ENDPERIODIC AUTOMORPHISMS OF SURFACES AND FOLIATIONS JOHN CANTWELL, LAWRENCE CONLON, AND SERGIO R. FENLEY Abstract. We extend the unpublished work of M. Handel and R. Miller on the classification, up to isotopy, of endperiodic automorphisms of surfaces. We give the Handel-Miller construction of the geodesic laminations, give an axiomatic theory for pseudo-geodesic laminations, show the geodesic lamina- tions satisfy the axioms, and prove that pseudo-geodesic laminations satisfying our axioms are ambiently isotopic to the geodesic laminations. The axiomatic approach allows us to show that the given endperiodic automorphism is iso- topic to a smooth endperiodic automorphism preserving smooth laminations ambiently isotopic to the original ones. Using the axioms, we also prove the \transfer theorem" for foliations of 3-manifolds, namely that, if two depth one foliations F and F0 are transverse to a common one-dimensional foliation L whose monodromy on the noncompact leaves of F exhibits the nice dynamics of Handel-Miller theory, then L also induces monodromy on the noncompact leaves of F0 exhibiting the same nice dynamics. Our theory also applies to surfaces with infinitely many ends. 1. Introduction The Nielsen-Thurston theory of automorphisms of compact surfaces [19, 43, 29, 33] classifies the isotopy class of an automorphism f of a compact, hyperbolic surface. For endperiodic automorphisms of noncompact surfaces, M. Handel and R. Miller outlined an analogous theory (unpublished). Both theories produce a pair of transverse geodesic laminations and a map h (endperiodic in the Handel-Miller case), isotopic to f and preserving the lamina- tions. In the compact case, there are h-invariant reducing circles which decompose the surface into periodic pieces and pseudo-Anosov pieces. Similarly, in the endperi- odic case, there are reducing circles and reducing lines. These reduce the surface into finitely many (finite or infinite) h-orbits of compact subsurfaces, finitely many arXiv:1006.4525v8 [math.GT] 10 Jul 2019 noncompact pieces on which a power of h is a translation, and finitely many non- compact \pseudo-anosov" pieces. (The lower case \a" indicates that the analogy with pseudo-Anosov automorphisms of compact surfaces is weak.) In our exposi- tion, reduction arises late in the game when an analysis of the laminations yields the reducing curves in a very natural way. The first nine sections of this paper treat the basics, defining endperiodicity, presenting the Handel-Miller construction of the geodesic laminations arising from an endperiodic automorphism, giving a detailed analysis of their structure, con- structing the endperiodic automorphism preserving the laminations, and analyzing 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 37E30; Secondary 57R30. Key words and phrases. endperiodic, lamination, finite depth. 1 2 J. CANTWELL, L. CONLON, AND S. FENLEY its dynamics. These sections fill in roughly a thirty year gap in the literature, the first goal of this paper. Our second goal is to prove two important new theorems, Theorem 11.1 and Theorem 12.7 (see below), which are critical for applications to foliation theory. For this, it becomes necessary to relax the condition that the laminations be geodesic. We do this in Section 10 where we state four axioms for the \pseudo-geodesic" laminations and show that these laminations are ambiently isotopic to the geodesic laminations of the Handel-Miller theory. We note that the geodesic laminations satisfy our axioms, so we are not axiomatizing the empty set, and the isotopy theorem then shows that our axioms are complete. The entire theory developed in the geodesic case becomes immediately available in the pseudo-geodesic case. As in the Nielsen-Thurston theory, smoothness is a problem. Thurston's tech- nique of \blowing down" the laminations to produce a pair of transverse foliations with finitely many p-pronged singularities made it possible to smooth h and the foliations except at the singularities. This used a pair of projectively invariant mea- sures to produce the smooth coordinate atlas on the complement of the singular set. In our case, the blow-down does not yield foliations and the projectively invariant measures may not have full support. In our \Smoothing Theorem" (Theorem 11.1), having relaxed the geodesic condition on the laminations, we directly construct a pair of transverse smooth laminations preserved by an endperiodic diffeomorphism h and verify the axioms. Handel-Miller theory has applications to foliations analogous to the applications of Nielsen-Thurston theory to fibrations (cf. [25]). In