Complete affine manifolds with Anosov holonomy groups

Suppose that \rho is P-Anosov in the sense of [GGKW17ii]. Hence, \Gamma:= \rho(\pi_1(N)) is word-hyperbolic by [GGKW17ii].

First, suppose that the Zariski closure of the image of the linear holonomy group is reductive. By Lemma 3.1, \rho is a k-dominated representation of index k.

We take a finite index normal subgroup \Gamma' of \Gamma. Assume that the Zariski closure Z of \rho(\Gamma') is a connected reductive Lie group. By Theorem 4.3 and Proposition 4.4, \rho|\Gamma' is partially hyperbolic in the singular value sense with index k, k < n/2. So is \rho since \Gamma is a finite-index extension of \Gamma'. By Theorem 4.2, \rho is a partially hyperbolic representation in the bundle sense with index k.

Now, we drop the reductive condition of the Zariski closure. Mainly, we have to prove the expanding and contracting properties in the subbundles. The semisimplification \rho^{ss} is P-Anosov by Proposition 1.8 of [GGKW17ii]. Since the projection to the Levi factor does not change eigenvalues by the proof of Lemma 2.40 of [GGKW17ii], \rho^{ss}(g) for each g \in \Gamma has an eigenvalue equal to 1 by Theorem 4.3. By Proposition 4.4 and Theorem 4.2, \rho^{ss} is a partially hyperbolic representation in the bundle sense with index k, k < n/2.

By Proposition 1.3 of [GGKW17ii], \rho is P-Anosov with respect to a continuous Anosov map \zeta: \partial_\infty \Gamma \rightarrow {\mathcal{F}} for the flag variety \mathcal{F} := {\mathsf{GL}}(n, {\mathbb{R}})/P.

We can conjugate \rho as close to \rho^{ss} as one wishes in {\rm Hom}(\Gamma, {\mathsf{GL}}(n, {\mathbb{R}})) since the orbit of \rho^{ss} is the closed orbit in the closure of the orbit of \rho under the conjugation action. (See Section 2.5.4 of [GGKW17ii]. ) Let \zeta_i: \partial_\infty \Gamma \rightarrow {\mathcal{F}} denote the Anosov map for \rho_i conjugate to \rho converging to \rho^{ss}. Theorem 5.13 of [GW12] generalizes to {\mathsf{GL}}(n, {\mathbb{R}}) since we can multiply a representation by a homomorphism \Gamma \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}^+ not changing the P-Anosov property to {\mathsf{SL}}_\pm(n, {\mathbb{R}})-representations. (See Section 2.5.3 of [GGKW17ii]).

Hence, Theorem 5.13 implies that \zeta_i converges to \zeta^{ss}: \partial_\infty \Gamma \rightarrow {\mathcal{F}} the map for \rho^{ss} in the C^0-sense.

Let {\mathbb V}^{ss+}, {\mathbb V}^{ss0}, and {\mathbb V}^{ss-} denote the bundles of the partially hyperbolic decomposition of {\mathbb{R}}^n_{\rho^{ss}} as in Definition 1.1. Let {\mathbb V}^{+}_i, {\mathbb V}^{0}_i, and {\mathbb V}^{-}_i denote the bundles of the decomposition of {\mathbb{R}}^n_{\rho_i} of respective dimensions k, n-2k, and k obtainable from \zeta_i since \rho_i is k-dominated. The single product bundle \mathbf{UC} \hat M \times {\mathbb{R}}^n covers the direct sums of these bundles.

• Let \hat {\mathbb V}^{ss+}, \hat {\mathbb V}^{ss0}, and \hat {\mathbb V}^{ss-} denote the cover of {\mathbb V}^{ss+}, {\mathbb V}^{ss0}, and {\mathbb V}^{ss-}.

• Let \hat {\mathbb V}^{+}_i, \hat {\mathbb V}^{0}_i, and \hat {\mathbb V}^{-}_i denote the cover of {\mathbb V}^{+}_i, {\mathbb V}^{0}_i, and {\mathbb V}^{-}_i.

Then the above convergence \zeta_i \rightarrow \zeta^{ss} means that

in the respective Grassmann spaces pointwise for each x \in \mathbf{UC} \hat M.

We may construct a sequence of the fiberwise metrics \left|\mkern-2mu\left|\cdot\right|\mkern-2mu\right|_{{\mathbb{R}}^n_{\rho_i}} so that the sequence of the lifted norms of \left|\mkern-2mu\left|\cdot\right|\mkern-2mu\right|_{{\mathbb{R}}^n_{\rho_i}} uniformly converging to that of \left|\mkern-2mu\left|\cdot\right|\mkern-2mu\right|_{{\mathbb{R}}^n_{\rho^{ss}}} on \mathbf{UC} \hat M \times {\mathbb{R}}^n over each compact subset of \mathbf{UC} \hat M using a fixed set of a partition of unity subordinate to a covering with trivializations.

The flow \phi^{ss} on {\mathbb{R}}_{\rho^{ss}} satisfies the expansion and contraction properties in Definition 1.1. Note that the lift \Phi^{ss} of \phi^{ss} and that \Phi_i of the flow \phi_i for {\mathbb{R}}^n_{\rho_i} in the product bundle \mathbf{UC} \hat M \times {\mathbb{R}}^n are the same by construction induced from trivial action on the second factor. Since M is compact, there exists t_0 such that for t> t_0,

• \Phi^{ss}_{t}| {\mathbb V}^{ss+} is expanding by a factor c^+> 1

• \Phi^{ss}_{t}| {\mathbb V}^{ss-} is contracting by a factor c^- < 1 with respect to the metric \left|\mkern-2mu\left|\cdot\right|\mkern-2mu\right|_{{\mathbb{R}}^n_{\rho^{ss}}}.

Hence for sufficiently large i, the flow \Phi_i on {\mathbb{R}}^n_{\rho_i} satisfies the corresponding properties as well as the domination properties for \left|\mkern-2mu\left|\cdot\right|\mkern-2mu\right|_{{\mathbb{R}}^n_{\rho_i}} by (?).

Hence, \Phi_i is partially hyperbolic with index k.

For converse, suppose that \rho is partially hyperbolic with index k. Proposition 4.5 of [BPS] shows that \rho is k-dominated. Lemma 3.1 shows that \rho is P_\theta-Anosov for k \in \theta. Also, k < n/2 since the neutral bundle exists.

Each fiber is uniformly bounded under d_{\mathbf{U} \hat M}.

Since l_1 and l_2 are both (1, 0)-quasi-geodesics, this follows from Proposition 3.1 of Chapter 3 of [CDP90].

There is a map G\hat{M} \to \mathbf{UC} \hat{M} given by sending the complete isometric geodesic g: \mathbb{R} \to \hat{M} to (g(0), \vec{v}_0) where \vec{v}_0 is the unit tangent vector at g(0). This map is clearly bijective. In Section III of [Matheus90], the map G\hat{M} \to \hat{M} defined by g \mapsto g(0) is shown to be a quasi-isometry. Therefore, post-composing this map with a lift that sends each g(0) to a vector in the fiber of \mathbf{UC} \hat{M} over g(0) results in a quasi-isometry. For a sequence \{g_i\} of geodesics in \hat{M}, if d_{GX}(g, g_i) \to 0, then (g_i(0), g_i'(0)) \to (g(0), g'(0)) since otherwise, we would obtain a positive lower bound for the integral (?).

The inverse map \mathbf{UC} \hat{M} \to G\hat{M} is also continuous due to the continuity of the exponential map and considerations involving (?), where d_X(g(t), h(t)) grows sublinearly. The continuity of integral values under g and h can be shown by cutting off for |t| > N.

Choose a basepoint x_0 in \hat M. For each complete isometric geodesic g: {\mathbb{R}} \rightarrow \hat M, let g_{x_0} denote the projection point on g({\mathbb{R}}) that is of the minimal distance from x_0 and let \partial_+ g, \partial_-g \in \partial_\infty \hat M denote the forward and backward endpoints, and let t(g) \in {\mathbb{R}} denote \pm d(g(0), g_{x_0}) where we use + if g(0) is ahead of g_{x_0}.

We define \mathcal{E}(g) = (\partial_+ g, \partial_- g, t(g)). The surjectivity follows from Proposition 2.1 of Chapter 2 of [CDP90] since t is an isometry on each complete isometric geodesic. The compactness of the fiber is implied by Lemma 2.2.

Champetier [Champetier94] constructs the space G\hat \Gamma_M from \hat \Gamma_M quasi-isometric to \Gamma_M following Gromov.

Recall \partial_\infty \hat{M} = \partial_\infty \hat{\Gamma}_M. Using the orbit map \Gamma_M \to \hat{M} sending \gamma to \gamma(x_0), we extend the map to \hat{\Gamma}_M \to \hat{M} by sending each edge to a shortest geodesic.

Let I: G\hat{\Gamma}_M \to G\hat{M} be a map that sends a geodesic g in \hat{\Gamma}_M to a geodesic g' in \hat{M} with the same endpoints in \partial_\infty \hat{M}, and maps g(0) to the nearest point on the image of g'.

The map I': G\hat{M} \to G\hat{\Gamma}_M can be defined by taking a geodesic g in \hat{M} to a geodesic g' in \hat{\Gamma}_M in a similar manner, with g(0) going to one of the elements of \Gamma_M(x_0) nearest to it.

By Theorem 11.72 of [DK2018], which states that every geodesic in \hat{\Gamma}_M is a quasi-geodesic in \hat{M} and vice versa, and considering that every geodesic in \hat{M} is uniformly bounded away from one in \hat{\Gamma}_M in the Hausdorff distance, it follows that G\hat{M} is quasi-isometric to G\hat{\Gamma}_M via the maps I and I', using (?).

We define \mathcal{E}': G\hat \Gamma_M \rightarrow \partial_\infty^{(2)} \hat \Gamma_M \times {\mathbb{R}} as we did for \mathcal{E} above. By Proposition 4.8 and (4.3) of [Champetier94], \mathcal{E}' sends G\hat \Gamma_M to \partial_\infty^{(2)} \hat \Gamma_M \times {\mathbb{R}} = \partial_\infty^{(2)}\hat M\times {\mathbb{R}} as a quasi-isometric homeomorphism. Since \mathcal{E}(g, t) and \mathcal{E}'\circ I'(g, t) are uniformly bounded away from each other, the result follows.

Proposition 2.5 and Lemma 2.3 imply the result.

This follows by Theorem 1.3(3) of [GGKW17ii] since the set \theta contains k and n-k.

By Lemma 4.1 and Proposition 3.1, \rho is k-dominated.

Bochi, Potrie, and Sambarino [BPS] construct subbundles Z and \Theta of E_\rho where Z dominates \Theta and \dim Z = k, \dim \Theta = n-k.

Now, \rho is also n-k-dominated. By Lemma 4.1, we obtain a new splitting of the bundle E_\rho = Z'\oplus \Theta' over \partial_\infty^{(2)}\hat M \times {\mathbb{R}} where \dim Z' = n-k and \dim \Theta' is k. Furthermore, Z' dominates \Theta'. Then Z is a subbundle of Z', and \Theta' is a subbundle of \Theta by Proposition 2.1 of [BPS].

We now form bundles Z, Z'\cap \Theta, \Theta' over \partial_\infty^{(2)}\hat M \times {\mathbb{R}}.

The dominance property (?) of Definition 1.1 follows from those of Z, \Theta and Z', \Theta'.

There are exponential expansions of a_i(g) for 1\leq i \leq k by the partially hyperbolic condition of the premise.

Now (iii)(a) of Definition 1.1 follows:

Define U_p(A) as the sum of eigenspaces of \sqrt{AA^*} corresponding to p largest eigenvalues. Define S_{n-p}(A):= U_{n-p}(A^{-1}). Since black\hat M/\Gamma_M is compact, Theorem 2.2 of [BPS] shows

Since by the paragraph above Theorem 2.2 of [BPS], we obtain

where the unit vectors of S_{n-k}(\psi^t_{\phi^{-1}_t(x)})^{\perp} goes to vectors of norm at least the k-th singular value for \psi_t. The angle between \hat Z(x) and \hat \Phi(x) is uniformly bounded below by a positive constant by the compactness of black\hat M/\Gamma_M. Hence, unit vectors in \hat Z({\phi^{-1}_t(x)}) have components in S_{n-k}(\psi^t_{\phi^{-1}_t(x)})^\perp whose lengths are uniformly bounded below by a positive constant for sufficiently large t.

As t \rightarrow \infty, \phi_t passes the images of the fundamental domain under \Gamma_M. Let g_i denote the sequence of elements of \Gamma_M arising in this way. Since the a_k(g_i) grows exponentially, the expansion properties of Z follow blackby the above paragraph. (iii) of Definition 1.1 follows up to reversing the flow.

By the quasi-isometry of \mathbf{UC} \hat M with \partial^{(2)}\hat M \times {\mathbb{R}} in Theorem 2.6,

we construct our pulled-back partially hyperbolic bundles over \mathbf{UC} \hat M.

We define function f: Z(\rho(\pi_1(N))) \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}} by f(x) = \det(x-{\rm I}) for each element x.

Suppose that f(\rho(g)) \ne 0, g\in \Gamma_M. Then \rho(g)(x) + b = x has a solution for each b by Cramer’s rule. Hence \rho'(g) has a fixed point, which is a contradiction. We obtain that f is zero on the Zariski closure, implying that each element has at least one eigenvalue equal to 1.

(I) We begin with some preliminary:

The embedding Z \hookrightarrow {\mathsf{GL}}(n, {\mathbb{R}}) induces a map \iota_Z:{\rm Cl}(\mathfrak{a}_Z^+) \rightarrow {\rm Cl}(\mathfrak{a}^+_n) for the Weyl chamber \mathfrak{a}^+_n of {\mathsf{GL}}(n, {\mathbb{R}}). Let \log\lambda_1, \dots, \log\lambda_n denote the coordinates of the Weyl chamber \mathfrak{a}^+_n, which actually are standard coordinates.

Of course, \iota_Z \circ \log \vec{\lambda}_Z| \rho(G) = \log\vec{\lambda}|\rho(G). Let B:=\mathcal{BC}_Z(\rho(G)) denote the Benoist cone of \rho(G) in Z. The image \iota_Z(B) is not convex in general.

Now, B is a convex cone with nonempty interior in {\rm Cl}(\mathfrak{a}_Z^+).

By Theorem 4.3, for each b \in B, there is an index i where the log of the i-th coordinate of \iota_Z(b) equals 0. We denote by

which is a consecutive set.

Let S([1, ..., n]) denote the collection of subsets of consecutive elements. We define an integral interval function

given by sending b \in B to \mathcal{I}(b). Since the sequences of ordered norms of eigenvalues of convergent sequence of linear maps converge, we have

Let S denote a finite set of generators of \rho(G) and their inverses. By Theorems 1.3 and 1.4 of [BS2021], the sequence \frac{1}{m} \log\vec{\lambda}_Z(S^m)\subset J(S) geometrically converges to a compact convex set J(S) \subset{\rm Cl}(\mathfrak{a}_Z^+) as m \rightarrow \infty

(see Section 3.1 of [BS2021]). Moreover, the cone spanned by 0 and J(S) is the Benoist cone B. This implies that the set of directions of \log \vec{\lambda}_Z(\rho(G)) is dense in B. (See also [Benoist98]). Let S_n denote the unit sphere in the Lie algebra \mathfrak{a}_n of {\mathsf{GL}}(n, {\mathbb{R}}) with respect to the standard coordinates. Since

by Theorem 4.2(3) of [GGKW17ii], we obtain

for every b \in B -\{O\} going to an element of \iota_Z(B) \cap S_n for a constant C> 0.

(II) Our first major step is to prove \mathcal{I}(B-\{0\}) \subset [k+1, n-k]: Let \iota_n denote the involution of \mathfrak{a}_n. First, suppose that the rank of Z is \geq 2, and hence \dim \mathfrak{a}_Z^+ \geq 2.

A diagonal subspace

is a subspace of the maximal abelian algebra \mathfrak{a}_n given by \log\lambda_i - \log\lambda_j=0 for some indices i and j. The inverse images under \iota_Z in {\rm Cl}(\mathfrak{a}_Z^+) of the diagonal subspaces of \mathfrak{a} may meet B. We let \mathcal{I}_B the maximal collection of indices (i, j), i < j, where \iota_Z^{-1}(\Delta_{i, j}) contains B, which may be empty.

Let \mathcal{I}'_B the collection of indices (k, l), k< l, of \Delta_{k, l} not in \mathcal{I}_B. We call the closures of the components of

the generic flat domains of B. There are finitely many of these to be denoted B_1, \dots, B_m which are convex domains in B.

We make notes of two “discrete continuity" properties due to Danciger and Stecker:

• In the interior of each B_i, \mathcal{I} is constant since the \mathcal{I}-value is never empty and the change in \mathcal{I}-values will happen only in the inverse images of some of \Delta_{k,l}.

• For adjacent regions, their images under \mathcal{I} differ by adding or removing some top or bottom consecutive sets.

Heuristically speaking: the worms leave “traces".

We now aim to prove that the following never occurs –(*):

(The idea is that k, k+1 both cannot be in a zero set since they differ by a constant due to Anosov properties. )

We use the discrete version of continuity: Suppose that this (*) is true. Since B is convex with \dim B \geq 2, there is a chain of adjacent polyhedral images B_{l_1}, \dots, B_{l_m} where b_1 \in B_{l_1}^o and b_2 \in B_{l_m}^o where B_{l_j}\cap B_{l_{j+1}} contains a nonzero point. For adjacent B_{l_p} and B_{l_{p+1}}, we have by (?)

Considering \mathcal{I}(B_{l_j}^o), j=1, \dots, m, and the \mathcal{I}-values of the intersections of adjacent generic flat domains, we have \mathcal{I}(b') \ni k, k+1 for some nonzero element b' of B by the connectedness of the \mathcal{I}-values as we change generic flat domains to adjacent ones according to (?). Hence, we obtain

Since we can assume \iota_Z(b') \in S_n for b' in (?) by normalizing, we obtain a contradiction to (?).

Hence, we proved (*), and only one of the following holds:

• for all b\in B in the interiors of generic flat domains, every element of \mathcal{I}(b) is \leq k or

• for all b \in B in the interiors of generic flat domains, every element of \mathcal{I}(b) is > k.

Note that the opposition involution \iota_n sends \iota_Z(B) to itself since the inverse map g\rightarrow g^{-1} preserves Z and the set of eigenvalues of g is sent to the set of the eigenvalues of g^{-1}. In the first case, by the opposition involution \iota_n preserving G, \mathcal{I}(\iota_n(b)) for b \in B contains an element \geq n-k+1. This again contradicts the above. Hence, we conclude \mathcal{I}(b) \subset [k+1, \dots, n] for all b \in B in the interiors of generic flat domains. Acting by the opposition involution and by similar arguments, we obtain \mathcal{I}(b)\subset [k+1, \dots, n-k] for all b \in B in the interiors of generic flat domains.

Furthermore, we can show that \mathcal{I}(b) \subset [k+1, n-k] for all b \in B -\{0\} since otherwise, we have \mathcal{I}(b') \ni k, k+1 for some b'\ne 0 by a similar reason to the above applied to lower-dimensional strata. This is a contradiction as before. Also, the argument shows [k+1, n-k] \ne \emptyset and k < n/2.

Suppose that Z has rank 1. Then the maximal abelian group A_Z is 1-dimensional. For each g \in Z, there is an index i(g) for which \log\lambda_{i(g)}(g) =0. Thus, \mathfrak{a}_Z is in the null space of \log \lambda_i for some index i. Since g \mapsto g^{-1} preserves \mathfrak{a}_Z, we have \log \lambda_{n-i+1} = 0 on \mathfrak{a}_Z. Since {\rm Cl}(\mathfrak{a}_Z^+) = \mathfrak{a}_Z \cap {\rm Cl}(\mathfrak{a}^+), we also have \log \lambda_{n-i+1}=0 on \mathfrak{a}_Z^+. Hence,

Now (?) and k < i imply \mathcal{I}(B-\{0\}) \subset [k+1, n-k].

(III) To complete the proof, we show the partial hyperbolicity property:

We let \log \vec{a}_Z|Z: Z \rightarrow \mathfrak{a}_Z^+ denote the Cartan projection of Z. Recall

Since \rho(G) has a connected reductive Zariski closure, the sequence

have limit points only in \iota_Z(B) by Theorem 1.3 of [BS2021].

By the conclusion of step (II),

for any sequence \{g_l\},

uniformly in terms of w(g_l).

