Hostname: page-component-7b9c58cd5d-9k27k Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-13T15:12:49.953Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Hausdorff dimension of divergent trajectories on homogeneous spaces

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 December 2019

Lifan Guan
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, UK email guanlifan@gmail.com
Ronggang Shi
Affiliation:
Shanghai Center for Mathematical Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai200433, PR China email ronggang@fudan.edu.cn
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

For a one-parameter subgroup action on a finite-volume homogeneous space, we consider the set of points admitting divergent-on-average trajectories. We show that the Hausdorff dimension of this set is strictly less than the manifold dimension of the homogeneous space. As a corollary we know that the Hausdorff dimension of the set of points admitting divergent trajectories is not full, which proves a conjecture of Cheung [Hausdorff dimension of the set of singular pairs, Ann. of Math. (2) 173 (2011), 127–167].

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© The Authors 2019

1 Introduction

Let $G$ be a connected Lie group, $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$ be a lattice of $G$ and $F=\{f_{t}:t\in \mathbb{R}\}$ be a one-parameter subgroup of $G$. A discrete subgroup $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}\leqslant G$ is called a lattice if there exists a finite $G$-invariant measure on the homogeneous space $G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$. The action of $F$ on the homogeneous space $G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$ by left translation defines a flow. In this paper we consider the dynamics of the semiflow given by the action of $F^{+}\,\stackrel{\text{def}}{=}\,\{f_{t}:t\geqslant 0\}$. For $x\in G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$ we say the trajectory $F^{+}x\,\stackrel{\text{def}}{=}\,\{f_{t}x:t\geqslant 0\}$ is divergent if $f_{t}x$ leaves any fixed compact subset of $G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$ provided $t$ is sufficiently large. We say $F^{+}x$ is divergent on average if for any characteristic function $\unicode[STIX]{x1D7D9}_{K}$ of a compact subset $K$ of $G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$ one has

$$\begin{eqnarray}\lim _{T\rightarrow \infty }\frac{1}{T}\int _{0}^{T}\unicode[STIX]{x1D7D9}_{K}(f_{t}x)\,dt=0.\end{eqnarray}$$

Clearly, if the trajectory $F^{+}x$ is divergent, then it is divergent on average. The aim of this paper is to understand the set of divergent points

$$\begin{eqnarray}\mathfrak{D}^{\prime }(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})\,\stackrel{\text{def}}{=}\,\{x\in G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}:F^{+}x\text{ is divergent}\},\end{eqnarray}$$

and the set of divergent on average points

$$\begin{eqnarray}\mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})\,\stackrel{\text{def}}{=}\,\{x\in G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}:F^{+}x\text{ is divergent on average}\},\end{eqnarray}$$

in terms of their Hausdorff dimensions. Here the Hausdorff dimension is defined by attaching $G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$ with a Riemannian metric. It is well known that different choices of Riemannian metrics will not affect the Hausdorff dimension of subsets of $G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$. Indeed, a specific Riemannian metric will be used later for the sake of convenience.

According to the work of Margulis [Reference MargulisMar75] and Dani [Reference DaniDan84, Reference DaniDan86], if $F$ is $\text{Ad}$-unipotent then the space $G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$ admits no divergent on average trajectories of $F^{+}$. In other words, the set $\mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})$, hence the set $\mathfrak{D}^{\prime }(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})$, is empty. On the other hand, the set $\mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})$ can be complicated when $F$ is $\text{Ad}$-diagonalizable. For example, it was proved by Cheung in [Reference CheungChe11] that the Hausdorff dimension of $\mathfrak{D}^{\prime }(F^{+},\text{SL}_{3}(\mathbb{R})/\text{SL}_{3}(\mathbb{Z}))$ with $F=\{\operatorname{diag}(e^{t},e^{t},e^{-2t}):t\in \mathbb{R}\}$ is equal to $7\frac{1}{3}$. Based on his results, Cheung raised the following conjecture in [Reference CheungChe11].

Conjecture 1.1. Let $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$ be a lattice of a connected Lie group $G$ and let $F=\{f_{t}:t\in \mathbb{R}\}$ be a one-parameter subgroup of $G$. Then the Hausdorff dimension of $\mathfrak{D}^{\prime }(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})$ is strictly less than the manifold dimension of $G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$.

Since $\text{Ad}$-unipotent flows admit no divergent trajectories, the conjecture is actually about nonquasiunipotent flows, i.e., the flows $F$ such that $\text{Ad}(F)$ has a nontrivial diagonal part (see Lemma 1.3 for the related concepts). It is proved by Kleinbock and Margulis [Reference Kleinbock and MargulisKM96] that for all nonquasiunipotent flows, the set of points that have bounded trajectories have full Hausdorff dimension. Divergent trajectories can be thought of as the dual to bounded trajectories, and Conjecture 1.1 asks if these two dynamical properties always have opposite characterizations.

The conjecture is known to be true in the following cases where $G$ is a semisimple Lie group without compact factors and $F$ is $\text{Ad}$-diagonalizable:

  1. (i) $G$ is of rank one [Reference DaniDan85];

  2. (ii) $G=\prod _{i=1}^{k}\text{SO}(n,1)$ where $n\geqslant 2$, $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}=\prod _{i=1}^{k}\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}_{i}$ where each $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}_{i}$ is a lattice in $\text{SO}(n,1)$ and $F\leqslant G$ is the diagonal embedding of an $\mathbb{R}$-split torus of $\text{SO}(n,1)$ [Reference CheungChe07, Reference YangYan19];

  3. (iii) $G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}=\text{SL}_{m+n}(\mathbb{R})/\text{SL}_{m+n}(\mathbb{Z})$ and $F=F_{n,m}=\{\operatorname{diag}(e^{nt},\ldots ,e^{nt},e^{-mt},\ldots ,e^{-mt}):t\in \mathbb{R}\}$ where $m,n\geqslant 1$ [Reference CheungChe11, Reference Cheung and ChevallierCC16, Reference Kadyrov, Kleinbock, Lindenstrauss and MargulisKKLM17].

Indeed, for all the cases listed above, the Hausdorff dimensions of the corresponding $\mathfrak{D}^{\prime }(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})$ have been determined.

There is evidence that a stronger version of this conjecture is true. It was proved by Einsiedler and Kadyrov in [Reference Einsiedler and KadyrovEK12] that the Hausdorff dimension of $\mathfrak{D}(F^{+},\text{SL}_{3}(\mathbb{R})/\text{SL}_{3}(\mathbb{Z}))$ is at most $7\frac{1}{3}$ when $F=F_{1,2}$ as in (iii). Using the contraction property of the height function introduced in [Reference Eskin, Margulis and MozesEMM98], it was proved by Kadyrov, Kleinbock, Lindenstrauss and Margulis in [Reference Kadyrov, Kleinbock, Lindenstrauss and MargulisKKLM17] that for any $m,n\geqslant 1$, the Hausdorff dimension of $\mathfrak{D}(F^{+},\text{SL}_{m+n}(\mathbb{R})/\text{SL}_{m+n}(\mathbb{Z}))$ is at most $\dim G-mn/(m+n)$ when $F=F_{n,m}$ as in (iii). See also [Reference Einsiedler, Lindenstrauss, Michel and VenkateshELMV12, Reference KadyrovKad12, Reference Kadyrov and PohlKP17, Reference Liao, Shi, Solan and TamamLSST19, Reference Das, Fishman, Simmons and UrbanskiDFSU17, Reference WeissWei04] for related results.

Now we state the main result of this paper, from which Cheung’s conjecture follows.

Theorem 1.2. Let $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$ be a lattice of a connected Lie group $G$ and let $F=\{f_{t}:t\in \mathbb{R}\}$ be a one-parameter subgroup of $G$. Then the Hausdorff dimension of $\mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})$ is strictly less than the manifold dimension of $G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$.

We will reduce the proof of Theorem 1.2 to the special case where $G$ is a semisimple linear group. Recall that a connected semisimple Lie group $G$ contained in $\text{SL}_{k}(\mathbb{R})$ has a natural structure of real algebraic group. So terminologies of algebraic groups have natural meanings for $G$ and are independent of the embeddings of $G$ into $\text{SL}_{k}(\mathbb{R})$. In particular, the one-parameter group $F$ has the following real Jordan decomposition which is a special case of [Reference BorelBor91, Theorem 4.4].

Lemma 1.3. Let $G\leqslant \text{SL}_{k}(\mathbb{R})$ be a connected semisimple Lie group. For any one-parameter subgroup $F=\{f_{t}:t\in \mathbb{R}\}$, there are uniquely determined one-parameter subgroups

$$\begin{eqnarray}K_{F}=\{k_{t}:t\in \mathbb{R}\},\quad A_{F}=\{a_{t}:t\in \mathbb{R}\}\quad \text{and}\quad U_{F}=\{u_{t}:t\in \mathbb{R}\}\end{eqnarray}$$

with the following properties:

  1. $f_{t}=k_{t}a_{t}u_{t}$;

  2. $K_{F}$ is bounded, $A_{F}$ is $\mathbb{R}$-diagonalizable and $U_{F}$ is unipotent;

  3. all the elements of $K_{F}$, $A_{F}$ and $U_{F}$ commute with each other.

The subgroups $K_{F},A_{F}$ and $U_{F}$ are called compact, diagonal and unipotent parts of $F$, respectively. In § 2 we will reduce the proof of Theorem 1.2 to its following special case which contains the main unknown situations.

Theorem 1.4. Let $G\leqslant \text{SL}_{k}(\mathbb{R})$ be a connected center-free semisimple Lie group without compact factors. Let $F=\{f_{t}:t\in \mathbb{R}\}$ be a one-parameter subgroup of $G$ such that the compact part $K_{F}$ is trivial but the diagonal part $A_{F}$ is nontrivial. We assume the following hold:

  1. $G=\prod _{i=1}^{m}G_{i}$ is a direct product of connected normal subgroups $G_{i}$;

  2. $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}=\prod _{i=1}^{m}\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}_{i}$ where each $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}_{i}$ is a nonuniform irreducible lattice of $G_{i}$;

  3. the group $A_{F}$ has nontrivial projection to each $G_{i}$.

Then the Hausdorff dimension of $\mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})$ is strictly less than the manifold dimension of $G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$.

The proof of Theorem 1.4 is from § 3 till the end of the paper. Indeed, during the proof we will give an algorithm to calculate explicitly the upper bound of the Hausdorff dimension in the setting of Theorem 1.4. Roughly speaking, the dimension gap is given by an explicitly calculable contraction rate of a height function defined in § 4. We believe that an optimal contraction rate makes it possible to give a sharp upper bound. The upper bound we give is not sharp in general, since we do not try to calculate the optimal contraction rate.

The basic strategy for proving Theorem 1.4 is the same as in [Reference Kadyrov, Kleinbock, Lindenstrauss and MargulisKKLM17]. Indeed, when $F$ is diagonalizable, i.e. $F=A_{F}$, Theorem 1.2 can be established using the strategy developed in [Reference Kadyrov, Kleinbock, Lindenstrauss and MargulisKKLM17] and the contraction property of the height function proved in [Reference ShiShi14]. The Eskin–Margulis height function (abbreviated as EM height function) is introduced in [Reference Eskin and MargulisEM04] and serves as our main tool. But when $F$ has nontrivial unipotent parts, essential new ideas are needed. Indeed, when $U_{F}$ is nontrivial, we can no longer reduce the study of $\mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})$ to its intersections with unstable manifolds $G^{+}x$ (see § 3 for the precise definition of $G^{+}$) as in [Reference Kadyrov, Kleinbock, Lindenstrauss and MargulisKKLM17] due to the existence of nontrivial $U_{F}$. Namely, we need to consider the intersection of $\mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})$ with $G^{\text{c}}G^{+}x$ where $G^{\text{c}}$ is the connected component of the centralizer of $A_{F}$.

Using the method of [Reference Kadyrov, Kleinbock, Lindenstrauss and MargulisKKLM17] and the EM height function, it is not hard to give a nontrivial upper bound for the dimension of $\mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})\cap zG^{+}x$ for each fixed $z\in G^{\text{c}}$. But the Hausdorff dimension of a set can be full even if the dimension of every slice is uniformly bounded by a nontrivial constant. So the main difficulty lies in the fact that there are no clear relations among those $\mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})\cap zG^{+}x$ with different $z$. We manage to deal with this issue by showing that for any $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}$ sufficiently small the intersection $\mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})\cap B_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}}^{\text{c}}zB_{1}^{+}x$ can be covered by $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}^{-(m-\unicode[STIX]{x1D716})}$ balls of radius $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}$, where $m$ is the manifold dimension of $G^{+}$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}>0$. Here $B_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}}^{\text{c}}$ and $B_{1}^{+}$ denote the metric ball of radius $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}$ and $1$ centered at $1_{G}$ in $G^{\text{c}}$ and $G^{+}$, respectively. This argument is carried out in the last two sections. Sections 3 and 4 are devoted to prove a uniform contraction property for a family of one-parameter subgroups with respect to the EM height function that are needed in the last two sections.

2 Proof of Theorem 1.2

In this section we prove Theorem 1.2 assuming Theorem  1.4. Let $G,\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4},F$ be as in Theorem 1.2. We choose and fix a Euclidean norm $\Vert \cdot \Vert$ on the Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}$ of $G$, which induces a right invariant Riemannian metric $\operatorname{dist}(\cdot ,\cdot )$ on $G$. Moreover, this metric naturally induces a metric on $G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$, also denoted by ‘$\operatorname{dist}$’, as follows:

$$\begin{eqnarray}\operatorname{dist}(g\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4},h\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})=\inf _{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FE}\in \unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}}\operatorname{dist}(g\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FE},h)\quad \text{where }g,h\in G.\end{eqnarray}$$

Let $\mathfrak{r}$ be the maximal amenable ideal of the Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}$ of $G$, i.e., the largest ideal whose analytic subgroup is amenable. The adjoint action of $G$ on $\mathfrak{s}=\mathfrak{g}/\mathfrak{r}$ defines a homomorphism $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}:G\mapsto \operatorname{Aut}(\mathfrak{s})$. Let $S$ be the connected component of $\operatorname{Aut}(\mathfrak{s})$. It follows from the Levi decomposition of $G$ that $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(G)=S$ and $S$ is a center-free semisimple Lie group without compact factors. It is known that $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}\cap \operatorname{Ker}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B})$ is a cocompact lattice in $\operatorname{Ker}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B})$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})$ is a lattice in $S$, see e.g. [Reference Benoist and QuintBQ12, Lemma 6.1]. Therefore, the induced map $\overline{\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}}:G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}\mapsto S/\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})$ is proper, i.e., the preimage of a compact subset is still compact. Thus, a trajectory $F^{+}x$ is divergent on average if and only if the trajectory $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(F)\overline{\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}}(x)$ is divergent on average, and consequently

(2.1)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \overline{\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}}(\mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}))=\mathfrak{D}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(F^{+}),S/\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})). & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

Let $\unicode[STIX]{x1D711}:\mathfrak{s}\rightarrow \mathfrak{g}$ be an embedding of Lie algebras such that $\text{d}\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}\circ \unicode[STIX]{x1D711}$ is the identity map. It follows from (2.1) that for any $x\in G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$ and any $v\in \mathfrak{s}$

$$\begin{eqnarray}\exp (v)\overline{\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}}(x)\in \mathfrak{D}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(F^{+}),S/\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}))\end{eqnarray}$$

if and only if

$$\begin{eqnarray}\exp (\unicode[STIX]{x1D711}(v))\exp (v^{\prime })x\in \mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})\quad \text{for all }v^{\prime }\in \mathfrak{r}.\end{eqnarray}$$

For any $x\in G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$, there is a neighborhood $U_{x}$ of $x$ of the form $U_{x}=\exp (V_{x})\exp (\unicode[STIX]{x1D711}(W_{x}))x$, where $V_{x}$ (respectively $W_{x}$) is an open neighborhood of $0$ in $\mathfrak{s}$ (respectively $\mathfrak{r}$) on which the exponential map is a bi-Lipschitz diffeomorphism onto its image. Here the metrics on $\mathfrak{s}$ and $\mathfrak{r}$ are given by Euclidean structures induced from that of $\mathfrak{g}$. Note that $\mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})\cap U_{x}$ is equal to

$$\begin{eqnarray}\{\exp (v)\exp (w)x:v\in V_{x},\exp (v)\overline{\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}}(x)\in \mathfrak{D}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(F^{+}),S/\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})),w\in W_{x}\}.\end{eqnarray}$$

Since the Hausdorff dimension is preserved by bi-Lipschitz maps and the induced metrics on homogeneous spaces are locally given by the metrics on Lie groups, we have

(2.2)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \dim \mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})\cap U_{x} & = & \displaystyle \dim \{v\in V_{x}:\exp (v)\overline{\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}}(x)\in \mathfrak{D}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(F^{+}),S/\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}))\}\times W_{x}\nonumber\\ \displaystyle & {\leqslant} & \displaystyle \dim \{v\in V_{x}:\exp (v)\overline{\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}}(x)\in \mathfrak{D}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(F^{+}),S/\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}))\}+\dim \mathfrak{r}\nonumber\\ \displaystyle & = & \displaystyle \dim \mathfrak{D}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(F^{+}),S/\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}))\cap \exp (V_{x})\overline{\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}}(x)+\dim \mathfrak{r}\nonumber\\ \displaystyle & {\leqslant} & \displaystyle \dim \mathfrak{D}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(F^{+}),S/\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}))+\dim \mathfrak{r},\end{eqnarray}$$

where Marstrand’s product theorem (see, e.g. [Reference Bishop and PeresBP17, Theorem 3.2.1]) is used to get the first inequality. Assuming that $\dim \mathfrak{D}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(F^{+}),S/\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}))<\dim \mathfrak{s}$, then in view of (2.2) we have

$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \dim \mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}) & = & \displaystyle \sup _{x\in G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}}\dim \mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})\cap U_{x}\nonumber\\ \displaystyle & {\leqslant} & \displaystyle \dim \mathfrak{D}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(F^{+}),S/\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}))+\dim \mathfrak{r}\nonumber\\ \displaystyle & {<} & \displaystyle \dim \mathfrak{s}+\dim \mathfrak{r}=\dim G.\nonumber\end{eqnarray}$$

Hence to prove Theorem 1.2 it suffices to give a nontrivial upper bound of the Hausdorff dimension of $\mathfrak{D}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(F^{+}),S/\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}))$. We summarize what we have obtained as follows.

Lemma 2.1. Theorem 1.2 is equivalent to its special case where $G$ is a center-free semisimple Lie group without compact factors.

Proof of Theorem 1.2 modulo Theorem 1.4.

According to Lemma 2.1, it suffices to prove the theorem under the additional assumption that $G$ is a center-free semisimple Lie group without compact factors. Under this assumption, the adjoint representation $\text{Ad}:G\rightarrow \text{SL}(\mathfrak{g})$ is a closed embedding. According to the real Jordan decomposition in Lemma 1.3, the compact part $K_{F}$ does not affect the divergence on average property of the trajectories. So we assume without loss of generality that $K_{F}$ is trivial.

There exist finitely many connected semisimple subgroups $G_{i}$ such that $G=\prod _{i}G_{i}$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}_{i}\,\stackrel{\text{def}}{=}\,\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}\cap G_{i}$ is an irreducible lattice of $G_{i}$ for each $i$. It follows that $\prod _{i}\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}_{i}$ is a finite-index subgroup of $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$ and the natural quotient map $G/\prod _{i}\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}_{i}\rightarrow G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$ is proper. So we assume moreover that $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}=\prod _{i}\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}_{i}$.

Denote by $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}_{j}$ the projection of $G$ to $G/G_{j}=\prod _{i\neq j}G_{i}$ and denote by $\overline{\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}}_{j}$ the induced map from $G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$ to $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}_{j}(G)/\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}_{j}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})=\prod _{i\neq j}G_{i}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}_{i}$. Here if $G=G_{j}$ we interpret $\prod _{i\neq j}G_{i}$ as a trivial group and $\prod _{i\neq j}G_{i}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}_{i}$ as a single point set. If $G_{j}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}_{j}$ is compact or the projection of $A_{F}$ to $G_{j}$ is trivial, then

$$\begin{eqnarray}\mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})=\overline{\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}}_{j}^{-1}\biggl(\mathfrak{D}\biggl(\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}_{j}(F^{+}),\mathop{\prod }_{i\neq j}G_{i}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}_{i}\biggr)\biggr).\end{eqnarray}$$

So either $\mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})$ is an empty set or we finally can reduce the problem to the setting of Theorem 1.4 where each $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}_{i}$ is a nonuniform lattice and the projection of $A_{F}$ to each $G_{i}$ is nontrivial. This completes the proof.◻

3 Preliminary on linear representations

From this section, we start the proof of Theorem 1.4. At the beginning of each section we will set up some notation that will be used later. Let $G$ and $F$ be as in Theorem 1.4. Let $A_{F}=\{a_{t}:t\in \mathbb{R}\}$ and $U_{F}=\{u_{t}:t\in \mathbb{R}\}$ be the diagonal and the unipotent parts of $F$, respectively. Let $H$ be the unique connected normal subgroup of $G$ such that $A_{F}\leqslant H$ and the projection of $A_{F}$ to each simple factor of $H$ is nontrivial. Since $A_{F}$ is nontrivial and $G$ is center-free, $H$ is the (nontrivial) product of some simple factors of $G$. Hence $H$ is a semisimple Lie group without compact factors. Let $S$ be the product of simple factors of $G$ not contained in $H$. Then $S$ is a semisimple and normal subgroup of $G$ that commutes with $H$. Moreover, $G=HS$ and $H\cap S=1_{G}$, where $1_{G}$ is the neutral element of $G$.

In this section we will prove a couple of auxiliary results for a finite-dimensional linear representation $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}:G\rightarrow \text{GL}(V)$ on a (nontrivial real) normed vector space $V$. These results will be used in the next section to prove a uniform contracting property of the EM height function. We will use $\Vert \cdot \Vert$ to denote the norm on $V$.

For $\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}\in \mathbb{R}$, we denote the $\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}$-Lyapunov subspace of $A_{F}$ by

$$\begin{eqnarray}V^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}}=\{v\in V:\unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}(a_{t})v=e^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}t}v\}.\end{eqnarray}$$

Recall that if $V^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}}\neq \{0\}$, then $\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}$ is a called an Lyapunov exponent of $(\unicode[STIX]{x1D70C},V)$. Since $U_{F}$ commutes with $A_{F}$, every Lyapunov subspace $V^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}}$ is $U_{F}$-invariant. As $A_{F}$ is $\mathbb{R}$-diagonalizable, the space $V$ can be decomposed as $V^{+}\oplus V^{0}\oplus V^{-}$ where

$$\begin{eqnarray}V^{+}=\bigoplus _{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}>0}V^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}}\quad \text{and}\quad V^{-}=\bigoplus _{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}<0}V^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}}.\end{eqnarray}$$

Now we consider the adjoint representation of $G$ on the Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}$ of $G$. It is easily checked that $\mathfrak{g}^{+},\mathfrak{g}^{-}$ and $\mathfrak{g}^{\text{c}}\,\stackrel{\text{def}}{=}\,\mathfrak{g}^{0}$ are subalgebras of $\mathfrak{g}$. The connected subgroup $G^{+}$ (respectively $G^{-}$) with Lie algebras $\mathfrak{g}^{+}$ (respectively $\mathfrak{g}^{-}$) is called unstable (respectively stable) horospherical subgroup of $a_{1}$. We denote the connected component of the centralizer of $a_{1}$ in $G$ by $G^{\text{c}}$ whose Lie algebra is $\mathfrak{g}^{\text{c}}$. Let $d,d^{\text{c}},d^{-}$ be the manifold dimensions of $G^{+}$, $G^{\text{c}}$ and $G^{-}$, respectively. It follows from the nontriviality of $A_{F}$ that $d>0$.

For $r\geqslant 0$ we let $B_{r}^{G}=\{h\in G:\operatorname{dist}(h,1_{G})<r\}$, $B_{r}^{\pm }=\{h\in G^{\pm }:\operatorname{dist}(h,1_{G})<r\}$ and $B_{r}^{\text{c}}=\{h\in G^{\text{c}}:\operatorname{dist}(h,1_{G})<r\}$. By rescaling the Riemannian metric if necessary, we may assume that:

  1. (i) the product map $B_{1}^{-}\times B_{1}^{\text{c}}\times B_{1}^{+}\rightarrow G$ is a bi-Lipschitz diffeomorphism onto its image;

  2. (ii) the logarithm map is well defined on $B_{1}^{G}$ and is a bi-Lipschitz diffeomorphism onto its image.

According to (i), it is safe to identify the direct product $B_{1}^{-}\times B_{1}^{\text{c}}\times B_{1}^{+}$ with its image $B_{1}^{-}B_{1}^{\text{c}}B_{1}^{+}\subset G$ and we will mainly use the latter notation for sake of convenience. The same statement as (ii) also holds for $B_{1}^{\pm }$ and $B_{1}^{\text{c}}$.

We fix a Haar measure $\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}$ on $G^{+}$ normalized with $\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(B_{1}^{+})=1$. Since the metric ‘$\operatorname{dist}$’ is right invariant, any open ball of radius $r$ in $G^{+}$ has the form $B_{r}^{+}h$$(h\in G^{+})$ and there exists $C_{0}\geqslant 1$ such that

(3.1)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle C_{0}^{-1}r^{d}\leqslant \unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(B_{r}^{+}h)=\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(B_{r}^{+})\leqslant C_{0}r^{d}\quad \text{for all }0\leqslant r\leqslant 1. & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

For $g,h\in G$ we let $g^{h}=h^{-1}gh$. For $z\in G^{\text{c}}$, let $F_{z}=\{f_{t}^{z}:t\in \mathbb{R}\}$ and $F_{z}^{+}=\{f_{t}^{z}:t\geqslant 0\}$. Note that $f_{t}^{z}=a_{t}u_{t}^{z}$ and

(3.2)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \{u_{1}^{z}:z\in B_{1}^{\text{c}}\}\quad \text{is relatively compact.} & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

Lemma 3.1. Let $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}:G\rightarrow \text{GL}(V)$ be a representation on a finite-dimensional normed vector space $V$. Let $\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}$ be a Lyapunov exponent of $(\unicode[STIX]{x1D70C},V)$. For any $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}>0$, there exists $T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}}>0$ such that, for all $t\geqslant T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}},z\in B_{1}^{\text{c}}$ and unit vector $v\in V^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}}$ we have

(3.3)$$\begin{eqnarray}e^{(\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})t}\leqslant \Vert \unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}(f_{t}^{z})v\Vert \leqslant e^{(\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})t}.\end{eqnarray}$$

Proof. For all $v\in V^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}}$ with $\Vert v\Vert =1$ we have $\Vert \unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}(a_{t})v\Vert =e^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}t}$. On the other hand, in view of (3.2), there exist $C>0$ and $n\in \mathbb{N}$ (in this paper $\mathbb{N}=\{1,2,3,\ldots \}$) such that

$$\begin{eqnarray}\Vert \unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}(u_{t}^{z})\Vert \leqslant C(|t|+1)^{n}\end{eqnarray}$$

for all $z\in B_{1}^{\text{c}}$ and $t\in \mathbb{R}$. Therefore, for any unit vector $v\in V^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}},z\in B_{1}^{\text{c}}$ and sufficiently large $t$,

$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \Vert \unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}(f_{t}^{z})v\Vert & {\geqslant} & \displaystyle \Vert \unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}(u_{-t}^{z})\Vert ^{-1}\Vert \unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}(a_{t})v\Vert \geqslant C^{-1}(|t|+1)^{-n}e^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}t}\geqslant e^{(\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})t},\nonumber\\ \displaystyle \Vert \unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}(f_{t}^{z})v\Vert & {\leqslant} & \displaystyle \Vert \unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}(u_{t}^{z})\Vert \Vert \unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}(a_{t})v\Vert \leqslant C(|t|+1)^{n}e^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}t}\leqslant e^{(\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})t}.\Box \nonumber\end{eqnarray}$$

Since $z\in G^{\text{c}}$, it follows from the above discussion that the adjoint action of $f_{t}^{z}$ preserves each Lyapunov subspaces, and hence it preserves $\mathfrak{g}^{+},\mathfrak{g}^{-}$ and $\mathfrak{g}^{\text{c}}$. Consequently, the conjugate action of $f_{t}^{z}$ preserves $G^{+},G^{-},G^{\text{c}}$. Moreover, we have the following.

Lemma 3.2. Let $\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}$ be the top Lyapunov exponent of $A_{F}$ in the representation $(\text{Ad},\mathfrak{g})$, i.e. $\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}=\max \{r\in \mathbb{R}:\mathfrak{g}^{r}\neq \{0\}\}$. Then for any $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}>0$, there exists $T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}}^{\prime }>0$ such that, for all $t\geqslant T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}}^{\prime }$ and $z\in B_{1}^{\text{c}}$, we have

(3.4)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle B_{e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})t}r}^{+} & \subset & \displaystyle f_{-t}^{z}B_{r}^{+}f_{t}^{z}\subset B_{r/4}^{+}\quad \text{for all }r\leqslant 1,\end{eqnarray}$$
(3.5)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle B_{e^{-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}t}r}^{\text{c}} & \subset & \displaystyle f_{-t}^{z}B_{r}^{\text{c}}f_{t}^{z}\subset B_{e^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}t}r}^{\text{c}}\quad \text{for all }r\leqslant e^{-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}t}.\end{eqnarray}$$

Proof. We only give detailed proofs for the second inclusion of (3.5). The proofs of the remaining inclusions are similar, and hence are omitted.

By assumption, the logarithm map from $B_{1}^{G}$ to $\mathfrak{g}$ is a bi-Lipschitz diffeomorphism onto its image. Hence there exists $R\geqslant 1$ such that, for any $h_{1},h_{2}\in B_{1}^{G}$, we have

$$\begin{eqnarray}R^{-1}\operatorname{dist}(\log h_{1},\log h_{2})\leqslant \operatorname{dist}(h_{1},h_{2})\leqslant R\operatorname{dist}(\log h_{1},\log h_{2}).\end{eqnarray}$$

By applying Lemma 3.1 to the adjoint representation of $G$, we know that there exists $T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}/2}>2\log R$ such that, for all $t\geqslant T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}/2},v\in \mathfrak{g}^{\text{c}}$ and $z\in B_{1}^{\text{c}}$, we have

$$\begin{eqnarray}\Vert \text{Ad}(f_{-t}^{z})v\Vert \leqslant e^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}t/2}\Vert v\Vert .\end{eqnarray}$$

By taking $T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}}^{\prime }\geqslant T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}/2}$ large enough, we may assume that $\text{Ad}(f_{-t}^{z})v\in \log B_{1}^{\text{c}}$ for all $t\geqslant T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}}^{\prime }$ and $v\in \log B_{r}^{\text{c}}$ where $r\leqslant e^{-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}t}$. Thus for $r\leqslant e^{-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}t}$ and $h\in B_{r}^{\text{c}}$

$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \operatorname{dist}(f_{-t}^{z}hf_{t}^{z},1_{G}) & = & \displaystyle \operatorname{dist}(f_{-t}^{z}\exp (\log h)f_{t}^{z},1_{G})=\operatorname{dist}(\exp (\text{Ad}(f_{-t}^{z})\log h),1_{G})\nonumber\\ \displaystyle & {\leqslant} & \displaystyle R\operatorname{dist}(\text{Ad}(f_{-t}^{z})\log h,0)\leqslant Re^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}t/2}\operatorname{dist}(\log h,0)\leqslant R^{2}e^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}t/2}\operatorname{dist}(h,1_{G})<e^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}t}r.\nonumber\end{eqnarray}$$

This completes the proof of the second inclusion in (3.5). ◻

From now on till the end of this section, we assume that $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}:G\rightarrow \text{GL}(V)$ is a representation on a finite-dimensional normed vector space $V$ which has no nonzero $H$-invariant vectors. As any two norms on $V$ are equivalent, we also assume without loss of generality that the norm is Euclidean.

Recall that a nonzero $H$-invariant subspace $V^{\prime }$ of $V$ is said to be $H$-irreducible if $V^{\prime }$ contains no $H$-invariant subspaces besides $\{0\}$ and itself. The complete reducibility of representations of $H$ implies that there exists a unique decomposition (called $H$-isotropic decomposition)

(3.6)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle V=V_{1}\oplus \cdots \oplus V_{m} & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

such that irreducible sub-representations of $H$ in the same $V_{i}$ are isomorphic but irreducible sub-representations in different $V_{i}$ are nonisomorphic. Since $S$ commutes with $H$, each $V_{i}$ is $S$-invariant, and hence $G$-invariant. Each $V_{i}$ is called an $H$-isotropic subspace of $V$.

Let $\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}_{i}$ be the top Lyapunov exponent of $A_{F}$ in $(\unicode[STIX]{x1D70C},V_{i})$, i.e.,

$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \unicode[STIX]{x1D706}_{i}=\max \{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}\in \mathbb{R}:V_{i}^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}}\neq \{0\}\}. & & \displaystyle \nonumber\end{eqnarray}$$

Since the projection of $A_{F}$ to each simple factor of $H$ is nontrivial, every $\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}_{i}$ is positive. Let $\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}$ be the minimum of top Lyapunov exponents in all the $V_{i}$, i.e.,

(3.7)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \unicode[STIX]{x1D706}=\min \{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}_{i}:1\leqslant i\leqslant m\}>0. & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

Let $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}_{i}:V_{i}\rightarrow V_{i}^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}_{i}}$ be the $A_{F}$-equivariant projection.

Lemma 3.3. For all $v\in V_{i}\smallsetminus \{0\}$, the map

(3.8)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \unicode[STIX]{x1D711}_{v}:G^{+}\mapsto \mathbb{R}\quad \text{where }\unicode[STIX]{x1D711}_{v}(h)=\Vert \unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}_{i}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}(h)v)\Vert ^{2} & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

is not identically zero.

Proof. Suppose $\unicode[STIX]{x1D711}_{v}$ is identically zero. Then $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}(G^{+})v\subset V_{i}^{\prime }$ where $V_{i}^{\prime }\subset V_{i}$ is the $A_{F}$-invariant complimentary subspace of $V_{i}^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}_{i}}$. This implies that $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}(G^{-}G^{\text{c}}G^{+})v\subset V_{i}^{\prime }$. Since $G^{-}G^{\text{c}}G^{+}$ contains an open dense subset of $G$, see e.g. [Reference Margulis and TomanovMT94, Proposition 2.7], we moreover have that $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}(G)v\subset V_{i}^{\prime }$. This is impossible since the intersection of $V_{i}^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}_{i}}$ with each $H$-invariant subspace of $V_{i}$ is nonzero. This contradiction completes the proof.◻

Lemma 3.4. For all $v\in V_{i}\smallsetminus \{0\}$ and $r\geqslant 0$, let

$$\begin{eqnarray}E(v,r)=\{h\in B_{1}^{+}:\Vert \unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}_{i}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}(h)v)\Vert \leqslant r\}.\end{eqnarray}$$

Then there exists $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{i}>0$ such that

(3.9)$$\begin{eqnarray}C_{i}\,\stackrel{\text{def}}{=}\,\sup _{\substack{ \Vert v\Vert =1,v\in V_{i} \\ r>0}}r^{-\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{i}}\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(E(v,r))<\infty .\end{eqnarray}$$

In particular, $\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(E(v,0))=0$.

Proof. Since $G^{+}$ is a unipotent group, it is simply connected and by [Reference Corwin and GreenleafCG90, Theorem 1.2.10(a)] there is an isomorphism of affine varieties $\mathbb{R}^{d}\rightarrow G^{+}$ such that the Lebesgue measure of $\mathbb{R}^{d}$ corresponds to the Haar measure $\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}$. During the proof, we will identify the group $G^{+}$ with $\mathbb{R}^{d}$ for convenience.

By Lemma 3.3, for every nonzero $v\in V_{i}$ the map $\unicode[STIX]{x1D711}_{v}$ in (3.8) is a nonzero polynomial map. So $\unicode[STIX]{x1D711}_{v}|_{B_{1}^{+}}$ is nonzero. Note that the degrees of $\unicode[STIX]{x1D711}_{v}$ ($v\in V_{i}$) are uniformly bounded from above. Therefore, the $(C,\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC})$-good property of polynomials in [Reference Bernik, Kleinbock and MargulisBKM01, §3] implies that there exist positive constants $C$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}$ such that

(3.10)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(E(v,r))\leqslant C\biggl(\frac{r^{2}}{\sup _{h\in B_{1}^{+}}\unicode[STIX]{x1D711}_{v}(h)}\biggr)^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}} & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

for all nonzero $v\in V_{i}$. Since the set of unit vectors of $V_{i}$ is compact,

(3.11)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \inf _{\Vert v\Vert =1,v\in V_{i}}\sup _{h\in B_{1}^{+}}\unicode[STIX]{x1D711}_{v}(h)>0. & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

So (3.9) follows from (3.10) and (3.11) by taking $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{i}=2\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}$.◻

Remark 3.5. According to [Reference Bernik, Kleinbock and MargulisBKM01, Lemma 3.2] we have $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}=1/dl$ where $d$ is the manifold dimension of $G^{+}$ and $l$ is a uniform upper bound of the degree of $\unicode[STIX]{x1D711}_{v}~(v\in V_{i})$. So the constant $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{i}$ can be calculated explicitly.

Lemma 3.6. Let $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{0}=\min _{1\leqslant i\leqslant m}\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{i}$ where $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{i}>0$ so that Lemma 3.4 holds and let $\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}$ be as in (3.7). Then for any $0<\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}<\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}<\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{0}$, there exists $T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703},\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}}>0$ such that, for all $t\geqslant T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703},\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}}$, $z\in B_{1}^{\text{c}}$ and $v\in V$ with $\Vert v\Vert =1$, we have

(3.12)$$\begin{eqnarray}\int _{B_{1}^{+}}\Vert \unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}(f_{t}^{z}h)v\Vert ^{-\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}\,d\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(h)\leqslant e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}t}.\end{eqnarray}$$

Proof. Without loss of generality, we assume further that the Euclidean norm $\Vert \cdot \Vert$ on $V$ satisfies the following properties:

  1. the Lyapunov subspaces of $A_{F}$ are orthogonal to each other;

  2. the $H$-isotropic subspaces $V_{i}~(1\leqslant i\leqslant m)$ are orthogonal to each other.

Let

(3.13)$$\begin{eqnarray}R_{i}=\sup _{v\in V_{i},\Vert v\Vert =1,h\in B_{1}^{+}}\Vert \unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}_{i}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}(h)v)\Vert \quad \text{and}\quad R=\max \{R_{i}:1\leqslant i\leqslant m\}.\end{eqnarray}$$

Let $C=\max \{C_{i}:1\leqslant i\leqslant m\}$ where $C_{i}$ is given in (3.9). Let $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}^{\prime }=\max \{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{i}:1\leqslant i\leqslant m\}$.

According to Lemma 3.1, there exists $T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703},\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}}^{\prime \prime }>0$ such that (3.3) holds for any $t\geqslant T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703},\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}}^{\prime \prime }$, any nonzero $v\in V^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}_{i}}~(1\leqslant i\leqslant m)$ and any $z\in B_{1}^{\text{c}}$, i.e.,

$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \Vert \unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}(f_{t}^{z})v\Vert ^{-\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}\leqslant e^{-(1-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}/2\unicode[STIX]{x1D703})\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}_{i}t}\Vert v\Vert ^{-\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}\leqslant e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}/2)\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}t}\Vert v\Vert ^{-\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}. & & \displaystyle \nonumber\end{eqnarray}$$

This inequality and the assumption of the norm implies that for all nonzero $v\in V_{i}$ and $t\geqslant T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703},\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}}^{\prime \prime }$

(3.14)$$\begin{eqnarray}\Vert \unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}(f_{t}^{z}h)v\Vert ^{-\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}\leqslant e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}/2)\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}t}\Vert \unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}_{i}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}(h)v)\Vert ^{-\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}},\end{eqnarray}$$

where ${\textstyle \frac{1}{0}}$ is interpreted as $\infty$. Let $T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703},\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}}\geqslant T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703},\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}}^{\prime \prime }$ be a large enough real number so that $t\geqslant T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703},\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}}$ implies

(3.15)$$\begin{eqnarray}\frac{(2m)^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}^{\prime }}CR^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}^{\prime }-\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}}{1-2^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}-\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{0}}}e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}/2)\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}t}\leqslant e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}t}.\end{eqnarray}$$

Let $v$ be a unit vector of $V$. We write $v=v_{1}+\cdots +v_{m}$ where $v_{i}\in V_{i}$. Since we assume different $V_{i}$ are orthogonal to each other, there exists an integer $i\in [1,m]$ such that $m\Vert v_{i}\Vert \geqslant \Vert v\Vert =1$.

There is a disjoint union decomposition of $B_{1}^{+}$ as

$$\begin{eqnarray}E(v_{i},0)\cup \biggl(\mathop{\bigcup }_{n\geqslant 0}E^{+}(v_{i},2^{-n}R_{i})\biggr),\end{eqnarray}$$

where

$$\begin{eqnarray}E^{+}(v_{i},2^{-n}R_{i})=E(v_{i},2^{-n}R_{i})\smallsetminus E(v_{i},2^{-n-1}R_{i}).\end{eqnarray}$$

Since $\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(E(v_{i},0))=0$, for any $z\in B_{1}^{\text{c}}$ and $t\geqslant T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703},\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}}$ we have

4 Eskin–Margulis height function

Let the notation be as in Theorem 1.4. In this section, we will establish a uniform contraction property of the EM height function on $G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$ with respect to a family of one-parameter subgroups $F_{z}~(z\in B_{1}^{\text{c}})$.

Recall that $G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}=\prod _{i=1}^{m}G_{i}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}_{i}$ where each $G_{i}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}_{i}$ is a noncompact irreducible quotient of a semisimple Lie group without compact factors. Since we assume the projection of $A_{F}$ to each $G_{i}$ is nontrivial, we have $H=\prod _{i=1}^{m}H_{i}$, where each $H_{i}=G_{i}\cap H$ is a nontrivial connected normal subgroup of $G_{i}$.

Let us recall the definition of the EM height function from [Reference Eskin and MargulisEM04]. The EM height function is constructed on each $G_{i}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}_{i}$ using a finite set $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E5}_{i}$ of $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}_{i}$-rational parabolic subgroups of $G_{i}$. Recall that a parabolic subgroup $P$ of $G_{i}$ is $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}_{i}$-rational if the unipotent radical of $P$ intersects $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}_{i}$ in a lattice. If the rank of $G_{i}$ is bigger than one, then Margulis’ arithmeticity theorem implies that there is a $\mathbb{Q}$-structure on $G_{i}$ such that $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}_{i}$ is commensurable with $G_{i}(\mathbb{Z})$. In this case the set $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E5}_{i}$ consists of standard $\mathbb{Q}$-rational maximal parabolic subgroups of $G_{i}$ with respect to a fixed $\mathbb{Q}$-split torus and fixed positive roots. So the irreducibility of $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}_{i}$ implies that no conjugates of $H_{i}$ is contained in any $P\in \unicode[STIX]{x1D6E5}_{i}$. The same conclusion holds in the case where $G_{i}$ has rank one. The reason is that in this case $H_{i}=G_{i}$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E5}_{i}=\{P\}$ where $P$ is a maximal parabolic subgroup defined over $\mathbb{R}$.

For each $P_{i,j}\in \unicode[STIX]{x1D6E5}_{i}$, there exists a representation $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}_{i,j}:G_{i}\rightarrow \text{GL}(V_{i,j})$ on a normed vector space and a nonzero vector $w_{i,j}\in V_{i,j}$ such that the stabilizer of $\mathbb{R}w_{i,j}$ is $P_{i,j}$. In fact, the map $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}_{i,j}$ is given by Chevalley’s theorem and is defined over $\mathbb{Q}$ when $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$ is arithmetic. We consider $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}_{i,j}$ as a representation of $G$ so that $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}(G_{s})$ is the identity linear map if $s\neq i$. Let $V_{i,j}^{H}$ be the $H$-invariant subspace of $V_{i,j}$ consisting of $H$-invariant vectors. Let $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}_{i,j}$ be the projection of $V_{i,j}$ to the $H$-invariant subspace $V_{i,j}^{\prime }$ complementary to $V_{i,j}^{H}$. Since no conjugates of $H_{i}$ is contained in $P_{i,j}$ and $G_{i}=K_{i}P_{i,j}$ for some maximal compact subgroup $K_{i}$ of $G_{i}$, there exists $C\geqslant 1$ such that

$$\begin{eqnarray}\Vert v\Vert \leqslant C\Vert \unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}_{i,j}(v)\Vert\end{eqnarray}$$

for all $v\in \unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}_{i,j}(G)w_{i,j}$. Note that $V_{i,j}^{\prime }$ is $G$-invariant and it has no nonzero $H$-invariant vectors. Therefore, Lemma 3.6 implies the following lemma which corresponds to Condition A in [Reference Eskin and MargulisEM04]. For simplicity, the set of indices $j$ such that $P_{i,j}\in \unicode[STIX]{x1D6E5}_{i}$ is also denoted as $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E5}_{i}$. This will not cause any confusion.

