ON EQUIVALENCE OF UNBOUNDED METRIC SPACES AT INFINITY

VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY

Abstract. Let (X, d) be an unbounded metric space. To investi- gate the asymptotic behavior of (X, d) at infinity, one can consider a sequence of rescaling metric spaces (X, 1 d) generated by given rn sequence (rn)n∈N of positive reals with rn → ∞. Metric spaces 1 that are limit points of the sequence (X, d)n∈ will be called rn N pretangent spaces to (X, d) at infinity. We found the necessary and sufficient conditions under which two given unbounded sub- spaces of (X, d) have the same pretangent spaces at infinity. In the case when (X, d) is the real line with Euclidean metric, we also describe all unbounded subspaces of (X, d) isometric to their pretangent spaces.

Contents 1. Introduction2 2. About metrics and pseudometrics3 3. Asymptotically pretangent and tangent spaces. Initial definitions 12 4. Elementary properties 14 5. Gluing pretangent spaces 20 6. Asymptotically pretangent spaces to real line and half-line 28 7. Asymptotically equivalent subspaces and asymptotically isometric spaces 34 References 45 arXiv:2106.00049v2 [math.MG] 20 Jun 2021

2020 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 54E35. Key words and phrases. Unbounded metric space, pseudometric space, equiva- lence relation, pretangent space at infinity. 1 2 VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY

1. Introduction Under asymptotic pretangent spaces to an unbounded metric space (X, d) we mean the metric spaces which are the limits of rescaling met-   ric spaces X, 1 d for r tending to infinity. The GromovHausdorff rn n convergence and the asymptotic cones are most often used for construc- tion of such limits. Both of these approaches are based on higher-order abstractions (see, for example, [23] for details), which makes them very powerful, but it does away the constructiveness. In this paper we use a more elementary, sequential approach, which was proposed in [8] and applied to description of finiteness, uniqueness, and completeness of asymptotic pretangent spaces in [9–11]. The sequential approach to defining the metric structure of (X, d) at infinity can be informally described as performing the following opera- tions:

• Among all sequences of points from X, select those that tend to infinity with a given speed. • Determine a pseudometric D on the set of all such sequences so that D(˜x, y˜) = 0 holds if and only if the sequences x˜ and y˜ are “indistinguishable” at infinity. • Transform the resulting pseudometric space into a metric space whose points are classes of indistinguishable at infinity sequences of points from X.

The paper is organized as follows. In Section2, we recall basic facts related to general pseudometric spaces and introduce the concept of pseudoisometries. Some new in- terrelations between the closed and complete subsets of pseudometric spaces are described in Proposition 2.8 and Corollaries 2.9–2.10. It was shown in Theorem 2.18 that two pseudometric spaces admit a pseudoi- sometry if and only if their metric identifications are isometric. In section3 we define the notions of asymptotically pretangent and asymptotically tangent metric spaces, which are the main objects of our studies. Some basic properties of asymptotically pretangent and tangent spaces are collected together in Section4. In particular, Proposition 4.3 describes the sequences of points of an unbounded metric space X turn- ing into a unique point ν0 of asymptotically pretangent spaces such that ν0 is “close to X as much as possible”. The gluing pretangent and tangent spaces are considered in Sec- tion5. The main result of the section, Theorem 5.4, shows as porosity ON EQUIVALENCE OF UNBOUNDED METRIC SPACES AT INFINITY 3 at infinity of a distance set of the original metric space X related to the porosity of a distance set of the gluing of pretangent spaces to X. In Section6, we investigate the asymptotically pretangent space to the metric subspaces of the real line R. The main result of the section, Theorem 6.5, completely characterizes the subspaces of R which are isometric to their asymptotically pretangent spaces. Conditions under which two subspaces of an unbounded metric spaces are asymptotically equivalent were found in Theorem 7.16 of Section7. In conclusion of this brief introduction, we note that there exist other techniques for studying metric spaces at infinity. As examples, we mention Gromov’s products [14,24], balleans [22] and the Wijsman convergence [3–5,21,27,28].

2. About metrics and pseudometrics In what follows, we will denote by N the set of all strictly positive integer numbers, and R the set of all real numbers and write R+ = [0, ∞). A metric on a set X is a function d: X2 → R such that for all x, y, z ∈ X: (i) d(x, y) > 0 with equality if and only if x = y, the positivity property; (ii) d(x, y) = d(y, x), the symmetry property; (iii) d(x, y) ≤ d(x, z) + d(z, y), the triangle inequality. A metric space is pair (X, d) consisting of a set X and a metric d on X. If (X, d) is a metric space and A is a subset of X, then, for simplicity, we well keep the notation A for the metric space (A, dA×A), where dA×A is the restriction of d: X × X → R on A × A. A useful generalization of the concept of metric is the concept of pseudometric.

Definition 2.1. Let X be a set and let d: X2 → R be a nonnegative, symmetric function such that d(x, x) = 0 for every x ∈ X. The function d is a pseudometric on X if it satisfies the triangle inequality. If d is a pseudometric on X, we say that (X, d) is a pseudometric space. It is clear that a pseudometric d: X2 → R is a metric if and only if d(x, y) = 0 implies x = y for all x, y ∈ X. Let (X, d) be a pseudometric space. An open ball with a radius r > 0 and a center c ∈ X is the set

Br(c) = {x ∈ X : d(c, x) < r}. 4 VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY

A sequence (xn)n∈N ⊆ X is a Cauchy sequence in (X, d) if, for every r > 0, there is an integer n0 ∈ N such that xn ∈ Br(xn0 ) for every n > n0. It is easy to see that (xn)n∈N is a Cauchy sequence if and only if

lim sup{d(xn, xn+k): k ∈ } = 0. n→∞ N

Remark 2.2. Here and later the symbol (xn)n∈N ⊆ X means that xn ∈ X holds for every n ∈ N.

A sequence (xn)n∈N of points in a pseudometric space (X, d) is said to converge to a point a ∈ X,

lim xn = a, n→∞ if, for every open ball B containing a, it is possible to find an integer n0 ∈ N such that xn ∈ B for every n > n0. Thus, (xn)n∈N is convergent to a if and only if

lim d(xn, a) = 0. n→∞ A sequence is convergent if it is convergent to some point. It is clear that every convergent sequence is a Cauchy sequence. The next basic concept is the concept of completeness. Definition 2.3. A subset S of a pseudometric space (X, d) is complete if for every Cauchy sequence (xn)n∈N ⊆ S there is a point a ∈ S such that

lim xn = a. n→∞ As in the case of metric spaces, we can introduce a topology on pseudometric spaces using the open balls.

Definition 2.4. Let (X, d) be a pseudometric space, BX = BX,d be the set of all open balls in (X, d) and τ be a topology on X. We will say that τ is generated by pseudometric d if BX is an open base for τ.

Thus, τ is generated by d if and only if every B ∈ BX belongs to τ and every nonempty A ∈ τ is the union of some family of elements of BX . In what follows, we assume that every pseudometric space (X, d) is also a topological space endowed with the topology τ generated by d. Proposition 2.5. If X is a complete metric space, then X is closed in every metric superspace of X. (See, for example, Theorem 10.2.1 [25]). ON EQUIVALENCE OF UNBOUNDED METRIC SPACES AT INFINITY 5

This result becomes invalid in the case of pseudometrics. One can prove that a complete pseudometric space X is closed in all pseudo- metric superspaces of X if and only if X = ∅. A valid pseudometric analogy of Proposition 2.5 will be given below in Proposition 2.8 and Corollary 2.9. Let X be a set. A binary relation on X is a subset of the Cartesian square X2 = X × X = {hx, yi: x, y ∈ X}. A binary relation R ⊆ X2 is an equivalence relation on X if the follow- ing conditions hold for all x, y, z ∈ X: (i) hx, xi ∈ R, the reflexivity property; (ii)( hx, yi ∈ R) ⇔ (hy, xi ∈ R), the symmetry property; (iii)(( hx, yi ∈ R) and (hy, zi ∈ R)) ⇒ (hx, zi ∈ R), the transitivity property. If R is an equivalence relation on X, then an equivalence class is a subset [a]R of X having the form

(2.1) [a]R = {x ∈ X : hx, ai ∈ R}, a ∈ X. The quotient set of X with respect to R is the set of all equivalence classes [a]R, a ∈ X. There exists the well-known, one-to-one correspondence between the equivalence relations and partitions. Let X be a nonempty set and P = {Xj : j ∈ J} be a set of nonempty subsets of X. Then P is a partition of X with the blocks Xj if [ Xj = X, j∈J and Xj1 ∩ Xj2 = ∅ holds for all distinct j1, j2 ∈ J.

Proposition 2.6. Let X be a nonempty set. If P = {Xj : j ∈ J} is a partition of X and RP is a binary relation on X defined as

hx, yi ∈ RP if and only if ∃j ∈ J such that x ∈ Xj and y ∈ Xj, then RP is an equivalence relation on X with the equivalence classes Xj. Conversely, if R is an equivalence relation on X, then the quotient set of X with respect to R is a partition of X with the blocks [a]R. For the proof, see, for example, [20, Chapter II, § 5]. For every pseudometric space (X, d), we define a binary relation =0 on X as

(2.2) (x =0 y) ⇔ (d(x, y) = 0), x, y ∈ X 6 VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY and, similarly (2.1), we write

(2.3) [a]0 = {x ∈ X : d(a, x) = 0}, for every a ∈ X.

Proposition 2.7. Let X be a nonempty set and let d: X2 → R be a pseudometric on X. Then =0 is an equivalence relation on X and the function δd, 0 0 (2.4) δd(α, β) := d(x, y), x ∈ α ∈ X/=, y ∈ β ∈ X/=, is a correctly defined metric on X/=0 , where X/=0 is the quotient set of X with respect to =0 . The proof of Proposition 2.7 can be found in [19, Ch. 4, Th. 15]. 0 In what follows we will sometimes say that (X/=, δd) is the metric identification of the pseudometric space (X, d). Now we are ready to formulate and prove a partial analog of Propo- sition 2.5 for the pseudometric spaces. Proposition 2.8. Let (X, d) be a pseudometric space and let A be a complete subset of (X, d). Then A is closed in (X, d) if and only if

(2.5) [a]0 ⊆ A holds for every a ∈ A, where [a]0 is defined by (2.3). Proof. Let A be closed in (X, d). Then the set X \ A is open in (X, d) 1 and, consequently, there is B ⊆ BX such that [ (2.6) X \ A = B. B∈B1 Using Proposition 2.6, we see that (2.5) holds for every a ∈ A if and only if

(2.7) [b]0 ⊆ X \ A holds for every b ∈ X \ A. From (2.6) it follows that (2.7) holds for every b ∈ X \ A if

(2.8) [b]0 ⊆ B holds for every b ∈ B and every B ∈ BX . Now (2.8) can be directly proved by using the definition of open balls and the triangle inequality. Conversely, let (2.5) hold for every a ∈ A. If A is not a closed set, then X \ A is not an open set and, consequently, there is c ∈ X \ A such that Br(c) ∩ A 6= ∅ ON EQUIVALENCE OF UNBOUNDED METRIC SPACES AT INFINITY 7 for every r > 0, where Br(c) is the open ball with the center c and the radius r. Consequently, there is a convergent sequence (an)n∈N ⊆ A,

(2.9) lim d(an, c) = 0. n→∞ Since A is complete and every convergent sequence is a Cauchy se- quence, there is a ∈ A such that

(2.10) lim d(an, a) = 0. n→∞ Using the triangle inequality and (2.9)–(2.10), we obtain

d(c, a) 6 lim sup d(c, an) + lim sup d(an, a) = 0. n→∞ n→∞

Therefore, c ∈ [a0] holds, that implies c ∈ A by (2.5). Thus, we obtain the contradiction c ∈ A ∩ (X \ A) = ∅.  Corollary 2.9. Let (X, d) be a pseudometric space and let A be a complete subset of X. Write A for the closure of A. Then A is also a complete subset of X and the equality [ (2.11) A = [a]0 a∈A holds. Proof. First we note that the set [ [a]0 a∈A S is complete. Indeed, if (xn)n∈N ⊆ a∈A[a]0 is a Cauchy sequence, then there is a sequence (an)n∈N ⊆ A such that

(2.12) d(xn, an) = 0 for every n ∈ N. The last equality and the definition of Cauchy se- quences imply that (an)n∈N is also a Cauchy sequence. Since A is complete, there exists b ∈ A such that

(2.13) lim d(an, b) = 0. n→∞ Using (2.12) and (2.13), we see that

lim d(xn, b) = 0, n→∞ in addition, from [ (2.14) A ⊆ [a]0 a∈A S S it follows that b ∈ [a]0. Thus, (xn)n∈ is convergent in [a]0 Sa∈A N a∈A and, consequently, a∈A[a]0 is complete as required. 8 VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY

Let us prove (2.11). Since the equality [x]0 = [a]0 holds for every S a ∈ A and every x ∈ [a]0, we obtain that the set a∈A[a]0 is closed by Proposition 2.8. The last statement and (2.14) imply the inclusion [ A ⊆ [a]0, a∈A because every closed superset of A contains the closure of A. To com- plete the proof, we recall that [ S = [s]0 s∈S holds for every closed S ⊆ X (as was shown in the first part of the proof of Proposition 2.8) and, consequently, [ [ A = [b]0 ⊇ [a]0, b∈A a∈A because A ⊇ A.  Corollary 2.9 implies the following.

Corollary 2.10. Let (X, d) be a pseudometric space and let A1, A2 be subsets of X. If the statement:

(i) For all x1 ∈ A1 and x2 ∈ A2, there are y1 ∈ A1 and y2 ∈ A2 such that

d(x1, y2) = d(x2, y1) = 0 is valid, then the equality

(2.15) A1 = A2 holds. Moreover, if A1 and A2 are complete subsets of X, then equality (2.15) implies the validity of (i). Proof. Let (i) hold. Then the equality (2.15) follows directly from Definition 2.4. If A1 and A2 are complete and (2.15) holds, then the validity of (i) follows from (2.3) and (2.11).  Definition 2.11. Let (X, d) and (Y, ρ) be pseudometric spaces. A mapping Φ: X → Y is distance preserving if ρ(Φ(x), Φ(y)) = d(x, y) holds for all x, y ∈ X. If (X, d) and (Y, ρ) are metric spaces, then the distance preserving mappings Φ: X → Y are usually called isometric embeddings of X in Y . If Φ is a bijective isometric embedding, then we call this mapping ON EQUIVALENCE OF UNBOUNDED METRIC SPACES AT INFINITY 9 an isometry of (X, d) and (Y, ρ). Two metric spaces are isometric if there is an isometry of these spaces. The concept of isometry can be extended to pseudometric spaces in various non-equivalent ways. We will now give one of these generaliza- tions that seems most appropriate for our purpose. Definition 2.12. Let (X, d) and (Y, ρ) be pseudometric spaces. A mapping Φ: X → Y is a pseudoisometry of (X, d) and (Y, ρ) if: (i)Φ is distance preserving; (ii) for every u ∈ Y there is v ∈ X such that ρ(Φ(v), u) = 0. Example 2.13. Let X be a set, (Y, ρ) be a metric space and let Φ: X → Y be a surjective mapping. Then the function d: X2 → R, defined by d(x, y) := ρ(Φ(x), Φ(y)), x, y ∈ X, is a pseudometric on X and the mapping Φ is a pseudoisometry of the pseudometric space (X, d) and the metric space (Y, ρ).

0 Example 2.14. Let (Y, ρ) be a pseudometric space and let (Y/=, δρ) be the metric identification of (Y, ρ). Then the natural projection 0 πY : Y → Y/=,

(2.16) πY (y) = {x ∈ Y : ρ(x, y) = 0}, y ∈ Y, is a pseudoisometry of the pseudometric space (Y, ρ) and the metric 0 space (Y/=, δρ).

0 Example 2.15. Let (Y, ρ), (Y/=, δρ) and πY be defined as in Exam- ple 2.14. Then the Axiom of Choice implies the existence of a function 0 0 Ψ: Y/= → Y such that πY (Ψ(α)) = α for every α ∈ Y/=. Using Defi- nition 2.12 and equalities (2.2)–(2.16) (with δd = δρ and (X, d) = (Y, ρ)) 0 we can easily show that Ψ is a pseudoisometry of (Y/=, δρ) and (Y, ρ). The following properties of pseudoisometries are easy to prove. Proposition 2.16. Let (X, d) and (Y, ρ) be pseudometric spaces. Then the following statements hold for every pseudoisometry Φ: X → Y : (i) If (X, d) and (Y, ρ) are metric spaces, then Φ is an isometry. (ii) If (Y, ρ) is a metric space, then Φ is a surjection. (iii) If (X, d) is a metric space, then Φ is an injection. (iv)Φ is a homeomorphism of the topological spaces X and Y (en- dowed with topologies generated by d and ρ, respectively) if and only if Φ is bijective. 10 VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY

Lemma 2.17. Let (X, d), (Y, ρ) and (Z, δ) be pseudometric spaces and let Φ: X → Y and Ψ: Y → Z be pseudoisometries. Then the mapping X −→Φ Y −→Ψ Z is also a pseudoisometry.

Proof. It follows directly from Definition 2.12.  We say that two pseudometric spaces are pseudoisometric if there is a pseudoisometry of these spaces. Theorem 2.18. Let (X, d) and (Y, ρ) be pseudometric spaces. Then (X, d) and (Y, ρ) are pseudoisometric if and only if the metric identifi- 0 0 cations (X/=, δd) and (Y/=, δρ) are isometric metric spaces. Proof. Suppose that (X, d) and (Y, ρ) are pseudoisometric. We will 0 0 prove that (X/=, δd) and (Y/=, δρ) are isometric. Write Φ: X → Y for a pseudoisometry of (X, d) and (Y, ρ). Let 0 0 πX : X → X/= and πY : Y → Y/= be the natural projection of X and Y on the quotient sets X/=0 and Y/=0 , respectively, i.e.,

(2.17) πX (x) = {z ∈ X : d(x, z) = 0},

(2.18) πY (y) = {t ∈ Y : ρ(t, y) = 0} hold for all x ∈ X and y ∈ Y . We claim that there is a mapping F : X/=0 → Y/=0 such that the diagram XYΦ

(2.19) πX πY

0 F 0 X/= Y/= is commutative, i.e., F ◦ πX = πY ◦ Φ holds. A desired F can be found if and only if the implication

(2.20) πX (x1) = πX (x2) ⇒ πY (Φ(x1)) = πY (Φ(x2)) is valid for all x1, x2 ∈ X. Let us prove the validity of (2.20). If we have πX (x1) = πX (x2), then (2.17) implies d(x1, x2) = 0. The last equality and statement (i) from Definition 2.12 give us the equality

(2.21) ρ(Φ(x1), Φ(x2)) = 0.

Now from (2.21) and (2.18) it follows that πY (Φ(x1)) = πY (Φ(x2)). Thus, there is F : X/=0 → Y/=0 such that diagram (2.19) is commuta- tive. ON EQUIVALENCE OF UNBOUNDED METRIC SPACES AT INFINITY 11

Let F : X/=0 → Y/=0 satisfy

(2.22) F ◦ πX = πY ◦ Φ and let α, β be arbitrary points of X/=0 . Then, by (2.4), we have

(2.23) δd(α, β) = d(x1, x2) for all x1 ∈ α and x2 ∈ β. Using (2.17) we can rewrite (2.23) as

(2.24) δd(πX (x1), πX (x2)) = d(x1, x2). The last equality and statement (i) from Definition 2.12 imply

(2.25) d(x1, x2) = ρ(Φ(x1), Φ(x2)). Now using Proposition 2.7 with X = Y and d = ρ, we obtain

(2.26) ρ(Φ(x1), Φ(x2)) = δρ(πY (Φ(x1)), πY (Φ(x2))). Consequently, we have

(2.27) δd(πX (x1), πX (x2)) = δρ(πY (Φ(x1)), πY (Φ(x2))). Using (2.22) we can rewrite (2.27) as

δd(πX (x1), πX (x2)) = δρ(F (πX (x1)),F (πX (x2))). Thus, we have δd(α, β) = δρ(F (α),F (β)) for all α, β ∈ X/=0 . Consequently, F is an isometric embedding of the 0 0 metric space (X/=, δd) in the metric space (Y/=, δρ). Moreover, by 0 Example 2.14, the mapping πY : Y → Y/= is a pseudoisometry and, consequently, Φ πY X −→ Y −→ Y/=0 0 is a pseudoisometry by Lemma 2.17. Since (Y/=, δρ) is a metric space, Φ πY the pseudoisometry X −→ Y −→ Y/=0 is surjective by Statement (ii) of Proposition 2.16. Using equality (2.22), we obtain that F ◦ πX is also surjective, that implies the surjectivity of F . Every surjective isometric 0 embedding is an isometry. Thus, F is an isometry of (X/=, δd) and 0 (Y/=, δρ). 0 0 Conversely, let (X/=, δd) and (Y/=, δρ) be isometric metric spaces. 0 0 Write F : X/= → Y/= for an isometry of these spaces. Let πX : X → X/=0 be the natural projection defined by (2.17) and let Ψ: Y/=0 → Y be defined as in Example 2.15. Then, using the same example and Lemma 2.17, we see that the mapping

πX F Ψ X −→ X/=0 −→ Y/=0 −→ Y is a pseudoisometry of (X, d) and (Y, ρ).  12 VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY

Corollary 2.19. The relation “to be pseudoisometric” is an equivalence relation on the class of all pseudometric spaces. Proof. The relation “to be isometric” is an equivalence relation on the class of all metric spaces.  Analyzing the proof of Theorem 2.18, we obtain the following. Corollary 2.20. Let Φ: X → Y be a pseudoisometry of pseudometric spaces (X, d) and (Y, ρ). If F : X/=0 → Y/=0 is a mapping such that diagram (2.19) is commutative, then F is an isometry of the metric 0 0 spaces (X/=, δd) and (Y/=, δρ). Remark 2.21. John Kelley [19] define the isometries of pseudometric spaces X and Y as the distance preserving surjective mappings X → Y . This concept is a generalization of the concept of the usual isometries of metric spaces and it is clear that every isometry of pseudometric spaces in Kelley’s sense is a pseudoisometry of these spaces. Another generalization of the concept of isometry to pseudoisometric spaces was given in [17,18].

3. Asymptotically pretangent and tangent spaces. Initial definitions

Let r˜ = (rn)n∈N be a sequence of positive real numbers with limn→∞ rn = ∞. In what follows r˜ will be called a scaling sequence. Moreover, the formula (xn)n∈N ⊂ A will be mean that all elements of the sequence (xn)n∈N belong to the set A. Definition 3.1. Let (X, d) be an unbounded metric space. Two se- quences x˜ = (xn)n∈N ⊂ X and y˜ = (yn)n∈N ⊂ X are mutually stable with respect to a scaling sequence r˜ = (rn)n∈N if there is a finite limit

d(xn, yn) (3.1) lim := dr˜(˜x, y˜). n→∞ rn If (X, d) is an unbounded metric space and r˜ is a scaling sequence, then we denote by Seq(X, r˜) the set of all sequences x˜ = (xn)n∈N ⊂ X for which there is a finite limit d(xn, p) ˜ (3.2) lim := dr˜(˜x), n→∞ rn where p is a fixed point of X. Remark 3.2. The triangle inequality implies that the set Seq(X, r˜) is invariant with respect to the choosing p ∈ X in (3.2). ON EQUIVALENCE OF UNBOUNDED METRIC SPACES AT INFINITY 13

Definition 3.3. Let (X, d) be an unbounded metric space and r˜ be a scaling sequence. A set F ⊆ Seq(X, r˜) is self-stable if any two x,˜ y˜ ∈ F are mutually stable. F is maximal self-stable if it is self-stable and, for arbitrary y˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜), we have either y˜ ∈ F or there is x˜ ∈ F such that x˜ and y˜ are not mutually stable. The maximal self-stable subsets of Seq(X, r˜) will be denoted by ˜ X∞,r˜. By Zorn’s lemma, for every self-stable A ⊆ Seq(X, r˜), there ˜ ˜ is X∞,r˜ such that A ⊆ X∞,r˜. ˜ Let X∞,r˜ be a maximal self-stable subset of Seq(X, r˜) and let ˜ ˜ dr˜ : X∞,r˜ × X∞,r˜ → R be defined by (3.1). Obviously, dr˜ is a symmet- ˜ ric non-negative function and dr˜(˜x, x˜) = 0 holds for every x˜ ∈ X∞,r˜. Moreover, the triangle inequality for d gives us the triangle inequality for dr˜,

dr˜(˜x, y˜) ≤ dr˜(˜x, z˜) + dr˜(˜z, y˜) ˜ ˜ whenever x˜, y˜, z˜ ∈ X∞,r˜. Hence, (X∞,r˜, dr˜) is a pseudometric space. Now we are ready to introduce the main object of our research. Definition 3.4. Let (X, d) be an unbounded metric space and let r˜ be a scaling sequence. The metric identifications of pseudometric spaces ˜ X (X∞,r˜, dr˜) will be denoted by (Ω∞,r˜, ρ) and called the asymptotically pretangent spaces to (X, d) with respect to r˜. A metric space (Y, ∆) is asymptotically pretangent to (X, d) if there X X are r˜ and Ω∞,r˜ such that (Y, ∆) = (Ω∞,r˜, ρ).

