Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-hw7sx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T02:03:52.013Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ergodic transformations conjugate to their inverses by involutions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2008

Geoffrey R. Goodson ,
Andrés del Junco ,
Mariusz Lemańczyk  and
Daniel J. Rudolph
Geoffrey R. Goodson
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, Towson State University, Towson, MD 21204, USA
Andrés del Junco
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, University of Toronto, Canada, M5S1A1
Mariusz Lemańczyk
Affiliation:
Institute of Mathematics, Nicholas Copernicus University, ul. Chopina 12/18 Toruń, Poland
Daniel J. Rudolph
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Let T be an ergodic automorphism defined on a standard Borel probability space for which T and T−1 are isomorphic. We investigate the form of the conjugating automorphism. It is well known that if T is ergodic having a discrete spectrum and S is the conjugation between T and T−1, i.e. S satisfies TS = ST−1 then S2 = I the identity automorphism. We show that this result remains true under the weaker assumption that T has a simple spectrum. If T has the weak closure property and is isomorphic to its inverse, it is shown that the conjugation S satisfies S4 = I. Finally, we construct an example to show that the conjugation need not be an involution in this case. The example we construct, in addition to having the weak closure property, is of rank two, rigid and simple for all orders with a singular spectrum of multiplicity equal to two.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Ergodic Theory and Dynamical Systems , Volume 16 , Issue 1 , February 1996 , pp. 97 - 124
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

[1]Ageev, O. N.. Conjugacy of a group action to its inverse. Mat. Zametki. 45 (1989), 3–11.Google Scholar
[2]Anzai, H.. Ergodic skew product transformations on the torus. Osaka J. Math. 3 (1951), 83–99.Google Scholar
[3]Baxter, J.R.. A class of ergodic transformations having simple spectrum. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 27 (1971), 275–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Glasner, E., B. Host and D. Rudolph. Simple systems and their higher order self-joinings. Israel J. Math. 78 (1992), 131–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5]Goodson, G. R.. Functional equations associated with the spectral properties of compact group extensions. Proc. Conf. Ergodic Theory and its Connections with Harmonic Analysis (Alexandria, 1993). Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 1994.Google Scholar
[6]Goodson, G. R., Lemańczyk, M.. On the rank of a class of bijective substitutions. Studia Math. 96 (1990), 219–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Halmos, P. R.. Ergodic Theory. Chelsea: New York, 1956.Google Scholar
[8]Junco, A. del. Disjointness of measure preserving transformations, minimal self-joinings and category. Ergodic Theory and Dynamical Systems I, (Prog. Math. 10). Birkhauser: Boston, 1981, 81–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9]Junco, A. del, Rahe, M. and Swanson, L.. Chacon's automorphism has minimal self-joinings. J. d'Analyse Math. 37 (1980), 276–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10]Junco, A. del and Rudolph, D. J.. On ergodic actions whose self-joinings are graphs. Ergod. Th. & Dynam. Sys. 7 (1987), 531–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11]Junco, A. del, Rudolph, D. J.. A rank one, rigid, simple, prime map. Ergod. Th. & Dynam. Sys. 7 (1987), 229–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12]King, J.. The commutant is the weak closure of the powers, for rank one transformations. Ergod. Th. & Dynam. Sys. 6 (1986), 363–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13]Keynes, H. and Newton, D.. Ergodicity in (G, σ)-extensions. Proc. Int. Conf. on Dynamical Systems. Springer L. N. 819, 265–275.Google Scholar
[14]Lind, D.. The structure of skew products with ergodic group automorphisms. Israel J. Math. 28 (1977), 205–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15]Lemańczyk, M. Toeplitz-ℤ2 extensions. Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaŕe. 24 (1988), 1–43.Google Scholar
[16]Mathew, J. and Nadkarni, M. G.. A measure preserving transformation whose spectrum has a Lebesgue component of multiplicity two. Bull. Lond. Math. Soc. 16 (1984), 402–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[17]Newton, D.. On canonical factors of ergodic dynamical systems. J. Lond. Math. Soc. 19 (1978), 129–136.Google Scholar
[18]Oseledec, V. I.. Two non-isomorphic dynamical systems with the same simple continuous spectrum. Funktsional. Anal. Prilozen. 5 (1971), 75–79.Google Scholar
[19]Queffelec, M.. Substitution Dynamical Systems, Spectral Analysis. (Lecture Notes in Mathematics 1294), 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[20]Robinson, E. A.. A general condition for lifting theorems. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 330 (1992), 725–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[21]Rudolph, D. J.. Fundamentals of Measurable Dynamics. Oxford University Press: Oxford, 1990.Google Scholar
[22]Thouvenot, J. P.. The metrical structure of some Gaussian processes. Proc. Conf. Ergodic Theory and Related Topics II. Georgenthal, Teubner-Texte zur Math. 94 (1986), 195–199.Google Scholar