arxiv: v1 [math.mg] 14 Feb 2018

Transcription

1 THE SOUL CONJECTURE IN ALEXANDROV GEOMETRY IN DIMENSION 4 arxiv: v1 [math.mg] 14 Feb 2018 Xiaochun Rong 1 & Yusheng Wang 2 Abstract. In this paper, we prove the Soul Conjecture in Alexandrov geometry in dimension 4, i.e. if X is a complete non-compact 4-dimensional Alexandrov space of non-negative curvature and positive curvature around one point, then a soul of X is a point. 0. Introduction The purpose of this paper is to prove the Soul Conjecture in Alexandrov geometry ([Per1]) in dimension 4. Let s start with some background. In Riemannian geometry, the classical Soul Theorem of Cheeger-Gromoll is ([CG], cf. [GM1]): Theorem 0.1. Let M be a complete non-compact Riemannian manifold of nonnegative sectional curvature. Then there is a compact totally convex submanifold, S (called a soul of M), such that M is diffeomorphic to the normal bundle of S. The following is the Soul Conjecture of Cheeger-Gromoll ([CG]), proved more than 20 years later by Perel man ([Per1]): Theorem 0.2. Let the assumptions be as in Theorem 0.1. If there is open set U M on which sectional curvature sec U > 0, then S is a point. Perel man showed that if S is not a point, then at every x M, there is a plane of zero curvature. His approach relies on the existence of a distance nonincreasing map, π : M S, which can be taken as the Sharafutdinov retraction ([Sh]), π(x) = lim t φ t (x), where φ t is the Sharafutdinov flow determined by a Busemann function f on M (see Section 1 for definitions). Precisely, Perel man established the following Flat Strip property: for x M\S, the distance xπ(x) = xs, and a minimal geodesic from x to π(x) and any geodesic in S at π(x) bound an isometrically embedded flat strip. At the same time, Perel man proved that π is a C 1 -Riemannian submersion (cf. [CS], [Wi]). An Alexandrov space X with curvature bounded below by κ is a length metric space on which the Toponogov comparison holds with respect to a complete surface of constant curvature κ. Since the seminal paper [BGP], there have been 1 Supported partially by NSF Grant DMS and a research found from Capital normal university. 2 Supported partially by NFSC Typeset by AMS-TEX

2 many works extending basic results in Riemannian geometry whose proofs rely on the Toponogov comparison to Alexandrov geometry; including Theorem 0.1 that any complete non-compact Alexandrov space of non-negative curvature homotopically retracts to a soul S, a compact convex subset without boundary, via the Sharafutdinov retraction. In [Per1], Perel man asked whether Theorem 0.2 holds in Alexandrov geometry, which we formulate as Conjecture 0.3. Let X be a complete non-compact Alexandrov space of nonnegative curvature with a soul S. If there is an open subset U such that curvature cur U > 0, then S is a point. An obstacle is that the Flat Strip property does not hold at every point (cf. [Li]). However, Conjecture 0.3 will follow, if one can show that the Sharafutdinov retraction, π : X S, is a submetry, i.e., for any x X and any small r > 0, π(b r (x)) = B r (π(x)). This is because cur U > 0 forces φ t to strictly shrink the size of any metric ball in U. The following cases have been known that the Sharafutdinov retraction, π : X S, is a submetry: (0.4.1) ([SY]) dim(s) = 1, or dim(s) = dim(x) 1. (0.4.2) ([Li]) dim(s) = dim(x) 2 and X is topologically nice, i.e. all iterated spaces of directions at each point are homeomorphic to spheres ([Ka]). Note that(0.4.1) implies Conjecture 0.3 in dimension 3([SY]), and(0.4.2) implies a case of Conjecture 0.3 in dimension 4 that X is a topological manifold, because in dimension 4, X is topological manifold iff X is a topologically nice ([Li]); which does not hold in dimension 5 ([Ka]). The main results in this paper imply Conjecture 0.3 in dimension 4. Theorem A. Let X be a complete non-compact Alexandrov 4-space with curvature cur 0 and an empty boundary, and let S be a soul of X. Then (A1) The Sharafutdinov retraction, π : X S, is a submetry. (A2) If there is an open set U of X such that cur U > 0, then S is a point. Note that without loss of generality, we can assume that X is simply connected (cf. [Li]). In view of the above discussion, (A1) implies (A2), and by (0.4.1) it remains to check the case of (A1): S is homeomorphic to a sphere. Acommonstartingpoint,inverifyingthatπ : X S isasubmetry, isthepartial Flat Strip property by Shioya-Yamaguchi [SY]: for p S and Ω c f 1 ([c,c 0 ]) with c 0 = maxf, a minimal geodesic from p to Ω c and a non-trivial minimal geodesic in S at p bound an isometrically embedded flat strip. Let Ω c p denote the set of the directions of minimal geodesics from p to Ω c. Note that v Ω c p actually points to a ray at p, γ v,p, that realizes the distance to Ω c for all c ([Li], see Section 1 below). Let F = γ v,p = F v, p S,v Ω c p v Ω c p 0 where F v is the union of the rays which are parallel to γ v,p0 through a piecewise flat strips over S (see Section 3), and p 0 S is a Riemannian point, i.e. the space of directions at p 0, Σ p0 S, is isometric to the unit sphere. 2

3 By definition, points in F satisfy the Flat Strip property, and thus π F : F S is a submetry. Hence throughout the rest of the paper, we will always assume that F X, and thus dim(s) < n 1 (see (0.4.1)). For dim(s) = n 2, the main discovery in [Li] is that if X is topologically nice, then F v is convex and splits, F v = S R+ (here S being simply connected is required). Let y F such that xy = xf. Because F or F is a union of at most countably many F v s, y F v for some v. Observe that the distance function, d(,f) : X R +, is concave at x if y F v \ S. If y S, then the concavity for d(,f) at x can be easily checked 3. When y F v \ S, because F v \ S locally divides X into two components, the gradient flow of d(,f) extends to a distance non-increasing flow, Ψ t : F v \S X, such that Ψ xf (y) = x. The significance of F v = S R+ is a natural isometry: ϕ c : S S c = F v Ω c = S {c}, c = f(y). Because the one-parameter family of composition maps, ϕ c π Ψ t : S c S c, is onto and distance non-increasing, ϕ c π Ψ t is an isometry. Consequently, Ψ t Sc : S c Ψ t ( S c ) is an isometry, and π Ψt ( S c ) : Ψ t( S c ) S is a submetry. Hence, π is a submetry at x with y S, and π is a submetry because the set of such x is dense. We point it out that the condition, topologically nice, is essential for [Li]; in general F v does not split, nor is it possible to have a distance non-increasing map, S S c. Here is a simple example. Example 0.5. Let M = TS 2 denote the tangent bundle of the unit sphere. Then the canonical metric on M has non-negative sectional curvature. Let D 2m SO(3) be the Dihedral group. Then the differential of the D 2m -action defines an isometric D 2m -action on M which preserves S 2. Clearly, X = M/D 2m is a complete Alexandrov 4-space of curvature 0 with a soul S = S 2 /D 2m. Note that S contains three singular points of X: one corresponds to the isotropy group Z m and the other two correspond to the isotropy group Z 2. As shown in Example 0.5, the obstacle for Theorem A is that F v has no splitting structure; F v may not be locally convex (nor every direction in Σ x F v points a radial curve in F v, see [Pet1]), and there may not be any isometry (nor a distance non-increasing map) from S to S c. We overcome the above two obstacles in the following two theorems(see Theorem 0.6 and 0.7). Theorem 0.6. Let X be a complete non-compact Alexandrov space with cur 0 and an empty boundary. Assume X has a soul of codimension 2. Then (0.6.1) the distance function d(,f) is concave on X \F. (0.6.2) the gradient flow of d(, F) determines a family of distance non-increasing flows from F, each of which flows some F v to X \ F, provided that dim(x) = 4 and X is simply connected and locally orientable. In verifying the concavity for d(,f), not only F v may not be locally convex, but also the local structure of F at points in S is more complicated. We first establish a criterion for d(,f) to be concave at x X \F in terms of properties of (Σ y X,Σ y F) (see Lemma 2.1), where y F satisfies xy = xf. If y / S, then Σ y X is a spherical suspension over Σ y Ω c, c = f(y). To verify the criterion, the key is to study the multi-valued map, ϕ c : S S c = F v Ω c by ϕ c (x) = 3 In [Li], Li actually uses d(, F vi ), where at most three F vi s are suitably selected. 3

4 π 1 (x) S c (the inverse of π S c : Sc S which is a branched metric cover), whose differential can be defined and shares the same properties of ϕ c. If y S, the verification of the criterion is more complicated, partially due to the lack of a suspension structure. Observe that x y, Ω c y (Σ y S) (the orthogonal complement of Σ y S), x y Ω c y = π 2, and thus dim((σ ys) ) = 1, where x y denotes a direction of a minimal geodesic from y to x. Such geometric structures were studied in [RW], based on which we are able to verify the criterion case by case. In the proof of (0.6.2), a key is to show that each F v \S separates its a neighborhood into two components. For our purpose, without loss of generality we may assume that X is also locally orientable by [HS] (see Lemma 7.1). Theorem 0.7. Let Ψ t [0,+ ) : F v X be a distance non-increasing flow in (0.6.2). Then for S c F v Ω c, there is a one-parameter family of distance non-increasing onto maps, π Ψ t : Sc S c, with π Ψ 0 = id Sc such that the following diagram commutes: S c Ψ t Ψ t ( S c ) π Ψ t Sc π π S. Consequently, π Ψ t is an isometry, and thus for all x Ψ t ( S c ) and r > 0, π(b r (x)) = B r (π(x)). Observe that for c = maxf, Sc = S and π Ψ t = π Ψ t. For c < maxf, we will show that there is a finite set, Q S, such that π : Sc \ ϕ c (Q) S \ Q is a metric k-cover, and the number of ϕ-image, ϕ c (q) < k for q Q. Moreover, S c is an Alexandrov two sphere of non-negative curvature. In constructing π Ψ t : S c S c, the geometry of ϕ c : S S c is crucial to show that for sufficiently small t, (π Ψ t ) 1 (Q) = ϕ c (Q) ; whose proof also replies on that S and S c are homeomorphic to a two sphere. Then the following diagram, S c \(π Ψ t ) 1 (Q) S c \ϕ c (Q) π π Ψ t S \Q, satisfies that π (π 1 ( S c \ϕ c (Q)) = (π Ψ t ) (π 1 ( S c \(π Ψ t ) 1 (Q))), which implies a lifting map of π Ψ t. Since the lifting map is distance non-increasing, it uniquely extends to the desired map, π Ψ t : S c S c, and thus π Ψ t is a distance nonincreasingontomap(soisanisometry)forallt. Thisimpliesthat, forallx Ψ t ( S c ) and r, π(b r (x)) = B r (π(x)). Note that (A1) follows from Theorems 0.6 and 0.7. Let x X \ F, and let y F such that xy = xf. It turns out that the union of x with y F \ S is dense in X, and that such a y belongs to a unique F v so that the distance nonincreasing flow in (0.6.2), Ψ t : F v X, satisfies that x = Ψ xf (y). By Theorem 0.7, π(b r (x)) = B r (π(x)), which actually holds for all x by the continuity of π. 4

5 The rest of the paper is organized as follows: In Section 1, we review basic properties of the Sharafutdinov retraction ([Per2], [Sh]), and finite quotient of joins and radial cone-neighborhood isometries ([RW]). From Section 2 to Section 6, we prove (0.6.1), i.e. d(,f) is concave. In Section 2, we provide a criterion for a distance function to be concave. In Section 3 and 4, the structures of F and Σ y F Σ y X are described in Theorem 3.1 and 4.1 respectively. In Section 5, we prove (3.1.3) in Theorem 3.1. And we complete the proof of (0.6.1) in Section 6. In Section 7, we show that (A1) can be reduced to the case where X is simply connected and locally orientable. Throughout Sections 8-10, we assume that dim(x) = 4 and dim(s) = 2. In Section 8, we show that S c is a simply connected closed Alexandrov surface of nonnegative curvature, and in Sections 9 and 10, we prove (0.6.2) and Theorem 0.7 respectively. We conclude the introduction with a list of symbols in the rest of the paper: Alex n (κ): the collection of complete Alexandrov n-spaces with curvature κ. B r (p): a closed ball in X with center p X and radius r. A : the size of a subset A X. A: the boundary of A X with respect to induced topology. A : the union of interior points of A. xy : the distance between x and y. xa : the distance from x to A. A π 2: = {x X xa π 2 }. A : = A =π 2 = {x X xa = π 2,a A}. [xy]: a minimal geodesic from x to y. [ab]: the union of all [ab] with b B. y x : the direction of [xy] at x. Σ a A: the space of directions of A at a. A x: the collection of directions of [xy] at x such that xy = xa and y A. S m : the unit m-dimensional sphere. A B: the join of A,B Alex(1) (see Section 1). 1. Preliminaries In this section, we will supply notions and properties that will be used through the rest of the paper, and the references are [BGP], [Per2], [Pet1] and [RW]. a. Busemann functions and directions of rays. In the rest of the paper, we will use X Alex n (0) to specify that X is noncompact and with an empty boundary. For p X, the Busemann function, f : 5

6 X R, is defined by f(x) = lim t ( x B t (p) t). Note that different choices of base points yield Busemann functions different by a constant (cf. [Li]). Following the approach in Riemannian case with replacing the Hessian comparison by suitable supporting functions, one gets (cf. [Per2]): Lemma 1.1. Let X Alex n (0). Then the Busemann function f : X R, is a proper concave function. By Lemma 1.1, f has a maximum c 0, and any sublevel set Ω c f 1 ([c,c 0 ]) is totally convex, i.e. for any x,y Ω c, all minimal geodesics jointing x and y lie in Ω c. Moreover, it is easy to verify the following properties. Lemma 1.2. For p with f(p) > c, any v Ω c p is tangent to a ray at p, γ p,v. Moreover, for all c 1,c 2 < f(p), Ω c 1 p = Ω c 2 p, and for any x Ω c, f(x) = x Ω c + c. As in the Riemannian case, using f one can construct a closed totally convex subset with an empty boundary ([Per2]), S X, called a soul S of X: let C 0 = f 1 (c 0 ), a compact convex subset. If C 0 =, then S = C 0. Otherwise, consider f 1 (x) = x C 0 : C 0 R. Because C 0 is convex and X Alex(0), f 1 is concave. Let C 1 = f1 1 (maxf 1). If C 1 =, then S = C 1. Otherwise, repeat this process. From the decreasing sequence of integers, dim(x) > dim(c 0 ) >, in k n steps one gets a totally convex set without boundary, say C k = S. To describe the structure of Σ p X, p S, we need the following property. Lemma 1.3 ([Ya]). Let Y Alex n (1), and let A be a compact (locally) convex subset in Y. If A = 4, then A π 2 = A =π 2. Because S X is convex and without boundary, Σ p S Σ p X is convex and without boundary, where p S. By Lemma 1.3, (Σ p S) π 2 = (Σ p S). By Lemma 1.2, Ω c p (Σ p S) π 2, so Ω c p (Σ p S). (1.1) b. Sharaftdinov retraction and construction of F via flat strips. A distance function is semi-concave in the sense of [Pet1], and thus its gradient, and the gradient flow, are well defined. Moreover, the gradient flow of any concave function is distance non-increasing. Applying to the distance functions {f,f i } from the construction of S, and patching together the gradient flows of {f,f i }, one obtains a one-parameter family of maps, φ t : X X, such that φ 0 = id X and π(x) = lim t φ t (x) : X S, is distance non-increasing, called a Sharafutdinov retraction. Let F γ v,p, p S, v Ω c p 4 Note that A belongs to Alex m (1) for some m n, and it is our convention that A consists of one point or two points with distance π if m = 0. Moreover, when m = 0, A = means that A consists of two points with distance π. 6

7 where γ v,p is the ray starting from p with direction v Ω c p. Note that any γ v,p is a gradient curve of f and thus π(γ v,p ) = p. To see that π : F S is a submetry, we need the following partial generalization of the Perel man Flat Strip property by Shioya-Yamaguchi ([SY]) Lemma 1.4. Let X Alex(0), let C X be a closed convex subset with C. Assume a minimal geodesic c(t) [0,1] C satisfies dist C c(t) is a constant, and there is a minimal geodesic γ 0 from c(0) to C which is perpendicular to c(t). Then there is a minimal geodesic γ 1 from c(1) to C such that {γ 0,c(t),γ 1 } bounds a flat rectangle (the 4-th side of which belongs to C) which is convex in X. Lemma 1.4, together with Lemmas 1.2 and 1.3, yields (cf. [Li]): Lemma 1.5. Let c(t) [0,1] be a minimal geodesic in S, and let γ v,c(0) be a ray with v Ω c c(0). Then there is a ray γ w,c(1) with w Ω c c(1) such that {γ v,c(0),c(t),γ w,c(1) } bounds a flat strip which is convex in X. By Lemma 1.5, π : F S is a submetry. Moreover, Lemma 1.5 implies that any ray in F starting from S coincides with some γ v,p. Remark 1.6. Observe that if F = X, then π : X S is a submetry (so Theorem A holds). Hence, in the rest of paper we will always assume F X. Together with (0.4.1), we may assume that dim(s) n 2; when dim(s) = n 1, F = X because (Σ p S) = {v} or {v 1,v 2 } with v 1 v 2 = π, and thus v and v i are tangent to rays. c. The rigidity of Toponogov comparison and a finite quotient of join. As pointed out in Introduction 0, a verification of concavity for d(,f) requires studying structures of (Σ p S,Σ p X). For any v v Σ p S and w (Σ p S), any triangle wvv Σ p X achieves equality in the following theorem. Theorem 1.7. (Toponogove comparison) Let Y Alex n (κ), and let S 2 κ denote the complete simply connected 2-manifold of curvature κ. (1.7.1) Given any p Y and [qr] Y, there is p and a [ q r] in S 2 κ with p q = pq, p r = pr and r q = rq such that for any s [qr] and s [ q r] with qs = q s, ps p s. (1.7.2) Given any [qp] and [qr] in Y, there is [ q p] and [ q r] in S 2 κ with q p = qp, q r = qr and p q r = pqr such that p r pr. (1.7.3) ([GM2]) In (1.7.2) (resp. in (1.7.1) for some interior point s in [qr]), if equality holds, then there exists a [pr] (resp. [qp] and [pr]) such that [qp], [qr] and [pr] bounds a convex surface which can be isometrically embedded into S 2 κ. For p S, since (Σ p S) = (Σ p S) π 2 (see Lemma 1.3), (Σp S) is totally convex in Σ p X (by (1.7.1)). A underlying geometry structure to the π -apart between 2 Σ p S and (Σ p S), is a spherical join structure. For convenience of readers, we recall the definition ([BGP]). For Y i Alex n i (1) (i = 1,2, and Y i = {p i } or {p i, p i } with p i p i = π if n i = 0), [ Y 1 Y 2 = Y 1 Y 2 0, π ( ]/(y 1,y 2,0) (y 1,y 2 2,0), y 1,y 2, π ) ( y 1 2,y 2, π ) 2 equipped with the metric cos (y 1,y 2,t)(y 1,y 2,t ) = costcost cos y 1 y 1 +sintsint cos y 2 y 2 7

8 is called the spherical join of Y 1 and Y 2. And Y 1 Y 2 is also called a spherical suspension over Y 2 if Y 1 = {p 1, p 1 } with p 1 p 1 = π. It is easy to see that Y 1 Y 2 Alex n (1) with n 1 +n 2 = n 1 and p 1 p 2 = π 2 for all p i Y i, and there is a unique minimal geodesic jointing p 1 with p 2. Observe that if the following property hods that for v Σ p S and w (Σ p S), there is a unique minimal geodesic from v to w, then there is an isometric embedding, Σ p S (Σ p S) Σ p X ([Li]). Unfortunately, ifx is not a topologicalmanifold around S, then one cannot expect such join structure in Σ p X. In [RW], we classify X Alex n (1) which contains two convex subsets without boundary such that the sum of dimension is n 1. Applying this result to the case dim(s) = n 2 and (Σ p S) is a circle, we conclude Σ p X as a finite quotient of join (see (1.8.2) below). Theorem 1.8 ([RW]). Let Y Alex n (1), and let Y 1,Y 2 be two compact convex subsets in Y such that y 1 y 2 = π 2 for any y i Y i. Then the following holds. (1.8.1) n 1 +n 2 n 1, where n i = dim(y i ). (1.8.2) If n 1 + n 2 = n 1 and if Y 1 = Y 2 =, then Y is isometric to a finite quotient of join. In detail, there is p i Y i (i = 1,2) and a finite group Γ which acts effectively and isometrically on (Σ pi Y i ) iso such that Y 1 = (Σ p2 Y 2 ) iso /Γ, Y 2 = (Σ p1 Y 1 ) /Γ and Y iso = [(Σ p1 Y 1 ) (Σ p2 Y 2 ) ]/Γ 5. d. The radial cone-neighborhood isometry. The notion of a radial cone-neighborhood isometry refers to a multi-valued map, f : Y Ỹ, that is distance non-decreasing and preserves the metric in the radial direction. A simple example is the inverse map of the projection: P : M M/Γ, where M is a complete Alexadrov space and Γ is a finite group of isometries. Definition 1.9 ([RW]). Let Y, Ỹ Alex(κ) with dim(ỹ) dim(y) 1. A multi-valued map f : Y Ỹ is called a radial cone-neighborhood isometry if the following properties hold: (1.9.1) m = max p Y { f(p) } < and Y m {p Y f(p) = m} is dense in Y; (1.9.2) For p,q Y, p f(p), q f(q), p q pq. Moreover, given [pq] and p, q and [ p q] can be chosen so that f : [pq] [ p q] f([pq]) is an isometry. Note that (1.9.1) and (1.9.2) imply that ([RW]): (1.9.3) For p Y m and p f(p), there is an ǫ p > 0 such that f : B ǫp (p) B ǫp ( p) is an isometric embedding. (1.9.4) For p Y \Y m and p f(p), there is an ǫ p > 0 such that B ǫp ( p) f(y) f(b ǫp (p)) and for any [pq] B ǫp (p), f([pq]) = l i=1 [ p q i] and f : [pq] [ p q i ] is an isometry; moreover, if q Y m, then there is δ > 0 such that V [pq],δ \{p} Y m and that f : V [pq],δ V [ p qi ],δ is an isometric embedding, where V [pq],δ {q S pq pq, [pq ] s.t. q p q p < δ}. A radial cone-neighborhood isometry has a well defined differential. For p Y and p f(p), by (1.9.2) one can define a multi-valued map, Df : Σ p Y Σ pỹ, 5 Note that the Γ-actions on (Σ pi Y i ) can be extended uniquely to a Γ-action on (Σ p1 Y 1 ) (Σ p2 Y 2 ). 8

