arXiv:2011.12264v3 [math.DS] 10 Aug 2021 epciey fteest r umnflsof submanifolds are sets these If respectively. d nesc tasnl on.Teeoe h eut 5 ,9 0 11 10, dimens Hausdorff 9, the 8, of [5, bound tangencies. results lower any of the Ha imply sets Therefore, the not above of do well point. above bound thicknesses mentioned single lower have a any can at imply sets William intersect not Cantor Indeed, interleaved does sets. two Cantor result two that the and His of one, intersection than the other. of greater dimension the is of thicknesses their gap of a product rob the of if 1 other construction 12, the 11, for 10, 15]. useful [9, 13, still sets 8, is Cantor [5, thickness are un the sections between ap guarante cross dimension, tangencies been which whose of have conditions manifolds robustness conditions formulate ble the These show to to other. order diffeomorphisms each in intersect “thickness line, sets the real Cantor called the stru quantity not on non-negative are set a which defined diffeomorphisms of [9] sets Newhouse open of examples struct [12]. an example unstable for between see intersection non-transverse a by unleashed aiod of manifolds h ntbeadsal eso point a of sets stable and unstable the , Keywords 2020 ehuesrsl 9 set httoCno eso h elline real the on sets Cantor two that asserts [9] result Newhouse’s t fundamental a is sets Cantor of intersection an of existence The o diffeomorphism a For ASOF IESO FCNO INTERSECTIONS CANTOR OF DIMENSION HAUSDORFF ahmtc ujc Classification. Subject Mathematics hoi yaisi ieso ,w nrdc a introduce we 3, dimension in dynamics chaotic Abstract. ery1 u ro mly h hcnse fCno sets. Cantor of Haus thicknesses of the set the employs fractal of proof a contains Our set sets sets stable 1. stable Cantor nearly and the are unstable and sections the cross horseshoe of whose tion one 2 of nearly dimension set Hausdorff unstable the that: of R osso a,Cno es hcns,Hudr dimension. Hausdorff thickness, sets, Cantor map, horseshoe : 3 aigtohrehe ihdffrn iesoso ntblt.W pro We instability. of dimensions different with horseshoes two having OHTK AK,HRK AAAI AE .YORKE A. JAMES TAKAHASI, HIROKI SAIKI, YOSHITAKA p W niceil iharyo opiae yaia hnmn is phenomena dynamical complicated of array rich incredibly An . W u s O OPE OSSO MAPS HORSESHOE COUPLED FOR ( ( samdlt rvd ad-n lmnayudrtnigof understanding elementary hands-on, a provide to model a As p p = ) = ) { { ϕ q q faReana manifold Riemannian a of ∈ ∈ M M 1. : : d d ( ( Introduction ϕ ϕ n n ( ( 72,3C5 37G25. 37C45, 37C29, p p ) ) 1 ϕ , ϕ , p n n ∈ ( ( M q q M )) )) hyaecalled are they , C → → r ie by given are 2 oe e fdiffeomorphisms of set -open as 0 as 0 M n n qipdwt distance a with equipped −∞} → ∞} → offdimension dorff tbemanifolds, stable d h intersec- the ; unstable te r of are other ete e isin lies set neither , 2 3 4 15] 14, 13, 12, , le osurface to plied n tl only still and 1 tbeadsta- and stable trlystable. cturally , s tangencies ust 1]observed [17] s faCantor a of ” nesc each intersect ] nhigher In 4]. o ocon- to ool httwo that e and o fthe of ion ve usdorff stable 2 YOSHITAKASAIKI,HIROKITAKAHASI,JAMESA.YORKE
Figure 1. The coupled horseshoe map f0.
In this paper, using the thickness and thick Cantor sets, we provide an elemen- tary example of diffeomorphisms in dimension 3 that display a new type of robust fractal non-transverse intersection between unstable and stable manifolds. These diffeomorphisms are variants of the piecewise linear map from the unit cube onto itself introduced in [16], as a model to provide a hands-on, elementary understand- ing of chaotic dynamics in dimension 3. We estimate the Hausdorff dimension of the set of non-transverse intersection in terms of some parameters of the diffeo- morphisms.
1.1. Coupled horseshoe maps. A block is a cuboid in the Euclidean space R3 = (xu, xc, xs): xu, xc, xs R all of whose sides are parallel to one of the axes of coordinates{ of R3. Given∈ two} blocks X and Y , we say X penetrates Y if X does not intersect the edges of Y and X Y has two connected components. Let A, B, C, D be pairwise disjoint\ blocks in [0, 1]3 such that D is a translate of A in the xu-direction and C is a translate of B in the xc-direction. Similarly, let A∗, B∗, C∗, D∗ be pairwise disjoint blocks in [0, 1]3 such that D∗ is a translate of ∗ ∗ ∗ A in the xc-direction and C is a translate of B in the xs-direction. We assume: (a) A∗ penetrates A and D, and D∗ penetrates A and D; (a∗) B penetrates B∗ and C∗, and C penetrates B∗ and C∗; (b) A∗ penetrates C, and D∗ penetrates B; (c) A penetrates B∗ and C∗, and D penetrates B∗ and C∗. See FIGURE 1 (i), (ii), (iii), (iii) respectively. Set R = A D and R = B∗ C∗. 1 ∪ 2 ∪ Let r 1, 2 , and let Diffr(R3) denote the set of Cr diffeomorphisms of R3. ∈ { }1 3 We say f0 Diff (R ) is a coupled horseshoe map if it maps A, B, C, D affinely to A∗, B∗,C∗,D∈ ∗ respectively with diagonal Jacobian matrices, see FIGURE 1 (iv).
Condition (a) implies that the restriction f0 R1 of f0 to R1 is a horseshoe map whose unstable manifolds are one-dimensional.| Condition (a∗) implies that f 0|R2 HAUSDORFFDIMENSION OF CANTOR INTERSECTIONS 3
Figure 2. Some coupled horseshoe maps are viewed as composi- tions of three processes (blocks corresponding to A, B, D are given the same labels): (i) to (ii); Squeeze and stretch each block as shown, without rotation. Next fix the position of C∗. (ii) to (iii); Flip B upward so that it is above C∗. Flip A backward so that it is behind D. (iii) to (iv); Flip A and D so that they are underneath C∗. is a horseshoe map whose stable manifolds are one-dimensional. Conditions (b) (c) determine how these horseshoe maps are coupled. See FIGURE 2 for one example. 1.2. Statements of results. For f , f Diffr(R3), we define 1 2 ∈ α α f1 f2 Cr = sup ∂ f1,j ∂ f2,j , k − k [0,1]3 | − | j∈{u,c,s} α X 0≤|Xα|≤r where fi =(fi,u, fi,c, fi,s) for i =1, 2 and α =(αu,αc,αs) denotes the multi-index: α αu αc αs r R3 r ∂ = ∂xu ∂xc ∂xs . We endow Diff ( ) with a C topology, a topology that has the r 3 r 3 collection of sets of the form g Diff (R ): f g Cr < ǫ with f Diff (R ) and ǫ> 0 as a base. { ∈ k − k } ∈ 2 3 2 Let f0 Diff (R ) be a coupled horseshoe map. We are concerned with a C ∈ 1 diffeomorphism f which is sufficiently C -close to f0. The compact f-invariant set ∞ Λ= f −n(R R ) 1 ∪ 2 n=−∞ \ contains two compact f-invariant sets ∞ ∞ −n −n Γ= f (R1) and Σ= f (R2), n=−∞ n=−∞ \ \ u s of the horseshoe maps f R1 and f R2 respectively. Let W (Γ) (resp. W (Σ)) denote the unions of the unstable| (resp.| stable) manifolds of points in Γ (resp. Σ). We will provide a condition on f0 which ensures that the set H(f)= W u(Γ) W s(Σ) Λ ∩ ∩ is non-empty. Under a stronger condition on f0 we will give an estimate of the Hausdorff dimension of H(f). To these ends, we will define thicknesses of cross sections of W u(Γ) and W s(Σ), and relate them to the following numbers 3 A∗ A 3 B B∗ a = | c|−| c| and a = | c|−| c |. 1 E∗ 2 A∗ 2 F 2 B | c | − | c| | c| − | c| 4 YOSHITAKASAIKI,HIROKITAKAHASI,JAMESA.YORKE
Figure 3. The sets W u(Γ) and W s(Σ).
