arxiv:submit/ [math.ds] 31 Mar 2018

Transcription

1 JULIA SETS APPEAR QUASICONFORMALLY IN THE MANDELBROT SET TOMOKI KAWAHIRA AND MASASHI KISAKA arxiv:submit/ [math.ds] 31 Mar 2018 Abstract. In this paper we prove the following: Take any small Mandelbrot set and zoom in a neighborhood of a parabolic or Misiurewicz parameter in it, then we can see a quasiconformal image of a Cantor Julia set which is a perturbation of a parabolic or Misiurewicz Julia set. Furthermore, zoom in its middle part, then we can see a certain nested structure ( decoration ) and finally another smaller Mandelbrot set appears. A similar nested structure exists in the Julia set for any parameter in the smaller Mandelbrot set. We can also find images of a Julia sets by quasiconformal maps with dilatation arbitrarily close to 1. All the parameters belonging to these images are semihyperbolic and this leads to the fact that the set of semihyperbolic but non- Misiurewicz parameters are dense with Hausdorff dimension 2 in the boundary of the Mandelbrot set. 1. Introduction Let P c (z) := z 2 + c and recall that its filled Julia set K c is defined by K c := {z C {P n c (z)} n=0 is bounded} and its Julia set J c is the boundary of K c, that is, J c := K c. It is known that J c is connected if and only if the critical orbit {P n c (0)} n=0 is bounded and if J c is disconnected, it is a Cantor set. The connectedness locus of the quadratic family {P c } c C is the famous Mandelbrot set and we denote it by M: M := {c J c is connected} = {c {P n c (0)} n=0 is bounded}. A parameter c is called a Misiurewicz parameter if the critical point 0 is strictly preperiodic, that is, Pc k (Pc(0)) l = Pc(0) l and Pc k (Pc l 1 (0)) Pc l 1 (0) for some k, l N = {1, 2, 3, }. A parameter c is called a parabolic parameter if P c has a parabolic periodic point. Here, a periodic point z 0 with period m is called parabolic if P m c (z 0 ) = z 0 and its multiplier (P m c ) (z 0 ) is a root of unity. For the basic knowledge of complex dynamics, we refer to [B] and [Mil2]. In 2000, Douady et al. ([D-BDS]) proved the following: At a small neighborhood of the cusp point c 0 1/4 in M, which is in a (primitive) small Mandelbrot set, there is a sequence {M n } n N of small quasiconformal copies of M tending to c 0. Moreover each M n is encaged in a nested sequence of sets which are homeomorphic to the preimage of J 1 4 +η (for η > 0 small) by z z2m for m 0 and accumulate on M n Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 58F23; Secondary 30D05. Key words and phrases. complex dynamics, quadratic family, Mandelbrot set, Julia set, Mandelbrotlike family, quasiconformal map. 1

2 2 TOMOKI KAWAHIRA AND MASASHI KISAKA In this paper, firstly we generalize some parts of their results (Theorem A). Actually this kind of phenomena can be observed not only in a small neighborhood of the cusp of a small Mandelbrot set, that is, the point corresponding to a parabolic parameter 1/4 M, but also in every neighborhood of a point corresponding to any Misiurewicz or parabolic parameters c 0 in a small Mandelbrot set. (For example, c 0 = 1/4 M can be replaced by a Misiurewicz parameter c 0 = i M or a parabolic parameter c 0 = 3/4 M.) More precisely, we show the following: Take any small Mandelbrot set M s0 (Figure 1-(1))) and zoom in the neighborhood of c 0 M s0 corresponding to c 0 M which is a Misiurewicz or a parabolic parameter (Figure 1-(2) to (6))). (Note that c 0 itself is also a Misiurewicz or a parabolic parameter.) Then we can find a subset J M which looks very similar to J c0 (Figure 1 (6)). Zoom in further, then this J turns out to be similar to J c0 +η, where η is very small and c 0 + η / M rather than J c0, because J looks disconnected (Figure 1 (8), (9)). Furthermore, as we further zoom in the middle part of J, we can see a nested structure which is very similar to the iterated preimages of J c0 +η by z 2 (we call these a decoration) (Figure 1 (10), (12), (14)) and finally another smaller Mandelbrot set M s1 appears (Figure 1 (15)). Secondly we show the following result for filled Julia sets (Theorem B): Take a parameter c from the above smaller Mandelbrot set M s1 and look at the filled Julia set K c and its zooms around the neighborhood of 0 K c. Then we can observe a very similar nested structure to what we saw as zooming in the middle part of the set J M (see Figure 2). Thirdly we show that some of the smaller Mandelbrot sets M s1 and their decorations are images of certain model sets by quasiconformal maps whose dilatations are arbitrarily close to 1 (Theorem C). Finally we show that all the parameters belonging to the decorations are semihyperbolic and also the set of semihyperbolic but non-misiurewicz parameters are dense in the boundary of the Mandelbrot set (Corollary D). This together with Theorem C leads to a direct and intuitive explanation for the fact that the Hausdorff dimension of M is equal to 2, which is a famous result by Shishikura ([S]). According to Wolf Jung, a structure in the Mandelbrot set which resembles a whole Julia set in appearance was observed in computer experiments decades ago by Robert Munafo and Jonathan Leavitt. He also claims that he described a general explanation in his website ([J]). We believe some other people have already observed these phenomena so far. For example, we note that Morosawa, Nishimura, Taniguchi and Ueda observed this kind of similarity in their book ([MTU, p.19], [MNTU, p.26]). Further, earlier than this observation, Peitgen observed a kind of local similarity between Mandelbrot set and a Julia set by computer experiment ([PS, Figure 4.23]). There are different kinds of known results so far which show that some parts of the Mandelbrot set are similar to some (part of) Julia sets. The first famous result for this kind of phenomena is the one by Tan Lei ([T1]). She showed that as we zoom in the neighborhood of any Misiurewicz parameter c M, it looks like very much the same as the magnification of J c in the neighborhood of c J c. Later this result was generalized to the case where c is a semihyperbolic parameter by Rivera-Letelier ([Riv]) and its alternative proof is given by the first author ([K2]). On the other hand, some connected

3 JULIA SETS APPEAR QUASICONFORMALLY IN THE MANDELBROT SET (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) Figure 1. Zooms around a Misiurewicz point c00 = c1 = s0 c0 in a primitive small Mandelbrot set Ms0, where c0 is a Misiurewicz parameter satisfying Pc0 (Pc40 (0)) = Pc40 (0). After a sequence of nested structures, another smaller Mandelbrot set Ms1 appears in (15). Here, s0 = i, c0 = i, c1 = i, s1 = i. The widths of the figures (1) and (15) are about and , respectively. 3

4 4 TOMOKI KAWAHIRA AND MASASHI KISAKA Julia sets of quadratic polynomial can appear quasiconformally in a certain parameter space of a family of cubic polynomials. Buff and Henriksen showed that the bifurcation locus of the family {f b (z) = λz + bz 2 + z 3 } b C, where λ C with λ = 1 contains quasiconformal copies of J(λz + z 2 ) ([BH]). (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) Figure 2. Zooms around the critical point 0 in K c for c = s 1 c M s1, which is the smaller Mandelbrot set in Figure 1 (15). Here s 1 = i, c = i, c = i. The organization of this paper is as follows: In section 2, we construct models for the nested structures mentioned above, define the small Mandelbrot set, and show the precise statements of the results. In section 3 we recall the definitions and basic facts on quadratic-like maps and Mandelbrot-like families. We prove Theorem A for Misiurewicz case in section 4 and for parabolic case in section 5. We prove Theorem B in section 6, Theorem C in section 7 and Corollary D in section 8. We end this paper with some concluding remarks in section 9. Appendices A and B are devoted to the proofs of Lemma 4.3 and Lemma 4.4, respectively.

5 JULIA SETS APPEAR QUASICONFORMALLY IN THE MANDELBROT SET 5 Acknowledgment: We thank Arnaud Chéritat for informing us a work by Wolf Jung. Also we thank Wolf Jung for the information of the web pages ([J]). 2. The Model Sets and the Statements of the Results Notation. We use the following notation for disks and annuli: D(R) := {z C z < R}, A(r, R) := {z C r < z < R}. D(α, R) := {z C z α < R}, We mostly follow Douady s notations in [D-BDS] in the following. Models. Let c / M. Then J c is a Cantor set which does not contain 0. Now take two positive numbers ρ and ρ such that J c A(ρ, ρ). We define the rescaled Julia set Γ 0 (c ) = Γ 0 (c ) ρ,ρ by Γ 0 (c ) := J c ρ (ρ ) 2 = { ρ (ρ ) 2 z z Jc such that Γ 0 (c ) is contained in the annulus A(R, R 2 ) with R := ρ/ρ. (In [D-BDS], Douady used the radii of the form ρ = R 1/2 and ρ = R 1/2 for some R > 1 such that Γ(c ) = J c R 3/2 is contained in A(R, R 2 ). In this paper, however, we need more flexibility when we are concerned with the dilatation.) Let Γ m (c ) (m N) be the inverse image of Γ 0 (c ) by z 2m. Then Γ m (c ) (m = 0, 1, 2, ) are mutually disjoint, because we have Γ 0 (c ) A(R, R 2 ), Γ 1 (c ) A( R, R), Γ 2 (c ) A( 4 R, R),. For another parameter c M, let Φ c : C K c C D be the Böttcher coordinate (i.e. Φ c (P c (z)) = (Φ c (z)) 2 ). Let Φ M : C M C D be the isomorphism with Φ M (c)/c 1 as c. (Note that Φ M (c) := Φ c (c).) Now define the model sets M(c ) and K c (c ) as follows (see Figure 3): M(c ) := M Φ 1 M ( ) ( Γ m (c ), K c (c ) := K c Φ 1 c m=0 } m=0 ) Γ m (c ). ( ) We especially call M(c ) a decorated Mandelbrot set, M(c ) M = Φ 1 M m=0 Γ m(c ) its decoration and M M(c ) the main Mandelbrot set of M(c ). Also we call K c (c ) a ( decorated filled Julia set and K c (c ) K c = Φ 1 c m=0 Γ m(c ) its decoration. We will apply the same terminologies to the images of M(c ) or K c (c ) by quasiconformal maps. Note that the sets Γ m (c ) (m 0), M(c ) and K c (c ) depend on the choice of ρ and ρ. When we want to emphasize the dependence, we denote them by Γ m (c ) ρ,ρ, M(c ) ρ,ρ and K c (c ) ρ,ρ respectively. Small Mandelbrot sets. When we zoom in the boundary of M, a lot of small Mandelbrot sets appear and it is known that these sets are obtained as follows: (This is the result by Douady and Hubbard and its proof can be found in [H, Théorème 1 du Modulation]. See also [Mil1].) Let s 0 0 be a superattracting parameter, that is, P s0 (z) = z 2 +s 0 has a superattracting periodic point, and denote its period by p 2. Then there exists a unique )

6 6 TOMOKI KAWAHIRA AND MASASHI KISAKA Figure 3. The first row depicts the decorated Mandelbrot set M(c ) for c = i (close to the Misiurewicz parameter c i, the landing point of the external ray of angle 11/56) and R = 220. The second row depicts the set m 0 Γ m(c ). The third row depicts the decorated filled Julia set K c (c ) for c (the rabbit). small Mandelbrot set M s0 containing s 0 and a canonical homeomorphism χ : M s0 M with χ(s 0 ) = 0. Following Douady and Hubbard we use the notation s 0 M and s 0 c 0 to denote M s0 = χ 1 (M) and χ 1 (c 0 ) (c 0 M), respectively. The set M s0 is called the small Mandelbrot set with center s 0 (see Figure 4). If c 1 := s 0 c 0 (c 0 M), then c 1 is a parameter in M s0 which corresponds to c 0 M and it is known that P c1 is renormalizable with period p and Pc p 1 is hybrid equivalent (see section 3) to P c0. We say M s0 is primitive if M s0 has a cusp or, in other word, has a cardioid as its hyperbolic component containing s 0. Otherwise, it is called satellite, in which case it is attached to some hyperbolic component of int(m) (see Figure 4). Definition 2.1. Let X and Y be non-empty compact sets in C. We say X appears (K- )quasiconformally in Y or Y contains a (K-)quasiconformal copy of X if there is a (K- )quasiconformal map χ on a neighborhood of X such that χ(x) Y and χ( X) Y. Note that the condition χ( X) Y is to exclude the case χ(x) int(y ). Now our results are as follows: Theorem A (Julia sets appear quasiconformally in M). Let M s0 be any small Mandelbrot set, where s 0 0 is a superattracting parameter and c 0 M any Misiurewicz

