Inhomogeneous Diophantine Approximation On Curves and Hausdorff Dimension
Inhomogeneous Diophantine Approximation On Curves and Hausdorff Dimension
Inhomogeneous Diophantine Approximation On Curves and Hausdorff Dimension
Abstract
The goal of this paper is to develop a coherent theory for inhomogeneous Diophantine approximation
on curves in Rn akin to the well established homogeneous theory. More specifically, the measure theo-
retic results obtained generalize the fundamental homogeneous theorems of R.C. Baker (1978), Dodson,
Dickinson (2000) and Beresnevich, Bernik, Kleinbock, Margulis (2002). In the case of planar curves, the
complete Hausdorff dimension theory is developed.
1 Introduction
Throughout ψ : R+ → R+ := (0, +∞) denotes a decreasing function and will
be referred to as an approximation function. Let f = (f1 , . . . , fn ) : I → Rn
be a C (n) map defined on an interval I ⊂ R and λ : I → R be a function.
For reasons that will soon be apparent, the function λ will be referred to as
an inhomogeneous function. Let An (ψ, λ) be the set of x ∈ I such that the
inequality
ka · f(x) + λ(x)k < ψ(|a|) (1)
holds for infinitely many a ∈ Zn \ {0}, where k · k denotes the distance
to the nearest integer, |a| := max{|a1 |, . . . , |an |} and a · b stands for the
standard inner product of vectors a and b in Zn . In the special case when
ψ(h) = ψv (h) := h−v for some fixed positive v we will denote An (ψv , λ) by
∗
Supported by EPSRC Grant EP/E061613/1
1
An (v, λ). Furthermore, in the case when the inhomogeneous function λ is
identically zero we write An (ψ) for An (ψ, λ) and An (v) for An (v, λ).
By definition, An (ψ, λ) is the set of x ∈ I such that the corresponding
point f(x) lying on the curve
C := (f1 (x), f2 (x), . . . , fn (x)) : x ∈ I ⊂ Rn
(2)
satisfies the Diophantine condition arising from (1). Within the homogeneous
setup (λ ≡ 0), investigating the measure theoretic properties of An (ψ) dates
back to 1932 and a famous problem of Mahler [24]. The problem states
that when (2) is the Veronese curve given by (x, x2 , . . . , xn ) then An (v) is of
Lebesgue measure zero whenever v > n. Mahler’s problem was eventually
settled by Sprindzuk [28] in 1965 and subsequently Schmidt [27] extended the
result to the case of arbitrary planar curves (i.e. n = 2) with non-vanishing
curvature. These two major results led to what is currently known as the
(homogeneous) theory of Diophantine approximation on manifolds [14].
Diophantine approximation on manifolds has been an extremely active
research area over the past 10 years or so. Rather than describe the activity
in detail, we refer the reader to research articles [3, 4, 8, 10, 15, 23, 29] and the
surveys [6, 22, 25]. Nevertheless, it is worth singling out the pioneering work
of Kleinbock and Margulis [23] in which the fundamental Baker-Sprindzuk
conjecture is established. This has undoubtedly acted as the catalyst to the
works cited above which together constitute a coherent homogeneous theory
for Diophantine approximation on manifolds. The situation for the inhomo-
geneous theory is quite different. Indeed, the inhomogeneous analogue of the
Baker-Sprindzuk conjecture [11, 12] has only just been established in 2008.
The aim of this paper is to develop a coherent theory for inhomogeneous
Diophantine approximation on curves akin to the well established homoge-
neous theory. More precisely, Hausdorff measure theoretic statements for
the sets An (ψ, λ) are obtained. In particular, a complete metric theory is
established in the case of planar curves (n = 2). In short, the results consti-
tute the first precise and general statements in the theory of inhomogeneous
Diophantine approximation on manifolds.
2
The curve C given by (2) is called non-degenerate at x ∈ I if the Wronskian
(j)
w(f1′ , . . . , fn′ )(x) := det(fi (x))16i,j6n
does not vanish. We say that C is non-degenerate if it is non-degenerate
at almost every point x ∈ I. Given a set X ⊂ Rn and a real number
s > 0, Hs (X) will denote the s-dimensional Hausdorff measure of X and
dim X will denote the Hausdorff dimension of X. The latter is defined to
be the infimum over s such that Hs (X) = 0. For the formal definitions and
properties of Hausdorff measure and dimension see [21].