Lemma 4.1. For any $1\leqslant i\leqslant m$ and $j\in \unicode[STIX]{x1D6E5}_{i}$, there exist positive constants $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{0}^{i,j}$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}^{i,j}$ such that, for any $0<\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}<\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}<\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{0}^{i,j}$, any nonzero $v\in \unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}_{i,j}(G)w_{i,j}$ and any $z\in B_{1}^{\text{c}}$, one has

(4.1)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \int _{B_{1}^{+}}\Vert \unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}_{i,j}(f_{t}^{z}h)v\Vert ^{-\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}\,dh\leqslant e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})t\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}^{i,j}}\Vert v\Vert ^{-\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}} & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

provided $t\geqslant T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703},\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}}^{i,j}$ where $T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703},\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}}^{i,j}>0$ is a constant depending on $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}$.

Proof. We assume without loss of generality that for all $V_{i,j}$ the norm $\Vert \cdot \Vert$ is Euclidean and $V_{i,j}^{H}$ and $V_{i,j}^{\prime }$ are orthogonal to each other. According to Lemma 3.6, for each representation $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}_{i,j}|_{V_{i,j}^{\prime }}$, there exist positive constants $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{0}^{i,j}$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}^{i,j}$ with the following properties: for any $0<\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}<\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}<\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{0}^{i,j}$ there exists $T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703},\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}}>0$ such that, for any $t\geqslant T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703},\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}},z\in B_{1}^{\text{c}}$ and any nonzero $v\in \unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}_{i,j}(G)w_{i,j}$, one has

$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \int _{B_{1}^{+}}\Vert \unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}_{i,j}(f_{t}^{z}h)v\Vert ^{-\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}\,dh & {\leqslant} & \displaystyle \int _{B_{1}^{+}}\Vert \unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}_{i,j}(f_{t}^{z}h)\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}_{i,j}(v)\Vert ^{-\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}\,dh\nonumber\\ \displaystyle & {\leqslant} & \displaystyle e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})t\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}^{i,j}}\Vert \unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}_{i,j}(v)\Vert ^{-\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}\nonumber\\ \displaystyle & {\leqslant} & \displaystyle C^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})t\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}^{i,j}}\Vert v\Vert ^{-\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}.\nonumber\end{eqnarray}$$

It is not hard to see from the above estimate that (4.1) holds for sufficiently large $t$.◻

Besides $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}_{i,j}$, the EM height function is constructed using positive constants $c_{i,j}$ and $q_{i,j}$ which are combinatorial data determined by the root system, see [Reference Eskin and MargulisEM04, (3.22), (3.28)]. Although only the product $c_{i,j}q_{i,j}$ is used in this paper, the constants $c_{i,j}$ and $q_{i,j}$ are given by different combinatorial data and we use both of them for the consistency with [Reference Eskin and MargulisEM04]. We assume the norm $\Vert \cdot \Vert$ on $V_{i,j}$ is $K_{i}$-invariant and let

(4.2)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle u_{i,j}(g\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})=\max _{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FE}\in \unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}}\frac{1}{\Vert \unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}_{i,j}(g\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FE})w_{i,j}\Vert ^{1/c_{i,j}q_{i,j}}}, & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

where $g\in G$. The maximum is used in the definition of $u_{i,j}$ since supremum on the right-hand side is achieved for some $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FE}\in \unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$. In the case where $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$ is arithmetic this follows from $\mathbb{Q}$-rationality of $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}_{i,j}$. The rank one case is also well known, see e.g. [Reference Kleinbock and WeissKW13, Proposition 3.1]. The main property of $u_{i,j}$ proved in [Reference Eskin and MargulisEM04, §3.2] is summarized in the following lemma.

Lemma 4.2 [Reference Eskin and MargulisEM04].

Let $1\leqslant i\leqslant m$. There are combinatorial data $\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}_{i,jk}>0$ where $j,k\in \unicode[STIX]{x1D6E5}_{i}$ such that the following hold:

  1. (i) $\sum _{k\neq j}\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}_{i,jk}<1$;

  2. (ii) for any $g\in G$, if $u_{i,j}(g\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})$ is achieved at $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FE}\in \unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$, then for any $t,\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}>0$ and $z\in B_{1}^{\text{c}}$ there exist $C^{\prime },b^{\prime }\geqslant 1$ depending on $t$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}$ such that

    (4.3)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \int _{B_{1}^{+}}u_{i,j}^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}(f_{t}^{z}hg\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})\,d\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(h)\leqslant \int _{B_{1}^{+}}\frac{1}{\Vert \unicode[STIX]{x1D70C}_{i,j}(f_{t}^{z}hg\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FE})w_{i,j}\Vert ^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}/c_{i,j}q_{i,j}}}\,d\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(h)+C^{\prime }\mathop{\prod }_{k\neq j}u_{i,k}^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}_{i,jk}}(x)+b^{\prime }. & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

The values $\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}_{i,jk}$ are given in [Reference Eskin and MargulisEM04, (3.31)] and (i) is [Reference Eskin and MargulisEM04, (3.32)]. The statement of Lemma 4.2(ii) is summarized from the proof of [Reference Eskin and MargulisEM04, (3.35)] and (4.3) is the explicit version of [Reference Eskin and MargulisEM04, (3.35)]. We can make the values $C^{\prime }$ and $b^{\prime }$ independent of $i$ since there are only finitely many $i$. The dependence of $C^{\prime }$ and $b^{\prime }$ on $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}$ can be removed if $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}$ is bounded from above.

Let

(4.4)$$\begin{eqnarray}\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{1}=\max \bigg\{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}>0:\frac{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}{c_{i,j}q_{ij}}\leqslant \unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{0}^{i,j}\text{ for all }i,j\bigg\}\quad \text{and}\quad \unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{1}=\min _{i,j}\bigg\{\frac{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{1}}{c_{i,j}q_{ij}}\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}^{i,j}\bigg\},\end{eqnarray}$$

where $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{0}^{i,j}$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}^{i,j}$ are constants given by Lemma 4.1. We call $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{1}$ a contraction rate of the dynamical system $(G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4},F^{+})$.

Remark 4.3. We will see in the following two sections that $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{1}$ plays an important role in bounding the Hausdorff dimension of $\mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})$. We believe that by obtaining the optimal $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{1}$, it would be possible to give a sharp upper bound on the dimension. By Remark 3.5, the constant $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{0}^{i,j}$ can be explicitly calculated, so are the constants $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{1}$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{1}$. Consequently, it will be clear from the proof in the next two sections that the upper bound of the dimension we obtain can also be explicitly calculated, although not optimal.

Lemma 4.4. For every $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}<\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{1}$, there exist $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}=\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC})\in (0,\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{1})$ and $T=T(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC})>0$ such that, for all $t\geqslant T$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}$ sufficiently small depending on $t$, the EM height function

(4.5)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle u:G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}\rightarrow (0,\infty )\quad \text{defined by }u(x)=\mathop{\sum }_{i\in [1,m],j\in \unicode[STIX]{x1D6E5}_{i}}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}\,u_{i,j}(x))^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}} & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

satisfies the following properties:

  1. (i) $u(x)\rightarrow \infty$ if and only if $x\rightarrow \infty$ in $G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$;

  2. (ii) for any compact subset $K$ of $G$, there exists $C=C(K,t)\geqslant 1$ such that $u(hx)\leqslant Cu(x)$ for all $h\in K$ and $x\in G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$;

  3. (iii) there exists $b=b(t)>0$ such that, for all $z\in B_{1}^{\text{c}}$ and $x\in G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$, one has

    (4.6)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \int _{B_{1}^{+}}u(f_{t}^{z}hx)\,d\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(h)<\frac{1}{2}e^{-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}t}u(x)+b; & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$
  4. (iv) there exists $\ell =\ell (t)\geqslant 1$ such that if $u(x)\geqslant \ell$, then for all $z\in B_{1}^{\text{c}}$

    (4.7)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \int _{B_{1}^{+}}u(f_{t}^{z}hx)\,d\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(h)<e^{-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}t}u(x). & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

The proof of Lemma 4.4 is essentially the same as in [Reference Eskin and MargulisEM04, §3.2], with the exception of the following minor differences: (i) we do not assume that $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$ is irreducible; (ii) we want (4.6) and (4.7) holds uniformly in $z$; (iii) we want to make the contraction constant in (4.6) as explicit as $\frac{1}{2}e^{-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}t}$. A sketch of proof will be given below to show how to adapt the proof given in [Reference Eskin and MargulisEM04, §3.2] to our settings.

Sketch of proof.

It follows from the corresponding properties for each function $u_{i,j}$ proved in [Reference Eskin and MargulisEM04, §3.2] that the first two conclusions hold for any choice of $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}$. Note that (iv) is a direct corollary of (iii).

Now we prove (iii). We fix $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}>0$ sufficiently small such that

$$\begin{eqnarray}\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}+\frac{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}^{i,j}}{c_{i,j}q_{i,j}}<\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{1}\quad \forall i,j.\end{eqnarray}$$

According to the definitions of $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{1}$, $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{1}$ and the choice of $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}$ above, there exists $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}>0$ such that

(4.8)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \unicode[STIX]{x1D703}<\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{1}\quad \text{and}\quad \frac{(\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}^{i,j}}{c_{i,j}q_{i,j}}\geqslant \unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}\quad \forall i,j. & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

Let $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}_{i,j}=\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}/c_{i,j}q_{i,j}$, $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{i,j}=\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}/c_{i,j}q_{i,j}$, then according to Lemma 4.1 there exists $T^{i,j}>0$ such that, for $t\geqslant T^{i,j}$, one has that (4.1) holds with $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}=\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}_{i,j}$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}=\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{i,j}$. We will show that Lemma 4.4 holds for $T=\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}^{-1}\log 4+\max _{i,j}T^{i,j}$.

Now let us fix $z\in B_{1}^{\text{c}}$ and $x=g\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}\in G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4},t\geqslant T$ and an index $i,j$. By (4.8), Lemmas 4.1 and 4.2 we have

(4.9)$$\begin{eqnarray}\int _{B_{1}^{+}}u_{i,j}^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}(f_{t}^{z}hx)\,d\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(h)\leqslant e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})t}u_{i,j}^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}(x)+C^{\prime }\mathop{\prod }_{k\neq j}u_{i,k}^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}_{i,jk}}(x)+b^{\prime },\end{eqnarray}$$

where $C^{\prime }$ and $b^{\prime }$ are positive constants depending on $t$.

