3.2. Proof of Proposition 3.8 provided by Claudio Procesi and proof of Theorem 1.1
We thank Professor Claudio Procesi for providing us the material after (134) until the end of proof of Proposition 3.8 (for your reference we also present our original arguments in
Appendix B).
Proof of Proposition 3.8. Let
. Note that (121) implies that
. We need to find an element
which is sufficiently close to
. Thus we can assume
such that their coordinates have the following forms, for some sufficiently small
, and
(for later convenient use, it is no harm to write the coordinate of
instead of
),
The local bijectivity of Keller maps says that for any
in a bounded set there always exists sufficiently small
such that, there exist
with
, namely,
[which is guaranteed by the fact that
is sufficiently close to
and
] and
Since
are polynomials, we can always solve
s (throughout the paper we do not need to use
t so we omit the solution of
t) from (126), (127) to obtain that
s is a power series of
such that each coefficient of
is a homogenous polynomial of
with degree
for all
; in particular, we can write
s as the following form, for some
,
First note that since
is sufficiently close to
, we see that (120) (c), (d) are automatically satisfied by
in case
. Further when (125) holds for
, we always have
i.e., (119) (b) [or respectively (120) (b)] automatically holds for
. Thus in order for
to be in
and to satisfy (125), we only need to require (119) (a) [respectively (120) (a)] and (125)to be satisfied by
.
Observe from the first strict inequality of (119) (a) or (120) (a) that two equalities cannot simultaneously occur in the second and third inequalities of (119) (a) or (120) (a). Therefore, we only need to consider the following two possible cases.
Case 1: Assume that, for , all inequalities of (119) (a)[or respectively (120) (a)]are strict inequalities.
Then the same must hold for (since is infinitesimal), i.e., is automatically in if (125) holds. Thus in this case we only need to consider one inequation, i.e., (125). Therefore we see that this case is easier than the case we encounter below (as we always have no need to worry about appeared below).
Case 2: Assume that, for , equality occurs in either the second or else the third inequality of (119) (a)[or respectively (120) (a).
Accordingly, we need to consider two inequations for : one is the inequation for corresponding to the part of (119) (a) [or respectively (120) (a)], where equality occurs for ; another is (125).
First assume we have case (119) and the second equality of (119) (a) holds for
(the case for the third equality is similar), i.e.,
. Then the two inequations we need to consider for
are
which, by (119) (b), (126), can be rewritten as the following forms,
where,
,
.
Using (128), and expanding each element inside the absolute value symbols in
and
in (131) as a power series of
(such that every coefficient of
is a homogenous polynomial of
with degree
k for
), we see that (131) can be always rewritten as the following forms, where
are two holomorphic functions of
(when
is regarded as fixed) in some neighbourhood of
and vanishing at
,
For the case (120), since
for
by (120), (121), and
is sufficiently small, we can always write
as, for some
,
Thus we can also write the two inequations we need to consider as the forms in (132).
First observe that for any
[recall Convention 2.3 (1)], we have,
Therefore the coefficient of the
term of
in (132) has the form
for some linear homogeneous form
in
for
. If these two forms are linearly independent of course we can choose
so that the two forms take positive real values (and the proof of Proposition 3.8 is then completed), otherwise there exist two complex numbers
not both zero so that setting
we can have that
.
Therefore we consider the later case and assume for instance that
is nonzero and set
. Then by (134) the
coefficient in (132) (ii) is of the form
below for some
[as mentioned in Remark 3.6 (i), here is the reason why we need the last two terms of
, which guarantee that we always have the last two non-negative terms of
and at least one of both is positive (noting that in general it is possible that
or
],
Further
is either zero or of the form
for some
,
. Assume we have the later case as otherwise
holds trivially. Namely,
If
then we can easily choose
with
and
so that
and
by (135) and (136).
Thus assume . We may take with for with .
Notice now that for any integer and any nonzero constant complex number the two sets where respectively are two open sets of the circle of arclength .
Lemma 3.9. The set where is an open set of the circle of arclength for some so there is a nonempty open set of the circle of arclength where both inequalities and hold.
Proof. The set where is formed by two opposite arcs of total arclength so at least two of the 4 endpoints of these arcs, where , are different from where , thus in a neighbourhood of these two points . □
Note that we can always choose sufficiently small such that . This proves Proposition 3.8. □
Proof of Theorem 1.1. Now we use Proposition 3.8 to prove Theorem 1.1. Proposition 3.8 (which says that the continuous function
does not have the maximal value on the nonempty compact set
) immediately gives a contradiction, which proves the first statement of Theorem 1.1. The second statement follows from [
2,
4]. □
3.3. Proof of Proposition 3.4
It remains to prove Proposition 3.4. We would like to mention that because we require to be closed, it seems to us that in general there is no way to define a system of inequations (119) or (120) satisfying that is closed. We need some “extra fact”. By considering all possible different cases, each of which provides us some different “extra fact”, we will be able to achieve the goal.
Before proceeding our proof of Proposition 3.4, let us give some further explanations. We aim to construct a nonempty subset
satisfying, say for example, (119). To do this, usually we can start with some given element
and of course we may choose some different
for a different case. Look at the condition (119): if, for example, we take
then (122) (a) can be satisfied by
by choosing some suitable
We always need to choose
in (119) (b) to be as big as possible otherwise
can possibly contain some extra elements which we may be unable to control somehow. In order to do this, we should choose
such that
is maximal (i.e.,
). In this case we can choose
to be
In this way, we may have that
(the closure of
). However then, equality can occur in the first inequality of (122) (a) and thus (119) (a) is not satisfied [i.e.,
]. To avoid this, we have to enlarge
[this is why we choose
in (143) (b), respectively (159) (b), to be as in (142), respectively (158)]. Then
cannot be in
. This means that we cannot choose the given element
as the “initial stage”. We have to find some other element as the “initial stage”, which is the reason why we require some “extra fact”.
First we need a lemma.
Lemma 3.10.
The defined in is a strictly increasing function of when is fixed, i.e.,
Consequently, for any .
Proof. For any
, let
Assume conversely that there exists
with
such that
. We will use the local bijectivity of Keller maps to obtain a contradiction. Let
Using
as local coordinates in
V we choose
sufficiently close to
, satisfying, for some
with
being sufficiently small,
such that
Since
, and locally
is a holomorphic, hence a continuous function of
, we have
when
is sufficiently small. This means that we can choose
with
which is a contradiction with the definition of
in (138). This proves the first assertion of the lemma. Then for any
,
, we have
proving the second. □
Proof of Proposition 3.4. Now we proceed the proof of Proposition 3.4 case by case.
Remark 3.11. In the first five cases, we are able to define such that we can choose the “initial stage”, which controls the growths of as mentioned in Fact 3.7, to guarantee that can grow faster (or decrease slower) than when or goes to infinity [see for example (193)]; thus by Theorem 1.2, cannot go too far from the correspondent value of the “initial stage”, which allow us to choose some in (119) (a) so that for any element in , equality cannot occur in the last inequality of (122) (a).
Case 1: Assume is not a weakly increasing function of , i.e., for some .
This provides us the following “extra fact”:
1) There exists a
such that
since strict inequality holds when
.
2) Once such
is fixed, there is a constant
so that for
we have:
We will see in (150) what is the role the above “extra fact” plays.
We define
, depending on the parameter
, to be the subset of
V consisting of all elements
such that its coordinates
satisfy,
Remark 3.12.
- (i)
As mentioned in Remark 3.2 (ii), we treat as a parameter which will be fixed upon our requirement in the course of the proof.
- (ii)
We put in (143) (b) in order for the element to be sufficiently smaller than when (143) holds.
- (iii)
The reason we put the factor in (143) (b) is to guarantee that when the last strict inequality of (143) (a) becomes an equality, will decrease, but will grow.
- (iv)
Note that the number in the last term of (143) (a) cannot be too big, otherwise for an element in , when the last strict inequality of (143) (a) becomes equality, will grow faster than and then we cannot apply Theorem 1.2.
First, multiplying (143) (b) by and re-denoting as , we see that (143) can be rewritten in the form (119).
