Conjugacy in the Cantor Set Automorphism Group
Ethan Akin

TL;DR
This paper surveys and extends results on the conjugacy classes within the automorphism group of the Cantor set, focusing on the dynamics of surjective maps and their generic properties under conjugation.
Contribution
It provides new insights into the structure of conjugacy classes in the Cantor set automorphism group and explores the dynamics of various subclasses of surjective maps.
Findings
Existence of elements with dense conjugacy classes in certain subsets.
Characterization of generic elements in these subsets.
Extension of previous results on the automorphism group's dynamics.
Abstract
We survey, and extend, results on the adjoint action of the homeomorphism group on the space of surjective continuous maps, , where is a Cantor set. We look also at the restriction of the action to various dynamically defined subsets of , e. g. the sets of topologically transitive maps, chain transitive maps, chain mixing maps, etc. In each case, we consider whether there exist elements with a dense conjugacy class and if so, what the generic elements look like.
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 · Geometric and Algebraic Topology · Advanced Topology and Set Theory
Conjugacy in the Cantor Set Automorphism Group
Ethan Akin
Mathematics Department, The City College, 137 Street and Convent Avenue, New York City, NY 10031, USA
(Date: February, 2015)
Abstract.
We survey, and extend, results on the adjoint action of the homeomorphism group on the space of surjective continuous maps, , where is a Cantor set. We look also at the restriction of the action to various dynamically defined subsets of , e. g. the sets of topologically transitive maps, chain transitive maps, chain mixing maps, etc. In each case, we consider whether there exist elements with a dense conjugacy class and if so, what the generic elements look like.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
37B05, 37B10, 37E99, 22F50
Contents
- 1 Relations and Maps
- 2 Representations of Mappings via Indexed Partitions
- 3 Representation Characterizations
- 4 Examples
Introduction
When a group acts on itself by the adjoint action, the orbit of an element is its conjugacy class. In the case of the group of homeomorphisms on a compact metric space , the adjoint action extends to , the space of all continuous maps on . For a continuous map on we refer to its orbit as its conjugacy class and denote it by .
The case of is of special interest because of its dynamic interpretation. We can regard a map as a discrete time dynamical system on the state space , describing the evolution by iteration: . The maps and are conjugate precisely when there exists such that . This says that is an isomorphism from to in the category of dynamical systems.
It is convenient to restrict attention to surjective maps, which form a closed subset . A dynamical system is a pair with a nonempty, compact metric space and . It is invertible when is injective, so that .
Considerable work has been done analyzing the adjoint action of for the special case when is a Cantor space, i.e. a metric space homeomorphic to the usual Cantor set. The basis of clopen sets makes everything more tractable in that case. Furthermore, the Cantor set plays a central role in the theory of dynamical systems. In various guises it appears as the state space, e.g. for coding-related systems like subshifts and for algebraic systems like adding machines (also called odometers). Furthermore, every system on a state space with no isolated points has an almost one-to-one lift to a system on the Cantor set.
For a Polish topological group like , it is of special interest when the adjoint action of on itself is topologically transitive, i.e. when there exists whose conjugacy class is dense in . Such a is called a transitive element. A group which admits such transitive elements is said to have the Rohlin Property.
The name is motivated by an ergodic theory result of Rohlin concerning the automorphism group of the Lebesgue space. When satisfies the Rohlin Property then the set of transitive elements is a dense subset of . It sometimes happens that a single conjugacy class is residual, i.e. it contains a dense set. Since distinct conjugacy classes are disjoint but any two residual subsets meet, it follows that there is at most one residual conjugacy class. When such a class exists we call its members transitive elements of residual type and we say that the group has the Strong Rohlin Property.
Finally, when the diagonal action of on any finite product admits a residual conjugacy class then we say that has ample generics. For a survey, see [10].
For a Cantor space it was shown by Glasner and Weiss in [9] and, independently, in [3] that the automorphism group has the Rohlin Property. For a certain class of good measures on it was shown in [2] that , the closed subgroup of automorphisms which preserve , has the Strong Rohlin Property. It was shown that the product of the universal adding machine (see below) with the identity on a Cantor space provides a transitive element of residual type. Using Fraïssé theory, Kechris and Rosendal showed in [12] that has the Strong Rohlin Property. An explicit description of a transitive element of residual type was then given in [4]. With the Haar measure on it was shown in [12] that has ample generics and in [13] that itself has ample generics. Transitivity results with different topologies were proved in [8].
A conjugacy invariant subset of defines a dynamic property, i.e. one which is an invariant under topological conjugacy. Conversely, we will consider the subsets defined by various dynamic concepts associated with recurrence, transitivity and mixing. We recall that the following subsets of are closed.
- •
, the surjective maps which admit fixed points.
- •
, the chain transitive maps, which contains , the topologically transitive maps, as a dense subset.
- •
, the chain recurrent maps, which contains the maps with dense recurrent points as a dense subset.
- •
, the chain mixing maps, which contains , the weak mixing maps, as a dense subset.
So and are closed as well. If a chain transitive map admits a fixed point then it is chain mixing and so we need not consider . Note that the density results assume that is a Cantor space.
For such a conjugacy invariant subset of with a Cantor space, we wish to consider whether the restriction of the adjoint action to admits transitive elements or transitive elements of residual type. For example, Hochman [11] proved that the universal adding machine is a transitive element of residual type for . Shimomura in [15], [16], [17] has extended these results, as we will describe below. If is a transitive element for , it means that every element of can be uniformly approximated by a map conjugate to , i.e. it is up to a change of variables.
Notice that when we say that is a transitive element for we are referring to the adjoint action of on . Meanwhile, itself defines a dynamical system on which may or may not be topologically transitive.
The analysis proceeds by using finite approximations for as in [3].
In general, if is an open cover of a compact metric space , we can regard the elements of as providing a finite approximation to . Think of them as pixels covering . We can represent by using , the set of pairs such that meets . Here the relationship is usually not that of a function, usually meets several members of . When is a Cantor space, we restrict attention to the case when is a decomposition of by clopen subsets.
There are different ways to think about this finite setup. Most authors, including Bernardes and Darji [7] and Shimomura in his papers, regard the elements of as vertices of a directed graph with the oriented edges the pairs in . The original function is conjugate to an inverse limit constructed from such graphs. The projective Fraïssé constructions of Kwiatkowska in [13] lead to similar inverse limit constructions.
I prefer the equivalent approach of regarding the set as a relation on , see, e.g. [1] Chapter 5. A relation on a set is just a subset . It is called a surjective relation when each of the two coordinate projections maps it onto . A function on is a special case of a relation such that is a singleton for every and, abusively, we write for both the singleton set and its unique element. We can iterate relations, and various dynamics concepts extend to relations. For us, a system will be a pair with a compact metric space and a closed, surjective relation on . In Section 1 we review these relation concepts from [1] and recall various dynamic constructions like inverse limits and the sample path system of a relation. For example, given a relation on a finite set, the sample path system is the subshift of finite type associated with the relation. For a continuous surjective map on a compact metric space, the sample path system is the natural homeomorphism lift. After the introductory general remarks of this section, all our spaces are assumed to be either Cantor spaces or finite.
In Section 2 we describe the elementary properties of the representation procedure. Instead of finite decompositions on a Cantor space , our tool for building representations will be an indexed partition , a continuous surjective map to a nonempty, finite discrete space. Since such a function is locally constant, a partition is just a decomposition whose members have been indexed by the set .
We pick out a collection of finite sets to serve as the index sets. Let be the countable set of all nonempty, finite subsets of finite products of of , the set of positive integers. This ensures that if is a nonempty relation on then itself is a member of .
If and is a partition then
[TABLE]
is a surjective relation on . If , then we will say that represents via .
If is the countable set of indexed partitions, equipped with the discrete topology, then then by is a locally constant map. Projecting away from the second coordinate we obtain the representation relation
[TABLE]
That is, is the set of surjective relations which represent .
If and with then as subsets of , . Thus, if represents via , then represents via . It follows that is open and conjugacy invariant.
For we write if , or, equivalently, if and lie in the same element of for all . If then . On the other hand, if then there exists such that and .
In Section 3 we obtain the results about representations. For example, Theorem 3.2:
Theorem: If is a partition, is a surjective relation on , and then there exist and such that
[TABLE]
This implies that is dense in for every surjective relation on a set in . It follows that the functions which can be represented by every surjective relation form a conjugacy invariant, dense, subset. This subset is exactly the set of transitive elements for .
In general, a closed, conjugacy invariant subset of is characterized by the set of relations in which represent its members. Furthermore, the closure of the conjugacy class of consists of exactly those such that .
We call a closed, conjugacy invariant set a conjugacy transitive set when it is the closure of a single conjugacy class. That is, the restriction of the action of the group to is topologically transitive. In that case, , the set of conjugacy transitive elements of , form a subset of which is, of course, dense.
We conclude the section by describing a lifting property introduced in [4] and extended in [17]. This property and an equivalent factoring property provide a sufficient condition that the conjugacy class of an element be a set and show, in particular, that is then a homeomorphism. We say that such a homeomorphism is of residual type. If is a closed, conjugacy transitive subset, then contains at most one conjugacy class whose elements are of residual type.
Finally, in Section 4 we collect the results built using the tools of the preceding sections. We show that are conjugacy transitive subsets each of which admits a conjugacy transitive element of residual type. On the other hand, and are conjugacy transitive subsets for which I can construct no conjugacy transitive element of residual type and I conjecture that they do not exist.
The set is of special interest. It is, in fact, conjugacy minimal. This follows from a theorem of Shimomura that if is not a periodic function then the closure of the conjugacy class of contains . This also shows that the only other conjugacy minimal subset of is the singleton . There is a simple inverse limit construction which yields elements in a subset which we label . if it is a homeomorphism with a unique fixed point and for every , other than the fixed point, the orbit is dense in . The construction is associated with a little semigroup, the analysis of which shows that some members of are topologically mixing while others are not even weak mixing. The weak mixing elements of form a dense subset of .
1. Relations and Maps
Our spaces are metric spaces with metrics (all labeled ) bounded by . On a finite product we use the metric . On a countably infinite product we use . Here is the coordinate projection. On a finite set or a discrete space like , the set of integers, or like , the set of positive integers, we use the zero-one metric.
We will use the relation notation following [1] and so we briefly review it.
For sets a relation is a subset of . is a relation on when . A map is a relation such that is a singleton set for every . For , the image . is the projection to of . is defined to be . For we let . So . If is a map, then . The relation is called surjective when and , or, equivalently, and for all .
If and then the composition is the image under the projection to of the set . Composition is associative.
For a relation on we let for and let and we define . We let . If then is the restriction of to .
A relation on is reflexive when , where is the identity map on . The relation is symmetric when . We will say that satisfies transitivity when . Then satisfies symmetry and transitivity and restricts to an equivalence relation on . We call the equivalence classes in the basic sets of . We don’t call a transitive relation because we give the latter term a different, dynamic, meaning, see below.
N. B. From now on we will assume that our spaces are metric spaces which are either compact or discrete.
A closed relation is a closed subset of . From compactness various properties of closed relations follow. A map is continuous iff it is a closed relation. Furthermore, the composition of closed relations is closed and the image of a closed set by a closed relation is closed. So if is open in then is open in . If is a closed relation on then is a closed subset of . If is a closed relation which satisfies transitivity, then the basic sets are closed sets.
For a relation on , we define the following relations associated with :
- •
The orbit relation is .
- •
The wandering relation is
- •
The chain relation where
.
The relations and are closed and the relations and satisfy transitivity. Clearly, and if is discrete, then .
For a closed relation on , we will say that is transitive when , topologically transitive when , and chain transitive when . We call periodic when for some . We call recurrent when , topologically recurrent when and chain recurrent when . We will refer to these as the three transitivity properties and the three recurrence properties.
For subsets the hitting time setindexhitting time set is
[TABLE]
A closed relation is topologically transitive iff for all nonempty open , . It is topologically recurrent iff for all nonempty open , .
If is discrete, then for a surjective relation the three recurrence properties coincide and the three transitivity properties coincide.
A relation on is called mixing if there exists a positive integer such that . It then follows, by induction, that for every . To see this, observe that if is mixing, then it is surjective and so, given , there exists such that . By inductive hypothesis and so . is called chain mixing if for every the relation is mixing. is called topologically mixing if for every there exists a positive integer such that implies . Of course, topological mixing implies chain mixing. Again, if is discrete, these three concepts coincide. We refer to these as the three mixing properties. By the nine dynamics properties we mean the three recurrence, the three transitive and the three mixing properties.
If is a closed, surjective relation on and is a closed relation on with then is surjective and it satisfies any of the nine dynamics properties when satisfies the corresponding property. Notice that if is a map then implies since is assumed surjective.
If is a closed, surjective relation on with compact, we let and be the sample path space with shift homeomorphism on and the projection map .
[TABLE]
The projection is a continuous surjection with . Also, .
Proposition 1.1**.**
Let be a closed surjective relation on a finite set .
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Proof.
If is recurrent then is a union of basic sets for and if then all lie in the same basic set. For any positive integer there is a sequence with for . The word on extends to a periodic point in which agrees with on .
If is transitive then consists of a single basic set and so contains a point in which every finite word of occurs, i.e. is a transitive point.
If and then for any positive integer there is a sequence . So there is an element of which agrees with on and agrees with on . Thus, is topologically mixing. ∎
We will write for a pair consisting of a compact metric space and closed relation on . We will call the pair a dynamical system or just a system, when the relation is surjective.
We will say that is a map of systems, and write when is a continuous map with , or, equivalently . Since is surjective, the latter inclusion is an equality if is a map. If and are maps, then iff the following diagram commutes:
[TABLE]
In general, implies for for and . It follows that .
We will write when is a continuous surjection with . We will then say that is surjective or that maps onto or that is a factor of . In general,
[TABLE]
For example, for every , the projection maps the sample space homeomorphism back onto the relation itself.
In the special case when is a continuous map, we label the sample path space pair as and call it the natural lift of to a homeomorphism. If then for all and . That is, the coordinate determines all of the later coordinates.
Lemma 1.2**.**
(a) Let be systems for . If and then iff .
(b)Let with , i.e. is surjective between the underlying spaces. If for each either or then , i.e. .
Proof.
(a): . Hence, iff . Similarly, . Hence, iff .
(b): Assume and . There exists such that and there exists such that because is surjective. Since maps into , . Since is a singleton, and so . If, instead then first lift and proceed as before. ∎
If is a closed subset of and is a closed relation on then the restriction of to is given by . When is a system, i. e. is surjective, then is a subsystem when is a surjective relation on , i.e. when . For a system the closed set is called an transitive, topologically transitive, or chain transitive subset when the restriction is a subsystem which satisfies the corresponding property. Similarly, for the three recurrence properties and the three mixing properties.
If and and is a subsystem of then is a system which satisfies any of the dynamics properties that does. Since it follows that is a subsystem satisfying the same dynamics properties.
For compact spaces, an inverse sequence of spaces is a sequence of continuous surjections . For we define to be the composition . The inverse limit is defined by
[TABLE]
The surjection is the restriction of the projection to the coordinate.
If is a surjective map on then we can let for all . The resulting inverse limit space is just a relabeling of , the natural lift of . To be precise, if we define by for all and for .
We will say that the sequence bifurcates when for every and there exist and such that . It is clear that if the sequence bifurcates then the limit space is perfect, i.e. it has no isolated points. Conversely, if all the ’s are finite and is perfect (and so is a Cantor set), then the sequence bifurcates.
If all of the spaces are perfect then is perfect whether the sequence bifurcates or not. In particular, if is a surjective continuous map on a Cantor set , then the natural homeomorphic lift is perfect and so is a Cantor set as well.
A map from to is a sequence of continuous maps such that
[TABLE]
for all . By restricting we obtain a continuous map with for all . If each is surjective then for any , is a decreasing sequence of nonempty compact sets and the nonempty intersection is . Hence, is surjective when the ’s are.
By identifying with we define . Then . The similar identification of with identifies with .
Similarly, for inverse sequences and we can naturally identify , the inverse limit of , with .
An inverse sequence of systems is a sequence of continuous surjections . With the above identifications, , the inverse limit of , is a closed surjective relation on . So we say that the system is the limit of the inverse sequence of systems. The reverse system has limit .
Definition 1.3**.**
An inverse sequence of systems satisfies the Shimomura Condition if for every there exists so that is a mapping.
Proposition 1.4**.**
Let be an inverse sequence of systems.
- (a)
If the sequence satisfies the Shimomura Condition then is a surjective continuous map on .
- (b)
If the sequence and its reverse both satisfy the Shimomura Condition then is a homeomorphism on .
- (c)
If for every , implies then the sequence satisfies the Shimomura Condition.
- (d)
If each is finite and is a mapping, then the sequence satisfies the Shimomura Condition.
Proof.
(a): Assume . To show that it suffices to show that for every . Let be such that is a map. Since , it follows that . Hence, the surjective closed relation is a surjective continuous map.
(b): If the the sequence and its reverse satisfy the condition, then and are mappings. This implies that is a homeomorphism with inverse .
(c): The assumption says that is a mapping.
(d): Call with a V in . If the Shimomura Condition fails then there exists so that for every there exists a V in which projects to a V in . If is finite, there are only finitely many V’s in . Hence, there exists a V in which is an image of V’s in for arbitrarily large. By compactness there is a V which projects to a V in . Hence, is not a mapping. ∎
If is a surjective map on then with , we obtain the inverse sequence of systems with for all whose inverse limit is the natural lift , as described above. Notice that and are maps and so the sequence and its reverse satisfy the Shimomura Condition.
If is a system and is a positive integer we define the -fold discrete suspension with and
[TABLE]
Clearly, is a map, or a homeomorphism, when is. Notice that
[TABLE]
We can identify the successive suspensions with by
[TABLE]
The construction is functorial. If then where . If is surjective then is. Hence, if is an inverse system then so is . We leave to the reader the easy proof of the following.
Lemma 1.5**.**
With the obvious identifications, the inverse limit of becomes . If the original sequence bifurcates or satisfies the Shimomura Condition, then so does the -fold suspension sequence.
For a continuous map on with compact, there are different definitions for topological transitivity, see [5]. As defined above, we say a map is topologically transitive when , or, equivalently, the hitting time set for all open,nonempty . It is equivalent to when if is dense in . A topologically transitive map is surjective.
The map is minimal when . Equivalently, for every nonempty open the sequence of open sets covers (and so has a finite subcover).
We write for the space of continuous surjections from to , for the homeomorphism group and for the space of continuous surjections on . All are equipped with the sup metrics. We let denote the subsets of chain recurrent, chain transitive and chain mixing surjective continuous mappings on . We let and denote the subsets of topologically transitive and minimal maps on . A map is weak mixing when . We let denote the weak mixing maps on .
Proposition 1.6**.**
Let be a compact metric space with the space of continuous maps on .
(a) The sets and for all are closed subsets of for any subset of .
(b) The sets and or for all are subsets of . The set of which admit exactly one fixed point is a subset of .
Proof.
(a) If is a proper subset of then the condition is an open condition by compactness. Hence, is closed. Similarly, if is an open subset of then implies that for some . It thus follows that is an open condition. Hence, and are closed in , see also [1] Chapter 7. By [1] Exercise 8.22 it follows that a chain transitive is not chain mixing iff it factors over a nontrivial periodic orbit, see also [14]. This last is an open condition and so is closed as well. The condition is equivalent to and this is an open condition. It follows that is closed.
(b) For every the condition is an open condition. Intersecting over rational we see that the condition that be injective is .
For fixed open sets the condition is an open condition. Intersecting over in a countable basis we see that is .
The map given by is continuous. Hence, is .
A map is minimal iff for every open nonempty, there exists such that . For each open set , this is an open condition because it is equivalent to finding a closed finite cover of such that for , for some . Intersecting over a countable basis we see that minimal is a condition.
Given , let . It is easy to check that for a homeomorphism , the condition that every point is either fixed by or has a dense orbit is equivalent to the condition that for every and every nonempty open there exists such that . For each open and this is an open condition as above. Notice that if is a closed set then iff . Intersecting over rational and in a countable basis we obtain a condition.
Given , let so that . Observe that if is any open set which contains for some then there exists such that . A mapping has at most one fixed point iff for every there exists so that implies . That is, if . For each and fixed this is an open condition on . Taking the union over and then the intersection over rational we obtain the condition. Intersect with the closed set of such that and we obtain the set of maps which admit a unique fixed point. ∎
Remark: There are different definitions for topological transitivity, see [5]. We call a map topologically transitive when which is equivalent to nonempty hitting times sets as described above. It is equivalent to when if is dense in . On the other hand, if is obtained by compactifying so that the translation map extends to the homeomorphism on which is not topologically transitive in this sense although it does have a dense orbit. Happily, when the space is perfect then all definitions agree. For example, if is perfect and the orbit of is dense then either or . To see this observe that is either in the closure of or . Suppose the first, then there is a sequence such that . So for every , . Thus, the entire orbit is in the closure of the forward orbit and so . Otherwise, which implies that is topologically transitive. Since the inverse of a topologically transitive homeomorphism is topologically transitive (e.g. ), it follows from either case that is topologically transitive.
If then . We denote will write for , the set of surjective maps which admit a fixed point. Similarly, we will write for and for etc. We will write for the set of homeomorphisms such that has a unique fixed point and if is not the fixed point then the orbit is dense in .
We will apply all this to two special cases: a Cantor space, a Cantor set equipped with an ultrametric , i.e.
[TABLE]
or to a finite set with the zero-one metric, also an ultrametric. Notice that if is a finite set then the metrics on and on are ultrametrics. With an ultrametric is a clopen equivalence relation.
2. Representations of Mappings via Indexed Partitions
Our spaces etc are all Cantor spaces, i.e. nonempty, zero-dimensional, perfect, compact metric spaces equipped with ultra-metrics. The maps are assumed to be continuous. We repeatedly use The Uniqueness of Cantor, the observation that all Cantor spaces are homeomorphic and, in particular, as nonempty clopen subsets of a Cantor space are Cantor spaces they are all homeomorphic to one another. A decomposition of is a finite, pairwise disjoint cover of by nonempty clopen subsets. Since the metric on is an ultrametric, the set of balls is a decomposition of for any .
Let denote the countable set of all nonempty, finite subsets of for . Notice that if is a nonempty relation between elements of then . We regard as a discrete set and the elements of as finite discrete spaces. Recall that a discrete space uses the zero-one metric .
An indexed partition (hereafter, just a partition) is a continuous surjection with . We define to be the associated decomposition of . If are decompositions then refines iff for every there exists a -necessarily unique- such that . We will say of partitions that refines when refines .
If is any decomposition of and has the same cardinality as then there is a partition such that . Since there are decompositions of any positive finite cardinality, it follows that for any there exist partitions .
Let denote the set of all indexed partitions. Each clopen subset of is a finite union of basic sets and so there are only countably many clopen sets. Hence,for each there are only countably many partitions . Since is countable, it follows that is countable. We give it the discrete topology.
If and are partitions then is a partition. If then we write by . This is usually not surjective and so is only an indexed partition when we restrict the range to .
The mesh of a finite collection of sets is . For a partition the mesh of , also called the mesh of , is
[TABLE]
The thickness of is the minimum of the diameters, i. e.
[TABLE]
The Lebesgue number of is
[TABLE]
Note that is a clopen neighborhood of the diagonal. If a set has diameter less than the Lebesgue number of then is constant on it and so it is contained in an element of .
Proposition 2.1**.**
Let and be partitions.
- (a)
The following are equivalent.
- (i)
* refines .*
- (ii)
There exists such that .
- (iii)
The relation is a map.
- (iv)
* is constant on every element of .*
When these conditions hold, is the unique map such that . 2. (b)
If the mesh of is less than Lebesgue number of , then refines . If, in addition, then each element of contains at least two elements of , or, equivalently, is not constant on any element of .
Proof.
(a) (i) (ii): Define if .
(ii) (i): If and then .
(ii) (iii): Because is a surjective map, and so implies .
(iii) (ii): Because is a map . Hence, . As the composition of maps, the latter is a map and inclusion between maps implies equality. Hence, with .
(iii) (iv): Obvious.
(b) The first part is clear from the definition of the Lebesgue number.
If contains a unique then since refines , . Then . ∎
Proposition 2.2**.**
Let .
(a) If is a partition and , then there exists such that .
(b) If and are partitions then there exists a homeomorphism such that .
Proof.
(a): For each , is a nonempty clopen subset of and so is a Cantor space. Since is a nonempty subset of , it is an element of . We can choose for all and concatenate.
(b): Choose a homeomorphism between the Cantor spaces for all and concatenate. ∎
If is a partition and is a continuous map then we write for . If is surjective, i.e. , then is a partition.
If is a partition then for continuous maps we write when , or, equivalently, if and lie in the same member of the decomposition of for all . This defines a clopen equivalence relation on . Clearly, implies and so we can use these equivalence relations to measure closeness of approximations between maps in .
Corollary 2.3**.**
If is a partition and , then there exists a homeomorphism such that .
Proof.
Apply Proposition 2.2(b) with and . ∎
Remark: With it follows that is dense in .
For a closed relation on and a partition , we let . So iff there exists such that and and so iff . Clearly, if the relation is a surjective relation on then is a surjective relation on and is a surjective system map.
If is a surjective map, i.e. , then
[TABLE]
and so is a partition.
Proposition 2.4**.**
If is a partition and is less than the Lebesgue number of , then for any closed surjective relation on .
Proof.
If is less than the Lebesgue number then the clopen equivalence relation is contained in .
If and then and . Hence, . ∎
For any closed surjective relation on , we have the surjective map of systems and so for , and . From this and Proposition 2.4 we obtain
Proposition 2.5**.**
If is a surjective closed relation on and is a partition then
[TABLE]
For partitions and , we write when and such that the following diagram commutes:
[TABLE]
i.e. .
Proposition 2.6**.**
With and assume that is a surjective system map. If and are partitions and . then
[TABLE]
Furthermore, the following diagram of systems commutes:
[TABLE]
Proof.
Because maps to we have and This and (2.3) imply (2.5). The commutative diagram of surjective system maps is then clear. ∎
Proposition 2.7**.**
(a) Assume and is a partition. Let be a homeomorphism. If and , then
[TABLE]
(b) Assume and are partitions and that . If then there exists a homeomorphism such that and .