Now we fix $\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}>0$ sufficiently small which will be specified later and define $u(x)$ as in (4.5). We can write (4.9) as

$$\begin{eqnarray}\int _{B_{1}^{+}}\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}u_{i,j}^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}(f_{t}^{z}hx)\,d\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(h)\leqslant e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})t}\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}u_{i,j}^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}(x)+\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{i,j}\mathop{\prod }_{k\neq j}\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}_{i,jk}}u_{i,k}^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}_{i,jk}}(x)+\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}b^{\prime },\end{eqnarray}$$

where $\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{i,j}=C^{\prime }\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}^{1-\sum _{k\neq j}\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}_{i,jk}}$. According to Lemma 4.2(1) and the Jensen’s inequality, we have

$$\begin{eqnarray}\mathop{\prod }_{k\neq j}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}u_{i,k}(x))^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}_{i,jk}}\leqslant \mathop{\prod }_{\substack{ k\neq j \\ \unicode[STIX]{x1D716}u_{i,k}(x)\geqslant 1}}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}u_{i,k}(x))^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}_{i,jk}}\leqslant 1+\mathop{\sum }_{k\neq j}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}u_{i,k}(x))^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}.\end{eqnarray}$$

Hence we have

$$\begin{eqnarray}\int _{B_{1}^{+}}\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}u_{i,j}^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}(f_{t}^{z}hx)\,d\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(h)\leqslant e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})t}\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}u_{i,j}(x)^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{i,j}u(x)+b^{\prime \prime },\end{eqnarray}$$

where $b^{\prime \prime }$ is some constant depending on $t$. Add the above inequalities up over all indices $i,j$, we have

(4.10)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \int _{B_{1}^{+}}u(f_{t}^{z}hx)\,dh\leqslant e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})t}u(x)+\biggl(\mathop{\sum }_{i,j}\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{i,j}\biggr)u(x)+b, & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

where $b$ is a constant depending on $t$. In view of (4.10), for all $\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}$ sufficiently small so that $\sum _{i,j}\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{i,j}\leqslant e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})t}$, one has (4.6) holds.◻

5 Applications of the uniform contraction property

In this section we will introduce some auxiliary sets closely related to $\mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})$ and study them using the uniform contraction property of the EM height function established in Lemma 4.4. To be specific, we will prove some covering results for these auxiliary sets in Proposition 5.1 and these covering results will play an important role in bounding the Hausdorff dimension of $\mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})$.

Let $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{1}$ be a contraction rate of the dynamical system $(G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4},F^{+})$ given by (4.4) and let $\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}$ be the top Lyapunov exponent of $A_{F}$ in the representation $(\text{Ad},\mathfrak{g})$. We also fix an auxiliary $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}\in (0,\unicode[STIX]{x1D706})$ which will eventually go to zero. Let $T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}}^{\prime }>0$ be given by Lemma 3.2 so that for all $t\geqslant T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}}^{\prime }$ we have (3.4) and (3.5) hold. We fix $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}<\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{1}$,

(5.1)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle t>\max \{T_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}}^{\prime },T(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}),\log 4/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF},\log 2/\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}\}, & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

where $T(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC})$ is given by Lemma 4.4 and an EM height function $u:G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}\rightarrow (0,\infty )$ so that Lemma 4.4 holds. Let $\ell \geqslant 1$ so that (4.7) holds for all $z\in B_{1}^{\text{c}}$ if $u(x)\geqslant \ell$. By Lemma 4.4(ii), there exists $C=C(t)\geqslant 1$ such that

(5.2)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle C^{-1}u(x)\leqslant u(f_{s}hx)\leqslant Cu(x)\quad \text{for all }0\leqslant s\leqslant t,h\in B_{2}^{G}\text{ and }x\in G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}. & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

Note that the logarithm map from the metric space $(B_{1}^{+},\operatorname{dist})$ to the Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{+}$ is a bi-Lipschitz diffeomorphism to its image with respect to the induced Euclidean structure. Therefore $(B_{1}^{+},\operatorname{dist})$ is Besicovitch, see [Reference MattilaMAT95], namely, for any subset $D$ of $B_{1}^{+}$ and a covering of $D$ by balls centered at $D$, there is a finite sub-covering such that each element of $D$ is covered by at most $E^{\prime }$ times. Therefore, there exists $E\geqslant E^{\prime }$ such that, for all $0<r\leqslant 1$, the set $B_{1/2}^{+}$ can be covered by no more than $Er^{-d}$ open balls of radius $r$, where $d=\dim G^{+}$.

We use $|I|$ to denote the cardinality of a finite set $I$. The following is the main result of this section.

Proposition 5.1. Let $x\in G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$. There exists $0<\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E}<1$ and $E_{0}\geqslant 1$ such that, for $z\in B_{1}^{\text{c}}$ and $N\in \mathbb{N}$, the set

(5.3)$$\begin{eqnarray}\mathfrak{D}_{x}(z,N,\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E},s)\,\stackrel{\text{def}}{=}\,\{h\in B_{1/2}^{+}:|\{1\leqslant n\leqslant N:u(f_{nt}^{z}hx)\geqslant s\}|\geqslant \unicode[STIX]{x1D70E}N\}\end{eqnarray}$$

with $s=C^{2}\ell$ can be covered by no more than $E_{0}e^{(d\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}(d+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}))tN}$ open balls of radius $e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})tN}$ in $B_{1}^{+}$.

The rest of this section is devoted to show that Proposition 5.1 holds for

(5.4)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \unicode[STIX]{x1D70E}=\frac{(1-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}/2)\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}t+\log C}{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}t+\log C}. & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

In the rest of this section we fix $z\in B_{1}^{\text{c}}$ and $N\in \mathbb{N}$. We begin with the following simple observation.

Lemma 5.2. If $B\subset G^{+}$ is a ball of radius $e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})tN}$ centered at $\mathfrak{D}_{x}(z,N,\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E},C^{2}\ell )$, then $B\subset \mathfrak{D}_{x}(z,N,\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E},C\ell )$.

Proof. Let $h_{0}$ be the center of $B$ and $h\in B$. It suffices to show that, for all $1\leqslant n\leqslant N$, if $u(f_{nt}^{z}h_{0}x)\geqslant C^{2}\ell$ then $u(f_{nt}^{z}hx)\geqslant C\ell$. By (3.4) we have

$$\begin{eqnarray}\operatorname{dist}(f_{nt}^{z}h_{0},f_{nt}^{z}h)=\operatorname{dist}(1_{G},f_{nt}^{z}hh_{0}^{-1}f_{-nt}^{z})<1.\end{eqnarray}$$

By (5.2)

$$\begin{eqnarray}u(f_{nt}hx)=u(f_{nt}hh_{0}^{-1}f_{-nt}\cdot f_{nt}h_{0}x)\geqslant C^{-1}u(f_{nt}h_{0}x)\geqslant C^{-1}\cdot C^{2}\ell =C\ell .\Box\end{eqnarray}$$

For a subset $I\subset \{1,\ldots ,N\}$, we let

$$\begin{eqnarray}\mathfrak{D}_{x}(z,I,C\ell )=\{h\in B_{1/2}^{+}:u(f_{nt}^{z}hx)\geqslant C\ell \text{ for all }n\in I\}.\end{eqnarray}$$

Since $\mathfrak{D}_{x}(z,N,\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E},C\ell )=\bigcup _{|I|\geqslant \unicode[STIX]{x1D70E}N}\mathfrak{D}_{x}(z,I,C\ell )$, one has

(5.5)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(\mathfrak{D}_{x}(z,N,\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E},C\ell ))\leqslant \mathop{\sum }_{|I|\geqslant \unicode[STIX]{x1D70E}N}\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(\mathfrak{D}_{x}(z,I,C\ell )). & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

The following lemma will play an important role in the proof of Proposition 5.1.

Lemma 5.3. Suppose that $I\subset \{1,\ldots ,N\}$ and $|I|\geqslant \unicode[STIX]{x1D70E}N$. Then

(5.6)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(\mathfrak{D}_{x}(z,I,C\ell ))\leqslant C^{2}u(x)e^{-(1-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}/2)\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}tN}. & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

We fix $I$ as in the statement of Lemma 5.3. Our strategy is to estimate the measure of $\mathfrak{D}_{x}(z,I,C\ell )$ by relating it to a subset coming from random walks on $G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$ with alphabet $f_{t}^{z}B_{1}^{+}$. Let $p=\sup I$ and for $1\leqslant k\leqslant p$ let

$$\begin{eqnarray}Z_{k}=\{(h_{1},\ldots ,h_{k})\in (B_{1}^{+})^{k}:u(f_{t}^{z}h_{n}\cdots f_{t}^{z}h_{1}x)\geqslant \ell ~\forall n\in (I\cap [1,k])\}.\end{eqnarray}$$

Define $\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}:(B_{1}^{+})^{p}\rightarrow G^{+}$ by

(5.7)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \unicode[STIX]{x1D702}(h_{1},\ldots ,h_{p})=\tilde{h}_{p}\cdots \tilde{h}_{1}\quad \text{where }\tilde{h}_{n}=f_{-(n-1)t}^{z}h_{n}f_{(n-1)t}^{z}. & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

By (3.4), we know that $\tilde{h}_{n}\in B_{1/4^{n-1}}^{+}$, and hence by the right invariance of $\operatorname{dist}(\cdot ,\cdot )$, the image of $\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}$ is contained in $B_{2}^{+}$. The following two lemmas are needed in the proof of Lemma 5.3.

Lemma 5.4. For all $h\in \mathfrak{D}_{x}(z,I,C\ell )$ one has $\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}^{-1}(h)\subset Z_{p}$.

Proof. Suppose that $\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}(h_{1},\ldots ,h_{p})=h$ where $h_{i}\in B_{1}^{+}$. In view of (5.7), for $1\leqslant n\leqslant p$ we have

$$\begin{eqnarray}f_{nt}^{z}h=f_{nz}\tilde{h}_{p}\cdots \tilde{h}_{1}\quad \text{and}\quad f_{t}^{z}h_{n}\cdots f_{t}^{z}h_{1}=f_{nt}^{z}\tilde{h}_{n}\cdots \tilde{h}_{1}.\end{eqnarray}$$

Therefore,

$$\begin{eqnarray}f_{nt}^{z}h\cdot (f_{t}^{z}h_{n}\cdots f_{t}^{z}h_{1})^{-1}=\mathop{\prod }_{n<i\leqslant p}f_{nt}^{z}\tilde{h}_{i}(f_{nt}^{z})^{-1}\end{eqnarray}$$

which is contained in the image of $\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}$ with $p$ replaced by $n-p$. Since the image of $\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}$ is always contained in $B_{2}^{+}$ and the metric on $G$ is right invariant, we have

$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \operatorname{dist}(f_{nt}^{z}h,f_{t}^{z}h_{n}\cdots f_{t}^{z}h_{1})=\operatorname{dist}(f_{nt}^{z}h\cdot (f_{t}^{z}h_{n}\cdots f_{t}^{z}h_{1})^{-1},1_{G})<2. & & \displaystyle \nonumber\end{eqnarray}$$

Therefore, by (5.2) we have for $n\in I$

$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle u(f_{t}^{z}h_{n}\cdots f_{t}^{z}h_{1}x)\geqslant C^{-1}u(f_{nt}^{z}hx)\geqslant \ell . & & \displaystyle \nonumber\end{eqnarray}$$

So $(h_{1},\ldots ,h_{p})\in Z_{p}$ and the proof is complete.◻

Let $\widetilde{\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}}_{n}$ be the Radon measure on $G^{+}$ defined by

(5.8)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \int _{G^{+}}\unicode[STIX]{x1D711}(h)\,d\widetilde{\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}}_{n}(h)=\int _{B_{1}^{+}}\unicode[STIX]{x1D711}(f_{-nt}^{z}hf_{nt}^{z})\,dh & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

for all $\unicode[STIX]{x1D711}\in C_{c}(G^{+})$. For any positive integer $n$ let $\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}_{n}=\widetilde{\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}}_{n-1}\ast \cdots \ast \widetilde{\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}}_{1}\ast \widetilde{\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}}_{0}$ be the measure on $G^{+}$ defined by the $n$ convolutions. Clearly, $\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}_{n}$ is absolutely continuous with respect to $\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}$, and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}_{p}$ is the pushforward of $(\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}|_{B_{1}^{+}})^{\otimes p}$ by the map $\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}$. The following lemma shows that $\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}_{n}$ has density bigger than or equal to $1$ at every $h\in B_{1/2}^{+}$.