Remark 3.13. For a point in
, by (143) (a), we have
,
which implies (ii) below,
where (i) is obtained from the part
in (143) (a).
Now we prove that
(for all
) by choosing some suitable “initial stage”
mentioned in Remark 3.6 (ii). By hypothesis
, so denote
By definition, there exists,
When
is set to
, we denote the middle three terms in (143) (a) by
respectively. Then we have the following three facts:
- (a)
by (146) and (145) respectively;
- (b)
by (146), (145) and (a) respectively;
- (c)
by (a) and (b) respectively.
Thus we obtain
i.e., (143) (a) is satisfied by
.
As for (143) (b) recall that, from Lemma 3.10,we have
. Using (146) and the definition of
given by (142), we obtain:
namely, (143) (b) is satisfied by
. Hence we see that the “initial stage”
is in
. We take
.
Observe that
So we can take
so that if
we have
. Thus by (144), we obtain, when
and
,
In particular, we have
. Assume (143) holds with
. Then (143) (b) shows that
by (142) (when
is sufficiently larger than
as
), a contradiction with (149) (2). Thus we have (121) [we do not have
in the present case]. Further,
is bounded by (149) and Proposition 2.22.
Now we want to prove that is closed. Thus we let . By Remark 3.5, first assume that the first strict inequality of (143) (a) becomes an equality for . Then we immediately obtain that .
For this point thus we must have
By definition (112), we have
, which gives
The above is a contradiction with the “extra fact” (142), which proves that the first strict inequality of (143) (a) is satisfied by
.
This also implies that the second and third inequalities cannot be both equalities.
Continuing, now assume the last strict inequality of (143) (a) becomes an equality for
, i.e.,
, we denote
. Then by (142),
First assume
Then by (143) (b),
Now assume
Again for
sufficiently large we have
and also
.
Now then
, which, together with the definition of
in (
4) implies
Note from (113), Remark 3.2 (ii) and Remark 3.12 that we can choose
as large as we wish. When
tends to infinity also
by (155). Thus we can apply Theorem 1.2 to obtain that
, which with (149) shows that
, a contradiction with (155). This proves that (143) is satisfied by
. By definition,
. Thus
.
The above shows that with being defined by (143), we have, for large, Proposition 3.4. Case 1 is now completed.
Thus from now on, we can assume that
is a weakly increasing function of
when
is fixed, i.e.,
Case 2: Assume for some with
By choosing
with
and by Lemma 3.10 [or (137)], we have
This, as in Case 1, provides us the following “extra fact” with
satisfying (113) [here we require that
, cf. Remark 3.2 (i)],
We define
to be the subset of
V consisting of all elements
such that its coordinates
satisfy (cf. Remark 3.12),
As in Case 1, we can rewrite (159) as the form in (119).
Remark 3.14. The reason we put the power , which is bigger than 1, in the denominator of (159) (b), is to ensure that will grows faster than when the last strict inequality of (159) (a) becomes equality for an element in .
Now we prove that
by choosing some suitable “initial stage”
mentioned in Remark 3.6 (ii). By definition, there exists
When
is set to
, we denote the middle three terms in (159) (a) by
respectively. Then using (160) and definition of
in (158), one can verify
i.e., (159) is satisfied by
, namely, the “initial stage”
is in
. We take
.
Exactly similar to Case 1, we can obtain that is a bounded set and (121) holds.
Let
. Assume the first strict inequality of (159) (a) becomes equality for
. Then we obtain that
. We have, where the first inequality follows from the definition of
in (112), while the second from (159) (b),
which is a contradiction with the “extra fact” (158).
Assume the last strict inequality of (159) (a) becomes equality for
. Then using (
91), (113) [cf. Remark 3.2 (ii) and Remark 3.12], one obtains, where (ii) is obtained by the second and third inequalities of (159) (a),
Note from Theorem 1.2 or (
83) that
but by (159) (b), as in Case 1, we have
and thus (note that here is the only place we make use of the fact that
),
a contradiction with (
83).
This proves that (159) is satisfied by , i.e., , and so is closed. Proposition 3.4 holds. Case 2 is now completed.
Hence from now on, we can assume
Then we can prove
Lemma 3.15. For any , we have
Proof. Assume
for some
. Choosing
with
, by Lemma 3.10, we obtain that
. Then
. By (167), we have
for all
. Let
By Proposition 2.15 or (
83), we have [using notation (
91)]
but then
which is a contradiction with (
83). □
Recall that we fix some choices of positive numbers satisfying (113) (cf. Remark 3.2) and that the element
satisfies (115). We choose
sufficiently close to
such that its coordinates have the form as in (126), i.e.,
and as in (128), we can solve from (127) to obtain, for some
[here for later convenience, we re-denote
in (128) as
],
We will see that the numbers
play crucial roles in our definition of
. First we prove
Lemma 3.16. We have .
Proof. Assume
or
[cf. Convention 2.3 (1)]. Then we can choose
in the following way: we always choose
so that (174) (ii), (iii) hold; if
, we can choose
with
being sufficiently large to guarantee (173) (iii) holds; if
, we can simply take
,
and
to guarantee (173) (iii) [thus (174) (i) holds], i.e.,
Then by (171) and (173), we have
This means that
and
with the following [where the first inequality follows from definition (112), the second from (174) (iii)],
which is a contradiction with the fact obtained from Lemma 3.10 and (156) that
is an increasing function on both variables. Thus
.
Similarly, if or , then we can choose in the following way: again we always choose so that (174) (ii), (iii) hold; if , we can choose with being sufficiently large to guarantee (173) (iii) holds; if , we can simply take , and to guarantee (173) (iii) holds. □
Case 3: Assume for any there exists such that .
Then we can choose sufficiently small
[which can depend on
but is independent of
when
, cf. notation (113) and Remark 3.2 (i)] such that we have the following “extra fact” (note that the following holds when
thus holds when
is sufficiently small),
We define
to be the subset of
V consisting of all elements
such that its coordinates
satisfy (cf. Remark 3.12),
Similar to (159), we put the power
, which is bigger than 1, in the denominator of (177) (ii) is to ensure that
will grows faster than
when equality occurs in the last strict inequality of (177) (ii) for an element in
.
We will prove
, but firstly, as in Cases 1 and 2, we can rewrite (177) as the form in (119), and
is bounded such that
if
. Secondly, we explain the reason we put
in (177) (ii) is that we want to guarantee the following
which is obtained by Theorem 1.2 and the facts from (177) (a) that
and
. Then (177) (ii) with (178) gives
which is also satisfied by any element in
by Remark 3.5. In particular, we have (121).
Now we prove that
by choosing some suitable “initial stage”
mentioned in Remark 3.6 (ii). With
, sufficiently close to
, being defined in (171), we want to choose suitable
such that (177) is satisfied by
, i.e.,
We take
such that
where the last equation is obtained from (172). Then the coefficients of
in the middle three terms of (180) (i) are respectively
i.e., all inequalities in (180) (i) are strict inequalities by recalling from notation (113) that we have complete freedom in choosing
with
independently of all other choices of the parameters. Further, the coefficient of
in the left hand-side of (180) (ii) is
which is bigger than 0 by the “extra fact” (176). Thus the “initial stage”
is in
. We take
.
Next we let . Assume the first strict inequality of (177) (i) becomes equality for . Then , but by (179) (which also holds for elements in ), we have , a contradiction with the definition of in (112).
Assume the last strict inequality of (177) (i) becomes equality for
. Then we obtain, when
[using (
91), (114), cf. Remark 3.2 (ii)],
but by (179),
Thus
By (184) and (
83), we have
a contradiction with (
83).
This proves that (177) is satisfied by , i.e., , and so is closed. Proposition 3.4 holds. Case 3 is now completed.
Hence from now on, we can assume
Case 4: Assume there exists a fixed but sufficiently small such that for any there exists satisfying (the “extra fact”).
First we remark that the reason we require
to be independent of
is to guarantee that we have (195). We define
to be the subset of
V consisting of all elements
such that its coordinates
satisfy (cf. Remark 3.12),
As in the previous case, we have (119), (121) and
is bounded.
Remark 3.17.
- (i)
In contrary to (177), in the denominator of (189) (ii), we put the power , which is smaller than 1 and is a number independent of [that is important otherwise we cannot obtain (195)], is to ensure that will decrease slower than when the last strict inequality of (189) (i) becomes equality for an element in .
- (ii)
Note that the number in the last term of (189) (i) cannot be too big otherwise for an element in
, when the last strict inequality of (189) (i) becomes equality,
will fall to a too small number and then we cannot use Theorem 1.2 or (
83) (for example we cannot choose the number to be
).
With
being defined in (171), we want to choose suitable
such that (189) (i), (ii) hold for
, i.e.,
Take
such that [the last equation is obtained from (172)],
Then the coefficients of middle three terms in (190) (i) are respectively
, i.e., all inequalities in (190) (i) are strict inequalities. Further, the coefficient of
in the left hand-side of (190) (ii) is
, which is positive by the “extra fact”. Thus
. We take
Similarly to (179), we obtain from (189) (ii) the following (which also holds for any element in
),
Let
. Assume the last strict inequality of (189) (i) becomes equality. Then we obtain that
,
, and by (192) and Lemma 3.15, we have
As before we have
and we obtain
a contradiction with Theorem 1.2 or (
83).
Assume the first strict inequality of (189) (i), becomes equality for . Then , but by (192), , a contradiction with definition (112).
This proves that (189) is satisfied by , i.e., , and so is closed. Proposition 3.4 holds. Case 4 is now completed.
Hence from now on, we assume
This with (188) shows that
. Since
is arbitrarily sufficiently small number, we see that
(thus also
) is unbounded, i.e.,
Case 5: Assume there exist some fixed with such that whenever there exist (which can depend on with and satisfying the following,
First we remark that the reason we require to be independent of is to guarantee that we have (206) and the reason we require to be independent of is to guarantee that is large enough for us to apply Theorem 1.2 [cf. (199)].
Fix any sufficiently small
(independent of
) such that
. First assume
. Then we have, when
,
where the strict inequality in (iii) follows from the fact in Lemma 3.15 that
, and where the first “
” in (199) (iii) follows from the fact that
is a fixed positive number (i.e., independent of
), and the last “
” follows from (199) (i), (ii) and (
4), (
83). We obtain from (199) a contradiction with (
83). Thus
Since
, we can always write, for some
,
where the inequation follows from (198) (v).
Let
such that
. Now we define
to be the subset of
V consisting of elements
satisfying, where
is the natural logarithm function,
where the inequality in (202) (iii) follows by noting that
since
by (198) (iv). Then as before we can rewrite (202) as the form in (119) and (121) holds and
is bounded. Similar to (189), in the denominator of (202) (ii), we put the power
, which by (201) (iii) is, up to
, smaller than
(that is a number independent of
) is to ensure that
will decrease slower than
when the last strict inequality of (202) (i) becomes equality for an element in
.
When we set
to be
in (202), the middle three terms in (202) (i) are respectively
Since
by (198) (ii), (200), we see that (202) (i) holds for
. Further the left-hand side of (202) (ii) is
, i.e., (202) (ii) holds for
. Thus
.
Let
. Assume the last strict inequality of (202) (i) becomes equality for
. Then
thus by (
83),
By (202) (ii), (iii), (204) (ii), we have the first inequality below; the second inequality follows from the inequation in (201) (iii); the third inequality follows from Lemma 3.15, thus we obtain, where we conduct computations up to
so
in (202) is omitted,
where
Using arguments as in (193), (195), we obtain a contradiction.
Assume the first strict inequality of (202) (i) becomes equality for . Then , and by (202) (ii), (iii), , a contradiction with the definition of in (112).
This proves that (202) is satisfied by , i.e., , and so is closed. Proposition 3.4 holds. Case 5 is now completed.
Thus from now on we assume that Case 5 does not occur.
Case 6: The remaining case.
In this case, unfortunately, we are not able to use (119) to define . We have to define in a more complicated way. The reason is below:
Remark 3.18. Because is too big [by (188)], we are unable to choose suitable “initial stage” mentioned in Remark 3.6 (ii) such that satisfy (172), and , defined in (171), satisfies (177) if we define as in (177). To see this, observe that in order for (177) (ii) to hold, we have to choose v to be bigger than u but then (172) shows that s may possibly be too big, which implies that may grow too fast by Fact 3.7. Since we do not have any information about in our definition of , when we can not apply Theorem 1.2 to obtain a contradiction if the last strict inequality of (159) (i) becomes equality for an element in . Therefore in order to able to obtain a contradiction, we have to find some other way to control the growth of .
Recall notations (113), (116) and (118) and Remark 3.2; in particular, we will frequently use the fact that and or [recall (117)].
Definition 3.19. With
being defined in (118), and with
to be defined in (218) in the proof of Lemma 3.21 (at this point we only need to use the facts that
, but do not require the explicit values of
), we take
with (120) (a), (b) being specified as follows,
Remark 3.20. The reason we put
in the powers of the second and fourth terms of (208) (i) is to control
such that when
, we have [we will see in (218) that
],
Further, condition (208) (i) implies that when
, we have,
Now we divide the proof of Proposition 3.4 into three lemmas.
Lemma 3.21. The set is nonempty.
Proof. First at this point it may be worth recalling that we have fixed
satisfying (115), i.e.,
We need to choose a suitable “initial stage”
as mentioned in Remark 3.6 (ii). To do this, as already mentioned in (171), we choose
to be sufficiently close to
such that (171) holds, i.e.,
and further,
s is determined by (172), i.e.,
where
satisfy (197). We want to take suitable
such that (208) is satisfied by
, defined in (171). Note from (116) and (212) that setting
to
corresponds to that
are respectively set to,
At this point, we also want to remind from notation (113) that we have complete freedom in choosing
with
independently of all other choices of the parameters. Further, it may be worth presenting the following obvious facts, for any
which are independent of
,
Recall from (117) that
with
satisfying
. Now we take ,
So [the following is the reason we define
in (118) (iii)],
Then by expanding in
, up to
, we have, for
,
where (218) (v) is precisely computed, up to
, by recalling,
Similarly, we can compute (218) (ii), (iii). We remark that, as mentioned in Remark 3.18 (ii), we define
v to be larger than
u, which allows us to obtain a contradiction if equality occurs in the last inequality of (208) (i) for an element in
.
Now we take
to be
. By (218) we can easily see that the coefficients of
in the middle three terms of (208) (i) are respectively,
We see that all inequalities in (208) (i) are strict inequalities when
is set to
, i.e., (208) (i) is satisfied by
.
When is set to , one can observe from (211)–(214) that is an element [by notation (113)], and then from (208) (ii), (211), (212), we see that is a element such that the coefficient of in is, by (218), , which means that the inequality in (208) (ii) is a strict inequality.
When is set to , one can easily observe from (214), (215) that are all elements, thus all strict inequalities in (120) (c), (d) hold.
Hence the “initial stage” □
By Remark 3.5, we see that elements of
satisfy (123) (c), (d) and
For convenience, we denote
Lemma 3.22.
When , we have the following,
Proof. First we have,
Then by Theorem 1.2, we must have
. Thus
, which with (220) (ii) implies (222) (1).
The proof of (222) (2) is a little trick, first we give a remark.
Remark 3.23. We will use the condition in the last inequality of (123) (c) that to prove that equality cannot occur in the first inequality of (123) (c), i.e., . Then we will use the condition in the first inequality of (123) (c) that to prove equality cannot occur in the last inequality of (208) (iv), i.e., . Note that this is no problem as we only use the defining conditions on .
To prove (222) (1), recall from (118) (iv) that
, which can be rewritten as,
Therefore [the following is obtained by first regarding (224) (i) as the equation
and then solving
and then setting
],
where,
and where we always choose
to be the unique element defined by (
6),
which converges absolutely by the fact from (123) (c) that
. Therefore, we obtain from (225), (226) that either
or else
Assume we have the later case. Then, where the first inequality follows from the fact that
is positive for all
,
which is a contradiction with the first inequality of (123) (c). This proves that we can only have (228). Exactly similar to the evaluation in (230), we can deduce from the right-hand side of (228) (ii) the following,
Thus we obtain from (228) (i) the following
which in particular gives the first inequality of (222) (2).
Using (118) (v), (iv) and (
233), up to
[then
can be omitted, and so
by (118) (i)], we have [observing from (218) that
, one can see that the power of
in the last equality is negative],
This proves (222) (2).
Now note from (118) that we have the following
where the last inequality of (ii) is obtained from (228) by noting the following
Thus (234) (ii) shows that, up to
, we have
for some
with
by noting that
. Using this in (234) (i), we obtain, up to
,
Now (210) with (236), (237)) shows that the last inequality of (222) (3) holds for
.
Now assume
Then, up to
[recall from (113) that
and we can also require that
, therefore
, which gives (i) below],
We obtain [we will frequently apply the following; we remark that as long as
and
, we can obtain the following; note that we require
to apply (167), however in our case here, the third inequality is an equality when
],
which is a contradiction. Thus the assumption (238) is wrong, i.e., the first inequality of (222) (3) holds for
. Similarly, if
, exactly as the above, we can use (236), (237)) to obtain (239) and (240), which is again a contradiction. This proves (222) (3).
This completes the proof of Lemma 3.22. □
Lemma 3.24. We have .
Proof. Let . We already see from (222) that all strict inequalities in (120) (c), (d) hold.
Assume equality occurs in the first inequality of (123) (a). Using notations in (221), we have
We claim
which obviously holds for
by (118) (i). To see it holds for
, first by the first inequality of (234) (ii) and (241), we obtain that
, more precisely,
To prove
is a
element, assume, say,
Then (234) (i) with (241), (244) shows
If
, then this together with (244), (245) implies that we can obtain a contradiction as in (240) [cf. the remark before (240) when
].
Thus
. We want to verify if (198) holds. To do this, we use notation there by denoting
and so
by (115), (116), and
with
, and
with
, and further we can obtain
We must have
, otherwise by (246) (i), as in (199) (iii), we can obtain a contradiction [in fact in many cases we have proved that
cannot differ from
by a number which is independent of
]. Thus we see that (198) holds, which contradicts the assumption that Case 5 does not occur. This proves that (242) holds for
.
Using (241), (234) (i) and the fact that , we see that . If, say, , then this with (223) (i), (243) (234) (i), (118) (i) shows that and , and we obtain a contradiction again as in (240). Thus is also a element. Then by (234) (i), (118) (i), are elements too, i.e., we have (242).
Now we need the precise definitions in (118). We have
where the strict inequality in (iii) is obtained by noting that
is locally a strict decreasing function on
(as
), and
and we have (242). Now regarding
as a local function on
, at point
, we have
This suggests us to denote (where
if
and
otherwise),
Then
is locally a strict decreasing function on
if
or a strict increasing function on
if
(noting that
). Thus in any case, we obtain that
. This with ((247) (iii), (249) (ii) proves
We have,
Now if
, then by the facts in (251) (vi), (vii) that
, we obtain a contradiction as in (240).
Hence . Then is a element as in (246) (i), and we have (246) (iii) by (251) (vii). By (251) (iv), with . The same statement after (246) shows that we still have , i.e., (198) holds, which again contradicts the assumption that Case 5 does not occur.
This proves that the first strict inequality of (208) (i) holds for .
Next assume in (220) (i), equality occurs in the last inequality, i.e.,
. Then
By (252) (i), (ii), (iv), we obtain a contradiction as in (240). This proves that the last strict inequality of (208) (i) holds for
.
The above with (220) shows that (208) is satisfied by , which implies that . This proves that . □
Now Proposition 3.4 follows from Lemmas 3.21–3.24 together with the following facts. When , by (222) (3), are bounded, thus is bounded by Proposition 2.22. Further by (222) (1), (3), (118) (i), (116), we see that , i.e., (121) holds. This completes the proof. □