7 JULIA SETS APPEAR QUASICONFORMALLY IN THE MANDELBROT SET 7 Figure 4. The original Mandelbrot set (left), a satellite small Mandelbrot set (middle), and a primitive small Mandelbrot set (right). The stars indicate the central superattracting parameters. or parabolic parameter. Then for every small ε > 0 and ε > 0, there exists an η C with η < ε and c 0 + η / M such that M(c 0 + η) appears quasiconformally in M in the neighborhood D(s 0 c 0, ε ) of s 0 c 0. In particular, the Cantor Julia set J c0 +η appears quasiconformally in M. Theorem A shows the following: Take any small Mandelbrot set M s0 and zoom in any small neighborhood of s 0 c 0 M s0, then we can find a quasiconformal image of M(c 0 + η). That is, as we zoom in, first we observe a quasiconformal image of J c0 +η, which corresponds to the Φ 1 M image of the rescaled Cantor set Γ 0(c 0 + η) in M(c 0 + η) and its iterated preimages (decoration) by z 2 and finally the main Mandelbrot set of the quasiconformal image of M(c 0 + η), say M s1, appears. Figure 1 shows zooms around a Misiurewicz parameter c 1 = s 0 c 0 in a primitive small Mandelbrot set M s0 (Figure 1 (1)). After a sequence of nested structures, a smaller small Mandelbrot set M s1 appears (Figure 1 (15)). Here M s0 is the relatively big small Mandelbrot set which is located in the upper right part of M. The map P s0 has a superattracting periodic point of period 4 and c 0 is the Misiurewicz parameter which satisfies P c0 (Pc 4 0 (0)) = Pc 4 0 (0) and corresponds to the junction of three roads as shown in Figure 4 in the middle. Since Misiurewicz or parabolic parameters are dense in M, we can reformulate Theorem A as follows: Let M s0 be any small Mandelbrot set, where s 0 0 is a superattracting parameter and c 0 M any parameter. Then for every small ε > 0 and ε > 0, there exists an η C with η < ε and c 0 +η / M such that M(c 0 +η) appears quasiconformally in M in the neighborhood D(s 0 c 0, ε ). In particular, the Cantor Julia set J c0 +η appears quasiconformally in M. Next we show that the same decoration of M(c 0 + η) in Theorem A appears quasiconformally in some filled Julia sets. Theorem B (Decoration in filled Julia sets). Let M s1 denote the main Mandelbrot set of the quasiconformal image of M(c 0 + η) in Theorem A. Then for every c M, K c (c 0 + η) appears quasiconformally in K s1 c, where s 1 c M s1. Theorem B shows the following: Choose any parameter from the main Mandelbrot set M s1 in the quasiconformal image of M(c 0 + η), that is, choose any c M and consider s 1 c

8 8 TOMOKI KAWAHIRA AND MASASHI KISAKA (i) (ii) (iii) Figure 5. (i): The decorated Mandelbrot set M(c ) for c = i (close to the parabolic parameter c 0 = (ii) and (iii): Embedded quasiconformal copies of M(c ) above near the satellite/primitive small Mandelbrot sets in Figure 4. M s1 and zoom in the neighborhood of 0 K s1 c. Then we can find a quasiconformal image of K c (c 0 + η), whose decoration is conformally the same as that of M(c 0 + η). Next we show that there are smaller Mandelbrot sets and their decorations which are images of model sets by quasiconformal maps whose dilatations are arbitrarily close to 1.

9 JULIA SETS APPEAR QUASICONFORMALLY IN THE MANDELBROT SET 9 Theorem C (Almost conformal copies). Let c 0 be any parabolic or Misiurewicz parameter and B any small closed disk whose interior intersects with M. Then for any small ε > 0 and κ > 0, there exist an η C with η < ε and two positive numbers ρ and ρ with ρ < ρ such that c 0 + η / M and M(c 0 + η) ρ,ρ appears (1 + κ)-quasiconformally in B M. In particular, B M contains a (1 + κ)-quasiconformal copy of the Cantor Julia set J c0 +η. Definition 2.2 (Semihyperbolicity). A quadratic polynomial P c (z) = z 2 + c (or the parameter c) is called semihyperbolic if (1) the critical point 0 is non-recurrent, that is, 0 / ω(0), where ω(0) is the ω-limit set of the critical point 0 and (2) P c has no parabolic periodic points. It is easy to see that if P c is hyperbolic then it is semihyperbolic. If P c is semihyperbolic, then it is known that it has no Siegel disks and Cremer points ([Ma], [CJY]). Also it is not difficult to see that J c is measure 0 from the result by Lyubich and Shishikura ([Ly1]). Thus the semihyperbolic dynamics is relatively understandable. A typical semihyperbolic but non-hyperbolic parameter c is a Misiurewicz parameter. But there seems less concrete examples of semihyperbolic parameter c which is neither hyperbolic nor Misiurewicz. Next corollary shows that we can at least see such a parameter everywhere in M. Corollary D (Abundance of semihyperbolicity). For every parameter c belonging to the quasiconformal image of the decoration of M(c 0 + η) in Theorem A, P c is semihyperbolic. Also the set of parameters which are not Misiurewicz and non-hyperbolic but semihyperbolic are dense in M. Corollary D together with Theorem C explains the following famous result by Shishikura: Theorem (Shishikura, 1998). Let SH := {c M P c is semihyperbolic}, then the Hausdorff dimension of SH is 2. In particular, the Hausdorff dimension of the boundary of M is 2. Explanation. Since there exist quadratic Cantor Julia sets with Hausdorff dimension arbitrarily close to 2 and we can find such parameters in every neighborhood of a point in M ([S, p.231, proof of Theorem B and p.232, Remark 1.1 (iii)]), we can find an η such that dim H (J c0 +η) is arbitrarily close to 2. Then by Theorem C and Corollary D it follows that we can find a subset of M with Hausdorff dimension arbitrarily close to 2 and consisting of semihyperbolic parameters as a quasiconformal image of the decoration of M(c 0 + η). This implies that dim H (SH) = 2. Remark. (1) A similar result to Theorem B still holds even when c C M is sufficiently close to M. Actually the homeomorphism χ : M s1 M can be extended to a homeomorphism between some neighborhoods of M s1 and M and so s 1 c = χ 1 (c) can be still defined for such a c C M. Then in this case, by modifying the definition of K c (c 0 + η) for this c C M we can prove that a K c (c 0 + η) appears quasiconformally in K s1 c, where s 1 c C M s1 is a point which is sufficiently close to M s1. We omit the details.

10 10 TOMOKI KAWAHIRA AND MASASHI KISAKA (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) Figure 6. Zooms around a parabolic point s1 c1 in a primitive small Mandelbrot set Ms1. After a sequence of complicated nested structures, another smaller Mandelbrot set Ms2 appears ((15)). (2) Corollary D and the above Theorem (Shishikura, 1998) means that relatively understandable dynamics is abundant in M (provided that Lebesgue measure of M is 0). In [S, p.225, THEOREM A], Shishikura actually proved dimh (SH) = 2, which immediately implies dimh ( M ) = 2. A new point of our explanation is that we constructed a decoration in M which contains a quasiconformal image of a whole Cantor Julia set and consists of semihyperbolic parameters. So now we can say that dimh ( M ) = 2 holds,

11 JULIA SETS APPEAR QUASICONFORMALLY IN THE MANDELBROT SET 11 because we can see a lot of almost conformal images of Cantor quadratic Julia sets whose Hausdorff dimension are arbitrarily close to 2. (3) Take a small Mandelbrot set M s1 (e.g. Figure 1 (15) = Figure 6 (1)) and another Misiurewicz or parabolic parameter c (e.g. c = 1 ) and zoom in the neighborhood of 4 s 1 c. Then we see much more complicated structure than we expected as follows: According to Theorem A, by replacing s 0 with s 1 and c 0 with c, it says that M(c + η) appears quasiconformally in D(s 1 c, ε ). This means that as we zoom in, we first see a quasiconformal image of J c +η, say J c +η (e.g. broken cauliflower, when c = 1 ). But 4 in reality as we zoom in, what we first see is a J c0 +η 0 (e.g. broken dendrite. See Figure 6 (5)). This seems to contradict with Theorem A, but actually it does not. As we zoom in further in the middle part of J c0 +η 0, we see iterated preimages of J c0 +η 0 by z 2 (Figure 6 (6), (7)) and then J c +η appears (Figure 6 (8)). After that we see again iterated preimages of J c0 +η 0 by z 2 (Figure 6 (9), (10)) and then a once iterated preimage of J c +η appears (Figure 6 (11)). This complicated structure continues and finally, we see a smaller Mandelbrot set, say M s2 (Figure 6 (15)). We can explain this complicated phenomena as follows: What we see in the series of magnifications above is a quasiconformal image of M(K c +η (c 0 + η 0 )), where ( ) M(K c +η (c 0 + η 0 )) := M Φ 1 M Γ m (K c +η (c 0 + η 0 )), m=0 Γ m (K c +η (c 0 + η 0 )) := inverse image of Γ 0 (K c +η (c 0 + η 0 )) by z 2m. Here M(K c +η (c 0 + η 0 )) is obtained just by replacing J c with K c +η (c 0 + η 0 ) in the definition of M(c ). Here, although c + η / M, K c +η (c 0 + η 0 ) can be defined in the similar manner. See the Remark (1) above. So what we first see as we zoom in the neighborhood of s 1 c is a quasiconformal image of K c +η (c 0 + η 0 ), whose outer most part is J c0 +η 0 (= broken dendrite) and inner most part is J c +η (= broken cauliflower). As we zoom in further, we see quasiconformal image of the preimage of K c +η (c 0 + η 0 ) by z 2, whose inner most part is a once iterated preimage of J c0 +η 0. After we see successive preimages of K c +η (c 0 + η 0 ) by z 2, a much more smaller Mandelbrot set M s2 finally appears. Since K c +η (c 0 + η 0 ) itself has a nested structure, the total picture has this very complicated structure. The proof is completely the same as for the Theorem A. 3. The quadratic-like maps and the Mandelbrot-like family In this section, we briefly recall the definitions of the quadratic-like map and the Mandelbrot-like family and explain the key Proposition 3.1 which is crucial for the proof of Theorem A. A map h : U U is called a polynomial-like map if U, U C are topological disks with U U (which means U U) and h is holomorphic and proper map of degree d with respect to z. It is called a quadratic-like map when d = 2. The filled Julia set K(h) and the Julia set J(h) of a polynomial-like map h are defined by K(h) := {z U h n (z) are defined for every n N} = h n (U ), J(h) := K(h). n=0

12 12 TOMOKI KAWAHIRA AND MASASHI KISAKA The famous Straightening Theorem by Douady and Hubbard ([DH2, p.296, THEOREM 1]) says that every polynomial-like map h : U U of degree d is quasiconformally conjugate to a polynomial P of degree d. More precisely h is hybrid equivalent to P, that is, there exists a quasiconformal map φ sending a neighborhood of K(h) to a neighborhood of K(P ) such that φ h = P φ and φ = 0 a.e. on K(h). Also if K(h) is connected, then P is unique up to conjugacy by an affine map. A family of holomorphic maps h = (h λ ) λ W is called a Mandelbrot-like family if the following (1) (8) hold: (1) W C is a Jordan domain with C 1 boundary W. (2) There exists a family of maps Θ = {Θ λ } λ W such that for every λ W, Θ λ : A(R, R 2 ) C is a quasiconformal embedding and that Θ λ (Z) is holomorphic in λ for every Z A(R, R 2 ). Figure 7. Tubing Θ = {Θ λ } λ W. (3) Define C λ := Θ λ ( D(R 2 )), C λ := Θ λ( D(R)) and let U λ (resp. U λ ) be the Jordan domain bounded by C λ (resp. C λ ). Then h λ : U λ U λ is a quadratic-like map with a critical point ω λ. Also let U := {(λ, z) λ W, z U λ }, U := {(λ, z) λ W, z U λ} then h : U U, (λ, z) (λ, h λ (z)) is analytic and proper. (4) Θ λ (Z 2 ) = h λ (Θ λ (Z)) for Z D(R). The family of maps Θ = {Θ λ } λ W satisfying the above conditions (1) (4) is called a tubing. (5) h extends continuously to a map U U and Θ λ : (λ, z) (λ, Θ λ (Z)) extends continuously to a map W A(R, R 2 ) U such that Θ λ is injective on A(R, R 2 ) for λ W.