9 Df( q p) = { q p q f(q)}, where Σ py denotes the set of directions of non-trivial geodesics from p (and Σ p Y is the closure of Σ py). Proposition 1.10 ([RW]). Let f : Y Ỹ be a radial cone-neighborhood isometry. Then (1.10.1) Df extends to a multi-valued map, Df : Σ p Y Σ p Ỹ, p f(p), which is again a radial cone-neighborhood isometry. (1.10.2) If Y is compact with Y = and dim(y) = dim(ỹ), then f is surjective (thus Ỹ is compact) and Ỹ =. We point it out that in the proof of Theorem 1.8, fixing p Y 2, we construct a natural radial cone-neighborhood isometry, φ p : Y 1 (Σ p Y 2 ), which is crucial in the proof. In the present paper, there is a natural multi-valued map, ϕ c : S X with ϕ c (S) Ω c, which is a radial cone-neighborhood isometry (see Section 4). Indeed, techniques developed in [RW] in analyzing a radial cone-neighborhood isometry are basic tools in our proofs of Theorems 0.6 and The Concavity of d(,f) Our main effort in Sections 2-6 is to prove (0.6.1), where main references are [BGP] and [RW]. Given Y Alex(0), a closed subset Z Y, and x Y \Z, let α(t) [0,ǫ) be an arc-length parameter minimal geodesic in Y \Z with α(0) = x, and let y Z such that xy = xz. Then there is a minimal geodesic [xy] such that d yα(t) dt t=0 + = cos y x α+ (0) ; and there is [α(t)y] which converges to [xy] as t 0. Note that d(,z) is concave on Y \Z if for any x Y \Z and such an α(t) α(t)z xy tcos y x α + (0) +o(t 2 ). For our purpose, we need the following criterion for d(,z) to be a concave function. Lemma 2.1. Let Y,Z,x,y,α(t),[xy] and [α(t)y] be as in the above. Suppose that for any small t, there is w Σ y Z 6 such that (2.1.1) x y w = π 2 and α(t) y lies in a [ x y w] Σ y Y, and either (2.1.2) w points a radial curve in Z, or (2.1.3) there is a w Σ y Z satisfying the following conditions: ( ) x y w = π 2 and ww 0 as t 0, ( ) [ x y w] and w determines a convex spherical surface (in Σ y Y), ( ) there is [yz] Z such that yz t and z y= w. Then we have that α(t)z xy tcos y x α+ (0) +o(t 2 ). Note that (2.1.1) and (2.1.2) are known results ([Per2], [Pet1]). We point out that in our circumstances, Z = F may not satisfy (2.1.2); e.g., F may not be locally convex. A verification of (2.1.3) for F is based on structures 6 Here, Σ y Z is defined to be the union of all limits of z y 9 with z Z converging to y.

10 of (Σ y F v,σ y X) (see Section 4), which in turn, relies on the structure of F (see Section 3). Proof of Lemma 2.1. As seen before the proof, it suffices to prove Lemma 2.1 with (2.1.1) and (2.1.3). By (2.1.1) and ( ) (an embedded spherical triangle x y ww, we get cos α(t) y w = cos α(t) y w cos ww, (2.1) and α(t) y w < π 2 (1 χ(t)) α(t) y x y, (2.2) where χ(t) 0 as t 0. Let xỹ α(t) R 2 denote a comparison triangle of xyα(t), and let ỹ R 2 such that [ỹỹ ] is perpendicular to [ỹ x] and [ỹ α(t)] is parallel to [ỹ x]. Note that ỹỹ t, so there is y [yz] such that yy = ỹỹ (see ( )). Moreover, by (1.7.2) we have that α(t)ỹỹ α(t) y w. (2.3) Note that if α(t)ỹỹ y α(t) not hard to see that w, then Lemma 2.1 holds because by (1.7.2) it is α(t)y α(t)ỹ = xy tcos ỹ x α(t) x xy tcos y x α+ (0). (2.4) Observe that α(t)ỹỹ α(t) y w is satisfied when x y α(t) y > 2 x α(t) ỹ ỹ, be- > y α(t) w (as t 0). cause by (2.2) we conclude that α(t)ỹỹ = π 2 x ỹ α(t) ỹ Theremaining caseiswhere x y α(t) y (and α(t)ỹỹ < y α(t) w ). Note that there is a constant C depending on xy and y x α + (0) such that x ỹ α(t) ỹ < C t, so 2 x ỹ α(t) ỹ x y α(t) y < 2C t. (2.5) In thiscase, we can select ỹ inthe plane containing xỹ α(t) such that α(t)ỹỹ = y α(t) w and [ỹỹ ] is perpendicular to [ỹ α(t)]. Note that ỹỹ < ỹỹ, so we can find y [yz] such that yy = ỹỹ. Then we have that α(t)y by (1.7.2) α(t)ỹ = α(t)ỹ + α(t)ỹ α(t)ỹ ( ) = α(t)ỹ + ỹ α(t) 1 cos 2 y α(t) w 1 cos 2 α(t) ỹ ỹ ỹ = α(t)ỹ + ỹ α(t) by (2.1) cos 2 α(t) ỹ ỹ 1 cos 2 y α(t) w + ỹ cos2 y α(t) w 1 cos 2 α(t) ỹ ỹ ỹ = α(t)ỹ + ỹ α(t) cos2 α(t) ỹ ỹ cos2 y α(t) w cos 2 ww 1 cos 2 y α(t) w + 1 cos 2 α(t) ỹ ỹ ỹ 10 ỹ

11 by (2.3) α(t)ỹ + ỹ α(t) = α(t)ỹ + ỹ α(t) by (2.5) α(t)ỹ +o(t 2 ). cos 2 y α(t) w (1 cos 2 ww ) 1 cos 2 α(t) y w + sin 2 x y α(t) y (1 cos 2 ww ) 1 cos 2 α(t) y w + 1 cos 2 α(t) ỹ ỹ ỹ 1 cos 2 α(t) ỹ ỹ ỹ We thereby complete the proof by taking (2.4) into account. 3. Structures of F X with dim(s) = dim(x) 2 By Lemma 2.1, d(,f) is concave if F satisfies (2.1.1) and (2.1.3). Our verification of (2.1.1) and (2.1.3) is divided into three steps: we first analyze structures of F in Sections 3 and 4, based on which we then analyze structures on (Σ y F,Σ y X) in Section 4. In Section 6, we show that F satisfies (2.1.1) and (2.1.3). Note that in Sections 3-6, dim(f) dim(x) 1, dim(s) = dim(x) 2 and dim(x) 4. Let S 0 S consisting of points whose spaces of directions are isometric to a unit sphere. Then S 0 is totally convex in S Alex(0), with a full measure ([OS]). Fixing p 0 S 0 and v Ω c p 0, we define a subset, F v F, as follows. For any p S 0 and [p 0 p], by Lemma 1.5 there is a w Ω c p such that {γ v,p0,[p 0 p],γ w,p } bounds a flat strip. We will call γ w,p parallel to γ p0,v along [p 0 p]. Let F v = {γ w,p p S 0,w Ω c p,γ p,w is parallel to γ p0,v along a piecewise minimal geodesic in S from p 0 to p}. Let F v denote the closure of F v in X. Because F v consists of rays, so does F v. Given p S 0, q S and [qp], and w Ω c q, similar to the above by Lemma 1.5, there is v Ω c p such that γ v,p is parallel to γ w,q along [qp]. Plus the fact that S 0 is dense in S, we see F = F w. w Ω c p 0 We now are ready to describe basic structures on F v. Theorem 3.1. Let X Alex(0) with a soul S of codimension 2, and let S 0 S and F v F be as in the above. Then (3.1.1) Given p,q S 0, [pq] and v Ω c p, there is a unique w Ω c q such that {γ v,p,[pq],γ w,q } bounds a flat strip. Moreover, the induced bijection, φ [pq] : Ω c p by v w, is an isometry. (3.1.2) There is k < such that for all p S 0, q S, Ω c q Σ p F v = k. (3.1.3) If F v F w, then F v F w = S. Ω c q Σ q F v Ω c p (3.1.1)easily implies that restricted to Σ p F v, φ [pq] is an isometry to Σ q F v ; (3.1.2) says that the number of rays in F v at p S 0 equals to k which is independent of 11