Hereafter, E∗ denotes the minimal block containing A∗ and D∗, and F denotes the minimal block containing B and C. For a block X we write X = Xu Xc Xs. We denote by I the Euclidean length of a bounded interval I. The following× × two numbers are also| | in use: A E∗ B∗ F b = | c|−| c | and b = | c |−| c| . 1 E∗ 2 A∗ 2 F 2 B | c | − | c| | c| − | c| Let dim denote the Hausdorff dimension on R3. The key term dimension-reducible will be defined in (3.3) in Section 3.1. Our main results are as follows. 2 3 Theorem A. Let f0 Diff (R ) be a coupled horseshoe map that is dimension- reducible, satisfies a a∈> 1 and max b , b 1. There exists a C2 neighborhood 1 2 { 1 2} ≤ of f0 such that for any f , H(f) is a non-empty totally disconnected set. VMoreover the following estimates∈ V hold: 2a +1 2a +1 1 < dim W u(Γ) < 2, 2 < dim W s(Σ) < 2, dim H(f) < 1. a1 +1 a2 +1 u s The set W (Γ) and W (Σ) intersect each other as in FIGURE 3. As a1 and a2 increase, dim W u(Γ) and dim W s(Σ) converge to 2. Our next result shows that their intersection contains a set of Hausdorff dimension nearly 1. Theorem B. There exists τ > 0 such that if f Diff2(R3) is a coupled horseshoe 0 0 ∈ map that is dimension-reducible and satisfies min a1, a2 > τ0 and max b1, b2 1, then there exists a C2 neighborhood of f such{ that} for any f , { } ≤ V 0 ∈V −1 1 1+ < dim H(f) < 1. min a1, a2 ! { } The number τ0 in Theoremp B is a large constant determined by a result in [7] which we recall in Section 2. Since τ is large and a < 3/( E∗ 2 A∗ ) and 0 1 | c | − | c| HAUSDORFFDIMENSION OF CANTOR INTERSECTIONS 5
Figure 4. Numerical computations of the sets H(f ) x = 1 0 ∩{ u } for non dimension-reducible, coupled horseshoe maps f0 with blocks approximately A [0, 1/3] [0, 1]2, B [2/3, 1] [0, 1/2] [0, 1], C [2/3, 1] [1/≈2, 1] [0, 1],× D [1/3,≈2/3] [0,×1]2, A∗ ×[0, 1] [0,≈1/2] [0,×2/3], B∗ × [0, 1]2 ≈[2/3, 5/6], C×∗ [0, 1]2 ≈[5/6, 1],× D∗ [0×, 1] [1/2, 1] ≈ [0, 2/3]:× (left) det Df >≈ 0 everywhere× as ≈ × × 0 in FIGURE 2; (right) det Df0 < 0 on A with a flip only of the xs-coordinate and det Df0 > 0 on B,C,D with no flip. a2 < 3/( Fc 2 Bc ), the assumption min a1, a2 > τ0 means that the size of the gap between| | −A∗ |and| D∗ and that between{B and}C are small. We do not claim the above theorems give optimal estimates on Hausdorff di- mension for general diffeomorphisms in dimension 3. For example, modifying the construction of Asaoka using the Plykin attractor [1], Barrientos and P´erez [2] constructed a C1 diffeomorphism having two hyperbolic sets, one of index 1 (the dimension of the unstable subbundle) and the other of index 2, for which the unsta- ble set of the first set and the stable set of the second one contain two-dimensional submanifolds which intersect each other in a smooth curve. As we reiterate, our aim here is to introduce a model and results which provide a hands-on, elementary understanding of chaotic dynamics in dimension 3. 1.3. Outline of proofs of the theorems. Proofs of the main results are briefly outlined as follows. We focus on the dimension estimate of H(f), as that of W u(Γ) and W s(Σ) are by-products. We begin by remarking that geometric structures of the set H(f0) for a general coupled horseshoe map f0 are rich. Our numerical experiment suggests that there is a case where H(f0) becomes a fractal set, as in FIGURE 4, with Hausdorff dimension seemingly exceeding 1. Moreover, these fractal sets appear to persist under small perturbations of the map. The map f0 in FIGURE 4 is not dimension reducible. A dimension estimate in such a case is beyond our reach. Therefore, we perform a dimension reduction. The assumption of dimension re- ducibility in Theorems A and B allows us to use the theory of normally hyperbolic invariant manifolds [4, 6] to construct two C2 surfaces, called graph-invariant sur- faces, one of which contains a neighborhood of Γ in W u(Γ) and the other contains a neighborhood of Σ in W s(Σ). See Section 3.3 for relevant definitions and formal statements. The upper bound dim H(f) < 1 is a consequence of this construction. A lower estimate of dim H(f) as well as showing H(f) = is more delicate. We perform a further reduction to the problem of how two6 Cantor∅ sets on the real line intersect each other. More precisely, we construct two Cantor sets contained 6 YOSHITAKASAIKI,HIROKITAKAHASI,JAMESA.YORKE in a smooth curve, by projecting the cross sections of W u(Γ) and W s(Σ) along their unstable and stable manifolds. Under the assumption of Theorem A, we show that the product of their thicknesses is at least 1. We then use the result of Newhouse [9] to conclude that the two Cantor sets intersect each other, and H(f) is non-empty. Under the assumption of Theorem B, we show that these two Cantor sets have large thicknesses. By the result of Hunt et al. [7], their intersection contains a Cantor set with large thickness. We then appeal to the general lower bound of Newhouse [11] for the Hausdorff dimension of Cantor sets in terms of their thicknesses. The condition max b1, b2 1 will be used only to facilitate the lower estimates of the thicknesses (see{ the} proof ≤ of Lemma 4.2(c)). The rest of this paper consists of three sections. In Section 2 we introduce key ingredients, and perform main constructions in Section 3. We prove main estimates and complete the proofs of the main results in Section 4.
2. Main Tools In this section we introduce main tools needed for the proofs of the theorems. In Section 2.1 we state a version of the fundamental theorem of Hirsch et al. [6] on normally hyperbolic invariant manifolds. In Section 2.2 we introduce the thickness of Cantor sets on the real line, and recall the gap lemma of Newhouse [9] and the theorem of Hunt et al. [7] on when two thick Cantor sets intersect thickly.
2.1. Persistence of normally attracting invariant manifolds. Let ϕ: M M be a Cr diffeomorphism (r 1) of a C∞ Riemannian manifold M. A C→1 submanifold V of M is said to be≥ r-normally hyperbolic for ϕ if ϕ(V ) = V , and s u there exist a continuous Dϕ-invariant splitting TV M = TV N N and constants ⊕ ⊕ s s c > 0, ν (0, 1) such that for any p V and all unit vectors v TpV , n Np , nu N u ∈and any n 1, ∈ ∈ ∈ ∈ p ≥ Dϕnns Dϕ−nnu k p k cνn and k p k cνn. Dϕnv r ≤ Dϕ−nv r ≤ k p k k p k In the case N u = 0 , V is called r-normally attracting for ϕ. Normally hyperbolic{ } invariant manifolds are persistent [4, 6]. We recall the precise statement of [6, (4.1) THEOREM] for the normally attracting case. The theorem below asserts that a compact r-normally attracting manifold V for a Cr r s diffeomorphism ϕ is C , and the stable set p∈V W (p) of V is invariantly fibered by Cr submanifolds tangent at V to N s. Moreover, these structures are unique and persist under Cr perturbations of ϕ. S Theorem 2.1 ([6, (4.1) THEOREM]). Let ϕ: M M be a Cr diffeomorphism, r 1, of a C∞ Riemannian manifold M leaving→ a compact C1 submanifold V ≥ invariant. Assume ϕ is r-normally attracting at V respecting the splitting TV M = TV N s. Then V is Cr, and the following hold: ⊕ r s (a) For each p V there exists a regular C submanifold Wp contained in the ∈ s s s stable set of p and tangent to Np , such that ϕ(Wp ) Wϕ(p) for every p V s ⊂ ∈ and p∈V Wp contains a neighborhood of V ; S HAUSDORFFDIMENSION OF CANTOR INTERSECTIONS 7
(b) If ϕ˜ is another diffeomorphism of M which is Cr-close to ϕ, then ϕ˜ is r-normally attracting at some unique V˜ , Cr-close to V . 2.2. Intersection of two Cantor sets. We adopt the definition of thickness by Palis and Takens [12] that is equivalent to the one by Newhouse [9]. Let S be a Cantor set in R. A gap of S is a connected component of R S. A bounded gap is a gap which is bounded. Let G be any bounded gap and x\be a boundary point of G. Let I be the bridge of S at x, i.e., the maximal interval in R such that: x is a boundary point of I; ◦ I contains no point of a gap whose Euclidean length is at least G . ◦ | | The thickness of S at x is defined by τ(S, x)= I / G . The thickness τ(S) of S is the infimum of τ(S, x) over all boundary points| x| |of| bounded gaps. Two Cantor sets S1, S2 in R are said to be interleaved if neither set is contained in the closure of a gap of the other set.
