Hausdorff Dimension of Divergent Geodesics On Product of Hyperbolic Spaces
Hausdorff Dimension of Divergent Geodesics On Product of Hyperbolic Spaces
Hausdorff Dimension of Divergent Geodesics On Product of Hyperbolic Spaces
hyperbolic spaces
Lei Yang∗
arXiv:1303.5993v2 [math.DS] 8 Apr 2013
Abstract
1 Introduction
Let M be a non-compact Riemann surface with constant curvature −1 and of finite total volume,
and let T1 (M) denote its unit tangent bundle. It is well known that M can be regarded as the quotient
space of the universal hyperbolic space H2 by some discrete subgroup Γ ⊂ Iso(H2 ) SL(2, R), say
M Γ\H2 . Under the condition when M is of finite total volume, Γ ⊂ SL(2, R) is a lattice. And there is a
natural identification T1 (M) Γ\SL(2, R). For simplicity, we denote SL(2, 1
R) by G, then T (M) Γ\G.
cos θ sin θ
Through this article, we use the following notations: let K = SO(2, R) = : θ ∈ R ,A=
− cos θ sin θ
et
1 x
at = : t ∈ R and let N = : x ∈ R . And each point x ∈ T1 (M), it determines a point
−t
e
0 1
on y ∈ M and also a direction v ∈ T1y (M), then starting from x, we have a unique geodesic flow, which is
denoted by {gt (x)}t∈R . On the Γ \ G level, the geodesic flow corresponds the action of the one-parameter
diagonal subgroup, say {at }t∈R , i.e., for Γx ∈ Γ \ G, the geodesic flow starting from x is just {Γxat }t∈R . In
∗
Department of Mathematics, The Ohio State University, email address: lyang@math.osu.edu
1
this article, we study the diagonal geodesic flows on the product space of hyperbolic surfaces (for some
technical reason we consider the negative geodesic flows, i.e., t is moving in negative direction, and this
is the same as the positive geodesic flows), say T1 (Γ1 \ H2 ) × · · · × T1 (Γk \ H2 ) Γ1 \ G × · · · × Γk \ G, and
we are interested in the points (x1 , . . . , xk ) ∈ Γ1 \ G × · · · × Γk \ G such that (g−t (x1 ), × · · · × g−t (xk )) → ∞
as t → +∞, i.e., for any compact subset K ⊂ Γ1 \ G × · · · × Γk \ G, there exists a constant T (K), such
that for all t > T (K), (g−t (x1 ), . . . , g−t (xk )) < K. If we denote the collection of such points by Dk , we
want to compute the Hausdorff dimension of Dk . For k = 1, i.e., on some single hyperbolic surface, it
is well known that g−t (x) ∈ Γ \ G → ∞ as t → +∞ if and only if g−t (x) is going toward some cusp part
of Γ \ G and it never escapes the cusp. Therefore for every point y ∈ Γ \ H2 , to make the geodesic flow
divergent, the only directions in T1y (Γ \ H2 ) we can choose are the ones whose opposite directions are
pointing to the cusps of Γ \ H2 , and thus the set D1 is of codimension one in Γ \ G. But for k ≥ 2, the set
becomes interesting. Actually, Dk turns out to be a self-similar Cantor-like subset of the whole space.
And in this article, we will prove the following theorem:
2
g1 g2
for g = ∈ G and z ∈ H2 , gz = g1 z+g2 . Then if we consider the map: G → H2 by sending
g3 z+g4
g3 g4
g ∈ G to gı ∈ H2 , it is easy to see that the stabilizer of ı is K, so this map induces an isomorphism
g1 g2
2 ∈ G and
G/K H . On the tangent bundle, the action is represented as follows: for g =
g3 g4
(z, v) ∈ SL(2, R), then the action g(z, v) = ( gg31 z+g
z+g2
, v
4 (g3 z+g4 )
2 ). This group action is conformal by the
results of fractional linear transformations, i.e., it preserves the hyperbolic metric and also the angles
between any two geodesics. Then we can identify G with T1 (H2 ) by sending g ∈ G to g(ı, ı) ∈ T1 (H2 ).
Under this map we can also identify Γ \ G with T1 (Γ \ H2 ) for any non-compact lattice Γ of G. Then
for x ∈ G T1 (H2 ), the geodesic flow {gt (x)}t∈R is identified with the orbit of the right action of
{at }t∈R , say {xat }t∈R , and on the level of homogeneous space Γ \ G, the geodesic flow starting from
Γx is equal to {Γxat }t∈R . In this article we insist on studying the negative geodesic flows, i.e., the
negative part of the whole geodesic line, say {Γxa−t}t>0 . Then for any Γx ∈ Γ \ G, we can decompose
a 0
x ∈ G as x = u+ (x)p− (x), where p− (x) ∈ P− =
: a ∈ R \ {0}, b ∈ R and u+ (x) ∈ U + =
−1
b a
1 t
. Then since at p− (x)a−t remains bounded for all large t, therefore at p− (x)a−t →
u(t) ∈ : t ∈ R
0 1
ξ(x) ∈ G as t → +∞. Thus on the product space Γ1 \ G × · · · × Γk \ G, (Γ1 x1 a−t , . . . , Γk xk a−t ) → ∞
as t → +∞, then (Γ1 u+ (x1 )a−t at p− (x1 )a−t , . . . , Γk u+ (xk )a−t at p− (xk )a−t ) → ∞, and for at p− (xi )a−t →
ξ(xi ) ∈ G as t → +∞, for i = 1, . . . , k, this implies (Γ1 u+ (x1 )a−t , . . . , Γk u+ (xk )a−t ) also diverges as
t → +∞. Conversely, for the same reason, if (Γ1 u+ (x1 )a−t , . . . , Γk u+ (xk )a−t ) diverges as t → +∞ then so
does (Γ1 x1 a−t , . . . , Γk xk a−t ) as t → +∞. Therefore if we define
we have dimH Dk = dimH Dk + dim(P− )k = dimH Dk + 2k. And on the level of H2 , for x ∈ R, the flow
{u(x)a−t }t>0 corresponds to the half geodesic ray {x + e−2t ı : t > 0}, then we have
3
volume, for i = 1, . . . , k. In a sequent paper, we will prove a similar result in this setting.
2 GEODESIC FLOWS ON Γ \ H2
In this section, we denote G = SL(2, R), and Γ ⊂ G some lattice of G. We may identify G with unit
tangent bundle of the universal hyperbolic space, say T1 (H2 ). Here we use the upper half space model,
the the ideal boundary of H2 , denoted by ∂H2 , is identified with R ∪ ∞. The diagonal flow u(x)a−t
corresponds to a geodesic flow on T1 (H2 ) joining ∞ ∈ ∂H2 and x ∈ R ⊂ ∂H2 . Then to study the quotient
space Γ \ H2 , we may divide H2 into countably many fundamental domains with respect to the Γ-action.
Up to a conjugation, we may assume some fundamental domain has ∞ as one of its cusps, among all the
fundamental domains sharing ∞ as a cusp, we choose one, and denote it by D0 , such that 0 ∈ R ⊂ ∂H2
is not a cusp of D0 . We denote all cusps of D0 by a1 = ∞, a2 , . . . , am , suppose the boundary of D0 has
n sides, then from a basic result of fundamental domains of Γ \ H2 , we may pair all sides of D0 in the
′ ′ ′
following way: {(ei , ei , si )}ni=1 , where ei , ei are sides of D0 and si ∈ Γ, such that for each i, si (ei ) = ei .
′ ′
Note that in this pairing notation, we put both (ei , ei , si ) and (ei , ei , s−1
i ) into our collection. And if we
put S = {si }ni=1 , then a well known result is that S generates Γ (see [1]). Next, we divide D0 into m parts
using only geodesic segments{P j}mj=1 , such that each part P j is connected and has only one cusp a j , then
for any point z ∈ P j ⊂ D0 , we say z is near a j , or close to a j . Then by dividing any fundamental domain
γD0 where γ ∈ Γ via γP j , similarly if z ∈ γP j then we say z is near γai . For a geodesic flow G, if at
some moment it moves into γP j , then we say at this moment G enters the cusp γai .
For any cusp ai , we have the subgroup Γai ⊂ Γ is nontrivial, where Γai denotes the group of elements
1 kl1
in Γ which fix the cusp ai . Then for a1 = ∞, Γ∞ = : k ∈ Z , for some l1 ∈ R, without loss of
0 1
1 k
generality (take a conjugation of Γ if necessary), we may assume l1 = 1, i.e., Γ∞ = : k ∈ Z .
0 1
kli
1 0 1 kli 1 0 1 − ai
kli
For general ai , Γai is of form = : k ∈ Z for some li ∈ R.
1 1 0 1 − 1 1 − kl2i kli
1 + ai
ai ai ai
For any geodesic flow G that once enters D0 and near aiat some moment, then the next cusp G enters
1 − kli kli
will be of form ui (k)s j aq , where ui (k) = kliai ∈ Γai and s j ∈ S ∪ {e} where e stands for the
− 2 ai
1 + kli
ai
identity of G, but s j aq , ai . In fact, G can spend some time near ai , going through several fundamental
domains near ai , say from D0 to ui (k)D0 and then enter another cusp of D0 , or enter another nearby
fundamental domain, which is of form ui (k)s j D0 for some s j ∈ S . When the formal happens then we
put s j = e and thus have the above statement. Then by transforming D0 to γD0 via γ, we have the
following: for any cusp γai , if a geodesic flow G is near γai at some moment, then the next cusp G
enters must be of form γui (k)s j aq .