12 p, and the number of rays in F v at q S \S 0 is bounded above by k; and (3.1.3) says that either F v = F w or F v F w = S. We point out that (3.1.1) holds for S of any codimension, and because our proof of (3.1.3) relies on structures of Σ p F v, p S, which will be studied in Section 4, we postpone a proof of (3.1.3) in Section 5. We now give a proof of (3.1.1). Note that for p S 0, we know that (cf. [GW]) Σ p X = (Σ p S) Y = S m Y, (3.1) where m = dim(s) 1 and Y belongs to Alex(1) of dimension dim(x) 2 m. Note that Σ p X = because X =, which implies Y =, so Y is a circle S 1 with perimeter 2π if dim(s) = dim(x) 2. Proof of (3.1.1). By Lemma 1.5, there is w Ω c q such that {γ v,p,[pq],γ w,q } bounds a flat strip. Note that this flat strip determines a minimal geodesic of length π 2 from v to q p in Σ p X. By (3.1), the minimal geodesic from v to q p is unique, so is w unique. Then we can define a natural map φ [pq] : Ω c p Ω c q with φ [pq] (v) = w. By taking φ [qp] (= φ 1 [pq] ) into account, we see that φ [pq] is a bijection. Next we will prove that φ [pq] is an isometry. (The proof is an alternative one of the proof of Lemma 2.2 in [Li].) Let u,v Ω c p, and let ū = φ [pq] (u), v = φ [pq] (v). It suffices to show that ū v uv. (3.2) Let γ u (t) [0,+ ) be the (arc-length parameter) ray with γ u (0) = p and γ + u (0) = u. By the definition of φ [pq], {γ u (t),[pq],γū(t)} and {γ v (t),[pq],γ v (t)} bound two flat strips S u and S v respectively. To those, we associate two flat strips S u and S v in Euclidean space R 3 bounded by { γ u (t),[ p q], γū(t)} and { γ v (t),[ p q], γ v (t)} respectively, where p q = pq, and the four γ are all perpendicular to [ p q], and γ u + (0) γ+ v (0) = γ+ ū (0) γ+ v (0) = ū v. (3.3) Hence, in order to see (3.2) it suffices to show that uv γ u + (0) γ+ v (0). (3.4) By(3.1), S u ands v (similarlyfor S u and S v )determinesageodesictriangle q p uv in Σ p X with q p u = q p v = π 2, which can be embedded isometrically into S2. Note that γ ū(t) p and γ ū(t) p [ q p u], γ v(t) p q p = γ v(t) p [ q p v], γ ū(t) p [ q p γ+ u (0)] and γ v(t) p [ q p γ+ v (0)], q p = γ ū(t) p q p = γ v(t) p q p = O(t) as t 0. (3.5) On the other hand, (3.3) implies that (ref. [BGP]) which together with (1.7.2) implies that γū(t) γ v (t) = γū(t)γ v (t) +o(t) as t 0, γ ū(t) p p γ v(t) γ ū(t) p γ v(t) p +o(t) as t 0. (3.6) It is not hard to see that (3.5) and (3.6) together implies (3.4). Remark 3.2. We point it out that in the above proof (e.g., the proof for (3.4)), the key ingredient is the joint structure on Σ p X (p S 0 ) (see (3.1)). Similarly, for any [pq] S with p S 0, we can define a map φ [pq] : Ω c p Ω c q which is distance non-increasing. (3.7) 12

13 Corollary 3.3. F X is equivalent to that Ω c p (Σ p S) for any fixed p S 0. Corollary 3.3 amounts to that if Ω c p = (Σ p S) for some p S 0, then X = F (and thus π is a submetry, see Remark 1.6). Proof. Assume that Ω c p = (Σ p S) for some p S 0. We need to show that X = F. By (3.1.1) and (3.1), we first conclude that Ω c p = Ω c p and Ω c p = (Σ p S) for all p S 0. It follows that X \F G {x X q S \S 0 s.t. xq = xs }. Note that dim((σ q S) ) dim(x) 1 dim(s) for any q S (by (1.8.1)). It then is not hard to see that G has measure 0 7 because S \S 0 has measure 0 on S. On the other hand, it is easy to see that F is closed in X (by Lemma 1.5), so X \F must have a positive measure if F X. Hence, it has to hold that X = F. Proof of (3.1.2). Ω c p 0 By (3.1.1), it is easy to see that, for all p S 0, Ω c p Σ p0 Fv. Because F v is closure of F v, for q S \S 0, Ω c q Σ p0 Fv. Hence, it remains to show that Ω c p 0 Σ p0 Fv <. Σ p Fv is isometric to Σ q F v Ω c p 0 Let v v Ω c p 0 Σ p0fv. By the definition of F v, γ v,p0 is parallel to γ v,p0 along a piecewise minimal geodesic l j=1 [p jp j+1 ] S 0 with p 1 = p l+1 = p 0. By (3.1.1), the isometry φ [pl p l+1 ] φ [pl 1 p l ] φ [p1 p 2 ] : Ω c p 0 Ω c p 0 (3.8) maps v to v. Since we have assumed that S has codimension 2, (Σ p0 S) is a circle (see (3.1)). Then the isometry in (3.8) must be an isometry of (Σ p0 S) restricted to Ω c p 0 the proof of Key Lemma 0.7 in [Li]). Thereby, if Ω c p 0 Σ p0fv =, we can conclude that Ω c p 0 = (Σ p0 S), which contradicts Corollary 3.3 because we have assumed that F X. Remark 3.4. For q S, let ξ 1,ξ 2 Ω c q such that γ ξi,q F v. And for small ball B ǫ (q) S, let F v Bǫ (q),ξ i denote the collection of rays in F v each of which is parallel to γ ξi,q along a minimal geodesic in B ǫ (q) starting from q. Note that (3.1.2) implies that for small ǫ > 0, F v Bǫ (q),ξ 1 F v Bǫ (q),ξ 2 = B ǫ (q) (3.9) and if γ w,q F v with q B ǫ (q) is parallel to a ray in F v Bǫ (q),ξ i, then By (3.9) it is easy to see that (cf. γ w,q F v Bǫ (q),ξ i. (3.10) S k (F v ) {q S Ω c q Σ q F v = k, i.e. at q there are k pieces of rays in F v } 7 An essential reason here is that the distance function to S is semi-concave on X \S ([Pet1]). And in this paper, measure always means the Hausdorff measure. 13

14 is open and dense in S. Note that S 0 S k (F v ), and that for any [qp] S with p S k (F v ), [qp]\{q} S k (F v ). And (3.9) and (3.10) imply that γ w,q F v Bǫ (q),ξ i is parallel to γ ξi,q along any [qq ], (3.11) and thus there is l k such that for all q B ǫ (q) and q B ǫ (q) S k (F v ), Ω c q Σ q F v Bǫ (q),ξ i Ω c q Σ q F v Bǫ (q),ξ i = l. (3.12) 4. Radial Cone-Neighborhood Isometries and Structures on (Σ y F v,σ y X). This section is a part of preparation for Section 6, where we show that d(,f) satisfies (2.1.1) and (2.1.3). We will analyze structures on (Σ y F,Σ y X); and if y F \ S, it reduces to analyze structures on (Σ y F v,σ y X), because by (3.1.3) there is a unique F v y. If y / S, let c = f(y) and S c = F v Ω c. Consider the inverse of π Sc : S c S, ϕ c ι (π S c ) 1 : S X, (4.1) where Im(ϕ c ) = S c and ι : S c X denotes the inclusion; the reason for adding ι is because apriori S c may not be an Alexandrov space. Observe that if ϕ c is a radial cone-neighborhood isometry, then by (1.10.1) ϕ c induces a radial cone-neighborhood isometric tangent map, Dϕ c : Σ p S Σ y X, (4.2) where π(y) = p (y ϕ c (p)). Since y is an interior point of a ray F v, Σ y X Alex(1) is isometric to a spherical suspension over the cross section Σ y Ω c Alex(1). Because S c = ϕ c (S) Ω c, Dϕ c (Σ p S) Σ y Ω c. (Note that although Σ y F v is a spherical suspension over Σ y Sc, it is not clear if Σ y F v Alex(1).) If y S, by (3.1.2) Σ y F v Ω c y = {ξ 1,,ξ h }, h k. We will describe Σ y F v as follows: for fixed ξ i, let [ξ i Σ y S] F v denote the union of the minimal geodesics of length π 2, each of which is determined by a flat strip containing γ y,ξ i and a minimal geodesic in S at y, and let [ξ i Σ y S] Fv denote the closure of [ξ i Σ y S] F v in Σ y X. Then Σ y F v = h [ξ i Σ y S] Fv. Note that [ξ i Σ y S] Fv determines a natural multi-valued map i=1 σ ξi : Σ y S Σ ξi (Σ y X) by η η ξ i,f v, (4.3) where η ξ i,f v is the union of directions from ξ i to η in [ξ i Σ y S] Fv. The main result in this section is: 14

