Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Annals of Mathematics is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Annals of
Mathematics.
http://www.jstor.org
Abstract
Introduction
Regular Cantor sets on the line play a fundamental role in dynamical
systems and notably also in some problems in number theory. They are defined
by expansive maps and have some kind of self-similarity property: small parts
of them are diffeomorphic to big parts with uniformly bounded distortion (see
precise definition in Section 1). In both settings, dynamics and number theory,
a key question is whether the arithmetic difference of two such sets contains
an interval when the sum of their Hausdorff dimensions is bigger than one.
Some background on regular Cantor sets which are relevant to our work can
be found in [PT2] and [Su].
From the dynamics side, in 1983, J. Palis and F. Takens ([PT], [PT1])
proved a theorem about homoclinic bifurcations associated to a basic set that
assures full density of hyperbolicity in the parameter family provided that the
Hausdorff dimension of the basic set is smaller than one. A central fact used
in the proof is that if K1 and K2 are regular Cantor sets on the real line
such that the sum of their Hausdorff dimensions is smaller than one, then
K1 - K2 = {x - Ix E K1, y E K2} (the arithmetic difference between K1 and
K2) is a set of zero Lebesgue measure (indeed of Hausdorff dimension smaller
than 1). In the same year, looking for some kind of converse of this result
Palis conjectured (see [P], [P1]) that for generic pairs of regular Cantor sets
(K1, K2) of the real line either K1 - K2 has zero measure or else it contains
We will also prove that the same result works if we replace stable in-
tersection by d-stable intersection, which is defined by asking that any pair
(K1,K2) in some neighbourhood of (K1,K2) satisfies HD(K1 n K2) > d;
most pairs of Cantor sets (K1, K2) E FQ0 have d-stable intersection for any
d < HD(K1) + HD(K1) - 1 (see §2.6).
Moreover, we will show that the open set U mentioned in the theorem
above is very large in Q°° in the sense that generic n-parameter families in Q°°
are actually contained in U (see section §3.9.1).
In a forthcoming paper, we prove the following fact concerning generic
homoclinic bifurcations associated to two dimensional saddle-type hyperbolic
sets (horseshoes) with Hausdorff dimension bigger than one: they yield open
sets of stable tangencies in the parameter line with positive density at the initial
bifurcation value. Moreover, the unions of this set with the hyperbolicity set in
the parameter line generically have full density at the initial bifurcation value.
This extends a theorem by Palis and Yoccoz ([PY]).
K= ng-n ( I(ab))
n>0 B
fa,b = [9 I(a,b)] ;
this is a contracting diffeomorphism from I(b) onto I(a, b). If a = (ao,..., an)
is a word of E, we put
fa = fao,al ° ** fan-a,n;
K(a)= K n I(a),
I-(a) = k(I (a)),
K°(a) = k (K(a)).
The different K- are related in the following way: let F- be the affine map
from I(9o) onto I"-(°)(_ 1, 0o) with the same orientation as fe_o- . Then, on
I(Oo):
Fo- ko ka-
= (_ ) foe o .
If we define
I= {(o,x), E ~-,x E I(Oo)},
C = {(0,x),0 E E-,ax E K°(o)},
F(, x) = (-1(), F(x)),
we have a fiber-contracting map F such that
A= n Fn(T).
n>O
A -Pr = UPr(a)
A
(0,A) 4 Ao ko (E P'(0o)).
We can lift the action of the renormalization operators to A; if (00, 01) E B,
we set
To1,o0 (0, A)= (01, Ao F901).
At this level, the various To,,oo are just the inverse branches of the map S:
The affine group Aff(R) still acts by composition on the left on A (fiberwise
onto E-).
2.1. In this section, assume we are given two sets of data (A, B,E,g),
(A', B', E', g') defining regular Cantor sets K, K'.
We defineas in Section 1.5 the spaces P = UP(a) and P' = UP(a').
A A'
A pair (h, h'), (h E P(a), h' E P'(a')) is called a smooth configuration for
K(a), K'(a'). Actually, rather than working in the product P x P', it is better
to go to the quotient Q by the diagonal action of the affine group Aff(R).
Elements of Q are called smooth relative configurations for K(a), K'(a').
We say that a smooth configuration (h, h') E P(a) x P(a') is
- linked if h(I(a)) n h'(I(a')) $ 0;
- intersecting if h(K(a)) n h'(K(a')) 4 0;
- stably intersecting if it is still intersecting when we perturb it in P x P',
and we perturb (g, g') in Q2 x Qs,.
All of these definitions are invariant under the action of the affine group, and
therefore make sense for smooth relative configurations.
2.2. As in 1.5, we can introduce the spaces A, A' associated to the limit
geometries of g, g' respectively. We denote by C the quotient of A x A' by the
diagonal action on the left of the affine group. An element of C, represented
by (0, A) E A4,(0', A') E A', is called a relative configuration of the limit
geometries determined by 0, 0'. We have canonical maps
A x A' -* x P'
C- Q
(i) U Ci is a neighbourhoodof £;
1<i<N
2. Let (g, g') E V. There exists d* < 1 such that for any (h, h') E P x P',
the set
and moreover HD(I - 1s) < d*. The same d* is also valid for (9, ') in a
neigbourhoodof (g, g') in Qs x Qe,.
Proof. Let us first prove that V is open. For A E R*, denote by HA the
homothety x - Ax. Let (g, g') E Q, x £Q,, and R > 1 be larger than the supre-
mum of the derivatives of the expansive maps g, g'. Then (g, g') belongs to V if
and only if for every 0 E E-, 0' E '-, A E JR = [-R, -R-1] U [R-1, R], there
exists t E R such that (Rt o kc, Hx o kV')is a stably intersecting configuration.
Using the compactness of the set of (0, ', A) under consideration, we see not
only that V is open but for (g, g') E V the following is true: there exist 6 > 0, a
neighbourhood W of (g, g') in QE x Qr' and a neighbourhood Z of the identity
in J Diffr(R) such that for any (0,', A) E E- x E'- x JR there is an interval
r>l
J of length 6 where (Rt o h o ko, h' o k0') is a stably intersecting configuration
for all t E J, h, h' E Z and (, 9') E W.
Assertion 2 in the theorem is now an easy consequence of the last state-
ment. Let (g,g') E V, (h,h') E P x P', t E I. Let e > 0 be small; let
a, a' be words in E, E' respectively such that I(a), I(a') have size of order
e, and such that h(K(a)) n h'(K(a')) k 0. We apply (in the quotient space
Q) TaTa, to (Rt o h, h') and obtain an intersecting configuration of the form
(h o k°, h' o HA o kV), where 0, 0' end with a, a' respectively and h, h' E Z
if e is small enough. The statement above now shows that there is an inter-
val of length c6e (for some fixed c > 0) contained in Is n [t - e, t + e]. But
this last property at the same time guarantees that Is is dense in I, and that
HD(I - Is) is at most d* < 1, where !d* depends only on c6 (cf. [PT2, p. 79,
Prop. 6]).
for all A E R*. Using again the renormalization operators, we finally get that
N = S- x E'- x R*. The proof is complete. O
iii) (Tai(0, A), T',i (0, A')) represents a point in intC for 1 < i < k;
k
iv) EI0(ai)1d > 1.
1
SR = - X '- X ([-R,
-R-1] U [R-1, R])
of S, with R conveniently large.
Fix once and for all a conveniently large constant co. The size of a word
a in E is the length JI(a)l; we say that a has approximate size p if
and denote by Z(p) the set of those words. Its cardinality is of order p-d, and
we set
d = HD(K), d' = HD(K').
Similarly, we define E'(p), with cardinality of order p-dl. To prove the Scale
Recurrence Lemma below, we need to assume that at least one of the two
regular Cantor sets K, K' is nonlinear. More precisely, we assume that there
exist 00,01 E E-, with 0 = -0, and xo E KS\ (0°) such that
(i) For any (a, a'), E*(a, a') is contained in a c2p-neighbourhoodof E(a, a');
(ii) Let (a, a') E E(p) x E'(p), s E E*(a, a'); there are at least C3p-(d+d') pairs
(b, b') E E(p) x E'(p) (with b, b' starting respectively with the last letter of
a, a') such that, if 0 E E-, 0' E '- end respectively with a, a' and
TbTb, ((, s ) = (, 0, )
Then our coordinate t((_, A), (9', A')) on the fiber will be by definition
t = A(kO(h(w(0o)))).
With the chosen normalization, A'(I(9o)) has size 1 while A(I(Oo)) has
size Isl.
3.4. The first step in the proof is to make sure that the hypothesis of the
Scale Recurrence Lemma is satisfied (by either g or g'), and that d + d' > 1.
So we make if necessary a small perturbation and will now assume that
these hypotheses are satisfied by g, g'.
We want to perturb g, g' (actually it will be sufficient to perturb g) in the
C°-topology in order to create a nonempty recurrent compact set of relative
configurations.
But a neighbourhood in the C° topology is a neighbourhood in some Ck
topology for finite k. We now fix such an integer k > 2.
The construction of the perturbation will depend on a scale parameter p;
the perturbation will become close to g when p is small.
In the following, we denote such a scale by p which will be assumed to be
small.
3.5. The required perturbation for g will be picked by a probabilistic ar-
gument out of a family of random perturbations that we will now construct.
We first pick a subset So of E(pl/k) such that
K = K(a)
3.6. We make now some easy remarks on the family g"; the finer properties
will be studied later.
fa-lao () if a' E o -1
f)j-
faaalao () + C5pl+l/2k w(La) if a ECS
with the properties (i), (ii) indicated in the statement of the lemma.
The set L is defined to be the subset of SR formed by the (0, 0', s) such
that 0 E E , and there exists a E E(p1/2), a' E E'(p1/2) with s E E*(a,a')
and 0, 0' ending with a, a' respectively.
3.8. For every (0, 0', s) in C, we will define in Section 4, in relation to the
conclusions of Marstrand's theorem, a nonempty subsetL°(_0, 0', s), depending
on w E Q, of the fiber of C over (0,', s).
Let
Co = {(0, ', s, t), (0,', ) e , t E L^(0,0', );
consider next the p-neighbourhood LC of CL in C x R:
L= { (0,0', s, t), (0, 0', s) E and 3 (00,, so, to) E Lo
with d(0,0o) < 2p5/2, d(_', 0 < 2p5/2, Is - Sol < p, It - tol < p}.
Fix u = (0, ', s,t) E L x R. We define two subsets Q°(u), Ql(u) of Q. First,
Second, Q°(u) is the set of w E Q such that there exist b E E(p), b' E '(p),
with bo = -o, b' = -o and the image TbT, (u) = (0,, ,
s,t) satisfies:
Basically, the reason for this inequality is the following: the sets L(0, 0', s)
are formed of values of t such that TbT',(, 0', s, t) is bounded for many pairs
(b,b') E E(p) x p'(p). It will follow from Marstrand's theorem that the
Lebesgue measure of L(O,0', s) is uniformly bounded from below. So we can
expect for fixed (b, b') the probability (in w) that TbT, (O,0', s, t) is right to be
bounded from below. When (b,, b') vary, we will be able to find c p (d+d' -1)
such pairs for which we have rough independence, which "explains" the in-
equality in the proposition.
3.9. With this estimate, the end of the proof of the theorem is not difficult.
The sets L°(0_,0', s) will always satisfy
Then, for each (0,0') E Ao x A', we choose a finite subset A1 (0,0') of the
fiber of C over (0,0'), which is p5/2 dense in this fiber, and has cardinality
< cgp-5/2. Let then
and therefore we can find ~~ E Q such that, for any u E A, either wo Ql (u)
or wo E p0(u) (or both).-
3.10. Fix ~~ as above. Define L =,C~ as follows:
and t E Lo,G
We claim that for (g~o, g'), L is a nonempty compact recurrent set of
relative configurations.
First, C contains CO I hence is nonempty. It is compact by construction.
Let u = (G1,G',st) EL
We can find 00 E AO, 0iO E A' I to E A2 with d(O,e) < p5212 d(O',O'0)<
0/
p5"2, it - toI < p5/2. Then, by construction of 4 (90, s) E 4; hence we can
find so E A 1(60, '0) with Ijs- so I < p5!2. Let uo = (~0,0,0' SO,to) E A.
With 81 8 I , t related to, 8, 9' s, t by the definition of L above, we have
we have
(&O frO1 -') E £ for iso -O I~< I,P1/2
and to ELo(I Is
Let
3.11. In order to prove the theorem in Section 2.5, one has to modify
slightly the argument as follows.
Let 0 < d < d + d'- 1; choose d< d* < d + d'- 1. We will indicate at
the end of Section 4 how to define L,(O, 0', s) (analogous to L° (0, 0', s)), for
(0, ', s) E . '~ -o
For u E Z x I, one defines Q (u) as Q1 (u) above (using L° instead of L°).
Then, ° (u) is the set of w E Q such that, with M = [p-d*], there exist pairs
(bl b'),..., (bM b'M) E (p) x S'(p) (with disjoint I(bi)) for which properties
(i), (ii) hold (we had M = 1 in §3.8).
We will see in Section 5 that in this case we still have (as Proposition 3.8)
The set C£,, defined as in 3.10 with the L, instead of L°, is easily seen
to be d-recurrent if w0 is selected as in 3.9.
3.12 Remark. Consider a smooth family (g,g, 9), , E [-1, +l1], of maps
as above such that HD(K,) + HD(K,) > 1 for all /.
We consider perturbations (g9, g,) constructed as above, where now Luis
restricted to a p3-dense finite subset A3 of the parameter space [-1, i]n, with
Thus the following reinforcement of the theorem in §2.4 is true: there exist
open and dense sets of families as above for which one can, for all values of
the parameter, find a recurrent compact set of configurations.
Moreover, generic families have the following property: for each value
of the parameter, there are periodic points of g,, g9 respectively such that
the ratio of the logarithms of the moduli of the corresponding eigenvalues is
irrational.
This allows (with the same proof) the following reinforcement of the sec-
ond theorem in §2.4: the open set V C Qe: x Ql: defined in §2.4 is not only
dense in {(g,g'),HD(K) + HD(K') > 1}, but its complement is infinite-
codimensional in the sense that generic n-parameter families (for any n) take
their values in V.
4.1. Given a point (, 0', s) in the space S of relative scales, and points
x E K(0o), x' E'(o),
K there is a unique relative configuration above (, 0', s)
such that
A(ko(x)) = A'('(x')),
(where(0, A), (0', A') representsthis configuration).Parametrizingthe fiberof
C over (, 0', s) as in §3.3, we see that the coordinate of this configuration is
given by
t := 7r, ,,s(x, ')
= k'- (') - k (w())- s(k(x) - ko(w(0o))).
4.2. We equip each set K(0o) (resp. K'(9O)) with the d-dimensional (resp.
d'-dimensional) Hausdorff measure id (resp. P/d). Then, for (0, ', s) E S, we
denote by /(_, 0', s) the image under 7ro,s of Ad x Ad'on K(0o) x K'(0o).
It is well-known that these constants cll > c1o > 0 exist such that, for
0o A, O9E A':
E
4.3. When one controls IXo0,o',S L2, this gives, by the Cauchy-Schwarz
inequality, a lower bound for the Lebesgue measure of ro ,, s(X), where X is a
subset of K x K' with positive (d+ d')-dimensional Hausdorff measure; indeed:
1d dt (X) < /
x Xd 0,s, (t) dt
1/2 ii iL
<7o,o/,s (X) 1-- Xo 0 s
and therefore
ire9's(X) >(i-d X Ld(X))2 | X
*X
,sL2L2
4.4. Fix (0, 0') in E- x E'-. Let a E E(pl/2k), a' E yI(p/2k), with ao = 0,
a/ = O0. As seen in 3.1,
0', ) =
TTaTa'(O, (al ... an, 'al .. . a, eE'sIa (a {I ')(-1)
We therefore have
2
/ (T' 0/,)
XTa', ds < c12(R),
L7^ a L2
We conclude that
2 d+d'
/j R a,a'
XTaT' (0,0',s) ds < CP4 2k C'12(R)
E(O, 0') = E
GJR, Xo,0', <L2
< C15
2
~·~.p d+dt
and 5
XTaT',(01',) C15P2k
a,a' -
we will have
m(JR- E(c, c')) < cl
for all c E E(p1/2), c' E I/(pl/2). This means that we can apply the Scale
Recurrence Lemma with the family E(c, ') of subsets of JR.
Let E*(c, c') be, then, the family of subsets of JR given by the Scale
Recurrence Lemma (cf. 3.7). We know that each E*(c,c') is contained in a
C2p1/2-neighbourhood of E(c, ').
4.5. Until now, we have only worked with the unperturbed maps g, g'
(except from a possible initial perturbation; see §3.4). We now consider the
family of random perturbations g9 of §3.5, and will proceed to construct the
sets L (0,'_, s), for (, ', s) E C. For a E E(pl/2k), let E-(a) be the open and
closed subset of E- formed by the 0 ending with a. Choose a subset E- of
E(pl/2k) such that
E-=U -(a)
2
is a partition of E-.
For a E E-, define a subset E1(a) of the subset E1 of §3.5 (recall E1 C
(pl/k)), as the set of words in E1 starting with a. For 0 E E-(a), we also
define 1(0) = 1 (a).
Letting 0 E E-, we write
f = [-1, +l]Si(°) x [-1, +l]Si-l(°)
This depends on 0, but nearby, 0 (with d(0, 0) < co1 p1/2k) will belong to the
same E-(a) and give the same projection w* of w.
For (_, 0', s) E £, the set LO(0, 0', s) will actually only depend (as far as w
is concerned) on the projection w* of w associated to _.
We will say that two words b°, bl E Y(p) are independent if there is no
word b E E(pl/2k) such that both b° and bl start with b.
With c16 > 0 conveniently small, to be chosen in the following, let
N= C16p-2k(dd-I)
T Tb (S0s,
, S,t) = (0i, 0i, , ti),
PROPOSITION. If c16 is sufficiently small, there exists C17 > 0 such that,
for any (0,_', s) E £ and any _ E Q, the Lebesgue measure of L-1 (,O, ,s)
is > C17.
4.7. In the proof of the proposition, we will use the following estimates on
the family of random perturbations, to be proved in the next section.
LEMMA. Let 0 E -, , E Q.
(i) For a E E+, with ao = o0,
I|1 ,w(a)l 1
Log I(a)l < CC5 p 2k.
K(0o) = UK(a)
E2
K'(0,) = K'(!).
2
1
C19 p2(d+d') < _d X d'(K(a) x K'(ag)) < c19 p2(d
Let J(a, a') := ro, ,,s(I(a) x I(a')) for a E I2, a' E I2; now,
Say (a, a') is good if there are no more than c1 p-1/2k(d+d'-1) intervals J(a,a')
whose centers are distant from the center of J(a, a') by less than 2c19 p1/2k.
LEMMA. The number of bad pairs (a, a') is less than
3 lecisp-1/2k(d+d')
12C39 C16C15p-/2k(d+d')
.6>x ,1 (-,-)1.
C19 p1/2k = c19
1/2
C161 IJ*
jIJ-(a,a
f
But then, by Cauchy-Schwarz,
j 1J(a, <
a') J(a,a)
Xi, (8
X...
*(a,a_) )JV
'
and thus
j2 C2 1 .( ,?j
X-
Let J* be the union over all bad pairs (a, a') of the intervals J* (a, a'); one can
extract a subfamily of intervals whose union is J* and which does not cover
any point more than twice.
Therefore we obtain
J
2 >1 -2 -1 1
- 12 19 16 _0,_
_
< 12 c9 C16C15.
/j X-
As J* contains J(a, a') for all bad (a, a'), the estimate of the lemma follows. D
4.9. To keep the argument clearer, we now prove Proposition 4.6 when
w = 0 (for the unperturbed map g). Afterwards we will indicate how to modify
the argument for general w.
First, we construct the pairs (b, b') amongst which the pairs (bi, b'i) of 4.6
must be looked for. We make the following easy observation:
LEMMA. Let 0 C Er,. The number of words c E E(p1/2) with co = 00,
such that cl ... Cm ~ Enr is o(p-1/2d) as p - 0, uniformly in 0.
Now let (0, 0', s) E C. It follows from conclusion (ii) of the Scale Recur-
rence Lemma and the last observation that we can find at least ½c3 p-1/2(d+d')
pairs (ci, C'i) E (pl/2) x '/(p/2) such that, writing
TciTc,i (0, O, s) =
(_00,i Si),
we have:
- OcE
oi EC
E;nr;
[si - p1/2, Si + p c/2] c E*(ci,c'i).
As (0i, 0'i, si) again belongs to £, we can for each i find at least ½C3p-1/2(d+d')
pairs (dij d'ij) CE (p1/2) X '(p1/2) (with the first letter of d'i d'i3being the last
one of ci, ci respectively), such that writing TdJTd, (i, 0i'(i, si) = 0',si),
we have
- 0 CEnr;
- - p/2, EE*(dij
[Sij Sij + pl/2] dij).
Concatenation of the ci, 'i and dij,d'ij gives a family of words (b2, b'ij) in
E(p) x E'(p) with at least Ic2 p-(d+d') elements.
Let (0, 0, s) be such that d(0, 0) < (co + C2)p1/2, d(0', ) < (co + c)p1/2,
s1 < C2 pl/2 and s C E(O, 0').
-
I
LEMMA. If c16 has been chosen sufficiently small, there are at least
1 -2 d+d'
2k pairs (a, a') E S2 x S2' which are good and which satisfy
6C3 c19 p
2
< 16
and sudch
and such that
that at least
least I1C3C1 p-(d+d' 2 2k) pairs (ci, Ci) start with (a, a').
6 19
Proof. By definition of E(0, ), the number of pairs (a, a') E I2 x E2 such
that
2
> 16
c 16
a 0
XTaT'/ L2
is at most C16C15p 2k""). Call (a, a') very good if it is good and satisfies
2
XTr(^) <C1
The number of pairs (a, a') which are not very good is thus
< C15C16(1 +lc312C19)P-
1p-2k(d+d').
(d+dl)
But for each (a,a') E I2 x E2, the number of pairs (c,c') E E(p1/2) x
E'(p1/2) starting with (a, a') is at most c19 p(d+d')(-2).
It follows, if c16 is small enough, that at least c3 p-1/2(d+d') pairs (_i,c'i)
start with a very good (a, a') E I2 x E2.
d+d'
The total number of pairs (a,a') is at most c9p 2k;
- if we discard
those pairs for which less than 6C3C1 p-(d+d )(2-~) pairs (i, ci) begin with
(a, a'), we are still left with 6C3 p-1/2(d+d') pairs (ci, i), of which no more than
2'
2 p-(d+d')( ) may begin with the same (a,a'). l
4.10. Let us call excellent those pairs (a, a') given by the last lemma.
Recall that we have defined
and define similarly J(ci,c i), J(bii, b'i). We only consider those i for which
(ci, 'i) starts with an excellent (a, a').
The following general lemmas will be used repeteadly:
LEMMA 1. Let (Ja)aEA, (J')aeA be two finite families of intervals, and
let X > 1, e > 0, v > 0.
Assume that for every a,
Then
, 1
U >
- >Ja
( ) (4v + 4) A)-
UJa =UJR
A' A
Then each point in U Ja belongs at most to two intervals J~, a E A'. Replace
A
each Jc, a E A', by the interval Jc with the same center and length e. Now,
1UJ.
IJ'l> A-1 IJal>A-'
A' A' A
On the other hand, let x E R; if x E J§, for a E A', then the center of Ja
belongs to [x - - x + ] and the center of Ja is contained in [x - (v + ½)E,
x + (V + j)e]. Replacing the Ja by intervals Ja with the same center and
length e, we see that there are at most (4v + 4), a E A', such that x E Jc.
Then we have:
UJ > Ua '
>
- 4+4+- IJ
A UU
A'
m( U K) >2m( .U) J)
> 2 IJZ.I O
A'
4.11. Now let (a, a') be an excellent pair. For i such that (c, ci) starts
with (a, a'), let J(i ci) = W- (I(ci) x I(_'i)), and let Jl(a,a') be the union
of those J(ci, c'). The Ad x /d'-measure of the union of the K(ci) x K'(c'i) is
> C20 p 2k (d+d' (because (a, a') is excellent), and it follows then from 4.3 that
When we come back to (0,O', s) and define Jl(a,a') to be the union of the
J(ci, cl) starting with (a, a'), the sizes of the J(i, ci) are still of order p1/2
and the centers are distant from those of J((ci, ci) by distances of order at most
p1/2. Then, by Lemma 1 above, we get
Jl (a, a')| > C2-21
C16p/2k.
Similarly, for each (ci,c'i) (starting with (a, a')), let J1 (c, c'i) be the union
of the J(bij, 'ij) starting with (i,'i). Then there are at least C3p-1/2(d+d)
such (b, b/'j), and (0i, si,s) = TiTC, (0, ', s) belongs to C.
Therefore, again using 4.3, we conclude that
Let p (resp. P2) be the sum, over excellent pairs (a, a'), of the characteristic
functions of J(a,a') (resp. J2(a,a')).
The number of excellent pairs is > 1c3c 2 2d by 4.8, and therefore
6an2 19 b
dereore .,
2 > C23 C22 C3 C19C16p-2k(d+d-1).
12
On the other hand, because excellent pairs are good, one has
P2
2 _<V cj-1 P-1/2k(d+d'-l1)
< C16
_<
We conclude that
we see that conditions (i), (ii) of 4.6 are satisfied; now, by choice of the
V3, b"'i:
we obtain
and thus
- < C5(c18 + C18)pl k.
Isij sij(*)l
This will guarantee condition (iii)' of 4.6 later.
Keeping the same notion of excellent pairs, we consider for the perturbed
map g* and excellent pair (a, a') the subsets Ji (a, a'), J2 (a, a') of J-* (a, a').
By the estimates of Lemma 4.7 and the Lemma 1 of 4.10, we will still have
IJ- (a, a')1 > C2- C16p2k
For the same reasons, we will get
1(-,Ci
IJ1 (, i, I) --C23J* I)1
and this allows us to prove in exactly the same way that
The proof of
(t) > c p-2k -1) t E L-(, s)
is the same, except that we have
(i') for any 1 < m < M, the words bl,..., bN are independent.
We also ask that
(v) n I(bl,)=
I(Ybm) 0 if (e,m) + (e, m').
To prove this, we proceed as above: for an excellent pair (a, a) and (ci,ci)
starting with (a, a'), we now define Jl(ci, i) as the set of t which belong to
at least p-d* intervals J(bij, b'i) (with (b1i,bi') starting with (ci, ci)). As
d* < 1 (d + d - 1), we still have
j1 (C, 'i) I ,> c-2l-IJ(ci, Ci)I
Next we define J2(a, a') as the set of t which belongs to at least p-1/2d*
sets Jl(_i,c'i) (with (ci, ci) starting with (a, a')). Because 1 d* < 2 - ) (d+
d'- 1), we will still have
If 92(t) > N, it is now easy to construct the (b-, b4) as required: the index
t refers to the excellent pairs such that t E J2(a,a'), and the index M <
! d* I d*
p-2*
2 p-~ d for the possibilities for fixed (a, a').
5.1. In this section, we will prove the estimates of the lemma in §4.7 and
the proposition in §3.8. We begin with the lemma in §4.7, part (i).
We are given 0 E - and a E Z+, with ao = 0o. Let w E Q; we want to
show that
Ik',W(h^(a)) - k(h(a))l < cC8 5 pl- .
o = o =', yo = o = 1, zo = o = z,
Ixn - Xnl
<7 CC5pl+l/2k
Letting no be the largest such integer, we will have lyn - Xnl < C2 p-l/k for
n > no. Therefore on an interval containing the six points xn, Yn, Zn, Xn, Yn,
Zn, we will have (cf. 3.6.3) either
fn+l(u) = fn+l(U)
or
yn+l - -- Xn
Xn+l Zn
with
n + t(in - fn))dt
J'o1Dfn+l(
Next,
In - 11 < Clyn - Xn, &n - 11 < Cn- nXnl
and also
a n- n| < ccs p /1+1/2k
We obtain, setting
Zn+1 - Xn+l Zn+l1- Xn+l
n+Wn=-- Yn+l,
Yn+l -- n+l Yn+l - Xn+l
that
-
]Wn+11 <_ lWnl(l + Clyn Xnl)
+ c Min (c5 p1+1/2k, lXn - Ynl +
±-n - YnP),
starting with
1-1/2k
Wno I CC5 p11/2k
It is thus clear that lWnlI _ cc5 p1-1/2k for all n > no, which gives part (i) of
the lemma in §4.7.
for 0 < j < m. Then uo, vo (resp. uo, io) are the endpoints of I(a) (resp.