Lower bounds. Our first result enables us to deduce lower bounds for
dim An (v, λ) and represents an inhomogeneous version of the homogeneous
theorem established by Dodson and Dickinson [18]. Furthermore, even within
the homogeneous setup the result is stronger – it deals with Hausdorff mea-
sure rather than just dimension.
Note that whenever the sum in (3) diverges, the theorem implies that
s
H (An (ψ, λ)) > 0. In turn, it follows from the definition of Hausdorff dimen-
sion that dim(An (ψ, λ)) > s. In particular, it is easily verified that the sum
in (3) diverges whenever s < (n + 1)/(1 + τψ ), where
− log ψ(q)
τψ := lim inf
q→∞ log q
is the lower order of 1/ψ at infinity. Thus, Theorem 1 readily gives the
following inhomogeneous version of the Dodson-Dickinson lower bound [18]
for non-degenerate curves.
3
Note that in the case of ψ(q) = q −v we have that τψ = v as one would
expect. In the case of λ being a constant function and ψ(q) = q −v , the above
corollary has previously been obtained by the author in [1]. Bugeaud [16] has
established (4) within the context of approximation by algebraic integers; i.e.
in the case that C is the Veronese curve (xn , . . . , x) and λ : x → xn+1 .
In the case s = 1, the s-dimensional Hausdorff measure Hs is simply
one dimensional Lebesgue measure on the real line R . Thus, Theorem 1
trivially gives rise to a complete inhomogeneous analogue of the theorem of
Beresnevich, Bernik, Kleinbock and Margulis [8] in the case of non-degenerate
curves.
Here and elsewhere |X| will stand for the Lebesgue measure of a measurable
subset X of R.
Upper bounds. It is believed that the lower bound for dim An (ψ, λ) given
in Corollary 1 is sharp. Establishing that this is the case, represents a chal-
lenging problem and in general is open even in the homogeneous setup –
it has only been verified in some special cases [2, 7, 13, 19]. In particular,
Baker [2] has settled the problem for planar curves within the homogeneous
setup. To the best of our knowledge, nothing seems to be known in the
inhomogeneous case. The following result, which is an inhomogeneous gen-
eralisation of Baker’s theorem, gives a complete theory for planar curves in
the inhomogeneous case.
4
2 Lower bounds: Proof of Theorem 1
The proof of Theorem 1 will rely on the ubiquitous systems technique as
developed in [9]. Essentially, the notion of ubiquitous system represents a
convenient way of describing the ‘uniform’ distribution of the naturally aris-
ing points (and more generally sets) from a given Diophantine approximation
inequality/problem - see [9, 20].
[
B Pα , ρ(2t ) ∩ I > k|I|.
lim inf
t→∞
α∈Jt
5
Lemma 1 Let ψ be an approximation function and (P, β) be a locally ubiq-
uitous system with respect to ρ. Suppose there exists a real number λ ∈ (0, 1)
such that ρ(2t+1 ) < λ ρ(2t ) for all n ∈ N. Then,
∞
s s
X Ψ(2t )s
H (Λ(P, β, Ψ)) = H (I0 ) if = ∞.
t=1
ρ(2t )
6
(j)
can assume that I is a closed interval. Then, since the functions fi and
λ(k) , 0 6 j 6 n, 1 6 i 6 n, 0 6 k 6 2 are continuous we have that
(j)
∀x∈I |fi (x)| 6 C, |λ(k) (x)| 6 (5)
The latter inequality holds for all sufficiently large H(F ). Using the Mean
Value Theorem, we obtain
By (6), we get that |F (x) + λ(x)| 6 ψ(H(F )) and so it follows that whence
7
2.3 Proof of Proposition 1
Without loss of generality we can assume that f1 (x) = x as otherwise we
can use the Inverse Function Theorem to change variables and ensure the
condition. Let Φ(Q, δ) denote the set of x ∈ I such that
for some F ∈ Fn (Q). We shall make use of the following lemma regarding
the measure of Φ(Q, δ).
|J| [
6 |J\Φ(C1 Q, δ)| 6 B(α, K2 Q−n−1 ) ∩ J
2
H(α)6K1 Q
and thus
[ |J|
B(α, Q−n−1) ∩ J > . (10)
H(α)6Q
2K2 K1n+1
8
We now proceed to establishing (9). Consider the system of inequalities
|an fn (ξ) + . . . + a1 f1 (ξ) + a0 | < Q−n ;
(
(11)
|a1 |, |a2 |, . . . , |an | 6 Q.