15 Theorem 4.1. (4.1.1) The ϕ c in (4.1) is a radial cone-neighborhood isometry. (4.1.2) The tangent map in (4.2), Dϕ c : Σ p S Σ y Ω c Σ y X, is a radial coneneighborhood isometry such that Im(Dϕ c ) = Σ y Sc. Moreover, if ξσ y Sc π 2 for some ξ Σ y X, then ξη = π 2 for all η Σ y Sc. (4.1.3) The multi-valued map σ ξi in (4.3) is a radial cone-neighborhood isometry Proof of (4.1.1) and its corollaries. Proof of (4.1.1). Observe that ϕ c satisfies (1.9.1), because ϕ c (q) < ϕ c (p) = k for all p S k (F v ) and q S \ S k (F v ) (by (3.1.2) and Remark 3.4) and S k (F v ) is dense in S. Then we only need to show that ϕ c satisfies (1.9.2). Note that for p 1,p 2 S and p i ϕ c (p i ), p 1 p 2 p 1 p 2 because π is distance non-increasing. By definition of F v, given a [p 1 p 2 ], there is a ray γ w,p2 such that {γ p 1 p 1,p 1,[p 1 p 2 ],γ w,p2 } bounds a flat strip S F v, where γ p 1 p 1,p 1 denotes the ray from p 1 to p 1. Note that S S c is a minimal geodesic parallel to [p 1 p 2 ] in S, i.e. ϕ c : [p 1 p 2 ] S S c is an isometry. It follows that ϕ c satisfies (1.9.2). Applying(1.9.3)and(1.9.4)totheradialcone-neighborhoodisometryϕ c ((4.1.1)), we conclude the following properties. Corollary 4.2. (4.2.1) Let p S k (F v ), γ w,p F v, and let B ǫ (p) S satisfy (1.9.3). Then there is an isometric embedding B ǫ (p) [0,+ ) F v whose image contains γ w,p. (4.2.2) Let [pq] S with p S\S k (F v ), q S k (F v ) close to p, and let V [pq],δ satisfy (1.9.4). Suppose that γ w,p F v is parallel to γ u,q F v along [pq]. Then for small δ, there exists an isometric embedding V [pq],δ [0,+ ) F v whose image contains γ w,p and γ u,p Proof of (4.1.2). The former part of (4.1.2) follows from (4.1.1), (1.10.1) and the comments after (4.2). And the latter part of (4.1.2) is an immediate corollary of Lemma 4.3 below (note that we cannot apply (1.10.2) here because dim(σ y Ω c ) = dim(s)+1). Lemma 4.3. Let Y,Ỹ Alex(1) with dim(ỹ) > dim(y) 1 and Y =, and let f : Y Ỹ be a radial cone-neighborhood isometry. If ξf(y) π 2 for some ξ Ỹ, then ξη = π for all η f(y). 2 Note that if f(y) is locally convex in Ỹ, then f(y) =, and thus Lemma 4.3 follows from Lemma 1.3. Proof. We proceed by induction on dim(y). When dim(y) = 1, Y is a circle. By (1.9.2) (and (1.9.3)), it is easy to see that f(y) is a union of several disjoint locally convex circles. Then the desired property follows by applying Lemma 1.3 to f(y). Assume that dim(y) > 1. Let ξ Ỹ with ξf(y) π 2. Claim 1: there is η 0 f(y) such that ξη 0 = ξf(y). By a standard open and closed argument, it reduces to show that for η f(y) close to η 0, ξη = π 2. Claim 2: there is [ξη 0] and [η 0 η] such that ξ η 0 η η 0 = π 2. By (1.7.2), ξη ξη 0 π 2 and ξ η 0 η η 0 = π 2 implies that ξη 0 = ξη = π 2. Hence, in the rest we only need to verify Claim 1 and 2. 15

16 Note that Claim 1 follows if we show that f(y) is closed and thus compact. Let ỹ be a limit point of f(y), i.e. there are ỹ i f(y) such that ỹ i ỹ. Let y i Y such that f(y i ) ỹ i. Passing to a subsequence, we can assume that y i y. By (1.9.2), it is easy to see that ỹ f(y). In order to verify Claim 2, we Let η 0 Y such that η 0 f( η 0 ). Since f is a radial cone-neighborhood isometry, for η f(y) close to η 0 there is [η 0 η] f(y) with η η 0 Df(Σ η0 Y) (see ( )), where Df : Σ η0 Y Σ η0 Ỹ is a tangent map of f (see (1.10.1)). On the other hand, because ξη 0 = ξf(y), for any [η 0 ξ] we have that ξ η 0 Df(Σ η0 Y) π 2. By (1.10.1), Df is also a radial cone-neighborhood isometry, so by the inductive assumption ξ η 0 ζ = π 2 for all ζ Df(Σ η 0 Y). Hence, ξ η 0 η η 0 = π 2, i.e. Claim 2 holds Proof of (4.1.3). Note that if y S k (F v ), then by (4.2.1) [ξ i Σ y S] Fv = {ξ i } Σ y S ( Σ y X), so each σ ξi is an isometric embedding, and thus a radial cone-neighborhood isometry. If y S \S k (F v ), we need to show that σ ξi satisfies (1.9.1) and (1.9.2). Note that for any B ǫ (y) S, y y is dense in Σ ys because S k (F v ) y B ǫ (y) S k (F v ) is dense in S. By (3.11) and (3.12), for small ǫ, there is l k such that for all η Σ y S and y y y y η ξ i,f v y y ξ i,f v = l. That is, σ ξi satisfies (1.9.1). On the other hand, by (1.7.2) it is clear that σ ξi (η)σ ξi (η ) ηη for all η,η Σ y S. Then Lemma 4.4 below implies that σ ξi satisfies (1.9.2). Lemma 4.4. For any [ηη ] Σ y S and [ξ i η] [ξ i Σ y S] Fv, there is an isometric embedding {ξ i } [ηη ] [ξ i Σ y S] Fv such that {ξ i } {η} = [ξ i η]. Proof. Since Σ ys is dense in Σ y S, we can assume that η,η Σ ys, i.e. there is [yq] and [yq ] (in S) such that η = q y and η = q y. We select two sequences q j [yq],q j [yq ] with q j y = q j y 0 as j. Note that there is [q jq j ] ( S) such that p p [q j q j ] y converges to [ηη ] (cf. [BGP]). Let γ wj,q j F v be the ray such that [ξ i η] is determined by the flat strip S j bounded by {γ ξi,y,[yq j ],γ wj,q j }. By the construction of F v, there is γ w j,q j F v such that {γ wj,q j,[q j q j ],γ w j } bounds a flat strip in F v. And by (3.10),,q j {γ w j,q j,[yq j ],γ ξ i,y} also bounds a flat strip S j F v. Note that all S j lie in a flat strip in F v over [yq]. Hence, if all S j also lie in a flat strip in F v over [yq ], then [ξ i η],[ηη ] and [ξ i η ] determined by S j bound a convex spherical surface in [ξ i Σ y S] Fv, i.e. Lemma 4.4. holds. In fact, by (3.1.2) there are only a finite number of flat strips over [yq ] in F v, so passing to a subsequence we can assume that S j lies in a same flat strip over [yq ] in F v. 16

17 5. Proof of (3.1.3) Our proof of (3.1.3) is based on the following lemma. Lemma 5.1. Let Y Alex n (1) with n 2, and let Z be a locally convex subset in Y with dim(z) = n 2 and Z =. Suppose that pz π, p Y. If 2 f i : Z Σ p Y by z ( i ) z p (i = 1,2), where ( i) z p z p, are two radial coneneighborhood isometries, then f 1 = f 2. Proof of (3.1.3) by assuming Lemma 5.1. We argue by contradiction. If F v F w and F v F w S, F v F w contains a ray γ ξ,q with q S and ξ Ω c q. Note that F v and F w determine two radial cone-neighborhood isometries from Σ q S to Σ ξ (Σ q X) (see (4.1.3)). Moreover, note that ξ (Σ q S) and dim(σ q X) = dim(σ q S)+2. It therefore follows from Lemma 5.1 that such two radial cone-neighborhood isometries coincide, which implies that F v = F w, a contradiction. Based on (3.1.3), one may observe a radial total convexity of F v. Corollary 5.2. Let α i (t) [0,+ ) (i = 1,2) be two rays in F v with α i (0) S. If α 1 (t) [0,+ ), α 2 (t) [0,+ ) and some [α 1 (0)α 2 (0)] bounds a flat strip, then for all t i [0,+ ) any [α 1 (t 1 )α 2 (t 2 )] belongs to F v. Proof. For convenience, we let x i denote α i (t i ). Without loss of generality, we assume that x 1 α 1 (0) x 2 α 2 (0) and x 1 α 1 (0) > 0. Since α 1 (t) [0,+ ), α 2 (t) [0,+ ) and some [α 1 (0)α 2 (0)] bounds a flat strip, by (1.7.2) it is not hard to see that α 1 (t 1) x 2 x 1 = arccos f(x 2) f(x 1 ), (5.1) x 1 x 2 where f is the Busemann function (note that f(x 2 ) f(x 1 ) = x 1 α 1 (0) x 2 α 2 (0) by Lemma 1.2). On the other hand, since f is concave (see Lemma 1.1) and αi (t)f = α i (t) (by Lemma 1.2), we have that ([Pet1]) df x1 ( x 2 x 1 ) cos α 1 (t 1) x 2 x 1. Then by the concavity of f and (5.1), f [x1 x 2 ] must be a linear function, i.e. f(y) = f(x 1 )+ x 1 y cos α 1 (t 1) x 2 x 1 for any y [x 1 x 2 ]. (5.2) Furthermore, by (1.7.3), (5.1) implies that there is an [x 2 α 1 (0)] such that [x 1 x 2 ], [x 1 α 1 (0)] and [x 2 α 1 (0)] bounds a convex flat surface E. For any y [x 1 x 2 ], we let y [x 2 α 1 (0)] be the point such that [yy ] in E is parallel to [x 1 α 1 (0)]. Similarly, we can calculate f(y ) as f(y) in (5.2), and it is easy to see that f(y ) = f(y)+ yy. Then by Lemma 1.2, we can conclude that [y y] belongs to a ray starting from y with y y Ω c y for c < f(y ). Similarly,wecanfindaminimalgeodesic[α 1 (0)α 2 (0)] (whichmaybe[α 1 (0)α 2 (0)]) such that [x 2 α 1 (0)], [x 2 α 2 (0)] and [α 1 (0)α 2 (0)] bounds a convex flat surface. And there is a ray, which starts from some y [α 1 (0)α 2 (0)] and is perpendicular to Ω c, such that both y and y lie in it. In other words, [x 1 x 2 ] belongs to an F w F. By (3.1.3), it has to hold that F w = F v, i.e., [x 1 x 2 ] F v. As a preparation for Lemma 5.1, we give the following partial analogy of Frankel s Theorem in Riemannian geometry (cf. [Pet2]). 17

18 Lemma 5.3. Let Y Alex n (1) with n 2 and Y i Alex n i (1) with n 1 = n 1, n 2 1 and Y i =. If there are two radial cone-neighborhood isometries f i : Y i Y (in particular, each f i is an isometric embedding), then f 1 (Y 1 ) f 2 (Y 2 ). Proof of Lemma 5.1 by assuming Lemma 5.3. We give the proof by induction on n starting with n = 2. If n = 2, then dim(z) = 0. In this case, that Z is locally convex and Z = means that Z consists of two points with distance π, so the conclusion is clear. Assume that n > 2. By Lemma 5.3, f 1 (Z) f 2 (Z), i.e., there is [pz] with z Z such that z p f 1(Z) f 2 (Z). By (1.10.1), the tangent maps Df i : Σ z Z Σ z p Y are also radial cone-neighborhood isometries. By the inductive assumption, we have that Df 1 = Df 2, which implies that f 1 = f 2. In the rest of this section, we will complete the proof of (3.1.3) by verifying Lemma 5.3. Proof of Lemma 5.3. For convenience, we let A f 1 (Y 1 ) and B f 2 (Y 2 ). If A B =, then there is a A and b B such that ab = AB > 0. We claim that ab < π 2. (5.3) If the claim fails, then by Lemma 4.3 B A =π 2 = A π 2 (and A B = π 2 ). By (1.8.1) and (1.9.3), we have that dim(y 1 ) + dim(y 2 ) n 1, which contradicts dim(y 1 )+dim(y 2 ) n. With (5.3), we will show the existence, a A and b B, such that a b < ab, a contradiction. By (1.10.1), Df 1 : ΣâY 1 Σ a Y is also a radial cone-neighborhood isometry, where â Y 1 with f 1 (â) a. Again by Lemma 4.3, for any fixed [ab], we have that b a η = π 2 for all η Σ aa. And note that dim(a) = n 1 = n 1 (see (1.9.3)). It then is not hard to see that g : Σ a A Σ b a (Σ a Y) by η η is an at most 2-valued b a map, which implies that the following composition of maps, g Df 1 : ΣâY 1 Σ a A Σ b a (Σ a Y) is a radial cone-neighborhood isometry. (5.4) Since dim(y 1 ) = n 1 and Y 1 =, g Df 1 has to be surjective (by (1.10.2)). It follows that for any ξ Σ a Y with ξ b a π 2 there exists η Σ aa such that b a ξ + ξη = π 2 (= b a η ). (5.5) Moreover, for any other η Σ a A, we have that cos ξη = cos ξη cos ηη. (5.6) On the other hand, since f 2 is a radial cone-neighborhood isometry, there is [bb 0 ] (in Y) which lies in B. Similarly, we can conclude that a b b 0 b = π 2. (5.7) 18

19 Let b i [bb 0 ] such that b i b as i. Without loss of generality, we may assume that [ab i ] [ab]. By (5.5), there is η i Σ a A such that b a b i a + b i a η i = π 2. (5.8) Passing to a subsequence, η i η 0 as i. Note that we can find [aa 0 ] A such that a 0 a η 0 << ab. (5.9) Put bb i = ǫ i, and for i large let a i [aa 0 ] such that aa i = ǫ i. Let ã b b i be a comparison triangle (in S 2 ) of abb i. Then we derive the following: cos a i b i by (1.7.2) cos ab i cosǫ i +sin ab i sinǫ i cos b i a a 0 a by Lemma 4.3, (1.7.2) cos ab cos 2 ǫ i +sin ab i sinǫ i cos b i a a 0 a by (5.6) = cos ab cos 2 ǫ i +sin ab i sinǫ i cos b i a η i cos η i a 0 a by (5.8) = cos ab (cos 2 ǫ i +sin ab i sinǫ i sin b i a b a cos η i a 0 cos ab by (1.7.2), (5.3), (5.9) cos ab (cos 2 ǫ i +sin ab i sinǫ i sin i b ã bã cos η i a 0 cos ab by law of sine = cos ab (cos 2 ǫ i +sin 2 ǫ i sin b i cos η i a 0 b ã b cos ab by (5.7), (5.9) and i > cos ab. a ) a a ) ) We now specify a = a i and b = b i for large i. 6. Proof of (0.6.1) Recall that Lemma 2.1 provides a criterion for d(,z) to be concave. Let x be an arbitrary point in X \ Z, α(t) [0,ǫ), y, [xy] and [yα(t)] as in Lemma 2.1. By specifying Z = F, the concavity of d(,f) follows from (2.1.1) and (2.1.3). Our verification of (2.1.1) and (2.1.3) is technical and tedious, and is divided into two cases: y / S or y S. Proof of (0.6.1) for y S, i.e., y lies in some F v \S. We first claim that ( x y ) = Σ y F v and ( x y ) = Σ x x y y (Σ y X) (i.e., B π ( x 2 y ) = [ x y ( x y ) ]); and for η,η ( x y ) with η close to η, any [ x y η] is perpendicular to an [ηη ] (e.g., [ x y ( x y ) ] = { x y } ( x y ) ). Note that (2.1.1) and ( ) follows from the former part of the claim, and ( ) follows from the latter part and (1.7.3). We now verify the above claim. Let β(t) [0,+ ) F v with β(0) S be the ray such that y = β(t 0 ) witht 0 > 0. Let c f(y)and S c F v Ω c. Notethat Σ y X = {β + (t 0 ),β (t 0 )} Σ y Ω c and Σ y F v = {β + (t 0 ),β (t 0 )} Σ y Sc. Hence, it suffices 19

20 to show that x y Σ y Ω c, x y η = π 2 for any η Σ y S c, Σ y S c = Σ x x y y (Σ y Ω c ), and any [ x y η] is perpendicular to any [ηη ] Σ y Sc with η close to η. Since xy = xf, by the first variation formula, we derive that x y Σ y F v π 2. Hence, x y Σ y Ω c, and by (4.1.2) x y η = π 2 for any η Σ y S c. Consider the multi-valued map (see (4.1.2)), ψ Dϕ c : Σ β(0) S Dϕ c ψ Σ y Sc Σ x y (Σ y Ω c ), (6.1) where ψ(η) = η for any η Σ x y Sc. Note that Σ y S c y = Σ x x y y (Σ y Ω c ) is equivalent to ψ issurjective. By (4.1.2)and (1.7.3), similar to (5.4)we conclude that ψ Dϕ c is a radial cone-neighborhood isometry. Because dim(σ β(0) S) = dim(σ x y (Σ y Ω c )) and Σ β(0) S =, by (1.10.2) ψ Dϕ c is surjective, so is ψ surjective. Furthermore, by (1.10.1) Σ η (Σ y Sc ) is the image of a tangent map of Dϕ c ; and x y η Σ η (Σ y Sc ) π 2 because x y η = x y Σ y S c = π 2. By Lemma 4.3, [ x y η] is perpendicular to [ηη ] with η close to η. Finally, by the definition of F v, for any u Σ y F v and small t, there is [yy ] F v such that yy = t and y y u as t 0 (cf. Corollary 5.2). Note that this guarantees ( ). For y S, similar to the claim in the above proof, we need the following lemma. Lemma 6.1. If y S, then the following holds. (6.1.1) { x y, Ω c y } (Σ y S) and x y Ω c y = π 2, and thus dim((σ ys) ) = 1. As a result, ( x y ) Ω c y = {ξ 1,ξ 2 }, where ξ 1 may be equal to ξ 2. (6.1.2) ( x y ) = Σ x x y y (Σ y X) (i.e., B π ( x 2 y) = [ x y ( x y) ]); and for ζ,ζ ( x y) with ζ close to ζ, any [ x y ζ] is perpendicular to an [ζζ ]. (6.1.3) ( x y ) Σ y F; in detail, ( x y ) = 2 i=1 [ξ iσ y S] Fvi, where F vi contains γ ξi,y (see (4.3) for [ξ i Σ y S] Fvi ). Proof of (0.6.1) for y S by assuming Lemma 6.1. It is easy to see that (2.1.1)and ( )follows from the first property in (6.1.2) and (6.1.3), and ( ) follows from the second property in (6.1.2) and (1.7.3). Moreover, since ( x y) = 2 i=1 [ξ iσ y S] Fvi ((6.1.3)), for any u ( x y) and small t, there is a flat strip S j F vi with γ ξi,y S j (i = 1 or 2) such that we can select [yy j ] S j with y j y ( x y ) so that yy j = t 0 and y j y u as j. This suffices to see ( ). The main effort in the rest of Section 6 is to verify Lemma 6.1. Proof of (6.1.1). Note that Ω c y (Σ y S) (see (1.1)). On the other hand, since xy = xf, x y Σ ys π 2 and x y Ω c y π 2. By Lemma 1.3, x y Σ ys π 2 implies that x y (Σ ys). And because the concave Busemann function f achieves the maximum on S, we have Ω c y v π 2 (i.e. df y(v) 0). (6.2) 20

21 Hence, it follows that x y Ω c y = π 2. (6.3) By (1.8.1), we notice that dim((σ y S) ) 1 (note that (Σ y S) is convex in Σ y X). And by the convexity of (Σ y S), dim((σ y S) ) = 1 because { x y, Ω c y } (Σ y S). As a result, ( x y ) Ω c y contains at most two points. In proving (6.1.2), the following technical result in [RW] is required. In fact, Lemma 6.2 plays a role in the proof of Theorem 1.8. Lemma 6.2 ([RW]). Let Y Alex n (1), and let Y 1,Y 2 be two compact convex subsets in Y with dim(y 1 )+dim(y 2 ) = n 1 and y 1 y 2 = π 2 for any y i Y i. Then (6.2.1) Given p 1 Y1, there is m such that λ p1 p 2 m for any p 2 Y2, where λ p1 p 2 denotes the number of minimal geodesics between p 1 and p 2 ; and {p 2 Y2 λ p 1 p 2 = m} is open and dense in Y2 (in particular, it is just Y2 if n 2 = 1). Moreover, for any p 2 Y2 with λ p 1 p 2 = m and any [p 1 p 2 ], there is a neighborhood U of p 2 in Y2 such that {p 1 } U can be embedded isometrically into Y around [p 1 p 2 ]. (6.2.2) If Y 2 =, then for any p 1 Y1 or for p 1 Y 1 with (Σ p1 Y 1 ) π 2 = (Σ p1 Y 1 ) we have that (Σ p1 Y 1 ) = Y 2 p 1 and (Σ p1 Y 1 ) =. Moreover, the multivalued map σ : Y 2 (Σ p1 Y 1 ) defined by p 2 p 2 p 1 is a radial cone-neighborhood isometry; as a corollary, σ 1 is a metric cover 8 if n 2 = 1. (6.2.3) If Y 1 = {p 1 } and if Y 2 =, then either {p 1 } Y 2 can be embedded isometrically into Y, or Y iso = [{p 1, p 1 } Σ p1 Y]/Z 2, where p 1 p 1 = π and the Z 2 -action maps p 1 to p 1. Proof of (6.1.2). By (6.1.1), dim((σ y S) ) = 1, i.e. (Σ y S) is isometric to a circle S 1 or an [ab] with diameter π. If (Σ y S) = S 1, then diam(s 1 ) π 2 (note that x y ξ i = π 2 in (Σ ys) ), and thus by (1.8.2), Σ y X = (Σ y S) S 1, or Σ y X = ( Σ y S S 1 )/Z 2 with Σ y S/Z 2 = Σ y S and S 1 /Z 2 = S 1 (only when ξ 1 = ξ 2 ), which implies (6.1.2). Consequently, in the rest of the proof we may assume that (Σ y S) = [ab]. We will divide the proof in two cases: x y [ab] or otherwise. Case 1: x y [ab]. By (6.2) and (6.3), it has to hold that ( x y ) Ω c y = Ω c y = {a,b} with ab = π. Hence, Σ y X = {a,b} A for some A Alex n 2 (1). Note that { x y,σ y S} A, so ( x y ) = {a,b} Σ y S with ( x y ) =. By (6.2.3), either { x y } ( x y ) can be embedded isometrically into Σ y X (with full dimension) or Σ y X is isometric to ({ x y, x y } ( x y ) )/Z 2 with ( x y ) /Z 2 = ( x y ), which implies (6.1.2). Case 2: x y/ [ab], i.e., x y= a or b, say a. We first claim that [aσ y S] = {a} Σ y S or ({a,ã} Σ y S)/Z 2 with Σ y S/Z 2 = Σ y S. Let ξ [ab] with aξ = π 2. To see the claim, it suffices to show that [aσ y S] {ξ} =π 2 and [aσy S] is totally convex in Σ y X. (6.4) 8 In the paper, a metric cover means a locally isomeric cover. 21