Proof.
(a) We have and . So (2.6) follows from (2.5).
(b) Let . and are partitions and so by Proposition 2.2 (b) there is a homeomorphism such that . That is, and . Hence, and so . ∎
The following estimate was proved by Bermudez & Darji [7] and by Shimomura [17].
Proposition 2.8**.**
Let . If then with .
Proof.
For all and so there exists such that . Since, and the result follows from the triangle inequality. ∎
If for then and so by (2.3). Hence, with the discrete topology on the map by is locally constant. We can regard as the set of triples and project away from the second coordinate to define
[TABLE]
We will say that , a surjective relation on , represents if there exists a partition such that , i.e. if . Equivalently, represents if there exists a system surjection .
From Proposition 2.6 we obtain the following.
Corollary 2.9**.**
Let . (a) If and , then .
(b) If then .
(c) If is the natural lift of to a homeomorphism then .
Proof.
(a): If is a partition with and then and so Proposition 2.6 implies .
(b): If is a partition with and , then , and so Proposition 2.6 implies .
(c): Since maps onto , it follows from (b) that .
Now let be a partition and . Because every clopen set is a finite union of basic sets it follows that there is a finite list of coordinates so that depends only on the value of at each of these coordinates. Furthermore, if is the smallest index in this set of coordinates then if . This means that is a function of . That is, there exists a partition such that . Because and , Proposition 2.6 implies that . Hence, . ∎
Because it is of interest to know whether a system factors over a nontrivial periodic orbit, we observe the following.
Proposition 2.10**.**
For and a permutation on the following are equivalent.
- (i)
* factors over the permutation , i.e. there is a system surjection .*
- (ii)
.
- (iii)
There exists which factors over .
Proof.
(i) (ii) and (ii) (iii) are obvious.
If with and then and are surjective system maps. ∎
3. Representation Characterizations
In this section we justify our emphasis on the use of surjective relations on finite sets to study and for a Cantor space. We will show that a closed, conjugacy invariant subset of is characterized by the set of relations which represent it, i.e. by . We develop the inverse limit construction which will be used in studying the examples in the next section. Finally, we describe a useful sufficient when the limit of such a construction has a conjugacy class and so is a residual element of the closure of its conjugacy class.
We will use homeomorphisms to identify the various Cantor spaces which turn up in our constructions so that we regard all our partitions as lying in . If we will say they are conjugate if there exists a homeomorphism such that is in the orbit of with respect to the adjoint action on . This definition is, of course, independent of the choice of homeomorphism which is used to identify the two spaces. Equivalently, and are conjugate if there exists a homeomorphism such that .
We first use the sample path space construction to show that every surjective relation on an element of can be represented by an element of . Usually, the sample path system of the finite system will do, but a bit of extra work is needed to assure that the associated space is Cantor.
Theorem 3.1**.**
If is a partition and is a surjective relation on then there exists such that and .
If is recurrent then can be chosen with dense periodic points.
If is transitive then can be chosen topologically transitive with dense periodic points.
If is mixing then can be chosen topologically mixing with dense periodic points.
Proof.
On let so that is the full shift with the Cantor space . Let on . Let , the sample path system for . Observe that is a Cantor space and that . Furthermore, . See the description associated with Proposition 1.1.
With the first coordinate projection, we define . Since , (2.5) implies .
By Proposition 2.2 (b) there exists a homeomorphism so that . Let . Since maps to , (2.6) implies that . Clearly .
The transitivity and mixing results follow from Proposition 1.1. ∎
Next, we show that any element of can be approximated by a homeomorphism which is represented by .
Theorem 3.2**.**
If is a partition, is a surjective relation on , and then there exists such that
- •
.
- •
There exists a partition such that .
- •
.
- •
If is chain recurrent and is recurrent then can be chosen with dense periodic points.
- •
If is chain mixing and is mixing then can be chosen topologically mixing and with dense periodic points.
Proof.
Apply Proposition 2.2(a) to get a partition such that . Define and . By Theorem 3.1 there exists a homeomorphism on such that . By (2.5)
[TABLE]
By Proposition 2.7(b) there exists such that . Let and let . By (2.6), .
The homeomorphism can be chosen so that .
If is chain recurrent then is recurrent. If, in addition, is recurrent then the product is recurrent.
If is chain mixing then is mixing. If, in addition, is mixing then the product is mixing.
Hence, by Theorem 3.1 we can choose as required and so the conjugate satisfies the additional properties as well. ∎
Corollary 3.3**.**
If and a surjective relation on , then is an open, conjugacy invariant, dense subset of . Furthermore,
- (i)
* is dense in and open relative to .*
- (ii)
If is mixing then \{f\in H(X):f\in\Gamma^{-1}(\phi)\ and is topologically mixing with dense periodic points is dense in .
- (iii)
If is recurrent then \{f\in H(X):f\in\Gamma^{-1}(\phi)\ and has dense periodic points is dense in .
- (iv)
\{f\in H(X):f\in\Gamma^{-1}(\phi)\* and is dense in .*
Proof.
is open because the map is locally constant. It is conjugacy invariant by (2.6). The rest then follows from Theorem 3.2. ∎
We turn now the the inverse limit constructions.
Definition 3.4**.**
We say that an inverse sequence of systems with for all , is a Shimomura Sequence when it is bifurcating and satisfies the Shimomura Condition. It is an invertible Shimomura Sequence when, in addition, satisfies the Shimomura Condition as well.
Theorem 3.5**.**
If is the inverse limit of a Shimomura Sequence , then is a Cantor space with , and if the sequence is an invertible Shimomura Sequence, then .
* consists of the factors of . That is, a surjective relation on lies in iff there exists and with .*
Proof.
is a Cantor space because the sequence bifurcates. The surjective relation on is a map by Proposition 1.4 which also says that is a homeomorphism if the sequence is invertible.
If is the projection from the limit then
. Hence, .
If is a partition, then because is the inverse limit, and is finite, factors through for sufficiently large . That is, there exists and such that . By ( 2.5) and so is a factor of .
For the converse, Corollary 2.9 (a) implies that any factor of an element of lies in . ∎
Definition 3.6**.**
If are surjective relations on elements of , we call a directional lift of if there exists such that
- (i)
.
- (ii)
* is a map.*
- (iii)
* contains more than one element for every .*
We then say that induces the lift or the lift occurs via .
It is a directional lift if satisfies, in addition,
- (iv)
* is a map,*
or, equivalently, if, in addition, a directional lift of via .
Notice that if induces a directional lift and and are surjections with , then induces a directional lift of .
Thus, an inverse sequence is a Shimomura sequence exactly when for all and for every there exists such that induces a directional lift, from to .