Hence, this implies that for any small constant C> 0, there is N> 0 such that

for at least one i \in [k+1, \dots, n-k] provided w(g) > N. This means that

for all g for a constant A > 0 depending on C. By the P_\theta-Anosov property of \rho and Lemma 3.1, we have

for some constants A', C'> 0. Since

it follows that

for some constants C'', A''> 0. Taking inverses also, we showed that \rho' is partially hyperbolic in the singular value sense with index k.

Finally, since [k+1, n-k] is not empty, k < n/2.

Suppose that \rho|\Gamma_M is partially hyperbolic representation in the bundle sense with index k for k < n/2. By Proposition 2.5 of Part 1, \rho is a k-Anosov representation in the bundle sense according to the definition in Section 4.2 of [BPS]. Proposition 4.5 of [BPS] implies that \rho is k-dominated. By Theorem 3.2 of [BPS] (following from Theorem 1.4 of [KLP18]), \Gamma_M is word hyperbolic.

There exists an exhaustion of \mathds{A}^n/\Gamma by compact FS submanifolds M_i where M=M_1 \subset M_2 \subset \cdots. (See Scott-Tucker [ST89] for constructions. Here, FS property easy to obtain.) Also, we may choose a Riemannian metric so that each M_i has convex boundary. Let \hat M_i denote the cover of M_i in \mathds{A}^n.

(I) The first step is to homotopy d_{\tilde N}-parallelly the inclusion of \hat M_i \rightarrow \mathds{A}^n to a d_{\tilde N}-cobounded quasi-isometry into an affine subspace of dimension n-k using Theorem 6.1:

Let us fix i to start. Since \Gamma_M is word-hyperbolic,

we can apply all the results in the previous sections. Proposition 8.1 gives us a d_{\tilde N}-cobounded quasi-isometric embedding f: \hat M_i \rightarrow \mathds{A}^n with the image in N_C(\hat M_i) \cap L for an affine subspace L of dimension n-k.

Here, N_C(\hat M_i) is a C-neighborhood of \hat M_i in \mathds{A}^n for some C where C is the constant obtained by Theorem 7.1 since we are modifying the map by neutralization. Since M_i is compact, and f is d_{\tilde N}-cobounded, each image of a cell under f in L has a uniformly bounded d_{\tilde N}-diameter. Hence, each has a uniformly bounded d_L-diameter by the last part of Theorem 6.1.

Since N_C(\hat M_i)\cap L is uniformly contractible in L with respect to d_L by Theorem 6.1, we modify f to be a continuous quasi-isometric embedding to N_{C'}(\hat M_i)\cap L by Proposition 8.3 for another constant C' depending only on C.

(Of course here, we will not try to extend any already continuous parts defined on \mathcal{R}_p and start from 0-cells. ) We let C to denote C' from now on.

Now, f as a map to \mathds{A}^n is d_{\tilde N}-cobounded since we modified the original d_{\tilde N}-cobounded map in a bounded manner in L with respect to d_L using Proposition 8.3 and (L, d_L) \rightarrow (\mathds{A}^n, d_{\tilde N}) is distance-nonincreasing.

Using the inclusion map \iota: N_C(\hat M_i) \cap L \rightarrow N_C(\hat M_i), we have

for a sufficiently large j(i).

Denote the composition of the right two maps by \iota also.

Since \iota \circ f is d_{\tilde N}-cobounded in terms of d_{\tilde N},

there is a d_{\tilde N}-parallel homotopy H between

by Lemma 6.2 up to choosing j(i) bigger again to accommodate the d_{\tilde N}-parallel homotopy.

This is equivariant homotopy, and for each t\in [0, 1].

We may assume that the image of H is in \hat M_{j(i)} by taking sufficiently large j(i).

We note that H, \iota, f, \iota_{ij(i)} are all continuous.

(II) The next step is to apply the homotopy to the cohomology theory to compute the cohomological dimensions:

We recall three facts from [Brown]

• \mathpzc{Hom}(C, C') for chain complexes (C, d) and (C', d') is the set of graded module homomorphisms of degree n from C to C'. That is

  \mathpzc{Hom}(C, C')_n:= \prod_{q\in {\mathbb Z}} {\rm Hom}(C_q, C'_{q+n})

  with the boundary operator D_n is given by D_n(f) := d' f - (-1)^n fd. (See Page 5 of [Brown].)

• \mathpzc{Hom}_c(C_\ast(\hat M_i), {\mathbb Z}) \subset \mathpzc{Hom}(C_\ast(\hat M_i), {\mathbb Z}) consists of every chain map f: C_\ast(\hat M_i) \rightarrow {\mathbb Z} such that for each m \in M, f(\gamma m) =0 for all but finitely many \gamma \in \Gamma. We define H^j_c*(\hat M_i) to be the j-th cohomology of \mathpzc{Hom}_c(C_\ast(\hat M_i), {\mathbb Z}). (See Section 7 of Chapter 8 of [Brown].)

• Since K(\Gamma, 1) is realized as a finite complex, \Gamma is of type FL by Proposition 6.3 of Chapter 8 of [Brown]. By Proposition 6.7 of Chapter 8 of [Brown], we have

  \mathrm{cd}\Gamma = \max\{j | H^j(\Gamma; {\mathbb Z}\Gamma)\ne 0\}.

(II)(a) We have maps

The composition equals \iota_{ij(i)}^\ast by the d_{\tilde N}-parallel homotopy H.

Since L \cap N_c(\hat M_i)) is a finite-dimensional smooth manifold, \iota_{ij(i)}^* is zero for dimensions > \dim L. Now, we choose a subsequence of M_i relabeled so that M_{i+1} = M_{j(i)} for each i, i=1, 2, \dots, where j(i) is chosen as above. Therefore, we obtain

(II)(b) Let \tilde K(\Gamma, 1) denote the universal cover of K(\Gamma, 1). According to the top of page 209 of [Brown], H^*(\Gamma, \mathbb{Z}\Gamma) is the cohomology of \mathpzc{Hom}_{\Gamma}(C_*(\tilde K(\Gamma, 1)), \mathbb{Z}\Gamma). \mathbb{A}^n is a contractible free \Gamma-complex of X. Since \mathbb{A}^n/\Gamma is homotopy equivalent to K(\Gamma, 1), there exist maps

such that f_1 \circ f_2 and f_2 \circ f_1 are homotopic to the identity maps equivariantly with respect to the \Gamma-actions. Hence, C_*(\mathbb{A}^n) is chain homotopy equivalent to a finite free resolution C_*(\tilde K(\Gamma, 1)) of \mathbb{Z} in a \mathbb{Z}\Gamma-equivariant manner with respect to \mathbb{Z}\Gamma-actions. Therefore, H^*(\Gamma, \mathbb{Z}\Gamma) equals the domain of the isomorphism

(II)(c) Since \hat M_i exhausts \mathds{A}^n, C_\ast(\mathds{A}^n) equals \varinjlim C_\ast(\hat M_i) as {\mathbb Z}\Gamma-modules. We have

Let \tilde \iota_i: \hat M_i \rightarrow \mathds{A}^n be the lift of the inclusion map \iota_i: M_i \rightarrow N. The lift is unique since \pi_1(M_i) \rightarrow \pi_1(N) is surjective. Then we have

By Theorem 3.5.8 of [Weibel], there is a surjective homomorphism

where \Lambda is the inverse limit of \Lambda_i.

We may assume that the image of f_2 is in \hat M_i for all i. Let f_2^i: \tilde K(\Gamma, 1) \rightarrow \hat M_i denote the restriction of the range space. Then we have \tilde \iota_i \circ f_2^i = f_2, and f_2^* = f_2^{i*} \circ \Lambda_i is an isomorphism. This means that each \Lambda_i is injective. Hence, we deduced that \Lambda is an isomorphism.

(II)(d) By Lemma 7.4 of Chapter 8 of [Brown], there is a natural isomorphism black

Since the cohomology of \mathpzc{Hom}_c(C_\ast(\hat M_i), {\mathbb Z}) is H^*_c(\hat M_i), the right side of (?) is zero for l > \dim L by (?). By the conclusion of (II)(b), we obtain that

By (?), we obtain \mathrm{cd}(\Gamma) \leq \dim L.

If otherwise, \mathrm{cd}(\Gamma_M) = n \leq n -k for any k, 1\leq k \leq n/2 and k in \theta for P = P_\theta.

By Theorem 1.1 of Part 1, \rho is partially hyperbolic and k < n/2. There is a constant C of the d_{\tilde N}-parallel homotopy obtained in Theorem 7.1. For each z \in \partial_\infty \pi_1(N), \mathcal{R}_z embeds quasi-isometrically into a generalized stable affine subspace A_z by lifting points to \mathbf{UC} \tilde{M} and then applying \tilde{s}_\infty, moving only a distance bounded above by C by Proposition 8.1. Let K be a compact fundamental domain of \mathbf{UC} \tilde{M}. Since \mathcal{R}_z is C'-dense for some C' > 0, a point of \mathcal{R}_z is in a C'-neighborhood K' of K. The affine subspace A_z is determined by \tilde{s}_\infty(K' \cap \mathcal{R}_z) for each z \in \partial_\infty \pi_1(N). Since \tilde{s}_\infty(K') is compact, and each A_z for z \in \partial_\infty \pi_1(N) contains a point of \tilde{s}_\infty(K'), the set of A_z for z \in \partial_\infty \pi_1(M) is compact. Since all A_z for z \in \partial_\infty \pi_1(M) are considered, the invariance under the affine group follows.

The main idea for proof is to pull everything back to a fundamental domain and find a suitable convex ball which is bounded.

Let F be a compact fundamental domain of \hat M \subset \mathds{A}^n, containing the origin O. Let L' be any affine subspace of dimension \dim L \leq n. Let d_{L'} denote the path metric on L' induced from d_{\tilde N}. Let r be any positive real number. The d_{L'}-ball B^{d_{L'}}_r(x) in L' of radius r> 0 for x \in F is a subset of B^{d_{\hat M}}_r(x) for a d_{\hat M}-ball of radius r with center x \in F

since the endpoints of a d_{L'}-path of length < r has d_{\hat M}-distances < r from x. Since \bigcup_{x\in F} B^{d_{\hat M}}_r(x) is bounded in d_E, there is a constant R(r, F) depending only on r and F so that B^{d_{\hat M}}_r(x) \subset B^{d_E}_{R(r, F)}(O) for every x \in F for the Euclidean ball B^{d_E}_{R(r, F)}(O) of radius R(r, F) with center O.

We take C(R, F) for each R> 0 to be the supremum of

where L' varies over the collection of affine subspace L' with \dim L'=\dim L and L' \cap F \ne \emptyset. Since the set of such subspaces, F, and {\rm Cl}(B^{d_E}_R(O)) are compact, and d_{L'}(x, y) is a continuous function of L' and x, y, the supremum exists.

Now,

and for any affine subspace L' with \dim L'=\dim L containing x \in F. Now, B^{d_E}_R(O) \cap L' is convex and is a subset of B^{d_{L'}}_{C(R, F)}(x). Since

B^{d_{L'}}_r(x) is contractible to a point inside B^{d_{L'}}_{C(R(r, F), F)}(x) \subset L'.

Since we can put any B^{d_{L}}_r(x) for x\in L \cap \hat M to a d_{\gamma(L)}-ball with the center in F by a deck transformation \gamma of \hat M, we obtained the radius C(R(r, F), F) for each r> 0 so that the uniform contractibility holds.

We can do the same for d_{\tilde N}|L by doing the same argument as above.

The final uniform properness of the embedding (L\cap \hat M, d_L) \rightarrow (\hat M, d_{\tilde N}) is proved: Given two points x and y of L\cap \hat M of d_{\tilde N}-distance < r, they can be homotopied to a point in a d_L-ball of radius R(r) for some R(r) in L by the part on d_{\tilde N}|L in the above paragraph. Hence, d_L(x, y) < 2R(r).

We define the homotopy H(y, t) = t f_1(y) + (1-t) f_2(y) for y\in Y, t \in [0, 1]. For a fixed y, the d_{\tilde N}-path length is bounded above by a constant C' by our premise and Theorem 6.1. Hence, H is a d_{\tilde N}-parallel homotopy. The second part is immediate.

Rays in a geodesic in different directions cannot be asymptotic since the geodesic is isometrically embedded. (See Section 3.11.3 of [DK2018].)

Suppose that d_{\hat M}(m(t_i), m'(t_i)) is bounded for some sequence t_i with t_i \rightarrow \infty. By Theorem 1.3 of Chapter 3 of [CDP90], d_{\hat M}(m(t), m'(t)) is uniformly bounded since m'(t) follows m(t) as a quasi-geodesic. If d_{\hat M}(m(t), m'(t)) is bounded, then p = q. Hence, the only possibility is that d_{\hat M}(m(t), m'(t))\rightarrow \infty as t\rightarrow \infty.

Suppose not.

Then there exists a sequence of points y_j = \gamma^{(i)}_j(t_i) \in S_{B_1, R} for a geodesic \gamma_j ending in v_i \in B_1 starting from p and a sequence z_i \in B_2 where d_{\hat M}(y_j, z_j) is bounded above by a constant C and t_{i} \rightarrow \infty. Since d_{\hat M}(z_i, p) is bounded above, d_{\hat M}(p, y_i) is bounded above. This is a contradiction since d_{\hat M}(p, y_i)= t_i.

Choose a point y \in l and let m_i be a ray from y to q_i

as obtainable by Proposition 2.1 of Chapter 2 of [CDP90]. Let B be a compact subset of \partial \hat M containing all q_i and B' be another one containing all r_i which is disjoint from B. We can choose such sets by Section 11.11 of [DK2018] using the Shadow topology since \partial \hat M is first-countable.

We may assume without loss of generality that l_i(0) \rightarrow y. Let K be the blackcompact convex hull of the compact set containing all l_i(0) and y and the isometric geodesic segments with endpoints l_i(0) and y.

Let R_0 be the number so that d_{\hat M}(S_{B, R_0}, K) \geq 24 \delta +1 by Lemma 6.5 , and let R= \max\{R_0, d_{\hat M}(y, l_i(0))|i=1, 2, \dots\}.

Considering the geodesic triangles with vertices l_i(0), q_i, y and with two edges equal to m_i and a part of l_i from l_i(0), we obtain a function t'_i with values > R where

by the \delta-hyperbolicity of \hat M, and Proposition 2.2 of Chapter 2 of [CDP90].

Let t_{i,0} be the last time when l_i(t) leaves the ball \partial B^{d_{\hat M}}_{R+24\delta}(y). Then the function t' is defined on [t_{i, 0}, \infty). Moreover, we obtain 0 \leq t_{i, 0} \leq 2R + 24 \delta by using three points y, l_i(0)\in B^{d_{\hat M}}_{R}(y) and l_i(t_{i, 0}) \in \partial B^{d_{\hat M}}_{R+24\delta}(y) and the triangle inequality. Hence, the function t'_i is always defined on [2R + 24 \delta, \infty).

Now, R \leq t'_i(t_{i, 0}) \leq R + 48 \delta by the condition (?) and the triangle inequality.

Since d_{\hat M}( l_i(t), m_i(t'_i(t))) is within 24\delta, and m_i is also an isometry, we obtain

by applying the triangle equalities to the chain of four points l_{i}(t_{i, 0}), y, m_i(t'_i(t)), and l_i(t). And by applying the triangle equalities to the chain of four points m_i(t'_i(t)), l_i(t), l_{i}(t_{i, 0}), and y, we obtain

Combining the two, we obtain

By choice of a subsequence, we may assume m_i converges to a ray m from x to q since \partial_\infty \hat M has the shadow topology. (See Section 11.11 of [DK2018].) By (?) and the Arzelà-Ascoli theorem, we may assume t'_i(t) \rightarrow t'(t) for t\in [2R + 24 \delta, \infty) and t_{i, 0} \rightarrow t_0, t_0\in [0, 2R + 24 \delta] blackfor a function t' defined on [2R + 24 \delta, \infty) up to a choice of a subsequence. (See Section ?.) Hence, we obtain by (?)

for t\in [2R + 24 \delta, \infty)

Hence, l ends at q as t \rightarrow \infty.

Similarly, we can show that l ends at r as t\rightarrow -\infty.

Since \partial \hat M is first countable by Section 11.11 of [DK2018], we need to worry about sequences only. Let q_i, q_i\in \partial_\infty M, be a sequence converging to q. Then f_{q_i}(x) equals d_{\hat M}(x, l_i) for a complete isometric geodesic l_i ending at q_i.

Since l_i has a distance from x bounded from above, it has a limiting geodesic l_\infty up to a choice of subsequences. (See Section ? of Part 1.)

Since we have l_i(t) \rightarrow l_\infty(t) for each t \in {\mathbb{R}}, we obtain

By Lemma 6.6, l_\infty ends at q.

l_\infty lifts to a geodesic in \mathcal{R}_q. Since f_q(x) = d_{\hat M}(x, l) for some geodesic l ending at q, and is the infimum value for all geodesics l' in \mathcal{R}_q, \liminf_{i\rightarrow\infty} f_{q_i}(x) \geq f_q(x) by (?).

We can prove the lower semi-continuity with respect to x similarly.

Suppose that q_i \in \partial_\infty \hat M converges to q \in \partial_\infty \hat M. Clearly, \liminf_{i \to \infty} f_{q_i}(x) \geq f_q(x) since any isometric geodesic l_i with endpoints q_i within a d_{\hat M}-distance \leq C'' from x for some C'' > 0 converges to an isometric geodesic ending at q by the Arzelà-Ascoli theorem (see Section ?).

Let l be as above, realizing f_q(x), which is a complete isometric geodesic with endpoints q and q' in \partial_\infty \hat M. By Lemma 6.3, we have q \ne q'. We can find a complete isometric geodesic l_i with endpoints q_i \in \partial_\infty \hat M and q' by Proposition 2.1 of Chapter 2 of [CDP90], where q_i \to q.

5 Let l be as above realizing f_q(x) which is

We claim that l_i meets a fixed compact subset of \hat M: We take a point y on l so that d_{\hat M}(x, y) < f_q(x) + 1. Then we take an isometric geodesic l'_i from y to q_i by Proposition 2.1 of Chapter 2 of [CDP90]. Let l'' be a ray in l from y to q'. By taking a subsequence, we obtain l'_i \rightarrow l''' to a ray l''' from y. Again, l''' ends at q by the shadow topology.

Now, l'_i is in a 24\delta-neighborhood of l'' \cup l_i by Proposition 2.2 of [CDP90].

Since q and q' are distinct, the respective rays from y ending at q and q' do not have a bounded Hausdorff distance by Lemma 6.4. Let R be a large number so that

• \partial B^{d_{\hat M}}_R(y) \cap (l''' - N_{24\delta}(l'')) contains a point z, and

• B^{d_{\hat M}}_\epsilon(z) is disjoint from N_{24\delta}(l'') for sufficiently small \epsilon, \epsilon> 0.

For sufficiently large i, there is a sequence z_i for z_i \in l'_i \cap \partial B^{d_{\hat M}}_R(y) where z_i \rightarrow z. Hence, z_i \not\in N_{24\delta}(l'') for sufficiently large i. Then z_i is in a 24\delta-neighborhood of l_i by the conclusion of the above paragraph. Hence, we obtain d_{\hat M}(\partial B^{d_{\hat M}}_R(y), l_i) \leq 24 \delta and l_i meets B^{d_{\hat M}}_{R+ 24\delta +1}(y) for sufficiently large i.

Therefore, the sequence of l_i reparametrized with l_i(0) \in B^{d_{\hat M}}_{R+ 24\delta +1}(y) converges to a complete isometric geodesic l' with the same endpoints as l up to a choice of a subsequence j_i by Lemma 6.6.

Because of

• f_{q_i}(x) \leq d_{\hat M}(l_i, x) and

• the fact that

  d_{\hat M}(l_{j_i}, x) \rightarrow d_{\hat M}(l', x) \leq d_{\hat M}(l, x) + C' \hbox{ implies } \limsup_{i\rightarrow \infty} f_{q_i}(x) \leq f_q(x) + C'

  by Lemma 2.2 of Part 1,

we obtain \limsup_{i \rightarrow \infty} f_{q_i}(x) \leq f_q(x) + C'.

Lemma 6.7 completes the proof by the fact in Page ?.

For each x \in \hat M, we claim that f_q(x) \leq C_x for every q for a constant C_x > 0 depending on x since \partial_\infty \hat M is compact: If not, we can find a sequence q_i in \partial_\infty \hat M so that a sequence of rays r_i from x_0 to q_i converges to a ray r_\infty from x_0 to a point q_\infty of \partial_\infty \hat M so that f_{q_i}(x) \rightarrow \infty. (See Lemma 11.77 of [DK2018].) We have a contradiction by Lemma 6.8 since f_{q_\infty}(x) is finite.

We define f: \hat M \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}_+ by f(x) = \sup_{q \in \partial_\infty \hat M} f_q(x). Since f_q is lower semi-continuous function of x as well, f is a lower semi-continuous function of x by the standard theory. (See [Vinogradova].) Since \Gamma_M acts on \partial_\infty \hat M, f is \Gamma_M-invariant.

Now, f induces a lower semi-continuous function f': M \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}_+. Since f' is lower semi-continuous, there is a minimum point x_0 \in \hat M under f.

In other words, for x_0, f_{q'}(x_0) < C' for a constant C'> 0 independent of q', q'\in \partial_\infty \hat M. Hence, f_q(\gamma(x_0))= f_{\gamma^{-1}(q)}(x_0) < C' for any \gamma \in \Gamma_M. For every point x in \hat M, f_q(x) \leq f_q(\gamma(x_0)) + d_{\hat M}(x, \gamma(x_0)) by the triangle inequality. Since a choice of \gamma can bound the second term, it follows that f_q(x) < C'' for a constant C''> 0 for every x \in \hat M.

We define as in [GLM09]

These integrals are bounded in \left|\mkern-2mu\left|\cdot\right|\mkern-2mu\right|_{{\mathbb{R}}^n_\rho} since the integrands are exponentially decreasing in the fiberwise metric at t\rightarrow \infty. (See Definition 1.1 of Part 1.) Then it is homotopic to s since we can replace \infty by T, T> 0 and let T \rightarrow \infty. Also \nabla_{V_\phi}(s_\infty) \in {\mathbb V}_0 as in the proof of Lemma 8.4 of [GLM09]. The continuity of s_\infty follows since we have exponential decreasing sums. This proves the first two items.

Let F denote a compact fundamental domain of \mathbf{U} \hat M.

Since the image of \hat s(F)\cup \hat s_{\infty}(F) is a compact subset of \mathds{A}^n_{\rho'}, we obtain

By the \Gamma_M-invariance, we obtain

For some uniform constant C'' and C''', we have

This follows since we can consider x to be in a compact fundamental domain F of \hat M and \hat s is bounded on F, and we use the equivariance of the metrics d_{\tilde N} and d_{\mathrm{fiber}}. The third item follows from this. The fourth item follows by Lemma 6.2.

The final item follows since s_\infty is a continuous map: Since \hat M is a Riemannian manifold, so is the sphere bundle \mathbf{U} \hat M. Each compact subset of \mathbf{UC}\hat M goes to a compact subset of \mathds{A}^n. We can cover a compact fundamental domain of \mathbf{UC} \hat M by finitely many compact convex normal balls B_i in \mathbf{U} \mathds{A}^n for i=1, \dots, f. We define K_i:=\mathbf{UC} \hat M \cap B_i, i=1, \dots, f, which needs not be connected.

Then we obtain

for C independent of i and g.

Let L be the d_{\mathbf{U} \hat M}-length of a path \gamma to \mathbf{UC} \hat M. We can break \gamma into paths \gamma_i, i=1, \dots, L/\delta' of length smaller than the Lebesgue number \delta'>0 for the covering \{B_i\}. Now, \hat \Pi_{\mathds{A}^n} \circ \hat s_{\infty}\circ \gamma_i goes into a path in \mathds{A}^n homotopic to a path whose length is bounded above by C. Hence, the image of \gamma is contained in a path homotopic to a union of paths whose lengths are bounded above by C.

Hence,

Hence, \hat \Pi_{\mathds{A}^n} \circ\hat s_\infty is a coarse Lipschitz map.

We have \hat \Pi_{\mathds{A}^n} \circ\hat s= {\bf dev}\circ \pi_{\mathbf{U} \hat M} |\mathbf{UC} \hat M by (?). By the fourth item proved above, we obtain a lower bound on the first term of (?) by

for the constant C' for the d_{\tilde N}-parallel homotopy. By Lemma 2.1 of Part 1, {\bf dev} \circ \pi_{\mathbf{U} \hat M} is a quasi-isometric embedding. Hence, we obtain quasi-isometric embedding \hat \Pi_{\mathds{A}^n} \circ\hat s_\infty.

(I) We choose two sequences of points of \mathbf{U} \hat M converging towards the ideal point p and find a sequence of deck transformation pulling back to a fundamental domain: Under \pi_{\mathbf{U} \hat M}, l_y and l_z respectively go to complete geodesics ending at p in the forward direction.

Since {\mathbb V}^{0e}_{\phi_t(y)} are parallel under the flow, A^{0e}_{\phi_t(y)} are independent of t for e=+, -.

Similarly, A^{0e}_{\phi_t(z)} are independent of t for e=+, -.

Choose y_i \in l_y so that y_i = \phi_{t_i}(y), and z_i \in l_z so that z_i = \phi_{t_i}(z) where t_i \rightarrow \infty as i \rightarrow \infty. Denote

We obtain that d_{\mathbf{U} \hat M}(y_i, z_i) < R for a uniform constant R by Lemma 11.75 and Theorem 11.104 of [DK2018] since two bordifications of \hat M agree. Since \hat \Pi \circ \hat s_\infty is d_{\tilde N}-parallelly homotopic to {\bf dev} \circ \pi_{\mathbf{U} \hat M} by Theorem 7.1, we obtain

for a constant R'> 0.

Since M is compact, \gamma_i(y_i) is in a compact fundamental domain F of \mathbf{UC} \hat M for an unbounded sequence \gamma_i, \gamma_i \in \Gamma_M.

\rho'(\gamma_i)(y'_i) is in a compact subset of \mathds{A}^n for y_i' = \pi_{\mathbf{U} \hat M} \circ \hat s_{\infty}(y_i). Choosing a subsequence, we may assume without loss of generality

Since \gamma_i is an isometry of d_{\hat M} = d_{\tilde N}| \hat{M}\times \hat{M}, (?) shows

as i \rightarrow \infty for a constant R'> 0.

Hence, we may assume without loss of generality that

(II) Now we choose the affine subspaces that we need: By Corollary 7.2, neutral affine subspaces A^0_{l_y} and A^0_{l_z} contain \hat \Pi_{\mathds{A}^n}(\hat s_{\infty}(y)) and \hat \Pi_{\mathds{A}^n}(\hat s_{\infty}(z)) in \mathds{A}^n respectively. Since the sequence consisting of the d_{\hat M}-distances between \gamma_i(z_i) and \gamma_i(y_i) for all i is uniformly bounded above,

(?), (?), and (?) imply that the sequence of the d_{\mathcal{AG}_k({\mathbb{R}}^n)}-distances between

is bounded above. Also, the sequence of the d_{\mathcal{AG}_k({\mathbb{R}}^n)}-distances between

is bounded above.

Let \left|\mkern-2mu\left|\cdot\right|\mkern-2mu\right|_E denote the norm of the Euclidean metric d_E on \mathds{A}^n.

(III) We claim that A^{0-}_{l_z} is affinely parallel to A^{0-}_{l_y}: Suppose not. Then there is a vector \vec{w} at z parallel to A^{0-}_{l_z} not parallel to A^{0-}_{l_y}. Then \vec{w} has a nonzero component \vec{w}_+ in {\mathbb V}^+(y_i) using the decomposition {\mathbb V}_+(y_i) \oplus {\mathbb V}_0(y_i)\oplus {\mathbb V}_-(y_i)) of {\mathbb V}(y_i) at y_i. Working with y_i, we obtain that the sequence of norms under \left|\mkern-2mu\left|\cdot\right|\mkern-2mu\right|_\rho of \rho(\gamma_i)(\vec{w}_+) becomes infinite by the condition (iii)(a) of the partial hyperbolicity in Definition 1.1 of Part 1. Since \gamma_i(y_i) is in a compact fundamental domain F of \mathbf{UC} \hat M, \left|\mkern-2mu\left|\cdot\right|\mkern-2mu\right|_\rho is uniformly equivalent to the Euclidean norm \left|\mkern-2mu\left|\cdot\right|\mkern-2mu\right|_E associated with d_E. Hence,

Moreover, by the domination condition (iii)(c) in Definition 1.1 of Part 1, we obtain that the sequence of directions of \rho(\gamma_i)(\vec{w}) converges to that of \rho(\gamma_i)(\vec{w}_+) of {\mathbb V}_+(y_\infty) under \left|\mkern-2mu\left|\cdot\right|\mkern-2mu\right|_E up to a choice of a subsequence.

Also,

Suppose not. We work with y_i, and the sequence of the images of any nonzero vector \vec{v} in the intersection under \rho(\gamma_i) cannot dominate that of \vec{w}_+ as described in (iii)(c) of Definition 1.1. The sequence of \left|\mkern-2mu\left|\cdot\right|\mkern-2mu\right|_E-norms of the images of \vec{w} under \rho(\gamma_i) is compatible with that of \vec{w}_+ again by the same condition. The sequence of \left|\mkern-2mu\left|\cdot\right|\mkern-2mu\right|_E-norms of the images under \rho(\gamma_i) of \vec{v} in {\mathbb V}_+(z_i) cannot dominate those of \vec{w}. This is absurd since \vec{w} \in {\mathbb V}^{0-}(z_i).

Hence, every nonzero vector \vec{w'} in {\mathbb V}_+(z_i) has a nonzero component parallel to {\mathbb V}_+(y_i) under the decomposition {\mathbb V}_+(y_i) \oplus {\mathbb V}_0(y_i) \oplus {\mathbb V}_-(y_i).

Since \dim {\mathbb V}_+(z_i) = \dim {\mathbb V}_+(y_i), we can find a vector \vec{w}' in {\mathbb V}_+(z_i) with the nonzero component equal to the above vector \vec{w}_+ in {\mathbb V}_+(y_i) by (?). Hence, the sequence of angles between directions of \rho(\gamma_i)(\vec{w}') and directions of \rho(\gamma_i)(\vec{w}_+) goes to zero as i \to \infty by the condition (iii)(c) of Definition 1.1 of Part 1.

The sequence of angles between \rho(\gamma_i)(A^{0-}_{l_z}) containing z'_i and \rho(\gamma_i)({\mathbb V}^+(z_i)) over z'_i converges to zero as i \to \infty by the conclusion of the above paragraph and the fourth paragraph above. This contradicts our partial hyperbolic condition (Definition 1.1 of Part 1) since \{\gamma_i(z_i)\} is convergent to a point of \mathbf{UC} \hat M and the angle between independent C^0-subbundles over a compact manifold has a positive lower bound.

(IV) Finally, we show that A^{0-}_{l_z} = A^{0-}_{l_y}: Suppose not. Let \vec{v} denote the vector in the direction of {\mathbb V}_+(y_i) going from parallel affine subspaces A^{0-}_{l_y} to A^{0-}_{l_z}. This vector is independent of y_i since A^{0-}_{y_i} is parallel to A^{0-}_{l_z} = A^{0-}_{z_i}. Then for the linear part A_{\gamma_i} of the affine transformation \gamma_i, it follows that

by the two paragraphs ago.

Since A^{0-}_{\gamma_i(y_i)} = \rho'(\gamma_i)(A^{0-}_{l_y}) is fixed under \gamma_i, and A^{0-}_{\gamma_i(z_i)} = \rho'(\gamma_i)(A^{0-}_{l_z}), we have

for sufficiently large i for every compact subset K of \hat M. This is a contradiction to the sentence containing (?).

We can consider {\bf dev} an isometry of d_{\hat M} to d_{\tilde N}. We identify \hat M with itself in \mathds{A}^n by {\bf dev}. So {\bf dev} is the inclusion map for this proof.

We obtain \pi_{\mathbf{U} \hat M} = \hat \Pi_{\mathds{A}^n} \circ s, and that \hat \Pi_{\mathds{A}^n} \circ s: \mathbf{U} \hat M \rightarrow \hat M is a quasi-isometry by Lemma 2.1 of Part 1. The image \hat \Pi_{\mathds{A}^n}\circ s(\mathcal{R}_p) = \pi_{\mathbf{U}\hat M}(\mathcal{R}_p) in \hat M is C-dense by Theorem 6.9 for C> 0.

Let X_p denote \pi_{\mathbf{U} \hat M} (\mathcal{R}_p). The map \pi_{\mathbf{U} \hat M}: {\mathcal{R}}_p \rightarrow X_p is a quasi-isometry since each fiber for each x \in \hat M is a uniformly bounded set in \mathbf{U}_x \hat M with metrics d_{\mathbf{U} \hat M} and d_{\mathds{A^n}}.

By Proposition 7.3, A^{0-}_y = A^{0-}_z for every y, z \in \mathbf{UC} \hat M. We choose one A^{0-}_y. Then under \Pi_{\mathds{A}^n}\circ s_\infty, every l_z goes into A^{0-} for z \in \mathcal{R}_p by Proposition 7.3.

This fact shows that there is a map \Pi_{\mathds{A}^n}\circ s_\infty : \mathcal{R}_p \rightarrow A^{0}_y is a quasi-isometric embedding with respect to d_{\mathbf{U} \hat M} and d_{A^{0-}_y} by Theorem 7.1. Define a quasi-isometric embedding f: X_p \rightarrow \mathds{A}^{0-}_y by taking a possibly discontinuous section of \Pi_{\mathbf{U} \hat M} and post-composing with the above map.

Now, X_p with the restricted metric of d_{\tilde N} is quasi-isometric to \hat M by Corollary 8.13 of [DK2018] and Theorem 6.9. There is the coarse inverse map \hat M \rightarrow X_p to the inclusion map X_p \rightarrow \hat M. Composing f with this map, we obtain a quasi-isometric embedding \hat M \rightarrow A^{0-}_y.

Since \hat M is quasi-isometric with an orbit of \pi_1(N), this follows.

We simply extend f over each cell using the uniform contractibility as indicated in [BW93] starting from 0-cells and then to 1-cells and so on. Here, we do need the boundedness of the diameters of each cell to obtain the bounded distance.