4
$\begingroup$

Let $\mathcal{T}_A$ be a Teichmüller space of the sphere $S^2$ with a finite set $A$ of marked points, and suppose that $f \colon \mathcal{T}_A \to \mathcal{T}_A$ is a holomorphic map that has a periodic cycle (that is not a fixed point).

In the case, when $A = 4$, $\mathcal{T}_A$ is biholomorphic to $\mathbb{D}$ and, therefore, such a map $f$ should be conjugated to a rotation map on $\mathbb{D}$ (for instance, by Denjoy–Wolff theorem). Thus, $f$ has a fixed point.

What about the case when $|A| > 4$? Can we say that $f$ necessarily has a fixed point if it has a periodic cycle?

As any holomorphic map on $\mathcal{T}_A$, the map $f$ should be $1$-Lipschitz. Therefore, since it has a cycle, then there exists a $f$-invariant compact subset of $\mathcal{T}_A$. Moreover, since $\mathcal{T}_A$ is geodesic, then $f$ should preserve geodesics between points of the hyperbolic cycle. But it is not clear for me whether these arguments lead to a conclusion….

$\endgroup$
2
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ When you say "map", do you mean biholomorphic? Every biholomorphic map of Teichmuller space of dimension $>1$ will come from the mapping class group and, hence, will have a fixed point if it has a periodic orbit (NRP). $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 19 at 14:35
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I am talking about holomorphic maps but I do not assume that they are injective. If f is a holomorphic map of the unit disk that is not an automorphism then every orbit either converges to a unique fixed point inside the disk or to a unique point on the boundary. In the last case periodic cycles are not possible, so I believe my claim is correct... $\endgroup$
    – A B
    Commented Jun 19 at 14:43

1 Answer 1

4
+100
$\begingroup$

Let $T$ denote the Teichmuller space of a hyperbolic Riemann surface of finite conformal type. Suppose that $f: T\to T$ is a holomorphic map which has a periodic orbit $Z$, i.e. a finite invariant subset on which $f$ acts as an order $n$ cyclic permutation. Set $g=f^n$, then $g$ fixes $Z$ pointwise. Since $f$ and $g$ commute, $f(F_g)\subset F_g$, where $F_g$ is the fixed-point set of $g$ in $T$. It is nonempty since $Z\subset F_g$. I claim that $F_g$ is a convex subset of $T$. Indeed, take two points $p, q\in F_g$. Then the Teichmuller geodesic segment $pq$ between $p, q$ is mapped via $g$ to a path $c$ in $T$ of length $\le d(p,q)$ (since $g: T\to T$ is a holomorphic map, it weakly decreases the Kobayashi-Teichmuller distance). But $c$ connects $p$ and $q$, hence, its length $=d(p,q)$, i.e. $c$ is a geodesic segment equal to $pq$; thus, $pq$ has to be fixed by $g$ pointwise. Thus, $pq\subset F_g$. (Most likely, $F_g$ is a submanifold but we do not need this.) Convexity of $F_g$ implies that it is contractible. The restriction of $f$ to $F_g$ is a periodic homeomorphism of order $n$. It is now a classical argument going back to Nielsen that $f$ has a fixed point in $F_g$. It goes as follows. Set $F:=F_g$ and $h:=f|_F$. Suppose first that $n$ is prime. A finite cyclic group of prime order cannot act freely on a contractible and locally contractible finite-dimensional locally compact metrizable space (since finite nontrivial groups have infinite cohomological dimension). Hence, some nontrivial element of $\langle h\rangle$ fixes a point in $F$. But, since $n$ is prime, this element generates the cyclic group $\langle h\rangle$. The general case is proven by induction on the number of prime factors of $n$. Suppose that $n=pq$ where $p$ is prime. Then $h^q$ has order $p$ and, hence, has nonempty fixed-point set $F'=F_{h^q}$ in $F$. But $F'$ is again convex, hence, a contractible and locally contractible subset, invariant under the action of $h$. Thus, we reduced the problem to finding a fixed point of $h^p$ in $F'$. The order of $h^p$ is $q<n$ and we continue inductively.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you! But don't you require that $d_{\tau}g$ is not the identity for every $\tau \in F_g$ in the first part of your argument? And can you provide a reference for the Nielsen's argument or, perhaps, elaborate a bit more on the fact that a finite prime order group cannot act freely on a contractible finite-dimensional CW-complex? $\endgroup$
    – A B
    Commented Jun 25 at 7:37
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @AB: What is $d_\tau g$? As for the nonexistence of free actions of cyclic group actions on contractible finite-dimensional cell complexes, see my answer on MSE here, namely, the second argument. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 25 at 8:31
  • $\begingroup$ By $d_{\tau}g$, I mean the differential of $g$ at the point $\tau$. Because in order to state that $F_g$ is a submanifold, you need to apply the inverse function theorem? $\endgroup$
    – A B
    Commented Jun 25 at 8:41
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @AB: I see. As I said, I do not need a submanifold, only an analytic subvariety. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 25 at 8:42

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .