We consider a system of four one-dimensional inelastic hard spheres evolving on the real line \mathbb{R}, and colliding according to a scattering law characterized by a fixed restitution coefficient r. We study the possible orders of collisions when the inelastic collapse occurs, relying on the so-called \mathfrak{b}-to-\mathfrak{b} mapping, a two-dimensional dynamical system associated to the original particle system which encodes all the possible collision orders. We prove that the \mathfrak{b}-to-\mathfrak{b} mapping is a piecewise projective transformation, which allows one to perform efficient numerical simulations of its orbits. We recover previously known results concerning the one-dimensional four-particle inelastic hard sphere system and we support the conjectures stated in the literature concerning particular periodic orbits. We discover three new families of periodic orbits that coexist depending on the restitution coefficient, we prove rigorously that there exist stable periodic orbits for the \mathfrak{b}-to-\mathfrak{b} mapping for restitution coefficients larger than the upper bounds previously known, and we prove the existence of quasi-periodic orbits for this mapping.
We will denote the transpose of a vector x of \mathbb{R}^d, and more generally, of any matrix M \in \mathcal{M}_{n\times m}(\mathbb{R}), by:
Let u \in \mathbb{S}^2. We define \widehat{\mathfrak{P}}(u)=u' \in \mathbb{S}^2, where u' is computed according to the following algorithm.
If u \cdot e_x < 0, replace u by -u. If not, skip this step.
Define the value of the variable contact to be \mathfrak{b}.
If \text{contact} = \mathfrak{a}, then:
Define p, q and v as:
If q \cdot v > 0, update the variable \text{contact} = \mathfrak{b}, and compute:
If instead q \cdot v < 0, update the variable \text{contact} = \mathfrak{c}, and compute:
If \text{contact} = \mathfrak{b}, then:
Define p, q and v as:
If q \cdot v > 0, update the variable \text{contact} = \mathfrak{c}, and compute:
If instead q \cdot v < 0, update the variable \text{contact} = \mathfrak{a}, and compute:
If \text{contact} = \mathfrak{c}, then:
Define p, q and v as:
If q \cdot v > 0, update the variable \text{contact} = \mathfrak{a}, and compute:
If instead q \cdot v < 0, update the variable \text{contact} = \mathfrak{b}, and compute:
Compute u' = q' \wedge p'. Replace u by u'.
If \text{contact} = \mathfrak{b}, stop the algorithm and return u' as the result of the algorithm.
If not, repeat the algorithm starting from step 3.
In the end, the different dimensional reductions we presented in this section allow to study the possible orders of collisions using a 2-dimensional dynamical system.
It is important to emphasize that, given any plane \mathcal{P} = \text{Span}\big[\omega,\sigma\big], it is always possible to compute its image by the mapping \widehat{\mathfrak{P}}. This is an important difference with respect to the original particle system, for which some configurations of particles are such that no collision will take place in the future. On the contrary, as it can be seen with the construction that we just sketched, one can always consider infinitely many iterations of the mapping \widehat{\mathfrak{P}}, so that the dynamical system given by (?) is properly defined.
It is also important to remark that we considered the \mathfrak{b}-to-\mathfrak{b} mapping in order to define \widehat{\mathfrak{P}}. Although in the original particle system an infinite number of collisions implies always that there will be also infinitely many collisions of type \mathfrak{b}, it is less clear that such a property holds also for the iteration we constructed on the planes \text{Span}\big[p(t_k),q(t_k)\big]. The property holds nevertheless for this iteration (see Proposition 4.5 and Corollary 4.6 in [DoHR025]): after a collision of type \mathfrak{b} follows necessarily one of the consecutive sequences of collisions \mathfrak{ab}, \mathfrak{cb}, \mathfrak{acb} or \mathfrak{cab}, so that \widehat{\mathfrak{P}} is indeed properly defined.
Observe that we do not need to assume u_3 \leq 0, u_1 \geq 0, because u and -u define the same initial plane \mathcal{P}(0). Nevertheless, in order to have a better intuition on the action of the mapping and to stay close to the action on the original position and velocity variables, it is always easier to consider u_3 \leq 0, u_1 \geq 0.
Concerning the case of the triple collisions that we want to avoid, which induces the restriction u_1 \neq 0, u_3 \neq 0, we will see that we will be able to define anyway the mapping \widehat{\mathfrak{P}} also in the “pathological” situations u_1 = 0 or u_3 = 0. This will have the advantage to extend the definition of \widehat{\mathfrak{P}} on a compact subset of the sphere \mathbb{S}^2.
We define the domain of the \mathfrak{b}-to-\mathfrak{b} mapping \widehat{\mathfrak{P}} as the subset, denoted by X, of the two-dimensional unit sphere \mathbb{S}^2 defined as:
Let X\subset \mathbb{R}^3 be defined in (3.2). Then the \mathfrak{b}-to-\mathfrak{b} mapping \widehat{\mathfrak{P}}:X \to \mathbb{S}^2 introduced in Definition 2.1, defined on X, coincides almost everywhere with a piecewise projective linear transformation, whose associated piecewise linear transformation \mathfrak{P} is given by:
with the matrices P_1, P_2, P_3 and P_4 respectively defined as:
The case when x < 0, z > 0 is treated by symmetry, defining \mathfrak{P}(u) = -\mathfrak{P}\big(-u\big), where \mathfrak{P}\big(-u\big) is defined in (3.3).
In other words, we have:
Given the symmetries of the system, we focus on the configurations for which x > 0, z < 0, and y > 0. The case y < 0 is deduced by considering the transformation \mathbb{R}^3 \supset X \ni \hspace{0.5mm}^t\hspace{-0.25mm} (x,y,z) \rightarrow \hspace{0.5mm}^t\hspace{-0.25mm} (-z,-y,-x).
We assume first that y>0 and \alpha y-x>0, where \alpha is defined in (?). The meaning of the condition on \alpha y -x will become clear after the computation of the first collision. We denote by u(0) = \hspace{0.5mm}^t\hspace{-0.25mm} (x,y,z) \in X the vector normal to the plane \mathcal{P}(0) describing the initial configuration of the system. After the initial configuration, corresponding to the case when a collision of type \mathfrak{b} just took place, the condition y > 0 implies that the next collision is of type \mathfrak{a}. Indeed, the vector of the initial positions p(0) is colinear to:
(observe that the assumptions x,-z > 0 are such that the entries of u(0)\wedge e_y are positive, in agreement with the fact that this vector represents relative distances between the particles). The vector q(0) of the initial relative velocities normal to u(0) is then:
(observe that the second entry of q(0) is always positive, implying that the pair (char) 2;-(char) 3; is separating). We prove now the following statement. When evolving on the intersection between the unit sphere and the plane \mathcal{P}(0) normal to u(0), the first plane that is intersected between \{x = 0\} and \{z = 0\} is determined by the scalar product between q(0) and the vector v(0) = u(0) - \big(u(0)\cdot e_y\big)e_y = \hspace{0.5mm}^t\hspace{-0.25mm} (x,0,z).
To see that the next collision is determined by the sign of q(0)\cdot v(0), for \lambda > 0 we consider the line t \mapsto p(0) + \big(q(0) - \lambda p(0)\big) t. The term -\lambda p(0) ensures that the velocity reaches at least one of the two planes \{x = 0\} or \{z = 0\} in finite positive time (and the choice of \lambda plays no role in determining the next collisions that take place, according to Theorem 4.1 in [DoHR025]). The line intersects the planes \{x = 0\} and \{z = 0\}, respectively at times t_x and t_z given by:
so that in the case when y > 0, t_x is always positive, while t_z might have both signs. More precisely, if \lambda < y(-z)/x, t_z < 0, and t_z > 0 if \lambda > y(-z)/x. For \lambda > 0 small enough, relying on Theorem 4.1 in [DoHR025], we clearly see that only collision takes place in the future, which has to be of type \mathfrak{a}. To see that the first collision to take place is necessarily of this type, without relying on the result of [DoHR025], we compute:
The denominator is a quadratic polynomial in \lambda, whose discriminant is the perfect square y^2\big(x^2+z^2\big)^2. Observing in addition that this polynomial vanishes at \lambda = y(-z)/x and that its derivative is negative at this point, we deduce that the polynomial has no root larger than y(-z)/x, proving that t_x < t_z in the case when t_z is positive. In summary, if y > 0, then 0 < t_x < t_z or t_z < 0 < t_x, and conversely if y < 0, then 0 < t_z < t_x or t_x < 0 < t_z. In other words, the next collision to take place is of type \mathfrak{a} when y > 0, and of type \mathfrak{c} when y < 0.
Besides, since we have:
we deduce that a collision of type \mathfrak{c} follows if q(0)\cdot v(0) > 0, and \mathfrak{a} follows if q(0)\cdot v(0) < 0.
We compute then the normal vector u_\mathfrak{a}(1) to the plane \mathcal{P}_\mathfrak{a}(1) = \text{Span}\big[p_\mathfrak{a}(1),q_\mathfrak{a}(1)\big] when the first collision takes place. It is colinear to:
where A is the first matrix given in (?). We have:
Hence,
which is colinear to the following vector, that we denote by u_\mathfrak{a}(1):
Turning now to the second collision, we rely on the same arguments we used for the first collision, and we determine its type by computing the scalar product q(1)\cdot v(1) = \big(p(1)\wedge u_\mathfrak{a}(1)\big) \cdot v(1), with q(1) = p(1) \wedge u_\mathfrak{a}(1), p(1) = u_\mathfrak{a}(1) \wedge e_x and v(1) = u_\mathfrak{a}(1) - \big( u_\mathfrak{a}(1) \cdot e_x \big)e_x. If we have q(1) \cdot v(1) > 0, then the second collision is of type \mathfrak{b}, and if q(1) \cdot v(1) < 0, the second collision is of type \mathfrak{c}. We have:
Therefore, the assumption \alpha y - x > 0 implies that the second collision is of type \mathfrak{b}.
We compute now the normal vector u_\mathfrak{ab}(2) to the plane \mathcal{P}_\mathfrak{ab}(2) = \text{Span}\big[ p_\mathfrak{ab}(2),q_\mathfrak{ab}(2) \big] associated to the configuration of the system after this second collision. u_\mathfrak{ab}(2) is colinear, and has the same orientation as q_\mathfrak{ab}(2) \wedge p_\mathfrak{ab}(2), where:
and
We find then:
which is a vector colinear and with the same orientation as:
Observing that rz(\alpha y + z) - r(y^2 + z^2) = r\alpha yz - ry^2 = ry(\alpha z - y), we can simplify even more and obtain that q_\mathfrak{ab}(2) \wedge p_\mathfrak{ab}(2) is colinear and has the same orientation as the following vector, that we denote by u_\frak{ab}(2):
The expression of (Proof), which describes the configuration of the particle system after the first collision of type \mathfrak{b}, corresponds then to the expression of \mathfrak{P}\big( \hspace{0.5mm}^t\hspace{-0.5mm}(x,y,z)\big), on the subset y > 0, \alpha y - x > 0. Therefore \widehat{\mathfrak{P}}, restricted on this subset, coincides with a projective transformation.
We turn now to the case when y > 0, \alpha y - x < 0. The first assumption implies that the first collision is of type \mathfrak{a}, already studied in the previous case, so that we restart from the normal vector u_\mathfrak{a}(1) to the plane \mathcal{P}_\mathfrak{a} = \text{Span}\big[p_\mathfrak{a}(1),q_\mathfrak{a}(1)\big], given by the expression (Proof). The assumption \alpha y - x < 0 implies this time that the second collision is of type \mathfrak{c}. The configuration of the system right after this second collision is given by the following position and velocity vectors:
and q_\mathfrak{ac}(2) = Cq(1) where q(1) = p(1) \wedge u_\mathfrak{a}(1) was computed in (Proof), so that:
so that:
which is colinear, and has the same direction (keeping in mind that z < 0) as the following vector, that we denote by u_\mathfrak{ac}(2):
We compute now the third collision. We pose:
and we deduce that the third collision, following \mathfrak{a} and \mathfrak{c}, is necessarily of type \mathfrak{b} by computing q(2) \cdot v(2) < 0 with v(2) = u_\mathfrak{ac}(2) - \big(u_\mathfrak{ac} \cdot e_z \big)e_z. We recover here the result of Proposition 4.5 in [DoHR025]. The configuration of the system after this third collision is given by the two vectors:
and
Therefore, the plane spanned by p_\mathfrak{acb}(3) and q_\mathfrak{acb}(3) is normal to:
which is colinear and has the same orientation of the following vector, that we denote by u_\mathfrak{acb}(3):
The configuration described by u_{\mathfrak{acb}}(3) represents the state of the system right after the first collision of type \mathfrak{b} that follows the initial configuration, in the case when y > 0 and \alpha y - x < 0. We have therefore \widehat{\mathfrak{P}}\big(\hspace{0.25mm}^t\hspace{-0.25mm}(x,y,z)\big) = u_\mathfrak{acb}(3) / \vert u_\mathfrak{acb}(3) \vert on this subset, which proves that the restriction of \widehat{\mathfrak{P}} to y > 0, \alpha y - x < 0 is also a projective transformation.
The cases when y < 0 being treated by symmetry, the proof of Theorem 3.3 is complete.
The mapping \mathfrak{P} is a piecewise linear endomorphism of \mathbb{R}^3, restricted to the quadrant x \geq 0, z \leq 0. This linear structure is consistent with what this mapping describes: the argument \hspace{0.5mm}^t\hspace{-0.5mm}(x,y,z) has to be seen as a normal vector to the plane \mathcal{P}(0) spanned by the position and velocity vectors of the configuration of the particle system, and \widehat{\mathfrak{P}} describes how the orientation of the plane \mathcal{P}(0) evolves. Therefore, only the orientation of the normal vector matters, so that any non zero scalar (positive or negative) multiplying the normal vector provides the same plane.
We remark that the region x \geq 0, z \leq 0 is invariant under the action of \mathfrak{P}. Indeed, if we consider the first expression in (3.3), \alpha y - x is assumed to be positive in this region, so that the first component of \mathfrak{P}\big( \hspace{0.25mm}^t\hspace{-0.25mm}(x,y,z) \big) is positive, while the third component is negative as is z by assumption.
In the case of the second expression in (3.3), the conclusion concerning the first component is direct. As for the third component, -r(\alpha y - z) is the sum of two negative numbers. The third and the fourth expressions have the same property.
The mapping \mathfrak{P} is defined almost everywhere on the quadrant \{x \geq 0, z \leq 0\}, namely, for every ^t \hspace{-0.25mm}(x,y,z) \in \{x \geq 0, z \leq 0\} except if x = 0, or if z = 0, or if \alpha y - x = 0, or if \alpha y - z = 0. Nevertheless, we can extend the definition of \mathfrak{P} to the whole quadrant \{x \geq 0, z \leq 0\}, for instance by assuming that \mathfrak{P}(u) = P_2u if \alpha y - x = 0 or \alpha y - z = 0. This extension of the domain to the whole quadrant is arbitrary, and there is no such extension which would correspond to a continuous extension of \mathfrak{P} on the whole quadrant.
If r \in\ ]0,7-4\sqrt{3}], the three eigenvalues \lambda_{P_1,i}, 1 \leq i \leq 3, of the matrix P_1 (defined in (3.3)) are real and given by the expressions:
We have:
If r \in\ ]7-4\sqrt{3},1], only one eigenvalue \lambda_{P_1,1} of P_1 is real, while the two other eigenvalues \lambda_{P_1,i}, i =2,3 are complex conjugated. The eigenvalues are given by the expressions:
and we have:
For any r \in\ ]0,1], the eigenspace associated to \lambda_{P_1,1} is \text{Vect}\{(\alpha,r+1,3\alpha)\}.
If r \in\ ]0,7-4\sqrt{3}], the eigenspaces associated respectively to \lambda_{P_1,i}, i = 2,3, are subsets of the hyperplane \{(x,y,z) \in \mathbb{R}^3\ /\ z=0 \}, which is invariant under the action of P_1, and complementary in \mathbb{R}^3 with the eigenspace associated to \lambda_{P_1,1}. The eigenspaces respectively associated to \lambda_{P_1,2} and \lambda_{P_1,3} are:
If r \in\ ]7-4\sqrt{3},1], the hyperplane \{(x,y,z) \in \mathbb{R}^3\ /\ z=0 \} is invariant under the action of P_1, and complementary in \mathbb{R}^3 with the eigenspace associated to \lambda_{P_1,1}, and P_1 restricted to this hyperplane writes:
in the basis \big(\mathfrak{Re}(u_2),\mathfrak{Im}(u_2)\big), where u_2 is an eigenvector associated to the eigenvalue \lambda_{P_1,2}.
The characteristic polynomial of the matrix P_1 is \chi_{P_1}(\lambda) = (\lambda - r^2) \big[ \lambda^2 + (2r-\alpha^2) \lambda + r^2 \big], and its determinant is \det(P_1) = r^4.
Therefore, \lambda_{P_1,1} = r^2 is an eigenvalue of P_1, associated to the one-dimensional eigenspace \text{Vect}\{(\alpha,r+1,3\alpha)\} given by the intersection of the two hyperplanes E_1 = \{(x,y,z) \in \mathbb{R}^3\ /\ (r+1)x = \alpha y\} and E_2 = \{(x,y,z) \in \mathbb{R}^3\ /\ \alpha x + (r^2+r-\alpha^2) y - r \alpha z = 0\}. Besides, the hyperplane E_3 = \{(x,y,z) \in \mathbb{R}^3\ /\ z=0 \} is invariant under the action of P_1. Since r \neq 0, the intersection between the three planes E_1 \cap E_2 \cap E_3 is reduced to \{0\}, and so the action of P_1 on \mathbb{R}^3 can be decomposed into its action, on the one hand, on the invariant line E_1 \cap E_2 (associated to the eigenvalue \lambda_{P_1,1} = r^2), and on the other hand on invariant hyperplane E_3 (associated to the two other eigenvalues).
The three eigenvalues of P_1 are real if and only if the discriminant \Delta_{P_1} of \lambda^2 + (2r-\alpha^2) \lambda + r^2 is non-negative. Since we have:
the two roots of r^2 - 14r + 1 are 7 \pm 4\sqrt{3}, and only 7 - 4\sqrt{3} \simeq 0.0718 belongs to [0,1]. The three eigenvalues of P_1 are then real if and only if r \leq 7-4\sqrt{3}. In this case, the eigenvalues different from \lambda_{P_1,1} = r^2 are:
We will denote by \lambda_{P_1,3} the eigenvalue obtained when \mp = +. In the case when \lambda_{P_1,i}, i =2,3, are real, we have 0 \leq r^2 \leq \lambda_{P_1,i} for any r \in [-1,7-4\sqrt{3}], with equality only if r=0 or r=-1. Therefore:
so that \lambda_{P_1,3} is the dominating eigenvalue for any r \in\ ]0,7-4\sqrt{3}].
In the case when the eigenvalues \lambda_{P_1,i} (i = 2,3) are complex, relying on the determinant of P_1 we have \vert \lambda_{P_1,i} \vert = r, so that \lambda_{P_1,i}, i =2,3, are the dominating eigenvalues in the case when r \in\ ]7-4\sqrt{3},1].
The critical restitution coefficient for which all the eigenvalues of P_1 are real coincides with the critical upper bound on the restitution coefficient for which the collapse of three particles is possible and stable ([CoGM995], [CDKK999]). This is consistent with the fact that the matrix P_1 describes the consecutive collisions \mathfrak{ab} in the particle system. Since the dominating eigenvalue is real only if r \leq 7-4\sqrt{3}, we deduce that this condition is equivalent to the existence of a stable fixed point of the mapping \varphi_1 corresponding to the action of P_1 on the unit sphere \mathbb{S}^2.
If r \in\ ]0,3-2\sqrt{2}], the three eigenvalues \lambda_{P_2,i}, 1 \leq i \leq 3, of the matrix P_2 (defined in (3.3)) are real and given by the expressions:
We have:
If r \in\ ]3-2\sqrt{2},1], only one eigenvalue \lambda_{P_2,1} of P_2 is real, while the two other eigenvalues \lambda_{P_2,i}, i =2,3 are complex conjugated. The eigenvalues are given by the expressions:
and we have:
For any r \in\ ]0,1], the eigenspace associated to \lambda_{P_2,1} is \text{Vect}\{(1,0,-1)\}.
If r \in\ ]0,3-2\sqrt{2}], the eigenspaces associated respectively to \lambda_{P_2,i}, i = 2,3, are subsets of the hyperplane \{(x,y,z) \in \mathbb{R}^3\ /\ x = z \}, which is invariant under the action of P_2, and orthogonal in \mathbb{R}^3 with the eigenspace associated to \lambda_{P_2,1}. The eigenspaces respectively associated to \lambda_{P_2,2} and \lambda_{P_2,3} are:
If r \in\ ]3-2\sqrt{2},1], the hyperplane \{(x,y,z) \in \mathbb{R}^3\ /\ x = z \} is invariant under the action of P_2, and orthogonal in \mathbb{R}^3 with the eigenspace associated to \lambda_{P_2,1}, and P_2 restricted to this hyperplane writes:
in the basis \big(\mathfrak{Re}(u_2),\mathfrak{Im}(u_2)\big), where u_2 is an eigenvector associated to the eigenvalue \lambda_{P_2,2}.
The characteristic polynomial of the matrix P_2 is \chi_{P_2}(\lambda) = (\lambda - r) \big[ \lambda^2 + (2\alpha^2 - 2r) \lambda + r^2 \big], and its determinant is \det(P_2) = r^3. \lambda_{P_2,1} = r is an eigenvalue of P_2, associated to the one-dimensional eigenspace E_4 = \text{Vect}\{(1,0,-1)\}. In addition, the hyperplane E_5 = \{(x,y,z) \in \mathbb{R}^3\ /\ x=z \} is invariant under the action of P_2. In addition, E_4 and E_5 are orthogonal.
The eigenvalues of P_2 are all real if and only if the discriminant \Delta_{P_2} of \lambda^2 + (2\alpha^2 - 2r)\lambda + r^2 is non-negative. We have here:
the two roots of r^2 - 6r + 1 are 3 \pm 2\sqrt{2}, and only 3 - 2\sqrt{2} \simeq 0.1716 belongs to [0,1]. Therefore, the three eigenvalues of P_2 are real if and only if r \leq 3 - 2\sqrt{2}. In this case, the eigenvalues different from \lambda_{P_2,1} = r are:
We will denote by \lambda_{P_2,2} the eigenvalue obtained when \pm = +, and by \lambda_{P_2,3} the eigenvalue obtained when \pm = -. Since r \neq 0, r-\alpha^2 = -\frac{1}{4}(1-r)^2 \leq 0 and (r - \alpha^2)^2 > \alpha^2(\alpha^2 - 2r), we deduce that \lambda_{P_2,i} < 0 for i = 2,3. Writing in addition the eigenvalues as:
we deduce \vert \lambda_{P_2,2} \vert \leq \lambda_{P_2,2} \leq \vert \lambda_{P_2,3} \vert.
In the case when r > 3 - 2\sqrt{2}, since \lambda_{P_2,1} = r, the determinant of P_2 allows to deduce that the three eigenvalues have the same modulus, equal to r.
It is interesting to observe that the critical restitution coefficient for which all the eigenvalues of P_2 are real coincides with the upper bound for the restitution coefficients associated to the stable periodic pattern of collision \mathfrak{ababcbcb}, which is also the upper bound of the restitution coefficients associated to any of the stable periodic patterns that were observed in [CDKK999].
Let \lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom} be the dominating eigenvalue of the matrix J P_2 P_3 P_1, always real for any 0 \leq r \leq 1, and let u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} be its associated eigenvector . Let r_{\text{crit},132^J} be the only root in ]0,1[ of the equation:
so that we have:
Then, for any r \in\ ]r_{\text{crit},132^J},1[, there exists a single point in the domain of \widehat{\mathfrak{P}}_r which generates the periodic orbit 132312 and this orbit is locally stable. This point is given by u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} / \vert u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} \vert.
The characteristic polynomial \chi_{\widetilde{P}_{132^J}} of the reduced collision matrix \widetilde{P}_{132^J} = J P_2 P_3 P_1 (with J defined in (?)) is given by the expression:
The eigenvalues of the collision matrix \widetilde{P}_{132^J} are plotted on Figure ? when they are real, as well as their respective moduli on Figure ? in the case when they are real or complex.
The discriminant of the characteristic polynomial, denoted by \Delta_{\chi_{\widetilde{P}_{132^J}}}, is itself a polynomial in the restitution coefficient r, and is given by the expression:
The discriminant \Delta_{\chi_{\widetilde{P}_{132^J}}} cancels clearly for r = -1, 0 and 1, so that for such values the characteristic polynomial \chi_{\widetilde{P}_{132^J}} has a root with a multiplicity at least 2. In addition, the discriminant has one single other real root r_{\Delta,132^J} in ]0,1[, that can be approximated as:
For 0 < r < r_{\Delta,132^J}, we have \Delta_{\chi_{\widetilde{P}_{132^J}}}(r) < 0, indicating that the characteristic polynomial \chi_{\widetilde{P}_{132^J}} has three distinct real roots, while \Delta_{\chi_{\widetilde{P}_{132^J}}}(r) > 0 for r_{\Delta,132^J} < r <1, so that in this case \chi_{\widetilde{P}_{132^J}} has one single real root, and two complex conjugated roots. For 0 < r < 1, all the roots of the characteristic polynomial, when real, are negative. In addition, the only eigenvalue that remains real for any 0 < r < 1, that we denote by \lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}, is dominating the two other eigenvalues, both in the cases when they are real, or complex (see Figure ?). We observe that it is possible to give an explicit expression of \lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom} relying on Cardano’s cubic formula.
We choose now the eigenvector u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} associated to the dominating eigenvalue \lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom} such that \big(u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}}\big)_x =~1, which can always be done except for r_{\text{crit},132^J,1}, with:
in which case the first component of the eigenvector is zero. On Figures ?-?, we always highlight the critical value r_{\text{crit},132^J,1} of the restitution coefficient, represented as a vertical red line. Under the assumption that \big(u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}}\big)_x =~1, the third component \big(u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}}\big)_z of the eigenvector u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} is plotted for r \in [0,1] on Figure ?, and is negative on [0,1] if and only if r > r_{\text{crit},132^J,1}.
Starting from the initial configuration u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}}, in order to detect if the first block of collisions is \mathfrak{ab}, that is, if \mathfrak{P}\big( u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} \big) = P_1 u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}}, we plot on Figure ? the quantity \alpha \big( u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} \big)_y - \big( u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} \big)_x. We observe in particular that \alpha \big( u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} \big)_y - \big( u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} \big)_x is positive on ]r_{\text{crit},132^J,1},1] if and only if r > r_{\text{crit},132^J,2}, with r_{\text{crit},132^J,2} defined such that:
(where the quantities \alpha and u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} both depend on r), and that we can numerically evaluate as:
Since r_{\text{crit},132^J,2} > r_{\text{crit},132^J,1}, for any r \in\ ]r_{\text{crit},132^J,2},1] the dominating eigenvector u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} belongs to the domain of \mathfrak{P}, and even to the domain in which \mathfrak{P} coincides with P_1.
We turn now to the feasibility inequalities concerning P_1 u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}}. As it can be observed on Figure ?, the second component \big( P_1 u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} \big)_y is always negative for any r \in\ ]r_{\text{crit},132^J,1},1], ensuring that \mathfrak{P} coincides either with P_2 or P_3 when evaluated on P_1 u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}}. In order to distinguish between these two cases, we represent on Figure ? the quantity \alpha \big( P_1 u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} \big)_y - \big( P_1 u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} \big)_z. Since this quantity is negative for any r \in\ ]r_{\text{crit},132^J,1},1], we have: \mathfrak{P}\big( P_1 u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} \big) = P_3 P_1 u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}}.
We turn now to the last feasibility inequalities. In order to have \mathfrak{P}\big( P_3 P_1 u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} \big) = P_2 P_3 P_1 u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}}, we need to have \alpha \big( P_3 P_1 u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} \big)_y - \big( P_3 P_1 u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} \big)_x < 0 and \alpha \big( P_3 P_1 u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} \big)_y - \big( P_3 P_1 u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} \big)_z > 0. We plot respectively on Figures ? and ? the two quantities \alpha \big( P_3 P_1 u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} \big)_y - \big( P_3 P_1 u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} \big)_x and \alpha \big( P_3 P_1 u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} \big)_y - \big( P_3 P_1 u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} \big)_z. We see on Figure ? that \alpha \big( P_3 P_1 u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} \big)_y - \big( P_3 P_1 u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} \big)_x < 0 for any r \in\ ]r_{\text{crit},132^J,1},1]. On the other hand, on Figure ? we see also that \alpha \big( P_3 P_1 u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} \big)_y - \big( P_3 P_1 u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} \big)_z > 0 for any r \in\ ]r_{\text{crit},132^J,1},1].
In the end, for any r \in\ ]r_{\text{crit},132^J,2},1], where r_{\text{crit},132^J,2} is defined in (?), all the feasibility inequalities are fulfilled for the dominating eigenvector u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}}, so that:
and since by definition u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} is an eigenvector of J P_2 P_3 P_1, the feasibility inequalities for the next three iterations of \mathfrak{P} are fulfilled and we have:
Since u_{\lambda_{132^J}^\text{dom}} is the eigenvector associated to the dominating eigenvalue of J P_2 P_3 P_1, it is also locally stable under the repeated iterations of \mathfrak{P}. The proof of Theorem 7.1 is complete.
Below r_{\text{crit},132^J}, approximately given by (7.1), the periodic orbit 132312 cannot be stable. The existence of such an unstable orbit can be studied by investigating the feasibility inequalities of the eigenvectors that are associated with the eigenvalues of J P_2 P_3 P_1 that are not dominating.
The result of Theorem 7.1 is consistent with the numerical simulations recorded in Table ?. Indeed, the periodic pattern 132312 is not observed for r below 0.24, but is observed for any r \geq 0.24. The fact that 132312 was not observed for r = 0.23 in Table 7.1 can be explained by the fact that the basin of attraction of the periodic orbit might be relatively small compared to the other orbits that were detected for this particular restitution coefficient.
Let r \in\ ]0,1[ be any restitution coefficient.
Then, there exists no point in the domain of \widehat{\mathfrak{P}}_r which generates the periodic orbit 13223122 in a stable manner.
In the case of the collision pattern 13223122, which is also palindromic, we study the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of the matrix \widetilde{P}_{1322^J} = J P_2 P_2 P_3 P_1 (with J defined in (?)). The characteristic polynomial \chi_{\widetilde{P}_{1322^J}} of \widetilde{P}_{1322^J} is:
We plot the eigenvalues of \widetilde{P}_{1322^J} for r \in [0,1] in the case when they are real on Figures ? and ?. We also plot the moduli of the three eigenvalues on Figures ? and ?.
The discriminant \Delta_{\chi_{\widetilde{P}_{1322^J}}} of the characteristic polynomial \chi_{\widetilde{P}_{1322^J}} is:
with
Q_{\Delta_{1322^J}} has one single real root r_{\Delta,1322^J} in ]0,1[, which satisfies:
Since \Delta_{\chi_{\widetilde{P}_{1322^J}}}(r) < 0 for any r \in\ ]0,r_{\Delta,1322^J}[ and \Delta_{\chi_{\widetilde{P}_{1322^J}}}(r) > 0 for any r \in\ ]r_{\Delta,1322^J},1[, the characteristic polynomial \chi_{\widetilde{P}_{1322^J}} has three distinct real roots if r < r_{\Delta,1322^J}, and one single real root and two complex conjugated roots if r > r_{\Delta,1322^J}.
According to the discussion at the beginning of Section ? concerning the feasibility inequalities for palindromic collision sequences, a stable periodic orbit, with period 13223122, corresponds necessarily to a dominating eigenvector of the reduced collision matrix \widetilde{P}_{1322^J}, and such an eigenvector has necessarily to be associated to a negative eigenvalue. Considering Figures ? and ?, we denote by \lambda^\text{real}_{1322^J} the only root of the characteristic polynomial \chi_{\widetilde{P}_{1322^J}} which is real for any value of r. \lambda^\text{real}_{1322^J} is always negative, but contrary to the case of the pattern 132312, such an eigenvalue is not always dominating (see Figures ? and ?). More precisely, since the two other roots \lambda^j_{1322^J}, 2 \leq j \leq 3, are positive for any r \in\ ]0,r_{\Delta,1322^J}[, we can determine the restitution coefficient for which \lambda^\text{real}_{1322^J} = - \lambda^j_{1322^J} by determining when the characteristic polynomial of \big( \widetilde{P}_{1322^J} \big)^2 has a double root (since the eigenvalues of \big( \widetilde{P}_{1322^J} \big)^2 are the squares of the eigenvalues of \widetilde{P}_{1322^J}). There is only one real root of the discriminant of the characteristic polynomial of \big( \widetilde{P}_{1322^J} \big)^2 in ]0,r_{\Delta,1322^J}[, that we denote by r_{\text{crit},1322^J,1}, and which is approximately equal to:
The determinant of \widetilde{P}_{1322^J} is equal to -r^{14}. Therefore, in the case when the eigenvalues \lambda^j_{1322^J} are complex conjugated, they have the same modulus, and so the real eigenvalue \lambda^\text{real}_{1322^J} has the same modulus as the complex eigenvalues when r solves the equation:
Equation (?) has one single real root r_{\text{crit},1322^J,2} \in\ ]r_{\text{crit},1322^J,1},1[, such that:
Therefore, for restitution coefficients r \in\ ]0,1[, the dominating eigenvalue of \widetilde{P}_{1322^J} is real and negative if and only if r_{\text{crit},1322^J,1} < r < r_{\text{crit},1322^J,2}. We will emphasize the two critical values r_{\text{crit},1322^J,1} and r_{\text{crit},1322^J,2} on Figures ? and ? when dealing with the feasibility inequalities associated to the period 13223122. They will be represented as dashed red vertical lines.
Turning to these feasibility inequalities, we consider the eigenvector u_{\lambda^\text{real}_{1322^J}} associated to the eigenvalue \lambda^\text{real}_{1322^J} (the dominating eigenvalue if r \in\ ]r_{\text{crit},1322^J,1},r_{\text{crit},1322^J,2}[) such that \big( u_{\lambda^\text{real}_{1322^J}} \big)_x = 1, which is always possible except for r = r_{\text{crit},1322^J,3}, which is such that:
in which case we have necessarily \big( u_{\lambda^\text{real}_{1322^J}} \big)_x = 0. This critical value will be represented on Figures ?-? as a solid red vertical line.
On Figure ?, we start with plotting the third component \big( u_{\lambda^\text{real}_{1322^J}} \big)_z, which has to be negative in order to have that u_{\lambda^\text{real}_{1322^J}} belongs to the quadrant \{x \geq 0, z \leq 0\}, which is the domain of \mathfrak{P}. On ]r_{\text{crit},1322^J,1},r_{\text{crit},1322^J,2}[, the third component vanishes only once, at r_{\text{crit},1322^J,4} that is approximately given by:
Therefore, on ]r_{\text{crit},1322^J,1},r_{\text{crit},1322^J,2}[, \big( u_{\lambda^\text{real}_{1322^J}} \big)_z < 0 if and only if r \in\ ]r_{\text{crit},1322^J,4},r_{\text{crit},1322^J,2}[. We plot now the quantity \alpha \big( u_{\lambda^\text{real}_{1322^J}} \big)_y - \big( u_{\lambda^\text{real}_{1322^J}} \big)_x on Figure ?, which, when positive, ensures that \mathfrak{P}\big( u_{\lambda^\text{real}_{1322^J}} \big) = P_1 u_{\lambda^\text{real}_{1322^J}}. This quantity vanishes only once on ]r_{\text{crit},1322^J,1},r_{\text{crit},1322^J,2}[, at r_{\text{crit},1322^J,5}, approximately given by:
We deduce then that \alpha \big( u_{\lambda^\text{real}_{1322^J}} \big)_y - \big( u_{\lambda^\text{real}_{1322^J}} \big)_x is positive on ]r_{\text{crit},1322^J,1},r_{\text{crit},1322^J,2}[ if and only if r < r_{\text{crit},1322^J,5}.
We now show that r_{\text{crit},1322^J,4} = r_{\text{crit},1322^J,5}, which implies that the periodic pattern 13223122 cannot take place starting from the eigenvector u_{\lambda^\text{real}_{1322^J}} associated to the negative eigenvalue \lambda^\text{real}_{1322^J}, at least when such an eigenvalue is dominating. To do so, we will determine two conditions for which the vector u_\alpha = \hspace{0.5mm}^t\hspace{-0.25mm} (\alpha,1,0) is an eigenvector of the reduced collision matrix \widetilde{P}_{1322^J}.
On the one hand, u_\alpha is an eigenvector of the reduced collision matrix \widetilde{P}_{1322^J} only if \alpha \big( \widetilde{P}_{1322^J} u_\alpha \big)_y = \big( \widetilde{P}_{1322^J} u_\alpha \big)_x. This condition can be written in terms of the following polynomial equation on the restitution coefficient r:
On the other hand, u_\alpha is an eigenvector of the reduced collision matrix \widetilde{P}_{1322^J} only if \big( \widetilde{P}_{1322^J} u_\alpha \big)_z = 0. This condition can also be written as a polynomial equation on r, which reads:
As a side comment, we observe that the polynomial r^2 - 6r + 1 is also a factor of Q_{\Delta_{1322^J}}, involved in the discriminant of the characteristic polynomial of \widetilde{P}_{1322^J}.
The two conditions Q_{1322^J,1}(r) = 0 and Q_{1322^J,2}(r) = 0 are necessary and sufficient to ensure that u_\alpha is an eigenvector of \widetilde{P}_{1322^J}. On ]0,1[, each of these two conditions is fulfilled for the same restitution coefficient, which is 3-2\sqrt{2} \simeq 0.1716, and there is no other solution on ]0,1[. Therefore, for this particular choice of r, u_\alpha is indeed an eigenvector of \widetilde{P}_{1322^J}, and a direct computation shows that \big( \widetilde{P}_{1322^J} u_\alpha \big)_x < 0, so that u_\alpha is actually an eigenvector associated to the only eigenvalue of \widetilde{P}_{1322^J} which is real for any r. u_\alpha is therefore an eigenvector associated to the dominating eigenvalue. Since for r = 3-2\sqrt{2}, u_\alpha is such that \big( u_\alpha \big)_z = 0 on the one hand, and such that \alpha \big( u_\alpha \big)_y - \big( u_\alpha \big)_x = 0 on the other hand, by uniqueness of the roots of the feasibility inequalities we deduce that:
In the end, on the one hand, we need to have r > r_{\text{crit},1322^J,4} = 3 - 2\sqrt{2} in order to fulfill the first feasibility inequality \big( u_{\lambda^\text{real}_{1322^J}} \big)_z < 0. On the other hand, we need to have r < r_{\text{crit},1322^J,5} = 3 - 2\sqrt{2} in order to fulfill the second feasibility inequality \alpha \big( u_{\lambda^\text{real}_{1322^J}} \big)_y - \big( u_{\lambda^\text{real}_{1322^J}} \big)_x > 0. We deduce that there exists no value of the restitution coefficient r for which the periodic orbit 13223122 can be realized in a stable manner for the dynamical system \big(\widehat{\mathfrak{P}}_r^n \big)_n. The proof of Theorem 7.3 is complete.
The result of Theorem 7.3 is a negative result. The fact that the periodic pattern 13223122 can never be realized in a stable manner is consistent with the results of the numerical simulations presented in Section ?, since this pattern was never observed. Indeed, a periodic orbit that has a basin of attraction of zero Lebesgue measure cannot be observed in numerical simulations.
In order to determine if the period 13223122 can be realized in an unstable manner, it would be necessary to investigate for r \in\ ]0,1[ the feasibility inequalities related to the eigenvector of \widetilde{P}_{1322^J} = J P_2 P_2 P_3 P_1 associated to the eigenvalue that is real for any value of r. Indeed, the other eigenvalues being either positive or complex, they cannot be associated with periodic orbits (either the associated eigenvector is not real-valued, or it cannot fulfill the feasibility inequalities because of the signs of such eigenvalues).
The text on this page is from arXiv:2512.24812v2 by Roberto Castorrini and Théophile Dolmaire, under the licence CC BY 4.0. The corpus made these changes: it read the items out of the LaTeX source, it expanded the macros of the paper, it put each proof after its statement, and it converted the text to HTML. The formulas are the TeX of the paper, and KaTeX renders them. A formula or a reference can look different from the PDF. The page is published under CC BY 4.0.
The record of each item is in analysis/objects/2512/2512.24812.jsonl.