The Short Curve conjecture for Weil–Petersson geodesics

Given a Weil–Petersson geodesic g:(a,b)Teich(S)g:(a,b) \to \operatorname{Teich}(S), let its forward and backward end invariants be (ν,ν+)(\nu^{-},\nu^{+}). For each subsurface ZSZ\subseteq S that is not a three-holed sphere, let dZ(ν,ν+)d_Z(\nu^{-},\nu^{+}) denote the distance in the curve complex of ZZ between the projections of the end invariants. For a simple closed curve α\alpha, write α(g(t))\ell_\alpha(g(t)) for its length along gg.

Short Curve conjecture. If gg is a Weil–Petersson geodesic with end invariant (ν,ν+)(\nu^{-},\nu^{+}), then:

  1. For every ϵ>0\epsilon>0 there is an A>0A>0 such that, if dZ(ν,ν+)>Ad_Z(\nu^{-},\nu^{+})>A, then
inftα(g(t))ϵ\inf_t\ell_\alpha(g(t))\leq\epsilon

for every αZ\alpha\in\partial Z. 2. For every A>0A>0 there is an ϵ>0\epsilon>0 such that, if

inftα(g(t))ϵ,\inf_t\ell_\alpha(g(t))\leq\epsilon,

then there is a subsurface ZSZ\subsetneq S such that αZ\alpha\in\partial Z and dZ(ν,ν+)>Ad_Z(\nu^{-},\nu^{+})>A.

The conjecture asserts that large subsurface coefficients exactly detect the appearance of short boundary curves along Weil–Petersson geodesics. It gives a subsurface-projection coding of geodesic behavior in the moduli space, generalizing the role of continued fractions for geodesics on the modular surface.

Sources & referencesView supporting material

Primary source

Babak Modami, “Prescribing the behavior of Weil-Petersson geodesics in the moduli space of Riemann surfaces”, arXiv:1212.0051 (2015).

Progress summary

Never refreshed

Nothing recorded yet. Refresh searches the literature and the public web for attempts on this problem, and writes the first summary here.

Solutions 0

No solutions have been posted yet.