It defines a convex body in Rn+1 symmetric about the origin. Consider its
successive minima τ1 , . . . , τn+1 . By definition, τ1 6 τ2 6 . . . 6 τn+1 . Note
that τ1 > C1 . Indeed, otherwise we would have H 6 C1 Q and
|an fn (ξ) + . . . + a0 | 6 C1 Q−n = C1n+1 (C1 Q)−n 6 δH −n ,
a contradiction. By Minkowski’s theorem on successive minima [17],
τ1 · · · τn+1 6 1. Thus, we obtain the bound
τn+1 6 (τ1 · τ2 · · · τn )−1 < C1−n = C2
where C2 is an absolute constant depending only on Q. Finally, by the
definition of τn+1 , we obtain the set of n + 1 linearly independent functions
(j) (j) (j)
Fj (X) = an fn (X) + . . .+ a1 X + a0 , 1 6 j 6 n + 1 with integer coefficients
(j)
ai such that
|Fj (ξ)| 6 C2 Q−n ;
(
(j)
(12)
|ai | 6 C2 Q, i = 1, n.
Now consider the following system of linear equations
θ1 F1 (ξ) + . . . + θn+1 Fn+1 (ξ) + λ(ξ)
= 0;
Pn
θ1 F1′ (ξ) + . . . + θn+1 Fn+1
′
(ξ) + λ′ (ξ) = Q+ i=1 |Fi′ (ξ)|; (13)
(1) (n+1)
θ1 aj + . . . + θn+1 aj = 0, 2 6 j 6 n.
We transform this system in the following manner. Take each j-th row
(2 6 j 6 n), multiply it by fj′ (ξ) and subtract the result from the second
(1) (n+1)
row. As a result, the second row will have the form θ1 a1 + . . . + θn+1 a1 .
(1) (n+1)
Similarly we can transform the first row to the form θ1 a0 + . . . + θn+1 a0 .
(j)
Since the matrix (ai ), 0 6 i 6 n, 1 6 j 6 n + 1 is non-degenerate, the
system (13) has a unique solution θ1 , . . . , θn+1 . Choose integers t1 , t2 , . . . , tn
such that |ti − θi | < 1, 1 6 i 6 n + 1. Consider the function
F (X) = t1 F1 (X) + . . . + tn+1 Fn+1 (X) + λ(X)
= xn fn (X) + . . . + x1 X + x0 + λ(X),
9
(1) (n+1)
where xi = t1 ai + . . . + tn+1 ai . By the first equation in (13), we obtain
Now consider the coefficients xi . They are obviously integers. By the third
equation in (13), we get |xm | 6 (n+1)C2Q = C5 Q for all m > 2. The bounds
for x0 and x1 are given by
6 C4 Q + (n − 1)(n + 1)C2 Q · C + C 6 C6 Q
and
Pn
|x0 | 6 |F (ξ)| + |λ(ξ)| + i=1 |xi fi (ξ)|
for sufficiently large Q. Thus, for every ξ ∈ I\Φ(C1 Q, δ) there exists F (x) ∈
Fn such that
|F (ξ) + λ(ξ)| 6 C3 Q−n ;
Q 6 |F ′ (ξ) + λ′ (ξ)| 6 C4 Q; (14)
|H(F )| 6 max(C5 , C6 , C7 )Q.
10
where F ∈ Fn (C7 Q). Let Q satisfy the condition
1
(n · C · C7 Q + C) · 2C3 Q−n−1 + C 6 Q.
2
Then for all x0 ∈ σ(F ) ∩ [a + 2C3Q−n−1 , b − 2C3Q−n−1 ] there exists a number
α ∈ (x0 − 2C3 Q−n−1 , x0 + 2C3 Q−n−1 ) such that F (α) + λ(α) = 0.
In particular it means that the function F ′ (x) + λ′ (x) has the same sign
within the given interval. Again, on using the Mean Value Theorem we get
that F (x) + λ(x) = F (x0 ) + λ(x0 ) + (F ′ (x2 ) + λ′ (x2 ))(x − x0 ), where x2 lies
between x and x0 . Set x = x0 ± 2C3 q −n−1 . Then
(F ′ (x2 ) + λ′ (x2 )) · (x − x0 )
has different signs. Therefore the value of F (x) + λ(x) = F (x0 ) + λ(x0 ) +
(F ′ (x2 ) + λ′ (x2 ))(x − x0 ) has different signs at the two ends of the interval
11
Thus the function F (x) + λ(x) has a root within this interval and thereby
completes the proof of Lemma 3.
⊠
In view of Lemma 3, we have that for all ξ satisfying system (14) there
exists α with H(α) 6 C7 Q such that
F (α) + λ(α) = 0
and
|ξ − α| < 2C3 Q−n−1 .
12
3.2 Auxiliary lemmas
As in the proof of Proposition 1, there is no loss of generality in assuming
that f1 (x) = x. Then we simply denote f2 (x) by f (x). With the aim of
establishing Theorem 2 we fix v > 2. By the conditions of Theorem 2, we
3
have that f ′′ (x) 6= 0 for all x except a set of Hausdorff dimension 6 v+1 .
Using the standard arguments – see [5] – we can assume without loss of
generality that
c1 6 |f ′′ (x)| 6 c2 for all x ∈ I, (17)
where c1 , c2 are positive constants.
Before stating the next lemma recall that F2 is the set of all functions
of the form a0 + a1 x + a2 f (x), where a0 , a1 , a2 are integers not all zero;
H = H(F ) = max{|a1 |, |a2 |}.
Lemma 5 There are constants C1 > 0 and ǫ0 > 0 such that for all F ∈ F2
and any subinterval J ⊂ I of length |J| 6 ǫ0 at least one of the following
inequalities is satisfied for all x ∈ J:
Proof. For the case of λ(x) ≡ 0 this is proved in [5, Lemmas 5, 6]. To finish
the proof in inhomogeneous case it is sufficient to note that |λ′ (x)| ≪ 1 and
|λ′′ (x)| ≪ 1.
⊠
In what follows without loss of generality we can assume that |I| 6 ǫ0 –
see [5] for analogues arguments.
13
such that there exists a solution x ∈ I to the system
(
|F (x) + λ(x)| 6 H −v
(18)
|F ′ (x) + λ′ (x)| 6 H δ .
Proof. Since |λ′ (x)| ≪ 1, |λ(x)| ≪ 1 and δ > 0, we have that (18) implies
the following system (
|F (x)| ≪ H δ
(19)
|F ′(x)| ≪ H δ .
Subtracting the second inequality of (19) multiplied by x from the first in-
equality of (19) gives
(
|a0 + a2 (f (x) − xf ′ (x))| ≪ H δ
(20)
|a1 + a2 f ′ (x)| ≪ H δ .
Note that
a1
g = g(t + ∆) = g(t) + ∆g ′ (ξ) = g(t) + O(H δ−1 ) ,
a2
14
a1
where ∆ = a2
− t. Hence all solutions of the system are also solutions of the
inequality
a1 a0
g + ≪ H δ−1 .
a2 a2
One can easily check that for |a2 | = H the number of integer solutions of
this inequality is not greater than CH 1+δ for some constant C. Therefore
N(δ) ≪ H 1+δ and the proof is complete. ⊠
Proof. Denote by x, y and z some points on the considered plane not all
lying on the same line. Take one more integer point v somewhere outside
the plane. We now calculate the volume V of the tetrahedron xyzv.
On one hand the volume of every tetrahedron with integer vertexes is at
least 61 . Therefore V > 16 .
On the other hand, V = 13 Sh, where S is the area of the triangle xyz and
h is the distance between v and the plane. Therefore,
1 1 2
6 V = Sh ⇐⇒ 6 S.
6 3 h
Let v = (α, β, γ). Then
|Aα + Bβ + Cγ − D| 1
h= √ >√ ,
2
A +B +C2 2 A + B2 + C 2
2
√
since α, β and γ are integers and h > 0. Thus, S > 12 A2 + B 2 + C 2 as
required. ⊠
15
The bound (16) will then follow from the definition of Hausdorff dimension.
Note that A2 (v, λ) can be represented in one of the following forms
∞ [
\ ∞
A2 (v, λ) = A(a0 , a1 , a2 ) and (21)
n=1 H=n
∞ [
\ ∞
A2 (v, λ) = B(t),
n=1 t=n
16
Since |f ′′(x)| > d for all x ∈ I, we have that a1 + a2 f ′ (x) is a monotonic
function. Therefore the set of x ∈ I such that |a1 + a2 f ′ (x)| > H 1−ǫ is a
union of at most two intervals. For one interval we have that
a1 + a2 f ′ (x) ≪ −H 1−ǫ
a1 + a2 f ′ (x) ≫ H 1−ǫ .
We see that the sign of F ′ (x)+λ′(x) on each of these intervals doesn’t change.
