2010
DOI: 10.1007/s00208-010-0621-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A case of the dynamical Mordell–Lang conjecture

Abstract: We prove a special case of a dynamical analogue of the classical Mordell-Lang conjecture. Specifically, let ϕ be a rational function with no periodic critical points other than those that are totally invariant, and consider the diagonal action of ϕ on (P 1 ) g . If the coefficients of ϕ are algebraic, we show that the orbit of a point outside the union of the proper preperiodic subvarieties of (P 1 ) g has only finite intersection with any curve contained in (P 1 ) g . We also show that our result holds for in… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

0
34
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

4
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
0
34
0
Order By: Relevance
“…(see [4,5,13,23]). In almost all known ramified cases, Φ is given by the coordinatewise action through one-variable rational maps on (P 1 ) m , i.e.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(see [4,5,13,23]). In almost all known ramified cases, Φ is given by the coordinatewise action through one-variable rational maps on (P 1 ) m , i.e.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This project originated in the summer of 2009, when four of the authors (R.B., D.G., P.K., and T.T.) were working to extend their results from [BGKT11] to other cases of the Dynamical Mordell-Lang Conjecture. At that time, T.S.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…for an arbitrary variety V ⊆ C 2 and a sufficiently large integer N ≥ 1. For a fixed t and the diagonal case n = m, this is of the same flavour as the uniform dynamical Mordell-Lang conjecture, which, for a fixed (t 1 , t 2 ) ∈ C 2 asserts that the iterates n, m ≥ 1 such that f (n) (t 1 ), g (m) (t 2 ) ∈ V , see [3,16,17] and references therein, lie in finitely many arithmetic progressions (which number does not depend on t 1 , t 2 ).…”
Section: Proof Of Theorem 15 We Definementioning
confidence: 88%