Lemma 3.7**.**
Let be partitions and . If is less than the thickness of and refines both and then is a directional lift of induced by the unique surjective map such that .
If and, in addition, refines then is a directional lift of induced by .
Proof.
If refines , then Proposition 2.1(a) implies that is the unique surjective map such that such that and (2.5) implies .
If is less than the thickness of , Proposition 2.1(b) implies that each member of contains more than one element of and so no is a singleton.
(see (1.2)) and so . By Proposition 2.1(a) again this is a map if refines .
Thus, from the hypotheses it follows that induces a directional lift from to .
If we apply the result to to obtain a directional lift when, in addition, refines . ∎
We call a basic sequence of partitions when
- •
refines for all .
- •
as .
For a basic sequence, let be , the unique surjection such that .
Theorem 3.8**.**
Let be a basic sequence of partitions. If then is a Shimomura sequence with inverse limit . If then it is a invertible Shimomura Sequence.
Proof.
For every , if is sufficiently large, then is less than the minimum of the Lebesgue number of , the Lebesgue number of and the thickness of . By Lemma 3.7 induces a directional lift from to . It follows that the sequence is a Shimomura Sequence.
The surjections induce a surjection from onto the inverse limit. because the , the map is injective and so is an isomorphism from to the inverse limit.
If we can choose large enough that refines as well showing that the sequence is a invertible Shimomura Sequence. ∎
Corollary 3.9**.**
If is a basic sequence of partitions, and , then consists of the factors of .
Proof.
This is immediate from Theorems 3.8 and 3.5. ∎
If is a collection of surjective relations on elements of , we let
[TABLE]
That is, when all the relations which represent are in .
Definition 3.10**.**
Let be a nonempty collection of surjective relations on elements of . We say that satisfies Condition if
- •
* is closed under factors. That is, if is a factor of then .*
- •
* admits directional lifts. That is, if then there exists which is a directional lift of .*
Proposition 3.11**.**
If then is closed under factors and if then there exists which is a directional lift of . In particular, satisfies Condition .
Proof.
is closed under factors by Corollary 2.9 (a).
If then there exists a partition such that . Construct a basic sequence of partitions with . By Theorem 3.8 is a Shimomura sequence and it is invertible if . Hence, for sufficiently large , the map induces a directional lift of and if then large enough implies that the lift is directional.
For general , we apply the result to the natural lift . By Corollary 2.9 (c) and so every admits a directional lift in . ∎
Now we obtain our main characterization result.
Theorem 3.12**.**
Let be nonempty. Let be a collection of surjective relations on elements of .
- (a)
* and*
[TABLE]
- (b)
* is closed and conjugacy invariant.*
- (c)
* satisfies condition .*
- (d)
If is dense in , then .
- (e)
If and are conjugacy invariant and then is dense in .
- (f)
If is closed in and is conjugacy invariant then . If is closed in and is conjugacy invariant then .
- (g)
If satisfies condition then
[TABLE]
Proof.
(a) The two inclusions are obvious and then imply the equations by monotonicity of and .
(b) If is a partition and is a sequence in converging to then is eventually constant at and so eventually is eventually constant at . If for all then . As was arbitrary . is conjugacy invariant by (2.6).
(c) Clearly, and Condition is preserved by arbitrary unions. So the result follows from Proposition 3.11.
(d) Clearly, . If then for some and . Because is dense in there exists such that . Hence, and so .
(e) If and is a partition then and so there exists and such that . By Proposition 2.7 (b) there exists a homeomorphism such that . Since is conjugacy invariant . Since was arbitrary, is dense in .
(f) . By (b) is closed and conjugacy invariant. By (a) . By (d), is dense in . Since is closed, it equals .
Now assume that is closed in the relative topology. So if is the closure in then is dense in and . Since is closed and conjugacy invariant it follows that which equals by (c). Hence, .
(g) Let . By Condition we can inductively build a Shimomura sequence with and for all . Let be the inverse limit of the sequence. By Theorem 3.5 is a Cantor set with and every element of is a factor of some . Because is closed under factors, we have , i. e. . If is the natural lift of to a homeomorphism then by Corollary 2.9(c) and so . After identification of with via a homeomorphism, we have that with .
The reverse inclusions follow from (a) and monotonicity of . ∎
Thus, and are inverse bijections between the collection of closed, conjugacy invariant subsets of and the collection of those sets of surjective relations on elements of which satisfy condition .
Corollary 3.13**.**
If is closed and conjugacy invariant then is a dense subset of .
Proof.
satisfies Condition by (c) and by (f) . Hence, (g) implies that . So by (e) is dense in . Since is a subset of , its intersection with is a subset of . ∎
Theorem 3.14**.**
If are conjugacy invariant subsets of and is closed, then iff . In particular, for the closure of the conjugacy class of is .
Proof.
Clearly, implies . By Theorem 3.12 (f) and by (d) and (f) the closure . Hence, implies .
If is the closure of the conjugacy class of and is the conjugacy class of then iff and so iff . ∎
From Corollary 2.9 we obtain the following result from [15].
Corollary 3.15**.**
(a) If and is a factor of then is in the closure of the conjugacy class of .
(b) If and is the natural lift of to a homeomorphism then, (after identifying with ) the closure of the conjugacy classes of and of agree.
Discussed by most of the authors whose work I am describing is the important question of when the conjugacy class of a map is a in . In that case, the class is a residual subset of its closure. Here we will describe sufficient conditions which are convenient to apply. They come from Shimomura [17] and from [4].
We will say that a Shimomura Sequence is pointed when is a singleton and so is the trivial system. Any Shimomura sequence can be adjusted to become pointed by inserting the trivial system at level and shifting the other index numbers up by one. We will call this the pointed extension of the original sequence.
Definition 3.16**.**
Let be a pointed Shimomura sequence. If then satisfies the lifting property with respect to the sequence if for every and there exists and such that and with .
Theorem 3.17**.**
Let be a pointed Shimomura sequence. The set of which satisfy the lifting property with respect to the sequence is a subset of . If the set is nonempty then it is exactly the set of which are conjugate to the inverse limit of .
Proof.
Given and we let be the set of such that and there exists with and such that and . is open, because the map is locally constant. That is, for any the relations are unaltered as varies in a small enough open neighborhood. The intersection over the countable set of ’s and rational is the set of maps with the lifting property.
If satisfies the lifting property then using (2.6) it is easy to check that any conjugate of satisfies the lifting property.
Now assume that satisfies the lifting property. Since is trivial, there is a unique . Let . Inductively, we use the lifting property to define an increasing sequence and with for and with .
Now define for all by if , and by if . These define a map from onto the inverse limit . Since the as it follows that the map from to is injective and so is a homeomorphism. This shows that is conjugate to the inverse limit map. ∎
We show that for homeomorphisms, the lifting property is preserved by discrete suspension. This requires a little construction.
Lemma 3.18**.**
Assume , is a closed relation on and is a positive integer. If is a continuous map between the -fold suspensions, then there exist a homeomorphism and a continuous map such that .
Proof.
Let for . Since maps to , it maps to . By (1.5) this says that has and .
Since is continuous, it follows that is a clopen, invariant subset of for . Define to equal on the clopen invariant . Since is thus decomposed into invariant pieces, maps to itself. Since , we have that for all . Thus, if we let we see that and so for . That is, .
If then if and . Otherwise , . In either case, we have . That is, . ∎
Theorem 3.19**.**
If satisfies the lifting property for the pointed Shimomura sequence and is a positive integer then the -fold suspension on satisfies the lifting property for the pointed extension of .
Proof.
If then is a lift of the map to the trivial system. That is, we can lift the bottom level of the pointed extension of the suspension.
Given and , apply Lemma 3.18 to get a homeomorphism and so that . Let be an modulus of uniform continuity for and choose so that and the mesh of is less than . Then the mesh of is less than and so has mesh less than . Furthermore,
[TABLE]
as required. ∎
We describe an alternative to the lifting property which is a bit easier to use.
Definition 3.20**.**
If is a pointed Shimomura sequence, then we says that the the sequence has the factoring property if whenever with , there exists and such that .
Theorem 3.21**.**
Let be a pointed Shimomura sequence with limit . The sequence has the factoring property iff has the lifting property with respect to the sequence.
Proof.
Write , the projection from the inverse limit.
Assume has the lifting property and we are given .
Let be smaller than the Lebesgue number of . By the lifting property applied to , there exists such that and with . Because is smaller than the Lebesgue number of , is a map with . We can always replace by with arbitrarily large and so we can get if it was not already. This is the factoring property.
Now assume the factoring property and suppose we are given and .
Because is the inverse limit, factors through for sufficiently large. This is because any clopen set is a finite union of basic sets and consists of finitely many clopen sets. We choose large enough that and . Thus, there exists so that . By the factoring property, there exist and so that .
Now use the factoring property again to get so that . Let . Since, it follows that . Furthermore,
[TABLE]
This proves the lifting property. ∎
We will say that is of residual type when its conjugacy class is a subset of and so is a residual subset in its closure.
Theorem 3.22**.**
If is of residual type then .
Proof.
Let be the closure in of the conjugacy class of . Hence, is a closed, conjugacy invariant subset of . By Corollary 3.13 is a dense, subset of . By definition, the conjugacy class of is dense in . If the conjugacy class is a then these two residual subsets intersect. That is, there exists which is conjugate to . Since is itself conjugacy invariant, . ∎
We will use the lifting property and the factoring property to construct examples of residual type. However, I do not know whether the property is necessary, i.e. whether any of residual type admits a Shimomura sequence with respect to which it has the lifting property. So, for example, I do not know if the discrete suspensions of a homeomorphism of residual type are necessarily of residual type. Nonetheless, Theorem 3.19 will suffice for construction purposes.
4. Examples
Following Bernardes and Darji [7], we define for integers , an loop, or a loop of length , to be a relation isomorphic to on given by , i.e. translation by on the the group . An dumbbell is a relation isomorphic to on given by . Notice that a loop and a dumbbell are both the trivial surjective relation on a singleton.
For the dumbbell, restricts to a loop on . It is called the in-loop of the dumbbell. The restriction to is a loop called the out-loop of the dumbbell. We call the restriction to the connecting path of the dumbbell. We extend the language via the -unique- isomorphism to any dumbbell.
If then the inloop points precede the outloop points with respect to the partial order given by . On the other hand, if , then the connecting path is trivial and we call the dumbell an wedge. In that case, is isomorphic to by the map which sends to for and to for .
If and is a positive integer, then the -fold suspension is isomorphic to by . If , then is not a dumbell as the two loops share a common path of length
Proposition 4.1**.**
Every surjective relation on a finite set is a factor of a finite disjoint union of dumbbells.
Every transitive on is a factor of a single loop.
Every recurrent on is a factor of a finite disjoint union of loops which may taken to be of the same length.
Proof.
We can regard a surjective relation as describing a directed graph with vertices and with edges given by the pairs in .
If is transitive, i.e. is a single basic set then we can choose a path along the graph which begins and ends at the same vertex and which passes through every edge. This expresses as a factor of a loop. If is recurrent and so is the union of basic sets then is the factor of a finite number of loops. Taking the least common multiple of the lengths, we can lift each loop to an loop and so express as a factor of a disjoint union of loops.
We can include any edge for a surjective relation in a path and extend it forward and backward until on each side a repeat of a vertex occurs. This exhibits a dumbbell which maps into and which hits the given edge. As there are only finitely many edges we can express as a factor of a finite union of dumbbells. ∎
Lemma 4.2**.**
If and is the -loop on then the following are equivalent:
- (i)
There exists .
- (ii)
There exists a partition such that .
- (iii)
.
- (iv)
* is an -fold suspension of some system .*
If exists, it is necessarily a system surjection.
Proof.
If then is congruent to . Thus, and so since is a map (see Lemma 1.2(b). Since such a system map is necessarily a surjection and is a permutation, the equivalence of (i), (ii) and (iii) follows from Proposition 2.10.
(iv) (i): If and so then the second coordinate projection from to maps onto and onto .
(i) (iv): If then we let which is a clopen invariant subset of . Define the homeomorphism by for . Clearly, for , , while . ∎
We will repeatedly use the rigidity of maps between loops and dumbbells as described in the following Lemma.
Lemma 4.3**.**
(a) There exists a map iff is a divisor of . In that case, given and there is a unique such , necessarily surjective, with .
(b) There exists a map iff is a divisor of and of . In that case, given and there is a unique such , necessarily surjective, with .
(c) If and is not surjective, then either is the in-loop or the out-loop of .
(d) Assume . There exists a map iff is a divisor of , is a divisor of and . If and then such a exists with iff and . In that case, is unique.
Proof.
(a): is a map with and so if maps to then and so . Since is the orbit of any of its points, the map is uniquely determined by its value on any point. By rotating in the loop we see that the value of can be arbitrarily chosen.
(b): By (a) applied to the restriction of to the inloop and the outloop, we see from (a) that for to exist we must have and . In that case, the map from to obtained by sending to its congruence class is a map from to . Again we can rotate the loop to get an arbitrary value of .
If then by moving forward and backward we see that is uniquely determined by the value . If is on the inloop then (a) implies that the restriction to the inloop is uniquely determined by . Thus, is determined and since is on the connecting path, is determined. Similarly, if is on the outloop.