Let r˜ = (rn)n∈N be a scaling sequence. As usual, a subsequence

(bk)k∈N of r˜ is a sequence defined by bk = rnk , where n1 < n2 < ... is a strictly increasing sequence of indexes. It is clear that every subsequence of a scaling sequence is also a scaling sequence. 0 Let r˜ = (rnk )k∈N be a subsequence of a scaling sequence r˜. Then, 0 for every x˜ = (xn)n∈N ∈ Seq(X, r˜), we write x˜ := (xnk )k∈N. It is easy to see that we have {x˜0 :x ˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜)} ⊆ Seq(X, r˜0) and ˜ 0 ˜ (3.3) dr˜0 (˜x ) = dr˜(˜x) for every x˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜). Moreover, if sequences y˜, z˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜) are mutually stable with respect to r˜, then y˜0 and z˜0 are mutually stable with respect to r˜0 and

0 0 (3.4) dr˜(˜y, z˜) = dr˜0 (˜y , z˜ ) 14 VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY ˜ holds. Consequently, by Zorn’s lemma, for every X∞,r˜ ⊆ Seq(X, r˜), ˜ 0 there is X∞,r˜0 ⊆ Seq(X, r˜ ) such that 0 ˜ ˜ (3.5) {x˜ :x ˜ ∈ X∞,r˜} ⊆ X∞,r˜0 . ˜ ˜ Let us denote by ϕr˜0 the mapping from X∞,r˜ to X∞,r˜0 defined by 0 ˜ ϕr˜0 (˜x) =x ˜ for all x˜ ∈ X∞,r˜. It follows from (3.4) that, after corre- ˜ ˜ sponding metric identifications, the mapping ϕr˜0 : X∞,r˜ → X∞,r˜0 passes 0 X X to an isometric embedding em :Ω∞,r˜ → Ω∞,r˜0 such that the diagram

˜ ϕr˜0 ˜ X∞,r˜ −−−→ X∞,r˜0   π  0 (3.6) y yπ 0 X em X Ω∞,r˜ −−−→ Ω∞,r˜0 ˜ ˜ is commutative. Here, for all x˜ ∈ X∞,r˜ and t˜∈ X∞,r˜0 , ˜ π(˜x) := {y˜ ∈ X∞,r˜ : dr˜(˜x, y˜) = 0}, (3.7) 0 ˜ π (t˜) := {z˜ ∈ X∞,r˜0 : dr˜0 (t,˜ z˜) = 0}. In what follows, for every scaling sequence r˜, the set of all subse- quences of r˜ we will be denote by R˜ = R˜ (˜r). Definition 3.5. Let (X, d) be an unbounded metric space, r˜ be a scal- ˜ ing sequence, X∞,r˜ be a maximal self-stable subset of Seq(X, r˜) and let X ˜ X Ω∞,r˜ be the metric identification of X∞,r˜. The space Ω∞,r˜ is asymptot- ically tangent to (X, d) with respect to r˜ if, for every r˜0 ∈ R˜ , there is ˜ X X∞,r˜0 satisfying (3.5) such that, for the metric identification Ω∞,r˜0 of ˜ 0 X X X∞,r˜0 , the isometric embedding em :Ω∞,r˜ → Ω∞,r˜0 is an isometry. Remark 3.6. A set of reformulations of Definition 3.5 will be given in the next section of the paper (see Proposition 4.8). Now we only note 0 X X that em :Ω∞,r˜ → Ω∞,r˜0 is an isometry if and only if it is a surjection.

4. Elementary properties Let (X, d) be an unbounded metric space. It is clear that every bounded (xn)n∈N ⊂ X belongs to Seq(X, r˜) for every scaling sequence ˜ r˜. Let us consider now the set X∞ of all sequences (xn)n∈N ⊂ X satisfying the limit relation limn→∞ d(xn, p) = ∞, where p is a given point of X. Proposition 4.1. Let (X, d) be an unbounded metric space. Then the following statements hold. ON EQUIVALENCE OF UNBOUNDED METRIC SPACES AT INFINITY 15 ˜ (i) The intersection X∞ ∩Seq(X, r˜) is nonempty for every scaling sequence r.˜ ˜ (ii) For every x˜ ∈ X∞, there exists a scaling sequence r˜ such that ˜ x˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜) and dr˜(˜x) = 1.

Proof. (i) Let r˜ = (rn)n∈N be a scaling sequence and let p ∈ X. Let us 1/2 denote by B(p, rn ) the closed ball 1/2 (4.1) {x ∈ X : d(x, p) ≤ rn }. Write 1/2 (4.2) kn := sup{d(x, p): x ∈ B(p, rn )}, n = 1, 2,.... We can find x˜ = (xn)n∈N ⊂ X such that k (4.3) lim n = 1. n→∞ d(xn, p)

Since X is unbounded and limn→∞ rn = ∞, the equality limn→∞ kn = ˜ ∞ holds. Consequently, we have limn→∞ d(xn, p) = ∞, i.e., x˜ ∈ X∞. 1/2 It follows from (4.1) and (4.2) that kn ≤ rn holds for every n ∈ N. The last inequality and (4.3) imply d(x , p) lim n = 0. n→∞ rn ˜ Thus, x˜ belongs to X∞ ∩ Seq(X, r˜). ˜ (ii) Let x˜ = (xn)n∈N ∈ X∞ and let p ∈ X. Then we have limn→∞ d(xn, p) = ∞. Define a sequence r˜ = (rn)n∈N as: ( d(xn, p) if xn 6= p rn := 1 if xn = p. ˜ From x˜ ∈ X∞ it follows that limn→∞ rn = ∞. Hence, r˜ is a scaling ˜ sequence. It is clear that dr˜(˜x) = 1. Thus, Seq(X, r˜) contains x˜.  For every unbounded metric space (X, d) and every scaling sequence ˜ 0 r˜, we define the set X∞,r˜ of sequences z˜ = (zn)n∈N ⊂ X by the rule:

    ˜ 0 d(zn, p) (4.4) z˜ ∈ X∞,r˜ ⇔ lim = 0 , n→∞ rn where p is a point of X. ˜ 0 Remark 4.2. The set X∞,r˜ is invariant under replacing of p ∈ X by arbitrary point of X (cf. Remark 3.2). 16 VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY

In Proposition 4.3 below, we collect together some basic properties of ˜ 0 the set X∞,r˜. Similar results were formulated without proofs at [9,10]. Proposition 4.3. Let (X, d) be an unbounded metric space and let r˜ be a scaling sequence. Then the following statements hold. ˜ 0 ˜ 0 (i) We have X∞,r˜ ⊆ Seq(X, r˜) and x˜ ∈ X∞,r˜ for every bounded x˜ = (xn)n∈N ⊂ X. ˜ 0 ˜ (ii) The set X∞,r˜ ∩ X∞ is nonempty. ˜ 0 (iii) If we have z˜ ∈ X∞,r˜, y˜ = (yn)n∈N ⊂ X and dr˜(˜z, y˜) = 0, then ˜ 0 y˜ ∈ X∞,r˜. ˜ 0 (iv) If F is a self-stable subset of Seq(X, r˜), then X∞,r˜ ∪ F is also a self-stable subset of Seq(X, r˜). ˜ 0 (v) The set X∞,r˜ is self-stable. ˜ 0 ˜ (vi) The inclusion X∞,r˜ ⊆ X∞,r˜ holds for every maximal self-stable ˜ subset X∞,r˜ of Seq(X, r˜). ˜ 0 (vii) Let z˜ ∈ X∞,r˜ and x˜ = (xn)n∈N ⊂ X. Then x˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜) if and only if x˜ and z˜ are mutually stable. ˜ 0 (viii) For every x˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜) and every z˜ ∈ X∞,r˜ we have ˜ dr˜(˜x) = dr˜(˜x, z˜). ˜ 0 (ix) The set X∞,r˜ is a point of every asymptotically pretangent X space Ω∞,r˜. ˜ 0 ˜ 0 0 (x) The equality ϕr˜0 (X∞,r˜) = X∞,r˜0 holds for every r˜ , where ϕr˜0 is defined as in (3.6). Proof. In what follows, p will be denote a given point of X. ˜ 0 (i) It follows directly from the definitions of Seq(X, r˜) and X∞,r˜. (ii) This statement follows from the proof of statement (i) in Propo- sition 4.1. ˜ 0 (iii) Let z˜ ∈ X∞,r˜, y˜ = (yn)n∈N ⊂ X and dr˜(˜z, y˜) = 0 hold. To prove ˜ 0 y˜ ∈ X∞,r˜, we note that d(yn, p) ˜ 0 ≤ lim sup ≤ dr˜(˜z, y˜) + dr˜(˜z) = 0. n→∞ rn It implies the existence of the finite limit ˜ d(yn, p) dr˜(˜y) = lim n→∞ rn ˜ ˜ 0 and the equality dr˜(˜y) = 0. Thus, y˜ ∈ X∞,r˜ holds. ˜ (iv) Let F ⊆ Seq(X, r˜) be self-stable. It is clear that dr˜(˜y) exists for ˜ 0 ˜ 0 every y˜ ∈ F ∪ X∞,r˜. Hence F ∪ X∞,r˜ is self-stable if and only if z˜ and ON EQUIVALENCE OF UNBOUNDED METRIC SPACES AT INFINITY 17

˜ 0 x˜ are mutually stable for all x,˜ z˜ ∈ F ∪ X∞,r˜. If z˜, x˜ ∈ F , then z˜ and x˜ are mutually stable because F is self-stable. ˜ 0 Suppose x˜ ∈ F and z˜ ∈ X∞,r˜. The double inequality

d(xn, p) − d(zn, p) ≤ d(xn, zn) ≤ d(xn, p) + d(zn, p), the membership x˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜), and the equality d(z , p) lim n = 0 n→∞ rn imply the existence of dr˜(˜x, z˜). ˜ 0 ˜ 0 The case x,˜ z˜ ∈ X∞,r˜ is similar. Thus the set F ∪ X∞,r˜ is self-stable. (v) This follows from (iv) with F = ∅. ˜ ˜ 0 ˜ (vi) Using statement (iv) with F = X∞,r˜ we see that X∞,r˜ ∪ X∞,r˜ ˜ ˜ 0 is self-stable. Since X∞,r˜ is maximal self-stable, the equality X∞,r˜ ∪ ˜ ˜ ˜ 0 ˜ X∞,r˜ = X∞,r˜ holds. Thus, X∞,r˜ ⊆ X∞,r˜. ˜ 0 (vii) Let z˜ ∈ X∞,r˜ and x˜ = (xn)n∈N ⊂ X. Suppose x˜ and z˜ are mutually stable. Then, using the triangle inequality and (4.4), we obtain

d(xn, p) d(xn, p) (4.5) lim sup ≤ dr˜(˜x, z˜) ≤ lim inf . n→∞ rn n→∞ rn Hence, x˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜) holds. If x˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜), then, similarly to (4.5), we obtain

d(xn, zn) ˜ d(xn, zn) (4.6) lim sup ≤ dr˜(˜x) ≤ lim inf . n→∞ rn n→∞ rn Consequently, there is a finite limit d(x , z ) lim n n , n→∞ rn i.e., x˜ and z˜ are mutually stable. ˜ 0 ˜ (viii) Let x˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜) and z˜ ∈ X∞,r˜. Then the equality dr˜(˜x) = dr˜(˜x, z˜) follows from (4.6). (ix) It follows from (iii), (vi) and the definition of pretangent spaces.

(x) Let (nk)k∈N be a strictly increasing sequence of natural numbers, 0 ˜ 0 ˜ 0 r˜ := (rnk )k∈N, y˜ = (yk)k∈N ∈ X∞,r˜0 and let x˜ = (xn)n∈N ∈ X∞,r˜. Write ( yk if n = nk for some k ∈ N zn := xn otherwise. 0 ˜ 0 Then, for z˜ = (zn)n∈N, we have z˜ =y ˜ and z˜ ∈ X∞,r˜.  The following lemma is modification of Lemma 2.1 from [9]. 18 VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY

Lemma 4.4. Let (X, d) be an unbounded metric space, y˜ be a sequence ˜ of points of X, r˜ be a scaling sequence and let X∞,r˜ be a maximal self- stable subset of Seq(X, r˜). If y˜ and x˜ are mutually stable for every ˜ ˜ x˜ ∈ X∞,r˜, then y˜ ∈ X∞,r˜. ˜ Proof. Suppose that y˜ and x˜ are mutually stable for every x˜ ∈ X∞,r˜. ˜ 0 Let us consider an arbitrary z˜ ∈ X∞,r˜. By statement (vi) of Proposi- tion 4.3, we obtain ˜ (4.7) z˜ ∈ X∞,r˜. Since y˜ and z˜ are mutually stable by supposition, y˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜) holds by statement (vii) of that proposition. Using our supposition again, ˜ ˜ we obtain y˜ ∈ X∞,r˜, because X∞,r˜ is a maximal self-stable subset of Seq(X, r˜).  Lemma 4.5. Let (X, d) be an unbounded metric space, let r˜ be a scaling ˜ sequence and let x˜ = (xn)n∈N, y˜ = (yn)n∈N and t = (tn)n∈N be sequences of points of X. If x˜ and y˜ are mutually stable with respect to r˜, and dr˜(˜x, t˜) = 0, then y˜ and t˜ are mutually stable with respect to r˜.

