Topological dynamics formulation: Difference between revisions

From Polymath Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
New page: Define a '''topological dynamical system''' over the rationals to be a pair (X,T), where X is a compact metrisable space, and <math>T = (T_q)_{q \in {\Bbb Q}^+}</math> is a continuous acti...
 
No edit summary
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 11: Line 11:
Then <math>\tilde f</math> has discrepancy at most C, contradicting EDP.  QED
Then <math>\tilde f</math> has discrepancy at most C, contradicting EDP.  QED


'''Proof of EDP assuming Conjecture 1'''  It suffices to show EDP for the positive rationals.  Suppose for contradiction that this failed, then there exists <math>f: {\Bbb Q}^+ \to \{-1,1\}</math> with  discrepancy bounded by some finite C.  Let <math>\Omega</math> be the compact metrisable space <math>\Omega = \{-1,1\}^{\Bbb Q}^+</math> with shift :<math>T_q ( (a_r)_{r \in {\Bbb Q}^+} ) := (a_{qr})_{r \in {\Bbb Q}^+}</math>;  
'''Proof of EDP assuming Conjecture 1'''  It suffices to show EDP for the positive rationals.  Suppose for contradiction that this failed, then there exists <math>f: {\Bbb Q}^+ \to \{-1,1\}</math> with  discrepancy bounded by some finite C.  Let <math>\Omega</math> be the compact metrisable space <math>\Omega = \{-1,1\}^{{\Bbb Q}^+}</math> with shift :<math>T_q ( (a_r)_{r \in {\Bbb Q}^+} ) := (a_{qr})_{r \in {\Bbb Q}^+}</math>;  
observe that this is a continuous action of the rationals. Let <math>x_0 \in \Omega</math> be the point
observe that this is a continuous action of the rationals. Let <math>x_0 \in \Omega</math> be the point
:<math>x_0 := (f(r))_{r \in {\Bbb Q}^+}</math>
:<math>x_0 := (f(r))_{r \in {\Bbb Q}^+}</math>
Line 31: Line 31:
The '''Krylov-Bogolubov theorem''' asserts that X supports a probability measure that is shift-invariant.  The reason for this is that the positive rationals are amenable, and thus admit a Folner sequence F_n.  Now start with your favourite probability measure (e.g. a Dirac mass) and average it over the Folner sequences.  Then use [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prokhorov%27s_theorem Prokhorov's theorem] to take a weak limit, which will be automatically invariant by construction.
The '''Krylov-Bogolubov theorem''' asserts that X supports a probability measure that is shift-invariant.  The reason for this is that the positive rationals are amenable, and thus admit a Folner sequence F_n.  Now start with your favourite probability measure (e.g. a Dirac mass) and average it over the Folner sequences.  Then use [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prokhorov%27s_theorem Prokhorov's theorem] to take a weak limit, which will be automatically invariant by construction.


Once we have a shift-invariant measure, ergodic theory comes into play.  For instance, the Birkhoff ergodic theorem will assert that for all rationals, and all continuous functions F, the limit <math>\lim_{N\to\infty} \frac{1}{N} \sum_{n=1}^n T_{q^n} F(x)</math> exists for almost every x in X (with respect to the invariant measure).  Because there are only countably many rationals, and the space of continuous functions is separable, we can thus find an x which is '''generic''', in the sense that the above limits exist for all F and all q.  In particular, this implies that if EDP fails, we can find a minimal sequence f such that the limit
Once we have a shift-invariant measure, ergodic theory comes into play.  For instance, the Birkhoff ergodic theorem will assert that for all rationals, and all continuous functions F, the limit <math>\lim_{N\to\infty} \frac{1}{N} \sum_{n=1}^n T_{q^n} F(x)</math> exists for almost every x in X (with respect to the invariant measure).  Because there are only countably many rationals, and the space of continuous functions is separable, we can thus find an x which is '''generic''', in the sense that the above limits exist for all F and all q.  In particular, this implies that if EDP fails, we can find a minimal sequence f of bounded discrepancy such that the limit


<math>\lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{1}{N} \sum_{n=1}^n F(f( q^n r_1 ), \ldots, f(q^n r_m))</math>
<math>\lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{1}{N} \sum_{n=1}^n F(f( q^n r_1 ), \ldots, f(q^n r_m))</math>


exists for all positive rationals <math>q, r_1,\ldots,r_m</math> and all functions <math>F: \{-1,+1\}^m \to {\Bbb C}</math>.
exists for all positive rationals <math>q, r_1,\ldots,r_m</math> and all functions <math>F: \{-1,+1\}^m \to {\Bbb C}</math>.
Note also that if <math>f: X \to \{-1,+1\}</math> has bounded discrepancy on a measure preserving system, then its mean must be zero, as can be seen by averaging <math>\frac{1}{n} (f(x)+\ldots+f(T_n x))</math> with respect to x, and then sending n to infinity.  Thus, f equals 1 exactly half of the time, and -1 half the time.

Latest revision as of 08:50, 25 January 2010

Define a topological dynamical system over the rationals to be a pair (X,T), where X is a compact metrisable space, and [math]\displaystyle{ T = (T_q)_{q \in {\Bbb Q}^+} }[/math] is a continuous action of the positive rationals (as a multiplicative group) on X. In other words, for each positive rational q, [math]\displaystyle{ T_q: X \to X }[/math] is a homeomorphism such that [math]\displaystyle{ T_{qr} = T_q T_r }[/math] for all positive rationals q, r. In particular, the [math]\displaystyle{ T_q }[/math] all commute. For any function [math]\displaystyle{ f: X \to {\Bbb C} }[/math], we write [math]\displaystyle{ T_q f }[/math] for [math]\displaystyle{ f \circ T_q }[/math].

The Erdos discrepancy problem is then equivalent to

Conjecture 1. Let (X,T) be a topological dynamical system over the positive rationals, and let [math]\displaystyle{ f: X \to \{-1,+1\} }[/math] be a continuous function. Then the quantity [math]\displaystyle{ \sum_{i=1}^n T_i f(x) }[/math] is unbounded as x ranges over X and n ranges over the natural numbers.

Proof of Conjecture 1 assuming EDP Suppose for contradiction that [math]\displaystyle{ |\sum_{i=1}^n T_i f(x)| \leq C }[/math] for some C and all x, n. Pick a point [math]\displaystyle{ x_0 }[/math] in X, and consider the function [math]\displaystyle{ \tilde f: {\Bbb N} \to \{-1,1\} }[/math] defined by

[math]\displaystyle{ \tilde f(i) := T_i f(x_0). }[/math] (1)

Then [math]\displaystyle{ \tilde f }[/math] has discrepancy at most C, contradicting EDP. QED

Proof of EDP assuming Conjecture 1 It suffices to show EDP for the positive rationals. Suppose for contradiction that this failed, then there exists [math]\displaystyle{ f: {\Bbb Q}^+ \to \{-1,1\} }[/math] with discrepancy bounded by some finite C. Let [math]\displaystyle{ \Omega }[/math] be the compact metrisable space [math]\displaystyle{ \Omega = \{-1,1\}^{{\Bbb Q}^+} }[/math] with shift :[math]\displaystyle{ T_q ( (a_r)_{r \in {\Bbb Q}^+} ) := (a_{qr})_{r \in {\Bbb Q}^+} }[/math]; observe that this is a continuous action of the rationals. Let [math]\displaystyle{ x_0 \in \Omega }[/math] be the point

[math]\displaystyle{ x_0 := (f(r))_{r \in {\Bbb Q}^+} }[/math]

and let X be the orbit closure of [math]\displaystyle{ x_0 }[/math], i.e. the topological closure of [math]\displaystyle{ \{ T_q(x_0): q \in {\Bbb Q}^+ \} }[/math]. This is a compact metrisable space, and T restricts to a continuous action on this space.

Set [math]\displaystyle{ \tilde f: X \to \{-1,+1\} }[/math] to be the function

[math]\displaystyle{ \tilde f( (a_r)_{r \in {\Bbb Q}^+} ) := a_1 }[/math];

observe that this is a continuous function. By Conjecture 1, we can find [math]\displaystyle{ x = (a_r)_{r \in {\Bbb Q}^+} }[/math] and n such that [math]\displaystyle{ |\sum_{i=1}^n T_i \tilde f(x)| \gt C }[/math]. But x can be approximated to arbitrary accuracy by a shift of [math]\displaystyle{ x_0 }[/math]. Unpacking all the definitions, we conclude that f has discrepancy greater than C, a contradiction. QED.


We say that a topological system X is minimal if it contains no proper non-empty compact shift-invariant subset. An easy application of Zorn's lemma shows that every topological system contains a minimal system. Thus, to prove Conjecture 1, it suffices to do so for minimal systems.

Given a non-empty open set in a minimal system, one must be able to cover that system by the shifts of the open set, since otherwise the complement of that cover would be a proper compact shift-invariant subset, contradicting minimality. By compactness, this implies that a minimal system can be covered by finitely many translates of the open set.

In terms of sequences, this means that the sequences [math]\displaystyle{ f: {\Bbb Q}^+ \to \{-1,+1\} }[/math] associated to a minimal system (by (1)) have the following almost periodicity property: given any finite set of equations of the form

[math]\displaystyle{ f(q_1 x) = a_1, \ldots, f(q_k x) = a_k }[/math] (*)

for some positive rationals [math]\displaystyle{ q_1,\ldots,q_k }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ a_1,\ldots,a_k\in \{-1,+1\} }[/math], the set of solutions x to (*) is either empty or syndetic, which means that there is a finite set of positive rationals [math]\displaystyle{ r_1,\ldots,r_m }[/math] such that for every positive rational x, at least one of [math]\displaystyle{ xr_1,\ldots,xr_m }[/math] solves (*).

The Krylov-Bogolubov theorem asserts that X supports a probability measure that is shift-invariant. The reason for this is that the positive rationals are amenable, and thus admit a Folner sequence F_n. Now start with your favourite probability measure (e.g. a Dirac mass) and average it over the Folner sequences. Then use Prokhorov's theorem to take a weak limit, which will be automatically invariant by construction.

Once we have a shift-invariant measure, ergodic theory comes into play. For instance, the Birkhoff ergodic theorem will assert that for all rationals, and all continuous functions F, the limit [math]\displaystyle{ \lim_{N\to\infty} \frac{1}{N} \sum_{n=1}^n T_{q^n} F(x) }[/math] exists for almost every x in X (with respect to the invariant measure). Because there are only countably many rationals, and the space of continuous functions is separable, we can thus find an x which is generic, in the sense that the above limits exist for all F and all q. In particular, this implies that if EDP fails, we can find a minimal sequence f of bounded discrepancy such that the limit

[math]\displaystyle{ \lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{1}{N} \sum_{n=1}^n F(f( q^n r_1 ), \ldots, f(q^n r_m)) }[/math]

exists for all positive rationals [math]\displaystyle{ q, r_1,\ldots,r_m }[/math] and all functions [math]\displaystyle{ F: \{-1,+1\}^m \to {\Bbb C} }[/math].

Note also that if [math]\displaystyle{ f: X \to \{-1,+1\} }[/math] has bounded discrepancy on a measure preserving system, then its mean must be zero, as can be seen by averaging [math]\displaystyle{ \frac{1}{n} (f(x)+\ldots+f(T_n x)) }[/math] with respect to x, and then sending n to infinity. Thus, f equals 1 exactly half of the time, and -1 half the time.