13 JULIA SETS APPEAR QUASICONFORMALLY IN THE MANDELBROT SET 13 (6) The map λ ω λ extends continuously to W. (7) h λ (ω λ ) C λ for λ W. (8) The one turn condition: When λ ranges over W making one turn, then the vector h λ (ω λ ) ω λ makes one turn around 0. Now let M h be the connectedness locus of the family h = (h λ ) λ W : M h := {λ W K(h λ ) is connected} = {λ W ω λ K(h λ )}. Douady and Hubbard ([DH2, Chapter IV]) showed that there exists a homeomorphism χ : M h M. This is just a correspondence by the Straightening Theorem, that is, for every λ M h there exist a unique c = χ(λ) M such that h λ is hybrid equivalent to P c (z) = z 2 + c. Furthermore they showed that this χ can be extended to a homeomorphism χ Θ : W W M by using Θ = {Θ λ } λ W, where W M := {c C G M (c) < 2 log R}, G M := the Green function of M is a neighborhood of M. Also Lyubich showed that χ Θ is quasiconformal on any W with W W ([Ly2, p.366, THEOREM 5.5 (The QC Theorem)]). Then Douady et al. showed the following: Proposition 3.1. [D-BDS, p.29, PROPOSITION 3] For any Γ A(R, R 2 ), let Γ m be the preimage of Γ by z 2m. Then and therefore χ 1 Θ (Φ 1 M (Γ m)) = {λ W h m+1 (ω λ ) Θ λ (Γ)} M h {λ h k λ(ω λ ) Θ λ (Γ) for some k N} = χ 1 Θ λ ( ( M m=0 Φ 1 M (Γ m)) ). We apply this proposition to the rescaled Julia set Γ = Γ 0 (c )(:= J c (ρ/(ρ ) 2 )) contained in A(R, R 2 ), where c / M, J c A(ρ, ρ) and R := ρ/ρ. Then we have ( ( ) ) ( ( χ 1 Θ M Φ 1 M (Γ ) ) m) = χ 1 Θ M Φ 1 M Γ m (c ) = χ 1 Θ (M(c )). m=0 m=0 4. Proof of Theorem A for Misiurewicz case Let M s0 be any small Mandelbrot set, where s 0 0 is a superattracting parameter (i.e., the critical point 0 is a periodic point of period p 2 for P s0 ), c 0 M any Misiurewicz parameter and c 1 := s 0 c 0 M s0. By the tuning theorem by Douady and Hubbard [H, Théorème 1 du Modulation], there exists a simply connected domain Λ = Λ s0 in the parameter plane with the following properties: If M s0 is a primitive small Mandelbrot set, then M s0 Λ. If M s0 is a satellite small Mandelbrot set, then M s0 {s 0 (1/4)} Λ. For any c Λ, P c is renormalizable with period p.

14 14 TOMOKI KAWAHIRA AND MASASHI KISAKA This means that P p c is a quadratic-like map on a suitable domain U c onto U c which contains the critical point 0. In what follows we denote f c := P p c U c : U c U c. We shall first choose U c1 and U c 1 carefully in Lemma 4.1 and then give a definition of U c and U c at the end of Step (M1) below. Step (M1): Definition of U c and U c In this case f c1 is Misiurewicz, that is, q c1 := f l c 1 (0) for some l N is a repelling periodic point of period k with multiplier µ c1 := (f k c 1 ) (q c1 ). Then the Julia set J(f c1 ) of the quadratic-like map f c1 is a dendrite and K(f c1 ) = J(f c1 ). Since q c1 is repelling, a repelling periodic point q c of period k for f c persists by the implicit function theorem. But note that q c f l c(0), if c c 1. Take a linearizing coordinate φ c : Ω c C with φ c (q c ) = 0, where Ω c is a neighborhood of q c such that φ c (f k c (z)) = T c (φ c (z)), T c (z) := µ(c)z, µ(c) := (f k c ) (q c ). Note that φ c (z) depends holomorphically on c. Lemma 4.1. There exist Jordan domains U c1, U c 1 and V c1 with C 1 boundaries and integers N, j N which satisfy the following: (1) f c1 = P p c 1 U c1 : U c 1 U c1 is a quadratic-like map. (2) g c1 := P N c 1 Vc1 : V c1 U c1 is an isomorphism and f j c 1 (V c1 ) U c1 U c 1. (3) V c1 Ω c1. Also we can take V c1 arbitrarily close to q c1 Ω c1. Figure 8. The relation between U c, U c, V c, and V c, which are defined as a holomorphic perturbation of those for c = c 1 given in Lemma 4.1. Remark. There are infinitely many different choices of V c1 and each choice of V c1 gives a different decorated small Mandelbrot set.

15 JULIA SETS APPEAR QUASICONFORMALLY IN THE MANDELBROT SET 15 Proof. We can take Jordan domains U c1 and U c 1 with C 1 boundaries which are neighborhoods of J(f c1 ) and f c1 : U c 1 U c1 is a quadratic-like map. Note that we can take these Jordan domains in any neighborhood of J(f c1 ). Now for j N let A j := f j c 1 (U c1 U c 1 ). Since f c1 is conjugate to z 2 on U c 1 J fc1, A j Ω c1 for every sufficiently large j. Also since (U c1 U c 1 ) J c1, we have A j J c1. From these facts and the shrinking lemma ([LyMin, p.86]), it follows that there exist sufficiently large N and j N and V c1 which is a component of Pc N 1 (U c1 ) such that g c1 := Pc N 1 Vc1 : V c1 U c1 is an isomorphism and V c1 Ω c1 A j. In particular we have fc j 1 (V c1 ) U c1 U c 1. (Lemma 4.1) Now define U c := U c1 for every c in a neighborhood S of c 1 contained in D(c 1, ε ). Let U c be the Jordan domain bounded by the component of Pc p (U c ) which is contained in U c ( U c1 ) and V c the Jordan domain bounded by the component of Pc N (U c ) which is close to V c1. Then we have if S is sufficiently small. Define U c U c, and f j c (V c ) U c U c for c S f c := P p c U c and g c := P N c Vc. Then it follows that f c : U c U c is a quadratic-like map with a critical point 0 and g c : V c U c ( U c1 ) is an isomorphism. See Figure 8. Let b c := gc 1 (0) V c and call it a pre-critical point. Step (M2): Construction of the Mandelbrot-like family G = G n We construct a Mandelbrot-like family G = G n := {G c : V c U c } c Wn such that V c U c and W = W n S for every sufficiently large n N as follows: Recall that the quadratic-like map f c : U c U c has a repelling periodic point q c of period k, since the repelling periodic point q c1 persists under the perturbation. So we take a linearizing coordinate φ c : Ω c C around q c with φ c (q c ) = 0 such that φ c (f k c (z)) = T c (φ c (z)), T c (z) := µ(c)z, µ(c) := (f k c ) (q c ). For later use, here we normalize φ c so that Define φ c (b c ) = 1, for the pre-critical point b c = g 1 c (0). a c := f l c(0) then note that a c1 = q c1 and a c q c when c c 1 is very close to c 1. Hence for such a c, a c is repelled from q c by the dynamics of f k c. By taking a sufficiently small S, we may assume that a c = f l c(0) S for each c S. Now we define W = W n := {c Λ fc kn (a c )(= fc l+kn (0)) V c }. Lemma 4.2. The set W = W n is non-empty for every sufficiently large n. Moreover there exists an s n W n such that fs kn n (a sn ) = b sn, that is, g sn fs l+kn n (0) = 0 and hence has a superattracting periodic point. P sn

16 16 TOMOKI KAWAHIRA AND MASASHI KISAKA Proof. We observe the dynamics near q c through the linearizing coordinate φ c : Ω c C of q c. Let c = τ(c) := φ c (a c ), Ṽ c := φ c (V c ) and define W n := { c c W n } = {τ(c) c satisfies f kn c (a c ) V c } = { c c satisfies µ(c) n c (= µ(c) n τ(c)) Ṽc}. Then c W n if and only if c = τ(c) W n. Since µ(c) and τ(c) depend holomorphically on c, there exist α N, M 0 0 and K 0 0 such that µ(c) = (f k c ) (q c ) = µ c1 + M 0 (c c 1 ) α + o( c c 1 α ), τ(c) = K 0 (c c 1 ) + o( c c 1 ). The fact that K 0 0 for the expansion of τ(c) follows from the result by Douady and Hubbard ([DH2, p.333, Lemma 1]. See also [T1, p.609, Lemma 5.4]). In order to show W n, it suffices to show that for 1 = φ c (b c ) Ṽc the equation µ(c) n τ(c) = 1 has a solution. Now we have µ(c) n τ(c) = (µ c1 + M 0 (c c 1 ) α + o( c c 1 α )) n (K 0 (c c 1 ) + o( c c 1 )) ( = {µ c1 1 + M )} n 0 (c c 1 ) α + o( c c 1 α K 0 (c c 1 )(1 + o(1)) µ c1 ( = µ n c 1 K 0 (c c 1 ) 1 + nm ) 0 (c c 1 ) α + o( c c 1 α ) (1 + o(1)). µ c1 On the other hand, from the above expression the equation µ(c) n τ(c) = 1 with respect to c can be written as µ n c 1 K 0 (c c 1 ) + h(c) = 1, that is, (µ n c 1 K 0 (c c 1 ) 1) + h(c) = 0, h(c) = O( c c 1 α+1 ). (4.1) Then the equation µ n c 1 K 0 (c c 1 ) = 1 has a unique solution c = c µ n c 1 K 0. Consider the equation (4.1) on the disk D(c 1, 2/ µ n c 1 K 0 ). Then on the boundary of this disk by putting c = c 1 + 2/(µ n c 1 K 0 ) e iθ, we have µ n c 1 K 0 (c c 1 ) 1 = 2e iθ 1 1, meanwhile when n is sufficiently large we have 1+α h(c) = 2 µ n c 1 K 0 (1 + o(1)) < 1. Since we have µ n c 1 K 0 (c c 1 ) 1 > h(c) on the boundary of the disk, by Rouché s theorem the equation µ(c) n τ(c) = 1 has the same number of solutions as the equation µ n c 1 K 0 (c c 1 ) 1 = 0, that is, it has a unique solution. This shows that W n if n is sufficiently large. Moreover denote this solution c := s n, then we have fs kn n (a sn ) = b sn, that is, g sn fs l+kn n (0) = 0. Hence P sn has a superattracting periodic point. This completes the proof. (Lemma 4.2)

17 JULIA SETS APPEAR QUASICONFORMALLY IN THE MANDELBROT SET 17 Remark. In the proof above, even if we replace 1 Ṽc with w 1 which is close to 1, we can still do the same argument. Note that larger the n is, closer the W n is to c 1. Hence W n S Λ for every sufficiently large n. We call s n W n the center of W n. Now let L = L n := l + kn and V c be the Jordan domain bounded by the component of fc L (V c ) containing 0 and define G c := g c f L c : V c U c and G = G n := {G c } c Wn, where W n = {c Λ f L c (0) V c }. See Figure 8. Step (M3): Proof for G = G n being a Mandelbrot-like family The map fc L : V c V c is a branched covering of degree 2 and g c : V c U c is a holomorphic isomorphism. Hence G c := g c fc L : V c U c is a quadratic-like map. Next we construct a tubing Θ = Θ n = {Θ c } c Wn for G n as follows: For s n W n, since fs L n (0) V sn and fs j n (V sn ) U sn U s n, from Lemma 4.1, we have fs L+j n (0) / U s n. It follows that J(f sn ) is a Cantor set which is quasiconformally homeomorphic to a quadratic Cantor Julia set J c0 +η n for some η = η n with c 0 + η n / M. By continuity of the straightening of f c for c Λ, we have η n < ε for sufficiently large n. We denote the homeomorphism from J(f sn ) to J c0 +η n by Ψ sn : J(f sn ) J c0 +η n, which is indeuced by the straightening theorem. Take an R > 1 and let ρ := R 1/2 and ρ := R 1/2 such that J c0 +η n A(ρ, ρ). Define the rescaled Julia set and a homeomorphism Γ := Γ 0 (c 0 + η n ) = Γ 0 (c 0 + η n ) ρ,ρ := J c0 +η n R 3/2 A(R, R 2 ) for s n appropriately so that Θ 0 n : A(R, R 2 ) U sn V s n Θ 0 n is quasiconformal, Θ 0 n(z 2 ) = G sn (Θ 0 n(z)) for Z = R, Θ 0 n(z) = Ψ 1 s n (R 3/2 Z) for Z Γ 0 (c 0 + η n ), Θ 0 n(γ 0 (c 0 + η n )) = J(f sn ). Then the Julia set J(f c ) U c V c is a Cantor set for every c W n for the same reason for J(f sn ) and this, as well as U c and V c undergo holomorphic motion (see [S, p.229]). By S lodkowski s theorem there exists a holomorphic motion ι c on C which induces these motions. Finally define Θ c := ι c Θ 0 n, then Θ = Θ n := {Θ c } c Wn is a tubing for G n. Now we have to check that G n with Θ n satisfies the conditions (1) (8) for a Mandelbrotlike family. It is easy to check that (2) (7) are satisfied for G n with Θ n. First we prove the condition (1), that is, W n is a Jordan domain with C 1 boundary. In what follows, we work with the linearizing coordinate again. Let z c (t) (t [0, 1]) be a parametrization of the Jordan curve Ṽc. This is obtained by the holomorphic motion of Ṽc 1. Now we have to solve the equation with respect to the variable c µ(c) n τ(c) = z c (t) (4.2) to get a parametrization of W n. As with the equation (4.1), this equation (4.2) can be written as {µ n c 1 K 0 (c c 1 ) z c (t)} + h(c) = 0, h(c) = O( c c 1 α+1 ).