Proof. It follows from (3.1), the equality dr˜(˜x, t˜) = 0 and the inequali- ties

d(yn, tn) dr˜(˜x, y˜) − dr˜(˜x, t˜) ≤ lim inf n→∞ rn d(yn, tn) ˜ ≤ lim sup ≤ dr˜(˜x, y˜) + dr˜(˜x, t).  n→∞ rn Lemma 4.6. Let (X, d) be an unbounded metric space, r˜ be a scaling ˜ sequence, let x˜ = (xn)n∈N ∈ Seq(X, r˜) and let t = (tn)n∈N ⊂ X. If x˜ and t˜ are mutually stable with respect to r˜ and the equality

(4.8) dr˜(˜x, t˜) = 0 holds, then we have (4.9) t˜∈ Seq(X, r˜). Proof. Suppose that x˜ and t˜ are mutually stable with respect to r˜ and ˜ (4.8) holds. Let X∞,r˜ be a maximal self-stable subset of Seq(X, r˜) ˜ such that x˜ ∈ X∞,r˜. Then, by Lemma 4.5, t˜ and y˜ are mutually stable ˜ for every y˜ ∈ X∞,r˜. By statement (vi) of Proposition 4.3, we have ˜ 0 ˜ ˜ the inclusion X∞,r˜ ⊆ X∞,r˜. Hence, t and z˜ are mutually stable with ˜ 0 respect to r˜ for every z˜ ∈ X∞,r˜. Now (4.9) follows from statement (vii) of Proposition 4.3.  ON EQUIVALENCE OF UNBOUNDED METRIC SPACES AT INFINITY 19

˜ 0 Remark 4.7. The set ν0 = ν0,r˜ := X∞,r˜ is a common distinguished point X of all pretangent spaces Ω∞,r˜ (with given scaling sequence r˜). This point can be informally described as follows: “The points of pretangent X space Ω∞,r˜ are infinitely removed from the points of initial space X, X but Ω∞,r˜ contains a unique point ν0,r˜ which is close to X as much as X possible.” Example 2.2 from [9] shows that a pretangent space Ω∞,r˜ X can be one-point, Ω∞,r˜ = {ν0}, if (X, d) is sparse at infinity. ˜ ˜ In the next proposition, we define the mappings ϕr˜0 : X∞,r˜ → X∞,r˜0 0 X X and em :Ω∞,r˜ → Ω∞,r˜0 as in (3.6). Proposition 4.8. Let (X, d) be an unbounded metric space, r˜ be a ˜ ˜ scaling sequence, R be the set of all subsequences of r˜ and let X∞,r˜ be a maximal self-stable subset of Seq(X, r˜). Let us consider a pretangent X ˜ space Ω∞,r˜ corresponding to X∞,r˜. Write ˜ 0 ˜ X∞,r˜ = {(xnk )k∈N :(xn)n∈N ∈ X∞,r˜} 0 ˜ for every r˜ = (rnk )k∈N ∈ R. Then the following statements are equiv- alent: X (i)Ω ∞,r˜ is tangent; ˜ 0 0 0 (ii) X∞,r˜ is maximal self-stable subset of Seq(X, r˜ ) for every r˜ ∈ R˜ ; 0 ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ 0 (iii) For every r˜ ∈ R and every X∞,r˜0 satisfying X∞,r˜0 ⊇ X∞,r˜, ˜ ˜ the mapping ϕr˜0 : X∞,r˜ → X∞,r˜0 is onto; 0 ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ 0 (iv) For every r˜ ∈ R there is X∞,r˜0 such that X∞,r˜0 ⊇ X∞,r˜ and ˜ ˜ the mapping ϕr˜0 : X∞,r˜ → X∞,r˜0 is onto.

X Proof. (i) ⇒ (ii). Suppose Ω∞,r˜ is tangent. Let (nk)k∈N ⊂ N be 0 ˜ 0 strictly increasing and let r˜ := (rnk )k∈N. Write X∞,r˜ for the maximal 0 ˜ 0 ˜ self-stable subset of Seq(X, r˜ ) satisfying X∞,r˜ ⊆ X∞,r˜0 . It suffices to show that ˜ 0 ˜ X∞,r˜ ⊇ X∞,r˜0 . ˜ This inclusion holds if and only if for every y˜ = (yk)k∈N ∈ X∞,r˜0 there ˜ ˜ exists t = (tn)n∈N ∈ X∞,r˜ such that

(4.10) yk = tnk X 0 X X for every k ∈ N. Since Ω∞,r˜ is tangent, em :Ω∞,r˜ → Ω∞,r˜0 is an ˜ isometry. Consequently, for every y˜ = (yk)k∈N ∈ X∞,r˜0 , there is x˜ = ˜ 0 0 (xn)n∈N ∈ X∞,r˜ such that π (˜y) = π(em (˜x)). This equality and the 20 VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY

0 0 commutativity of diagram (3.6) imply π (ϕr˜0 (˜x)) = π (˜y). By definition of the natural projection π0, we can rewrite the last equality as d(x , y ) (4.11) lim nk k = 0. k→∞ rnk ˜ Let us define the sequence t = (tn)n∈N by the rule: ( yn if n ∈ {n1, n2, n3,...} (4.12) tn := xn otherwise. Then (4.10) evidently holds. From (4.11) and (4.12) it follows that t˜∈ ˜ d(xn,tn) X∞ and lim = 0. The last equality, Lemma 4.4 and Lemma 4.5 n→∞ rn ˜ imply t˜∈ X∞,r˜. (ii) ⇒ (iii). Let (ii) hold. Then, for every r˜0 ∈ R˜ , the inclusion ˜ ˜ 0 ˜ ˜ 0 X∞,r˜0 ⊇ X∞,r˜ and the maximality of X∞,r˜0 and X∞,r˜ imply the equality ˜ 0 ˜ ˜ ˜ X∞,r˜ = X∞,r˜0 and, consequently, ϕr˜0 : X∞,r˜ → X∞,r˜0 is onto. (iii) ⇒ (iv). This implication is trivial. 0 ˜ ˜ ˜ 0 ˜ (iv) ⇒ (i). Let (iv) hold, r˜ ∈ R, X∞,r˜0 ⊇ X∞,r˜ and let ϕr˜0 : X∞,r˜ → ˜ X∞,r˜0 be a surjection. By (3.6), ϕr˜0 is a distance preserving mapping ˜ ˜ of pseudometric spaces (X∞,r˜, dr˜) and (X∞,r˜0 , dr˜0 ). It follows directly from Definition 2.12 that every distance preserving surjection is pseu- doisometry. Thus, ϕr˜0 is a pseudoisometry. Since diagram (3.6) is com- 0 X X mutative and ϕr˜0 is a pseudoisometry, the mapping em :Ω∞,r˜ → Ω∞,r˜0 X is an isometry by Corollary 2.20. Thus, Ω∞,r˜ is asymptotically tangent to (X, d).  Remark 4.9. Proposition 4.8 is a modification of the corresponding statements from [1,2].

5. Gluing pretangent spaces

Let (X, d) be an unbounded metric space and let r˜ = (rn)n∈N be a scaling sequence. Write d(x , y ) (5.1) dr˜(˜x, y˜) = lim sup n n n→∞ rn for every pair x˜, y˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜). From (3.2) it follows that r˜ ˜ ˜ d (˜x, y˜) 6 dr˜(˜x) + dr˜(˜y). Hence, dr˜(˜x, y˜) is finite for all x˜, y˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜). It is also clear that dr˜(˜x, x˜) = 0 holds for every x˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜). Now using the inequality d(x , z ) d(x , y ) d(y , z ) (5.2) lim sup n n ≤ lim sup n n + lim sup n n , n→∞ rn n→∞ rn n→∞ rn ON EQUIVALENCE OF UNBOUNDED METRIC SPACES AT INFINITY 21 we see that the mapping r˜ 2 d : Seq (X, r˜) → R is a pseudometric on Seq(X, r˜). Conjecture 5.1. The pseudometric space (Seq(X, r˜), dr˜) is complete for every unbounded metric space and every scaling sequence r˜.

Proposition 5.2. Let (X, d) be an unbounded metric space, (nk)k∈N ⊂ N be a strictly increasing sequence, r˜ = (rn)n∈N be a scaling sequence 0 and r˜ = (rnk )k∈N be the corresponding subsequence of r˜. Then there is a unique mapping and ϕr˜0 : Seq(X, r˜) → Seq(X, r˜0) such that the following diagram ˜ ϕr˜0 ˜ X∞,r˜ X∞,r˜0

(5.3) Inr˜ Inr˜0 ϕr˜0 Seq(X, r˜) Seq(X, r˜0) ˜ is commutative for every maximal self-stable X∞,r˜ and every maximal ˜ self-stable X∞,r˜0 satisfying (3.5), where Inr˜ and Inr˜0 are the corre- sponding inclusion maps,

Inr˜(˜x) =x ˜ and Inr˜0 (˜y) =y ˜ ˜ ˜ for all x˜ ∈ X∞,r˜, y˜ ∈ X∞,r˜0 , and ϕr˜0 is defined as in (3.6). r˜0 0 r˜0 Proof. If we define ϕ : Seq(X, r˜) → Seq(X, r˜ ) as ϕ (˜x) = (xnk )k∈N for every x˜ = (xn)n∈N ∈ Seq(X, r˜), then diagram (5.3) is evidently ˜ ˜ commutative for all X∞,r˜ and X∞,r˜0 satisfying (3.5). Since the set of all ˜ r˜0 X∞,r˜ is a cover of Seq(X, r˜), the desirable mapping ϕ is unique.  X Let us denote by (Ω∞,r˜, ρ) the metric identification of the pseudo- metric space (Seq(X, r˜), dr˜). It is easy to prove that the equivalence x˜ and y˜ are mutually stable with respect (dr˜(˜x, y˜) = 0) ⇔ to r˜ and dr˜(˜x, y˜) = 0 is valid for all x˜, y˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜). Hence, from Lemma 4.5 it follows that X X each asymptotically pretangent Ω∞,r˜ is a subset of Ω∞,r˜, X X (5.4) Ω∞,r˜ ⊆ Ω∞,r˜. X ˜ Moreover, if Ω∞,r˜ is the metric identification of some X∞,r˜, then, for ˜ all x˜, y˜ ∈ X∞,r˜, we have

d(xn, yn) d(xn, yn) r˜ dr˜(˜x, y˜) = lim = lim sup = d (˜x, y˜) n→∞ rn n→∞ rn 22 VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY ˜ because the set X∞,r˜ is a self-stable subset of Seq(X, r˜). Consequently, X for every asymptotically pretangent space (Ω∞,r˜, ρ), the metric ρ is a X restriction of the metric ρ on the set Ω∞,r˜,

ρ = ρ| X X . Ω∞,r˜×Ω∞,r˜ Since, for every x˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜), the one-point set {x˜} is a self-stable ˜ subset of Seq(X, r˜) and, consequently, belongs to some X∞,r˜, the set X X of all Ω∞,r˜ is a cover of the metric space (Ω∞,r˜, ρ). Moving on to the metric identifications of the pseudometric spaces (Seq(X, r˜), dr˜) and (Seq(X, r˜0), dr˜0 ), we obtain the unique mapping 0 X X Em : Ω∞,r˜ → Ω∞,r˜0 with the commutative diagram π X Seq(X, r˜) Ω∞,r˜

(5.5) ϕr˜0 Em0,

0 0 π X Seq(X, r˜ ) Ω∞,r˜0 where ϕr˜0 is defined as in (5.3), and π(˜x) := {y˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜): dr˜(˜x, y˜) = 0}, π0(˜z) := {t˜∈ Seq(X, r˜0): dr˜0 (t,˜ z˜) = 0} for every x˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜) and every z˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜0) (cf. (3.7)). Similarly to diagram (5.3), we obtain the commutative diagrams ˜ π X X∞,r˜ Ω∞,r˜

(5.6) Inr˜ Em

π X Seq(X, r˜) Ω∞,r˜ and 0 ˜ π X X∞,r˜0 Ω∞,r˜0

(5.7) 0 Inr˜0 Em

0 0 π X Seq(X, r˜ ) Ω∞,r˜0 for the identical embeddings

X X 0 X X Em:Ω∞,r˜ → Ω∞,r˜ and Em :Ω∞,r˜0 → Ω∞,r˜0 . ON EQUIVALENCE OF UNBOUNDED METRIC SPACES AT INFINITY 23

X Since the set of all pretangent spaces Ω∞,r˜ is a cover of the metric X 0 X X space (Ω∞,r˜, ρ), the mapping Em : Ω∞,r˜ → Ω∞,r˜0 (see (5.5)) can also be characterized as a unique mapping for which the diagram 0 X em X Ω∞,r˜ Ω∞,r˜0

(5.8) Em Em0

0 X Em X Ω∞,r˜ Ω∞,r˜0 X 0 X is commutative for all pretangent spaces Ω∞,r˜, where em :Ω∞,r˜ → X Ω∞,r˜0 is defined as in (3.6). It is interesting to note that in diagram (5.8) the mappings Em, Em0 and em0 are isometric embeddings, but Em0 is a Lipschitz mapping with constant 1, i.e., the inequality ρ0(Em0(α), Em0(β)) ≤ ρ(α, β) X holds for all α, β ∈ (Ω∞,r˜0 , ρ). Moreover, unlike Proposition 4.8, 0 X X Em : Ω∞,r˜ → Ω∞,r˜0 may be neither injective nor surjective even if ϕr˜0 : Seq(X, r˜) → Seq(X, r˜0) (see (5.5)) is onto for every r˜0 ∈ R˜ . For more detailed description of situation, we shall use the concept of porosity at infinity.

Definition 5.3. Let E ⊆ R+. The porosity of E at infinity is the quantity l(∞, h, E) (5.9) p+(E, ∞) = lim sup , h→∞ h where l(∞, h, E) is the length of the longest interval in the set [0, h]\E. The set E is porous at infinity if p+(E, ∞) > 0, and, respectively, E is nonporous at infinity if p+(E, ∞) = 0. Let (X, d) be a metric space, and let p ∈ X. Write (5.10) Sp(X) = {d(x, p): x ∈ X}. Theorem 5.4. Let (X, d) be an unbounded metric space and let p ∈ X. Then the following statements are equivalent: (i) The set Sp(X) is nonporous at infinity, p+(Sp(X), ∞) = 0. (ii) The mapping ϕr˜0 : Seq(X, r˜) → Seq(X, r˜0) is a surjection for every scaling sequence r˜ and every r˜0 ∈ R˜ (˜r). (iii) The equality X X (5.11) Sp(Ω∞,r˜1 ) = Sp(Ω∞,r˜2 ) 24 VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY

holds for any two scaling sequences r˜1 and r˜2, where Sp(ΩX ) := {ρ (ν, ν ): ν ∈ ΩX }, ∞,r˜i i 0,r˜i ∞,r˜i (ΩX , ρ ) is the metric identification of the pseudometric ∞,r˜i i r˜i space (Seq(X, r˜i), d ) and ν = X˜ 0 = {x˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜ ): d˜ (˜x) = 0} 0,r˜i ∞,r˜i i r˜i is the distinguished point of ΩX , i = 1, 2. ∞,r˜i Proof. (i) ⇒ (ii). Suppose that Sp(X) is nonporous at infinity, + p (Sp(X), ∞) = 0. Let r˜ = (rn)n∈N be an arbitrary scaling sequence, 0 ˜ 0 r˜ = (rnk )k∈N ∈ R(˜r) and let x˜ = (xk)k∈N ∈ Seq(X, r˜ ). We must find r˜0 y˜ = (yn)n∈N ∈ Seq(X, r˜) such that ϕ (˜y) =x ˜, i.e.,

(5.12) (ynk )k∈N = (xk)k∈N.

