Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-59b7f5684b-569ts Total loading time: 0.531 Render date: 2022-09-29T15:26:23.703Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "displayNetworkTab": true, "displayNetworkMapGraph": false, "useSa": true } hasContentIssue true

Finite blocking property versus pure periodicity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

THIERRY MONTEIL*
Affiliation:
CNRS – LIRMM – Univ. Montpellier 2, 161 rue Ada, 34392 Montpellier, Francehttp://www.lirmm.fr/∼monteil

Abstract

A translation surface 𝒮 is said to have the finite blocking property if for every pair (O,A) of points in 𝒮 there exists a finite number of ‘blocking’ points B1,…,Bn such that every geodesic from O to A meets one of the Bis. 𝒮 is said to be purely periodic if the directional flow is periodic in each direction whose directional flow contains a periodic trajectory (this implies that 𝒮 admits a cylinder decomposition in such directions). We will prove that the finite blocking property implies pure periodicity. We will also classify the surfaces that have the finite blocking property in genus two: such surfaces are exactly the torus branched coverings. Moreover, we prove that in every stratum such surfaces form a set of null measure. In Appendix A, we prove that completely periodic translation surfaces form a set of null measure in every stratum.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1]Boca, F., Gologan, R. and Zaharescu, A.. The statistics of the trajectory of a certain billiard in a flat torus. Comm. Math. Phys. 240 (2003), 5376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Calta, K.. Veech surfaces and complete periodicity in genus 2. J. Amer. Math. Soc. 17(4) (2004), 871908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Cheung, Y.. Hausdorff dimension of the set of nonergodic directions. Ann. of Math. (2) 158 (2003), 661678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Chernov, N. and Galperin, G.. Search light in billiard tables. Regul. Chaotic Dyn. 8(2) (2003), 225241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5]Fomin, D. and Kirichenko, A.. Leningrad Mathematical Olympiads 1987–1991. MathPro Press, 1994, p. 197.Google Scholar
[6]Gutkin, E.. Blocking of billiard orbits and security for polygons and flat surfaces. Geom. Funct. Anal. 15(1) (2005), 83105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Hiemer, P. and Snurnikov, V.. Polygonal billiards with small obstacles. J. Stat. Phys. 90(1–2) (1998), 453466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Klee, V.. Is every polygonal region illuminable from some point?  Amer. Math. Monthly 76(80) (1969).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9]Kerckhoff, S., Masur, H. and Smillie, J.. Ergodicity of billiard flows and quadratic differentials. Ann. of Math. 124(2) (1986), 293311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10]Kontsevich, M. and Zorich, A.. Connected components of the moduli spaces of Abelian differentials with prescribed singularities. Invent. Math. 153(3) (2003), 631678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11]Masur, H.. Interval exchange transformations and measured foliations. Ann. of Math. (2) 115(1) (1982), 169200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12]Masur, H.. Hausdorff dimension of the set of nonergodic foliations of a quadratic differential. Duke Math. J. 66(3) (1992), 387442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13]Masur, H. and Smillie, J.. Hausdorff dimension of sets of nonergodic measured foliations. Ann. of Math. 134(3) (1991), 455543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14]Masur, H. and Tabachnikov, S.. Rational Billiards and Flat Structures (Handbook on Dynamical Systems, 1A). North-Holland, Amsterdam, 2002, pp. 10151089.Google Scholar
[15]Monteil, T.. A counter-example to the theorem of Hiemer and Snurnikov. J. Stat. Phys. 114(5–6) (2004), 16191623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[16]Monteil, T.. On the finite blocking property. Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) 55(4) (2005), 11951217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[17]Monteil, T.. A homological condition for a dynamical and illuminatory classification of torus branched coverings. Preprint http://arxiv.org/abs/math.DS/0603352.Google Scholar
[18]Tokarsky, G.. Polygonal rooms not illuminable from every point. Amer. Math. Monthly 102(10) (1995), 867879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[19]Veech, W.. Gauss measures for transformations on the space of interval exchange maps. Ann. of Math. (2) 115(1) (1982), 201242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[20]Veech, W.. Teichmüller curves in moduli space, Eisenstein series and an application to triangular billiards. Invent. Math. 97(3) (1989), 553583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[21]Vorobets, Y.. Planar structures and billiards in rational polygons: the Veech alternative. Russian Math. Surveys 51(5) (1996), 779817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[22]Zemljakov, A. and Katok, A.. Topological transitivity of billiards in polygons. Mat. Zametki 18(2) (1975), 291300.Google Scholar
2
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Finite blocking property versus pure periodicity
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Finite blocking property versus pure periodicity
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Finite blocking property versus pure periodicity
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *