On the linearizability of 3-webs: end of controversy

There are two theories describing the linearizability of 3-webs: one is developed in the article "On the linearizability of 3-webs" (Nonlinear analysis 47, (2001) pp.2643-2654) and another in the article "On the Blaschke conjecture for 3-webs" (J. Geom. Anal. 16, 1 (2006), 69-115). Unfortunately, they cannot be both correct because on an explicit 3-web W they contradict: the first predicts that W is linearizable while the second states that W is not linearizable. The essential question beyond this particular 3-web is: which theory describes correctly the linearizability condition? In this paper we present a very short proof, due to J.-P.~Dufour, that W is linearizable, confirming the result of the first article

Projective Metrizability and Formal Integrability

The projective metrizability problem can be formulated as follows: under what conditions the geodesics of a given spray coincide with the geodesics of some Finsler space, as oriented curves. In Theorem 3.8 we reformulate the projective metrizability problem for a spray in terms of a first-order partial differential operator $P_1$ and a set of algebraic conditions on semi-basic 1-forms. We discuss the formal integrability of $P_1$ using two sufficient conditions provided by Cartan-K\"ahler theorem. We prove in Theorem 4.2 that the symbol of $P_1$ is involutive and hence one of the two conditions is always satisfied. While discussing the second condition, in Theorem 4.3 we prove that there is only one obstruction to the formal integrability of $P_1$, and this obstruction is due to the curvature tensor of the induced nonlinear connection. When the curvature obstruction is satisfied, the projective metrizability problem reduces to the discussion of the algebraic conditions, which as we show are always satisfied in the analytic case. Based on these results, we recover all classes of sprays that are known to be projectively metrizable: flat sprays, isotropic sprays, and arbitrary sprays on 1- and 2-dimensional manifolds. We provide examples of sprays that are projectively metrizable without being Finsler metrizable

Metrizable isotropic second-order differential equations and Hilbert's fourth problem

It is well known that a system of homogeneous second-order ordinary differential equations (spray) is necessarily isotropic in order to be metrizable by a Finsler function of scalar flag curvature. In Theorem 3.1 we show that the isotropy condition, together with three other conditions on the Jacobi endomorphism, characterize sprays that are metrizable by Finsler functions of scalar flag curvature. The proof of Theorem 3.1 provides an algorithm to construct the Finsler function of scalar flag curvature, in the case when a given spray is metrizable. One condition of Theorem 3.1, regarding the regularity of the sought after Finsler function, can be relaxed. By relaxing this condition, we provide examples of sprays that are metrizable by conic pseudo-Finsler functions as well as degenerate Finsler functions. Hilbert's fourth problem asks to determine the Finsler functions with rectilinear geodesics. A Finsler function that is a solution to Hilbert's fourth problem is necessarily of constant or scalar flag curvature. Therefore, we can use the conditions of [11, Theorem 4.1] and Theorem 3.1 to test when the projective deformations of a flat spray, which are isotropic, are metrizable by Finsler functions of constant or scalar flag curvature. We show how to use the algorithms provided by the proofs of [11, Theorem 4.1] and Theorem 3.1 to construct solutions to Hilbert's fourth problem.Comment: 15 page

Projective and Finsler metrizability: parameterization-rigidity of the geodesics

In this work we show that for the geodesic spray $S$ of a Finsler function $F$ the most natural projective deformation $\widetilde{S}=S -2 \lambda F\mathbb C$ leads to a non-Finsler metrizable spray, for almost every value of $\lambda \in \mathbb R$. This result shows how rigid is the metrizablility property with respect to certain reparameterizations of the geodesics. As a consequence we obtain that the projective class of an arbitrary spray contains infinitely many sprays that are not Finsler metrizable