γ1 γ2 √ γ
For a cusp γai , where γ = ∈ Γ, we define the height of γai , denoted by kγai k = li |γ3 + a4i |,
γ3 γ4
4
√ √ √ −1
0 li (γ1 + γa2i )
γ1 γ2 li li γ2
in fact, it is just the lower left entry of √
li √ −1 = √ γ4 √ −1 . And also we
γ3 γ4 ai li li (γ3 + ai ) li γ4
√ −1 √
li 0 li 0
note that √ 1 √ −1 Γai √ 1 √ −1 = Γ∞ . In particular, if ai = ∞, then kγ∞k = |γ3 |. But for
li ai li li ai li
a fixed cusp γai , the choice of γ is flexible, in fact, we can choose any element in the coset γΓai . In this
article we choose γ in the following way: For each cusp ai of D0 , we choose a neighborhood Θi of ai
in ∂H2 , for a1 = ∞, the neighborhood we choose should be Θ1 = (−∞, −M) ∪ (M, ∞) for some large
number M > 0. Then for a fixed cusp γai we choose γ such that γ−1 ∞ < Θi . This always can be done
since if γ−1 ∞ ∈ Θi , then we apply ui (k) to get ui (k)γ−1 ∞, for a suitable k, we may move it out of Θi .
For the case of a1 = ∞, the picture is very clear: if |γ−1 ∞| is larger than M, then we apply u1 (k) to get
u1 (k)γ−1 ∞ = γ−1 ∞ + k, this is pure translation, then obviously we can make
−1
|γ ∞| smaller than M for
1 0 1 0
suitable k. For general case of ai , we translate Θi via 1 to Θi which is a neighborhood
− ai 1 − a1i 1
1 0
−1 γ−1 ∞ is near ∞, then we may choose suitable k to make
of ∞. Then if γ ∞ ∈ Θi , then 1
− ai 1
1 kli 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 kli 1 0
γ−1 ∞ = γ−1 ∞ + kli away from ∞. Thus γ−1 ∞ will
0 1 − a1i 1 − a1i 1 1
ai 1 0 1 − a1i 1
be out of Θi , i.e., ui (k)γ−1 ∞ < Θi . then we replace γ by γui (−k), then we make γ−1 ∞ < Θi .
′ ′
Near each cusp of D0 , say ai , we can find two horocircles, say Ci and Ci , with radius ri and ri ,
′ ′
respectively, both through ai , such that Ci ⊂ Γai Pi ⊂ Ci . A point x + yı ∈ H2 in inside Ci (and Ci
′
respectively), if and only if (x − ai )2 + y2 < 2ri y (and (x − ai )2 + y2 < 2ri y respectively). On the other
√ −1
li 0 x+yı
hand, if we apply √ √ acting on x + yı, we get li = li (aaii x+ai yı
−x)−li yı , and its imaginary part
− aili li − a (x+yı)+li
i
Now, for a fixed x ∈ R ⊂ ∂H2 , we denote G x the geodesic flow joining ∞ and x, which corresponds
to the diagonal flow u(x)a−t (let u(x)a−s act on ı), then the element u(x)a−s corresponds to the point
ı ı
x+ e2s
, ∈ γPi ) if and only if γ−1 (x + e2sı ) is near ai , and then we may apply the
it is near γai (i.e., x + e2s √ −1
li 0 −1 ı
γ1 γ2
above proposition. So we need to calculate ℑ √li √ γ (x + e2s ). Suppose γ = , then
− ai li γ3 γ4
5
√ −1 √ √
li 0 −1 li −1 γ4 − li −1 γ2
√li √ γ = √ √ , so
− ai li li (−γ3 − γa4i ) li (γ1 + γa2i )
√ −1
li 0 −1 ı 1 (γ4 x−γ2 )+γ4 e−2s ı
√li √ γ (x + e2s
) = li (γ1 + γa2 )−x(γ3 + γa4 )−(γ3 + γa4 )e−2s ı
− ai li i i i
(3)
−2s 2 γ 4 γ
4 −2s γ
1 [(γ4 x−γ2 )+γ4 e ı][(γ1 + ai )−x(γ3 + ai )+(γ3 + ai )e ı]
= li γ2 γ4 2 γ4 2 −4s
[(γ1 + a )−x(γ3 + a )] +(γ3 + a ) e
i i i
6
γ1 γ2 α β j
we put γ = and s j = j , then we have:
γ3 γ4 τj ρj
γ1 γ2 1 − kla i
kl i α j β j
γui (k)s j = kl i
kli
γ3 γ4 − a2i
i
1 + ai τj ρj
γ1 [α j (1 − kli ) + τ j kli ] + γ2 [−α j kl2i + τ j (1 + kli
γ1 [β j (1 − kli
+ ρ j kli ] + γ2 [−β j kla2i + ρ j (1 + kli
ai ai ai )] ai ) ai )]
= i
kli
γ3 [α j (1 − ai ) + τ j kli ] + γ4 [−α j kla2i + τ j (1 + kli
ai )] γ3 [β j (1 − kli
ai ) + ρ j kli ] + γ4 [−β j kla2i + ρ j (1 + kli
ai )]
i i
(5)
Then we have:
kli
γ1 [α j (1 − ai ) + τ j kli ] + γ2 [−α j kla2i + τ j (1 + kli
ai )] + 1
aq {γ1 [β j (1 − kli
ai ) + ρ j kli ] + γ2 [−β j kla2i + ρ j (1 + kli
ai )]}
i i
γui (k)s j aq = kli
γ3 [α j (1 − ai ) + τ j kli ] + γ4 [−α j kla2i + τ j (1 + kli
ai )] + 1
aq {γ3 [β j (1 − kli
ai ) + ρ j kli ] + γ4 [−β j kla2i + ρ j (1 + kli
ai )]}
i i
(6)
and its height
lq |γ3 [α j (1 − klaii ) + τ j kli ] + γ4 [−α j kla2i + τ j (1 + klaii )] + a1q {γ3 [β j (1 − klaii ) + ρ j kli ] + γ4 [−β j kla2i + ρ j (1 + kli
p
kγui (k)s j aq k = ai )]}|
i i
ρ β β ρ
lq |kli [(τ j + aqj ) − a1i (α j + aqj )](γ3 + γa4i ) + γ3 (α j + aqj ) + γ4 (τ j + aqj )|
p
=
(7)
p √ ρj 1 βj
Since lq li |(τ j + aq ) − ai (α j + aq )| = ks j aq kkai k|ai − s j aq |, especially, if ai = ∞, it will become ks j aq k,
if s j aq = ∞, i.e., s j = e and aq = a1 = ∞, it will become kai k.
Then since |ai − s j aq |ks j aq kkai k is bounded from both above and from below (including the above
two extreme cases), in fact there are only finitely many choices for ai , s j and aq , thus in the above
√
expression the coefficient of k, which we denote by Ω(k), can be compared with li |γ3 + γa4i | = kγai k,
i.e., Ω(k) ≍ kγai k.
β ρ
In the expression of γui (k)s j aq , the remainder except Ω(k)k is γ3 (α j + aqj ) + γ4 (τ j + aqj ). To estimate
kγui (k)s j aq k, we need to prove the following inequality:
βj ρj γ4
|γ3 (α j + ) + γ4 (τ j + )| ≪ |γ3 + | (8)
aq aq ai
γ1 (n) γ2 (n)
Proof of (8). We prove it by contradiction. Suppose for each integer n > 0, there exist γ(n) = ,
γ3 (n) γ4 (n)
α j (n) β j (n)
ai (n), s j (n) = and aq (n), such that
τ j (n) ρ j (n)
β j (n) ρ j (n) γ4 (n)
|γ3 (n)(α j (n) + ) + γ4 (n)(τ j (n) + )| > n|γ3 (n) + | (9)
aq (n) aq (n) ai (n)
Since there are only finitely many choices for ai (n) s j (n) and aq (n), by passing to a subsequence, we may
assume they remain the same, say equal to ai s j and aq , respectively. And then by choose a subsequence
again we may assume that |γ3 (n)| ≥ |γ4 (n)| always true or |γ3 (n)| ≤ |γ4 (n)| always true. If this is the
formal case. Therefore by dividing both sides by |γ3 (n)| the above inequality becomes:
βj γ4 (n) ρj γ4 (n) 1
|(α j + )+ (τ j + )| > n|1 + | (10)
aq γ3 (n) aq γ3 (n) ai
7
Since | γγ34 (n)
(n)
| ≤ 1, the left hand side remains uniformly bounded for any n, thus the only case to make the
inequality hold is that 1 + γγ43 (n) 1 γ4 (n) γ4 (n) −1
(n) ai → 0 as n → ∞, i.e., − γ3 (n) → ai as n → ∞. Since − γ3 (n) = γ(n) ∞,
we have γ(n)−1 ∞ → ai . This contradicts our choice of γ(n) since previously we choose γ such that
γ−1 ∞ < Θi ∋ ai .
