Horseshoe for an interval map Created 2026-09-24 Updated 2026-11-05
In an open-interval convention, a continuous interval map has a horseshoe if there are an open interval and two disjoint open intervals with . Each of the two branches can therefore be followed by either branch on the next step.
For the full tent map on , choose , and . Either branch maps onto . Successive preimages specify a binary itinerary; when branches are monotone they have ordinary inverse branches, while more general continuous covering arguments use the intermediate value theorem to select subintervals.
Open endpoints require care: for example, the all-left limiting itinerary of the tent map selects the boundary point zero. Compact symbolic realizations include suitable endpoints and account for boundary coding ambiguities. The branch-covering geometry nevertheless supplies arbitrarily long binary itineraries and is the mechanism used by interval exactness produces a horseshoe and three-cycle forces a two-iterate interval horseshoe.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2001 iii Paper 53 1 b Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
Use the interval exactness of a tent-map core from the preceding part. Choose two separated nondegenerate closed intervals inside . There are integers with . Taking works for both, because :Within each , the continuous function attains both endpoint levels and . Choose a segment between those levels, reversing its orientation if necessary. Starting from a point at level , take the first point at level one, and then the last point at level before it. Between these two points, continuity and the first-passage choice give , with all intermediate levels attained. The interior of that segment therefore satisfies . The intervals are disjoint and lie inside .
Thus interval exactness produces a horseshoe:This is a horseshoe for an interval map for an iterate of , proving Glendinning chaos for every . The proof does not require the same horseshoe iterate to work for every parameter.