I-(a)). For n > 0, we define (Xn)n>0, (Yn)n>O, (Un)n>O, (vn)n>0, (Xn)n>0'
(Yn)n>0, (Un)n>o, (Vn)n>0 as in 5.2. One has
II-°'(a) I = Lim
imn- Unl lYn-- Xnl
I -(a) I n-+oo -P
Ivn - unI In- nI
As above, we have
Max(lvn - nl1,IUn -iinl) < cc5 p1+1/2k, for all n > -m,
with
=f Dfn+l1(ii4 + t(In - fLn))dt
fo1Dfn+l(Un + t(vn - Un))dt
so that
1+1
lAn -A-1 cc5 P l+l/2k
11 I CC5
This means that for n2 = [p-1/k] > ni, we will still have
-
Log 1n2 n2 < Cp1-1/2k
Log
n2-un2l
We can show in the same way that
-
Yn2 n2 -1/2k
Log CC5p
-
1Yn2 xn2
For n > n2, we write as in 5.2,
IVn+l - Un+ll I Vn - Unl
Iyn+l - Xn+l IYn - Xnn
5.4. In the rest of this section, we will prove the proposition in §3.8. We
first recall the setting where u = (0, 0', s, t) E C x R.
The set Qfl(u) is the set of parameters w E Q, such that there exists
u = (0,, s,t) E L x R with
d(, ) < 2p5/2, d(_', j) < 2p5/2, Is- I< p, It- tl <
and
te L°(, ', s).
The set Qo(u) is the set of parameters w E Qffor which there exist b E E(p),
b' E E'(p) (with bo = 00, bo = 0o) such that the image
Tb, (U) = U
= (0, , S, t
satisfies
11/2
(0)sO, ')E L for Is-' < pl/
tE L°(, , ,).
where
Q' =[-1,+1]r1(-),
Q'O(u) = {' E Q', (w', ") E Q(u)},
and IQ/ is Lebesgue measure normalized on Q'. Proposition §3.8 will then
follow by Fubini's theorem.
5.6. From now on, "/ is fixed, with w* E Ql(u). This means that there
exists u = (0, 0, s, t) in £ x IR such that
T(--, 0 s, t) =: i =: ( ,i t),
we have
LEMMA. For 1 < i < N, _i E Er and, for all w' E Q', (0 i,', s) E L if
Proof. From d(O,_) < 2p5/2, it follows that d(t_, ) < cp7/2; but " E Enr
and this set is determined by a condition on an endword in E(p3). Therefore
_i E Si. Moreover, C has the same fiber over (, O ). By the proposition in
§1.3,k-0 and kc are at a C1 distance of order at most p5/2, and similarly for
--4i
5.7. Let W'E Q'; in view of the lemma above, if there exists 1 < i < N
with
ti(w')E L°(0, i, si('))
then w' E Q°(u).
Let a E E2, a = (O-r,..., 00) be the endword of 0 in E2( E(pl/2k)). For
1 < i < N, let
a = (0_,..., o0 = bI, b',..., b,)
We will prove that for any -' E Q', the set of (WI1,... ,C N) for which there
exists 1 < i < N with ti(w') E L° ( 'i, ', i(O')) fills [-1, +1]N except for a set
of normalized Lebesgue measure < exp(-c7 p 2k (d+d-1)) (provided C5is large
enough). By Fubini's theorem, this will imply our statement.
5.8. For c/' Q', set i' = ((O, '),w"). For 1 < i < N, define
L L:=L-(i 0si, i(c2)) (cf. §4.5).
Choose 0 E - with d(0, 0) < p5/2, such that the endword a E ES of 0 (and
0) does not appear elsewhere in 0. For w' = (w1,... ,WN,i/), w = (w',wC),
consider
T Tb,i (f, ', s, t) (, 0'i, Si ( ), ti (W)).
LEMMA 1. ti(w') depends only (for fixed w") on wi, not on V' and wj,
j 5 i. Moreover, there exists c7 > 0 such that
mw{i, ti(Ci) E Li} > cl7.
LEMMA 2. Let w' = (w1,..., CWN, ) E Q' and 1 < i < N. If ti(wi) E Li,
then ti(w') E L (O,i0'i, si(w')), and thus w' E Qo(u).
Clearly the two lemmas imply Proposition §3.8, when we recall that N =
[C2 p-1/2k(d+d'-l)].
5.9. Proof of Lemma 1. Let 1 < i < N. We want to understand how the
endpoints of K-'W(bi)depend on w'. Consider first the sequence defined by
xo = xo(W) = O, Xn(W') = f- (xn-I(w')) for n > 0.
is independent of w'.
U-m = U-m(W') = 0,
For the same reasons as above (using that a does not appear twice in _), we
have that un(') is independent of ' for -m < n < r. Then we have, by §3.6.3
For n > r, Un(G') again cannot belong to any I(a), a E S1($). Setting
where B is the affine map (with the appropriate orientation) sending I(a) onto
I(8o). Neither B nor k-,cz depends on '.
The other endpoint of I-,(bi) satisfies a similar formula.
This means that ti, as a function of ', only depends on wi. Moreover, as
kOe, is bounded in the Cl-topology and the derivative of B is of order p-1/2k,
We have just seen that in fact t' = ti(0). On the other hand,
TT.i(qS,,=(
, ,i), ,i,
with d(, _) < 3p5/2, d(', ) < 2p5/2, Is - s < p, It - tl < p and
Iti < 2(1 + R).
Then Iti- t I< cR, which implies
5.10. Proof of Lemma 2. Let w' = (c1 ,... ,CN, /), _ = (_', "), C =
((O, i), "). Let also 1 < i < N. We assume that ti(wi) E Ll( 1i i, si(i))
and we want to show that
where w(i) is obtained from w when the coordinates in S1(0i) are equal to 0.
We will show that for 1 < j < N:
and applying a second time the same estimate from this lemma (to compare
T(i) and T(i)) will give
-
IS(j) (j) < CC5C18pl-1/2k
Proof. Let
TbT'i(, s('),= (,
S,(t')). , t
As d(0, ~) < p5/2, kC,Wand k0,w are at a Cl-distance of order no more than
p5/2. This implies that
I(() - si()l < cp5/2,
Ii(_')- Si(')I < cp5/2.
To compare si(W), Si(w('), we go back to the proof of Lemma 1. The
endpoints of Iw(bi) depend, for fixed w", only on wi:
Finally, let
(') T:clj(oi,, ,si ( '), ti (W')) = (o(j), '(j), s(j), t()).
The lemma is proved in the next section. Using it, we finish the proof of
Lemma 2.
Let t (j) be the t-coordinate of
(') :Teej
(0, S",(S), ti(~'))
-
l (j) t(j) < CC5 P
By Lemma 3, the same estimate holds for It(j) - t(j) . We conclude that
for p small enough, we have indeed
+
w(W )
W+ - Ur fo Dk(ur + t(w+ - Ur) c5Wipl/2k)dt
Vr - Ur
fo1 Dk(Ur + t(Vr - Ur) + CWipl+l/2k)dt
we see that
d+(w i)< C5 p1+1/2k,
(9wi
6.1. We will first formulate and prove a result, in a slightly more general
setting, which contains the key argument in the proof of the Scale Recurrence
Lemma. We consider a finite alphabet A and a finite set A with a map
A AxA
A (a(A), (A)).
Define
Set also
N = #Aq, Ni = #Ai , i = N1 N7 .
We will assume that there exists p* > 0 such that p7 > p* for all i, j.
The stochastic matrix (pj) has a left eigenvector (pi)iEA satisfying
pi= p pp i
>p*, = .
i i
If we set
a
P
A' - { O if w(A) o(A')
N 1 if w(A) = a(A) = i E A,
= pi N-
N-l p pA'.
i
A'
we have
=
EA/ 1IA 12;
W122< E
A' A' A'
hence
WA = E eiax zA
acting
(, on has norm (we know already that the norm is
acting on (CA, || |) has norm n0o(we know already that the norm is < 1).
PROPOSITION. Under the above hypothesis, there exists 0 < ;1 < 1, e > 0,
0 < T < 1, depending only on Ao, so such that, if IExI< e for all A E A, then
XA = 1E),
YA= XN E
AeA XI\/(
+ aA),
Ni
pAIZAI22> 2 pAIE 1.
X X
for some K2 < 1 depending only on so, Ao and this will imply the proposition
(with nl = T = 21/3). To prove this inequality, we will consider the Fourier
transforms of XA, Zx, YA. We normalize the Fourier transform as
We then have
and
ZA(~) = ysinp .
IZA(0)1^<
\Z,(}\~ IY(f)[ iI<
Y<(x)dx
|W ^
xdEP
= p E,A
/-00o Y{x()dx=A
A
to get
EPAl()
12 < pA(P EA,i12) < EP A EAI'2;
A A A' A'
2
j EplA ( 1)l2 d <[Max(no, 3)]2 J IpAXA() d
J-00 X J00 A
+ 2 pAlEAl2.
Now we have
Illl=1122l2, 12 2
= 2leA
IIZXIIL2 1 211 1,
and therefore
1
2<
]pAIZAIL2 pZAEAI,
A
-1
with r222 [Max(no,
- ra)]2 + E. If e is small enough, < I which concludes
the proof of the proposition. O1
We are given a family E(a,a') of subsets of JR, for a E E(p), a' E '(p).
Define, for (a, a', u) A
F(a, a', u) = {x, uex E E(a, a')},
which is a subset of [-r, r], r = Log R. To say that all JR - E(a, a') have
small measure amounts is to say that all [-r, r]- F(A), A E A, have small
measure:
m([-r, r] - F(A)) < cl.
LEMMA. The hypothesis of the Scale Recurrence Lemma implies that the
hypothesis of Proposition 6.2 holds, namely there exist Ao > 0, 0 < no < 1
such that for E E [1, Aop-1] the operator defined by
6.6. Let A1 > 0, and then let A be given by the corollary in 6.4. For
A E A, we set
Eo(A) = [-r, r]-VAp(F()).
Starting from Eo, we define for n > 0 sets En(A) in the following way; if
En(A) has already been defined, we define, with C3 > 0 fixed sufficiently small,
En(A) as the set of x E [-r, r] such that
#{A', w(A) = a(A'), [x + a - Alp, x + aX + Aip] C [-r, r] - En(A)}
Before proving the lemma we finish the proof of the Scale Recurrence
Lemma. It is clear that for each A E A, the sequence (E,(A))n>0 is increasing.
On the other hand, by Lemma 6.6, we have
P IVApnp(En+l
(A))I< K5 PA + MaxIVp(Eo(A))I.
IlVAp(En(A))I
and therefore
E*(a, a') = {e, x E Fo(a, a', +1)} U {-e, x E F(a, a', -1)}.
TLogI(-')
f -
aa -
Log II()| <Cp.
Taking A1 > 2C, for x E Foo(A), we will have
for zl < p and at least c3p-(d+d') elements A' (with a(A') = w(A)), for all
0, 0' ending with a, a' respectively. This immediately implies conclusion (ii)
of the Scale Recurrence Lemma.
6.7. We now prove Lemma 6.5. Let r7o > 0 be extremely small, and
E [1, Ao p-l]. If the norm of the operator in the lemma is > (1 - r7o)1/2, we
can find z E CA with
Now,
WAI2< PpA IzA,'2
A'
and all pX have order pd+d'. Therefore there exist ri > 0 very small, and
A c A, with
we have
E E zo - Z,112< 2p(d+d
Ai Ai
with very small q72> 0, as pA has order pd+d'. On the other hand |ZA'12
Ai
has order p-(d+d'). Thus, if we write
If we take Ao,A1 E AnAi, and compare the two expressions for zxAobtained
we get
exp(i ao ) -exp(i aA ) 12< 4 p-(d+d')
L
Ai
meaning that
sin (ao-ax) <7/5
holds for all A' E Ai but at most 75 p-(d+d') elements. The constants 774, 75
here are still small.
To derive a contradiction, we will choose Ao, A1 of the form
In a neighbourhood of 0, 01, x, this will still belong to [1y, 3y]. As #(A-A) <
71 p(d+d), we can find a°, a1 a', u such that Ai = (a, a',u) E A and / is
close to _0. The number of A' = (b, b',v) such that I° (b) is close to x is still of
order p-(d+d), and for two such A', A' we will have
laA- aA - 7 64-
2k<rr-' I
for some integer k and small 776> 0. Combining the two inequalities, we should
have for most choices of b°, b1 (with I° (b) close to x) either
Iyo- Y1l
_> Tr-1
i -
or
lYo- Y1I < 4r/6(-y 1-1
We have here 1 < J < Aop-1; hence 7rx-lyl-1 > 7rrlyl-lA 1p. When Ao << [-y
and r76small enough, the bounded geometry of regular Cantor sets is contra-
dicted.
S pAIVAp(JEn(A))I_ 5 5 PIV/p(En(A))I
of 6.6. Recall that En(A) is the set of x E [-r, +r] such that the number of A',
with w(A) = a(A'), for which
n J)
PAIVAp(En(A)l< 6 pA IVAp(En(A))I.
A X
Consider now only those A' for which r-Log co+aA' belongs to the interval
J1 of the same center as J and length 2 Log co; the number of such A's is still of
order p-(d+d'), in particular much larger than C3p-(d+d) if C3 is small enough.
As all pX have order p(d+d), we will obtain an estimate
Taking 6 > 0 small enough, we will have 1 > K5 = 2C6 + K4 (where K4 is from
6.4), which concludes the proof.
6.9. In case A) of 6.5, we just set
A = A x A',
A= (p) x p),
F (a, a') = {x, +e E E(a, a')},
and deal separately with the two families (F+(a,a')) and (F-(a,a')) in the
same manner as in case B).
REFERENCES
[H] M. HALL,On the sum and product of continued fractions, Ann. of Math. 48 (1947),
966-993.
[L] PERLARSSON, L'ensemble difference de deux ensembles de Cantor aleatoires, C. R.
Acad. Sci. Paris Ser. I Math. 310 (1990), 735-738.
[M] C. G. MOREIRA, Stable intersections of Cantor sets and homoclinic bifurcations,
Ann. Inst. H. Poincare Anal. Non Lineaire 13 (1996), No. 6, 741-781.
[MO] P. MENDES and F. OLIVEIRA, On the topological structure of the arithmetic sum of
two Cantor sets, Nonlinearity 7 (1994), 329-343.
[N1] S. NEWHOUSE, Nondensity of Axiom A(a) on S2, Proc. A.M.S. Sympos. Pure Math.
14 (1970), 191-202.
[N2] , Diffeomorphisms with infinitely many sinks, Topology 13 (1974), 9-18.
[N3] , The abundance of wild hyperbolic sets and nonsmooth stable sets for
diffeomorphisms, IHES Publ. Math. 50 (1979), 101-151.
[P] J. PALIS,Homoclinic orbits, hyperbolic dynamics and dimension of Cantor sets,
Contemp. Math. 58 (1987), 203-216.
[P1] , Homoclinic bifurcations, sensitive-chaotic dynamics and strange attrac-
tors, in Dynamical Syst. and Related Topics, World Sci. Publ., Co., River Edge,
NJ (1991), 466-472.
[PT] J. PALISand F. TAKENS,Cycles and measure of bifurcation sets for two-dimensional
diffeomorphisms, Invent. Math. 82 (1985), 379-442.
[PT1] , Hyperbolicity and the creation of homoclinic orbits, Ann. of Math. 125
(1987), 337-374.
[PT2] , Hyperbolicity and Sensitive Chaotic Dynamics at Homoclinic Bifurcations.
Fractal Dimensions and Infinitely Many Attractors, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cam-
bridge, 1992.
[PY] J. PALISand J.-C. Yoccoz, Homoclinic tangencies for hyperbolic sets of large Haus-
dorff dimension, Acta Math. 172 (1994), 91-136.
[PY1] , On the arithmetic sum of regular Cantor sets, Ann. Inst. J. Poincare
Anal. Non Lineaire 14 (1997), 439-456.
[S] A. SANNAMI, An example of a regular Cantor set whose difference set is a Cantor
set with positive measure, Hokkaido Math. J. 21 (1992), 7-24.
[Su] D. SULLIVAN,Differentiable structures on fractal-like sets, determined by intrinsic
scaling functions on dual Cantor sets, in The Mathematical Heritage of Herman
Weyl (Durham, NC, 1987), 15-23, Proc. Sympos. Pure Math. 48, A.M.S., Provi-
dence, RI (1988).