If this is the latter case, then we divide both sides of the inequality by |γ4 (n)| to get
γ3 (n) βj ρj γ3 (n) 1
| (α j + ) + (τ j + )| > n| + | (11)
γ4 (n) aq aq γ4 (n) ai
γ3 (n) 1
Then we get the left hand side remains uniformly bounded, and thus γ4 (n) + ai → 0 as n → ∞. So we
get the same statement as in the formal case and thus the same contradiction.
This completes the proof.
And for lower bound of kγui (k)s j aq k, we have that there exists some large integer N such that for
|k| ≥ N the following estimate of kγui (k)s j aq k holds:
The upper bound has been proved, so we only need the lower bound, i.e., there exists some constant,
Const., such that
kγui (k)s j aq k ≥ Const.|k|kγai k (16)
where |k| < N. But note that we do not prove this for arbitrary ai , k, s j and aq , instead, we will only
prove this for γai and γui (k)s j aq such that there exists some geodesic G x = {x + e2sı } s∈R , which enters
γai and after a while it leaves γai for γui (k)s j aq . And since we assume |k| is bounded, in the above
inequality the factor |k| is unnecessary. Thus it suffices to prove the following:
ı
Lemma 2.1. There exists some constant Const., such that if some geodesic G x = {x + }
e2s s∈R
enters γai
′ ′ ′
when s = t and leaves it for γ aq when s = t , then kγ aq k ≥ Const.kγai k
8
1
Proof. At first, we claim that there exists some constant Λ, such that e2t < Λ |x−γai|
. If G x enters
1
γai deeply, then the conclusion is already there since at e2s = |x−γa i|
, G x is already near γai , then
e < |x−γai | . If G x does not enter γai deeply, then we have kγai k |x − γai | ≥ 2c1 i , and x + ei2t is near γai
2t 1 2
Combing both of them, we have for arbitrary γ ai k and aq , the following holds:
9
Proof. This follows directly from pure calculation. In fact,
√ p 1
kai kkγa j k|γa j − ai | = li l j | (γ1 + γ2 /a j ) − (γ3 + γ4 /a j )|
√ p a1i
= li l j | a j (γ4 − γ2 /ai ) − (−γ3 + γ1 /ai )|
−γ4 ai +γ2 (22)
= ka j kkγ−1 ai k| −γ3 ai +γ1
− a j|
= |ai |kγ−1 ai k|γ−1 ai − a j |
Proposition 2.3. There exists some constant Const. such that for any γ ∈ Γ, ai and a j , we have
Proof. At first, by replacing γ by ui (k)γ for some suitable k, we can make ui (k)γa j < Θi . And this
replacement does not change γ−1 ai so does not change the value ka j kkγ−1 ai k|γ−1 ai − a j | which equals
kai kkγa j k|ai − γa j |. This shows that this replacement does not change the value kai kkγa j k|γa j − ai |. Then
we can assume that there exists a constant λ such that kai k|γa j − ai | ≥ λ. Then it suffices to prove
kγa j k ≥ Const..
Suppose not, then there exists a sequence γ(n) ∈ Γ and sequence of cusps of D0 , a j (n) such that
kγ(n)a j (n)k > 0 for any n (kγa j k = 0 if and only if a j = ∞ and γ ∈ Γ∞ , and in this case |γa j − ai |kγa j k =
1), and γ(n)a j (n) → 0 as n → ∞. Since the choices of a j (n) are finite, passing to a subsequence we may
assume that a j (n) = a j remains the same. Then we consider the action of Γ ⊂ SL(2, R) on R2 just by
linear transformation. Since Γ is a discrete subgroup, and if we denote the stabilizer group of 1, a1j by
Ua j , we have the intersection of Ua j and Γ, Ua j ∩ Γ = Γa j which is cocompact in Ua j , this implies that
1 γ1 (n) + γ2 (n)
1
2 aj
the orbit Γ 1 is discrete in R . γ(n) 1 =
. kγ(n)a j k → 0 tells that the y-coordinate of
aj aj γ3 (n) + γ4a(n)
j
1 1 k 1 k(n) 1
γ(n) 1 tends to 0 as n → ∞. Since
∈ Γ∞ ⊂ Γ, we can apply u1 (k(n)) = on γ(n)
1
aj 0 1 0 1 aj
for some suitable k(n) to remain the y-coordinate and make the x-coordinate γ1 (n)+ γ2a(n)
j
+k(γ3 (n)+ γ4a(n) )
j
1
also bounded, this can always be done since kγ(n)a j k > 0. This shows that u1 (k(n))γ(n) 1 is
aj n∈N
1
bounded, but kγ(n)a j k → 0 implies the previous set is infinite, which contradicts the fact that Γ 1 is
aj
discrete. This proves that kγa j k ≥ Const..
This completes the proof.
10
′
Now let us consider the general case: for two cusps γa j and γ ai , the distance
′
γ ′ γ
′ γ1 + a2 γ1 + a2
j
|γa j − γ ai | = γ
γ3 + a4
− γ
i
′
′
j γ3 + a4
i
′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′
′ γ1 γ γ2 γ γ γ ′ γ γ3 γ γ4 γ γ
√ p γ1 γ3 + ai
4 + aj
3 + a2a 4 −γ1 γ3 − 2
ai − 1
aj − a2a 4
i j i j
= li l j kγa j kkγ′ ai k (24)
′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′
√ p 1
ai
[(γ1 γ4 −γ2 γ3 )+ a1 (γ2 γ4 −γ2 γ4 )]−[(γ1 γ3 −γ1 γ3 )+ a1 (γ1 γ4 −γ2 γ3 )]
j j
= li l j kγa j kkγ′ ai k
′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′
p [(γ1 γ4 −γ2 γ3 )+ a1 (γ2 γ4 −γ2 γ4 )]−ai [(γ1 γ3 −γ1 γ3 )+ a1 (γ1 γ4 −γ2 γ3 )]
j j
= kai k l j kγa j kkγ′ ai k
Then we have
q ′ ′ 1 ′ ′ ′ ′ 1 ′ ′
l j [(γ1 γ4 − γ2 γ3 ) + (γ2 γ4 − γ2 γ4 )] − ai [(γ1 γ3 − γ1 γ3 ) + (γ1 γ4 − γ2 γ3 )] = kγ′−1 γa j k|γ′−1 γa j −ai |
aj aj
(26)
This shows that
kai kkγ′−1 γa j k|γ′−1 γa j − ai |
|γa j − γ′ ai | = (27)
kγa j kkγ′ ai k
Applying Proposition 2.3 with γ′−1 γ, ai and a j , we have kγ′−1 γa j k|γ′−1 γa j − ai | ≫ 1, and thus get
following proposition for general case:
1
|γa j − γ′ ai | ≫ (28)
kγa j kkγ′ ai k
For a geodesic G x , we have a sequence of cusps {γ(n)a(n)}n∈N such that the geodesic enters them
one after another sequently, and we call it the spectrum of x.
We will prove the following estimate of distance between x and γ(n)a(n):
1
|x − γ(n)a(n)| ≍ (29)
kγ(n)a(n)kkγ(n + 1)a(n + 1)k
1
Proof. Choose a large constant M such that if |x − γai | ≤ Mkγaik
2 then G x enters γai deeply.
1
If |x − γ(n)a(n)| ≥ Mkγ(n)a(n)k2 then the statement is already there since kγ(n + 1)a(n + 1)k ≫
1
kγ(n)a(n)k. Now we assume |x − γ(n)a(n)| < Mkγ(n)a(n)k 2 , then G x enters γ(n)a(n) deeply. Then when G x
, i.e.,
kγ(n)a(n)k2(e2tn+1 |x − γ(n)a(n)|2 + e−2tn+1 ) ≍ kγ(n + 1)a(n + 1)k2 (e2tn+1 |x − γ(n + 1)a(n + 1)|2 + e−2tn+1 )
11
1
, and for γ(n)a(n), since G x enters it deeply, we have e2tn+1 > |x−γ(n)a(n)| . This implies on the left hand
2 2tn+1 2
side of the previous expression, kγ(n)a(n)k e |x − γ(n)a(n)| is the major term. As we have proved,
1
e2tn+1 ≤ Λ |x−γ(n+1)a(n+1)| then the right hand side is compared with kγ(n + 1)a(n + 1)k2 e−2tn+1 . Therefore
From the above argument, we can also conclude that the time tn when G x enters γ(n)a(n), is asymp-
totically ln kγ(n)a(n)k. And moreover, if G x enters γ(n)a(n) deeply, then at the time T n = 21 ln |x−γ(n)a(n)| 1
,
√ −1
l(n) 0
ℑ √l(n) √ γ(n)−1 (x + eı2s ) admits its maximum.
− a(n) l(n)
√ −1
l(n) 0
From now on, we define the following function for x ∈ R, W x (t) = ℑ √
l(n) √ γ(n)−1 (x +
− a(n) l(n)
ı
e 2s ) when t ∈ [tn , tn+1 ). Then if G x enters γ(n)a(n) deeply, W x (t) has a local maximum in [tn , tn+1 ) at
s = T n.
