On recurrence in G-spaces
Igor Protasov, Ksenia Protasova

TL;DR
This paper introduces a generalized notion of recurrence in G-spaces, defining $rak{F}$-recurrence based on group actions and families of subsets, providing a new framework for analyzing recurrence phenomena.
Contribution
It proposes a novel, general concept of recurrence in G-spaces using families of subsets and group actions, extending previous notions.
Findings
Defined $rak{F}$-recurrence in G-spaces.
Characterized properties of $rak{F}$-recurrent sets.
Provided a framework for future recurrence analysis.
Abstract
We introduce and analyze the following general concept of recurrence. Let be a group and let be a G-space with the action , . For a family of subset of and , we denote for some , and say that a subset of is -recurrent if for each .
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAdvanced Topology and Set Theory Β· Advanced Banach Space Theory Β· Finite Group Theory Research
UDC 2010 MSC: 37A05, 22A15, 03E05
On recurrence in G-spaces
Igor Protasov, Ksenia Protasova (Kyiv University)
Abstract.
We introduce and analyze the following general concept of recurrence. Let be a group and let be a G-space with the action , . For a family of subset of and , we denote for some , and say that a subset of is -recurrent if for each .
Key words and phrases:
-space, recurrent subset, ultrafilters, Stone-ech compactification.
Let be a group with the identity and let be a -space, a set with the action , . If and is the product of and then is called a left regular -space.
Given a -space , a family of subset of and , we denote
[TABLE]
Clearly, and if is upward directed , imply and if is -invariant imply ) then
[TABLE]
If is a left regular -space and then
For a -space and a family of subsets of , we say that a subset of is -recurrent if for every . We denote by the filter on with the base where is a finite subfamily of , and note that, for an ultrafilter on , if and only if each member of is -recurrent.
The notion of an -recurrent subset is well-known in the case in which is an amenable group, is a left regular -space and for some left invariant Banach measure on . See [1] and [2] for historical background.
Now we endow with the discrete topology and identity the Stone-ech compactification of with the set of all ultrafilters on . Then the family , where , forms a base for the topology of . Given a filter on , we denote .
We use the standard extension [3] of the multiplication on to the semigroup multiplication on . We take two ultrafilters , choose and, for each , pick . Then and the family of these subsets forms a base of the ultrafilter .
We recall [4] that a filter on a group is left topological if is a base at the identity for some (uniquely at defined) left translation invariant (each left shift is continuous) topology on . If is left topological then is a subsemigroup of [4]. If and a filter is left topological then .
**Proposition 1. *For every -space and any family of subsets of , the filter is left topological. ***
Proof. By [4], a filter on a group is left topological if and only if, for every , there is , such that, for every , for some .
We take an arbitrary , put and, for each , choose such that . Then so put .
To conclude the proof, let \ \ A_{1},\ldots,A_{n}\in\mathfrak{F}\ \. We denote We use the above paragraph, to choose corresponding to and put .
Let be a -space and let be a family of subsets of . We say that a family of subsets of is -disjoint if for any distinct .
A family of subsets of is called -packing large if, for each , any -disjoint family of subsets of of the form is finite.
We say that a subset of a group is a -set if and every infinite subset of contains two distinct elements such that and .
Proposition 2. Let be a -space and let be a -invariant upward directed family of subsets of . Then is -packing large if and only if, for each , the subset \ \triangle_{\mathfrak{F}}(A)\ of is a -set.
Proof. We assume that is -packing large and take an arbitrary infinite subset of . Then we choose distinct such that , so , and is a -set.
Now we suppose that is a -set and take an arbitrary infinite subset of . Then there are distinct such that so and . It follows that the family is not -disjoint.
Proposition 3. For every infinite group , the following statements hold
* a subset is a -set if and only if and every infinite subset of contains an infinite subset such that , for any distinct ;*
* the family of all -sets of is a filter;*
* if then for some finite subset of .*
Proof. We assume that is a -set and define a coloring of , by the rule: if and only if , . By the Ramsey theorem, there is an infinite subset of such that is monochrome on . Since is a -set for all .
follows from .
We assume the contrary and choose an injective sequence in such that \ x_{n+1}\notin x_{i}A\ for each , and denote . Then x_{m}^{-1}x_{n}\in A\ \ for every , , so is not a -set.
**Proposition 4. *Let be a infinite group and let denotes the filter of all -sets of . Then is the smallest closed subset of containing all ultrafilters on of the form , , . ***
Proof. We denote by the smallest closed subset of containing all , . It follows directly from the definition of the multiplication in that if and only if either is principal and or, for each , there is an injective sequence in such that for all .
Applying Proposition , we conclude that \ q^{-1}q\in\overline{\varphi}\ for each \ q\in\beta G\ so . On the other hand, if then there is such that is a -set. By above paragraph, so .
Now let be an amenable group, be a left regular -space and for some left invariant Banach measure on . For combinatorial characterization of see [6]. Clearly, is upward directed -invariant and -packing large. By Proposition 2, . By Proposition 4, contains all ultrafilters of the form , , so we get Theorem 3.14 from [1].
We suppose that a -space is endowed with a -invariant probability measure defined on some ring of subsets of . Then the family for some is -packing large.
In particular, we can take a compact group , endow with the Haar measure, choose an arbitrary subgroup of and endow with the discrete topology.
Another example: let a discrete group acts on a topological space so that, for each , the mapping , is continuous. We take a point , denote by the filter of all neighborhoods of , and recall that is recurrent if, for every , there exists such that . Clearly, is a recurrent point if and only if if a set of -recurrence, so by Proposition 1, defines some non-discrete left translation invariant topology on .
Proposition 5. Let be a infinite group, be a -set of and let be a left translation invariant topology on with continuous inversion at the identity . Then the closure is a neighborhood of in .
Proof. On the contrary, we suppose that is not a neighborhood of , put . Then is open and .
We take an arbitrary and choose an open neighborhood of the identity such that . Then we take and choose an open neighborhood of such that and . We take and choose an open neighborhood of such that and and so on. After steps, we get a sequence in such that for all . We denote . Then for all , so is not a -set.
A subset of an infinite group is called a -set if and there exists a natural number such that every subset of , contains two distinct such that , . These subsets were introduced in [5] under name thick subsets, but thick subsets are well-known in combinatorics with another meaning [3]: is thick if, for every finite subset of, there is such that . The family of all -sets of is a filter [5], clearly, . Every infinite group has a -set but not -set : it suffices to choose inductively a sequence of subsets of , such that has no infinite subsets of the form and put , so .
By analogy with Propositions 3 and 4, we can prove
Proposition 6. Let be an infinite group and let be the filter of all -subsets of . Then if and only if either is principal and or, for every , there exists a sequence of subsets of , , such that for all .
Let be a subset of a group such that , . We consider the Cayley graph with the set of vertices and the set of edges . We recall that a subset of vertices of a graph is independent if any two distinct vertices from are not incident. Clearly, is a -set if and only if any independent set in is finite, and is -set if and only if there exists a natural number such that any independent set is of size .
Problem 1. Characterize all infinite graphs with only finite independent set of vertices.
Problem 2. Given a natural number , characterize all infinite graphs such that any independent set of vertices is of size .
In the context of this note, above problems are especially interesting in the case of Cayley graphs of groups.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Bergelson V., Hindman N. Qotient sets and density recurrent sets // Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 364 (2012), 4495-4531.
- 2[2] Furstenberg H. Poincare recurrence and number theory // Bulletin Amer. Math. Soc. 5.3 (1981),211-234.
- 3[3] Hindman N., Strauss D. Algebra in the Stone- C Λ Λ πΆ \check{C} ech compactification // de Gruyter, Berlin, 1998.
- 4[4] Protasov I. Filters and topologies on groups // Mat. Stud. 3 (1994),15-28.
- 5[5] Reznichenko E., Sipacheva O. Discrete subsets in topologicaln groups and countable extremally disconnected groups // preprint (arxiv: 1608, 03546 v 2) 2016.
- 6[6] Zakrzewski On the complexity of the ideal of absolute null sets // Ukr. Math. J. 64 (2012),306-308.
