Solution
ID: past-exam-of-the-mathematics-course-of-the-university-of-cambridge/2015/ii/paper-4/28b/solution
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2015 ii Paper 4 28B Solution by
Codex 0 Created 2026-09-24 Updated 2026-10-06
A horseshoe for an interval map consists of two branches covering a common interval: there are an open interval and disjoint open subintervals with . Equivalently one can work with two closed intervals with disjoint interiors whose images cover their union, and then restrict the branches. Glendinning chaos means that some positive iterate has such a horseshoe, rather than requiring one for itself.
For the three-cycle, use the intermediate value theorem on endpoint images. The interval covering relations are and . Consequently both and cover . This proves has a horseshoe. The directed covering graph of an interval map has exactly these forced arrows; a closed walk has length three and a primitive itinerary. Pulling back the intervals successively and using the fixed-point property produces a point fixed by with this itinerary. It cannot be fixed by , and a shared endpoint belongs to the already given three-cycle, so a genuine period-three orbit results.
For the increasing spatial order of the five-cycle, let , . The forced graph isThe primitive loops , , , and force exact periods . For periods below five the known five-cycle endpoints cannot be responsible, so the interval itineraries give distinct interior orbits. Both and cover , so is guaranteed to be Glendinning-chaotic.
A horseshoe for itself is not guaranteed. As a counterexample put on and interpolate by for , for . This has the required five-cycle. The unique fixed point is , with to its left and to its right. Any nondegenerate closed interval whose image covers itself must contain this fixed point in its interior: an interval entirely on either side, or with the fixed point as an endpoint, fails to cover its extreme endpoint. Two intervals with disjoint interiors therefore cannot both cover themselves, as a horseshoe would require. Hence this example has no one-iterate horseshoe.
For the alternative spatial order, set and . Endpoint images giveThe self-loop at , the two-cycle , and the four-cycle force ; period three is not guaranteed. To see this last claim, take the connect-the-dots map at with values . Its exact interval transitions are those displayed. Any length-three closed itinerary is the repeated self-loop in ; there the map is the affine decreasing function , whose third iterate has only its original fixed point. Endpoints belong to the five-cycle. Thus no exact three-cycle exists in this example.
Chaos is still guaranteed: from there are two different length-four closed walks, four self-loops and . Pullbacks give disjoint branches of over a common interval in , hence a horseshoe for an interval map for an iterate. A horseshoe for itself is again not guaranteed: the same connect-the-dots example is strictly decreasing on and increasing on with image . Its unique fixed point is , again with to the left and to the right. The same fixed-point argument rules out two self-covering intervals with disjoint interiors. These counterexamples distinguish the three separate questions about periods, chaos and a one-iterate horseshoe.
New to topics? Read the docs here!