Lemma 5.5. For all $n\leqslant N$ and $h\in B_{1/2}^{+}$ we have $(d\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}_{n}/d\unicode[STIX]{x1D707})(h)\geqslant 1.$

Proof. The conclusion is clear if $n=1$. Now we assume $n>1$ and let

$$\begin{eqnarray}\unicode[STIX]{x1D708}=\widetilde{\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}}_{n-1}\ast \widetilde{\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}}_{n-2}\ast \cdots \ast \widetilde{\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}}_{1}.\end{eqnarray}$$

It follows from (3.4) and (5.8) that for $k>0$ the probability measure $\widetilde{\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}}_{k}$ is supported on $B_{1/4^{k}}^{+}$. Since the metric on $G^{+}$ is right invariant, the measure $\unicode[STIX]{x1D708}$ is supported on $B_{1/2}^{+}$. Suppose $\unicode[STIX]{x1D708}=\unicode[STIX]{x1D711}\,d\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}$, then $\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}_{n}=\unicode[STIX]{x1D708}\ast \widetilde{\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}}_{0}=\unicode[STIX]{x1D711}\ast \unicode[STIX]{x1D7D9}_{B_{1}^{+}}\,d\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}$. So for any $h\in B_{1/2}^{+}$, we have

$$\begin{eqnarray}\unicode[STIX]{x1D711}\ast \unicode[STIX]{x1D7D9}_{B_{1}^{+}}(h)=\int _{G^{+}}\unicode[STIX]{x1D711}(h_{1})\unicode[STIX]{x1D7D9}_{B_{1}^{+}}(h_{1}^{-1}h)\,d\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(h_{1})\geqslant \int _{B_{1/2}^{+}}\unicode[STIX]{x1D711}(h_{1})\,d\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(h_{1})=1.\Box\end{eqnarray}$$

Now we are ready to prove Lemma 5.3.

Proof of Lemma 5.3.

By Lemmas 5.4 and 5.5,

(5.9)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(\mathfrak{D}_{x}(z,I,C\ell ))\leqslant \unicode[STIX]{x1D707}_{p}(\mathfrak{D}_{x}(z,I,C\ell ))\leqslant \unicode[STIX]{x1D707}^{\otimes p}(Z_{p}). & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

So it suffices to estimate $\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}^{\otimes p}(Z_{p})$. For $1\leqslant k\leqslant p$ let

$$\begin{eqnarray}s(k)=\int _{Z_{k}}u(f_{t}^{z}h_{k}\cdots f_{t}^{z}h_{1}x)\,d\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}^{\otimes k}(h_{1},\ldots ,h_{k}).\end{eqnarray}$$

Let

(5.10)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle s(p+1)=\int _{Z_{p}}\biggl[\int _{B_{1}^{+}}u(f_{t}^{z}h_{p+1}f_{t}^{z}h_{p}\cdots f_{t}^{z}h_{1}x)\,d\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(h_{p+1})\biggr]d\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}^{\otimes p}(h_{1},\ldots ,h_{p}). & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

Then, for every $1<k\leqslant p+1$,

$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle s(k)\leqslant \int _{Z_{k-1}}\biggl[\int _{B_{1}^{+}}u(f_{t}^{z}h_{k}f_{t}^{z}h_{k-1}\cdots f_{t}^{z}h_{1}x)\,d\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(h_{k})\biggr]\,d\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}^{\otimes (k-1)}(h_{1},\ldots ,h_{k-1}). & & \displaystyle \nonumber\end{eqnarray}$$

If $k-1\in I$, then $s(k)\leqslant e^{-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}t}s(k-1)$ by (4.7). If $k-1\not \in I$, then by (5.2) we have $s(k)\leqslant Cs(k-1)$. We apply this estimate to $k=p+1,p,\ldots ,2$; then we have

$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle s(p+1)\leqslant C^{(N-|I|)}e^{-|I|\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}t}\int _{B_{1}^{+}}u(f_{t}hx)\,d\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(h)\leqslant C^{1+(1-\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E})N}e^{-\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E}\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}tN}u(x), & & \displaystyle \nonumber\end{eqnarray}$$

where in the second inequality we use the assumption $|I|\geqslant \unicode[STIX]{x1D70E}N$ and (5.2).

According to (5.4), we have $C^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E}N}e^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E}\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}tN}=C^{N}e^{(1-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}/2)\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}tN}$, and hence

(5.11)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle s(p+1)\leqslant C^{-N}e^{-(1-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}/2)\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}N}C^{1+N}u(x)=Ce^{-(1-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}/2)\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}tN}u(x). & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

On the other hand, in view of (5.10), (5.2) and the fact $p=\sup I$ we have

(5.12)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle s(p+1)\geqslant C^{-1}s(p)\geqslant C^{-1}\ell \cdot \unicode[STIX]{x1D707}^{\otimes p}(Z_{p}). & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

Therefore, (5.6) follows from (5.9), (5.11) and (5.12) and the observation $\ell \geqslant 1$.◻

Proof of Proposition 5.1.

As before we fix $z$ and $N$ as in the statement. Let $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E}$ be as in (5.4). Since $(B_{1}^{+},\operatorname{dist})$ is Besicovitch, there exists a covering $\mathfrak{U}$ of $\mathfrak{D}_{x}(z,N,\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E},C^{2}\ell )$ by open balls of radius $e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})tN}$ centered at $\mathfrak{D}_{x}(z,N,\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E},C^{2}\ell )$ such that each element of $\mathfrak{D}_{x}(z,N,\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E},C^{2}\ell )$ is covered by at most $E$ elements. By Lemma 5.2, each $B\in \mathfrak{U}$ is contained in $\mathfrak{D}_{x}(z,N,\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E},C\ell )$. So in view of (3.1)

(5.13)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(\mathfrak{D}_{x}(z,N,\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E},C\ell ))\geqslant \frac{|\mathfrak{U}|}{E}\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(B_{e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})tN}}^{+})\geqslant \frac{|\mathfrak{U}|}{C_{0}E}e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})dtN}. & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

On the other hand, there are $2^{N}$ subsets $I\subset \{1,\ldots ,N\}$. So by (5.5) and Lemma 5.3, we have

(5.14)$$\begin{eqnarray}\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(\mathfrak{D}_{x}(z,N,\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E},C\ell ))\leqslant C^{2}2^{N}e^{-(1-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}/2)\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}tN}u(x).\end{eqnarray}$$

Note that $2^{N}<e^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}tN/2}$ by (5.1). This together with (5.14) implies

(5.15)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \unicode[STIX]{x1D707}(\mathfrak{D}_{x}(z,N,\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E},C\ell ))\leqslant C^{2}e^{-(1-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}tN}u(x). & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

By (5.13) and (5.15),

$$\begin{eqnarray}|\mathfrak{U}|\leqslant u(x)C_{0}C^{2}E\cdot e^{(d\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}(d+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}))tN}.\end{eqnarray}$$

The conclusion now follows by taking $E_{0}=u(x)C_{0}C^{2}E$.◻

6 Upper bound of Hausdorff dimension

In this section, we complete the proof of Theorem 1.4. We will use the same notation as in § 5 prior to Proposition 5.1. For $(z,h)\in B_{1}^{\text{c}}B_{1}^{+},\ell ^{\prime }>0$ and $N\in \mathbb{N}$, let $I_{N,\ell ^{\prime }}(z,h)$ denote the set of $n\in \{1,\ldots ,N\}$ satisfying $u(f_{nt}zhx)\geqslant \ell ^{\prime }$. For $x\in G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$, let

(6.1)$$\begin{eqnarray}\mathfrak{D}_{x}^{0}(F^{+},N,\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E},\ell ^{\prime })=\{(z,h)\in B_{1/2}^{\text{c}}B_{1/2}^{+}:|I_{N,\ell ^{\prime }}(z,h)|\geqslant \unicode[STIX]{x1D70E}N\}.\end{eqnarray}$$

Lemma 6.1. Let $x\in G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$. Then there exist $0<\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E}<1$ and $E_{2}\geqslant 1$ such that, for any $N\in \mathbb{N}$, the set $\mathfrak{D}_{x}^{0}(F^{+},N,\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E},C^{4}\ell )$ can be covered by no more than $E_{2}e^{(d^{\text{c}}\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}+d\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}(d^{\text{c}}+d+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}))tN}$ open balls of radius $e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})tN}$ in $G^{\text{c}}G^{+}$.

Proof. Let $0<\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E}<1$ and $E_{0}\geqslant 1$ so that Proposition 5.1 holds. We will show that the lemma holds for this $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E}$ and some constant $E_{2}$ which will be specified later.

We fix $N\in \mathbb{N}$. We claim that for any metric ball $W=B_{e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})tN}}^{\text{c}}z\subset B_{1}^{\text{c}}$ where $z\in G^{\text{c}}$, we have

(6.2)$$\begin{eqnarray}(\mathfrak{D}_{x}^{0}(F^{+},N,\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E},C^{4}\ell )\cap (WB_{1}^{+}))\subset (W\mathfrak{D}_{x}(z,N,\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E},C^{2}\ell )).\end{eqnarray}$$

Let $(z_{1},h_{1})\in WB_{1}^{+}$. Suppose that $1\leqslant n\leqslant N$ and $u(f_{nt}z_{1}h_{1}x)\geqslant C^{4}\ell$. In view of (5.2) we have

(6.3)$$\begin{eqnarray}u(f_{nt}^{z}h_{1}x)=u(z^{-1}f_{nt}zh_{1}x)\geqslant C^{-1}u(f_{nt}zh_{1}x)=C^{-1}u(f_{nt}(zz_{1}^{-1})f_{-nt}\cdot f_{nt}z_{1}h_{1}x).\end{eqnarray}$$

By the right invariance of the metric, $\operatorname{dist}(zz_{1}^{-1},1_{G})=\operatorname{dist}(z_{1}z^{-1},1_{G})\leqslant e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})tN}$. So (3.5) implies $\operatorname{dist}(f_{nt}(zz_{1}^{-1})f_{-nt},1_{G})\leqslant e^{-\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}tN}$. This together with (6.3) and (5.2) imply

$$\begin{eqnarray}u(f_{nt}^{z}h_{1}x)\geqslant C^{-2}u(f_{nt}z_{1}h_{1}x)\geqslant C^{2}\ell .\end{eqnarray}$$

In other words, we have proved that if $n\in I_{N,C^{4}\ell }(z_{1},h_{1})$, then $u(f_{nt}^{z}h_{1}x)\geqslant C^{2}\ell$. Therefore, if $(z_{1},h_{1})$ belongs to the left-hand side of (6.2), then it also belongs to the right-hand side.

Since $(B_{1}^{\text{c}},\text{dist})$ is also Besicovitch, there exists $E_{1}\geqslant 1$ such that, for all $0<r\leqslant 1$, $B_{1/2}^{\text{c}}$ can be covered by no more than $E_{1}r^{-d^{\text{c}}}$ open balls of radius $r$ centered in $B_{1/2}^{\text{c}}$. We fix a cover $\mathfrak{U}^{\text{c}}$ of $B_{1/2}^{\text{c}}$ that consists of open balls of radius $e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})Nt}$ with $|\mathfrak{U}^{\text{c}}|\leqslant E_{1}e^{d^{\text{c}}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})Nt}$. We assume each element of $\mathfrak{U}^{\text{c}}$ is centered in $B_{1/2}^{\text{c}}$ so that it is contained in $B_{1}^{\text{c}}$ by (5.1). Let $W_{z}\in \mathfrak{U}^{\text{c}}$ be a ball centered at $z\in B_{1}^{\text{c}}$. Proposition 5.1 implies that there exists a covering $\mathfrak{U}_{z}$ of $\mathfrak{D}_{x}(z,N,\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E},C^{2}\ell )$ by open balls of radius $e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})tN}$ such that

$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle |\mathfrak{U}_{z}|\leqslant E_{0}e^{(d\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}(d+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}))tN}. & & \displaystyle \nonumber\end{eqnarray}$$

In view of claim (6.2), the following class of sets

(6.4)$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \{W_{z}B:W_{z}\in \mathfrak{U}^{\text{c}},B\in \mathfrak{U}_{z}\} & & \displaystyle\end{eqnarray}$$

forms an open cover of $\mathfrak{D}_{x}^{0}(F^{+},N,\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E},C^{4}\ell )$. It is easily checked that there exists $E_{1}^{\prime }\geqslant 1$ not depending on $N$ such that each element $W_{z}B$ of (6.4) can be covered by $E_{1}^{\prime }$ open balls of radius $e^{-(\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF})Nt}$ in $G^{\text{c}}G^{+}$. Therefore the lemma holds with $E_{2}=E_{0}E_{1}E_{1}^{\prime }$.◻

Theorem 6.2. For any $x\in G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$, the Hausdorff dimension of

$$\begin{eqnarray}\mathfrak{D}_{x}^{0}\,\stackrel{\text{def}}{=}\,\{(z,h)\in B_{1/2}^{\text{c}}B_{1/2}^{+}:zhx\in \mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})\}\end{eqnarray}$$

is at most $d^{\text{c}}+d-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{1}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}$.

Proof. For each $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}<\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{1}$ and $0<\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}<1$ we first choose $t>0$, a height function $u$ and $\ell ,C\geqslant 1$ so that Lemma 4.4, (3.4), (3.5), (5.2) and (5.1) hold. Then there exists $0<\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E}<1$ and $E_{2}\geqslant 1$ so that Lemma 6.1 holds.

It follows from parts (i) and (ii) of Lemma 4.4 and the definition of $\mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})$ that

$$\begin{eqnarray}\mathfrak{D}_{x}^{0}\subset \mathop{\bigcup }_{M\geqslant 1}Q_{M}\quad \text{where }Q_{M}=\mathop{\bigcap }_{N\geqslant M}\mathfrak{D}_{x}^{0}(F^{+},N,\unicode[STIX]{x1D70E},C^{4}\ell ).\end{eqnarray}$$

Recall that for any metric space $S$, the Hausdorff dimension of $S$ is less than or equal to the lower box dimension, see e.g. [Reference Bishop and PeresBP17, (1.2.3)]. So Lemma 6.1 implies

$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \dim _{H}Q_{M} & {\leqslant} & \displaystyle \liminf _{N\rightarrow \infty }\frac{[d^{\text{c}}\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}+d\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}(d+d^{\text{c}}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC})]tN+\log E_{2}}{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}tN}\nonumber\\ \displaystyle & = & \displaystyle d^{\text{c}}+d-\frac{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}}{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}\frac{d+d^{\text{c}}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}}{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}}.\nonumber\end{eqnarray}$$

Therefore

$$\begin{eqnarray}\dim _{H}\mathfrak{D}_{x}^{0}\leqslant d^{\text{c}}+d-\frac{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}}{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}\frac{d+d^{\text{c}}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}}{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}}.\end{eqnarray}$$

The conclusion follows by first letting $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}\rightarrow 0$ and then letting $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}\rightarrow \unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{1}$.◻

Lemma 6.3. If $x\in \mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})$ and $h\in G^{-}$, then $hx\in \mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})$.

Proof. Note that, by Lemma 3.1,

$$\begin{eqnarray}\operatorname{dist}(f_{t}hx,f_{t}x)\leqslant \operatorname{dist}(f_{t}hf_{-t},1_{G})\rightarrow 0\end{eqnarray}$$

as $t\rightarrow \infty$. Therefore the lemma holds.◻

Proof of Theorem 1.4.

We will show that

$$\begin{eqnarray}\dim _{H}\mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})\leqslant d^{-}+d^{\text{c}}+d-\frac{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{1}}{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}}.\end{eqnarray}$$

In view of the local nature of the Hausdorff dimension and the definition of the metric on $G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$, it suffices to prove that for any $x\in G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$

$$\begin{eqnarray}\dim _{H}\{g\in B_{r}^{G}:gx\in \mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})\}\leqslant d^{-}+d^{\text{c}}+d-\frac{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{1}}{\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}},\end{eqnarray}$$

where $r<1$ so that $B_{r}^{G}\subset B_{1}^{-}B_{1/2}^{\text{c}}B_{1/2}^{+}$. Recall that we assume the logarithm map on $B_{1}^{G}$ is bi-Lipschitz onto its image in $\mathfrak{g}$ with respect to the metric given by the Euclidean structure. So Marstrand’s product theorem [Reference Bishop and PeresBP17, Theorem 3.2.1] implies

$$\begin{eqnarray}\dim B_{1}^{-}S\leqslant \dim S+d^{-}\end{eqnarray}$$

for any $S\subset B_{1/2}^{\text{c}}B_{1/2}^{+}$. In particular, Lemma 6.3 implies

$$\begin{eqnarray}\{g\in B_{r}^{G}:gx\in \mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})\}\subset B_{1}^{-}\mathfrak{D}_{x}^{0}\end{eqnarray}$$

whose Hausdorff dimension is bounded from above by $\dim _{H}\mathfrak{D}_{x}^{0}+d^{-}$. In view of Theorem 6.2, the Hausdorff dimension of $\mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})$ is at most $d+d^{\text{c}}+d^{-}-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{1}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D706}$, which is strictly less than the manifold dimension of $G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4}$.◻

Remark 6.4. It is worth mentioning that, if $F=A_{F}$, then the contraction property of the Benoist–Quint height function proved in [Reference ShiShi14] will allow us to prove a stronger result. Namely, we can get a nontrivial upper bound for the Hausdorff dimension of the intersection of $\mathfrak{D}(F^{+},G/\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})$ with orbits of the so-called $(F^{+},\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E4})$-expanding subgroups introduced in [Reference Kleinbock and WeissKW13]. But unfortunately, we are not able to prove a uniform contracting property for the Benoist–Quint height function in some cases where the unipotent part of $F$ is nontrivial.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Y. Cheung for his comments on the preliminary version of this paper. We also would like to thank the anonymous referee for carefully reading the draft and helping us improve the paper.

Footnotes

1

Current address: Mathematisches Institut, Georg-August Universität Göttingen, Bunsenstrasse 3-5, D-37073 Gottingen, Germany

L. G. is supported by EPSRC Programme Grant EP/J018260/1 and R. S. is supported by NSFC 11871158.

References

Benoist, Y. and Quint, J.-F., Random walks on finite volume homogeneous spaces, Invent. Math. 187 (2012), 3759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernik, V., Kleinbock, D. and Margulis, G. A., Khintchine type theorems on manifolds: the convergence case for standard multiplicative versions, Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN 9 (2001), 453486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bishop, C. and Peres, Y., Fractals in probability and analysis, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, vol. 162 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borel, A., Linear algebraic groups, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 126, second edition (Springer, New York, NY, 1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheung, Y., Hausdorff dimension of the set of points on divergent trajectories of a homogeneous flow on a product space, Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems 27 (2007), 6585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheung, Y., Hausdorff dimension of the set of singular pairs, Ann. of Math. (2) 173 (2011), 127167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheung, Y. and Chevallier, N., Hausdorff dimension of singular vectors, Duke Math. J. 165 (2016), 22732329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corwin, L. and Greenleaf, F., Representations of nilpotent Lie groups and their applications, Part I: Basic theory and examples, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, vol. 18 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1990).Google Scholar
Dani, S. G., On orbits of unipotent flows on homogeneous spaces, Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems 4 (1984), 2534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dani, S. G., Divergent trajectories of flows on homogeneous spaces and Diophantine approximation, J. Reine Angew. Math. 359 (1985), 5589.Google Scholar
Dani, S. G., On orbits of unipotent flows on homogeneous spaces II, Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems 6 (1986), 167182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Das, T., Fishman, L., Simmons, D. and Urbanski, M., A variational principle in the parametric geometry of numbers, with applications to metric Diophantine approximation, C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris 355 (2017), 835846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Einsiedler, M. and Kadyrov, S., Entropy and escape of mass for SL3(ℝ)/SL3(ℤ), Israel J. Math. 190 (2012), 253288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Einsiedler, M., Lindenstrauss, E., Michel, P. and Venkatesh, A., The distribution of closed geodesics on the modular surface, and Duke’s theorem, Enseign. Math. (2) 58 (2012), 249313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eskin, A. and Margulis, G. A., Recurrence properties of random walks on finite volume homogeneous manifolds, in Random walks and geometry (de Gruyter, Berlin, 2004), 431444.Google Scholar
Eskin, A., Margulis, G. A. and Mozes, S., Upper bounds and asymptotics in a quantitative version of the Oppenheim conjecture, Ann. of Math. (2) 147 (1998), 93141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kadyrov, S., Entropy and escape of mass for Hilbert modular spaces, J. Lie Theory 22 (2012), 701722.Google Scholar
Kadyrov, S., Kleinbock, D., Lindenstrauss, E. and Margulis, G. A., Singular systems of linear forms and non-escape of mass in the space of lattices, J. Anal. Math. 133 (2017), 253277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kadyrov, S. and Pohl, A., Amount of failure of upper-semicontinuity of entropy in noncompact rank one situations, and Hausdorff dimension, Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems 37 (2017), 539563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleinbock, D. and Margulis, G. A., Bounded orbits of nonquasiunipotent flows on homogeneous spaces, in Sinai’s Moscow seminar on dynamical systems, American Mathematical Society Translations Series 2, vol. 171, Advances in the Mathematical Sciences, vol. 28 (American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1996), 141172.Google Scholar
Kleinbock, D. and Weiss, B., Modified Schmidt games and a conjecture of Margulis, J. Mod. Dyn. 7 (2013), 429460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liao, L., Shi, R., Solan, O. N. and Tamam, N., Hausdorff dimension of weighted singular vectors, J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS), doi:10.4171/JEMS/934 (2019), to appear in print.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margulis, G. A., On the action of unipotent groups in the space of lattices, in Lie groups and their representations, Proc. summer school in group representations, Bolyai János Mathematical Society, Budapest, 1971 (Halsted, New York, NY, 1975), 365370.Google Scholar
Margulis, G. A. and Tomanov, G. M., Invariant measures for actions of unipotent groups over local fields on homogeneous spaces, Invent. Math. 116 (1994), 347392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mattila, P., Geometry of sets and measures in Euclidean spaces. Fractals and rectifiability, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, vol. 44 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shi, R., Pointwise equidistribution for one parameter diagonalizable group action on homogeneous space, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., to appear. Preprint (2014), arXiv:1405.2067.Google Scholar
Weiss, B., Divergent trajectories on noncompact parameter spaces, Geom. Funct. Anal. 14 (2004), 94149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, L., Hausdorff dimension of divergent diagonal geodesics on product of finite-volume hyperbolic spaces, Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems 39 (2019), 14011439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar