ ] ] where @xmath234 is a constant controlled by finitely many covariant derivatives of the riemannian curvature of the ambient space @xmath595 and finitely many covariant derivatives of the second fundamental form of @xmath845 relative to @xmath922 . of course the riemannian curvature of @xmath595 is bounded uniformly in @xmath103 ( tending to @xmath126 in fact ) and all of its derivatives vanish ; while @xmath845 itself depends on @xmath103 , each derivative of its second fundamental form , relative to @xmath922 , is bounded independently of @xmath103 . consequently , if @xmath42 is the closed ball of radius @xmath938 in @xmath939 and @xmath940 , we have @xmath941 : c^{2,2\beta}(\sigma , m^2g)\right\| } \leq cm^{-2}.\ ] ] evidently then , taking @xmath103 large enough , @xmath942 $ ] defines a map @xmath943 which is continuous with respect to the @xmath944 norm on @xmath42 as well as the @xmath939 norm , so by the schauder fixed point theorem admits a fixed point @xmath945 . accordingly @xmath946 $ ] and @xmath947 = { \mathcal{h}}[0 ] + { \mathcal{l}}u_0 + { \mathcal{l}}v_0 + { \mathcal{q}}[u_0+v_0 ] = 0.\ ] ] the higher regularity of @xmath948 then follows immediately , and the @xmath641 decay estimate of @xmath949 ensures embeddedness . in this subsection we briefly outline a highly symmetric construction where the symmetry imposed is not so great that there are no obstructions . the obstruction space is nontrivial but of finite dimension independent of the symmetries and the genus of the surfaces constructed . the construction can easily be explained in terms of the earlier presentation : the initial configuration used is @xmath11 and the symmetry group imposed is @xmath484 ( and not @xmath487 ) . this corresponds to using the scaffolding @xmath950 . the towers desingularizing @xmath8 and @xmath9 are then symmetric enough that they carry no kernel . the construction in this respect can proceed as the earlier one in [ mainthm ] . on the other hand the towers desingularizing the circles @xmath951 are classical scherk singly periodic surfaces and the symmetries imposed fix @xmath320 but not @xmath304 . this situation is similar to many recent constructions @xcite where there is enough symmetry to simplify the obstruction space in comparison to the more general situation in @xcite , but not enough to render it trivial as in [ mainthm ] . more precisely we have a two - dimensional kernel , one dimension for each circle of intersection @xmath555 and @xmath952 . ( note that modulo the symmetries these are the only circles of intersection besides @xmath8 and @xmath9 ) . there are no circles in the scaffolding contained in @xmath304 and therefore @xmath304 is not held fixed by the construction . we introduce then two continuous parameters in the construction , @xmath953 and @xmath954 . @xmath555 is replaced by a parallel copy on @xmath376 at ( signed ) distance @xmath953 and similarly @xmath952 is replaced by a parallel copy on @xmath377 at ( signed ) distance @xmath954 . by the symmetries then all @xmath331 are appropriately replaced also . @xmath304 is a union of annuli with boundaries the @xmath331 . these are replaced then by minimal graphs so that the new annuli span the @xmath331 s . this way @xmath304 is replaced by a new torus with derivative discontinuities along its circles of intersection with the @xmath320 s . the construction of the initial surfaces then proceeds as usual by using towers appropriately . note that modulo the symmetries there are four circles which get desingularized : @xmath955 and the ( perturbed to new positions ) @xmath956 . following the same conventions as in section [ sinit ] we denote by @xmath957 the number of half periods the desingularizing towers will have between successive circles of reflection in @xmath389 along @xmath958 respectively . this together with three alignment parameters @xmath959 and the continuous parameters @xmath953 and @xmath954 determine the initial surfaces . we have the following .    [ thm-2 ] given data @xmath960 for an initial surface as outlined above there exists @xmath911 such that whenever @xmath912 , one of the initial surfaces ( for some appropriate values of @xmath961 ) described above can be perturbed to a minimal surface which contains @xmath389 , is symmetric under the action of @xmath484 , and has genus @xmath962 . moreover as @xmath963 the minimal surfaces converge as varifolds to @xmath11 .        in this subsection we discuss corollaries in our setting of a general desingularization theorem announced in ( * ? ? ? * theorem f ) and ( * ? ? ? * theorem 3.1 ) . the statement of this theorem is motivated in @xcite , and its proof is outlined in detail in @xcite and will be presented in detail in @xcite . we will refer to this theorem in the rest of the discussion as the `` general theorem '' . the general theorem applies to situations where the intersection curves are transverse and have double points only , because the corresponding general construction is understood only when classical scherk surfaces are used to model the desingularizing regions in the vicinity of the intersection curves . therefore we can only consider the cases where the initial configurations in our setting are @xmath964 or @xmath965 ( recall [ e : wk ] ) excluding the possibility @xmath966 .    