smooth foliations of depth one, the monodromy f of the noncompact leaves is endperiodic and there is a smooth representative h of the isotopy class of f preserving the laminations. We will prove the fundamental \Transfer Theorem" (Theorem 12.7). By this theorem, if F and F0 are depth one foliations on M, both transverse to a 1-dimensional foliation L, and if the first return map (monodromy) induced by L on a depth one leaf L of F preserves a pair of pseudo-geodesic laminations satisfying the axioms, then the monodromy it induces on a depth one leaf L0 of F0 also preserves such a pair of laminations. For this, the laminations on the leaf of F0 cannot be assumed to be geodesic, even if those on the leaf of F are, necessitating our axiomatic characterization. The proof of the theorem proceeds by showing that the the truth of our axioms for the monodromy of F implies their truth for the monodromy of F0. 2. Endperiodic Automorphisms We fix a temporary hypothesis, Temporary Hypothesis. Until Section 2.1, we assume that L is a non- compact, connected n-manifold with finitely or infinitely many ends and possibly with boundary. Let f : L ! L be a homeomorphism. We do not assume that L is orientable nor, if it is, that f is orientation preserving. Suppose L ⊃ V1 ⊃ ::: ⊃ Vn ⊃ V n+1 ⊃ Vn+1 ⊃ ::: with the Vn open, connected, T1 n=1 Vn = ;, and V n r Vn compact. Then the nested sequence of sets fVng defines an end of L. If fVng and fUng define ends of L, then fVng is said to be equivalent to fUng if for every n there exists an m such that Vn ⊃ Um and for every m there exists an n ENDPERIODIC AUTOMORPHISMS 3 such that Um ⊃ Vn. The equivalence classes, e = [fVng], are called the ends of L and the set E(L) of equivalence classes is called the endset of L. Often one gives an \exhaustion" K0 ⊂ K1 ⊂ · · · ⊂ Kn ⊂ · · · ⊂ L where the Kn S1 are compact and n=0 Kn = L. Then for any e 2 E(L), e = [fUng] where Un is an unbounded component of the complement of Kn. Let T be the topology on L, that is T is the set of open sets in L. For V 2 T let, Vb = V [ fe = [fVng] 2 E(L) j there exists an n with V ⊃ Vng: Then it is well known that Bb = T [ fVb j V 2 Tg is a base for a compact, separable metrizable topology on L [ E(L) which restricts to a totally disconnected topology on the closed set E(L). If e 2 E(L), we will say that U ⊂ L is a neighborhood of the end e if Ub is a neighborhood of e in the space (L [ E(L); Tb). Notice that f induces an automorphism on the space of ends of L which, by abuse, we will also denote by f. pe Definition 2.1 (pe). An end e of L is periodic of period pe > 0 if f (e) = e and pe is the least positive integer with this property. Remark. If there are finitely many ends, every end is periodic. Definition 2.2 (positive and negative ends, E±(L)). An end e of period pe is a positive end if there is a closed, connected neighborhood Ue of e such that L r Ue is connected and pe (1) f (Ue) ⊂ Ue; T1 npe (2) n=0 f (Ue) = ;; (3) Fr Ue is compact. The end e is a negative end if the parallel assertions hold with pe replaced by −pe. We denote the set of positive (respectively negative) ends by E+(L) (respectively E−(L)). Remark. We will write @M for the boundary of a manifold M and the symbol Fr A for the topological boundary (frontier) of the subset A of a topological space. Remark. The positive ends are the attracting ends and the negative ends are the repelling ends. Ends may fail to be positive or negative. For instance, on a four times punctured sphere, one easily produces a homeomorphism f that cyclically permutes three punctures, fixes the fourth and satisfies f 3 = id. These ends are neither positive nor negative. Similar examples can be produced in which the ends are nonplanar. Definition 2.3 (f-neighborhood of an end). A set Ue as in Definition 2.2 will be called an f-neighborhood of e. Definition 2.4 (endperiodic automorphism). The homeomorphism f : L ! L is called an endperiodic automorphism of L if all periodic ends are positive or negative. Example 2.5. A simple example of an endperiodic automorphism is depicted in Figure 1. Here, the ends e1 and e2 are periodic of period 2 and negative, with pe2 = pe1 = 2. The end e is periodic of period 1, positive, with pe = 1. The circle f-junctures (Definition 2.9) separate the neighborhoods of the ends into f- domains (Definition 2.24) having negative Euler characteristic. The arrows indicate 4 J. CANTWELL, L. CONLON, AND S. FENLEY e1 e e2 Figure 1. An example with two negative ends the action of f. Notice that all of the \interesting" dynamics of f occurs in the compact region complementary to neighborhoods of the three ends.