Lemma 2.2 (the gap lemma [9]). Let S1,S2 be two interleaved Cantor sets in R such that τ(S )τ(S ) > 1. Then S S is non-empty. 1 2 1 ∩ 2 The gap lemma does not imply any lower bound of the Hausdorff dimension of the intersection. The next result in [7] asserts that the intersection of two interleaved Cantor sets with large thicknesses contains a Cantor set with large thickness. Theorem 2.3 (in [7, p.881, Remark]). For any ǫ (0, 1) there exists δ > 0 such ∈ that if two Cantor sets S1, S2 in R with τ(S1) > δ, τ(S2) > δ are interleaved, then S S contains a Cantor set whose thickness is at least (1 ǫ) min τ(S ), τ(S ) . 1 ∩ 2 − { 1 2 } We will deal with Cantor sets which are subsets of C1 curvesp in R3. Their thicknesses will be defined with respect to the induced metrics on these curves.
3. Main constructions In this section we perform main constructions needed for the proofs of our main results. After some initial setups in Section 3.1, we provide standard hyperbolicity estimates in Section 3.2. In Section 3.3 we construct two graph-invariant surfaces, and in Section 3.4 construct two Cantor sets. 3.1. Initial setups. Let f Diff1(R3) be a coupled horseshoe map. The expan- 0 ∈ sion and contraction rates of f0 on each block are A∗ A∗ A∗ (3.1) λ = | u|, λ = | c|, λ = | s|, and 0,u A 0,c A 0,s A | u| | c| | s| B B B (3.2) µ = | u|, µ = | c| , µ = | s| . 0,u B∗ 0,c B∗ 0,s B∗ | u| | c | | s | We say f is dimension-reducible if f Diff2(R3) and 0 0 ∈ 2 2 (3.3) λ0,c >λ0,s and µ0,u >µ0,c. For simplicity, throughout the rest of this paper we put the following 8 YOSHITAKASAIKI,HIROKITAKAHASI,JAMESA.YORKE
Standing Assumption: the map f0 is a coupled horseshoe map that is dimension- reducible and satisfies max b , b 1. { 1 2} ≤ Let ǫ> 0 and set λu = λ0,u ǫ, λc = λ0,c+ǫ, λs = λ0,s+ǫ, and µu = µ0,u ǫ, µc = µ ǫ, µ = µ + ǫ. We assume− ǫ is sufficiently small so that the following− hold: 0,c − s 0,s (3.4) λu > 1 > 1/2 >λc >λs > 0 and µu >µc > 2 > 1 >µs > 0;
2 2 (3.5) λc >λs and µu >µc;
(3.6) max λ (1 + b ),µ−1(1 + b ) < 1; { c 1 c 2 }
2 −1 −2 (3.7) max λcλ0,c,µc µ0,c < 1.
The definition of f0 implies (3.4) for ǫ> 0 small enough. Condition (3.5) and (3.6) can be fulfilled by the dimension reducibility and by the assumption max b1, b2 1 respectively, for ǫ small enough. Condition (3.7) will facilitate some estimates.{ } ≤
3.2. Hyperbolicity estimates. We use the set of the first-order partial deriva- R3 tives ∂xu , ∂xc , ∂xs as a basis for the tangent space at each point of . Unstable, center-unstable,{ stable,} and center-stable, cones with angle θ (0, 1) which are 3 ∈ subsets of TpR are defined as follows: u(θ)= (ξ,η,ζ): η2 + ζ2 θ2ξ2 , cu(θ)= (ξ,η,ζ): θ2(ξ2 + η2) ζ2 , Cp ≤ Cp ≥ s(θ)= (ξ,η,ζ): ξ2 + η2 θ2ζ2 , cs(θ)= (ξ,η,ζ): θ2(η2 + ζ2) ξ2 . Cp ≤ Cp ≥ By a Cr curve (resp. a Cr surface ) we mean a regular one-dimensional (resp. two-dimensional) Cr submanifold of R3. We say a C1 curve γ is tangent to u(θ) (resp. cu(θ)) if T γ u(θ) (resp. T γ cu(θ)) holds for every p γ. Similarly,C C p ⊂ Cp p ⊂ Cp ∈ we say a C1 surface S is tangent to cu(θ) if T S cu(θ) holds for every p S. C p ⊂ Cp ∈ C1 curves and surfaces being tangent to s(θ) or cs(θ) are defined similarly. For each p R3 let denote the EuclideanC normC on T R3. The next proposition ∈ k·k p asserts that the uniform expansion and contraction of f0 on a neighborhood of each block is passed on to nearby C1 diffeomorphisms. Proposition 3.1. For any sufficiently small θ > 0, there exist disjoint open sets ∗ U, U containing R1, R2 respectively, such that for any f which is sufficiently 1 C -close to f0 the following hold: u u cu cu (a) If p U then Dfp( p (θ)) f(p)(θ), Dfp( p (θ)) f(p)(θ) and −∈1 s Cs ⊂ C−1 cs C cs ⊂ C Dff(p)( f(p)(θ)) p(θ), Dff(p)( f(p)(θ)) p (θ); ∗ C ∗ ⊂ C−1 s C s ⊂ C −1 cs cs (a ) If q U then Df ( (θ)) −1 (θ), Df ( (θ)) −1 (θ) and ∈ q Cq ⊂ Cf (q) q Cq ⊂ Cf (q) − s s − cu cu Df 1 ( −1 (θ)) (θ), Df 1 ( −1 (θ)) (θ); f (q) Cf (q) ⊂ Cq f (q) Cf (q) ⊂ Cq (b) Let γ U be a C1 curve. If γ is tangent to u(θ) (resp. cu(θ)), then f(γ) is tangent⊂ to u(θ) (resp. cu(θ)). If γ is tangentC to s(Cθ) (resp. cs(θ)), then f −1(γ) isC tangent to Cs(θ) (resp. cs(θ)). AnalogousC statementsC hold for a C1 surface in U; C C HAUSDORFFDIMENSION OF CANTOR INTERSECTIONS 9
cu Figure 5. The graph-invariant surface V in R1 for f (blue) and its forward and backward images (red).
(b∗) Let γ U ∗ be a C1 curve. If γ is tangent to s(θ) (resp. cs(θ)), then f −1(γ)⊂is tangent to s(θ) (resp. cs(θ)). If γ Cis tangent toC u(θ) (resp. cu(θ)), then f(γ) is tangentC to u(Cθ) (resp. cu(θ)). AnalogousC statements Chold for a C1 surface in U ∗; C C u (c) Let p U. Then Dfpv λu v for all v p (θ), Dfpv λc v for all ∈cu −k1 k ≥−1 k k ∈ C s k k− ≥1 k k −1 v p (θ), Dff(p)v λs v for all v f(p)(θ), Dff(p)v λc v ∈ C kcs k ≥ k k ∈ C k k ≥ k k for all v f(p)(θ); ∗ ∈∗ C −1 −1 s −1 −1 (c ) Let q U . Then Dfq v µs v for all v q (θ), Dfq v µc v ∈ cs k k ≥ k k ∈ C u k k ≥ k k for all v (θ), Df −1 v µ v for all v (θ), Df −1 v ∈ Cq k f (q) k ≥ uk k ∈ Cf(p) k f (q) k ≥ µ v for all v cu (θ). ck k ∈ Cf(p) Proof. All the assertions follow from the assumption that f0 is affine on A, B, C, D with the expansion and contraction rates given by (3.1) and (3.2).