Therefore F (x)+λ(x) is monotonic on them, where F (x) = a0 +a1 x+a2 f (x).
Thus for sufficiently large H the set A1 (a0 , a1 , a2 ) is a union of at most 2
intervals (note that it can be empty, i.e. be a union of empty intervals).
Using Lemma 4 and inequality in (23) we get that the length of each
interval is ≪ H −v−1+ǫ .
(1)
We will use the following cover of A2 (v, λ):
∞
[
Cn = A1 (a0 , a1 , a2 ).
H=n
Note that for a fixed H the number of different pairs (a1 , a2 ) is no greater
than 4H. By (22) there are O(H) possibilities for a0 if (a1 , a2 ) are fixed.
Therefore an appropriate s-volume sum for Cn will be
∞
X ∞
X
2
C≪ H ·H s(ǫ−1−v)
= H 2−s(1+v−ǫ) .
H=n H=n
(2)
The set A2 (v, λ). Here we have the inequality |F ′ (x) + λ′ (x)| 6 H 1−ǫ .
Therefore Lemma 5 implies
17
In other words |a2 f ′′ (x) + λ′′ (x)| ≫ H. This implies that |a2 | ≫ H. Note
that (27) is also true in the case of x ∈ A3 (a0 , a1 , a2 ).
Let δ be an arbitrary number in (0, 1]. Consider the set
∞ [
\ ∞
Aδ (v, λ) = Aδ (a0 , a1 , a2 ), (28)
n=1 H=n
By Lemma 6, for a fixed H there exist only O(H 2−δ ) nonempty sets
Aδ (a0 , a1 , a2 ). By Lemma 4 the length of each interval in Aδ (a0 , a1 , a2 ) is
1
bounded by H −v−1+ 3 (v+1)δ . Therefore the corresponding s-volume sum for
Cn is bounded by
∞
H 2−δ · H s(−v−1+ 3 (v+1)δ) .
X 1
(30)
H=n
3
If s > v+1
then the exponent of H is equal to
1
2 − δ + s −v − 1 + (v + 1)δ < 2 − δ − 3 + δ = −1.
3
3
Hence for s > v+1 the right hand side of (30) tends to 0 as n → ∞. It follows
3
that dim(Aδ (v, λ)) 6 v+1 for any δ ∈ [0, 1].
For simplicity denote by k the quantity 31 (v + 1). Note that k > 1. For
(2)
l ∈ N consider the set A2 (v, λ) as a union
l
(2)
[
A2 (v, λ) = Aδi (v, λ) ∪ Aδ∗ (v, λ), (31)
i=1
18
where δ1 = ǫ, δi+1 = kδi , δ ∗ = 1. Since k > 1 we have that δi → ∞ as i → ∞.
Therefore there exists a natural number l which depends on ǫ only such that
δl+1 > 1 and δl 6 1. This proves (31).
Since the Hausdorff dimension of each set Aδi (v, λ) and Aδ∗ (v, λ) appear-
3 (2) 3
ing in (31) is not greater than v+1 , we get that dim(A2 (v, λ)) 6 v+1 .
(3)
The set A2 (v, λ). Consider the set
[
B3 (t) := A3 (a0 , a1 , a2 )
2t−1 6H<2t
2−v
and let δ := 3
.
Recall that for all x ∈ A3 (a0 , a1 , a2 ) we have |F ′′ (x)+λ′′ (x)| ≫ H. There-
fore, by Lemma 4, we have that the length of each interval in A3 (a0 , a1 , a2 )
with H ≍ 2t is not greater than
(H −v /H) 2 ≪ 2−t( ).
1 v+1
2
\ ∞
∞ [ [
AII (v, λ) = B3 (t) ∩ J.
n=1 t=n class II intervals J
It follow that
(3)
A2 (v, λ) = AI (v, λ) ∪ AII (v, λ).
The required upper bound for AI (v, λ) will follow on showing the following
lemma.
19
3
Lemma 8 dim(AI (v, λ)) 6 v+1
(1 + ǫ1 ).
3
Proof. Consider a class I interval J. We have at most O 2t( 2 −c) segments
3
from B3 (t) on it. Therefore there are not greater than O(2 2 t ) intervals from
B3 (t) lying inside class I intervals. Consider the following cover of AI (v, λ):
∞
[ [
Cn := B3 (t) ∩ J.
t=n class I intervals J
3
Its v+1
(1 + ǫ1 )-volume is bounded by
∞ ∞ ∞
3(ǫ1 +1)
2 )
−t( v+1
2( 2 − 2 (ǫ1 +1))t =
X 3
X 3 3 X 3
·
2 2
t
·2 v+1 = 2− 2 ǫ 1 t .
t=n t=n t=n
20
Lemma 9 For every fixed J as above all points ~a = (a0 , a1 , a2 ) ∈ Z3 such
that A3 (a0 , a1 , a2 ) ∩ J 6= ∅ lie on a single affine plane.
Proof. Suppose that there exist four integer points ~a, ~b, ~c, d~ not lying on the
same plane such that A3 (~a) ∩ J 6= ∅, A3 (~b) ∩ J 6= ∅, A3 (~c) ∩ J 6= ∅ and
~ ∩ J 6= ∅. It means that the points ~a, ~b, ~c, d~ form a tetrahedron with
A3 (d)
integer vertexes. Therefore its volume is at least 61 .
On the other hand all of these four points must lie inside a paral-
lelepiped R formed by the inequalities (33), (34) and |a2 | < H for a fixed
x ∈ J. The volume of this figure is bounded by
V ≪ 2 · 2t(1−2c) · 2 · 2t(1−c) · 2 · 2t · D −1 ≪ 2t(3−3c) · D −1 ,
where D is the determinant of the matrix
1 x f (x)
0 1 f ′ (x)
0 0 1
i.e. D = 1. Since c > 1 we have V = o(1) contrary to V > 1/6. The proof is
complete.
⊠
Let the plane from Lemma 9 have the form Ax + By + Cz = D. We
evaluate the intersection area of this plane with parallelepiped R specified
in the proof of the lemma. In order to do this let us consider the body P∆
given by the inequalities
|F (x) + λ(x)| 6 2t(1−2c) ;
|a | 6 2t ; (35)
2
|Aa0 + Ba1 + Ca2 − D| 6 ∆,
where ∆ > 0 is a positive parameter. Here a0 , a1 , a2 are viewed as real
variables. The volume of P∆ can be expressed in two different ways. Firstly,
since the determinant of system (35) is B − Ax, we have that
8 · 2t(2−2c) · ∆
V (P∆ ) = . (36)
|B − Ax|
Secondly, V (P∆ ) = S · h where S is the area of the edges defined by the third
inequality of (35) and h is a distance between these edges. That is
2∆
V (P∆ ) = S · √ . (37)
A2 + B 2 + C 2
21
Hence on combining (36) and (37) we obtain that
√
2t(2−2c) · A2 + B 2 + C 2
S≍ . (38)
|B − Ax|
Note that S is the area of the intersection of the plane Aa0 +Ba1 +Ca2 −D = 0
with the figure defined by the first two inequalities of (35). Therefore the
intersection area of this plane with the parallelepiped is not greater than S.
Note that all points a should lie inside this intersection and (38) gives an
estimate for its area.
Case (i): We consider intervals J of type II such that not all points a
associated with J lie on the same line. By Lemma 7, we get that the number
of such points on a fixed interval J is bounded by
√
2t(2−2c) · A2 + B 2 + C 2 √ 2 2t(2−2c)
N≪ / A + B2 + C 2 = . (39)
|B − Ax| |B − Ax|
Since J is not a class I interval we get that for all x ∈ J,
1
|B − Ax| ≪ 2t( 2 −c) . (40)
22
This result with (40) implies
1
|C − Af (x)| ≪ 2t( 2 −c) . (42)
The second inequality in (41) together with the fact that J is a class II
1
interval implies |A| ≪ 2 2 t .
Fix A. Denote by M(A) the number of possible integer triples (A, B, C)
which can be the coefficients of a plane corresponding to some class II interval.
It follows from (40) and (42) that
Therefore for a fixed (A, B, C) the number x can lie only in the interval of the
1
2t( 2 −c)
length |A|
. Finally we get that the number of class II intervals associated
1
22t
with the triple (A, B, C) is at most |A|
.
We will use the following cover for the AII (v, λ):
∞
[ [
Cn = B3 (t) ∩ J;
t=n J are class II intervals
23
type II intervals under consideration. Transforming this series we get
t
∞ 22 ∞
X
t( 32 −ǫ1 −s( v+1 ))
X 1 X 3 v+1
2 2 ≪ t · 2t( 2 −ǫ1 −s( 2 ))
|A| t=n
t=n |A|=1 (43)
∞
3 v+1
X
≪ 2t( 2 −s( 2 )) .
t=n
3
If s > v+1
then this series obviously tends to zero as n → ∞.
