
TL;DR
This paper establishes a novel characterization of ergodicity for aperiodic automorphisms of Lebesgue spaces through the continuity of a specific map on a metric Boolean algebra, also extending to periodic and totally ergodic cases.
Contribution
It introduces a new equivalence between ergodicity and map continuity on Boolean algebras, providing a fresh perspective on ergodic theory.
Findings
Ergodicity is equivalent to the continuity of a certain map on a metric Boolean algebra.
A related characterization is provided for periodic and totally ergodic transformations.
The results unify different types of transformations under a common framework.
Abstract
We show that the ergodicity of an aperiodic automorphism of a Lebesgue space is equivalent to the continuity of a certain map on a metric Boolean algebra. A related characterization is also presented for periodic and totally ergodic transformations
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
TopicsMathematical Dynamics and Fractals · Advanced Topology and Set Theory · Mathematical and Theoretical Analysis
ERGODICITY VIA CONTINUITY
I.V. Podvigin111Sobolev Institute of Mathematics and Novosibirsk State University; email:[email protected]
Abstract
We show that the ergodicity of an aperiodic automorphism of a Lebesgue space is equivalent to the continuity of a certain map on a metric Boolean algebra. A related characterization is also presented for periodic and totally ergodic transformations.
MSC2010: 37A25; 28D05; 54C05
1 Introduction
The main goal of this short note is to show that the ergodicity of an aperiodic transformation of a Lebesgue space is equivalent to the continuity of a certain transformation associated with . There are many different but equivalent definitions of ergodicity for measure preserving transformations in the literature (see [2, §2.3] for example). Yet another criterion presented here seems to be new and quite interesting.
Let be the metric space of -equivalent classes of -measurable sets (a set belongs to the class induced by a set iff ). The metric is the Frechet–Nikodym metric defined as
[TABLE]
Let denote the class of sets of -measure zero. Given an automorphism for each define the map as
[TABLE]
We also put
[TABLE]
The sequence is called the wandering rate of [1, §3.8].
It is well known that is ergodic iff for every It turns out equivalent to being continuous everywhere except the point which is the main statement (Theorem 2) in this note. We also present related characterizations for periodic (Theorem 1) and for totally ergodic transformations (Theorem 3).
2 Continuity of the maps
2.1. Periodic transformation. The first local aim is to investigate the continuity of the transformations , for It is required for studying the continuity of for periodic transformation The continuity of is quite easy to prove by using the methods of university measure theory courses. We give a proof of this assertion for completeness of exposition.
Lemma 1
The transformation is everywhere continuous for each
**Proof **
It is evident that
[TABLE]
and then
[TABLE]
This completes the proof. It is worth noting that even the Lipschitz property of follows from the proof.
Recall the definitions of periodic and aperiodic transformations. A point is called periodic for if there exists a number with and the smallest of these numbers is called the period of Denote the set of periodic points of period by and the set of aperiodic points by . It is clear that
[TABLE]
If then the automorphism is called almost everywhere periodic (or shortly periodic). If then is an aperiodic transformation.
The following proposition on the continuity of for periodic automorphisms is a corollary of Lemma 1.
Proposition 1
Let be a periodic automorphism of a probability space Then the transformation is everywhere continuous.
**Proof **
Since for arbitrary there exists a number such that
[TABLE]
For every put
[TABLE]
and then
[TABLE]
As soon as
[TABLE]
the last calculation in the proof of Lemma 1 yields
[TABLE]
This completes the proof.
The converse to Proposition 1 is discussed in the next subsection.
2.2. The points of continuity. The following statements describe in detail all points of continuity of
Lemma 2
Let be an automorphism of a Lebesgue space If then is a continuity point of
Proposition 2
Suppose that is an automorphism of a Lebesgue space and Then is a discontinuity point of Moreover, if is aperiodic then iff is a discontinuity point of
Before proving these assertions, we remark that Propositions 1 and 2 together imply the following characterization of periodic automorphisms of a Lebesgue space.
Theorem 1
An automorphism of a Lebesgue space is periodic iff is everywhere continuous.
**Proof **** **(of Lemma 2)
Consider the partition
[TABLE]
of into ergodic components where is the set of indices (see [5] for example). Express the condition in terms of this ergodic decomposition:
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
It follows that
[TABLE]
Consequently, for each we have
[TABLE]
It is equivalent to
[TABLE]
On the set of indices consider the family of measures defined as
[TABLE]
We claim that (1) guarantees the equivalence of the probability measure and the measure It is clear that Suppose that the opposite is false. Then there exists a set with
[TABLE]
It follows that
[TABLE]
which is a contradiction. Consequently, for each there exists such that implies
Now we are ready to prove the continuity of at the point For arbitrary take as in the previous discussion. For with because the set is invariant under there exists a set of indices such that
[TABLE]
This yields
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Assume that We have
[TABLE]
which implies and, hence, It follows that
[TABLE]
completing the proof.
**Proof **** **(of Proposition 2)
Without loss of generality, assume that the automorphism is aperiodic. Suppose that and then the set of measure is -invariant.
The restriction of to is aperiodic and preserves the probability measure Applying the Rokhlin–Halmos lemma (see [3] for example), we find that for and there exists a set such that the sets for are disjoint and satisfy the inequality
[TABLE]
It is clear that Put Then
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
In this way, taking and sufficiently large we obtain is small enough but
[TABLE]
This proves that is discontinuous at the point with
Now, if is a discontinuity point of then Lemma 2 tells us that The proof is complete.
2.3. Ergodic and totally ergodic transformations. The following characterization of ergodic transformations is also direct corollary of Proposition 2.
Theorem 2
An aperiodic automorphism of a Lebesgue space is ergodic iff is continuous everywhere except the point .
**Proof **
If is ergodic then for Consequently, Lemma 2 shows that is continuous at such points. However, Proposition 2 states that is a discontinuity point.
Now, if is not ergodic then there exists an -measurable -invariant set with . It follows that and Proposition 2 implies that has a discontinuity at
As another application of Proposition 2, we discuss here a characterization of totally ergodic transformations, which means that the powers for all are ergodic transformations.
Define a new map as
[TABLE]
Theorem 3
An aperiodic automorphism of a Lebesgue space is totally ergodic iff is continuous everywhere except the point .
**Proof **
If is totally ergodic then for all and all Hence, and therefore is continuous at that point. Indeed, for arbitrary we take Then the inequality implies that and therefore
[TABLE]
It is evident, that the class is a discontinuity point of
Assume now that is not totally ergodic. Take the smallest such that is not ergodic. Therefore all powers for are not ergodic either (because the invariant sets of are invariant under for all ). It is clear that there are only finitely many, at most such sequences of non ergodic transformations Denote by the finite set of possible values of Thus, and Put Take a nontrivial invariant set of the transformation We claim that it is a discontinuity point of
By Theorem 2, all transformations for (being non ergodic) are discontinuous at Considering (2), we conclude that for sufficiently small and all there exist some sets such that satisfy
[TABLE]
For the set it is easy to see that and for all
[TABLE]
Considering the value we conclude that
[TABLE]
for some The second equality is true because for the ergodic transformation we have and therefore the infimum is reached on non ergodic transformations.
For arbitrary there exists a number such that
[TABLE]
Taking into account the estimates (3) and (4), the monotonicity property
[TABLE]
and the equality
[TABLE]
we obtain
[TABLE]
Take sufficiently small so that the expression is positive. Then the last estimate guarantees that is discontinuous at The proof is complete.
In conclusion, we remark that it would be interesting to find a related characterization for transformations with a different type of mixing property (see [4] for example).
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. The work was supported by the program of fundamental scientific research of SB RAS № I.1.2., project № 0314-2016-0005.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] , , (), , , ed. , , , () (with ) (), .
- 2[2] , , (), , , ed. , , , () (with ) (), .
- 3[3] , , (), , , ed. , , , () (with ) (), .
- 4[4] , ‘‘’’, , , : (), () (with ) (), .
- 5[5] , , (), , , ed. , , , () (with ) (), .