3.3. Construction of graph-invariant surfaces. In this subsection we prove a dimension reduction result announced in Section 1.3. A key concept is that of graph-invariant surfaces. There are two different types of graph-invariant surfaces as we deal with two different horseshoe maps. ∗ Let π : (xu, xc, xs) (xu, xc), π : (xu, xc, xs) (xc, xs) be the natural projec- 7→2 3 2 cu 7→ tions, and let f Diff (R ). A C surface V is said to be graph-invariant in R1 ∈ 2 for f if there exists a C function φ: π(R1) R, called the defining function such that the following hold (see FIGURE 5): → cu V = (xu, xc,φ(xu, xc)): (xu, xc) π(R1) ; ◦ cu {−1 −1 cu cu∈ } cu V f (R1) f (V ) and V f(R1) f(V ); ◦ ∩ sup ⊂ ∂αφ < 1/10. ∩ ⊂ ◦ α:1≤|α|≤2 π(R1) | | 2 cs −1 Similarly,P a C surface V is said to be graph-invariant in R2 for f if there 2 ∗ ∗ exists a C function φ : π (R2) R such that the following hold: cs ∗ → ∗ V = (φ (xc, xs), xc, xs): (xc, xs) π (R2) ; ◦ cs {−1 ∗ −1 cs cs∈ } cs V f (R2) f (V ) and V f(R2) f(V ). ◦ ∩ ⊂ α ∗ ∩ ⊂ sup ∗ ∂ φ < 1/10. ◦ α:1≤|α|≤2 π (R2) | | PropositionP 3.2. For any sufficiently small θ (0, 1/10), there exists a C2 neigh- 2 3 ∈ borhood of f0 in Diff (R ) such that if f then the following hold: V ∈V cu (a) There exists a unique graph-invariant surface V in R1 for f. More- ∞ n cu cu over n=0 f (R1) V , and the defining function φ of V satisfies sup ⊂∂αφ < θ; α:1≤|Tα|≤2 π(R1) | | P 10 YOSHITAKASAIKI,HIROKITAKAHASI,JAMESA.YORKE
∗ cs −1 (a ) There exists a unique graph-invariant surface V in R2 for f . More- ∞ −n cs ∗ cs over n=0 f (R2) V , and the defining function φ of V satisfies ⊂α ∗ sup ∗ ∂ φ < θ. α:1≤|Tα|≤2 π (R2) | | Proof. WeP only give a proof of (a) since that of (a∗) is analogous. Let θ (0, 1/10) ∈ 2 be small enough, U be an open set containing R1, and let f be sufficiently C -close to f0 for which the conclusion of Proposition 3.1 holds. Let ps denote the xs- coordinate of the fixed saddle of f0 in A. Since f0 is dimension-reducible, there exist a C2 surface M diffeomorphic to the two-dimensional sphere and f˜ Diff2(R3) 0 ∈ such that π(R1) ps M, f˜0 U = f0 U , and M is 2-normally attracting for f˜0. ×{ } ⊂ ˜ | | 2 ˜ By Theorem 2.1 applied to (f0, M), there exist a C neighborhood of f0, an 2 Y open neighborhood ∆ of π(R1) in R , a constant δ0 > 0, and for each g a 2-normally attracting C2 submanifold V (g) for g, and a C2 function φ(g): ∆∈ Y R such that the following hold: →
graph(φ(g)) = (xu, xc,φ(g)(xu, xc)): (xu, xc) ∆ V (g); ◦ sup { ∂αφ(g) < θ; ∈ } ⊂ ◦ α:1≤|α|≤2 ∆ | | For each p graph(φ(g)) there exists a C2 curve W s through p which is P p ◦ tangent to ∈s(θ) such that if g(p) graph(φ(g)) then g(W s) W s ; C ∈ p ⊂ g(p) Set W (g)= W s : p graph(φ(g)) . Then ◦ { p ∈ } (3.8) π(R ) (p δ ,p + δ ) W (g) U. S 1 × s − 0 s 0 ⊂ ⊂ 2 For each f which is sufficiently C -close to f0, we choose gf such that f = g , and set V cu = graph(φ(g )) R . Then V cu is a graph-invariant∈ Y |U f |U f ∩ 1 surface in R1 for f whose defining function is φ(gf ) π(R1). Moreover we have sup ∂αφ(g ) < θ. | α:1≤|α|≤2 π(R1) | f |π(R1)| PLemma 3.3. If f Diff2(R3) is sufficiently C2-close to f , then ∞ f n(R ) is ∈ 0 n=0 1 contained in W (gf ). T ∞ n Proof. Since the block D is a translate of A in the xu-direction, n=0 f0 (R1) is contained in π(R1) ps . From this and (3.8) the desired inclusion follows. ×{ } T Lemma 3.4. If θ (0, 1/10) is small enough and f Diff1(R3) is sufficiently C1- ∈ ∈ 2 close to f , then any C1 curve which is tangent to s(θ) and intersects f n(R ) 0 C n=0 1 does not intersect R1 f(R1). \ T Proof. If θ (0, 1/10) is small enough, any C1 curve which is tangent to s(θ/2) ∈ 2 n C and intersecting n=0 f0 (R1) does not intersect R1 f0(R1). This implies the assertion. \ T ∞ n cu To complete the proof of Proposition 3.2(a), we prove n=0 f (R1) V by ∞ n cu ⊂ way of contradiction. If p n=0 f (R1) and p / V , then by Lemma 3.3 there ∈ s ∈ T s would exist q graph(φ(gf )) such that p Wq q . Let σ denote the curve in Wq bordered by p∈and q. By PropositionT 3.1,∈ the images\{ } of σ under backward iteration s −1 are tangent to (θ) and expanded by a factor λc in W (gf ). Hence, we would reach C −n −n0 n0 1 such that f (σ) W (gf ) for every 0 n n0 1 and f (σ) W (gf ). ≥ −n ⊂ ≤ ≤ − −n0+1 6⊂ Since f (p) W (gf ) for every n 0, we would have f (q) graph(φ(gf )) ∈ ≥ ∈2 and f −n0 (q) / graph(φ(g )). Therefore f −n0+1(σ) intersects both f n(R ) and ∈ f n=0 1 T HAUSDORFF DIMENSION OF CANTOR INTERSECTIONS 11
−n0+1 s R1 f(R1). By Lemma 3.4, f (σ) is not tangent to (θ) if θ (0, 1/10) is \ 2 C ∈ sufficiently small and f is sufficiently C -close to f0. This yields a contradiction. To show the uniqueness, let V1, V2 be graph-invariant surfaces in R1 for f which 2 is sufficiently C -close to f0. The above argument shows that both V1 and V2 ∞ n contain n=0 f (R1). The uniqueness in Theorem 2.1 implies V1 = V2. 3.4. ConstructionT of Cantor sets. Let θ (0, 1/10) be small enough and let 2 ∈ f be sufficiently C -close to f0 for which the conclusion of Proposition 3.2 holds. ∗ s Let P A, Q C denote the fixed saddles of f. Note that Q C . Let Wloc(P ) ∈ ∈ s ∈ u denote the connected component of W (P ) A containing P , and let Wloc(Q) denote the connected component of W u(Q) ∩C∗ containing Q. Put ∩ γ = W s (P ) V cu and σ = W u (Q) V cs. c loc ∩ c loc ∩ s cu 2 See FIGURE 6. Since Wloc(P ) and V are of class C and intersect each other 2 2 transversely at any point of γc, γc is a C curve. For the same reason, σc is a C curve. We take C1 curvesγ ˜ γ ,σ ˜ σ such thatγ ˜ γ andσ ˜ σ have two c ⊃ c c ⊃ c c \ c c \ c connected components both of infinite length, and view γc Γ and σc Σ as Cantor sets with respect to the induced metrics onγ ˜ andσ ˜ , with∩ thicknesses∩ τ(γ Γ) c c c ∩ and τ(σc Σ) respectively. ∩ u u For p γc Γ, let p denote the connected component of W (p) f(R1) which contains∈ ∩p. For Fq σ Σ, let s denote the connected component∩ of ∈ c ∩ Fq W s(q) f −1(R ) which contains q. Set ∩ 2 F u = u and F s = s. Fp Fq p∈γ ∩Γ q∈σ ∩Σ [c [c u s The sets p and q are called unstable and stable leaves respectively. Note that F ∞ F ∞ f −1( u) f n(R ) for p γ Γ and f( s) f −n(R ) for q σ Σ. Fp ⊂ n=0 1 ∈ c ∩ Fq ⊂ n=0 2 ∈ c ∩ These properties and Proposition 3.2 imply F u f(V cu) and F s f −1(V cs). Our two CantorT sets are subsets of the set ⊂ T ⊂ L = f(V cu) f −1(V cs) F u F s, ∩ ⊂ ∩ which are obtained by projections along the unstable and stable leaves. The set L consists of two connected components for any f which is sufficiently C2-close to f0. Since any connected component of L is a transverse intersection between two C2 surfaces, it is a C2 curve. By Proposition 3.1, the connected components of L are tangent to both cu(θ) and cs(θ). For definiteness, we fix a C2 curve L˜ which C C is tangent to both cu(θ) and cs(θ), contains L and such that L˜ L consists of two connected componentsC both ofC infinite length. Note that each uns\ table or stable leaf intersects L˜ at most at one point. For p F u let u(p) denote the unstable leaf containing p, and for q F s let s(q) denote∈ the stableF leaf containing q. We now define projections Πu : ∈F u L Fand Πs : F s L by Πu(p) L u(p) and Πs(q) L s(q). Set → → ∈ ∩F ∈ ∩F Ω = Πu(γ Γ) and Ω = Πs(σ Σ). 1 c ∩ 2 c ∩ We view Ω1 and Ω2 as Cantor sets with respect to the induced metric on L˜, with thicknesses τ(Ω1) and τ(Ω2). Clearly, Ω1 and Ω2 are interleaved, and satisfy Ω W u(Γ), Ω W s(Σ) and Ω Ω Λ. 1 ⊂ 2 ⊂ 1 ∩ 2 ⊂ 12 YOSHITAKASAIKI,HIROKITAKAHASI,JAMESA.YORKE
Figure 6. (i) the saddles P and Q; (ii) the surfaces f(V cu) and f −1(V cs).
4. Estimates of thicknesses and proofs of the main results In this last section we prove main estimates on the previous constructions, and complete the proofs of our main results. Based on preliminary estimates in Sec- tions 4.1 and 4.2, we estimate the thicknesses of the cross sections of the unstable and stable sets in Section 4.3. In Section 4.4 we show that the thicknesses are well-preserved under the projections along the unstable and stable manifolds. In Section 4.5 we estimate the thicknesses of the Cantor sets constructed in Section 3, and complete the proofs of Theorems A and B in Sections 4.6 and 4.7. Computa- tional proofs are postponed to Sections 4.8 and 4.9.
4.1. Distortion estimates and symbolic coding. Let θ (0, 1/10) be small 2 ∈ enough and let f be sufficiently C -close to f0 for which the conclusion of Proposi- tion 3.2 holds. We establish bounded distortions on iterations of curves on the graph-invariant surfaces V cu, V cs in Proposition 3.2. Since these surfaces are graphs of functions with two-variables, it is convenient to treat them through the natural projections π and π∗ in Section 3.3. A C2 curve γ in V cu f(V cu) is called cu-admissible if it is tangent to cs(θ) and the curvature of π(γ)∪ is everywhere at most θ. Similarly, a C2 curve σC in V cs f −1(V cs) is called cs-admissible if it is cu ∪∗ tangent to (θ) and the curvature of π (σ) is everywhere at most θ. Since γc C 2 and σc are transverse intersections of two C surfaces with small derivatives, the implicit function theorem shows that γc is cu-admissible and σc is cs-admissible. A proof of the next lemma is given in Section 4.8. Lemma 4.1. For any K > 0 there exists θ (0, 1/10) such that if f Diff2(R3) 2 ∈ ∈ is sufficiently C -close to f0, then the following hold: n k −n (a) For any n 1 and any cu-admissible curve γ in k=0 f (R1), f (γ) is cu-admissible.≥ Moreover, for all p, q γ, ∈ T −n Df T γ k | p k eK; Df −n ≤ k |Tqγk HAUSDORFF DIMENSION OF CANTOR INTERSECTIONS 13
(0) (1) 2 Figure 7. The sets γc and γc for f which is sufficiently C -close to f0 in FIGURE 2, and all 1- and 2-cylinders in γc.
∗ n −k n (a ) For any n 1 and any cs-admissible curve σ in k=0 f (R2), f (σ) is cs-admissible.≥ Moreover, for all p, q σ, n ∈ T Df T σ k | p k eK . Df n ≤ k |Tqσk To describe the structure of the Cantor set γc Γ, it is convenient to use a coding on two symbols f(A), f(D). For each integer n∩ 0 define ≥ n γ(n) = γ f k(f(R )). c c ∩ 1 k \=0 (n) (n−1) −n (n−1) The set γc with n 1 is obtained from γc by deleting from f (γc ) all ≥ n those points not contained in f(R1), and then applying f to the remaining set. ∞ −n ∞ (n) Since γc n=0 f (A), n=0 γc = γc Γ holds. Each point in γc Γ is uniquely coded by⊂ a sequence of the symbols which∩ records the history of its backward∩ orbit T T − over the set f(R1)= f(A) f(D). For each word ω = ω−n ω−1 of elements of f(A), f(D) of length n ∪1, we define an n-cylinder in γ ···by { } ≥ c [ω−]= p γ : f −i(p) ω for all 0 i n 1 . { ∈ c ∈ −i−1 ≤ ≤ − } (n−1) n The set γc with n 1 consists of 2 connected components all of which are n-cylinders. Each n-cylinder≥ [ω−] contains exactly two (n + 1)-cylinders [f(A)ω−] and [f(D)ω−], and the set [ω−] ([f(A)ω−] [f(D)ω−]) has exactly three connected \ ∪ components (see FIGURE 7). For convenience, let us call γc the 0-cylinder in γc. Similarly, each point in σc Σ is uniquely coded by a sequence of two symbols. For each word ω+ = ω ω ∩of elements of f −1(B∗), f −1(C∗) of length n 1, 1 ··· n { } ≥ we define an n-cylinder in σc by [ω+]= q σ : f i(q) ω for all 0 i n 1 . { ∈ c ∈ i+1 ≤ ≤ − } For convenience, let us call σc the 0-cylinder in σc. 4.2. Estimates on bounded gaps. As in Section 4.1, let θ (0, 1/10) be small 2 ∈ enough and let f be sufficiently C -close to f0 for which the conclusion of Propo- sition 3.2 holds. We view γc Γ as constructed inductively like the middle third ∩ (n) Cantor set: at step n 1 we construct the n-th approximation γc by deleting −n (n−1) ≥ n from f (γc ) all those points not contained in f(R1), and then applying f to the remaining set. An important difference from the middle third Cantor set is 14 YOSHITAKASAIKI,HIROKITAKAHASI,JAMESA.YORKE
(n−1) that we must delete from each connected component of γc some neighborhoods of its boundary points. Hence, any gap of γ Γ is not created in a finite step of c ∩ the induction, and a careful analysis is required to estimate the thickness of γc Γ. Let G be a bounded gap of γ Γ. Define ∩ c ∩ t = max n 0: there exists an n-cylinder in γ which contains G . G { ≥ c } −tG Let G denote the maximal curve in G such that f (G) does not intersect f(R1). The set G G has exactly two connected components. If t 1, let ω−(G) = \ G ≥ ω−tG ω−1 denote the word of length tG that defines the tG-cylinder in γc which ··· − ′ contains G. If tG = 0, then put [ω (G)] = γc. Any bounded gap G of γc Γ other t ∩ than G contained in [ω−(G)] satisfies t ′ > t . If t 1, f − G ([ω−(G)]) stretches G G G ≥ across A or D, depending on whether ω−tG = f(A) or ω−tG = f(D). Similarly, for a bounded gap J of σ Σ define c ∩ t = max n 0: there exists an n-cylinder in σ which contains J . J { ≥ c } tJ −1 Let J denote the maximal curve in J such that f (J) does not intersect f (R2). + Let ω (J) = ω1 ωtJ denote the word of length tJ that defines the tJ -cylinder ··· + in σc containing J. If tJ = 0, then put [ω (J)] = σc. The next lemma provides preliminary estimates on the gaps of γc Γ and σc Σ. Let ℓ(γ) denote the length of a C1 curve γ. ∩ ∩ Lemma 4.2. For any K > 0 there exists θ (0, 1/10) such that if f Diff2(R3) 2 ∈ ∈ is sufficiently C -close to f0, then the following hold: (a) For any bounded gap G of γ Γ, c ∩ −tG −tG −K ℓ(f (G)) K ℓ(f (G)) K e e and 1+ e (1 + θ)b1; ≤ E∗ 2 A∗ ≤ ℓ(f −tG (G)) ≤ | c | − | c| (a∗) For any bounded gap J of σ Σ, c ∩ tJ tJ −K ℓ(f (J)) K ℓ(f (J)) K e e and 1+ e (1 + θ)b2; ≤ F 2 B ≤ ℓ(f tJ (J)) ≤ | c| − | c| (b) Let G , G be bounded gaps of γ Γ such that 0 t < t and [ω−(G )] 1 2 c∩ ≤ G1 G2 1 ⊃ G2. Then ℓ(G1) >ℓ(G2); (b∗) Let J , J be bounded gaps of σ Σ such that 0 t < t and [ω+(J )] 1 2 c ∩ ≤ J1 J2 1 ⊃ J2. Then ℓ(J1) >ℓ(J2). Proof. Let K > 0, and let θ (0, 1/10) be small enough and let f be sufficiently 2 ∈ C -close to f0 for which the conclusion of Lemma 4.1 holds. For any bounded gap −tG G of γc Γ, f (G) is cu-admissible by Lemma 4.1. Hence, the first inequality in Lemma∩ 4.2(a) holds for θ small enough. −tG Let G be a bounded gap of γc Γ. There is a decomposition of f (G G) into a countably infinite number of cu∩-admissible curves \ ∞ ∞ f −tG (G G)= Gn Gn , \ + ∪ − n=1 n=1 [ [ with the following properties: HAUSDORFF DIMENSION OF CANTOR INTERSECTIONS 15