18 18 TOMOKI KAWAHIRA AND MASASHI KISAKA Note that this h(c) is, of course, different from the one in (4.1). Rewrite this as where F (c) := µ n c 1 K 0 (c c 1 ) z c1 (t), The equation F (c) = 0 has a unique solution c = c n (t) := c 1 + d n (t), F (c) + G(c) = 0, (4.3) G(c) := h(c) (z c (t) z c1 (t)). d n (t) := z c 1 (t) µ n c 1 K 0. Consider (4.3) in the disk D(c n (t), d n (t) 1+β ) for a small β > 0. estimates F (c) = O( d n (t) β ), G(c) = O( d n (t) ) Since we have the on the boundary of this disk, we have F (c) > G(c) for sufficiently large n. By Rouché s theorem (4.3) has a unique solution č n (t) in the disk D(c n (t), d n (t) 1+β ), so it satisfies č n (t) = c n (t) + O( d n (t) 1+β ) = c 1 + d n (t)(1 + O( d n (t) β )). By using this solution we can parametrize W n as zčn(t)(t) = µ(č n (t)) n τ(č n (t)) and since z c (t) is holomorphic in c, in particular it is continuous in c and we have zčn(t)(t) z c1 (t) i.e. W n Ṽc 1 (n ). Note that this convergence is uniform with respect to t. Moreover the following holds: Lemma 4.3. The function č n (t) is of class C 1 and with respect to C 1 norm. zčn(t)(t) z c1 (t) (n ) We show the proof of this lemma in Appendix A. Now since z c1 (t) is a Jordan curve of class C 1 and the parametrization zčn(t)(t) of W n is C 1 close to z c1 (t), it follows that zčn(t)(t) is also a Jordan curve for every sufficiently large n by the following lemma (See Appendix B for the proof): Lemma 4.4. Let z n (t) and z(t) (t [0, 1]) be closed curves of class C 1 in C and assume that z(t) is a Jordan curve. If z n (t) z(t) (n ) with respect to C 1 norm, then z n (t) is also a Jordan curve for every sufficiently large n N. So W n is a Jordan domain with C 1 boundary and this implies that W n is also a Jordan domain with C 1 boundary. Next the one turn condition (8) is proved as follows: When c ranges over W n making one turn, the variable t for the function zčn(t)(t) = µ(č n (t)) n τ(č n (t)) varies from t = 0 to t = 1. Since zčn(t)(t) is C 1 close to z c1 (t), this implies that fc kn (a c ) = fc l+kn (0) = f L (0) makes one turn in a very thin tubular neighborhood of V c1. Hence G c (0) = g c fc l+kn (0) = g c fc L (0) makes one turn in a very thin tubular neighborhood of U c1. Step (M4): End of the proof of Theorem A for Misiurewicz case

19 JULIA SETS APPEAR QUASICONFORMALLY IN THE MANDELBROT SET 19 For every ε > 0 and ε > 0, take an n N so sufficiently large that c 0 + η = c 0 + η n D(c 0, ε) M. We conclude that the model M(c 0 + η) appears quasiconformally in M in the neighborhood D(c 1, ε ) = D(s 0 c 0, ε ) of c 1 = s 0 c 0 by applying Proposition 3.1 to the Mandelbrot-like family G = G n with Θ = Θ n. Indeed from Proposition 3.1, the set N := M G {c G k c(0) Θ c (Γ 0 (c 0 + η)) for some k N} is the image of M(c 0 + η) by the quasiconformal map χ 1 Θ = χ 1 Θ n, where M G is the connectedness locus of G. On the other hand, for c M G, the orbit of the critical point 0 by G c = g c fc l+kn = Pc Lp+N is bounded, which implies that the orbit of 0 by P c is also bounded and hence c M. If G k c(0) Θ c (Γ 0 (c 0 + η)) for some k N, then c M as well. So the set N is a subset of M. In particular, since a conformal image Φ 1 M (J c 0 +η R 3/2 ) of J c0 +η is a subset of M(c 0 + η), we conclude that J c0 +η appears quasiconformally in M. This completes the proof of Theorem A for Misiurewicz case. Remark. In [D-BDS], there is no proof for W n being C 1 Jordan domain and also the proof for the one turn condition (8) is intuitive. 5. Proof of Theorem A for parabolic case The proof is a mild generalization of Douady s original proof for the cauliflower. We divide it into four steps (Steps (P1) (P4)) that are parallel to the Misiurewicz case (Steps (M1) (M4)). Step (P1): Definition of U c, U c, and V c Let us recall the settings: Let M s0 be the small Mandelbrot set with center s 0 0. Now we take any parabolic parameter c 0 M and set c 1 := s 0 c 0, which is parabolic as well. Let p be the period of the superattracting cycle in the dynamics of P s0. As in the previous section, we take the simply connected domain Λ = Λ s0 in the parameter place associated with the small Mandelbrot set M s0. Note that the parabolic parameter c 1 = s 0 c 0 belongs to Λ unless M s0 is a satellite small Mandelbrot set and c 0 = 1/4. For a technical reason, if M s0 is a satellite small Mandelbrot set, then we assume in addition that c 0 1/4. (The case we excluded will be discussed at the end of Step (P1).) Then there exist Jordan domains U c 1 and U c1 (with C 1 boundaries) containing 0 such that the restriction f c1 = Pc p 1 U c1 : U c 1 U c1 is a quadratic-like map. A pair of petals. Let be the Fatou component in K(f c1 ) containing 0. (We call it the critical Fatou component). The boundary contains a unique parabolic periodic point q c1 of f c1 (resp. P c1 ) of period k. (resp. kp.) The multiplier (f k c 1 ) (q c1 ) is of the form µ 0 := e 2πiν /ν, where ν and ν are coprime integers. Since P c1 has only one critical point, q c1 has ν-petals. That is, by choosing an appropriate local coordinate w = ψ(z) near q c1 with ψ(q c1 ) = 0, we have ψ f kν c 1 ψ 1 (w) = w(1 + w ν + O(w 2ν )). See [B, Proof of Theorem 6.5.7] and [K1, Appendix A.2]. The set of w s with arg w ν = 0 (resp. arg w ν = π) determines the repelling directions (resp. the attracting directions) of

20 20 TOMOKI KAWAHIRA AND MASASHI KISAKA this parabolic point. Note that the critical Fatou component is invariant under f kν and it contains a unique attracting direction. In particular, the sequence fc kνm 1 (0) (m N) converges to q c1 within tangentially to the attracting direction. Set { Ω + := z = ψ 1 (w) C 2π 3ν Ω := } 2π arg w 3ν, 0 < w < r, { z = ψ 1 (w) C 5π 3ν arg w π 3ν, 0 < w < r for some r 1 such that Ω + and Ω are a pair of repelling and attracting petals with Ω + Ω. (See Figure 9.) By multiplying a ν-th root of unity to the local coordinate w = ψ(z) if necessary, we may assume that the attracting petal Ω is contained in. } c 1, Figure 9. We choose a pair of repelling and attracting petals. Their intersection has two components when ν = 1. Fatou coordinates. For the coordinate w = ψ(z), we consider an additional coordinate change w W = 1/(νw ν ). In this W -coordinate, the action of fc kν 1 on each petal is W W O(W 1 ). By taking a sufficiently small r if necessary, there exist conformal mappings φ + : Ω + C and φ : Ω C such that φ ± (fc kν 1 (z)) = φ ± (z) + 1 which are unique up to adding constants. We call φ ± the Fatou coordinates. Since the critical orbit {fc kνm 1 (0)} m 0 lands on Ω and never escapes from it, we normalize φ such that φ (fc kνm 1 (0)) = m for m 0. We will also normalize φ + after Lemma 4.1 below. Parabolic counterpart of Lemma 4.1. Now we choose Jordan domains U c1, U c 1 and as in the Misiurewicz case: V c1 Lemma 4.1. There exist Jordan domains U c1, U c 1 and V c1 with C 1 boundaries and integers N, j N which satisfy the following: (1) f c1 = P p c 1 U c1 : U c 1 U c1 is a quadratic-like map. (2) g c1 := P N c 1 Vc1 : V c1 U c1 is an isomorphism and f j c 1 (V c1 ) U c1 \ U c 1. (3) V c1 Ω +. Also we can take V c1 arbitrarily close to q c1 Ω +. The proof is the same as that of Lemma 4.1. See Figure 10. Let b c1 := g 1 c 1 (0) V c1. We normalize the Fatou coordinate φ + such that φ + (b c1 ) = 0.

21 JULIA SETS APPEAR QUASICONFORMALLY IN THE MANDELBROT SET 21 Figure 10. We choose V c1 in the repelling petal Ω +. For c sufficiently close to c 1, let U c := U c1 and define U c by the connected component of Pc p (U c ) with U c U c, and V c by the connected component of Pc N (U c ) whose boundary is close to that of V c1. Indeed, if we choose a sufficiently small disk D(c 1, ε 1 ) Λ D(c 1, ε ), then f c := Pc p U c gives a quadratic-like map f c : U c U c ; V c U c ; and fc j (V c ) U c U c and g c := Pc N Vc : V c U c is an isomorphism for each c D(c 1, ε 1 ). Set b c := g 1 c (0) V c. We regard the family {f c : U c U c } c D(c1,ε 1 ) as holomorphic perturbations of the quadratic-like map f c1. Perturbation of the parabolic periodic point. Let us define a sector S in D(c 1, ε 1 ) such that the perturbed Fatou coordinates are defined for each parameter c S. (Cf. [DH1, Exposé XI XIV]. See also [T2, Theorems 1.1 and A.1].) When ν = 1 (equivalently, µ 0 = 1), the parabolic fixed point q c1 of f k c 1 splits into two distinct fixed points q c and q c of f k c for each c c 1. In local coordinates centered at each of these two points, the action of f k c is of the form w µ c w + O(w 2 ) and w µ cw + O(w 2 ), where µ c = 1 + A 0 c c1 + O(c c 1 ), (5.1) µ c = 1 A 0 c c1 + O(c c 1 ) for some constant A 0 0. (They swap their roles when c makes one turn around c 1.) Hence the parameter c can be locally regarded as a two-to-one function c = c 1 + A 2 0 (µ c 1) 2 + of the multiplier µ = µ c close to 1. We choose a small r 0 > 0 and define a sector S in D(c 1, ε 1 ) by { S := c D(c 1, ε 1 ) 0 < µ c 1 < r 0 and arg(µ c 1) π < π }. 2 8 See Figure 11 (left). (The conditions for µ c ensure arg µ c < 0 and arg µ c > 0 for c c 1. ) When ν 2 (equivalently, µ 0 1), the parabolic fixed point q c1 of fc k 1 splits into one fixed point q c and a cycle of period ν of fc k for each c c 1. In a local coordinate centered at q c, the action of fc k is of the form w µ c w + O(w 2 ) where µ c = (f k c ) (q c ) = µ 0 ( 1 + B0 (c c 1 ) + O((c c 1 ) 2 ) ) (5.2)

22 22 TOMOKI KAWAHIRA AND MASASHI KISAKA for some constant B 0 0. Hence the parameter c can be locally regarded as a one-to-one function c = c 1 + B0 1 (µ c µ 0 ) + of the multiplier µ = µ c close to µ 0. We choose a small r 0 > 0 and define a sector S in D(c 1, ε 1 ) by { ( ) S := c D(c 1, ε 1 ) 0 < µ c 1 µ 0 < r 0 and arg µc 1 π µ 0 2 < π }. 8 See Figure 11 (right). Figure 11. The sector S for ν = 1 (left) and ν 2 (right). Perturbed Fatou coordinates and the phase. For any c sufficiently close to c 1, there exists a local coordinate w = ψ c (z) near q c with ψ c (q c ) = 0 such that ψ c f kν c ψ 1 c (w) = µ ν c w (1 + w ν + O(w 2ν )), where µ ν c 1 and ψ c ψ uniformly as c c 1. See [K1, Appendix A.2]. By a further ν-fold coordinate change W = µ ν2 c /(νw ν ), the action of fc kν is W µ ν2 c W O(W 1 ), where W = is a fixed point with multiplier exactly µ ν2 c point q c of f kν c close to µ ν2 c or that corresponds to the fixed. There is a fixed point of the form W = 1/(1 µ ν2 )+O(1) with multiplier on each branch of the ν-fold coordinate. Note that µ ±ν2 c = 1 ± ν 2 A 0 c c1 + O(c c 1 ) µ ±ν2 c = 1 ± ν 2 B 0 (c c 1 ) + O((c c 1 ) 2 ) according to ν = 1 or ν 2 by (5.1) and (5.2).

23 JULIA SETS APPEAR QUASICONFORMALLY IN THE MANDELBROT SET 23 Figure 12. A typical behavior of the critical orbit by f kν c near q c for ν = 3. It is known that for each c in the sector S, there exist unique (perturbed) Fatou coordinates φ + c : Ω + c C and φ c : Ω c C satisfying the following conditions (See [La], [DSZ] and [S, Proposition A.2.1]): Each Ω ± c contains two fixed points q c and q c of fc kν that converge to q c1 as c c 1 in S. φ ± c is a conformal map from Ω ± c onto the image in C. φ ± c (fc kν (z)) = φ ± c (z) + 1 if both z and fc kν (z) are contained in Ω ± c. Every compact set E in Ω ± is contained in Ω ± c if c S is sufficiently close to c 1. In particular, for such a c, if fc kνm 1 (0) Ω for some m 1, then fc kνm (0) Ω c ; and V c Ω + c. The maps φ ± c are normalized as follows: φ c (fc kνm (0)) = m if fc kνm (0) Ω c ; and φ + c (b c ) = 0, where b c = gc 1 (0). For any compact set E in Ω ±, φ ± c E converges uniformly to φ ± E as c c 1 in S. We can arrange the domains Ω ± c such that Ω + c = Ω c =: Ω c for each c (Figure 12). Hence for each z Ω c, τ(c) := φ + c (z) φ c (z) C is defined and independent of z. The function τ : S C is called the lifted phase. Note that the value τ(c) is determined by the unique normalized Fatou coordinates associated with the analytic germ fc kν. It does not depend on the choice of the parametrization 1. If ν = 1, then τ(c) is of the form 2πi τ(c) = + O(1) (c c 1 ), A 0 c c1 1 In [D-BDS], the lifted phase for ν = 1 is described in terms of the normalized germ f µ (z) = z + z 2 + µ + (µ 0). In this case the multiplier for two fixed points of f µ are 1 ± 2 µi (1 + O(µ)) and τ = π/ µ + O(1) as µ 0. In [DSZ], they use α = (ν/2πi) log(µ c /µ 0 1) (so that µ c = exp(2πi(ν + α)/ν)) to parametrize the germs. Any parameterizations are analytically equivalent and they determine the same value τ as long as it represent the same analytic germ near the fixed points.

24 24 TOMOKI KAWAHIRA AND MASASHI KISAKA where A 0 is given in (5.1) and we choose the branch of c c 1 such that the corresponding multiplier µ c = 1 + A 0 c c1 + satisfies Im (µ c 1) > 0. If ν 2, then where B 0 is given in (5.2). 2πi τ(c) = ν 2 B 0 (c c 1 ) + O(1) (c c 1), Satellite roots. Now we deal with the remaining case: Suppose that M s0 is a satellite small Mandelbrot set of M with renormalization period p and c 0 = 1/4. That is, c 1 = s 0 c 0 is the root of M s0. Then P c1 has a parabolic periodic point q c1 of period p with ν 2 petals such that p = p ν. In this case, we slightly modify the construction above and get a degenerate quadratic-like mapping f c1 := Pc p 1 U c1 : U c 1 U c1, which satisfies: U c 1 and U c1 are topological disks with U c 1 U c1 such that U c 1 U c1 = {q c1 }. f c1 : U c 1 U c1 is a proper branched covering of degree two. (This is part of the construction of Λ = Λ s0 for the satellite M s0. See [H] for more details.) Since q c1 is a fixed point of Pc p 1 with multiplier 1 and ν petals, we can find a pair of attracting and repelling petals Ω and Ω + as in Figure 9 (right). Moreover, we choose a Jordan domain V c1 Ω + U c 1 satisfying the conditions (1) (3) of Lemma 4.1. When c is close to c 1, there exists a fixed point q c of Pc p with q c q c1 as c c 1. The bifurcation of the local dynamics is described in terms of the multiplier µ c = (Pc p ) (q c ). We define the sector S as in the case of ν 2. Then perturbed Fatou coordinates make sense for any c S Λ. We may also assume that q c is repelling, and define a Jordan domain U c by adding a small disk centered at q c to U c1. (We slightly modify U c such that U c is a C 1 Jordan curve that moves holomorphically with respect to c.) Then we have a quadratic-like family f c : U c U c, where U c is a connected component of Pc p (U c ) with U c U c. We can also choose the Jordan domain V c such that V c is a connected component of Pc N (U c ) that is close to V c1. Step (P2): Construction of the Mandelbrot-like family G = G n We construct a Mandelbrot-like family G = G n := {G c : V c U c } c Wn such that V c U c and W = W n S Λ for every sufficiently large n N as follows: Recall that the quadratic-like map f c : U c U c has a (repelling) periodic point q c of period k which bifurcates from the parabolic periodic point q c1 of f c1 and we take perturbed Fatou coordinates φ ± c : Ω ± c = Ω c C such that φ ± c (f kν c (z)) = φ ± c (z) + 1 with normalization φ c (fc kνm (0)) = m if fc kνm (0) Ω c for sufficiently large m; and φ + c (b c ) = 0, where b c := gc 1 (0) is the pre-critical point. For m N with fc kνm 1 (0) Ω c 1, we may assume that S is sufficiently small such that fc kνm (0) Ω c for each c S Λ. Now for each n m, define W = W n := {c S fc kνn (0) V c }. Lemma 4.2. The set W = W n is not empty for every sufficiently large n. Moreover there exists an s n W n such that fs kνn n (0) = b sn, that is, g sn fs kνn n (0) = 0 and hence P sn has a super-attracting periodic point.

25 JULIA SETS APPEAR QUASICONFORMALLY IN THE MANDELBROT SET 25 Proof. In what follows, we work with the perturbed Fatou coordinate φ + c : Ω + c = Ω c C of q c. Let c := φ + c (0), Ṽ c := φ c (V c ) and noting that τ(c) = φ + c (z) φ c (z) is independent of z, we have Define W n := { c c W n } c = φ + c (0) = τ(c). = {τ(c) c satisfies f kνn c (0) V c } = { c c satisfies c + n (= τ(c) + n) Ṽc}. Then c W n if and only if c = τ(c) W n. In order to show W n, it suffices to show that for 0 = φ + c (b c ) Ṽc the equation τ(c) + n = 0 has a solution. Case 1 : ν = 1. Since the equation τ(c) + n = 0 can be written as 2πi τ(c) = + O(1) (c c 1 ), A 0 c c1 2πi A 0 c c1 + n + h(c) = 0, h(c) = O(1). (5.3) Since the equation 2πi A 0 c c1 + n = 0 has a unique solution ( 2π ) 2, c = c 1 + c(n), c(n) := A 0 n we consider this equation (5.3) on the disk D(c 1 +c(n), r) for r > 0. Then on the boundary of this disk, by putting c = (c 1 + c(n)) + re iθ, we have 2πi 2πi + n = A 0 c c1 A + n 0 c(n) + re iθ = 2πi 1 + n A 0 c(n) 1 + reiθ c(n) 12 ( reiθ = n (1 c(n) + O r 2 ) ) + n c(n) ( 1 ( = n 2 reiθ c(n) + O r 2 ) ). c(n) Taking r := c(n) 1+β for any small β > 0, we have 2πi + n A 0 c c1 = O(n1 2β ), when n is sufficiently large. Meanwhile we have h(c) = O(1), so 2πi A 0 c c1 +n > h(c). Hence by Rouché s theorem the equation has a unique solution. Case 2 : ν 2. In this case 2πi τ(c) = ν 2 B 0 (c c 1 ) + O(1) (c c 1),

26 26 TOMOKI KAWAHIRA AND MASASHI KISAKA the equation τ(c) + n = 0 can be written as Since the equation 2πi + n + h(c) = 0, ν 2 B 0 (c c 1 ) 2πi ν 2 B 0 (c c 1 ) + n = 0 has a unique solution c = c 1 + c(n), c(n) := 2πi ν 2 B 0 n, h(c) = O(1). we consider this equation on the disk D(c 1 + c(n), r) for r > 0. Then on the boundary of this disk, by putting c = (c 1 + c(n)) + re iθ, we have 2πi ν 2 B 0 (c c 1 ) + n = 2πi ν 2 B 0 (c(n) + re iθ ) + n = 2πi ν 2 B 0 c(n) 1 + n 1 + reiθ c(n) ( = n (1 reiθ c(n) + O r 2 ) ) + n c(n) ( re iθ ( = n c(n) + O r 2 ) ). c(n) Taking r := c(n) 1+β, we have 2πi ν 2 B 0 (c c 1 ) + n = O(n1 β ) when n is sufficiently large. Meanwhile we have h(c) = O(1), so by Rouché s theorem the equation has a unique solution. This shows that W n if n is sufficiently large. Moreover denoting this solution by c = s n, we have f kνn s n (0) = b sn, that is g sn f kνn s n (0) = 0, which means that P sn has a superattracting periodic point. (Lemma 4.2. ) We call s n W n the center of W n. Now let L = L n := kνn and V c be the component of fc L (V c ) containing 0 and define G c := g c f L c : V c U c and G = G n := {G c : V c U c } c Wn, where W n = {c S f L c (0) V c }. Step (P3): Proof for G = G n being a Mandelbrot-like family The map fc L : V c V c is a branched covering of degree 2 and g c : V c U c is a holomorphic isomorphism. Hence G c := g c fc L : V c U c is a quadratic-like map. Then a tubing Θ = Θ n = {Θ c } c Wn for G n can be constructed by exactly the same method as in the Misiurewicz case. Now we have to check that G n with Θ = Θ n := {Θ c } c Wn satisfies the conditions (1) (8) for a Mandelbrot-like family. It is easy to check that (2) (7) are satisfied. First we prove the condition (1), that is, W n is a Jordan domain with C 1 boundary. In what follows, we work with the perturbed Fatou coordinate again. Let z c (t) (t [0, 1]) be

27 JULIA SETS APPEAR QUASICONFORMALLY IN THE MANDELBROT SET 27 a parametrization of the Jordan curve Ṽc. This is obtained by the holomorphic motion of Ṽc 1. Now we have to solve the equation with respect to the variable c to get a parametrization of W n. Case 1 : ν = 1. τ(c) + n = z c (t) (5.4) As with the equation (5.3), this equation (5.4) can be written as 2πi + n z c (t) + h(c) = 0, A 0 c c1 h(c) = O(1). Note that this h(c) is, of course, different from the one in (5.3). Rewrite this as where F (c) + G(c) = 0, (5.5) 2πi F (c) := + n z c1 (t) and G(c) := h(c) (z c (t) z c1 (t)). A 0 c c1 The equation F (c) = 0 has a unique solution 4π 2 c = c n (t) := c 1 + d n (t) with d n (t) := A 2 0(n z c1 (t)). 2 Consider (5.5) in the disk D(c n (t), d n (t) 1+β ) for a small β > 0. Since we have the estimate F (c) = O( d n (t) β 1 2 ) = O(n 1 2β ), G(c) = O(1) on the boundary of this disk, we have F (c) > G(c) for sufficiently large n. By Rouché s theorem (5.5) has a unique solution č n (t) in D(c n (t), d n (t) 1+β ), so it satisfies č n (t) = c n (t) + O( d n (t) 1+β ) = c 1 + d n (t)(1 + O( d n (t) β )). By using this solution we can parametrize ( W n + n) as zčn(t)(t) = τ(č n (t)) + n and since z c (t) is holomorphic in c, it is continuous in c in particular and we have zčn(t)(t) z c1 (t) i.e. ( W n + n) Ṽc 1 (n ). Note that this convergence is uniform with respect to t. Case 2 : ν 2. with we have the estimates The argument is completely parallel to Case 1. By replacing d n (t) 2πi ν 2 B 0 (n z c1 (t)), F (c) = O( d n (t) 1+β ) = O(n 1 β ) and G(c) = O(1) on D(c n (t), d n (t) 1+β ) for any small β > 0. So the same conclusion as in Case 1 follows. The rest of the argument is completely the same as in Case 1. Next the Lemma 4.3 also holds in the parabolic case, but the calculation is different. We show the proof in Appendix A. The rest of the argument is completely the same as in Step (M3), which completes the proof of Step (P3). Step (P4): End of the proof of Theorem A for Parabolic case