Case (ii): We consider intervals J of type II such that all points a associated
with J lie on the same line L. Fix such an interval J. Represent this line in
a form:
α + tβ
where α = (α0 , α1 , α2 ) is an integer point on L, β = (β0 , β1 beta2 ) is a vector
between the nearest integer points on L and t is an arbitrary real number.
Then all the vectors (a0 , a1 , a2 ) associated with J are of the form
where αi , βi are fixed and k ∈ Z vary. Since J is of class II, there are at least
3
2t( 2 −c) different values k. For each vector (a0 , a1 , a2 ) under consideration we
have that |a0 | ≪ 2t . Hence taking values of |a0 | for two different vectors for
J and subtracting one value from another we get
1
|β0 (k1 − k2 )| ≪ 2t ⇒ |β0 | 6 2t(c− 2 ) . (44)
3
Since there are at least 2t( 2 −c) different values k, we can ensure that
3
|k1 − k2 | > 2t( 2 −c) for some k1 , k2 . Dividing these inequalities by |k1 − k2 |
24
and changing variables as in Lemma 6 give the system
( t
|β0 + β2 g(y)| 6 2 · 2− 2 ;
t
|β1 + β2 y| 6 2 · 2− 2
where y = f ′ (x) and g(y) = f (x) − xf ′ (x). Using (44) we get H = max{|β0 |,
1
|β1 |, |β2 |} ≪ 2t(c− 2 ) . Substituting this into the system we get
1 1
|β0 + β2 g(y)| ≪ H 1−2c = H − 1+2ǫ1 ;
(46)
1 1
− 1+2ǫ
|β1 + β2 y| ≪ H =H .
1−2c 1
where y1 ∈ f ′ (J1 ) and y2 ∈ f ′ (J2 ). Since for all x ∈ I, f ′ (x) > d > 0 the
inequality can be transformed to the form
1 1
− 1+2ǫ
2− 2 t H 1
|x1 − x2 | ≪ ≪ .
|β2 | |β2 |
Therefore the number of class B intervals J with parameters β0 , β1 , β2 is not
greater than
1
2t(c− 2 )
. (47)
|β2 |
t
Further, since |α2 + kβ2 | 6 2t there are at most |β22 | intervals inside J ∩ B3 (t).
Using (47) we have the following upper bound for s-volume sum.
∞ X 2t(c− 21 ) 2t ∞
X v+1
X 3 v+1
X 1
C = · · 2−st( 2 ) = 2t( 2 +ǫ1 −s( 2 ))
t=n
|β2 | |β2 | t=n
|β2 |2
(β0 ,β1 ,β2 ) (β0 ,β1 ,β2 )
∞
X 3 v+1
X K(β2 )
≪ 2t( 2 +ǫ1 −s( 2
))
t=n 1
|β2 |2
|β2 |62t(c− 2 )
∞
3 v+1
X
≪ t · 2t( 2 +ǫ1 −s( 2
))
.
t=n
25
Using the same arguments as in the case when (a0 , a1 , a2 ) lie on a plane we
obtain that ∞
3 v+1
X
C≪ 2t( 2 +2ǫ1 −s( 2 )) .
t=n
Since ǫ and ǫ1 can be made arbitrary small then all values in the max-
3
imum can be made arbitrary close to v+1 , thus implying (15) and thereby
completing the proof of Theorem 2.
References
[1] D. A. Badziahin. Inhomogeneous approximations and lower bounds for the Hausdorff
dimension Vestsi Nats. Akad. Navuk Belarusi Ser. Fi z.-Mat. Navuk 126, No. 3, pp.
32–36, 2005. (in Russian)
[2] R.C. Baker. Dirichlet’s Theorem on Diophantine Approximation. Math. Proc. Cam.
Phil. Soc., V. 83, pp. 37 – 59, 1978.
[3] V. Beresnevich. On approximation of real numbers by real algebraic numbers. Acta
Arith. 90 (1999), no.2, pp. 97–112.
[4] V. Beresnevich. A Groshev Type Theorem for Convergence on Manifolds. Acta Math.
Hung., V. 94, pp. 99 – 130, 2002.