1 1 −tG n n The sets G+ and G− sandwich f (G). For each n 2, G+ and G− ◦ −tG n−1 k k ≥ sandwich f (G) k=1(G+ G−). −∪i n n ∪ −n n For each n 1, f (G+ G−) f(R1) for all 0 i n 1 and f (G+ ◦ n ≥ S ∪ ⊂ ≤ ≤ − ∪ G−) R1 f(R1). ⊂ −\n n −n n By Lemma 4.1, f (G+) and f (G−) are cu-admissible. Proposition 3.1 gives ℓ(Gn )+ ℓ(Gn ) (1 + θ)( A E∗ )λn. + − ≤ | c|−| c | c Using this estimate, λc < 1/2 and the first inequality in Lemma 4.2(a) we have ∞ ℓ(f −tG (G)) ℓ(f −tG (G G)) (ℓ(Gn )+ ℓ(Gn )) =1+ \ =1+ n=1 + − ℓ(f −tG (G)) ℓ(f −tG (G)) ℓ(f −tG (G)) P A E∗ ∞ 1 1+ eK (1 + θ) | c|−| c | =1+ eK (1 + θ)b , ≤ E∗ 2 A∗ 2n 1 c c n=1 ! | | − | | X as required in the second inequality in Lemma 4.2(a). A proof of Lemma 4.2(a∗) is completely analogous. Let G , G be bounded gaps of γ Γ as in Lemma 4.2(b). Then 1 2 c ∩ −tG −K −tG ℓ(G1) −K ℓ(f 1 (G1)) e ℓ(f 1 (G1)) e t t −tG1 G2 − G1 −tG2 ℓ(G2) ≥ ℓ(f (G2)) ≥ λc ℓ(f (G2)) −K −tG −3K e ℓ(f 1 (G1)) e > 1. K −tG K ≥ λc(1 + e (1 + θ)b1) ℓ(f 2 (G2)) ≥ λc(1 + e (1 + θ)b1) We have used Lemma 4.1(a) for the first inequality, and Proposition 3.1(c) for the second one. The third and fourth inequalities follow from Lemma 4.2(a). By (3.6), the last inequality holds if K and θ are small enough. A proof of Lemma 4.2(b∗) is completely analogous. Let G be a bounded gap of γ Γ. Let x G and let I be the bridge of γ Γ at c ∩ ∈ c ∩ x. The maximal curve I˜ in I such that f −tG (I˜) is contained in the minimal curve γ′ containing γ Γ is called the core of I. Similarly, let J be a bounded gap of c c ∩ σc Σ. Let x J and let L be the bridge of σc Σ at x. The maximal curve ˜ ∩ ∈ −tJ ˜ ∩ ′ L in L such that f (L) is contained in the minimal curve σc containing σc Σ is called the core of L. Instead of directly estimating the length of a bridge from∩ below, we estimate the length of its core from below. 2 Lemma 4.3. For any δ > 0 there exists a C neighborhood of f0 such that if f then the following hold: V ∈V (a) Let G be a bounded gap of γc Γ, x be a boundary point of G, and let I˜ be the core of the bridge of γ Γ∩ at x. Then c ∩ ℓ(I˜) > a δ; ℓ(G) 1 − ∗ (a ) Let J be a bounded gap of σc Σ, x be a boundary point of J, and let L˜ be the core of the bridge of σ ∩Σ at x. Then c ∩ ℓ(L˜) > a δ. ℓ(J) 2 − 16 YOSHITAKASAIKI,HIROKITAKAHASI,JAMESA.YORKE
Proof. Let K > 0, and let θ (0, 1/10) be small enough and let f be sufficiently 2 ∈ C -close to f0 for which the conclusion of Lemma 4.2 holds. Let G be a bounded gap of γ Γ and let x be a boundary point of G. Let I˜ denote the core of the c ∩ bridge at x. Lemma 4.2(b) implies that the endpoint of f −tG (I˜) is f −tG (x) and ′ 2 one of the endpoints of γc, see FIGURE 8. For any f sufficiently C -close to f0, ′ the sum of the lengths of the two connected components of (γc γc) f(R1) is at most eK ( A E∗ ). Moreover, Lemma 4.2(a) yields \ ∩ | c|−| c | (4.1) ℓ(f −tG (G G)) ℓ(f −tG (G)) eK( E∗ 2 A∗ ). \ ≤ ≤ | c | − | c| Hence (4.2) ℓ(f −tG (I˜)) e−K A∗ eK ( E∗ 2 A∗ ) eK( A E∗ ). ≥ | c| − | c | − | c| − | c|−| c | Using Lemma 4.2(a) and (4.1) and (4.2), we obtain
˜ −tG ˜ −K −tG ˜ ℓ(I) −K ℓ(f (I)) e ℓ(f (I)) e −t K −t ℓ(G) ≥ ℓ(f G (G)) ≥ 1+ e (1 + θ)b1 ℓ(f G (G)) e−2K e−K A∗ eK( E∗ 2 A∗ ) eK ( A E∗ ) | c| − | c | − | c| − | c|−| c | ≥1+ eK (1 + θ)b E∗ 2 A∗ 1 | c | − | c| >a δ. 1 − Since b1 1, the last inequality holds for K and θ small enough. A proof of Lemma 4.3(a≤ ∗) is completely analogous.
4.3. Main estimates on thicknesses I. Using the results in the previous sec- tions, we obtain the following lower bounds of thicknesses.
2 Proposition 4.4. For any δ > 0 there exists a C neighborhood of f0 such that if f then V ∈V τ(γ Γ) > a δ and τ(σ Σ) > a δ. c ∩ 1 − c ∩ 2 − Proof. Let δ > 0. Let be a C2-neighborhood of f as in Lemma 4.3. Let f . V 0 ∈V Let G be a bounded gap of γc Γ and let x be a boundary point of G. Let I denote the bridge at x and I˜ the core∩ of I. Then ℓ(I) ℓ(I˜) δ τ(γ Γ, x)= > a . c ∩ ℓ(G) ≥ ℓ(G) 1 − 2
Since G is an arbitrary bounded gap of γc Γ and x is an arbitrary boundary point of G, we obtain τ(γ Γ) > a δ. A proof∩ of the other bound is analogous. c ∩ 1 − 4.4. Lipschitz continuity of projections. Let θ (0, 1/10) be small enough 2 ∈ and let f be sufficiently C -close to f0 for which the conclusion of Proposition 3.2 u u u holds. For two cu-admissible curves γ1, γ2 we write γ1 γ2 if Π (γ1 F ) = Π (γ2 u u u ∼u u ∩ u ∩ F ), and define a projection Πγ1γ2 : γ1 F γ2 F by Πγ1γ2 (p) γ2 (p). u ∩ → ∩u ∈ ∩F Note that Πγ1γ2 is invertible and the inverse is Πγ2γ1 . Reciprocally, for two cs- s s s s admissible curves σ1, σ2 we write σ1 σ2 if Π (σ1 F ) = Π (σ2 F ), and define a projection Πs : σ F s σ F∼s by Πs (q)∩ σ s(q).∩ σ1σ2 1 ∩ → 2 ∩ σ1σ2 ∈ 2 ∩F HAUSDORFF DIMENSION OF CANTOR INTERSECTIONS 17
Figure 8. On the lower estimate of ℓ(I˜)/ℓ(G) in Lemma 4.3.
1 For a C curve γ and p, q γ, let ℓγ(p, q) denote the length of the curve in γ bordered by p and q. The next∈ lemma proved in Section 4.9 asserts that the pro- jections defined as above are bi-Lipschitz continuous, and the Lipschitz constants 2 can be made arbitrarily small for f which is sufficiently C -close to f0. Lemma 4.5. For any K > 0 there exists θ (0, 1/10) such that if f Diff2(R3) 2 ∈ ∈ is sufficiently C -close to f0, then the following hold: (a) Let γ , γ be cu-admissible such that γ γ . For all p, q γ F u, 1 2 1 ∼ 2 ∈ 1 ∩ u u K ℓγ (Π (p), Π (q)) e ℓγ (p, q); 2 γ1γ2 γ1γ2 ≤ 1 (a∗) Let σ , σ be cs-admissible such that σ σ . For all p, q σ F s, 1 2 1 ∼ 2 ∈ 1 ∩ s s K ℓσ (Π (p), Π (q)) e ℓσ (p, q). 2 σ1σ2 σ1σ2 ≤ 1 4.5. Main estimates on thicknesses II. By Lemma 4.4, the lower bounds in Proposition 4.4 transfer to that of the thicknesses of Ω1 and Ω2 as follows. 2 Proposition 4.6. For any δ > 0 there exists a C neighborhood of f0 such that if f then V ∈V τ(Ω ) > a δ and τ(Ω ) > a δ. 1 1 − 2 2 − Proof. Let δ > 0. Let K > 0 be such that e2K < 1+ δ and e−2K > 1 δ. Let 2 − θ (0, 1/10) be small enough, and f be sufficiently C -close to f0 for which the conclusion∈ of Lemma 4.1 holds. There is a one-to-one correspondence between the bounded gaps of Ω1 and the bounded gaps of γc Γ: a bounded gap G of Ω1 and the corresponding bounded gap G′ of γ Γ satisfy∩ the relation ∂G = Πu(∂G′). c ∩ There is also a one-to-one correspondence between the cores of bridges of Ω1 and the cores of bridges γc Γ: the core I of a bridge of Ω1 and the corresponding core I˜′ of a bridge of γ Γ∩ satisfy the relation ∂I˜ = Πu(∂I˜′). c ∩ Let G be a bounded gap of Ω1 and let x be a boundary point of G. Let I be the ′ u ′ bridge of Ω1 at x. Let G be the bounded gap of γc Γ such that ∂G = Π (∂G ). Let y be the boundary point of G′ such that Πu(y)∩ = x. Let I′ be the bridge of γ Γ at y. By Lemmas 4.3(a) and 4.5(a) we have c ∩ ℓ(I) ℓ(I˜) ℓ(I˜′) δ e−2K e−2K a > a δ. ℓ(G) ≥ ℓ(G) ≥ ℓ(G′) ≥ 1 − 2 1 − 18 YOSHITAKASAIKI,HIROKITAKAHASI,JAMESA.YORKE
Since G is an arbitrary bounded gap of Ω1 and x is an arbitrary boundary point of G, it follows that τ(Ω1) a1 δ. Hence the first inequality in Proposition 4.6 holds. A proof of the second≥ one− is completely analogous.
4.6. Proof of Theorem A. From Propositions 4.4, 4.6, Lemma 2.2 and the as- 2 sumption a1a2 > 1, H(f) is non-empty for any f which is C -close to f0. The lower bounds of dim W u(Γ) and dim W s(Σ) are consequences of Proposition 4.4 and Lemma 4.5. The upper bounds of these follow from Lemma 4.5. 2 Let θ (0, 1/10) be small enough and let f be sufficiently C -close to f0 for which the∈ conclusions of Propositions 3.1 and 3.2 hold. We claim that there exists ∞ 1 cu ∞ −n cs a countable family γk k=1 of C curves contained in V n=0 f (V ) and tangent to cs(θ) such{ that} for each p H(f) there exist integers∩ n< 0 and k 1 Cn u ∈ u S n ≥ such that f (p) γk F . Since each γk F is covered by 2 curves in γk of ∈n ∩ ∩ u length at most λc , for all n 1, it follows that dim(γk F ) ln 2/ ln λc < 1. By the countable stability and≥ the invariance of Hausdorff∩ dimension≤ − under the action of bi-Lipschitz homeomorphisms, we obtain dim H(f) < 1. Hence, H(f) is totally disconnected [3]. It is left to prove the claim. If p H(f) then p Λ, and there exist integers n cu ∈ u ∈ n cs s n− < 0 n+ such that f (p) V F for all n n− and f (p) V F for all ≤ ∈ ∩ N≤ cu ∈ cs ∩ n n+. Set N = n+ n−. By Proposition 3.1, f (V ) intersects V transversely ≥ n N− cu cs n at f + (p), and so f (V ) V contains a curve which contains f + (p) and is tangent to cs(θ). We apply∩ f −N and use Proposition 3.1 to obtain a curve in V cu f −N (VC cs) which contains f n− (p) and is tangent to cs(θ). This implies the claim,∩ and the proof of Theorem A is complete. C
4.7. Proof of Theorem B. In view of Theorem 2.3, we fix τ0 > 0 such that if S1, S2 are two interleaved Cantor sets in R with τ(S1) > τ0/2, τ(S2) > τ0/2, then S S contains a Cantor set whose thickness is at least (6/7) min τ(S ), τ(S ) . 1 ∩ 2 { 1 2 } Assume min a1, a2 > τ0. Combining Propositions 4.4 and 4.6 we obtain τ(Ω1) > { } 2 p τ0/2 and τ(Ω2) > τ0/2 for all f that is sufficiently C -close to f0. Then 6 5 τ(Ω Ω ) min τ(Ω ), τ(Ω ) > min a , a . 1 ∩ 2 ≥ 7 { 1 2 } 6 { 1 2} By [11] (see also [12, p.77, Propositionp 5]), the Hausdorffp dimension of a Cantor set with thickness τ is at least ln 2/ ln(2 + 1/τ). Hence we obtain 1 1 1 1 1 < < , dim H(f) − 2 ln 2 τ(Ω1 Ω2) min a , a ∩ { 1 2} as required. This completes the proof of Theorem B.p
4.8. Proof of Lemma 4.1. Let K > 0, and let θ (0, 1/10) be small enough, 2 ∈ and let f be sufficiently C -close to f0 for which the conclusion of Proposition 3.2 holds. To obtain distortion bounds on V cu and V cs, we consider iterations of planar maps ϕ: π(R ) π(R ) and ϕ∗ : π∗(R ) π∗(R ) given by 1 → 1 2 → 2 −1 −1 ∗ ∗ ∗ −1 ϕ = π f (π cu ) and ϕ = π f (π cs ) . ◦ ◦ |V ◦ ◦ |V HAUSDORFF DIMENSION OF CANTOR INTERSECTIONS 19
Since V cu and V cs are C2 submanifolds, ϕ and ϕ∗ are of class C2. Moreover −1 ∗ (4.3) sup det Dϕ <λ0,c and sup det Dϕ <µ0,c. ∗ π(R1) | | π (R2) | | Furthermore, Proposition 3.2 implies
2 2 (4.4) sup Φij < θ and sup Φij < θ , ∗ π(R1) k∇ k π (R2) k∇ k i,jX∈{u,c} i,jX∈{c,s} where =(∂ , ∂ ) and ∇ xu xc Φ Φ Φ Φ Dϕ = uu uc and Dϕ∗ = cc cs . Φcu Φcc Φsc Φss Let n 1 and let γ be cu-admissible as in Lemma 4.1(a). By Proposition 3.1, f −n(γ) is≥ tangent to s(θ). By the graph invariance of V cu, f −n(γ) is tangent to cu C (θ). We parametrize the curve γ0 = π(γ) by arc length s, and put γi+1(s) = Cϕ γ (s) inductively for 0 i n 1. We have ◦ i ≤ ≤ −
γ˙ i+1(s)= Dϕγi(s)γ˙ i(s) andγ ¨i+1(s)= Miγ˙ i(s)+ Dϕγi(s)γ¨i(s), where the single and double dots denote the first- and second-order derivatives on s respectively, and
Φuu, γ˙ i(s) Φuc, γ˙ i(s) Mi = h∇ i h∇ i , Φcu, γ˙ i(s) Φcc, γ˙ i(s) h∇ i h∇ i and the brackets in Mi denote the inner products. Let κi(s) denote the curvature of the curve γi at γi(s). Using the above formulas we have 1 κ (s) Dϕ γ˙ (s) M γ˙ (s) + det Dϕ γ˙ (s) γ¨ (s) i+1 ≤ γ˙ (s) 3 k γi(s) i × i i k | γi(s)|·k i × i k k i+1 k γ˙ (s) 3 1 k i k Dϕ M + det Dϕ κ (s) . ≤ γ˙ (s) 3 k γi(s)k·k ik γ˙ (s) | γi(s)| i k i+1 k k i k −i −1 Using γ˙ i(s) λc and γ˙ i+1(s) λc γ˙ i(s) from Proposition 3.1, (4.3), (4.4) k k ≥ k 3 k ≥−1 k k 3 and (3.7) we have κi+1(s) λc θ + λ0,cκi(s) λcθ+λcκi(s). Using this inequality inductively and then κ ≤θ, we have ≤ 0 ≤ n −1 θ θ 3θ (4.5) κ (s) λ3θ λi + λnκ (s) 2λ3θ + λnθ + = . n ≤ c c c 0 ≤ c c ≤ 4 2 4 i=0 X −n −n Since π(f (γ(s))) = γn(s), from (4.5) it follows that f (γ) is cu-admissible. Let 0 i n 1. For all arc length parameters s, t [0,ℓ(γ )] we have ≤ ≤ − ∈ 0 γ˙ (s) γ˙ (t) 3θ k i+1 k k i+1 k Dϕ ℓ (γ (s),γ (t)) + Dϕ Dϕ γ˙ (s) − γ˙ (t) ≤ 4 k γi(t)k γi i i k γi(s) − γi(t)k k i k k i k √ θℓγi (γi(s),γi(t)). ≤ The second inequality is from the upper bound on the curvature of γi in (4.5). The last one is from (4.3) and (4.4). Summing this estimate over all 0 i n 1, ≤ ≤ − 20 YOSHITAKASAIKI,HIROKITAKAHASI,JAMESA.YORKE and then using ℓ (γ (s),γ (t)) ℓ (γ (s),γ (t))λn−i from Proposition 3.1 and γi i i ≤ γn n n c ℓγn (γn(s),γn(t)) < 2, we obtain
n−1 n−1 γ˙ n(s) γ˙ i+1(s) γ˙ i+1(t) n−i K ln k k k k k k 2√θ λc < 2√θ< . γ˙ n(t) ≤ γ˙ i(s) − γ˙ i(t) ≤ 3 i=0 i=0 k k X k k k k X −n −1 n The last inequality holds for θ small enough. Since f (γ)=(π V cu ) ϕ π(γ), for all points p = γ(s) and q = γ(t) in γ, the chain rule yields | ◦ ◦
−1 −n cu Df T γ D(π V ) T −n γn γ˙ (s) Dπ T γ p k | | π(f (p)) k n p k −n| k = −1 k k k | k. Df T γ D(π V cu ) T − γ γ˙ n(t) Dπ T γ k | q k k | | π(f n(q)) n k k k k | q k K The first and last fractions of the right-hand side are at most e 3 since γ and f −n(γ) are tangent to cu(θ). The proof of Lemma 4.1(a) is complete. A proof of Lemma 4.1(a∗) is doneC by exchanging the roles of ϕ, ϕ∗ and proceeding in the same way.
4.9. Proof of Lemma 4.5. Let K > 0, and let θ (0, 1/10) be small enough, 2 ∈ and let f be sufficiently C -close to f0 for which the conclusion of Lemma 4.1 with K replaced by K/5, and the following hold: for all cu-admissible curves γ1, γ2 such that γ γ and for all p, q γ F u, 1 ∼ 2 ∈ 1 ∩ −n u −n u −n K ℓf (γ2)(f (Πγ1γ2 (p)), f (Πγ1γ2 (q)) (4.6) e 5 , −n −n −n ℓf (γ1)(f (p), f (q)) ≤ where n = n(p, q) 0 is the integer such that f −k(p) and f −k(q) belong to the same connected component≥ of f(V cu) for all 0 k n, and f −n−1(p) and f −n−1(q) do not belong to the same connected component≤ of≤ f(V cu). Let γ , γ be cu-admissible curves such that γ γ . Let p, q γ F u. By 1 2 1 ∼ 2 ∈ 1 ∩ (4.6) the mean value theorem, there exist ξ γ1 in between p and q, and η γ2 u u ∈ ∈ in between Πγ1γ2 (p) and Πγ1γ2 (q) such that u u −n K ℓγ2 (Πγ1γ2 (p), Πγ1γ2 (q)) Df Tξγ1 e 5 k | k. ℓ (p, q) ≤ Df −n γ1 k |Tηγ2 k For the fraction of the right-hand side, Lemma 4.1(a) gives
−n −n −n −n ′ Df Tξγ1 Df Tpγ1 Df Tp γ2 3K Df Tpγ1 k | k k | k 5 −n k −n | k −n e k −n | k , Df Df ′ Df ≤ Df ′ k |Tpγ1 k k |Tp γ2 k k |Tηγ2 k k |Tp γ2 k ′ u where p = Πγ1γ2 (p). From this estimate and (4.6), it is enough to show −n Df Tpγ1 K 5 (4.7) k −n | k e . Df ′ ≤ k |Tp γ2 k To this end, we use the planar map ϕ introduced in the proof of Lemma 4.1. −i ′ −i ′ ′ For 0 i n put pi = π(f (p)) and pi = π(f (p )). Let v0, v0 be unit vectors ≤ ≤′ i at p0 and p0 which are tangent to π(γ1) and π(γ2) respectively. Put vi = Dϕp0 v0 HAUSDORFF DIMENSION OF CANTOR INTERSECTIONS 21
′ i ′ ∠ ′ ′ and vi = Dϕp′ v0. Let (vi, vi) [0, π) be the angle between vi and vi, and put 0 ∈ s = sin ∠(v , v′). Set c = λ2λ−1. For 0 i n 1 we have i i i 0 c 0,c ≤ ≤ − 1 ′ ′ ′ si+1 = ′ Dϕpi vi Dϕpi vi + Dϕpi vi (Dϕpi Dϕpi )vi vi+1 vi+1 k × × − k k k·k ′ k vi vi −i −i ′ k k k k ( det Dϕ s + θℓ u −i (f (p), f (p ))) ≤ v v′ | pi | i F (f (p)) k i+1k k i+1k λ2(λ−1s +2θλ−i) c s + √θλ−i. ≤ c 0,c i u ≤ 0 i u To estimate the second cross product we have used (4.4). For the last inequality we −1 ′ −1 ′ have used (4.3), and Proposition 3.1 to deduce vi+1 λc vi , vi+1 λc vi , −i −i ′ −i k k ≥ k k k k ≥ k k ℓ u −i (f (p), f (p )) 2λ . Using this inductively and then s 2θ gives F (f (p)) ≤ u 0 ≤ s 2θci+1 + √θλ−i i (c λ )k, and thus i+1 ≤ 0 u k=0 0 u ′ vi+1 Pvi+1 −i −i ′ k k k k θℓ u f −i p (f (p), f (p )) + Dϕp′ si v − v′ ≤ F ( ( )) k i k k ik k ik i−1
2θλ−i +2θci + √θλ−i+1 (c λ )k. ≤ u 0 u 0 u k X=0 Summing this inequality over all 0 i n 1 yields ≤ ≤ − i v 2θ ∞ −1 K ln k nk 4θ + + √θ λ−i+1 (c λ )k . v′ ≤ 1 c u 0 u ≤ 15 n 0 i=0 k k k − X X=0 Since 0
References [1] Asaoka, M.: Hyperbolic sets exhibiting C1-persistent homoclinic tangency for higher dimen- sions. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 136 (2008) 677–686. [2] Barrientos, P. G., P´erez, S. A.: Robust heteroclinic tangencies. Bull. Braz. Math. Soc. 51 (2020) 1041–1056. [3] Falconer, K.: Fractal Geometry (Mathematical foundations and applications). Second edi- tion. Wiley, Chichester, 2003 [4] Fenichel, N.: Persistence and smoothness of invariant manifolds for flows, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 21 (1972) 193–226. [5] Gonchenko, S. V., Shil’nikov, L. P., Turaev, D. V.: On the existence of Newhouse regions in a neighborhood of systems with a structurally unstable homoclinic Poincar´ecurve (the multidimensional case). Russ. Acad. Sci. Dokl. Math. 47 (1993) 268–273. [6] Hirsch, M. W., Pugh, C. C., Shub, M.: Invariant manifolds. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 583, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York, 1977. 22 YOSHITAKASAIKI,HIROKITAKAHASI,JAMESA.YORKE
[7] Hunt, B. R., Kan, I., Yorke, J. A.: When Cantor sets intersect thickly, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 339 (1993) 869–888. [8] Kiriki, S., Soma, T.: C2-robust heterodimensional tangencies. Nonlinearity 25 (2012) 3277– 3299. [9] Newhouse, S. E.: Nondensity of Axiom A(a) on S2, Proc. Sympos. Pure Math. 14 Amer. Math. Soc. Providence, R.I., (1970) 191–202. [10] Newhouse, S. E.: Diffeomorphisms with infinitely many sinks, Topology 13 (1974) 9–18. [11] Newhouse, S. E.: The abundance of wild hyperbolic sets and non-smooth stable sets for diffeomorphisms, Inst. Hautes Etudes´ Sci. Publ. Math. 50 (1979) 101–151. [12] Palis, J., Takens, F.: Hyperbolicity and sensitive chaotic dynamics at homoclinic bifurcations. Cambridge studies in advanced mathematics 35, Cambridge University Press 1993. [13] Palis, J., Viana, M.: High dimension diffeomorphisms displaying infinitely many periodic attractors, Ann. of Math. 140 (1994) 207–250. [14] Robinson, C.: Bifurcation to infinitely many sinks, Commun. Math. Phys. 90 (1983) 433– 459. [15] Romero, N.: Persistence of homoclinic tangencies in higher dimensions, Ergodic Theory and Dynamical Systems 15 (1995) 735–757. [16] Saiki, Y., Takahasi, H., Yorke, J. A.: Piecewise linear maps with heterogeneous chaos, Nonlinearity 34 (2021) 5744–5761. [17] Williams, R. F.: How big is the intersection of two thick Cantor sets?, Continuum Theory and Dynamical Systems (Arcata, CA, 1989), 163–175, Contemp. Math., 117, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1991.
Graduate School of Business Administration, Hitotsubashi University, Tokyo, 186-8601, JAPAN Email address: [email protected]
Keio Institute of Pure and Applied Sciences (KiPAS), Department of Mathe- matics, Keio University, Yokohama, 223-8522, JAPAN Email address: [email protected]
Institute for Physical Science and Technology and Mathematics and Physics Departments, University of Maryland College Park, MD 20742, USA Email address: [email protected]