WorksMathematics
Cantor's onion: a uniformly quasiregular map whose Julia set is a Cantor set of spheres
Abstract
For integers with , we construct a uniformly quasiregular map of of degree whose Julia set is a Cantor set of concentric round spheres. To our knowledge, this is the first example of a uniformly quasiregular map in dimension three with infinitely many Fatou components. The map is a three-dimensional analogue of McMullen's maps , built from two Zorich-type power maps glued across a single shell by a slit construction. Its Julia set has Hausdorff dimension , where , and the restriction of the map to its Julia set is a skew product over the shift on two symbols and has topological entropy . We also prove that uniformly quasiregular maps that expand uniformly near their Julia set, possibly with branching there, have no wandering domains and only finitely many periodic Fatou components, all of them attracting basins. The map constructed here belongs to this class.
Introduction
Let , , be uniformly quasiregular (uqr): non-injective, with for some and all . Here denotes the maximal dilatation. The Fatou set is the set where the iterates form a normal family, and the Julia set is . The known examples in dimension have few Fatou components:
Lattès-type maps have ;
Mayer’s power maps [26] have two superattracting basins separated by a round sphere, and more generally the power-type maps of [8] have two superattracting basins separated by a quasisphere;
conformal trap constructions [21, 30] have a single Fatou component with Cantor Julia set;
there are uqr maps whose Julia sets are wild or higher-genus Cantor sets [13, 11, 12]. A Cantor set does not separate , so these too have connected Fatou set.
The first author constructed in [14] a uqr semigroup whose Julia set is a Cantor set of spheres. To our knowledge, the map constructed below is the first single uqr map with this property, and the first uqr map of whose Fatou set has infinitely many components.
Round spheres have also appeared as Julia components in the non-uniform setting. In [3 Theorem 1], Burkart, Fletcher and Nicks constructed a quasiregular map of of transcendental type whose Julia set has components that are round spheres centred at 0. These separate bounded hollow quasi-Fatou components, which are wandering domains escaping to , in analogy with Baker’s multiply connected wandering domains. That map is not uqr, and its dynamics is quite different from that considered here.
We follow the model of McMullen’s maps [27]. For and small , their Julia set is homeomorphic to a Cantor set times a circle, and every bounded Fatou component is eventually mapped into the immediate basin of . See [5, 32] for more on this family.
Theorem 1.1. Let be integers with . There is a uqr map of degree and a Cantor set such that
In particular , where is the solution of . Writing and , the Fatou components are exactly the following, and there are infinitely many of them:
the immediate basin of , , which is invariant: is a fixed point of local index , and locally uniformly on it;
the ball , with equal to the immediate basin of ;
for every bounded complementary interval of , the shell .
Every component except the immediate basin of is strictly preperiodic.
The smallest degrees are 13, for or , which give different maps, and 18, for .
The dynamics on the Julia set is as one would expect. The restriction is a skew product over the one-sided shift on two symbols, whose fibre maps are Lattès-type maps of the spheres. Consequently repelling periodic points are dense in , and has topological entropy , with an explicit mixing measure of maximal entropy (Proposition 6.3).
The semigroup example of [14] is the uqr analogue of the rational semigroup generated by and . Its generators are power-type maps that fix and have no poles, and the Cantor structure of the Julia set comes from composing different generators.
A single uqr map of polynomial type, that is, with , cannot have such a Julia set. Suppose it did. Then , so lies in a Fatou component , and . Every component of is a Fatou component mapped onto [22 Ch. 21], so it contains a preimage of , which can only be itself. Hence , so is completely invariant. By the blowing-up property of the Julia set [22 Ch. 21] (for and any neighbourhood of , the union omits at most finitely many points), every neighbourhood of a point of meets the backward orbit of , which is itself. So . But is the exterior of the outermost sphere, so its boundary is a single sphere.
So a single map must combine -type behaviour near with -type behaviour near a pole at 0, as McMullen’s maps do in the plane. The slit shell of § 4 is exactly what glues these two behaviours into one branched cover.
The construction has three ingredients.
(i) Two explicit maps semiconjugate by the Zorich map to similarities (§ 2). One is a rescaled Mayer power map near . The other is an inverted power map near 0.
(ii) A one-dimensional expanding system on heights , whose invariant Cantor set gives (§ 3).
(iii) A quasiregular branched cover of the middle shell onto the ball , which matches the two explicit maps on the boundary (§ 4).
Uniform quasiregularity (§ 5) holds because every orbit meets the middle shell at most once, and away from it the dynamics is .
Finally, § 7 considers uqr maps that expand uniformly near , allowing branching on . They have no wandering domains (Theorem 7.2), and only finitely many periodic Fatou components, each an attracting or superattracting basin (Theorem 7.4). The map of Theorem 1.1 shows that this class contains maps with infinitely many Fatou components.
The Zorich map and semiconjugacies
Write points of as with and . Let be the group of isometries of generated by
Let be the Zorich map of [22 §6.5.4], [35, 26, 3], see [10] for a detailed verification that it is quasiregular. We use the following standard properties.
(Z1) , where is a branched cover, bi-Lipschitz on each unit square of the integer grid, and invariant under the planar part of . The map induces a homeomorphism from the pillow onto . It is equivariant for the reflections in the grid lines: for a reflection of , where . The reflection induces the same , since it differs from by , which lies in .
(Z2) is -quasiregular, and its fibres are exactly the -orbits. In particular maps each plane onto the round sphere of radius .
(Z3) The branch set of is , and maps it onto four rays from , in the directions of the cone points .
On each slab there is with for almost every and all , since and is bi-Lipschitz on each square of the grid. So is locally bi-Lipschitz off its branch set, and it is -BLD on each slab [29], [35 I.4].
Lemma 2.1. Let be an orientation-preserving similarity of with . Then there is a unique continuous map with on . It is a quasiregular branched cover with . Moreover, if is a composition of such similarities, the corresponding map is the composition of the corresponding 's.
Proof. This is essentially [22 Theorem 21.4.1]. Off the four rays , the map is locally of the form , for local inverses of , and this gives the bound on there. The rays are removable. Almost every line parallel to a coordinate axis misses them, so is ACL. Moreover is locally integrable, since is quasiregular off a closed null set and has locally bounded multiplicity, so because almost everywhere. The last assertion follows from uniqueness.
For the similarities used below, has ratio or , and has degree or (Remark 2.2).
Remark 2.2. In polar form , the similarity gives
a rescaling of Mayer’s power map of degree . The similarity gives
which maps a neighbourhood of 0 onto a neighbourhood of . It is the analogue of , of degree . In both cases maps spheres centred at 0 onto spheres centred at 0.
The one-dimensional model
Fix and put
Since , we have . Define affine maps
Then
So maps onto increasingly, and maps onto decreasingly; see Figure 1. Let be the gap between and , and let

Figure 1. The height dynamics for : maps onto decreasingly and maps onto increasingly. The dashed line is the diagonal: is fixed by , and . Heights in the gap correspond to the middle shell of § 4.
Lemma 3.1. is a Cantor set containing and . Every has an orbit that enters . The bounded complementary intervals of are exactly the images of under compositions of the inverse branches and ; equivalently, they are the open intervals mapped onto by some finite composition of the forward branches. There are infinitely many of them.
Proof. is the attractor of the iterated function system on . The two maps are affine contractions with ratios and , and their images and are disjoint. The remaining statements are standard for such systems [20], [7 Ch. 9]. Also is fixed and , so . □
The two outer maps and the middle shell
Let
Both are orientation-preserving similarities: the linear part of is , with determinant . Both satisfy . By Lemma 2.1 they define quasiregular maps and of with and . Since and , setting , , and gives continuous maps of , which are quasiregular because isolated points are removable.
Write and define the regions
By Remark 2.2, maps onto with degree , and maps onto with degree . In particular:
maps the closed ball onto as a proper branched cover of degree , with ;
maps onto as a proper branched cover of degree , with .
Note that . Fix with , and write and for the outer and inner collars of .
The proposition below is consistent with degree theory. With the boundary orientation of , the outer sphere is oriented as the boundary of and the inner sphere as the boundary of . So and restricted to map onto with total degree , which is the degree of .
Proposition 4.1. There is a quasiregular branched cover of degree , that is, each point of has preimages counted with local index, such that:
on ;
on ;
and .
The construction of is a three-dimensional version of a classical way of building branched covers of surfaces: cut sheets along slits and reglue them crosswise. In the plane, take two copies of the identity map , cut each copy along the segment , and glue the upper edge of each slit to the lower edge of the other. The result is a connected two-sheeted cover of branched over the endpoints of , locally modelled on near each endpoint. Preimage counts are unchanged, so the degree is the sum of the degrees of the pieces. Applied to on a disc and on the complement of a smaller disc, over a small slit in the common target disc, this produces a degree-5 branched cover of an annulus onto a disc, which is the topological picture of the middle annulus of the McMullen map . Constructions of branched covers by cutting and pasting are standard in topology [36 §10.B], [15], and have a long history in the theory of quasiregular maps, going back to Rickman’s work and the Picard theorem [34].
The proof also uses the following relative Lipschitz approximation theorem of Tukia and Väisälä, which extends Sullivan’s theorem [37]. Here a locally bi-Lipschitz embedding means an embedding that is bi-Lipschitz on a neighbourhood of each point, with respect to the Lipschitz structures.
Theorem 4.2 ([38 Theorem 4.4]). Let and be Lipschitz -manifolds without boundary, , let be closed, and let be a neighbourhood of . Let be an embedding that is a locally bi-Lipschitz embedding near . Then there is an isotopy of embeddings such that:
;
on and near , for all ;
is a locally bi-Lipschitz embedding near .
The theorem in [38] also controls the distance from to , which we do not need.
Proof. Step 1: a slit. By (Z3) and Lemma 2.1, the branch set of is contained in . Since , its branch values other than and lie on the four rays , and the same holds for . Choose a closed round ball whose centre lies off these rays, with radius small compared with the modulus of its centre. Then is at positive distance from the closures of the rays, which contain . Choose also a flat closed -disc .
Then consists of disjoint closed balls, each mapped homeomorphically onto . Similarly consists of such balls. We may choose the centre of close to . Then all of these balls lie away from : those of in , and those of in . Fix one ball of the first kind and one ball of the second, and put
The maps and are bi-Lipschitz. Indeed, and map into itself, so and map into . Since misses , so do and . On these compact sets and for local inverses of away from its branch set, where is locally bi-Lipschitz.
Step 2: cross-gluing. Let and be disjoint abstract copies of and , on which we keep the maps and . Note that each of and contains a copy of , and that the slits and lie outside these copies. Give a transverse orientation, with sides , and transport it to and by and . Cut along and along , so that each slit acquires two faces, joined along its rim. Glue the face of to the face of via , and the face of to the face of likewise. Let be the resulting space. Identified points have the same image under and , so and together define a continuous map .
We give an atlas with locally bi-Lipschitz transition maps, in which is quasiregular. Choose an affine coordinate on in which is a round disc in a coordinate plane. Near each open arc of the circle of length less than that of , use smooth toroidal coordinates , where is arc length along the arc, are polar coordinates in the normal plane, and corresponds to . We read such a triple as the point of , so that the axis is not a coordinate singularity. There are three kinds of charts.
Away from the seam, the charts of restricted to or . There is or .
On the interior of the seam, the chart is followed by the coordinate on . A point just on the side lies in one piece and maps just above , while a point just on the side lies in the other piece and maps just below , so is a local homeomorphism there; this is what the crosswise rule is for. Its transition to the charts of the first kind is or followed by an affine map, hence bi-Lipschitz by Step 1.
Along the rim , a neighbourhood in consists of two copies of a neighbourhood of a point of cut along and glued crosswise. In each normal plane this is the planar picture described before the proof, so the neighbourhood is the double cover of a neighbourhood of in branched along . The chart is , using the branch of determined by the sheet, where is the winding map. It is a homeomorphism onto a neighbourhood in , and . Its transitions to the charts above are branches of , composed with the bi-Lipschitz maps , and . These overlaps avoid the axis , where the branches of are smooth, so the transitions are locally bi-Lipschitz. This is all that is needed for a Lipschitz atlas. Transitions between rim charts over overlapping arcs are translations in , since the labelling of the sheets by and is global, so they are isometries.
In these charts is , , an affine map, or . The winding map is quasiregular [35 I.3.1], so is a quasiregular branched cover. Cutting and regluing does not change preimage counts, so its degree is . Its only new branch set is the rim circle, of local index 2, which lies over .
Step 3: topology. A thin regular neighbourhood of in is a ball. Cutting along opens the slit: the two faces, joined along the rim, form a 2-sphere bounding a spherical hole. So the cut is homeomorphic to with an open ball removed, and likewise for the cut . Cross-gluing identifies the two hole-spheres, face to face and rim to rim. Removing a ball from each of two 3-manifolds and gluing the resulting boundary spheres is the connected sum [17 Ch. 3]. Since and are closed balls in ,
The boundary spheres of are the copies of in and of in . The copy of in and the copy of in are untouched by the surgery, and on them and respectively.
We now transfer to . Both and are homeomorphic to . Orient so that is sense-preserving. This is possible: and are sense-preserving on and , and near interior points of the seam is a local homeomorphism, so the orientations of and agree across the seam. Since the rim has codimension two, they define an orientation of . Call and the -collars of . Their copies in and are untouched by the surgery. Let and be the closures of the complements of the -collars and of their copies. Both are again homeomorphic to . Choose an orientation-preserving homeomorphism sending outer to outer and inner to inner boundary sphere; starting from any homeomorphism sending outer to outer, compose if necessary with a reflection in the factor. The identity maps of the -collars onto their copies are orientation-preserving, since is or there and both are sense-preserving. So on each boundary sphere of , the map differs from the identity map onto the corresponding copy by an orientation-preserving homeomorphism of , which is isotopic to the identity [24]. Using these isotopies in thin collars of inside , we modify so that it agrees with the identity map on . Extending by the identity map of the -collars onto their copies gives a homeomorphism that maps the -collars identically onto their copies.
The map maps onto , and it is bi-Lipschitz on the -collars. To make it locally bi-Lipschitz everywhere, we use Theorem 4.2. We apply it with , , , , and . Since is bi-Lipschitz on the -collars, is a locally bi-Lipschitz embedding near . Let on and on . Then on , so is continuous and locally bi-Lipschitz on all of . It is injective, because and . Only a version for manifolds without boundary, as in Theorem 4.2, is needed, because is already bi-Lipschitz near . Since , the set is open in , by invariance of domain, and closed in , by compactness. As is connected, is onto. Covering by finitely many charts of the atlas above, by compactness is uniformly locally bi-Lipschitz in these charts. In particular it is quasiconformal, and so below has finite maximal dilatation, which is all that is used later. In the proof as given here, this approximation step is the only non-explicit part, so this proof does not give an explicit bound for , or for the constant in Proposition 5.2. Remark 6.6 outlines how can instead be written down explicitly.
Set . This is a quasiregular branched cover of degree . It equals on and on . Also and , because . □
Remark 4.3. The boundary spheres of both cover the single sphere , from the same side, with partial degrees and . This is a “fold” rather than an interpolation between distinct target spheres. The extension theorems of Berstein and Edmonds [2] and of Pankka, Rajala and Wu [31 Theorem 3.1] require each boundary component to cover its own target sphere with the full degree, so they do not apply directly. The quasiregular interpolations of Drasin and Sastry [6] and of Burkart, Fletcher and Nicks [3 Theorem 2] solve a different problem. They interpolate in a ring between power-type maps of different degrees given on the two boundary spheres, which map onto two different spheres: piecewise linear power maps in [6], and the Mayer power maps and in [3]. Note also that only finiteness of matters here, since every orbit meets at most once (Proposition 5.2). The slit construction gives this directly, for every pair with .
Remark 4.4. The branch values of lie on the four rays and on the circle . Indeed, off the seam is or , and the only new branch set is the rim. So every branch value of other than and the points of the rays lies in the ball , which maps into the immediate basin of . This is the analogue of the condition for the Cantor-circle regime of the McMullen maps: there, the free critical values lie in the trap door, the component of the preimage of the immediate basin of that contains the pole [5].
The map and its uniform quasiregularity
Define by
By Proposition 4.1, on the open set and on the open set . So is continuous and quasiregular. The construction depends on the choice of , which are arbitrary, and of , and , so Theorem 1.1 in fact provides a family of such maps.
Lemma 5.1. is a branched cover of degree . Moreover:
(i) and ;
(ii) ;
(iii) maps onto if , and onto if .
Proof. Count preimages, using Remark 2.2 and Proposition 4.1.
A point of has preimages in , under , and in , under .
A point of has preimages at heights in and at heights in , and none in , since . For a point of , these preimages lie on , where on and on , so none is counted twice.
A point of has all of its preimages in , under .
The remaining statements follow from the formulas for and .
Proposition 5.2. For all , . In particular is uniformly quasiregular.
Proof. First we show that each orbit meets at most once. If , then and . The set is forward invariant, and it is disjoint from because . The set is disjoint from because .
Next, off , is or . So along an orbit segment avoiding , is locally , where is a composition of and and hence a similarity. By Lemma 2.1 its distortion is at most at a.e. point.
For a.e. and each , the orbit segment therefore splits into at most three blocks:
a block avoiding , of distortion at most ; it may end on , where is still or on a neighbourhood;
at most one application of ;
a block avoiding again, which after passing through lies in , of distortion at most .
Pointwise distortion is submultiplicative at points of differentiability outside the (null) branch sets, where the chain rule holds almost everywhere because quasiregular maps satisfy Lusin’s conditions and [35 Ch. I]. Submultiplicativity is used for and separately. This gives .
Dynamics
Theorem 6.1. We have , and the Fatou components are:
, on which locally uniformly;
;
the shells for the bounded complementary intervals of in .
In particular there are infinitely many Fatou components, and all except are strictly preperiodic.
Proof. On , heights increase under to locally uniformly, so locally uniformly and . Since , also . Since , also .
Now let . By Lemma 3.1 and Lemma 5.1(3), the sphere , together with a shell neighbourhood of it, is mapped into after finitely many steps. Indeed, lies in a bounded complementary interval of , whose forward images each lie in a single until one of them equals . So .
On the other hand, let and . Suppose were equicontinuous near , with respect to the chordal metric. Put . For every , maps onto , where . In Zorich coordinates this map is induced by a similarity of the -variable with ratio at least .
So for any disc around and all large , contains the image of a full fundamental domain of , that is, . These spheres have radius at least , so their diameters are bounded below. This contradicts equicontinuity. Hence .
Each listed set in the statement of the theorem is connected, lies in , and has boundary in , so it is a Fatou component. These are all the components: is closed with , so is the union of the bounded complementary intervals, and the listed sets cover . The bounded complementary intervals of are infinite in number by Lemma 3.1. Each shell is mapped by some onto , since the interval is mapped onto . Then maps onto , and onto . □
As it must be [9], the Julia set is uniformly perfect. A ring domain in that separates cannot lie in or in , since each of these has in a single complementary component. So it lies in one of the shells and separates its boundary spheres. Normalise the modulus of a ring domain so that the round shell has modulus . By the monotonicity of modulus [16], a ring domain separating the boundary components of a round shell has modulus at most that of the shell. So the modulus is at most , which is at most the length of the largest gap of . Since , the shell itself separates and has modulus , so this bound is sharp.
We turn now to the dimension of the Julia set, and then to the dynamics of on it.
Proposition 6.2. Let be the solution of . Then . In particular has Lebesgue measure zero.
Proof. The map is a bi-Lipschitz homeomorphism from , with the product of the Euclidean metrics, onto the closed shell . By Theorem 6.1, , and bi-Lipschitz maps preserve Hausdorff dimension. By the proof of Lemma 3.1, is the attractor of an iterated function system of two similarities with ratios and and disjoint images. So it satisfies the open set condition, and its Hausdorff and upper box dimensions both equal [20], [7 Ch. 9]. The product formulas for dimension [7 Ch. 7] give
To describe on , let , with the shift and the metric . Let on , and let be the itinerary map, with when . As for any iterated function system of contractions with disjoint images, is a homeomorphism with [20], [7 Ch. 9]. By Remark 2.2, there are branched covers of , of degrees and , with and , such that
These are maps of Lattès type. Let . Since is invariant under the translations in , it induces a continuous surjection . Its fibres have at most two points, and , by (Z2). The maps and induce endomorphisms and of , with . Let be the image under of normalised Lebesgue measure on , that is, the image under of Haar measure on .
Proposition 6.3. Let be the skew product , and put .
(i) is a homeomorphism from onto , and .
(ii) Repelling periodic points of are dense in . More precisely, the points with for some , such that near the map is topologically conjugate to an expanding similarity near its fixed point, are dense in .
(iii) .
(iv) Let be the Bernoulli measure on with weights and . Then is an -invariant mixing Borel probability measure on with . So is a measure of maximal entropy for .
Proof. Write , and .
(i) Recall that , where , and , where . By (6.1), for . Composing with gives (i).
(ii) Let , with , and let . Choose with . For , let be the point whose itinerary is the periodic word repeating the first letters of . Then and , since both lie in the same cylinder of length . Put . For this periodic height , we have , where with and either the identity or . The eigenvalues of lie in , so is invertible with . For put and . Then , which lies in the -orbit of , so satisfies . Here we used that near the -th point of the orbit, whose height lies in .
Since is -dense in , the points are -dense. For large , this is less than . So we can choose with , and then . Then . Moreover, no point of the orbit of under lies in . Otherwise, since and map into itself, would lie in , and so would , as is -invariant. So is injective near each point of this orbit, and near
where is the inverse of near , and is the translation by . Now is a similarity of ratio fixing , so is repelling in the stated sense. Finally, and , and is Lipschitz on slabs, so is close to when is small and is large.
(iii) Topological entropy is preserved by conjugacy, so by (i) it suffices to compute . Let on . The map satisfies , and its fibres have at most two points. So [39 Ch. 7], and by Bowen’s inequality [4 Theorem 17], since finite sets carry zero entropy. It remains to show that .
Give the quotient metric of the Euclidean metric, and the maximum of the two metrics. For a word and , put . If begins with , then lifts to a linear similarity of ratio . Hence, for a lift of ,
with equality when , because a vector of length less than 1 is the shortest representative of its class modulo . Write for the Bowen metric of the distances between the -th iterates.
Upper bound. Let , and choose with . For each word of length , fix beginning with , and a set that is -dense in , with for a constant . Let , let be the first letters of , and choose with . For , the sequences and agree in their first letters, and by (6.2) the -th torus coordinates are within . So . Hence there is an -spanning set with at most
points, and .
Lower bound. Let . For each word of length , fix beginning with , and let be a maximal set whose points are at mutual distance at least . Comparing areas, . Points and with are at -distance at least 1, from the first index at which and differ. Now let in , and let be a shortest lift of , so . Let be the least index with . If , the torus coordinates already differ by . If , then . So by the equality case of (6.2), the -th torus coordinates are at distance . Hence the points , for and , are at mutual -distance at least , so they form an -separated set with at least
points, and .
(iv) Let on , with the Haar probability measure. Let be the partition of into the sets , where runs over the half-open squares of side tiling , and is the projection. Then maps each atom of bijectively onto , and for Borel . Indeed, on product sets the shift multiplies by and multiplies by , and . Summing over the atoms, , so is invariant.
Let . By induction, each of its atoms is mapped by bijectively onto , and has measure . An atom of determines the first letters of , and its torus coordinates lie in the image of a square of side . So the diameters of the atoms tend to , is a generator, and the Kolmogorov–Sinai theorem gives [39 Ch. 4]. The same constant-Jacobian property gives for every atom of , every and every Borel set . Since finite unions of such atoms approximate every Borel set, is mixing.
Now , which is therefore -invariant and mixing. By the variational principle [39 Ch. 8] and (iii), . Conversely, the relativised variational principle of Ledrappier and Walters [25], with the integral of the fibre entropies bounded by their supremum, gives
since the fibres of are finite. Transporting by gives (iv). □
We use the following standard identity for Möbius maps of . Write for the chordal metric, and for the chordal derivative.
Lemma 6.4. For every Möbius map of and all ,
Proof. First consider the Euclidean identity for finite , , , .
It holds for similarities.
It holds for the inversion , since and .
It is preserved under composition, by the chain rule.
Every Möbius map is a composition of similarities and this inversion, so the identity holds in general; see also [1 (3.1.5) and §3.5], where it is written as for . Substituting it into the formula [1 (3.1.3)] gives the chordal identity, which extends to points at by continuity. □
Remark 6.5. Three features of the construction are necessary, in the following sense.
(i) branches on . The branch rays of and cross every sphere with . Some branching on is unavoidable. The sphere is invariant, and has degree . If were locally injective near , then would be a local homeomorphism of onto itself, by invariance of domain, hence a covering map of degree . This is impossible, as is simply connected.
(ii) is not conformal near . Indeed, is of Lattès type on each sphere , . A map that is conformal and uniformly expanding near its Julia set could not have a Julia set with non-degenerate components. To see this, suppose that a uqr map of , , is conformal on a neighbourhood of , with there, where is the chordal derivative defined before Lemma 6.4. Shrinking , we may assume it has finitely many components. By Liouville’s theorem [16], [22], is a Möbius map on each component of . By Lemma 6.4, expands
chordal distances by at least on each component of , globally and not only infinitesimally. A component of lies in a single component of , and so does each . Hence , and is a point. So is totally disconnected and is connected.
(iii) The shell map is not radial. Suppose an open map on mapped each sphere into a sphere . Then is continuous, and openness forces to be strictly monotone. Indeed, if had a local extremum at an interior point , strict or not, then a small neighbourhood of a point of would be mapped into one closed side of , while its image contains a point of ; so the image would not be open. But the boundary conditions force . So the fold in the height dynamics, which produces the Cantor set , cannot be realised by maps preserving concentric spheres. This is why has to be built by a non-radial construction.
Remark 6.6 (Higher dimensions). The construction extends to for every , giving uqr maps of degree whose Julia set is a Cantor set of round -spheres, with . We outline the changes. The details, which we have checked, are routine but lengthy, and we omit them.
Zorich maps and the semiconjugacies of § 2 exist in all dimensions [22 §6.5.4]. Suppose the angular map is obtained by reflecting a bi-Lipschitz map of onto a hemisphere in the grid faces. Then its automorphy group consists of the maps , where and is a diagonal sign matrix with determinant 1. The maps and , where , are orientation-preserving and conjugate this group into itself.
In the slit construction, the slit is a codimension-one disc, the new branch set is a codimension-two sphere, and .
For , the map can be obtained from Theorem 4.2 as in dimension three. In place of Kneser’s theorem one uses that every orientation-preserving homeomorphism of is isotopic to the identity, which follows from the stable homeomorphism theorem, see [23], [33] and the references there. In every dimension, including , can instead be written down explicitly. Place the slit where the inverse branches and are smooth. Parametrize the double of a small ellipsoid around the slit by oblate spheroidal coordinates, reparametrized radially near the rim so that the map is bi-Lipschitz in the winding-map charts. Then match the collars using diffeomorphisms supported in small balls, each the time-one map of an explicit vector field.
A no-wandering theorem for expanding uqr maps
Throughout this section, is uqr, , and is the chordal metric. A wandering orbit is a sequence of pairwise distinct Fatou components with . We fix and write . Branching on has to be allowed: by Remark 6.5(1), a locally injective expansion hypothesis near would exclude the map of Theorem 1.1. So expansion is formulated through inclusions of balls.
Lemma 7.1. For every wandering orbit, .
Proof. For , the set is a compact subset of . So it is covered by finitely many Fatou components. Since the are pairwise distinct, it contains for only finitely many .
Theorem 7.2. Suppose there are a neighbourhood of and constants , , with the following property. Whenever , with , and ,
Then has no wandering domains, that is, there is no wandering orbit of Fatou components.
Proof. Let be a wandering orbit. By Lemma 7.1 there is with for all . Choose with . For ,
which is for all large . Hence for all large , contradicting Lemma 7.1.
The constant is uniform in . This is the natural form of expansion for maps built from semiconjugacies, where the loss comes only from the semiconjugating map. The hypothesis allows branching on .
The same expansion hypothesis also controls the periodic Fatou components. Write .
Lemma 7.3. Suppose satisfies the hypothesis of Theorem 7.2. There are and such that, for every :
(i) for infinitely many ;
(ii) for all .
Proof. Since is compact and is an open neighbourhood of it, we can choose with and . Then is a compact subset of .
We first record an estimate. Let and , and suppose for . Put . The ball misses , so it lies in , and so does its image under , by forward invariance of . By hypothesis this image contains . Hence
(i) Suppose for all . Then (7.1) applies for every . Its middle term equals for large , which contradicts .
(ii) If there is nothing to prove. Otherwise by (i), and is a compact subset of . Put , and fix and .
If , then .
If for , then (7.1) with gives when , and this is trivial when .
Otherwise, let be the largest index with . Then , and for . So if , and (7.1), applied from , gives if .
Since and , in all cases
Recall that a fixed point of a uqr map is attracting if uniformly on a neighbourhood of , and superattracting if, in addition, lies in the branch set of . By [19 Proposition 4.9], every Fatou component of with is one of the following:
(a) the basin of an attracting or superattracting fixed point in ;
(b) a parabolic basin: there are a fixed point and with locally uniformly on ;
(c) a rotation domain: is a homeomorphism of , and the group it generates has compact closure in the group of homeomorphisms of , with the topology of locally uniform convergence.
See [19 Definition 4.8] for these definitions, and also [18].
Theorem 7.4. Suppose satisfies the hypothesis of Theorem 7.2. Then has only finitely many periodic Fatou components, and each of them contains an attracting or superattracting periodic point. Consequently every Fatou component is eventually mapped into the immediate basin of one of finitely many attracting or superattracting cycles.
Proof. We may assume that . Let , and be as in Lemma 7.3 and its proof.
Finiteness. The Fatou components form an open cover of the compact set by pairwise disjoint sets, so only finitely many of them meet . By Lemma 7.3(i), every cycle of periodic components has a member that meets . Distinct cycles have no common members. So there are only finitely many cycles, each of finite length.
Type. Let be a periodic component of period , and put . Since maps Fatou components onto Fatou components [22 Ch. 21], , and is uqr with . By the classification above, is of type (a), (b) or (c) for . We exclude (b) and (c).
Suppose is a parabolic basin. Then there are a fixed point and with locally uniformly on . For we get , since . This contradicts Lemma 7.3(ii), as .
Suppose is a rotation domain, and let be the compact closure of the group generated by . Let for , and put
Since the Fatou components are open and pairwise disjoint, is compact. So is a compact subset of , and for the same reason its intersection with is compact. So is a compact subset of . Since is locally compact, the evaluation map is continuous, so is compact. But is a nonempty open proper subset of , since [22 Ch. 21], so it is not compact. Choose .
If for some , then . So for every . Now let with . Then , and if then . So the -orbit of never meets , contradicting Lemma 7.3(i).
So is the basin of an attracting or superattracting fixed point of , which is a periodic point of . For the last statement, let be any Fatou component. By Theorem 7.2, for some , so is periodic.
For a rational map of degree at least , the hypothesis of Theorem 7.2 holds if is hyperbolic. In that case is expanding for a suitable conformal metric on a neighbourhood of such that and miss the closure of the postcritical set [28 §19]. So the inverse branches of along orbits in extend to balls of a fixed radius, and the Koebe distortion theorem turns the expansion into the required ball inclusions. Conversely, if the hypothesis holds, then contains no critical point , since lies in a ball of radius about . By Theorem 7.4, every critical point is then attracted to an attracting cycle, so is hyperbolic. So for rational maps, Theorem 7.2 is the classical fact, going back to Fatou, that hyperbolic rational maps have no wandering domains; see, for example, [28].
Corollary 7.5. The map of Theorem 1.1 satisfies the hypothesis of Theorem 7.2.
Proof. Write for the height of , and also for the last coordinate of , so that . Recall that and .
Choice of constants. By Proposition 4.1 and the definition of , we have on and on . Let be the slab . As noted in § 2, is -BLD on for some . Hence, for with and , we have the Euclidean inclusions
The first holds because is -Lipschitz on convex subsets of , and . The second follows by path lifting [35 II.3]. Let . The segment avoids : the BLD lower bound applied to the radial derivative of gives , so . Lift this segment under starting at . As long as the lift stays in , it has length less than , since is -BLD there. So it stays in , the whole segment lifts, and . On the compact region the chordal and Euclidean metrics are comparable: for , for some .
Now fix with
so small that the chordal ball lies in for every with . This is possible because these points form a compact subset of the interior of . Since , the Euclidean ball also lies in for these . Let for . These sets are disjoint, and on . Put
Then is an open neighbourhood of .
Following an orbit. Let with , and write . For , let be the index with . Put , so that . Let be the ratio of the similarity , with . Each has ratio or , so is non-decreasing and .
Claim. If , then for . This holds for . Suppose it holds for some . The ball has radius at most , and its centre has height within of , so it lies in . Hence on it, and
This proves the claim. It is the step that requires : the intermediate balls must stay in the region where the same branch or applies, and their radii grow by the actual multipliers or , not merely by 2.
Conclusion. Let and put . The heights of and of are within of , and . By the choice of , the balls below lie in , where the metrics are comparable. So
and, by the claim,
Finally,
Hence .
For the map of Theorem 1.1, the conclusions of Theorems 7.2 and 7.4 are of course already contained in Theorem 6.1. The role of Corollary 7.5 is to show that the class in Theorem 7.2 contains maps with infinitely many Fatou components.
Acknowledgements
Acknowledgements. Parts of this work, including the exploration of possible constructions and the drafting of some arguments, were carried out with the assistance of Claude, an AI system developed by Anthropic. The authors have checked all arguments and take full responsibility for the content.
School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL 60115-2888, USA
Email address: [email protected]
Institute for Advanced Study, Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand
Email address: [email protected]
References
- [1]A. F. Beardon, The Geometry of Discrete Groups, Grad. Texts in Math. 91, Springer, 1983.DOI
- [2]I. Berstein, A. L. Edmonds, On the construction of branched coverings of low-dimensional manifolds, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 247 (1979), 87–124.DOI
- [3]J. Burkart, A. N. Fletcher, D. A. Nicks, Interpolating quasiregular power mappings, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 379 (2026), 1351–1370.arxiv.org/abs/2411.10190
- [4]R. Bowen, Entropy for group endomorphisms and homogeneous spaces, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 153 (1971), 401–414.DOI
- [5]R. L. Devaney, D. M. Look, D. Uminsky, The escape trichotomy for singularly perturbed rational maps, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 54 (2005), 1621–1634.
- [6]D. Drasin, S. Sastry, Periodic quasiregular mappings of finite order, Rev. Mat. Iberoam. 19 (2003), 755–766.DOI
- [7]K. Falconer, Fractal Geometry: Mathematical Foundations and Applications, 3rd ed., Wiley, 2014.
- [8]A. N. Fletcher, D. A. MacClure, Strongly automorphic mappings and Julia sets of uniformly quasiregular mappings, J. Anal. Math. 141 (2020), 483–520.arxiv.org/abs/1703.02455
- [9]A. N. Fletcher, D. A. Nicks, Julia sets of uniformly quasiregular mappings are uniformly perfect, Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 151 (2011), 541–550.
- [10]A. N. Fletcher, J. Pratscher, A complete realization of the orbits of generalized derivatives of quasiregular mappings, J. Geom. Anal. 31 (2021), 4447–4491.arxiv.org/abs/1908.11320
- [11]A. N. Fletcher, D. Stoertz, Genus 2 Cantor sets, Pacific J. Math. 321 (2022), 283–307.DOI
- [12]A. N. Fletcher, D. Stoertz, V. Vellis, Genus g Cantor sets and germane Julia sets, Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A, published online 2 December 2025, https://doi.org/10.1017/prm.2025.10091
- [13]A. N. Fletcher, J.-M. Wu, Julia sets and wild Cantor sets, Geom. Dedicata 174 (2015), 169–176.arxiv.org/abs/1403.6790
- [14]A. N. Fletcher, Quasiregular semigroups with examples, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. 39 (2019), no. 4, 2157–2172.arxiv.org/abs/1801.02545
- [15]R. H. Fox, Covering spaces with singularities, in Algebraic Geometry and Topology: A Symposium in Honor of S. Lefschetz, Princeton Univ. Press, 1957, 243–257.DOI
- [16]F. W. Gehring, Rings and quasiconformal mappings in space, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 103 (1962), 353–393.
- [17]J. Hempel, 3-Manifolds, Ann. of Math. Studies 86, Princeton Univ. Press, 1976.
- [18]A. Hinkkanen, G. J. Martin, Limit functions for convergence groups and uniformly quasiregular maps, J. London Math. Soc. (2) 73 (2006), 716–726.
- [19]A. Hinkkanen, G. J. Martin, V. Mayer, Local dynamics of uniformly quasiregular mappings, Math. Scand. 95 (2004), 80–100.DOI
- [20]J. E. Hutchinson, Fractals and self-similarity, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 30 (1981), 713–747.
- [21]T. Iwaniec, G. J. Martin, Quasiregular semigroups, Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Math. 21 (1996), 241–254.
- [22]T. Iwaniec, G. J. Martin, Geometric Function Theory and Non-linear Analysis, Oxford University Press, 2001.DOI
- [23]R. C. Kirby, Stable homeomorphisms and the annulus conjecture, Ann. of Math. (2) 89 (1969), 575–582.
- [24]H. Kneser, Die Deformationssätze der einfach zusammenhängenden Flächen, Math. Z. 25 (1926), 362–372.
- [25]F. Ledrappier, P. Walters, A relativised variational principle for continuous transformations, J. London Math. Soc. (2) 16 (1977), 568–576.
- [26]V. Mayer, Uniformly quasiregular mappings of Lattès type, Conform. Geom. Dyn. 1 (1997), 104–111.DOI
- [27]C. T. McMullen, Automorphisms of rational maps, in Holomorphic Functions and Moduli I, MSRI Publ. 10, Springer, 1988, 31–60.
- [28]J. Milnor, Dynamics in One Complex Variable, 3rd ed., Ann. of Math. Studies 160, Princeton Univ. Press, 2006.
- [29]O. Martio, J. Väisälä, Elliptic equations and maps of bounded length distortion, Math. Ann. 282 (1988), 423–443.DOI
- [30]K. Peltonen, Examples of uniformly quasiregular mappings, Conform. Geom. Dyn. 3 (1999), 158–163.DOI
- [31]P. Pankka, K. Rajala, J.-M. Wu, Quasiregular ellipticity of open and generalized manifolds, Comput. Methods Funct. Theory 14 (2014), 383–398.
- [32]W. Qiu, X. Wang, Y. Yin, Dynamics of McMullen maps, Adv. Math. 229 (2012), 2525–2577.arxiv.org/abs/1204.1907
- [33]F. Quinn, Ends of maps. III. Dimensions 4 and 5, J. Differential Geom. 17 (1982), 503–521.
- [34]S. Rickman, The analogue of Picard’s theorem for quasiregular mappings in dimension three, Acta Math. 154 (1985), 195–242.
- [35]S. Rickman, Quasiregular Mappings, Springer, 1993.DOI
- [36]D. Rolfsen, Knots and Links, AMS Chelsea Publishing, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2003. Corrected reprint of the 1976 original.
- [37]D. Sullivan, Hyperbolic geometry and homeomorphisms, in Geometric Topology (Proc. Georgia Topology Conf., Athens, Ga., 1977), Academic Press, 1979, 543–555.DOI
- [38]P. Tukia, J. Väisälä, Lipschitz and quasiconformal approximation and extension, Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Ser. A I Math. 6 (1981), 303–342.DOI
- [39]P. Walters, An Introduction to Ergodic Theory, Grad. Texts in Math. 79, Springer, 1982.