Hausdorff Dimension of Singular Vectors
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
HAUSDORFF DIMENSION OF SINGULAR VECTORS YITWAH CHEUNG AND NICOLAS CHEVALLIER Abstract. We prove that the set of singular vectors in Rd; d ≥ 2; has Hausdorff dimension d2 d d+1 and that the Hausdorff dimension of the set of "-Dirichlet improvable vectors in R d2 d is roughly d+1 plus a power of " between 2 and d. As a corollary, the set of divergent t t −dt trajectories of the flow by diag(e ; : : : ; e ; e ) acting on SLd+1 R= SLd+1 Z has Hausdorff d codimension d+1 . These results extend the work of the first author in [6]. 1. Introduction Singular vectors were introduced by Khintchine in the twenties (see [14]). Recall that d x = (x1; :::; xd) 2 R is singular if for every " > 0, there exists T0 such that for all T > T0 the system of inequalities " (1.1) max jqxi − pij < and 0 < q < T 1≤i≤d T 1=d admits an integer solution (p; q) 2 Zd × Z. In dimension one, only the rational numbers are singular. The existence of singular vectors that do not lie in a rational subspace was proved by Khintchine for all dimensions ≥ 2. Singular vectors exhibit phenomena that cannot occur in dimension one. For instance, when x 2 Rd is singular, the sequence 0; x; 2x; :::; nx; ::: fills the torus Td = Rd=Zd in such a way that there exists a point y whose distance in the torus to the set f0; x; :::; nxg, times n1=d, goes to infinity when n goes to infinity (see [4], chapter V). While it is easy to see that the set Sing(d) of all singular vectors in Rd has zero Lebesgue measure, it is hard to compute its Hausdorff dimension. After a few partial results by Baker and Rynne (see [2], [3] and [20]), it has been proved in [6] by the first author that the 4 Hausdorff dimension of Sing(2) is 3 . In this paper we extend this result to higher dimensions. d2 Theorem 1.1. The Hausdorff dimension of Sing(d) is d+1 . Singular vectors x 2 Rd are characterized by Mahler's criterion d+1 lim inffkwk : 0 6= w 2 gthx g = 0 t!1 Z Date: February 28, 2014. 1991 Mathematics Subject Classification. 11J13, 11K55, 37A17. Key words and phrases. singular vectors; self-similar coverings; multi-dimensional continued fractions; simultaneous Diophantine approximation; best approximations; divergent trajectories. The first author is partially supported by NSF grant DMS 0956209. 1 1 −x where g = diag(et; : : : ; et; e−dt) and h = d . Equivalently, fg h SL g is a t x 0 1 t x d+1 Z t2R divergent trajectory of the flow on SLd+1 R= SLd+1 Z induced by the left action of gt. d Corollary 1.2. Divergent trajectories of gt have Hausdorff codimension d+1 . Proof. The Hausdorff codimension of Sing(d) in Rd coincides with that for divergent trajec- tories in SLd+1 R= SLd+1 Z (see [5]). In [12] Einsiedler-Kadyrov showed that the Hausdorff dimension of divergent trajectories of gt does not increase in the case of SL3 R= SL3 Z even after enlarging it to include trajectories that diverge "on average". This result generalizes to higher dimensions; see [?]. Divergent trajectories and their Hausdorff dimension have been considered for other classes of "hyperbolic" flows, starting with Masur's Duke paper [18] which established codimension 1 ≥ 2 for Teichm¨ullerflows. Positive Hausdorff codimension for divergent trajectories in a product of real rank one spaces is also known; see [24] and also [5]. Let " be a fixed positive real number. Recall that a vector x in Rd is "-Dirichlet improvable if the system of inequalities (1.1) admits a solution for T large enough. H. Davenport and W. Schmidt have proved that the set DI"(d) of "-Dirichlet improvable vectors has zero measure for all " < 1 ([10] and [11]). This result has been generalized in several directions (see for instance [15]) but less is known about the Hausdorff dimension of DI"(d). The intersection of the sets DI"(d), " > 0, is the set of singular vectors, so it is natural to expect that the Hausdorf dimension of DI"(d) decreases to the Hausdorff dimension of Sing(d) as " goes to zero. When d = 2, the bounds on Hdim DI"(d) obtained in [5] implies this continuity at " = 0 of the Hausdorff dimension. Our second result extends these bounds to higher dimensions. Theorem 1.3. Let d ≥ 2 be an integer and let t be any real number > d. There is a constant C such that for " small enough, d2 d2 + "t ≤ Hdim DI (d) ≤ + C"d=2: d + 1 " d + 1 Actually, we give a slightly better lower bound; see corollary 6.10. In the two dimensional case, this result already improves the lower bound of [6] but there is a further improvement giving a precise rate of convergence when " goes to zero. Theorem 1.4. For all real numbers t > 1, we have 4 + "t ≤ Hdim DI (2) 3 " for " small enough. Our proof of the above Theorem doesn't work when the dimension is ≥ 3. In particular, our analysis stops short of establishing the existence of the exponent d2 log(Hdim DI"(d) − ) (1.2) lim d+1 "!0+ log " 2 for d ≥ 3. It seems that our approach could potentially be carried further to establish existence of the above limit, which we will guess to lie in the interval [d − 1; d[. At last we have to say that results about singular linear forms can be deduced using a transference Theorem ([4], chapter V, corollary section II). But a direct proof is not clear. The proofs rely on three main tools. The first is lattice theory, especially Minkowski's theorems and reduced bases. The second is the notion of self-similar covering introduced in [5] and [6]. The third is the notion of best Diophantine approximation. Section 2 is devoted to lattices theory and counting results. Section 3 is devoted to Hausdorff dimension bounds using self-similar covers and Section 4 is devoted to best Diophantine approximations. The proofs of the above Theorems actually begin in Section 5. Proving the upper bounds is the most easy parts of the proofs. While the upper bounds are proved in Section 5, the lower bounds need the Sections 6, 7 and 8. 2. Counting lattice points 2.1. Notation. We shall use the standard notations ; ; in number theory: f(a; b; :::) g(a; b; :::) means that f(a; b; :::) ≤ Cg(a; b; :::) where C is a constant that does not depend on the parameters a; b; ::: etc. Most of the time, C depends only the dimension or on the norm. The symbol is used for the reverse inequality and when both inequalities hold. Suppose that Rn is endowed with a norm k · k. For a lattice L in Rn and 1 ≤ k ≤ n, we denote by λk(L) = inffr ≥: B(0; r) contains at least k linearly independent vector of Lg the kth minimum of L. The successive minima of a lattice L in Rn are the real numbers λ1(L); : : : ; λn(L). This notation suppresses the dependence on the norm. 2.2. Successive minima and reduced basis. Assume that Rn is equipped with a norm. By the (second) Minkowski theorem, the successive minima of a lattice L in Rn satisfy (see [4]) 2n (M) vol(L) ≤ λ (L) ··· λ (L) vol(B(0; 1)) ≤ 2n vol(L): n! 1 n We shall use this fact many times and simply write λ1(L) ··· λn(L) vol(L) where the constants involved in depend only on the dimension and on the volume of the unit ball. 3 We shall need reduced bases in a lattice. Minkowski reduced bases are well-suited to our needs. Other kinds of reduced bases could work as well. We shall use the following properties of a Minkowski reduced basis v1; : : : ; vn. For all i, i (M') λi(L) ≤ kvik ≤ 2 λi(L); A proof of this inequality can be found in [23]. Actually, Minkowski reduced bases are associated to Euclidean norms and the above inequality holds only in these cases. When dealing with a non Euclidean norm, we consider a reduced basis associated to the standard Euclidean norm and by the norm equivalence, one has kvik λi where the constants involved depend not only on the dimension but also on the norm. An important property of a reduced basis is that the angles between a vector of the basis and the subspace spanned by other vectors cannot be too small. More precisely, there is positive constant cn depending only on the dimension such that ? (M") vi ≥ cnλi(L) ? where vi is the orthogonal projection of vi on the line orthogonal to the subspace spanned by the other basis vectors. Once again, the above inequality holds for Euclidean norms and for other norms, one has ? vi λi(L) where the implicit constants depend on the norm. To prove (M"), note that by (M') one has ? ? λ1(L) ··· λi−1(L) vi λi+1(L) ··· λn(L) j det(v1; : : : ; vi−1; vi ; vi+1; : : : ; vn)j = vol(L) and then use the Minkowski theorem. For sake of simplicity, the reader can suppose that all the results are stated for the standard Euclidean norm. However, it is clear that the results of Section 2 hold with any norm with constants possibly depending on norms. The results in Section 4 hold for any norm. 2.3. Codimension one sublattice of minimal volume. Fix a norm k · k on Rn.