If the sequence x˜ = (xk)k∈N belongs to the set ˜ 0 0 ˜ X∞,r˜0 = {x˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜ ): dr˜0 (˜x) = 0}, then the existence of a desired y˜ follows from statement (x) of Propo- sition 4.3. ˜ Let us consider the case dr˜0 (˜x) > 0. To simplify notation, denote ˜ (5.13) t := dr˜0 (˜x). Using (5.9), we can rewrite the equality p+(Sp(X), ∞) = 0 in the form l(∞, h, Sp(X)) lim = 0. h→∞ h Since t > 0, the last equality implies l(∞, tr , Sp(X)) l(∞, tr , Sp(X)) (5.14) 0 = lim n = lim n . n→∞ trn n→∞ rn

Let us consider a sequence (sm)m∈N ⊆ (0, 1) such that limm→∞ sm = 1 and sm < sm+1 for every m ∈ N. It follows from the definition of l(∞, h, E),(5.14) and the definition of (sm)m∈N that there is a sequence

j1 < j2 < . . . < jk < . . . of positive integer numbers such that

(s1trn, trn) ∩ Sp(X) 6= ∅ for all n > j1, (s2trn, trn) ∩ Sp(X) 6= ∅ for all n > j2,...,

(sktrn, trn) ∩ Sp(X) 6= ∅ ON EQUIVALENCE OF UNBOUNDED METRIC SPACES AT INFINITY 25 for all n > jk nd so on. Hence, we can find a sequence z˜ = (zn)n∈N ⊆ X satisfying the double inequality

d(p, zn) (5.15) skt 6 6 t rn whenever n > jk. From (5.15) it follows that

d(p, zn) d(p, zn) (5.16) skt 6 lim inf 6 lim sup 6 t. n→∞ rn n→∞ rn

Now letting k → ∞ and using the limit relation limk→∞ sk = 1, we obtain from (5.16) the equality d(p, z ) (5.17) t = lim n . n→∞ rn

Let us define a sequence y˜ = (yn)n∈N by the rule ( xn if n ∈ {n1, . . . , nk,...}, (5.18) yn = zn otherwise. Limit relations (5.13) and (5.17) imply d(y , p) lim n = t. n→∞ rn Hence, y˜ belongs to Seq(X, r˜). Now (5.12) follows from (5.18).

(ii) ⇒ (iii). Suppose statement (ii) holds. Let r˜1 = (r1,n)n∈N and r˜2 = (r2,n)n∈N be two arbitrary scaling sequences and let r˜ = (rm)m∈N be a sequence defined by the rule ( r1,n if m is odd and m = 2n − 1, rm = r2,n if m is even and m = 2n, i.e.,

(r1, r2, r3, r4, r5,...) = (r1,1, r2,1, r1,2, r2,2, r1,3,...).

Then r˜1 and r˜2 are subsequences of r˜. Moreover, the equalities

lim r1,n = lim r2,n = ∞ n→∞ n→∞ imply the equality limm→∞ rm = ∞. Thus, r˜ also is a scaling sequence. X To prove equality (5.11), let us consider an arbitrary ν1 ∈ Ω∞,r˜1 . 1 Then there is x˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜1) such that 1 1 π (˜x ) = ν1, 26 VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY

1 X where π : Seq(X, r˜1) → Ω∞,r˜1 is the natural projection of the pseudo- r˜1 X metric space (Seq(X, r˜1), d ) on its metric identification (Ω∞,r˜1 , ρ1). 0 Using statement (ii) with r˜ =r ˜1, we can find x˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜) such that ϕr˜1 (˜x) =x ˜1. ˜ 0 Let z˜ be an arbitrary point of X∞,r˜1 . Then the equality ˜ ˜ 1 dr˜(˜x) = dr˜1 (˜x ) holds by (3.3) and, in addition, we have ˜ 1 1 dr˜1 (˜x ) = dr˜1 (˜x , z˜) by statement (x) from Proposition 4.3. Since x˜1 and z˜ are mutually stable with respect to r˜1, we also have

1 r˜1 1 dr˜1 (˜x , z˜) = d (˜x , z˜).

r˜1 Example 2.14 with (Y, ρ) = (Seq(X, r˜1), d ) implies ˜ 1 (5.19) dr˜(˜x) = dr˜1 (˜x , z˜) = ρ1(ν1, ν0,r˜1 ). 2 Let us define now x˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜2) as x˜2 = ϕr˜2 (˜x), where x˜ is the same as in (5.19), and write 2 2 ν2 := π (˜x ). Then, similarly to (5.19), we obtain ˜ dr˜(˜x) = ρ2(ν2, ν0,r˜1 ). X X Thus, for every ν1 ∈ Ω∞,r˜1 , we have ρ1(ν1, ν0,r˜1 ) ∈ Sp(Ω∞,r˜2 ), that implies X X Sp(Ω∞,r˜1 ) ⊆ Sp(Ω∞,r˜2 ). The converse inclusion X X Sp(Ω∞,r˜2 ) ⊆ Sp(Ω∞,r˜1 ) can be proved similarly. Equality (5.11) follows. (iii) ⇒ (i). Let statement (iii) hold. We need prove the equality p+(Sp(X), ∞) = 0. Suppose contrary that t := p+(Sp(X), ∞) > 0. Then there exists a sequence of open intervals

(a1, b1),..., (an, bn),... ON EQUIVALENCE OF UNBOUNDED METRIC SPACES AT INFINITY 27 such that:

(5.20) lim bn = ∞; n→∞ 0 < a1 < b1 < a2 < b2 < . . . < an < bn < . . . ;

(5.21) (an, bn) ∩ Sp(X) = ∅ for every n ∈ N; and b − a (5.22) lim n n = p+(Sp(X), ∞) = t > 0. n→∞ bn

From (5.20) it follows that we may define a scaling sequence r˜1 = (r1,n)n∈N by r1,n = bn, n ∈ N. Let z˜ = (zn)n∈N belong to Seq(X, r˜1).

Then, using (5.21), we see that there is a subsequence (znk )k∈N of z˜ such that either

(5.23) d(p, znk ) 6 ank for all k ∈ N, or

(5.24) d(p, znk ) > bnk for all k ∈ N. In the first case, using (5.22) and (5.23), we obtain d(z , p) d(z , p) a ˜ n nk n dr˜1 (˜z) = lim = lim lim = 1 − t, n→∞ k→∞ 6 n→∞ bn bnk bn because b − a a t = lim n n = 1 − lim n . n→∞ bn n→∞ bn Analogously, if we have (5.24) for all k ∈ N, then the inequality ˜ dr˜1 (˜z) > 1 holds. Thus, for every z˜ ∈ Seq(X, r˜1), we have ˜ dr˜1 (˜z) ∈/ (1 − t, 1), that implies X (5.25) Sp(Ω∞,r˜1 ) ∩ (1 − t, 1) = ∅. Let c be a point of the open interval (1 − t, 1). By statement (ii) of Proposition 4.1, there is a scaling sequence r˜ = (rn)n∈N and x˜ ∈ ˜ Seq(X, r˜) such that dr˜(˜x) = 1. Then, for the scaling sequence r˜2 = (r2,n)n∈N defined by 1 r = r , n ∈ , 2,n c n N we have the equality ˜ dr˜2 (˜x) = c. 28 VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY

X Thus, c belongs to Sp(Ω∞,r˜2 )∩(1−t, 1). The last statement and (5.25) imply X X Sp(Ω∞,r˜1 ) 6= Sp(Ω∞,r˜2 ) contrary to statement (iii).  Remark 5.5. It should be noted here that the porosity of the set Sp(X) at infinity does not depend on the choice of point p in (5.10), although we may have {d(x, a): x ∈ X}= 6 {d(x, b): x ∈ X} for different a, b ∈ X. The standard definition of porosity at a finite point can be found in [26]. See [2,6,7, 12] for some applications of the porosity to studies of the infinitesimal properties of metric spaces.

6. Asymptotically pretangent spaces to real line and half-line ˜ In the first proposition we will describe the structure of X∞,r˜ for X = R or X = R+.

Proposition 6.1. Let (X, d) be a metric space with X = R or X = R+ endowed with the usual metric d(x, y) = |x − y|. Then the following statements hold for every scaling sequence r˜, every maximal self-stable ˜ ˜ ˜ X∞,r˜ and each b = (bn)n∈N ∈ X∞,r˜ satisfying ˜ ˜ |bn| (6.1) dr˜(b) = lim > 0. n→∞ rn (i) For every y˜ = (y ) ∈ X˜ there is a finite limit lim yn n n∈N ∞,r˜ n→∞ bn ˜ and, conversely, if, for y˜ ∈ X∞, this limit exists and is finite, ˜ then y˜ ∈ X∞,r˜. ˜ (ii) For every two x˜ = (xn)n∈N and y˜ = (yn)n∈N from X∞,r˜ the equality dr˜(˜x, y˜) = 0 holds if and only if x y lim n = lim n . n→∞ bn n→∞ bn X ˜ (iii) The pretangent space Ω∞,r˜ corresponding to X∞,r˜ is isometric to (X, d) and tangent. Proof. Statements (i)–(iii) were proved in Proposition 2.1 [11] for the case when X = R+. Let us consider the case X = R. ˜ Let r˜ be a scaling sequence, X∞,r˜ be a maximal self-stable subset of ˜ ˜ Seq(X, r˜) and let b ∈ X∞,r˜ satisfy (6.1). ON EQUIVALENCE OF UNBOUNDED METRIC SPACES AT INFINITY 29 ˜ (i). If y˜ = (yn)n∈N ∈ X∞,r˜, then there are the finite limits ˜ |yn| ˜ |yn − bn| dr˜(˜y) = lim and dr˜(b, y˜) = lim . n→∞ rn n→∞ rn ˜ For the case dr˜(˜y) = 0 we obtain d˜ (˜y) |y | y 0 = r˜ = lim n = lim n ˜ ˜ n→∞ n→∞ dr˜(b) |bn| bn ˜ ˜ ˜ because dr˜(b) 6= 0. Suppose dr˜(˜y) 6= 0, then d˜ (˜y) |y | (6.2) 0 < r˜ = lim n < ∞. ˜ ˜ n→∞ dr˜(b) |bn| Write t = |t| sign(t) for every t ∈ R, where  1 if t > 0  sign(t) = 0 if t = 0 −1 if t < 0. It follows from (6.2), that the limit lim yn exists if and only if there n→∞ bn is lim sign(yn) . If the last limit does not exist, then there are two n→∞ sign(bn) infinite sequences n˜ = (nk)k∈N and m˜ = (mk)k∈N of natural numbers such that

sign(ynk ) = sign(bnk ) and sign(ymk ) = − sign(bmk ) for all k ∈ N. Consequently, we obtain

|y − b | |y | − |b | ˜ nk nk nk nk ˜ ˜ ˜ dr˜(˜y, b) = lim = lim = dr˜(˜y) − dr˜(b) k→∞ k→∞ rnk rnk and, similarly, |y − b | ˜ mk mk ˜ ˜ ˜ dr˜(˜y, b) = lim = dr˜(˜y) + dr˜(b). k→∞ rmk Thus we have the equality ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ dr˜(˜y) + dr˜(b) = dr˜(˜y) − dr˜(b) which implies ˜ ˜ ˜ min{dr˜(˜y), dr˜(b)} = 0, ˜ contrary to (6.2). It is shown that for every y˜ ∈ X∞,r˜ there is a finite limit lim yn . n→∞ bn ˜ Conversely, let y˜ ∈ X∞ and y (6.3) lim n = c n→∞ bn 30 VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY ˜ ˜ for some c ∈ R. The last equality and the inequality dr˜(b) > 0 imply that there is a finite limit ˜ |yn| dr˜(˜y) = lim . n→∞ rn Thus we must show that for every x˜ ∈ X˜ there is lim |yn−xn| , i.e., ∞,r˜ n→∞ rn ˜ x˜ and y˜ are mutually stable w.r.t. r˜. It is easy to do. Since x˜ ∈ X∞,r˜, we have a finite limit x (6.4) lim n := k. n→∞ bn Hence

|yn − xn| |bn| xn yn ˜ ˜ (6.5) lim = lim − = dr˜(b)|c − k|, n→∞ |rn| n→∞ rn bn bn where the constants c, k are defined by (6.3) and (6.4), respectively. (ii). Statement (ii) follows from (6.5). ∗ ∗ (iii). Statement (i) implies that the sequence r˜ = (rn)n∈N with ∗ rn = rn sign(bn), n ∈ N, ˜ ∗ ˜ belongs to X∞,r˜. Considering r˜ instead of b in (6.3) and (6.4), we ˜ obtain the mapping f : X∞,r˜ → R with xn ˜ f(˜x) = lim ∗ , x˜ = (xn)n∈N ∈ X∞,r˜. n→∞ rn X It is easy to see that there is a unique mapping ψ :Ω∞,r˜ → R such that the diagram ˜ π X X∞,r˜ Ω∞,r˜

(6.6) ψ f

R is commutative, where π is the natural projection (see (3.6)). Since, ˜ ∗ dr˜(˜r ) = 1,(6.5) implies that ψ is an isometry. It remains to prove X that Ω∞,r˜ is tangent. Let n˜ = (nk)k∈N be a strictly increasing sequence of positive integer 0 numbers and let r˜ = (rnk )k∈N be the corresponding subsequence of the ˜ scaling sequence r˜. If X∞,r˜0 is a maximal self-stable set such that ˜ 0 ˜ X∞,r˜0 ⊇ {x˜ :x ˜ ∈ X∞,r˜}, ON EQUIVALENCE OF UNBOUNDED METRIC SPACES AT INFINITY 31 ˜ then, by statement (i), for every x˜ = (xk)k∈N ∈ X∞,r˜0 there is a finite limit x lim k := s. k→∞ rnk sign(bnk ) ˜ Define y˜ = (yn)n∈N ∈ X∞ by the rule: ( xk if there is nk such that nk = n yn := rn sign(bn) otherwise.