Next, we will prove that for two cusps γai and γ′ aq = γui (k)s j aq , if |k| is large enough, then any
point x very close to γ′ aq , say the distance between them is much less than kγ′ a1q k2 has the following
property: G x will enter both γai and γ′ aq , and from leaving γai to entering γ′ aq , it at most spends a
uniformly bounded time, say s0 . Rigorously, the following proposition will be proved:
Proposition 2.4. There exist constants N0 , ǫ and s0 , such that for any two cusps γai and γ′ aq =
γui (k)s j aq , where γ ∈ Γ, ai and aq are two cusps of D0 , ui (k) ∈ Γai and s j ∈ S ∪ {e}, if |k| > N0 ,
then for any x ∈ R, if |x − γ′ aq | < kγ′ aǫ q k2 , then G x enters γai and γ′ aq in the given order, and from leaving
γai to entering γ′ aq , it spends at most s0 .
Proof. Choose N0 large enough so that when |k| > N0 , kγui (k)s j aq k ≍ |k|kγai k ≫ kγai k, then for any
small ǫ > 0, if |x − γ′ aq | < ǫ
kγ′ aq k2
, then the distance between x and γai ,
12
Conversely, we have
|x − γai | ≤ |γ′ aq − γai | + |x − γ′ aq |
1 1
≪ kγ′ aq kkγai k + kγ′ aq k2 (32)
1
≪ kγai kkγ′ aq k
In above, the second inequality is true because γ′ aq = γui (k)s j aq from which it follows |γai − γ′ aq | ≍
1
kγai kkγ′ aq k as we have proved.
1
Therefore we have |x − γai | ≍ kγai kkγ ′ a k , then at first G x will enter γai at some moment, and when
q
it leaves γai , say at s = t, then the next cusp γ”ar G x enters will have height kγ”ar k ≍ kγ′ aq k since
1
|x − γai | ≍ kγai kkγ”ark
.
′
If γ”ar = γ aq then there is nothing to prove. Suppose not, then we have
kγ”ar k2 e−2t ≍ 1
1
e−2t−2s0 ≥ |x − γ”ar | ≥ |x − γ′ aq |
Λe2s0
Then we have e−2t−2s0 ≥ e2t+2s0 |x − γ′ aq |2 , and thus
This shows at time s = t + s0 , G x has already entered γ′ aq deeply, and thus proves the proposition.
Definition 2.1. x ∈ ∆σ if and only if the spectrum of x, {γ(n)a(n)}n∈N has a subsequence {γ′ (n)a′ (n)}n∈N
such that the following properties hold:
13
1. kγ′ (n)a′ (n)k1+σ ≤ kγ′ (n + 1)a′ (n + 1)k ≤ 2kγ′ (n)a′ (n)k1+σ
2. From G x leaving γ′ (n)a′(n) to entering γ′ (n + 1)a′(n + 1), it spends at most s0 , where s0 is defined
as above.
As a close of this section, we will prove the following proposition concerning Hausdorff dimension
of ∆σ :
1
Proposition 2.5. For any σ > 0, the Hausdorff dimension of ∆σ , denoted by dimH (∆σ ) is at least 2+σ .
Theorem 2.1. (See [2]) Consider a Cantor set F ⊂ R defined as a nested intersection:
\
F= Fj
j≥0
where F0 is a closed interval and each F j is a disjoint union of finitely many closed intervals. Let (m j ) j≥1
be a sequence of positive integers and (ǫ j ) j≥1 a sequence of real numbers that tend to zero monotonically
and suppose that for each j ≥ 1 there are at least m j intervals of F j contained in each interval of F j−1
and these intervals are separated by gaps of length at least ǫ j . Then the Hausdorff dimension of F
satisfies the lower bound
ln(m1 · · · m j−1 )
dimH F ≥ lim sup
j→∞ − ln(m j ǫ j )
Proof of Proposition 2.5. For some fixed ai , we start with some cusp γ(0)ai with kγ(0)ai k large enough,
ǫ ǫ
and define F0 = [γ(0)ai − kγ(0)aik
2 , γ(0)ai + kγ(0)a k2 ], where ǫ is defined as above. Then assuming F j−1 has
i
ǫ ǫ
been constructed and every interval of it is of form [γai − kγai k2
, γai + kγai k2
], we define F j inductively
as follows:
For each closed interval I = [γai − ǫ
kγai k2
, γai + kγaǫi k2 ] of F j−1 , for any cusp γ′ ai ∈ I, where
γ′ = γui (k), for k > N0 . Then if we take I ′ = [γ′ ai − kγ′ ǫai k2 , γ′ ai + kγ′ ǫai k2 ], then from Proposition 2.4,
we have for any x ∈ I ′ , G x enters γai and then γ′ ai , and from leaving γai to entering γ′ ai , it spends
at most s0 . Note that we have proved that kγui (k)ai k is of form |kγai kΩ(k)k + Θ(γ)| where |Ω(k)| ≍ 1,
i.e., its height is a linear function of k whose coefficient is more or less kγai k, then there are more or
1+σ 1+σ 1+σ
less |[kγai k kγa
,2kγai k ]|
ik
= kγa ik σ
kγai k = kγai k choices of k such that kγui (k)ai k ∈ [kγai k
1+σ
, 2kγai k1+σ ]. Thus
we have at least (up to a constant multiplication) kγai kσ choices of I ′ , and any two different intervals
I1′ = [γ1′ ai − kγ′ ǫai k2 , γ1′ ai + kγ′ ǫai k2 ] and I2′ = [γ2′ ai − kγ′ ǫai k2 , γ2′ ai + kγ′ ǫai k2 ], the gap between them is at least
1 1 2 2
|γ1′ ai − γ2′ ai | − kγ′ ai2ǫ ′ ′ 1 1 1
kkγ′ ai k , since |γ1 ai − γ2 ai | ≫ kγ′ ai kkγ′ ai k , we have the gap is ≫ kγ′ ai kkγ′ ai k ≍ kγai k2+2σ .
1 2 1 2 1 2
Then we define F j by the union of all these I ′ ’s.
ǫ ǫ
From this construction, we have for each interval [γai − kγai k2
, γai + kγai k2
] of F j−1 , the height
(1+σ) j−1 (1+σ) j−1
kγai k ∈ [kγ(0)aik ,2 j−1
kγ(0)ai k ], then the above argument shows that m j ≍ kγai kσ ≥
14
j−1 1 1 j−1
σ σ
kγ(0)ai k(1+σ) and ǫ j ≫ kγai k2+2σ
≥ j−1 . We can put m j = kγ(0)ai k(1+σ) and
2( j−1)(2+2σ) kγ(0)ai k(1+σ) (2+2σ)
1
ǫj = j−1 , and then
2( j−1)(2+2σ) kγ(0)ai k(1+σ) (2+2σ)
P j−1
ln(m1 · · · m j−1 ) = ln mk
Pk=1
j−1 k−1
= k=1 σ(1 + σ) ln kγ(0)ai k
j−1
(1+σ) −1 (34)
= σ (1+σ)−1 ln kγ(0)ai k
= ((1 + σ) j−1 − 1) ln kγ(0)ai k
And j−1
( j−1)(2+2σ)
kγ(0)ai k(1+σ) (2+2σ)
− ln m j ǫ j = ln( m1j ǫ j ) = ln 2 j−1
kγ(0)ai k(1+σ) σ (35)
j−1
= ( j − 1)(2 + 2σ) ln 2 + (1 + σ) (2 + σ) ln kγ(0)ai k
Therefore,
ln(m1 ···m j−1 ) ((1+σ) j−1 −1) ln kγ(0)ai k
lim sup j→∞ − ln m j ǫ j = lim sup j→∞ ( j−1)(2+2σ) ln 2+(1+σ) j−1 (2+σ) ln kγ(0)ai k
1
(36)
= 2+σ
T 1
Then from the above theorem it follows that if we define F = j≥0 F j , then dimH F ≥ 2+σ . On the other
T ǫ ǫ
hand, for any point x ∈ F, suppose x ∈ j≥0 I j , where I j = [γ( j)ai − kγ( j)ai k2 , γ( j)ai + kγ( j)ai k2 ] is a closed
interval of F j , then from our construction, we have kγ( j)ai k ∈ [kγ( j − 1)ai k1+σ , 2kγ( j − 1)ai k1+σ ] and
γ( j) = γ( j − 1)ui (k( j)) for k( j) > N0 (in fact k( j) ≍ kγ( j − 1)ai kσ ), which follows from Proposition 2.4
that G x enters γ( j − 1)ai and then γ( j)ai and moreover from leaving γ( j − 1)ai to entering γ( j)ai it spends
at most s0 . Then for x, {γ( j)ai } j≥0 can be chosen as the subsequence of the spectrum of x satisfying the
conditions in Definition 2.1. This shows that F ⊂ ∆σ .
1
Thus we prove that dimH ∆σ ≥ 2+σ .
15
g ∈ G and ϕ ∈ L2 (G). It is easy to define similarly the regular right action on L2 (Γ \ G), which is also
denoted by R(g). Then there exists a constant κ such that S(R(t) f)
S( f ) ≤ κ for all t ∈ K, for K is compact.
For γ ∈ Γ, we consider the NAK-decomposition of γ = n(γ)a(γ)k(γ). Then f and L(γ−1 ) f have the
same projection on L2 (Γ\G). We denote R(k(γ))◦L(γ−1 ) f by fγ . It is easy to see that fγ is also supported
on a single fundamental domain T1 (γD0 ), so we can also treat it as a function on Γ \ G. Moreover, fγ is
supported on γΩk(γ)−1 = n(γ)a(γ)(k(γ)Ωk(γ)−1), and on γΩ′ k(γ)−1 = n(γ)a(γ)(k(γ)Ω′k(γ)−1 ), fγ = 1.