28 28 TOMOKI KAWAHIRA AND MASASHI KISAKA This part is also completely the same as in the Misiurewicz case and hence this completes the proof of Theorem A for Parabolic case. Remark. Theorem A is a kind of generalization of the Douady s result but the statements of the results of ours and his are not quite parallel. Actually Douady considered not only the case of the quadratic family but also more general situation and proved a theorem ([D-BDS], p.23, THEOREM 2) and then showed the theorem for Mandelbrot set ([D-BDS], p.22, THEOREM 1) by using it. Douady s result also shows that a sequence of quasiconformal images of M( ε) appears in D(s 0 1 4, ε ). It is possible to state our result like Douady s. But in order to do this, it is necessary to assume several conditions which are almost obvious for the quadratic family case and this would make the argument more complicated. So we just concentrated on the case of the quadratic family. We avoided stating our result like a sequence of quasiconformal images of M(c 0 + η) appears for the same reason. In what follows, we summarize the general situation under which a result similar to THEOREM 2 in [D-BDS] (that is, Theorem A below) hold and this implies our Theorem A. These are the essential assumptions for more general and abstract settings, which leads to the general result Theorem A. {f c : U c U c } c Λ is an analytic family of quadratic-like maps with a critical point ω c, where Λ C is an open set. The parameter c 1 Λ is either Misiurewicz or parabolic. {g c : V c U c } c Λ is an analytic family of analytic isomorphism, where V c satisfies f j c (V c ) U c U c for some j N. The open sets U c, U c and V c are Jordan domains with C 1 boundary and move by a holomorphic motion. Let z c (t) be a parametrization of V c. Then z c (t) is holomorphic in c and C 1 in t and 2 c t z c(t) exists and continuous. (1) When c 1 is Misiurewicz, for some l N, f l c 1 (ω c1 ) is a repelling periodic point of period k and we let a c := f l c(ω c ). Let q c be the repelling periodic point persisting when c is perturbed from c 1. Then assume that a c q c for c( c 1 ) which is sufficiently close to c 1. (2) When c 1 is parabolic, f c1 has a parabolic periodic point q c1 of period k with multiplier λ 1. Then assume that q c1 bifurcates such that f c has an appropriate normal form as in Step (P1) for c which is sufficiently close to c 1. (Douady gives a sufficient condition for this condition when k = 1 and λ 1 = 1 in [D-BDS, p.23].) Note that there exists a c 0 such that f c1 is hybrid equivalent to P c0. Now define the map F c : U c V c U c so that F c := f c on U c and F c := g c on V c. Also define K(F c ) := {z F n c (z) is defined for all n and F n c (z) U c V c }, M F := {c Λ ω c K(F c )}. Under the above assumptions, we can show the following theorem which implies our Theorem A: Theorem A. For every small ε > 0 and ε > 0, there exists an η C with η < ε and c 0 + η / M such that the decorated Mandelbrot set M(c 0 + η) appears quasiconformally in M F.

29 JULIA SETS APPEAR QUASICONFORMALLY IN THE MANDELBROT SET Proof of Theorem B Let M s1 be the main Mandelbrot set of the quasiconformal copy of the decorated Mandelbrot set M(c 0 + η) given in Theorem A. Choose any c M and set σ := s 1 c M s1. Let Φ c : C K c C D be the Böttcher coordinate. For any R > 1 with J c0 +η A(R 1/2, R 1/2 ), we take the Jordan domains Ω 1 and Ω 1 in C with Ω 1 Ω 1 whose boundaries are the inner and the outer boundaries of Φ 1 c (A(R, R 2 )). (That is, we take Douady s radii ρ = R 1/2 and ρ = R 1/2 in the definition of the model.) Then P c : Ω 1 Ω 1 is a quadratic-like restriction of P c, and the decorated filled Julia set K c (c 0 + η) = K c (c 0 + η) R 1/2,R is a compact set in Ω 1. 1/2 Now we want to show that for σ = s 1 c M s1 the filled Julia set K σ contains a quasiconformal copy of the model set K c (c 0 + η). Let us specify the copy first: Consider the quadratic-like maps f σ : U σ U σ and G σ : V σ U σ given in the proof of Theorem A. Since we have J(f σ ) U σ V σ, the set Γ := m 0 G m σ (J(f σ )) is a decoration of the filled Julia set K(G σ ) V σ. Then the union K := K(G σ ) Γ is a compact subset of U σ. In particular, the boundary K is contained in K σ, since the set of points that eventually lands on a repelling cycle of f σ or G σ is dense in K. Hence it is enough to show that there exists a quasiconformal map on a domain that maps the model set to K. Let h = h σ : U σ C be a straightening map of G σ : V σ U σ. By setting Ω 2 := h(u σ ) and Ω 2 := h(v σ), the map P c = h G σ h 1 : Ω 2 Ω 2 is also a quadratic-like restriction of P c such that h(k(g σ )) = K c. By slightly shrinking Ω 2, we may assume that the boundaries of Ω 2 and Ω 2 are smooth Jordan curves. Since h is quasiconformal, it suffices to show that there exists a quasiconformal map H : Ω 1 Ω 2 that maps K c (c 0 + η) onto h(k). Now we claim: Lemma 6.1. There exists a quasiconformal homeomorphism H : Ω 1 Ω 1 Ω 2 Ω 2 such that H is equivariant. That is, P c (H(z)) = H(P c (z)) for any z Ω 1. H maps J := Φ 1 c (J c0 +η R 3/2 ) in the model set onto h(j(f σ )). Proof. Since the boundary components of each annuli are smooth, we can take a smooth homeomorphism between Ω 1 and Ω 2. By pulling it back by the action of P c, we have a smooth, equivariant homeomorphism ψ 0 between the boundaries of the closed annuli Ω 1 Ω 1 and Ω 2 Ω 2. Next we consider the Julia sets: Consider a sequence of homeomorphisms J = Φ 1 c (J c0 +η R 3/2 ) (1) J c0 +η (2) J χf (σ) (3) J(f σ ) (4) h(j(f σ )), where (1) is just a conformal map; (2) is achieved by a holomorphic motion in C M; (3) is the inverse of a restriction of the quasiconformal straightening of f σ ; and (4) is a restriction of the quasiconformal straightening of G σ. Note that each step can be

30 30 TOMOKI KAWAHIRA AND MASASHI KISAKA connected by a holomorphic motion over a domain isomorphic to the unit disk. Hence for any neighborhood D of J, we have a quasiconformal map ψ 1 : D C that maps J onto h(j(f σ )). Since J is a Cantor set, we choose D such that D is a finite union of smooth Jordan domains satisfying D Ω 1 Ω 1 and ψ 1 (D ) Ω 2 Ω 2. Now the sets Ω 1 Ω 1 D and Ω 2 Ω 2 ψ 1 (D ) are multiply connected domains with the same connectivity. By a standard argument in complex analysis, they are conformally equivalent to round annuli with concentric circular slits, and there is a quasiconformal homeomorphism ψ 2 between these domains. Since each component of ψ 1 (D ) is a quasidisk, we can modify ψ 2 such that the boundary correspondence agree with ψ 0 and ψ 1. Hence we obtain a desired quasiconformal homeomorphism H by gluing ψ 0, ψ 1, and this modified ψ 2. (Cf. Bers lemma below.) (Lemma 6.1) By pulling back the map H given in Lemma 6.1 by the dynamics of P c, we have a unique homeomorphic extension H : Ω 1 K c Ω 2 K c such that P c (H(z)) = H(P c (z)) for any Ω 1 K c and that H maps the decoration of K c (c 0 + η) onto h(γ). We employ the following lemmas: (See Lyubich s book in preparation [Ly3].) Lemma 6.2. Let f : U U be a quadratic-like map with connected Julia set. Let W 1 U and W 2 U be two open annuli whose inner boundary is J(f). Let H : W 1 W 2 be an automorphism of f, that is, f(h(z)) = H(f(z)) on f 1 (W 1 ). Then H admits a continuous extension to a map H : W 1 J(f) W 2 J(f) identical on the Julia set. Lemma 6.3 (Bers Lemma). Let K be a compact set in C and let Ω 1 and Ω 2 be neighborhoods of K such that there exists two quasiconformal maps H 1 : Ω 1 K C and H 2 : Ω 2 C that match on K, i.e., the map H : Ω 1 C defined by H(z) := H 1 (z) for z Ω 1 K and H(z) := H 2 (z) for z K is continuous. Then H is quasiconformal and µ H = µ H2 for almost every z K. Now we apply Lemma 6.2 by regarding P c and Ω j K c as f and W j for each j = 1, 2. It follows that the restriction H 1 := H Ω1 K c of the map H : Ω 1 K c Ω 2 K c admits a continuous extension to H 1 : Ω 1 int(k c ) Ω 2 int(k c ) that agrees with the identity map H 2 := id : Ω 2 Ω 2 on K c. By Bers lemma (Lemma 6.3), we have a quasiconformal map H : Ω 1 Ω 2 such that H(K c (c 0 + η)) = h(k). 7. Proof of Theorem C Almost conformal straightening. Let us start with a formulation that gives a fine copy of the Mandelbrot set. Lemma 7.1 (Almost conformal straightening). Fix two positive constants r and δ. Suppose that for some R > max{r + δ, 8} we have a function u = u c (z) = u(z, c) that is holomorphic with u c(0) = 0 and u(z, c) < δ in both z D(R) and c D(r). Let f c (z) := z 2 + c + u(z, c), U c := D(R) and U c := fc 1 (U c ). Then for any c D(r) the map f c : U c U c is a quadratic-like map with a critical point z = 0. Moreover, it satisfies the following properties for sufficiently large R:

31 JULIA SETS APPEAR QUASICONFORMALLY IN THE MANDELBROT SET 31 (1) There exists a family of smooth (1 + O(R 1 ))-quasiconformal maps (a tubing) Θ = {Θ c : A(R 1/2, R) U c U c} c D(r) such that Θ c is identity on D(R) for each c; Θ c is equivariant on the boundary, i.e., Θ c (z 2 ) = f c (Θ c (z)) on D(R 1/2 ); and for each z A(R 1/2, R) the map c Θ c (z) is holomorphic in c D(r). (2) Each Θ c induces a straightening map h c : U c h(u c ) that is uniformly (1 + O(R 1 ))- quasiconformal for c D(r). Thus we obtain an analytic family of quadratic-like maps f = {f c : U c U c } c D(r). (Note that f with tubing Θ is not necessarily a Mandelbrot-like family.) Proof. One can check that f c : U c U c is a quadratic-like map as in Example 1 of [DH2, p.329]. Indeed, if w U c = D(R) and R > max{r + δ, 8}, then R 2 /4 > 2R > r + δ + R and thus the equation f c (z) = w has two solutions in D(R/2) by Rouché s theorem. By the maximum principle, f c : U c U c is a proper branched covering of degree two. Since f c (0) r + δ < R, the critical point 0 is contained in U c. Thus the Riemann-Hurwitz formula implies that U c is a topological disk contained in D(R/2) U c. Next we construct Θ: Let z = g c (w) be the univalent branch of fc 1 (w) = w (c + u) defined on the disk centered at w(0) := R with radius R/2 such that g c (R) is close to R 1/2. (Note that if z = R > 8 we have f c (z) R 2 (r + δ) > R(R 1) > 3R/2. Thus we have such a univalent branch.) We take the analytic continuation of the branch g c along the curve w(t) := Re it (0 t < 4π) that is univalent on each D(w(t), R/2). Then log z = log g c (w) = 1 2 log w log ( 1 c + u w where u = u(g c (w), c) on D(w(t), R/2). Let Υ c (w) := 1 ( 2 log 1 c + u ). w Then we have Υ c (w) = O(R 1 ) (by taking an appropriate branch) and hence dυ c dw (w(t)) = O(R 2 ) by the Schwarz lemma. For t [0, 2π), set v c (t) := Υ c (w(2t)) such that t w(t) = exp(log R + it) and t exp((log R)/2 + it + v c (t)) parametrize the boundaries of U c and U c. To give a homeomorphism between the closed annuli A(R 1/2, R) and A c := U c U c, we take their logarithms: Set l := (log R)/2, and consider the rectangle E := {s+it l s 2l, 0 t 2π}. Fix a smooth decreasing function η 0 : [0, 1] [0, 1] such that: η 0 (0) = 1; η 0 (1) = 0; and the j-th derivative of η 0 tends to 0 as x +0 and as x 1 0 for any j. Set η(s) := η 0 (s/l 1), s [l, 2l]. Then we have dη ds (s) = O(l 1 ), v c (t) = O(R 1 ), and dv c dt (t) = O(R 1 ). Now consider the smooth map θ c : E C defined by θ c (s + it) := s + it + η(s)v c (t). ),

32 32 TOMOKI KAWAHIRA AND MASASHI KISAKA Figure 13. Construction of the tubing Θ for f. The map θ c is injective for sufficiently large R since θ c (s + it) θ c (s + it ) (s s ) + i(t t ) η(s)(v c (t) v c (t )) (η(s) η(s ))v c (t ) (s s ) + i(t t ) O(R 1 ) t t O(l 1 R 1 ) s s. (7.1) The Beltrami coefficient of θ c is given by µ θc = (dη/ds) v c + η (dv c /dt)i 2 + (dη/ds) v c η (dv c /dt)i = O(R 1 ). Hence θ c is an orientation preserving diffeomorphism onto its image for sufficiently large R, and its maximal dilatation is bounded by 1 + O(R 1 ). By observing θ c through the exponential function, we obtain a smooth (1 + O(R 1 ))-quasiconformal homeomorphism Θ c : A(R 1/2, R) A c that fixes the outer boundary and satisfies Θ c (z 2 ) = f c (Θ c (z)) on the inner boundary. Holomorphic dependence of c Θ c (z) for each fixed z A(R 1/2, R) is obvious by the construction of θ c. Finally we construct the straightening map h c : U c C of f c : U c U c = D(R). Let us extend f c to a smooth quasiregular map F c : C C by setting f c (z) if z U c, F c (z) := {Θ 1 c (z)} 2 if z U c U c, and z 2 if z C U c. We define an F c -invariant Beltrami coefficient µ c (i.e., Fc µ c = µ c ) by 0 if z K(f c ) or z C U c, (F c ) z (z) µ c (z) := if z U c U (F c ) z (z) c, and (fc n ) µ c (z) if fc n (z) U c U c for some n > 0, where (f n c ) µ c (z) = µ c (f n c (z)) (f n c ) (z) (f n c ) (z).

33 JULIA SETS APPEAR QUASICONFORMALLY IN THE MANDELBROT SET 33 Then µ c is supported on D(R) and it satisfies µ c = O(R 1 ). By [IT, Theorem 4.24] we have a unique (1+O(R 1 ))-quasiconformal map h c : C C that satisfies the Beltrami equation (h c ) z = µ c (h c ) z a.e., h c (0) = 0, and (h c ) z 1 L p (C) for some p > 2. (The relation between R and p will be more specified in the next lemma.) The condition (h c ) z 1 L p (C) implies w = h c (z) = z + b c + O(1/z) as z for some constant b c C. Since µ c is F c -invariant, the map P (w) := h c F c h 1 c (w) is a holomorphic map of degree 2 with a critical point at h c (0) = 0 and a superattracting fixed point at h c ( ) =. Hence P (w) is a quadratic polynomial. The expansion of the form w = h c (z) = z + b c + O(1/z) implies that we actually have b c = 0 and P (w) is of the form P (w) = w 2 +χ(c) = P χ(c) (w). Hence the restriction h c Uc is our desired straightening map. The next lemma shows that the quasiconformal map h c : C C constructed above is uniformly close to the identity on compact sets for sufficiently large R: Lemma 7.2. Fix any p > 2 and any compact set E C. If R is sufficiently large, then the quasiconformal map h c in Lemma 7.1 satisfies uniformly for each c D(r) and z E. p. h c (z) z = O(R 1+2/p ) Indeed, the estimate is valid for any R C 0 p 2, where C 0 is a constant independent of Proof. We have µ c C/R =: k for some constant C independent of c D(r) by the construction of h c. By [IT, Theorem 4.24], we have (h c ) z 1 L p (C) for any p > 2 satisfying kc p < 1, where C p is the constant that appears in the Calderon-Zygmund inequality [IT, Proposition 4.22]. Gaidashev showed in [G, Lemma 6] that C p cot 2 (π/2p). Since cot 2 (π/2p) = (2p/π) 2 (1 + o(1)) as p, the inequality kc p (C/R) cot 2 (π/2p) 1/2 is established if we take R C 0 p 2 for some constant C 0 independent of p > 2. By following the proof of [IT, 4, Corollary 2], we have 1 h c (z) z K p µ c 1 kc p z 1 2/p p for any z C, where K p > 0 is a constant depending only on p and µ c p is the L p -norm of µ c. Since µ c C/R and µ c is supported on D(R), we have µ c p (C/R)(πR 2 ) 1/p = Cπ 1/p R 1+2/p. Hence if we take R C 0 p 2 such that kc p 1/2, we have h c (z) z = 2K p Cπ 1/p R 1+2/p z 1 2/p. This implies that h c (z) z = O(R 1+2/p ) on each compact subset E of C. Corollary 7.3. Fix any p > 2. If R is sufficiently large, then for each c D(r), f c is hybrid equivalent to a quadratic polynomial P χ(c) (w) = w 2 + χ(c) with χ(c) c δ + O(R 1+2/p ). Proof. We have χ(c) = h c (f c (0)) since h c maps the critical value of f c to that of P χ(c), For each c D(r), f c (0) = c + u c (0) is contained in a compact set D(r + δ). By Lemma 7.2, we obtain χ(c) = h c (f c (0)) = c + u c (0) + O(R 1+2/p )

34 34 TOMOKI KAWAHIRA AND MASASHI KISAKA for sufficiently large R and this implies the desired estimate. Coordinate changes. Under the same assumption as in Lemma 7.1, we assume in addition that (i) δ < 1 and r > 4; and (ii) R is large enough such that f = {f c : U c U c } c D(r) is an analytic family of quadratic-like maps (that may not necessarily be Mandelbrot-like), and that (1) and (2) of Lemma 7.1 hold. By (2) of Lemma 7.1, each f c f is hybrid equivalent to some quadratic map P χ(c) by the (1 + O(R 1 ))-quasiconformal straightening h c : U c h c (U c ). We say the map χ = χ f : D(r) C, χ(c) = h c (f c (0)) is the straightening map of the family f associated with the family {h c } c D(r). We say the map (z, c) (h c (z), χ f (c)) defined on D(R) D(r) is a (straightening) coordinate change. Now we show that the straightening map is quasiconformal with dilatation arbitrarily close to 1 if we take sufficiently large R and small δ: Lemma 7.4 (Almost conformal straightening of f). If r and R are sufficiently large and δ > 0 is sufficiently small, then the family f is associated with a (1+O(δ)+O(R 1 ))- quasiconformal straightening map such that χ = χ f : D(r) χ(d(r)) C (1) χ(m f ) = M, where M f is the connectedness locus of f; (2) χ D(r) Mf is (1 + O(R 1 ))-quasiconformal; and (3) χ Mf extends to a (1 + O(δ))-quasiconformal map on the plane. Proof. By slightly shrinking r > 4 if necessary, we may assume that f c is defined for c D(r). When c = re it (0 t 2π), we have f c (0) 0 = c+u(0, c) r δ > 3 (since δ < 1). Hence as c makes one turn around the origin so does f c (0). By [DH2, p.328], χ gives a homeomorphism between M f and M. Moreover, χ D(r) Mf is (1 + O(R 1 ))- quasiconformal by [DH2, Proposition 20, Lemma in p.327], since each Θ c is (1+O(R 1 ))- quasiconformal. For the dilatation of χ Mf, we follow the argument of [Mc2, Lemma 4.2]: Consider the families f t := {f c,t } c D(r) defined for each t D, where f c,t (z) := z 2 + c + t δ u(z, c). By the same argument as above, the connectedness locus M f t of f t is homeomorphic to M by the straightening map χ t = χ f t : M f t M. Then the inverse φ t := χ 1 t : M M f t gives a holomorphic family of injections over D. By Bers and Royden s theorem [BR, Theorem 1], each of them extends to a (1 + t )/(1 t )-quasiconformal map χ t on C. In particular, χ Mf = χ δ extends to a (1 + O(δ))- quasiconformal map on C. Now we apply Bers lemma (Lemma 6.3) to H 1 := χ D(r) Mf

35 JULIA SETS APPEAR QUASICONFORMALLY IN THE MANDELBROT SET 35 and H 2 = χ δ. Then H 1 and H 2 are glued along M and the glued map H : D(r) C, which coincides with χ, is (1 + O(δ) + O(R 1 ))-quasiconformal. Idea of the Proof of Theorem C. The rest of this section is devoted to the proof of Theorem C, which follows the argument of Theorem A. Recall that in the proof of Theorem A, we construct two families of quadratic-like maps f = {f c : U c U c } c Λ ( the first renormalization ) and G = {G c : V c U c } c W ( the second renormalization ), and we conclude that the small Mandelbrot set corresponding to the family G has a desired decoration. In the following proof of Theorem C, we first take a thickened family f = {f c : Û c Û c } c Λ that contains f = {f c : U c U c } c Λ as a restriction (in both dynamical and parameter spaces), such that U c Ûc and the modulus of Ûc U c is sufficiently large. Next we construct another thickened family Ĝ = {G c : V c Ûc} c Ŵ that contains G = {G c : V c U c } c W with V c V c. Then we can apply a slightly modified versions of the lemmas above to the family G. Finally we conclude that the small Mandelbrot set corresponding to the family G has a very fine decoration. Notation. We will use a conventional notation: For complex variables α and β, by α β we mean C 1 α β C α for an implicit constant C > 1. Proof of Theorem C: First renormalization. We start with a result by McMullen [Mc2, Theorem 3.1] applied to (and modified for) the quadratic family: Lemma 7.5 (Misiurewicz cascades). For any Misiurewicz parameter m 0 and any arbitrarily large r and R, there exist sequences {s n } n 1, {p n } n 1, {t n } n 1, and {δ n } n 1 that satisfy the following conditions for each sufficiently large n: (a) s n is a superattracting parameter of period p n with s n m 0 µ n 0, where µ 0 is the multiplier of the repelling cycle of P m0 on which the critical orbit lands. (b) t n C and t n µ 2n 0. (c) δ n > 0 and δ n nµ n 0. (d) Let X n : D n := D(s n, r t n ) D(r) be the affine map defined by C = X n (c) := c s n t n. Then there exists a non-zero holomorphic function c α(c) = α c defined for c D n such that α c µ n 0 and the map conjugates P pn c Z = A c (z) := z α c on D(R α c ) to the map F C := A c P pn c F C (Z) = A c P pn c A 1 c of the form A 1 c (Z) = Z 2 + C + u(z, C), (7.2) where u(z, C) = u C (Z) is holomorphic in both Z D(R) and C D(r), and satisfies u C (0) = 0 and u(z, C) δ n. We may regard the map (z, c) (Z, C) = (A c (z), X n (c)) as an affine coordinate change (Figure 14).

36 36 TOMOKI KAWAHIRA AND MASASHI KISAKA Figure 14. An affine coordinate change. Construction of the family f. Let us fix arbitrarily small ε > 0 and κ > 0 as in the statement. We choose any Misiurewicz parameter m 0 in int(b) M, where B is the closed disk given in the statement. (The Misiurewicz parameters are dense in M.) For any r and R bigger than 4 (we will replace them with larger ones if necessary, but it will happen finitely many times in what follows), by taking a sufficiently large n in Lemma 7.5 2, we have an analytic family {F C : D(R) C} C D(r) that satisfies the conditions for Lemma 7.1. Moreover, its restriction F n := { F C : F 1 C (D(R)) D(R)} C D(r) is an analytic family of quadratic-like maps that satisfies the conditions for Lemma 7.4. Hence we have an associated straightening coordinate change of the form (Z, C) (H C (Z), χ F n (C)). More precisely, for each C D(r), F C is hybrid equivalent to Z Z 2 + χ F n (C) by a (1 + O(R 1 ))-quasiconformal straightening H C by Lemma 7.1, and H C satisfies the estimate of Lemma 7.2. By Lemma 7.4, the straightening χ F n : D(r) C is (1+O(δ n )+O(R 1 ))-quasiconformal and satisfies the estimate of Corollary 7.3. Hence we may assume that R and n are large enough such that both Z H C (Z) and C χ F n (C) are (1 + κ) 1/2 -quasiconformal for the arbitrarily small κ > 0 given in the statement. Let f c := Pc pn : Û c Ûc be the pull-back of F C : F 1 C (D(R)) D(R) by the affine coordinate change (z, c) (Z, C) = (A c (z), X n (c)). (Note that Ûc = D(R α c ) is a round disk.) Set The quadratic-like family p := p n, s 0 := s n, and Λ := D n = D(s n, r t n ). f := { f c : Û } c Ûc c Λ 2 More precisely, we fix r first, and then take a larger R (and an n) if necessary to apply those lemmas.

37 JULIA SETS APPEAR QUASICONFORMALLY IN THE MANDELBROT SET 37 is our first family of renormalizations whose straightening coordinate change (z, c) (h c (z), χ(c)) is given by (h c (z), χ(c)) := (H C A c (z), χ F n X n (c)). Note that both h c : Ûc C and χ : Λ C are (1 + κ) 1/2 -quasiconformal. By Lemma 7.2 and Corollary 7.3, if we fix any p > 2 and any compact subset E of U c, then for sufficiently large R we have h c (z) = A c (z) + O(R 1+2/p ) on E and χ(c) = X n (c) + O(δ n ) + O(R 1+2/p ) on Λ. Hence the straightening coordinate change (z, c) (h c (z), χ(c)) is very close to the affine coordinate change (z, c) (A c (z), X n (c)) = (z/α c, (c s n )/t n ) if we take sufficiently large R and n. Construction of the family f. Let ρ > 4 be an arbitrarily large number. By taking sufficiently large r, R and n if necessary, we may assume the following: F C : F 1 C (D(ρ)) D(ρ) is quadratic-like for each C D(r). The set Ω(ρ) := {C D(r) F C (0) D(ρ)} gives a Mandelbrot-like family Now we define the Mandelbrot-like family F n (ρ) := {F C : F 1 C (D(ρ)) D(ρ)} C Ω(ρ). f = f(ρ) = {f c : U c U c } c Λ as the pull-back of F n (ρ) by the affine coordinate change (z, c) (A c (z), X n (c)) above. More precisely, we let U c := A 1 c (D(ρ)) = D(ρ α c ) for each c Λ, and consider the restriction f c : U c U c of f c : Û c Ûc. Then we define the subset Λ of Λ by Λ := (Ω(ρ)) such that the family f above becomes a Mandelbrot-like family. X 1 n Let M f = s 0 M be the connectedness locus of the family f, which coincides with that of f. Note that f has the same straightening coordinate change (z, c) (h c (z), χ(c)) as f such that χ(m f ) = M. Second renormalization. For a given Misiurewicz or parabolic parameter c 0 in the statement of Theorem C, we define a Misiurewicz or parabolic parameter c 1 M f by c 1 := χ 1 (c 0 ) = s 0 c 0. Let q c1 be a repelling or parabolic periodic point of P c1 that belongs to the postcritical set. More precisely, when c 1 is Misiurewicz, the orbit of 0 eventually lands on q c1 that is a repelling periodic point. When c 1 is parabolic, the orbit of 0 accumulates on q c1 that is a parabolic periodic point. The rest of the proof of Theorem C is divided into Claims 1 to 7 below and their proofs. For the first two claims, we may simply apply the argument of Steps (M1) (M2) or Steps (P1) (P2):

38 38 TOMOKI KAWAHIRA AND MASASHI KISAKA Claim 1. There exists a Jordan domain V c1 with C 1 boundary such that (1) V c1 is a connected component of P N c 1 (Ûc 1 ) for some N such that P N c 1 : V c1 Ûc 1 is an isomorphism. (2) There exists a j N such that f j c 1 ( V c1 ) = P pj c 1 ( V c1 ) Ûc 1 Û c 1. In particular, V c1 can be arbitrarily close to q c1 by taking sufficiently large N and j. Claim 2. There exists a Jordan domain Ŵ Λ M f ( Λ M f ) arbitrarily close to c 1 that satisfies the following: (1) There is a holomorphic motion of V c1 over Ŵ that generates a family of Jordan domains { V c } c Ŵ with C1 boundaries such that for each c Ŵ, f c j ( V c ) Ûc Û c and Pc N : V c Ûc is an isomorphism. (2) There exists an L such that fc L (0) = Pc pl (0) V c for any c Ŵ. pl+n (3) For c Ŵ, we heve Pc (0) Ûc. Moreover, when c makes one turn along Ŵ, then Pc pl+n (0) makes one turn around the origin. Indeed, such a domain Ŵ is given by Ŵ = {c Λ M f Lc (0) V } c. See Figure 15. Note that if we take sufficiently large N and j, we may always assume that V c U c as depicted in Figure 15. Moreover, the proof of Lemma 4.1 indicates that we can choose V c with arbitrarily small diameter. Figure 15. For any c Ŵ, the Julia set J(f c) moves only a little from J(f s ) of the center s W Ŵ.

39 JULIA SETS APPEAR QUASICONFORMALLY IN THE MANDELBROT SET 39 Definition of the center of Ŵ and W. By the same argument as in Step (M2) and Step pl+n (P2), there exists a unique superattracting parameter s Ŵ such that Ps (0) = 0. We call s the center of Ŵ. By Claim 2, we can find a family of Jordan domains {V c } c Ŵ with C1 boundaries such that V c V c and that Pc N : V c U c is an isomorphism for each c Ŵ. Let W Ŵ be the set of c such that fc L (0) V c. By the same argument as in Step (M3) and Step (P3), one can check that both Ŵ and W are Jordan domains with C1 boundaries. Note that s is the center of W as well. (See Figure 15 again.) Moreover, we have: Claim 3 (Straightening the center). By choosing V c in Claim 1 close enough to q c1, we can find an η D(ε) with c 0 + η / M such that f s : Û s Ûs is hybrid equivalent to a quadratic-like restriction of P c0 +η with (1 + κ) 1/2 -quasiconformal straightening map. In particular, J(f s ) is a (1 + κ) 1/2 -quasiconformal image of J c0 +η. Proof. By the construction of Ŵ in Claim 2 (following Step (M2) or Step (P2)), we can take Ŵ arbitrarily close to c 1. Since the straightening map χ = χ f : Λ C is continuous, we have χ(s) χ(c 1 ) = χ(s) c 0 < ε by taking s Ŵ close enough to c 1. Set η := χ(s) c 0. Then we have χ(s) = c 0 + η C M since Ŵ Λ M f. By the construction of the first renormalization, f s is conjugate to P χ(s) by the (1 + κ) 1/2 - quasiconformal straightening map h s such that h s (J(f s )) = J c0 +η. Remark. Since h s (z) = H Xn(s) A s (z) = z/α s + o(1), J(f s ) is actually an almost affine (even better than almost conformal!) copy of J c0 +η. Holomorphic motion of the Cantor Julia sets. Since Ŵ Λ M f, the Julia set J(f c ) for each c Ŵ is a Cantor set that is a (1 + κ)1/2 -quasiconformal image of J χ(c). Moreover, the Julia set J(f c ) moves holomorphically for c Ŵ : Claim 4 (Cantor Julia moves a little). There exists a holomorphic motion ι : J(f s ) Ŵ C such that ι c (z) := ι(z, c) maps J(f s ) bijectively to J(f c ) for each c Ŵ. Moreover, if R is sufficiently large, then ι c extends to a (1 + κ) 1/2 -quasiconformal homeomorphism on the plane for each c W Ŵ. A direct corollary of Claims 3 and 4 is: Corollary 7.6 (Julia appears in Julia). The Julia set J c contains a (1+κ)-quasiconformal copy of J c0 +η for any c W Ŵ. Proof of Claim 4. Since J(f c ) is a hyperbolic set for each c Ŵ, it has a local holomorphic motion near c. (See [S, p.229].) The holomorphic motion extends to that of J(f s ) over Ŵ as in the statement since Ŵ is simply connected (and isomorphic to D). By [DH2, Proposition 20, Lemma in p.327], the annulus Ŵ W is a (1 + O(R 1 ))- quasiconformal image of Ûs U s. Hence we have mod(ŵ W ) = (1 + O(R 1 )) mod(ûs U s ) = (1 + O(R 1 )) mod(a(ρ, R)).

40 40 TOMOKI KAWAHIRA AND MASASHI KISAKA By taking R relatively larger than ρ, this modulus is arbitrarily large. Now let us choose a uniformization ψ : Ŵ D such that ψ(s) = 0. For an arbitrarily small ν > 0, we may assume that ψ(w ) D(ν) when mod(ŵ W ) is sufficiently large. (See [Mc1, Theorems 2.1 and 2.4]. Indeed, it is enough to take R such that ν ρ/r.) By the Bers-Royden theorem ([BR, Theorem 1]), each ι c : J(f s ) J(f c ) extends to a (1 + ν)/(1 ν)- quasiconformal map on C. Thus the dilatation is uniformly smaller than (1 + κ) 1/2 if we choose a sufficiently large R. Definition of the families Ĝ and G. For each c Ŵ, let V c be the connected component of fc L ( V c ) (or, that of Pc pl N (Ûc)) containing the critical point 0. We define G c : V c Ûc by the restriction of Pc N fc L = Pc pl+n on V c. Then we have a family of quadratic-like maps Ĝ := {G c : V c Ûc} c Ŵ. Similarly, for each c W, let V c be the connected component of fc L (V c ) (or, that of (U c )) containing 0. Then we have a quadratic-like family P pl N c G = G(ρ) := {G c : V c U c } c W, where ρ comes from the definition of U c = A 1 c (D(ρ)). Note that both the annuli Ûc V c and U c V c compactly contain the Cantor Julia set J(f c ) for each c Ŵ. Claim 5 (Extending the holomorphic motion). If R is sufficiently large and relatively larger than ρ, we have the following extensions of the holomorphic motion ι of the Julia set J(f s ) given in Claim 4: (1) An extension to the holomorphic motion of J(f s ) V s U s Ûs over Ŵ that is equivariant to the action of G c : V c Ûc. (2) A further extension of (1) to the motion of the closed annulus Ûs V s over Ŵ. (3) An extension to the holomorphic motion of J(f s ) V s U s over W that is equivariant to the action of G c : V c U c. (4) A further extension of (3) to the motion of the closed annulus U s V s over W. In particular, the quasiconformal map ι c : U s V s U c V c induced by (4) extends to a (1 + κ) 1/2 -quasiconformal map on the plane for each c W. See Figure 16. Proof. (1) The sets U c, V c, and Ûc are all images of round circles by analytic families of locally conformal injections over Ŵ. In particular, they never intersect with the Julia set J(f c ) for each c Ŵ. Hence the extension of ι to J(f s) V s U s Ûs over Ŵ is straightforward. (2) By S lodkowski s theorem, it extends to the motion of C, and its restriction to the closed annulus Ûs V s is our desired motion. Note that ι c : Û s V s Ûc V c is uniformly (1 + κ) 1/2 -quasiconformal for c W Ŵ by taking a sufficiently large R that is relatively larger than ρ. (See the proof of Claim 4.) (3) Similarly, V c is an image of a round circle U c by an analytic family of injections (that is locally a univalent branch of G 1 c ) with c W. Since V c V c, V c never intersects with J(f c ) for c W and we obtain an extension of the motion of J(f s ) to that of

41 JULIA SETS APPEAR QUASICONFORMALLY IN THE MANDELBROT SET 41 Figure 16. Extending the holomorphic motion to the closed annuli. The motion of J(f s ) is contained in the motion of shadowed annuli. (Note that each nested annuli are extremely thick in our setting.) J(f s ) V s U s over W which satisfies G c ι c = ι c G s on V s. (4) To extend (3) to the closed annulus U s V U s V s and V s V s, we divide the annulus into two annuli s. The desired motion of U s V s over W is contained in the motion given in (2). For the annulus V s V s, we note that the map G c : V c V c Ûc U c is a holomorphic covering of degree two. Hence we can pull-back the motion of Ûs U s over W that is contained in the motion given in (2) by these covering maps. More precisely, we can construct an analytic family ι c : V s V s V c V c of (1 + κ) 1/2 -quasiconformal maps that agrees with the motion of J(f s ) V s U s, by taking a branch of G 1 c ι c G s with ι c given in (2). Claim 6 (Decorated tubing). By taking larger R, r, and ρ if necessary, there exist a ρ > 0 and a tubing { } ˇΘ := ˇΘc : A(Ř, Ř2 ) U c V c c W of the family G with the following properties: (1) Ř = ρ/ρ and Γ 0 (c 0 + η) = Γ 0 (c 0 + η) ρ,ρ is contained in A(Ř, Ř2 ). (2) ˇΘ s (ž) = h 1 s (((ρ ) 2 /ρ) ž) for ž Γ 0 (c 0 + η) such that ˇΘ s maps Γ 0 (c 0 + η) onto J(f s ). (3) Each ˇΘ c : A(Ř, Ř2 ) U c V c is a (1+κ)-quasiconformal embedding that is compatible with the holomorphic motion of U s V s over W given in (2) of Claim 5. More precisely, we have ˇΘ c = ι c ˇΘ s for each c W, where ι c : U s V s U c V c is the quasiconformal map induced by the motion. We call this tubing ˇΘ a decorated tubing of G. Proof. For each c Ŵ, the map G c = Pc pl+n V c can be decomposed as G c = Q c P 0, where P 0 (z) = z 2 and Q c : P 0 ( V c ) Ûc is an isomorphism. Let Note that γ c = G c (0) U c if c W. β c := Q c(0) and γ c := Q c (0).