It is clear that (ynk )k∈N = (xk)k∈N. A simple calculation shows that y lim n = s. n→∞ rn sign(bn) ˜ By statement (i), y˜ belongs to X∞,r˜. Using Proposition 4.8 we see that X Ω∞,r˜ is tangent.  Statement (i) of Proposition 6.1 implies the following.

Corollary 6.2. Let (X, d) be the metric space with X = R+ endowed with the usual metric d(x, y) = |x − y|. Then, for every scaling se- quence r˜, the set Seq(X, r˜) is self-stable and, consequently, (X, d) has the unique pretangent space at infinity with respect to every r˜. The following lemma is a reformulation of Theorem 3.1 from [10]. Lemma 6.3. Let (X, d) be an unbounded metric space. Then all pre- X tangent spaces Ω∞,r˜ are complete. The next lemma is a modification of Lemma 2.2 from [15].

Lemma 6.4. Let Y1 and Y2 be isometric subspaces of the real line R endowed with the usual metric. Then R\Y1 and R\Y2 also are isometric as subspaces of R.

Proof. The conclusion of the lemma is trivially valid if Y1 is an one- point set. Suppose that |Y1| > 2. Let f : Y1 → Y2 be an isometry of Y1 and Y2. It suffices to show that there is a self-isometry Ψ: R → R such that f is the restriction Ψ|A of Ψ on the set A,

(6.7) f = Ψ|A.

Let a and b be different points of Y1. Using shifts and reflections of the real line R, we can find a self-isometry Ψ2 : R → R such that

(6.8) a = Ψ2(f(a)) and b = Ψ2(f(b)).

f Ψ2|Y2 Then the function Y1 −→ Y2 −−−→ R is an isometric embedding of Y1 in

R, where Ψ2|Y2 is the restriction of Ψ2 on the set Y2. Let us denote the 32 VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY last embedding by ϕ. If t is an arbitrary point of Y1, then, using (6.8), we obtain (6.9) |a − t| = |ϕ(a) − ϕ(t)| = |a − ϕ(t)| and (6.10) |b − t| = |ϕ(b) − ϕ(t)| = |b − ϕ(t)|. Since the intersection of any two different “spheres” in R is either empty or contains exactly one point, (6.9) and (6.10) imply ϕ(t) = t. Thus, ϕ is the restriction of the identical mapping Id: R → R on the set Y1. −1 It implies equality (6.7) with Ψ = Ψ2 .  The following theorem is one of the main results of the paper.

Theorem 6.5. Let (X, d) be isometric to the real line R with the usual metric and let Y be unbounded subspace of (X, d). Then the following conditions are equivalent:

(i) Y is isometric to R or R+; (ii) For every scaling sequence r˜ = (rn)n∈N, every pretangent space Y Ω∞,r˜ is isometric to Y . Proof. Statement (iii) of Proposition 6.1 implies the validity of the implication (i) ⇒ (ii). Let us prove the validity of (ii) ⇒ (i). Suppose that condition (ii) holds. Let r˜ = (rn)n∈N be a fixed scaling sequence, Y∞,r˜ be a maximal Y self-stable subset of Sec(Y, r˜) and let Ω∞,r˜ be the metric identification of Y∞,r˜. For arbitrary k > 0, we denote by kr˜ the sequence (krn)n∈N,

(6.11) kr˜ := (krn)n∈N. Considering kr˜ as a new scaling sequence and using (6.11) it is easy to see that: • The equality Seq(Y, r˜) = Seq(Y, kr˜) holds; • The equivalence

(˜x and y˜ are mutually stable w.r.t r˜) ⇔ (˜x and y˜ are mutually stable w.r.t kr˜) is valid for all x˜, y˜ ∈ Seq(Y, r˜).

Hence, Y∞,r˜ is also a maximal subset of Seq(Y, kr˜). Therefore, we may re-designate Y∞,r˜ as Y∞,kr˜. It is also follows from (6.11) that (6.12) (˜x =r˜ y˜) ⇔ (˜x =kr˜ y˜) is valid for all x˜, y˜ ∈ Seq(Y, r˜). ON EQUIVALENCE OF UNBOUNDED METRIC SPACES AT INFINITY 33

Y Y Now Y∞,r˜ = Y∞,kr˜ and (6.12) imply the equality Ω∞,r˜ = Ω∞,kr˜. It Y Y follows from (ii) that (Ω∞,r˜, ρ) and (Ω∞,kr˜, ρk) are isometric, where

ρ(α, β) = dr˜(˜x, y˜) Y Y for x˜ ∈ α ∈ Ω∞,r˜, y˜ ∈ β ∈ Ω∞,r˜ and, analogously,

ρk(γ, δ) = dkr˜(˜u, v˜) Y Y for u˜ ∈ γ ∈ Ω∞,kr˜, v˜ ∈ δ ∈ Ω∞,kr˜ (see (2.4)). Moreover, using (3.1), (2.4) and (6.11), we see that 1 (6.13) ρ(α, β) = ρ (α, β) k k Y holds for all α, β ∈ Ω∞,r˜. Y By condition (ii), there exist isometric embeddings Φ:Ω∞,r˜ → R Y Y Y and Φk :Ω∞,kr˜ → R such that Φ(Ω∞,r˜) and Φk(Ω∞,kr˜) are isometric Y subspaces of R. Write A := {Φ(α): α ∈ Ω∞,r˜}. Then (6.13) implies Y −1 −1 Φk(Ω∞,kr˜) = k A = {k t: t ∈ A}. Consequently, the metric spaces R \ A and R \ k−1A are also isometric for every k > 0 by Lemma 6.4. Let us now prove that condition (i) is satisfied. Using the above introduced designations, we can rewrite this condition as: Either A is isometric to R or A is isometric to R+. First of all, we note that if R \ A is empty, then A = R holds. Let R \ A be nonempty. Let us consider the case when R \ A is connected and unbounded. By Lemma 6.3, R \ A is open. Consequently, we have (6.14) R \ A = (−∞, ∞), or there is s ∈ R such that (6.15) R \ A = (−∞, s) or R \ A = (s, ∞). Equality (6.14) implies A = ∅, contrary to the definition of pretan- gent metric spaces (see Remark 4.7). Hence, (6.15) holds. Passing in formula (6.15) from R \ A to A, we obtain A = [s, ∞) or A = (−∞, s], that implies the isometricity of A and R+. Thus, if (i) does not hold, then either R \ A is bounded or R \ A is unbounded and not connected. We claim that in both cases at least one of the connected components of R \ A is bounded. The last claim is trivially valid if R \ A is bounded. Let R \ A be un- bounded and not connected. Suppose that every connected component 34 VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY of R\A is unbounded. Since every two different connected components are disjoint and each of them can be represented as (−∞, c) or (c, ∞) for some c ∈ R, the set R\A contains exactly two components (−∞, c1) and (c2, ∞) such that c1 6 c2. Hence, the equality A = [c1, c2] holds, that is impossible because A, by condition (ii), is isometric to the un- bounded subspace Y of the space (X, d). The existence of bounded connected component of R \ A follows. To complete the proof it suffices to show that (ii) is false whenever the set R \ A contains a bounded connected component. It is easy to show. Indeed, the set Com(R \ A) of all connected components is at most countable and the cardinality of (0, ∞) is uncountably infinite. Consequently, if an open interval (a, b), −∞ < a < b < ∞, belongs to Com(R \ A), then there is k1 ∈ (0, ∞) such that −1 (6.16) k1 |b − a|= 6 |c − d| for every bounded connected component (c, d) of R \ A. By condi- −1 −1 tion (ii), A and k1 A are isometric. It implies that R \ A and R \ k1 A −1 −1
are isometric by Lemma 6.4. The open interval k1 a, k1 b is a con- −1 nected component of R \ k1 A. Hence, the isometricity of R \ A and −1 R\k1 A implies the existence of an open interval (c, d) such that (c, d) is a connected component of R \ A and the equality −1 −1 k1 a − k1 b = |c − d| holds. The last equality contradicts (6.16). The proof is completed. 

7. Asymptotically equivalent subspaces and asymptotically isometric spaces

Let (X, d) be a metric space, r˜ = (rn)n∈N be a scaling sequence and let Y , Z be unbounded metric subspaces of (X, d). Definition 7.1. Y and Z are asymptotically equivalent with respect to r˜ if there are mappings Φ: Seq(Y, r˜) → Seq(Z, r˜) and Ψ: Seq(Z, r˜) → Seq(Y, r˜) such that (7.1) dr˜(˜y, Φ(˜y)) = dr˜(˜z, Ψ(˜z)) = 0 for every y˜ ∈ Seq(Y, r˜) and every z˜ ∈ Seq(Z, r˜), where dr˜ is a pseudo- metric on Seq(X, r˜) defined by (5.1). Remark 7.2. It is easy to see that Y and Z are asymptotically equiv- 1 alent with respect to r˜ if and only if, for all (yn)n∈N ∈ Seq(Y, r˜) and 1 2 2 (zn)n∈N ∈ Seq(Z, r˜), there exist (yn)n∈N ∈ Seq(Y, r˜) and (zn)n∈N ∈ ON EQUIVALENCE OF UNBOUNDED METRIC SPACES AT INFINITY 35

Seq(Z, r˜) satisfying the limit relations d(y1, z2) d(y2, z1) lim n n = lim n n = 0. n→∞ rn n→∞ rn The first our goal is to show that the mappings Φ and Ψ satisfying (7.1) are pseudoisometries in the sense of Definition 2.12. The following lemma shows that these mappings are distance preserving. Lemma 7.3. Let (X, d) be a metric space, r˜ be a scaling sequence, Y , Z be unbounded subspaces of (X, d) and let Φ: Seq(Y, r˜) → Seq(Z, r˜) satisfy (7.2) dr˜(˜y, Φ(˜y)) = 0 for all y˜ ∈ Seq(Y, r˜). Then the equality r˜ r˜ (7.3) d (Φ(˜y1), Φ(˜y2)) = d (˜y1, y˜2) holds for all y˜1, y˜2 ∈ Seq(Y, r˜).

Proof. Let y˜1, y˜2 ∈ Seq(Y, r˜). Then, using the triangle inequality and (7.2), we obtain r˜ r˜ r˜ r˜ d (Φ(˜y1), Φ(˜y2)) − d (˜y1, y˜2) 6 d (˜y1, Φ(˜y1)) + d (˜y2, Φ(˜y2)) = 0. Equality (7.3) follows.  Lemma 7.4. Let (X, d) be a metric space, r˜ be a scaling sequence, let Y and Z be unbounded subspaces of (X, d) which are asymptotically equivalent with respect to r˜. If Φ: Seq(Y, r˜) → Seq(Z, r˜) satisfy (7.2) for every y˜ ∈ Seq(Y, r˜), then, for every z˜1 ∈ Seq(Z, r˜), there is y˜1 ∈ Seq(Y, r˜) such that r˜ (7.4) d (Φ(˜y1), z˜1) = 0. Proof. Suppose that Φ: Seq(Y, r˜) → Seq(Z, r˜) satisfies (7.2) for ev- ery y˜ ∈ Seq(Y, r˜). Since Y and Z are asymptotically equivalent with respect to r˜, there is Ψ: Seq(Z, r˜) → Seq(Y, r˜) such that (7.5) dr˜(Ψ(˜z), z˜) = 0 for every z˜ ∈ Seq(Z, r˜). Let z˜1 be an arbitrary element of Seq(Z, r˜). Write y˜1 := Ψ(˜z1). Then y˜1 ∈ Seq(Y, r˜) and, using (7.2) with y˜ =y ˜1, we obtain r˜ r˜ (7.6) d (Φ(˜y1), y˜1) = d (Φ(Ψ(˜z1)), y˜1) = 0.

It follows from (7.5) with z˜ =z ˜1 that r˜ (7.7) d (Ψ(˜z1), z˜1) = 0. Since =0 is an equivalence relation on every pseudometric space (see Proposition 2.7), equalities (7.6)–(7.7) imply (7.4).  36 VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY

Proposition 7.5. Let (X, d) be a metric space, r˜ be a scaling sequence, and let Y and Z be unbounded subspaces of (X, d) which are asymp- totically equivalent with respect to r˜. Then the pseudometric subspaces Seq(Y, r˜) and Seq(Z, r˜) of the pseudometric space (Seq(X, r˜), dr˜) are pseudoisometric. Proof. By Definition 7.1, there are Φ: Seq(Y, r˜) → Seq(Z, r˜) and Ψ: Seq(Z, r˜) → Seq(Y, r˜) such that dr˜(˜y, Φ(˜y)) = dr˜(˜z, Ψ(˜z)) = 0 holds for all y˜ ∈ Seq(Y, r˜) and z˜ ∈ Seq(Z, r˜). Hence, by Lemma 7.3, the mapping Φ is distance preserving. Moreover, by Lemma 7.4, for every z˜1 ∈ Seq(Z, r˜) there is y˜1 ∈ Seq(Y, r˜) such that r˜ d (Φ(˜y1), z˜1) = 0. Hence, Φ is a pseudoisometry of Seq(Y, r˜) and Seq(Z, r˜) by Defini- tion 2.12.  Corollary 7.6. Let (X, d) be a metric space, r˜ be a scaling sequence, and let Y and Z be unbounded subspaces of (X, d) which are asymptot- Y ically equivalent with respect to r˜. Then the metric identification Ω∞,r˜ Z of Seq(Y, r˜) is isometric to the metric identification Ω∞,r˜ of Seq(Z, r˜). Proof. It follows directly from Proposition 7.5 and Theorem 2.18.  Let A be an unbounded subset of a metric space (X, d) and let r˜ be a scaling sequence. In what follows, we will denote by Seq(A, r˜) the closure of Seq(A, r˜) in the pseudometric space (Seq(X, r˜), dr˜). Proposition 7.7. Let (X, d) be an unbounded metric space and let r˜ be a scaling sequence. Then the equality (7.8) Seq(Y, r˜) = Seq(Z, r˜) holds for any two unbounded Y , Z ⊆ X which are asymptotically equiv- alent with respect to r˜.

Proof. It follows from Corollary 2.9 and Definition 7.1.  If Conjecture 5.1 is valid, then, using Corollary 2.10, we obtain the following. Proposition 7.8. Let (X, d) be a metric space and let r˜ be a scaling sequence. Unbounded subspaces Y and Z of (X, d) are asymptotically equivalent with respect to r˜ if and only if the equality Seq(Y, r˜) = Seq(Z, r˜) holds. ON EQUIVALENCE OF UNBOUNDED METRIC SPACES AT INFINITY 37

We shall say that Y and Z are strongly asymptotically equivalent if Y and Z are asymptotically equivalent for all scaling sequences r˜.A sufficient condition under which Y and Z are strongly asymptotically equivalent can be given in terms of the so-called ε-nets. Let (X, d) be a metric space. The closed ball with center c ∈ X and radius r ∈ (0, ∞) is the set B(c, r) := {x ∈ X : d(x, c) 6 r}. Let W be a subset of X and let ε > 0. Then a set C ⊆ X is an ε-net for W if [ W ⊆ B(c, ε). c∈C Proposition 7.9. Let Y and Z be unbounded subspaces of a metric space (X, d). If there is ε > 0 such that Y is an ε-net to Z and vice versa, then X and Y are strongly asymptotically equivalent.

Proof. It follows directly from Remark 7.2.  Example 7.10. Let n ∈ N and let (X, d) be the n-dimensional Eu- clidean space Rn. Write Zn and Qn for the n-ary Cartesian powers of the set of all integer numbers and the set of all rational numbers, respectively. Then Zn and Qn are strongly asymptotically equivalent as subspaces of Rn. Example 7.11. Let Y be an unbounded subspace of (X, d) and let Y be the closure of Y in (X, d). Then Y and Y are strongly asymptotically equivalent. Let Y be an unbounded subspace of (X, d), let r˜ be a scaling sequence ˜ ˜ and let F ⊆ Seq(X, r˜). Let us define a set [F ]Y by the rule: ˜ ˜ r˜
(7.9) (˜y ∈ [F ]Y ) ⇔ (˜y ∈ Seq(Y, r˜)) & (∃x˜ ∈ F : d (˜x, y˜) = 0) . ˜ ˜ Note that [F ]Y can be empty for a non-void F if the set X \ Y is “big enough”. Proposition 7.12. Let Y and Z be unbounded subspaces of an un- bounded metric space (X, d) and let r˜ be a scaling sequence. Suppose that Y and Z are asymptotically equivalent with respect to r˜. Then ˜ following statements hold for every maximal self-stable set Z∞,r˜ ⊆ Seq(Z, r˜). ˜ (i) The family [Z∞,r˜]Y is maximal self-stable and we have the equalities ˜ ˜ ˜ (7.10) [[Z∞,r˜]Y ]Z = Z∞,r˜ = [Z∞,r˜]Z . 38 VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY

Z Y ˜ (ii) If Ω∞,r˜ and Ω∞,r˜ are the metric identifications of Z∞,r˜ and, ˜ ˜ respectively, of Y∞,r˜ := [Z∞,r˜]Y , then the mapping Z Y (7.11) Ω∞,r˜ 3 ν 7−→ [ν]Y ∈ Ω∞,r˜ Z Y is an isometry. Furthermore, if Ω∞,r˜ is tangent, then Ω∞,r˜ is also tangent. ˜ Proof. Suppose Z∞,r˜ is a maximal self-stable subset of Seq(Z, r˜). ˜ ∗ ˜ (i) Let y˜1, y˜2 ∈ Y∞,r˜ := [Z∞,r˜]Y . Then, by (7.9), there exist z˜1, ˜ z˜2 ∈ Z∞,r˜ such that r˜ r˜ (7.12) d (˜y1, z˜1) = d (˜y2, z˜2) = 0.

Since z˜1 and z˜2 are mutually stable, y˜1 and y˜2 are also mutually stable. ˜ ∗ Consequently, Y∞,r˜ is self-stable. The similar arguments show that ˜ ∗ [Y∞,r˜]Z is also self-stable. Moreover, since ˜ ˜ ∗ ˜ [[Z∞,r˜]Y ]Z = [Y∞,r˜]Z ⊇ Z∞,r˜, ˜ the maximality of Z∞,r˜ implies the first equality in (7.10). The second ˜ one also simple follows from the maximality of Z∞,r˜. It still remains to ˜ ∗ prove that Y∞,r˜ is a maximal self-stable subset of Seq(Y, r˜). ˜ ˜ Let Y∞,r˜ be a maximal self-stable set in Seq(Y, r˜) such that Y∞,r˜ ⊇ ˜ ∗ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ Y∞,r˜. Then [Y∞,r˜]Z is self-stable and [Y∞,r˜]Z ⊇ Z∞,r˜. Since Z∞,r˜ is ˜ maximal self-stable, the last inclusion implies the equality [Y∞,r˜]Z = ˜ Z∞,r˜. Using the last equality and (7.10) we obtain ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ∗ Y∞,r˜ = [[Y∞,r˜]Z ]Y = [Z∞,r˜]Y := Y∞,r˜, ˜ ∗ i.e., Y∞,r˜ is maximal self-stable. Z (ii) Let ν ∈ Ω∞,r˜ and let z˜ ∈ ν. It follows from (7.9) that r˜ (7.13) [ν]Y = {y˜ ∈ Seq(Y, r˜): d (˜y, z˜) = 0}. The last equality implies that function (7.11) is distance-preserving. In addition, using (7.10), we obtain

[[ν]Y ]Z = ν and [[β]Z ]Y = β Z Y for every ν ∈ Ω∞,r˜ and every β ∈ Ω∞,r˜. Consequently function (7.11) Y Z is bijective. To prove that Ω∞,r˜ is tangent if Ω∞,r˜ is tangent we can use statement (i) of the present proposition and statement (ii) of Proposi- tion 4.8.  The transition from a subspace to another subspace preserves the uniqueness of pretangent spaces if these subspaces are asymptotically equivalent. ON EQUIVALENCE OF UNBOUNDED METRIC SPACES AT INFINITY 39

Corollary 7.13. Let Y and Z be unbounded subspace of a metric space X. Suppose Y and Z are asymptotically equivalent with respect to a scaling sequence r˜ and there exists a unique maximal self-stable set ˜ ˜ ˜ Z∞,r˜ ⊆ Seq(Z, r˜). Then Y∞,r˜ := [Z∞,r˜]Y is a unique maximal self- stable subset of Seq(Y, r˜).

˜ ∗ Proof. Let Y∞,r˜ be a maximal self-stable subset of Seq(Y, r˜). Then, ˜ ∗ by statement (i) of Proposition 7.12, [Y∞,r˜]Z is a maximal self-stable subset of Seq(Z, r˜). Hence, by (7.10), ˜ ∗ ˜ ∗ ˜ ˜ Y∞,r˜ = [[Y∞,r˜]Z ]Y = [Z∞,r˜]Y = Y∞,r˜. ˜ The uniqueness of Y∞,r˜ follows.  Example 7.14. Let (X, d) be the complex plane C with the usual metric. Write Z for the intersection of the strip {z ∈ C: c1 6 Im z 6 c2}, where c1 and c2 are the real numbers such that c1 < 0 < c2, with the half-plane {z ∈ C: Re z > 0} and let Y = {z ∈ C: Re z > 0 and Im z = 0}. Then, by Proposition 7.9, Y and Z are strongly asymptotically equiv- alent. By Corollary 6.2, for every scaling sequence r˜, Y has the unique Y Y pretangent space Ω∞,r˜ and, by Statement (iii) of Proposition 6.1, Ω∞,r˜ is isometric to R+ and tangent. Now, using Proposition 6.1 and Corol- Z lary 7.13, we obtain that Z also has the unique pretangent space Ω∞,r˜ and this space is tangent and isometric to R+ for every r˜. Let (X, d) be a metric space and let p ∈ X. For every t > 0 we denote by S(p, t) the sphere with the radius t and the center p, S(p, t) := {x ∈ X : d(x, p) = t}, and for every Y ⊆ X we write

Y St := S(p, t) ∩ Y. Let Y and Z be subspaces of (X, d). Define (7.14) ε(t, Z, Y ) := sup inf d(z, y) Z y∈Y z∈St and (7.15) ε(t) = max{ε(t, Z, Y ), ε(t, Y, Z)},

Z where we set ε(t, Z, Y ) = 0 if St = ∅ and, respectively, ε(t, Y, Z) = 0 Y if St = ∅. 40 VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY

Remark 7.15. The quantity ε(t) is a special case of the following con- ditional Hausdorff distance. Let (X, d) be a metric space and let A ⊆ Y ⊆ X and B ⊆ Z ⊆ X. We define the conditional Hausdorff distance between A and B (with respect to Y and Z) by

(7.16) dH (A, B|Y,Z) := max{sup inf d(z, y), sup inf d(z, y)}. z∈B y∈Y y∈A z∈Z It is clear that we have

dH (A, B|Y,Z) = ε(t) for A = S(p, t) ∩ Y and B = S(p, t) ∩ Z and, moreover,

dH (A, B|Y,Z) = dH (A, B) for A = Y and B = Z, where dH (A, B) is the usual Hausdorff distance between A and B. (See, for example, book [13] for the properties of the Hausdorff distance and connected them properties of the Gromov– Hausdorff convergence.) Theorem 7.16. Let Y and Z be unbounded subspaces of a metric space (X, d). Then Y and Z are strongly asymptotically equivalent if and only if ε(t) (7.17) lim = 0. t→∞ t

Proof. Suppose that limit relation (7.17) holds. Let r˜ = (rn)n∈N be a scaling sequence, let p ∈ X, and let z˜ = (zn)n∈N ∈ Seq(Z, r˜). To find y˜ = (yn)n∈N ∈ Seq(Y, r˜) such that (7.18) dr˜(˜y, z˜) = 0 note that the statement z˜ ∈ Seq(Z, r˜) implies

(7.19) lim d(zn, p) = ∞. n→∞ It follows from (7.15) and (7.17) that ε(t, Z, Y ) (7.20) lim = 0. t→∞ t By (7.19) there is n0 ∈ N such that d(zn, p) > 0 if n ≥ n0. Write ( 1 if n < n0 (7.21) tn := d(zn, p) if n ≥ n0. Let c > 0. The definition of ε(t, Z, Y ) and (7.20) imply, for all suffi- ciently large n ∈ N, there are yn ∈ Y with

(7.22) d(zn, yn) ≤ ε(tn,Z,Y ) + ctn. ON EQUIVALENCE OF UNBOUNDED METRIC SPACES AT INFINITY 41

Set y˜ := (yn)n∈N, where yn are some points of Y for which (7.22) holds. Now using (7.19)–(7.21) we obtain

d(z , y ) d(z , p) d(z , y ) dr˜(˜z, y˜) = lim sup n n ≤ lim n lim sup n n n→∞ rn n→∞ rn n→∞ tn ˜ ε(tn,Z,Y ) + ctn ≤ dr˜(˜z) lim sup = c. n→∞ tn Letting c to zero, we obtain (7.18). Similarly, we can prove that, for ev- ery y˜ ∈ Seq(Y, r˜), there is z˜ ∈ Seq(Z, r˜) such that dr˜(˜z, y˜) = 0. Hence if (7.17) holds, then Y and Z are strongly asymptotically equivalent. Suppose now that (7.17) does not hold. Without loss of generality we can assume that ε(t, Z, Y ) lim sup > 0. t→∞ t

Then there is a sequence t˜ of positive numbers tn with limn→∞ tn = ∞ and there is a constant c > 0 such that, for every n ∈ N, there exists Z zn ∈ Stn for which

(7.23) inf d(zn, y) ≥ ctn = cd(p, zn). y∈Y

Z Let us denote by z˜ the sequence of points zn ∈ Stn which satisfy (7.23). ˜ ˜ Take the sequence t = (tn)n∈N as a scaling sequence. Then z˜ ∈ Seq(Z, t) and, by (7.23), dr˜(˜z, y˜) ≥ c > 0 ˜ holds for every y˜ = (yn)n∈N ∈ Seq(Y, t). Consequently, Y and Z are not strongly asymptotically equivalent.  Let (X, d) be an unbounded metric space and let Y be an unbounded ˜ ˜ metric subspace of X. If X∞,r˜ ⊆ Seq(X, r˜) and Y∞,r˜ ⊆ Seq(Y, r˜) are ˜ ˜ maximal self-stable sets and Y∞,r˜ ⊆ X∞,r˜, then there is a unique iso- Y X metric embedding EmY :Ω∞,r˜ → Ω∞,r˜ such that the following diagram ˜ in ˜ Y∞,r˜ X∞,r˜

(7.24) πY πX

Y EmY X Ω∞,r˜ Ω∞,r˜ 42 VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY

X Y is commutative. Here Ω∞,r˜ and Ω∞,r˜ are the pretangent spaces corre- ˜ ˜ sponding to X∞,r˜ and, respectively, to Y∞,r˜, πY and πX are the appro- priate natural projections defined similarly to (3.7) and in(˜y) =y ˜ for ˜ all y˜ ∈ Y∞,r˜. Using Theorem 7.16 with Z = X we obtain the following corollary. Corollary 7.17. Let (X, d) be an unbounded metric space and let Y be an unbounded subspace of X. Then the following conditions are equivalent. ˜ (i) For every r˜ and every maximal self-stable X∞,r˜ ⊆ Seq(X, r˜) ˜ there is a maximal self-stable Y∞,r˜ ⊆ Seq(Y, r˜) such that ˜ ˜ Y X Y∞,r˜ ⊆ X∞,r˜ and the embedding EmY :Ω∞,r˜ → Ω∞,r˜ is an isometry. (ii) The equality ε(t, X, Y ) lim = 0 t→∞ t holds. (iii) X and Y are strongly asymptotically equivalent. Proof. The equivalence (ii) ⇔ (iii) follows from Theorem 7.16. To prove (iii) ⇒ (i) we note that the equality ˜ ˜ ˜ [X∞,r˜]Y = Y ∩ X∞,r˜ ˜ holds for every maximal self-stable X∞,r˜ if X and Y are strongly asymp- totically equivalent. Consequently, (iii) implies (i) because the map- ping EmY is an isometry whenever X and Y are strongly asymptotically equivalent.  Remark 7.18. Theorem 7.16 and Corollary 7.17 can be considered as asymptotic modifications of previously proved facts from [16]. In the rest of the section we expand the concept of asymptotically equivalent subspaces of metric spaces to the concept of asymptotically isometric metric spaces. For every mapping F : A → B we will denote by F˜ the mapping ˜ defined on the set of all sequences a˜ = (an)n∈N ⊆ A such that F(˜a) := ˜ ˜ b = (bn)n∈N ⊆ B with bn = F (an) for every n ∈ N. Moreover, if A is a set of sequences whose elements belong to A, then we write (7.25) F˜(A˜) := {F˜(˜a):a ˜ ∈ A˜}. Now we are ready to introduce the concept of asymptotically isometric spaces. ON EQUIVALENCE OF UNBOUNDED METRIC SPACES AT INFINITY 43

Definition 7.19. Let (Y, ρ) and (Z, δ) be unbounded metric spaces and let r˜ = (rn)n∈N be a scaling sequence. The spaces (Y, ρ) and (Z, δ) are asymptotically isometric with respect to r˜ if there are mappings Φ: Y → Z and Ψ: Z → Y such that: (i) Φ˜ (˜y) belongs to Seq(Z, r˜) for every y˜ ∈ Seq(Y, r˜); (ii) Ψ˜ (˜z) belongs to Seq(Y, r˜) for every z˜ ∈ Seq(Z, r˜), where Φ˜ and Ψ˜ are defined as in (7.25) and, in addition, the restrictions ˜ ˜ Φ|Seq(Y,r˜) and Ψ|Seq(Z,r˜) are pseudoisometries. The mappings Φ and Ψ satisfying Definition 7.19 will be called as- ymptotic isometries of metric spaces Y and Z. Moreover, we will say that Y and Z are strongly asymptotically isometric if Y and Z are asymptotically isometric for all scaling sequences. Example 7.20. Let Y and Z be isometric metric spaces. Then Y and Z are strongly asymptotically isometric and every isometry Φ: Y → Z is an asymptotic isometry for every scling sequence r˜. Using Theorem 2.18 we obtain.

Proposition 7.21. Let X1 and X2 be unbounded metric spaces and r˜ = (rn)n∈N be a scaling sequence. If X1 and X2 are asymptoti- X1 cally isometric with respect to r˜, then the metric spaces (Ω∞,r˜, ρ1) and X2 (Ω∞,r˜, ρ2) are isometric. The following theorem shows, in particular, that the concept of asymptotically isometric metric spaces is an extension of the concept of asymptotically equivalent subspaces of a given metric space.

Theorem 7.22. Let (X, d) be a metric space, r˜ = (rn)n∈N be a scaling sequence and let Y , Z be unbounded and asymptotically equivalent with respect to r˜ subspaces of (X, d). Then Y and Z are asymptotically isometric with respect to r˜. In the proof of Theorem 7.22 we will use the concept of distance from a point to set. Let (X, d) be a metric space. For every x ∈ X and every nonempty set A ⊆ X, the distance from x to A is defined by ∆(x, A) := inf d(x, y). y∈A

Proof of Theorem 7.22. Let ε1 > 0 be fixed. Then, for every x ∈ X and every nonempty A ⊆ X, there is ax ∈ A such that

(7.26) |d(x, ax) − ∆(x, A)| 6 ε1. 44 VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY

Consequently, there is a mapping Φ: Y → Z such that

(7.27) |d(Φ(y), y) − ∆(y, Z)| 6 ε1 for every y ∈ Y . Similarly, there exists Ψ: Z → Y satisfying the inequality

(7.28) |d(Ψ(z), z) − ∆(z, Y )| 6 ε1 for every z ∈ Z. We claim that Φ: Y → Z and Ψ: Z → Y are asymptotic isometries. Let us prove it. Since Y and Z are asymptotically equivalent with respect to r˜, there is a mapping Φ˜ : Seq(Y, r˜) → Seq(Z, r˜) such that (7.29) dr˜(˜y, Φ˜ (˜y)) = 0 for every y˜ ∈ Seq(Y, r˜). ˜ Let y˜ = (yn)n∈N belong to Seq(Y, r˜). Then Φ(˜y) ∈ Seq(Z, r˜) can be ˜ written as Φ(˜y) = (zn,y˜)n∈N and, consequently, we may rewrite (7.29) in the form d(y , z ) (7.30) lim sup n n,y˜ = 0. n→∞ rn The definition of the distance from y ∈ Y to Z implies that

(7.31) ∆(yn,Z) 6 d(yn, zn,y˜) because zn,y˜ ∈ Z for every n ∈ N. Inequalities (7.31) and (7.27) imply

d(Φ(yn), yn) 6 ε1 + ∆(yn,Z) 6 ε1 + d(yn, zn,y˜). Now using (7.30) we have d(Φ(y ), y ) (7.32) lim sup n n = 0. n→∞ rn

Consequently, by Lemma 4.6, the sequence (Φ(yn))n∈N belongs to ˜ Seq(Z, r˜) for every (yn)n∈N ∈ Seq(Y, r˜). Hence, the mapping Φ satisfies condition (i) of Definition 7.19. Repeating the above arguments, we find that the mapping Ψ˜ satisfies condition (ii) of Definition 7.19 and that the equality dr˜(˜z, Ψ˜ (˜z)) = 0 holds for every z˜ ∈ Seq(Z, r˜). Now as in the proof of Proposition 7.5, we see that Φ˜ : Seq(Y, r˜) → Seq(Z, r˜) and Ψ˜ : Seq(Z, r˜) → Seq(Y, r˜) are pseudoisometries. Thus, Y and Z are asymptotically isometric with respect to r˜ by definition.  ON EQUIVALENCE OF UNBOUNDED METRIC SPACES AT INFINITY 45

We conclude this section by the following conjecture describing the interconnections between asymptotically isometric metric spaces and asymptotically equivalent metric subspaces of a given metric space. Conjecture 7.23. Let Y and Z be unbounded metric spaces and let r˜ be a scaling sequence. Then the following conditions are equivalent. (i) Y and Z are asymptotically isometric with respect to r˜. (ii) There are a metric space X and unbounded Y1, Z1 ⊆ X such that: (ii1) Seq(Y, r˜) is pseudoisometric to Seq(Y1, r˜); (ii2) Seq(Z, r˜) is pseudoisometric to Seq(Z1, r˜); (ii3) Y1 and Z1 are asymptotically equivalent with respect to r˜.

References [1] F. Abdullayev, O. Dovgoshey, and M. K¨u¸c¨ukaslan, Tangent metric spaces to starlike sets on the plane, J. Nonlinear Convex. Anal. 14 (2013), no. 3, 551–581. [2] M. Altinok, O. Dovgoshey, and M. K¨u¸c¨ukaslan, Local one-sided porosity and pretangent spaces, Analysis, M¨unchen 36 (2016), no. 3, 147–171. [3] G. Beer, Topologies on Closed and Closed Convex Sets, Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1993. [4] , Wijsman convergence: a survey, Set-Valued Anal. 2 (1994), 77–94. [5] V. K. Bhardwaj, S. Dhawan, and O. A. Dovgoshey, Density by moduli and Wi- jsman statistical convergence, Bull. Belg. Math. Soc. Simon Stevin 24 (2017), no. 3, 393–415. [6] V. Bilet and O. Dovgoshey, Boundedness of pretangent spaces to general metric spaces, Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Math. 39 (2014), no. 1, 73–82. [7] , Investigations of strong right upper porosity at a point, Real Anal. Exch. 39 (2014), no. 1, 175–206. [8] , Asymptotic behavior of metric spaces at infinity, Dopov. Nats. Akad. Nauk Ukr., Mat. Pryr. Tekn. Nauky (2017), no. 9, 9–14. [9] , Finite asymptotic clusters of metric spaces, Theory Appl. Graphs. 5 (2018), no. 2, 1–33, Article 1. [10] , Finite spaces pretangent to metric spaces at infinity, J. Math. Sci., New York 242 (2019), no. 3, 360–380, Translation from Ukr. Mat. Visn. 15, No. 4, 448–474 (2018). [11] , Uniqueness of spaces pretangent to metric spaces at infinity, J. Math. Sci., New York 242 (2019), no. 6, 796–819, Translation from Ukr. Mat. Visn. 16, No. 1, 57–87 (2019). [12] V. Bilet, O. Dovgoshey, and M. K¨u¸c¨ukaslan, Uniform boundedness of pre- tangent spaces, local constancy of metric derivatives and strong right upper porosity at a point, J. Analysis 21 (2013), 31–55. [13] D. Burago, Y. Burago, and S. Ivanov, A Course in Metric Geometry, Graduate Studies in Mathematics, vol. 33, American Mathematical Soc., 2001. [14] S. Buyalo and V. Schroeder, Elements of Asymptotic Geometry, EMS Monogr. Math., European Math. Society, Z¨urich, 2007. 46 VIKTORIIA BILET AND OLEKSIY DOVGOSHEY

[15] A. Dovgoshei and D. Dordovskii, Betweenness relation and isometric imbed- dings of metric spaces, Ukr. Math. J. 61 (2009), no. 10, 1556–1567. [16] O. Dovgoshey, Tangent spaces to metric spaces and to their subspaces, Ukr. Mat. Visn. 5 (2008), 470–487, Reprinted in Ukr. Math. Bull. 5 (2008), no. 4, 457–477. [17] , Combinatorial properties of ultrametrics and generalized ultrametrics, Bull. Belg. Math. Soc. Simon Stevin 27 (2020), no. 3, 379–417. [18] O. Dovgoshey and J. Luukkainen, Combinatorial characterization of pseudo- metrics, Acta Math. Hungar 161 (2020), no. 1, 257–291. [19] J. L. Kelley, General Topology, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 27, Springer-Verlag, New York  Heidelberg  Berlin, 1975. [20] K. Kuratowski and A. Mostowski, Set Theory with an Introduction to De- scriptive Set Theory, North-Holland Publishing Company, AmsterdamNew YorkOxford, 1976. [21] A. Lechiki and S. Levi, Wijsmann convergence in the hyperspace of a metric space, Bull. Unione Mat. Ital. 1-B (1987), 439–452. [22] I. Protasov and M. Zarichnyi, General Asymptology, Mathematical Studies Monograph Series, vol. 12, VNTL Publishers, L’viv, 2007. [23] J. Roe, Lectures on Coarse Geometry, University Lecture Series, vol. 31, Prov- idence, RI: American Mathematical Society, 2003. [24] V. Schroeder, An introduction to asymptotic geometry, Strasbourg Master Class on Geometry (Athanase Papadopoulos, ed.), IRMA Lectures in Mathe- matics and Theoretical Physics, vol. 18, Institut de Recherche Mathematique Avancee de Strasbourg, 2012, pp. 405–454. [25]M. O.´ Searc´oid, Metric Spaces, SpringerVerlag, London, 2007. [26] B. S. Thomson, Real Functions, Springer, Berlin, 1985. [27] R. A. Wijsman, Convergence of sequences of convex sets, cones and functions, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 70 (1964), 186–188. [28] , Convergence of sequences of convex sets, cones and functions II, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 123 (1966), no. 1, 32–45.

Viktoriia Bilet Institute of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics of NASU Dobrovolskogo str. 1, Slovyansk 84100, Ukraine Email address: [email protected]

Oleksiy Dovgoshey Institute of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics of NASU Dobrovolskogo str. 1, Slovyansk 84100, Ukraine Email address: [email protected]