recall that in the first case we have two clifford tori @xmath376 and @xmath377 intersecting orthogonally along two totally orthogonal circles @xmath8 and @xmath9 . in the second case we have three pairwise orthogonal clifford tori @xmath967 with six intersection circles @xmath8 , @xmath9 , @xmath555 , @xmath952 , @xmath968 , and @xmath969 , where we also have @xmath970={\mathbb{t}}[c'_4]$ ] , @xmath971={\mathbb{t}}[c'_1]$ ] , @xmath372={\mathbb{t}}[c_2]$ ] , @xmath972 , @xmath973 , and @xmath974 , as follows from [ e : cp ] , [ e : cpperp ] , and [ e : cpinter ] with @xmath16 . following the general theorem we define @xmath975 and @xmath976 or @xmath977 ( recall [ e : wk ] ) the abstract surfaces with connected components the closures of the connected components of @xmath978 or @xmath979 . recall now that by the discussion of the clifford tori in section [ initial ] , any clifford torus @xmath247 is covered isometrically by @xmath78 with deck transformations generated by @xmath980 and @xmath981 . the linearized operator for the mean curvature is @xmath982 , which clearly has a four dimensional kernel with basis @xmath983 where @xmath984 are the standard coordinates on @xmath78 . an alternative basis is given by @xmath985    the existence of kernel means that the general theorem can not be applied unless we impose enough symmetry to ensure that the kernel modulo the symmetries becomes trivial . to impose these symmetries we consider the scaffolding @xmath986 defined by @xmath987 ( recall [ e : cphph ] ) and the corresponding group @xmath988 . it is easy to calculate then that @xmath989 note that for @xmath990 we have @xmath991 , @xmath992 , @xmath993 , and @xmath994 . if we impose @xmath995 as the group of symmetries of the construction , then @xmath996 has to be contained in the nodal lines of any eigenfunction allowed by the symmetries on @xmath376 . @xmath376 this way is subdivided into two flat squares of side length @xmath345 . the eigenvalues for the laplacian on each square with dirichlet boundary data are of the form @xmath997 with @xmath998 . @xmath15 is not included then . working similarly on @xmath377 we conclude that there is no kernel modulo the symmetries on @xmath964 . we have also to check that there is no kernel on @xmath976 . in this case we have to impose an extra dirichlet condition on @xmath9 , and then @xmath376 ( or @xmath377 ) is subdivided into four flat rectangles of sides @xmath345 by @xmath236 and the eigenvalues allowed are @xmath999 with @xmath1000 , and so @xmath15 is again not included . we study now the case of @xmath384 . first we check that there is no kernel on @xmath304 . because of the symmetry @xmath1001 we can assume that we are working on a rectangular ( instead of a square ) flat torus with sides of length @xmath1002 and @xmath1003 . the eigenvalues of the laplacian then are @xmath1004 with @xmath1005 , which do not include @xmath15 . to check that there is no kernel on @xmath1006 note first that on @xmath376 dirichlet conditions are imposed on @xmath8 , @xmath9 , @xmath313 , @xmath555 , and @xmath1007 . this subdivides @xmath376 into eight flat rectangles of sides @xmath242 by @xmath345 where the laplacian with dirichlet conditions on the boundary have eigenvalues @xmath1008 with @xmath998 . similarly for @xmath377 so it remains only to check @xmath304 . this has dirichlet conditions imposed on @xmath555 , @xmath952 , @xmath1007 , and @xmath1009 . @xmath304 is then subdivided into four flat cylindrical annuli of width @xmath242 and so without even using the symmetries we have that the smallest eigenvalue is @xmath1010 so that @xmath15 is again not included . applying then the general desingularization theorem announced in ( * ? ? ? * theorem f ) and ( * ? ? ? * theorem 3.1 ) we have the following as a corollary .    [ thm-3 ] @xmath964 can be desingularized to produce embedded closed minimal surfaces in @xmath5 symmetric under @xmath995 of genus @xmath1011 , where the towers desingularizing @xmath8 and @xmath9 include @xmath460 and @xmath461 periods respectively , provided @xmath460 and @xmath461 are large enough in absolute terms . as @xmath1012 the minimal surfaces tend to @xmath964 . similarly @xmath384 can be desingularized to produce embedded closed minimal surfaces in @xmath5 symmetric under @xmath995 of genus @xmath1013 , where the towers desingularizing @xmath8 and @xmath9 include @xmath460 and @xmath461 periods respectively , the towers desingularizing @xmath555 and @xmath1007 include @xmath462 periods , and the towers desingularizing @xmath952 and @xmath1009 include @xmath1014 periods , provided @xmath957 are large enough in absolute terms . as @xmath1015 the minimal surfaces tend to @xmath384 . note that the main difference of this result compared with the earlier ones is the small symmetry imposed and and that the ( still large ) number of periods along each circle can be prescribed independently on each circle ( except for the identifications by the symmetries of @xmath555 with @xmath1007 and @xmath952 with @xmath1009 ) , as opposed to requiring that all numbers have a large common divisor @xmath103 .
Abstract:

Answer: for each integer @xmath0 , we apply gluing methods to construct sequences of minimal surfaces embedded in the round @xmath1-sphere . we produce two types of sequences , all desingularizing collections of intersecting clifford tori . sequences of the first type converge to a collection of @xmath2 clifford tori intersecting with maximal symmetry along these two circles . near each of the circles , after rescaling , the sequences converge smoothly on compact subsets to a karcher - scherk tower of order @xmath2 . sequences of the second type desingularize a collection of the same @xmath2 clifford tori supplemented by an additional clifford torus equidistant from the original two circles of intersection , so that the latter torus orthogonally intersects each of the former @xmath2 tori along a pair of disjoint orthogonal circles , near which the corresponding rescaled sequences converge to a singly periodic scherk surface . the simpler examples of the first type resemble surfaces constructed by choe and soret @xcite by different methods where the number of handles desingularizing each circle is the same . there is a plethora of new examples which are more complicated and on which the number of handles for the two circles differs . examples of the second type are new as well .