[5] V. Beresnevich, V. Bernik. On a metrical theorem of W.M. Schmidt. Acta Arithm.,
V. 75.3, pp. 219 – 233, 1996.
26
[6] V. Beresnevich, V. I. Bernik, and M. M. Dodson. Regular systems, ubiquity and
Diophantine approximation. A panorama of number theory or the view from Baker’s
garden (Zürich, 1999). CUP. 2002, pp. 260–279.
[7] V. Beresnevich, V. Bernik, M. Dodson. On the Hausdorff dimension of sets of well-
approximable points on nondegenerate curves. Dokl. Nats. Akad. Nauk Belarusi. 46
(2002), no. 6, 18–20.
[8] V. Beresnevich, V. I. Bernik, D. Y. Kleinbock, G. A. Margulis. Metric Diophan-
tine approximation: The Khintchine–Groshev theorem for non-degenerate manifolds..
Moscow Math. J. 2, No. 2, 203–225, 2002.
[9] V. Beresnevich, H. Dickinson, S.L. Velani. Measure Theoretic Laws for Limsup sets
Memoirs of the AMS, V. 179, N 846, 2006.
[10] V. Beresnevich, H. Dickinson, S.L. Velani. Diophantine approximation on planar
curves and the distribution of rational points. Ann. of Math. (2) 166 (2007), no. 3,
pp. 367–426.
[11] V. Beresnevich, S.L. Velani. Simultaneous inhomogeneous diophantine approximation
on manifolds. Preprint, 2007. http://arxiv.org/abs/0710.5685
[12] V. Beresnevich, S.L. Velani. An inhomogeneous transference principle and Diophan-
tine approximation. Preprint, 2008. http://arxiv.org/abs/0802.1837
[13] V. I. Bernik. An application of Hausdorff dimension in the theory of Diophantine
approximation. Acta Arith. 42 (1983), no. 3, 219–253.
[14] V. I. Bernik, M. M. Dodson. Metric Diophantine approximation on manifolds. Cam-
bridge Tracts in Mathematics 137, 1999.
[15] V. I. Bernik, D. Y. Kleinbock, G. A. Margulis. Khintchine-type theorems on mani-
folds: the convergence case for standard and multiplicative versions. Research Notices,
No. 9, pp. 453 – 486, 2001.
[16] Y. Bugeaud. Approximation by Algebraic Integers and Hausdorff Dimension. J.
London Math. Soc., V. 65, pp. 547 – 559, 2002.
[17] J. W. S. Cassels. An introduction to the geometry of numbers. Springer-Verlag, 1959.
[18] H. Dickinson, M. M. Dodson. Extremal Manifolds and Hausdorff Dimension. Duke
Math. J., V. 101, No. 2, pp. 271 – 281, 2000.
[19] M. Dodson, B. Rynne, J. Vickers, Metric Diophantine approximation and Hausdorff
dimension on manifolds. Math. Proc. Cam. Phil. Soc. 105 (1989), 547–558.
[20] M. Dodson, M.V. Melián, D. Pestana, S.L. Velani, Patterson measure and Ubiquity.
Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. 20:1 (1995), 37–60.
[21] K. Falconer. Fractal geometry: mathematical foundations and applications. John
Wiley, 1990.
[22] D. Y. Keinbock. Ergodic Theory on Homogeneous Spaces and Metric Number Theory.
Preprint, 2007.
27
[23] D. Y. Kleinbock, G. A. Margulis. Flows on homogeneous spaces and Diophantine
approximations on manifolds. Ann. Math., V. 148, pp. 339-360, 1998.
[24] K. Mahler. Über das Maßder Menge aller S-Zahlen. Ann. Math., 106 (1932), pp.
131–139.
[25] G. A. Margulis. Diophantine approximation, lattices and flows on homogeneous
spaces. A panorama of number theory or the view from Baker’s garden (Zürich,
1999). CUP. 2002, pp. 280–310.
[26] A. Pyartly. Diophantine Approximations on Submanifolds in Euclidean Space. Func.
Anal. and Applications, V. 3(4), pp. 59 – 62, 1969. (in Russian)
[27] W. M. Schmidt. Metrische Sätze über simultane approximation abhängiger Größen.
Monatsch. Math., V. 68, pp. 154-166, 1964.
[28] V.G. Sprindžuk. Mahlers problem in the metric theory of numbers, AMS Providence,
V. 25, RI, 1969.
[29] R. C. Vaughan and S.L. Velani. Diophantine approximation on planar curves: the
convergence theory. Invent. Math., 166 (2006), no. 1, 103–124.
Dzmitry Badziahin
Mathematics Department, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, England
Email address: [email protected]
28