If necessary, we may make Ω and Ω′ smaller such that there exists two neighborhoods of identity
Ξ′ ⊂ Ξ ⊂ D0 × Kǫ , satisfying the following: for any k ∈ K, Ξ′ ⊂ kΩ′ k−1 ⊂ kΩk−1 ⊂ Ξ. This can be
done since the subgroup K = SO(2, R) is compact. Then for any γ ∈ Γ, fγ is supported on n(γ)a(γ)Ξ
and on n(γ)a(γ)Ξ′, fγ = 1 (note that NA-component does not act on the K-component). Moreover, if
we treat fγ as a function on Γ \ G, fγ = R(k(γ)) f . Then we consider the evolution of fγ under geodesic
et
flow, say R(at ) fγ , where at is the diagonal element −t
. At first we regard R(at ) fγ as a function on
e
G, then R(at ) fγ is supported on n(γ)a(γ)Ξa−t , then if we project it to H2 G/K, it is just the image of
ω1 ω2
this subset acting on ı. Take ξ = ∈ Ξ, then
ω3 ω4
2t
n(γ)a(γ)ξa−t ı = n(γ)a(γ) ωω31ı+ω
ı+ω2 e
4e
2t (37)
1 χ(γ) λ−1 (γ)
If we put n(γ) = , and a(γ) = . Then
0 1 λ(γ)
2t
1 ω1 ı+ω2 e2t
n(γ)a(γ) ωω31ı+ω
ı+ω2 e
4e
2t = λ(γ)2 ω3 ı+ω4 e2t
+ χ(γ)
1 ω1 ω3 +ω2 ω4 e4t 1 e 2t (38)
= λ(γ)2 ω23 +ω24 e4t
+ χ(γ) + ı λ(γ)2
ω2 +ω2 e4t
3 4
ω1 ω2 e2t
If necessary, we can make Ω and Ω′ smaller such that for each ξ = ∈ Ξ, we have
ω23 +ω24 e4t
∈
ω3 ω4
4t
[ 43 e−2t , 34 e−2t ] and ω1 ωω32 +ω2 ω4 e
2 4t ∈ [− 14 , 41 ] for t ≥ 10. Then we have that the projection of n(γ)a(γ)Ξa−t
3 +ω4 e
onto G/K H2 is contained in
( " #)
1 1 3 1 4 1
x + yı : |x − χ(γ)| ≤ and y ∈ , (39)
4 λ(γ)2 4 λ(γ)2 e2t 3 λ(γ)2 e2t
Now we consider the inner product of R(at ) fγ and L(γ′−1 ) fγ for some γ′ ∈ Γ. Then from our choice
of f , we know that
Z
R(at ) fγ · L(γ′−1 ) fγ dµG (g) ≤ µG (γ′ n(γ)a(γ)Ξ ∩ n(γ)a(γ)Ξa−t ) (40)
G
Since G is semisimple and so unimodular, then µG is both left and right invariant. Therefore,
16
Proposition 3.1. See [7, Proposition 3.2] Let G be a real algebraic group, and σ is an involution of G.
Let A = {at } be a one parameter subgroup of G, such that σ(at ) = a−t . Let
Then there exist constant c and t0 such that for neighborhoods Hr1 ⊂ H, Zr2 ⊂ Z and Ur+3 of e in H, Z
and U + , respectively, small enough, t > t0 and any g ∈ G, we have
µG (gUr+3 Zr2 Hr1 ∩ Ur+3 Zr2 Hr1 a−t ) ≤ ce−2t µU+ (Ur+3 )2 (42)
To apply the above proposition, we put G = SL(2, R) and σ(g) = (gt )−1 , then H = K, Z = A and
U + = N. Therefore from the above proposition we have that:
Z
R(at ) fγ · L(γ′−1 ) fγ dµG (g) ≤ µG (g(γ, γ′ )Ξ ∩ Ξa−t ) ≤ ce−2t µN (Nr )2
G
where Nr is some small neighborhood of e in N, determined by Ξ. Combining this with the fact that
fγ = 1 on Ξ′ ⊂ Ξ, we have k fγ k22 ≥ µG (Ξ′ ) ≥ c′ µN (Nr )2 . Therefore, the following statement holds:
Proposition 3.2. There exist constants c̃ and t0 such that for t > t0 ,
Z
R(at ) fγ · L(γ′−1 ) fγ dµG (g) ≤ c̃e−2t k fγ k22 (43)
G
On the other hand, we can also treat fγ and R(at ) fγ as functions on Γ \ G. We will apply the
following theorem due to Moore:
Theorem 3.1. See [8, Theorem 1.1] Let M be a Riemann surface of constant negative curvature equal
to −1 of finite volume, and let T1 (M) be the unit tangent bundle of M. Let ϕ and ψ be in L2 (T1 (M))
orthogonal to the constants, and satisfying the Hölder condition in the fiber direction for some α > 1/2.
Then if gt is the geodesic flow, we have
In the above theorem, the Hölder condition of ϕ in the fiber direction for α is defined as follows:
∗
for every x ∈ T1 (M), if we define H(ϕ)(x) = supt∈K |t ϕ(x)−ϕ(x)|
|t|α , where |t| denotes some translate invariant
q
norm on K, then H(ϕ) ∈ L2 (T2 (M)), and the Hölder norm of ϕ is defined to be kϕk22 + kH(ϕ)k22 .
Here T1 (M) is the same as Γ \ G, the geodesic flow acting on L2 (Γ \ G) is the same as R(at ) action,
and from the equivalence between Hölder norm and Sobolev norm, we have the following:
Z Z Z
fγ · R(at ) fγ dµΓ\G − fγ dµΓ\G R(at ) fγ dµΓ\G ≤ LS( fγ )2 e−c|t| (45)
Γ\G Γ\G Γ\G
17
R R
where L and c depend only on Γ. Combining with S( fγ ) ≤ κS( f ) and Γ\G
R(at ) fγ dµΓ\G = f dµΓ\G ,
Γ\G γ
we have Z Z !2
fγ · R(at ) fγ dµΓ\G − fγ dµΓ\G ≤ L′ S( f )2 e−c|t| (46)
Γ\G Γ\G
R R
where L′ and c depend only on Γ. Note that Γ\G
fγ dµΓ\G = Γ\G
f dµΓ\G , we have
Z Z !2
fγ · R(at ) fγ dµΓ\G ≥ f dµΓ\G − L′ S( f )2 e−c|t| (47)
Γ\G Γ\G
where |N(t, γ)| denotes the number of elements in N(t, γ). Therefore we have
Z !2
9
|N(t, γ)|ce−2t k f k22 ≥ f dµΓ\G (52)
10 Γ\G
Therefore Z !2
9 1 2t
|N(t, γ)| ≥ f dµΓ\G e (53)
10 Γ\G ck f k22
γ1 γ2
Now, for a fixed cusp γ∞, we may choose a representative γ ∈ γΓ∞ , such that if γ = , then
γ3 γ4
γ1 γ2 1 n γ1 nγ1 + γ2
|γ4 | < |γ3 |. This can be done since for n ∈ Z, = , then we can choose
γ3 γ4 0 1 γ3 nγ3 + γ4
suitable n such that the condition above is satisfied. Then for any γ′ ∈ N(t, γ), we have γ′−1 γΩk(γ)−1 ∩
γΩk(γ)−1 a−t , ∅. Every element on the right hand side corresponds to an element (x + yı, yv2 ) ∈ T1 (H2 ),
where x + yı is containedin the set described
in (39) and v is very close to i. And on the right hand side if
γ”1 γ”2
we denote γ” = γ′−1 γ = , then there exists ω ∈ Ω close to e such that γ”ωk(γ)−1 = (x+yı, yv2 ),
γ”3 γ”4
18
where v is very close to i. Then if we consider the
NAK-decomposition of γ” = n(γ”)a(γ”)k(γ”),
then
cos(θ) sin(θ) cos(θ”) sin(θ”)
k(γ”) is very close to k(γ). Then we put k(γ) = , and k(γ”) =
,
− sin(θ) cos(θ) − sin(θ”) cos(θ”)
γ”3
it is easy to check that tan(θ) = − γγ43 and tan(θ”) = − γ” 4
. So from our previous choice of γ we have
γ”1 ı+γ”2 γ”1 γ”3 +γ”2 γ”4 1
|γ”4 | < |γ”3 |. Moreover, γ”ı = γ”3 ı+γ”4 = γ”23 +γ”24
+ ı γ”2 +γ” 2 , if we put γ”4 = kγ”3 , then |k| < 1, and
3 4
thus
1 1 1 1 1 1
= ∈[ , ] (54)
γ”23 + γ”24 γ”23 1 + k2 2 γ”23 γ”23
and
γ”1 γ”1 γ”3 +γ”2 γ”4 |γ”4 |
| γ” 3
− γ”23 +γ”24
| = (γ”23 +γ”24 )|γ”3 |
1 k
= γ”23 1+k2 (55)
1
≤ 2γ”23
1 γ1 1 1 1 1
The same holds for γ also. And since γı = χ(γ) + ı λ(γ)2 , we have |χ(γ) − γ3 | < 2γ32 and λ(γ)2 ∈ [ 2γ32 , γ32 ].
Therefore for any γ′ ∈ N(t, γ), if we set γ” = γ′−1 γ, then |γ”∞ − χ(γ)| ≤ 4λ(γ)1 1
2 + 2kγ”∞k2 and kγ”∞k ∈
2
[ 83 λ(γ)2 e2t , 43 λ(γ)2 e2t ] ⊂ [ 83 kγ∞k2 e2t , 38 kγ∞k2 e2t ]. For t > 10, we have 1
|γ”∞ − χ(γ)| < 2λ(γ)2 , and since
1 1 1
|χ(γ) − γ∞| < 2λ(γ) 2 , then |γ”∞ − γ∞| < λ(γ)2 ≤ kγ∞k2 .
1 1 t
Then if the interval I is of form [γ∞ − kγ∞k 2 , γ∞ + kγ∞k2 ] for some cusp point γ∞, and h = kγ∞ke
q q
and c1 = 38 and c2 = 83 , then from the previous argument, we have that there exists some constant
R 2
9
R = 10 Γ\G
f dµΓ\G ck1f k2 , such that
2
1 2
|{γ”∞ ∈ I : kγ”∞k ∈ [c1 h, c2 h]}| ≥ Re2t = Rh |I| (56)
2
where |I| denotes the length of I.
Remark: this is a generalization of [3, Theorem 2] from Γ = SL(2, Z) to any lattice Γ.
At the end of the section, we prove a basic fact concerning cusp points: for any interval I of length
|I| ≍ X1 , there exists at least one cusp point γai ∈ I with kγai k ≤ X, for all large X > 0.
In fact, for an interval I = [x − cX −1 , x + cX −1 ], where c is a constant to be determined, we
consider the spectrum of x, say {γ(n)a(n)}, and take the last one γ(m)a(m) in it with height kγ(m)a(m)k ≤
1
X, then we claim that γ(m)a(m) ∈ I. By 29, we have |x − γ(m)a(m)| ≍ kγ(m)a(m)kkγ(m+1)a(m+1)k , for
−1
kγ(m + 1)a(m + 1)k > X, we have |x − γ(m)a(m)| < cX for some constant c. Then we choose this
constant in our previous description of I. To sum up, we have the following proposition:
Proposition 3.3. There exists a constant c only depending on the space Γ \ H2 , such that, for any large
number X > 0 and any interval I of length 2c, there exists at least one cusp point γai ∈ I with kγai k ≤ X.
19
4 GEODESIC FLOWS ON PRODUCT SPACE Γ1 \H2 ×· · ·×Γk \H2
4.1 LOWER BOUND
For product of hyperbolic two dimensional spaces, Γ1 \ H2 × · · · × Γk \ H2 , where Γ1 , . . . , Γk ⊂
SL(2, R) are lattices of SL(2, R), i.e., Mi = Γi \ H2 admits a finite SL(2, R) invariant volume. Then the
geodesic flow gt (x1 , . . . , xk ), where (x1 . . . , xk )∈ M1 × · · · , ×Mk corresponds to the point Γ1 × · · · × Γk \
1 x
(ı, . . . , ı)u(x1 ) × · · · × u(xk ), with u(x) = , corresponds to the projection of the following geodesic
0 1
flow of H2 × · · · × H2 onto M1 × · · · × Mk :
ı ı
G(x1 ...xk ) = (x1 + 2s , . . . , xk + 2s ) ∈ H2 × · · · × H2 : s ∈ R (57)
e e
For each xi we define W xi (t) = 1
where γai is the cusp point of Γi which xi + e−2t ı
max(kγai k2 e−2t ,kγai k2 |xi −γai |2 e2t )
√ −1
li 0 −1
is close to. From our previous calculation it is easy to see that W xi (t) ≍ W xi (t) = ℑ √li √ γ (xi +
− ai li
−2t
e ı). Then for the product space, for x = (x1 , . . . , xk ), we define Wx (t) = max1≤i≤k W xi (t). Then Gx is
divergent, i.e., for any compact subset K ⊂ M1 × · · · × Mk , there exists a constant T depending on K,
such that for any t > T , Gx is always outside K, if and only if Wx (t) → ∞ as t → ∞.
At first, we consider the case when k = 2. as we have done in the previous section, we suppose
that {γ(n)a(n)} and {γ′ (m)a′ (m)} are the spectra of x1 and x2 respectively, and {tn } and {tm′ } are the
sequences of cusp-changing times for x1 and x2 respectively, i.e., for x1 (and for x2 respectively,), when
t ∈ [tn , tn+1 ) (and t ∈ [tm′ , tm+1
′ 1
) respectively), we have W x1 (t) = max(kγ(n)a(n)k2 e−2t ,kγ(n)a(n)k2 |x −γ(n)a(n)|2 e2t ) ,
1
1
(and W x2 (t) = max(kγ′ (m)a′ (m)k2 e−2t ,kγ′ (m)a′ (m)k2 |x −γ′ (m)a′ (m)|2 e2t ) respectively). In the previous section we have
2
′
proved that e ≍ kγ(n)a(n)k (and e2tm ≍ kγ′ (m)a′ (m)k2 respectively). Then for x = (x1 , x2 ), we can
2tn 2
find a sequence of times {τi } such that at each time t = τi , Wx (t) admits local minimum. Then when
t = τi , either Wx (t) changes from W x1 (t) to W x2 (t) or it changes conversely. Suppose the formal happens,
then suppose τi ∈ [tn , tn+1 ) ∩ [tm′ , tm+1
′
), since we assume that Wx (t) changes from W x1 (t) to W x2 (t), we
have on the left of τi Wx (t) is decreasing and on the right it is increasing. That means on the left of τi ,
Wx (t) = W x1 (t) = kγ(n)a(n)k2 |x11−γ(n)a(n)|2 e2t and on the right of τi Wx (t) = W x2 (t) = kγ′ (m)a′1(m)k2 e−2t , thus at
t = τi we have the following:
20
. Similarly, if the latter happens, then
kγ′ (m + 1)a′ (m + 1)k
Wx (τi ) ≍
kγ(n)a(n)k
Then Wx (t) → ∞ if and only if Wx (τi ) → ∞ and this happens if and only if
kγ(n)a(n)k kγ′ (m)a′ (m)k
max( , )→∞
kγ′ (m)a′ (m)k kγ(n)a(n)k
as min(kγ(n)a(n)k, kγ′(m)a′ (m)k) → ∞. In other words, given any large number M, their exists some
number R such that for any spectral cusp γ(n)a(n) of x1 and γ′ (m)a′ (m) of x2 , if min(kγ(n)a(n)k, kγ′(m)a′ (m)k) ≥
R, then
kγ(n)a(n)k kγ′ (m)a′ (m)k
max( , )≥M
kγ′ (m)a′ (m)k kγ(n)a(n)k
In this section, we will prove the following proposition:
Proposition 4.1. For any x1 ∈ ∆σ for Γ1 \ H2 , then the set D(x1 ) = {x2 ∈ R : G(x,y) is divergent } has
Hausdorff dimension 1.
Proposition 4.2. Let F ⊂ R2 and E its projection onto the x-axis. For each x ∈ E, let Lx be the line
{(x, y) : y ∈ R}. If dimH (F ∩ L x ) ≥ t for all x ∈ E, then
dimH F ≥ t + dimH E
Proof of Proposition 4.1. For a fixed x1 ∈ ∆σ , suppose {γ(n)a(n)} is the refined sequence of cusps of x1 ,
such that
21
1. kγ(n + 1)a(n + 1)k ∈ [kγ(n)a(n)k1+σ, 2kγ(n)a(n)k1+σ]
the following
|{γ”∞ ∈ I ′ : kγ”∞k ∈ [c1 hn+1 , c2 hn+1 ]}| ≥ 12 R|I ′ |h2n+1
h2
= R (hn+1
′ 2 (59)
n)
= R( qn ln qqnn+1ln qn+1 )2
For each such γ”, we define a closed interval In+1 = [γ”∞ − p q21 , γ”∞ + p q21 ], and define Fn+1 to be
n+1 n+1
q
the union of all such intervals. Using the notation in Theorem 2.1, we can take m j = ( q j−1 ln q jj ln q j−1 )2 , and
(ln q j )2
from what we have proved, the gap between two intervals I j and I ′j of F j is at least Const. h12 ≍ q2j
,
j
(ln q )2
so we can take ǫ j = q2j . Then if we define F = j≥n0 F j , according to Theorem 2.1, we have
T
j
ln mn0 · · · m j−1
lim sup =1 (61)
j→∞ − ln(m j ǫ j )
This proves that dimH F = 1.
F j , x2 ∈ I j = [γ′ ( j)∞ − p q12 , γ′ ( j)∞ + p q12 ], for each
T
On the other hand, for any x2 ∈ F = j≥n0
j j
j, and kγ′ ( j)∞k ∈ [c1 h j , c2 h j ]. Then from our previous discussion about geodesic flows on Γ \ H2 and
22
distance between a limit point and a cusp, we have that G x2 enters the cusp γ′ ( j)∞ at some moment
q2j
and moreover, the next cusp G x2 enters has height ≍ hj = h′j . Then if we consider the pair (x1 , x2 ), for
x1 ∈ ∆σ , any cusp of x1 has height near kγ(n)a(n)k = qn for some n, and near qn , the largest cusp of x2
smaller than qn is near (up to a constant multiplication) hn = lnqqn n , and the smallest cusp of x2 larger than
qn is near (up to a constant multiplication) h′n = qn ln qn , this implies that for any cusp γ′ (m)a′ (m) of x2
whose height is large enough,
Then there exists some small constant δ0 depending on k and the product space Γ1 \ H2 × · · · × Γk \ H2 ,
such that for all 0 < δ < δ0
For k = 2, we have
3
dimH E2 (δ) ≤ + δ1/3 (64)
2
And for k ≥ 3, we have: we have
Remark: this theorem is a generalization of the first part of [2, Theorem 6.1], and the main idea
of its proof is the same, but from the case when Γ = SL(2, Z) to general case when Γ is any lattice, we
have some difficulties to overcome. Here we follow the paper of Cheung to deal with the case k = 2 and
k ≥ 3 separately, since they are different in some essential manner.
In general, for any lattice Γ ⊂ SL(2, R), we use notations a, b, c to denote the cusp points of Γ in
R ⊂ ∂H2 . We want to give an upper bound of the number of cusp points lying in some interval I with
heights bounded by X. In particular, we will prove the following statement:
where Q(I, X) = {b is a cusp point : b ∈ I, kbk ≤ X} and |I| denotes the length of I.
23
Proof. Take all cusps lying in I with height less than or equal to X and order them from small to large,
1
say Q(I, X) = {bi }i=1,...,N with bi < bi+1 for all i. From what we have proved, bi+1 − bi ≫ kbi+1 kkbi k , then
there exists some c > 0 such that bi+1 − bi ≥ kbi+1ckkbi k . Combining kbi+1 k ≤ X, we have
c
bi+1 − bi ≥
Xkbi k
Take the summation for i = 1, . . . , N, we have
c X 1
b N − b1 ≥
X b∈Q(I,X) kbk
Then for a fixed interval I if we define F I (X) = |Q(I, X)|, then the above statement implies that
Z
1
dF I (t) ≪ |I|X
t≤X t
R
If we define G I (X) = t≤X 1t dF I (t), then dG I (t) = 1t dF I (t) and G I (X) ≪ |I|X.
With this estimate, we are ready to follow Cheung’s proof in [2].
Case k = 2: For the product space Γ1 \ H2 × Γ2 \ H2 , we define Qi ⊂ R ⊂ G/P to be the set of
cusps of Γi \ H2 , for i = 1, 2, and we define Q = Q1 × Q2 . For (a1 , a2 ) ∈ Q, we define B(a1 , a2 ) to be the
1
neighborhood of (a1 , a2 ) consisting of points whose ith component is within the ka1 kka2k
neighborhood
of ai for i = 1, 2. Let J denote the subset of Q consisting of the elements satisfying the following
conditions:
ka1 k < δka2 k or ka2 k < δka1 k (67)
For any (a1 a2 ) ∈ J, we define σ(a1 , a2 ) ⊂ J to be the collection of elements (a′1 , a′2 ) ∈ J such that
Case 1 if ka1 k < δka2 k, then a′1 ⊢ a1 , a′2 |= a2 , and ka′2 k < δka′1 k
Case 2 if ka2 k < δka1 k, then a′2 ⊢ a2 , a′1 |= a1 , and ka′1 k < δka′2 k
Here a′ ⊢ a means there exists some vertical downward geodesic flow G x entering a and leaving
it for a′ and a′ |= a means there exists some vertical downward geodesic flow G x entering a and then
entering a′ after a while (but a′ might not be the very next cusp point G x leaves a for).
We recall the definition of self-similar covering of some subset E ⊂ R2 :
24
1. ∩B(α j ) = {x}
2. diamB(α j+1) < λdiamB(α j ) for all j, and
3. α j+1 ∈ σ(α j ) for all j.
where diamB denotes the diameter of set B.
Let B denote the collection of all subsets of form B(a1, a2 ) where (a1 , a2 ) ∈ J, We will prove that
(B, J, σ) is a self-similar covering of E2 (δ). In the following reasoning, for simplicity, we treat A ≍ B
the same as A = B, and treat A ≪ B (A ≫ B respectively) the same as A ≤ B (A ≥ B respectively), i.e.,
we ignore the constant multiplications in estimate, this simplicity does not effect the final result.
In fact, for any x = (x1 , x2 ) ∈ E2 (δ), then we have Wx (t) = max(E x1 (t), E x2 (t)) > δ−1 for all t > 0.
And moreover, there is a sequence of times {tn } consisting of all local maxima of Wx (t). Take any tn , and
without loss of generality, we assume that Wx (tn ) = W x1 (tn ). Suppose at t = tn , G x1 is near an and denote
its next cusp point by an+1 . Then Wx (tn+1 ) = W x2 (tn+1 ), and if at this time G x2 is near bn , then from our
previous discussion on the properties of Wx (t), we have that between tn and tn+1 , there is a unique local
minimum τn of Wx (t) and W x1 (τn ) = W x2 (τn ) ≍ kakbn+1
nk
k
. Then since x ∈ E2 (δ), we have kan+1 k
kbn k > δ−1 , i.e.,
kbn k < δkan+1 k. And from the choice of an and bn , we have
1 1
|x1 − an+1 | ≤ <
kan+1 k2 kan+1 kkbn k
Moreover, when t = tn+1 , Wx (tn+1 ) = W x2 (tn+1 ), and at this time, G x2 is near bn , and we denote its next
cusp by bn+1 , and if we consider the next local minima tn+2 , we have Wx (tn+2 ) = W x1 (tn+2 ), and suppose
at this time G x1 is near cusp an+2 , then an+2 |= an+1 , so kan+2 k ≫ kan+1 k, and at the unique minimum
kbn+1 k
τn+1 of Wx (t) between tn+1 and tn+2 we have Wx (τn+1 ) ≍ ka n+2 k
> δ−1 . This means kbn+1 k > δ−1 kan+2 k >
kan+2 k ≫ kan+1 k, therefore,
1 1
|x2 − bn | ≍ ≤
kbn kkbn+1 k kan+1 kkbn k
From the above argument, we have x ∈ B(an+1, bn ), and for the same reason, x ∈ B(an+2, bn+1 ), thus
x ∈ ∩∞
n=1 B(an+1 , bn ). Moreover, we have an+2 |= an+1 and bn+1 ⊢ bn , so (an+2 , bn+1 ) ∈ σ(an+1 , bn ). Finally,
it is easy to see that
1 1
diamB(an+2 , bn+1 ) = <δ = δdiamB(an+1, bn )
kan+2 kkbn+1 k kan+1 kkbn k
Combining all the facts we get above, we conclude that (B, J, σ) is a self-similar covering of E2 (δ).
To get the upper bound of the Hausdorff dimension of E2 (δ), we need the following theorem proved
in [2].
Then dimH E ≤ s.
25
For a subset B(a1 , a2 ) ∈ B, its diameter diamB(a1, a2 ) ≍ 1
ka1 kka2 k . Then for every (a′1 , a′2 ) ∈ σ(a1 , a2 ),
s s
P diamB(a′1 ,a′2 ) P ka1 kka2 k
(a′1 ,a′2 )∈σ(a1 ,a2 ) diamB(a1 ,a2 ) ≍ (a′1 ,a′2 )∈σ(a1 ,a2 ) ka′1 kka′2 k
(69)
ka′ k ka′ k
For symmetry, we assume that ka1 k < δka2 k, if we put ka11 k = a and ka22 k = b, then from the definition of
J, we have a > δ−2 and for fixed a > 0, then b < δa. Then for fixed a > δ−2 , since a′1 ⊢ a1 , there are at
ka′ k
most C̃ choices of a′1 such that ka11 k ∈ [a, a + 1), where C̃ is a constant. Since we ignore all the constant
multiplications and treat them as 1 we may treat C̃ = 1. Note that a′ |= a implies |a′ − a| ≪ kak−2 . We
define
C(a2 , X) = {b is a cusp of Γ2 : |b − a2 | < ka2 k−2 : kbk ≤ Xka2 k}
R R
And define F(X) = |C(a2 , X)|, and G(X) = t≤X 1t dF(t) = ka2 k t≤X tka12 k dF(t), then from Proposition 4.4,
we have
tka2 k
G(t) ≤ ka2 k =t
ka2 k2
Then for any s ∈ ( 23 , 2), we have
s s
P diamB(a′1 ,a′2 ) P ka1 kka2 k
(a′1 ,a′2 )∈σ(a1 ,a2 ) diamB(a1 ,a2 ) ≍ (a′1 ,a′2 )∈σ(a1 ,a2 )
ka′1 kka′2 k
R (70)
P 1 1
≤ a>δ−2 a s b≤δa b s−1 dG(b)
Here for the integral we apply integration by parts and the fact G(b) ≤ b:
R 1
R
b≤δa b s−1
dG(b) = (δa)1s−1 G(δa) − b≤δa G(b)db1−s
R
= (δa)1s−1 G(δa) + (s − 1) b≤δa b−sG(b)db
R
≤ (δa)1s−1 (δa) + (s − 1) b≤δa b−s bdb
R (71)
= (δa)2−s + (s − 1) b≤δa b1−s db
s−1
= (δa)2−s + −s+2 (δa)2−s
1 2−s
= 2−s (δa)
1
1 δ3s−4 δ2 1
Then for s = 3
2 + δ 3 , then (2−s)(2s−3) ≍ 1
1 = δ 6 , thus for δ < 2−7 , the above sum is less than 1. This
2 2δ
3
26
Case k > 2: the same as above, let Qi denote the set of cusp points of Γi \ H2 , and we define
Q(k) = Q1 × · · · × Qk × {1, . . . , k} × {1, . . . , k}. For each fixed i ∈ {1, . . . , k} and X > 0, from Proposition
3.3, we may choose a subset Q(X, i) = {γ(n, X, i)a(n, X, i)}n∈Z ⊂ Qi such that
−∞ < · · · < γ(0, X, i)a(0, X, i) < γ(1, X, i)a(1, X, i) < · · · < γ(n, X, i)a(n, X, i) < · · · < +∞
with γ(n + 1, X, i)a(n + 1, X, i) − γ(n, X, i)a(n, X, i) ≍ X −1 for all n ∈ Z, and moreover, for any x ∈ R,
we may choose the cusp γ(n, X, i)a(n, X, i) ∈ Q(X, i) nearest x such that |x − γ(n, X, i)a(n, X, i)| ≪ X −1 .
With this we define the subset J ⊂ Q(k) consisting of elements (a1 , . . . , ak , i, j) ∈ Q(k) satisfying the
following conditions:
√
ka j k < δkai k and al ∈ Q(kai kka j k, l) for l , i, j (73)
1. a′j ⊢ a j
For simplicity, we write (ai(l) , bi(l) , i(l)) instead of (ai(pl ) , bi(pl ) , i(pl )), then we have
√
kai(l+1) k ≤ δkbi(l) k and kbi(l) k2 < kbi(l+1) kkai(l+2) k (74)
27
and moreover ai(l) and bi(l) are consecutive cusps in the spectrum of xi(l) .
Then for each l, we define (c1 , . . . , ck , i(l), i(l + 1)) ∈ J as follows: ci(l) = bi(l) , ci(l+1) = ai(l+1) ,
and for other subindex l, we choose cl to be the cusp in Q(kci(l) kkci(l+1) k, l) nearest xl . Then we have
(c1 , . . . , ck , i(l), i(l + 1)) ∈ J. And moreover, since ai(l+1) and bi(l+1) are consecutive cusps in the spectrum
of xi(l+1) , we have
1 1 1
|xi(l+1) − ai(l+1) | ≍ < =
kai(l+1) kkbi(l+1) k kai(l+1) kkbi(l) k kci(l+1) kkci(l) k
And also we have
1 1
|xi(l) − bi(l) | ≪ =
kbi(l) k2 kci(l) k2
1
For other subindex l, we have |xl − cl | < kci(l) kkci(l+1) k from our choice of cl . Therefore we have
diamB(c′1, . . . , c′k , i(l + 1), i(l + 2)) < λdiamB(c1, . . . , ck , i(l), i(l + 1))
Then we have
√
diamB(c′1, . . . , c′k , i(l + 1), i(l + 2)) < δdiamB(c1 , . . . , ck , i(l), i(l + 1))
28
For fixed subindex l, we define
kc′j k kc′l k √
We put kc j k = a and kci k = b, then we have a > δ−1 and b < δa. Since c′j ⊢ c j , for fixed a, the
kc′j k
number of cusps of c′j such that kc j k = a is ≪ 1, then we may treat it as 1. And since |c′l − cl | < 1
kci kkc j k , we
define
1
C(l, X) = {c′l : |c′l − cl | < and kc′l k ≤ Xkci k}
kci kkc j k
R 1
And put F(X) = |C(l, X)|, and G(X) = t≤X t
dF(t), from Proposition 4.4, we have
Z
1 Xkci k kci k
G(X) = kci k dF(t) ≤ kci k =X
t≤X tkci k kci kkc j k kc j k
Moreover, for fixed c′j and c′l , and for any other subindex m , i, the cusp c′m must be inside the 1
kci kkc j k and
kc′j kkc′l k
moreover c′m ∈ Q(kc′j kkc′l k, m), there are at most choices
but for the subindex i, we have that
kci kkc j k for c′m ,
kc′ kkc′ k
′ ′
kc kkc k kc k
c′i is within the 1
kci k2
neighborhood of ci , and c′i ∈ Q(kc′j kkc′l k, i), there are at most kcj i k2l = kcijkkc lj k kcijk
choices for c′i . Therefore, suppose s ∈ (k − 21 , k), the above summation is equal to:
s s kc′ kkc′ k k−2
kci kkc j k kci kkc j k kc j k
P P j l
(c′1 ,...,c′k , j,l)∈σl (c1 ,...,ck ,i, j) kc′j kkc′l k = (c′j ,c′l ) kc′j kkc′l k kci kkc j k kci k
kc j k P R (76)
1 √ 1
= kci k a>δ−1 a s−k+2 b≤ δa b s−k+2
dF(b)
Using the same argument as in case k = 2, combining the fact G(b) ≤ b kckcijkk we have:
R 1
R
√
b≤ δa b s−k+2
dF(b) = √
b≤ √δa
bk−1−s dG(b)
√ R
= G( δa)( δa)k−1−s − b≤ √δa G(b)dbk−1−s
√ √ k−1−s
kci k kci k
R
≤ ( δa)( δa) + (s + 1 − k) √ bbk−2−s db (77)
kc j k √ √
b≤ δa kc j k
kci k
= kc j k ( δa)
k−s
+ kckcijkk s+1−k
k−s ( δa)
k−s
√
1 kci k k−s
= k−s kc j k ( δa)
29
Plug the above into the summation (76), we have:
s √
kci kkc j k
kc j k P kci k
P 1 1 k−s
(c′1 ,...,c′k , j,l)∈σl (c1 ,...,ck ,i, j) kc′ kkc′ k ≤ kci k a>δ−1
a s−k+2 k−s kc j k ( δa)
j l
(k−s)/2
= δ k−s 2k−2s−2
P
a>δ−1 a (78)
δ(k−s)/2 δ2s+1−2k
≤ k−s 2s+1−2k
δ3/2(s−k)+1
= (k−s)(2s+1−2k)
δ3/2(s−k)+1 δ1/4
Then for δ small enough and for s = k − 1/2 + δ1/6 , then we have (k−s)(2s+1−2k) ≍ δ1/6
= δ1/12 ≪ 1. Let l
go over all subindex except j and take the summation of all
!s
X diamB(c′1, . . . , c′k , j, l)
(c′1 ,...,c′k , j,l)∈σl (c1 ,...,ck ,i, j)
diamB(c1, . . . , ck , i, j)
≪
P
l, j 1
(79)
≍ 1
Thus we claim that there exists some δ0 depending on k and the space Γ1 \ H2 × · · · × Γk \ H2 such that
for all δ < δ0 , we have dimH Ek (δ) ≤ k − 1/2 + δ1/6 .
This complete the proof.
3
Since Dk ⊂ Ek (δ), from dimH E2 (δ) ≤ 2 + δ1/3 and dimH Ek (δ) ≤ k − 1/2 + δ1/6 . By letting δ → 0,
we have dimH Dk ≤ k − 1/2
Combing this with Proposition 4.3 we have the following:
Combining all the theorems we get in this section with our discussion in Subsection 1.1, Theorem
1.1 is proved.
References
[1] A. Beardon, The geometry of discrete groups, Springer-Verlag (1983).
[2] Y. Cheung, Hausdorff dimension of the set of points on divergent trajectories of a homogeneous
flow on a product space, Ergod. Th. Dynam. Sys. 27 (2007), 65-85.
[3] Y. Cheung, Hausdorff dimension of the set of nonergodic directions, Ann. of Math., 158 (2003),
661-178.
[4] Y. Cheung, Hausdorff dimension of the set of Singular Pairs. Annals of Math., 173, (2011), 127-
167.
30
[5] S.G. Dani, Divergent trajectories of flows on homogeneous spaces, J. Reine Angew Math. 359
(1985), 55-89.
[6] K. Falconer, Fractal Geometry. Mathematical Foundations and Applications, John Wiley & Sons
Ltd., Chichester, 1990.
[7] A. Gorodnik, N. Shah, Khinchins theorem for approximation by integral points on quadratic vari-
eties, Math. Annalen 350 (2011), no. 2, 357-380.
[8] C.C. Moore, Exponential decay of correlation coefficients for geodesic flows. Group representa-
tions, ergodic theory, operator algebras and mathematical physics. C.C. Moore, ed., MSRI Publ.
6, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1987.
[9] H. Masur, Hausdorff dimension of the set of nonergodic foliations of a quadratic differential. Duke
Math. Journal, 66 (1992), 387-442.
[10] H. Masur, J. Smillie, Hausdorff dimension of sets of nonergodic measured foliations. Ann. of
Math., 134 (1991), 455-543.
[11] B. Weiss, Divergent trajectories on noncompact parameter spaces. Geom. Funct. Anal. 14 (2004),
no. 1, 94-149.
31