(c): The only proper subsystems of the dumbbell are the inloop, the outloop and their disjoint union. The image of is a subsystem in which any two elements can be connected by a chain. It follows that the image is either the inloop our the outloop when is not onto. When then the map of systems is surjective by Lemma 1.2(b).
(d): When , the dumbbell is not transitive. The only transitive subsets are the inloop and the outloop. The image of the inloop and the outloop of are transitive subsets. Furthermore, if then would be transitive and with a transitive image. Hence, . Since maps to we see that takes inloop to inloop and outloop to outloop. Note that this also uses . It thus follows from (a) that and are required.
If then is not in one of the endloops and so any pre-image is not in an endloop. Also, is not in the outloop and . Similarly, . Thus, the preimage of the points of the connecting path in must lie in the connecting path of . Hence, . Furthermore, if , i.e. lies on the connecting path in the image, and then and . Hence, and lie in the connecting path of . Thus, and .
Finally, given and satisfying the above conditions, is uniquely defined by taking to for . At the endpoints we are in the inloop on the left and the outloop on the right. We then move around the loops. ∎
Remark: Notice that when and then the only surjection between the dumbbells has . That is, the identity map is the unique surjection from a dumbbell to itself when the connecting path is nontrivial.
We will call a closed, conjugacy invariant subset of conjugacy transitive when it is the closure of the conjugacy class of some , i.e. . Such elements are called conjugacy transitive elements and the set of such elements is denoted . Thus, is conjugacy transitive when is nonempty, in which case it is a dense subset of . We call conjugacy minimal when . By Theorem 3.12(e)
[TABLE]
A conjugacy transitive point is of residual type when the conjugacy class is a subset of . Since distinct conjugacy classes are disjoint and two dense subsets meet, it follows that there is at most one dense conjugacy class. Theorem 3.22 implies that such residual type transitive points are contained in .
If is a collection of surjective relations on members of and we will say that generates if and every element of is a factor of some relation in .
Example 1 - :
By Theorem 3.1 is the set of all surjective relations on members of . Since the set of surjective relations on elements of is countable, Corollary 3.3 and the Baire Category theorem imply that the set of with is a dense subset of . Thus, is conjugacy transitive and this set is by (4.1).
Let with a conjugacy transitive point of . If is a factor of then is a conjugacy transitive point of because
[TABLE]
In particular, if is a conjugacy transitive homeomorphism and is an arbitrary member of then by using a homeomorphism from to , we can regard as a member of which has as a factor and so is conjugacy transitive. On the other hand, if is not injective then is not and so its conjugacy class is a subset of which is dense in .
We describe a Shimomura sequence with the factoring property whose limit is a conjugacy transitive element of . For let be a collection of dumbbells with the sets pairwise disjoint. Label by the vertices in at positions respectively. That is, these are the vertices at the left end, the mid-point, and the right end of the connecting path for . Let be a trivial system and for let be the disjoint union of the systems . is the unique map to the trivial system. For on is the unique map to taking to when or . When it is the unique map onto the inloop which takes to . When it is the unique map onto the outloop taking to . Thus, each level dumbbell is the image of two level dumbbells and each endloop at level is the image of a single level dumbbell. Hence, for each level dumbbell is the image under of dumbbells and each endloop is the image of dumbbells.
Theorem 4.4**.**
* is an invertible pointed Shimomura sequence which satisfies the factoring property. If is the limit, then is a conjugacy transitive point for of residual type.*
Proof.
The map takes the first vertices of the connecting path for into the same endloop as the initial vertex and the last vertices to the same endloop as the last vertex, it follows that realizes a directional lift and so the sequence is an invertible Shimomura sequence.
If is the limit then and by Theorem 3.5 is generated by the . Every finite union of dumbbells is clearly a factor of for sufficiently large and by Proposition 4.1 every surjective relation is a factor of a finite union of dumbbells. Hence, and so is a conjugacy transitive point for .
It remains to check the factoring property which will imply that is of residual type.
If then provides the required factoring since is trivial. Let with . For each the dumbbell is hit by at least one and at most dumbbells in . In addition, each endloop may be the image of some dumbbells in , again at most of them. Choose large enough that .
First we allocate each the dumbbells of to a dumbbell of . For each we distribute the dumbbells which hit it via among those which hit it via so that each of the latter is allocated at least one. The dumbbells which are mapped onto the inloop of are distributed among the dumbbells, if any, which are mapped onto the inloop via again so that each of the latter receives at least one. If there are none then these level dumbbells are allocated to map onto the inloop of some dumbbell of which maps onto via . Similarly, we allocate for the outloops.
Having made these allocations the maps are determined as follows. If maps onto then the vertex is the image of a vertex in the connecting path for . If has been allocated to then we choose the unique map which maps to . Because the inequalities given in Lemma 4.3 (d) are satisfied. If maps onto the inloop of then has been allocated to which either maps onto or onto its inloop. In either case, we map onto the inloop of in such a way that is mapped onto a vertex of the inloop of which is mapped by onto . There may be several of these and any one will do. We use a similar procedure for the outloops. ∎
An explicit description is given in [4] of this map , unique up to conjugacy, which is conjugacy transitive for and is of residual type. The existence of such an element had earlier been proved in [12].
Call simple if there are only finitely many chain recurrent points. This is equivalent to saying that there are finitely many periodic points and the chain recurrent points are periodic. Call very simple if there are only finitely many chain recurrent points and every point of is eventually mapped to a periodic point. We now reprove a result of Batista et al [6] showing that the simple homeomorphisms and the very simple maps are each dense in .
Let be the translation homeomorphism on , . With a Cantor set let be the two-point compactification of so that as . Let be the homeomorphism which extends on .
Proposition 4.5**.**
The homeomorphism is of residual type in .
Proof.
We will sketch the proof leaving the final details to the interested reader.
We use as our Cantor set , with the set of words of length . We define an inverse sequence. Let be the trivial system. For , let
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Thus, we think of as a set of parallel threads indexed by and gathered at the endpoints and .
Define the map by mapping to , to and
[TABLE]
It is easy to check that induces an isomorphism from to the inverse limit. Also it is clear that the sequence is an invertible Shimomura sequence.
Now suppose with . The factoring property is obtained from the following observations.
- •
Each endpoint of is mapped to an endpoint of .
- •
If the two endpoints of were mapped to the same endpoint of then the image, which is would be a transitive relation which it is not.
- •
The orderings given by and then imply that the left endpoint is mapped to the left and the right to the right.
- •
Each thread of is mapped by onto a thread of .
- •
If is a vertex on a thread in and it is the image of the thread in then there is a unique such that and this equation uniquely determines on the thread.
- •
If then each thread in is the image of threads in .
It follows that with large enough we can use the image under of each thread to allocate at least one thread with the same image under . Then we pick a point in each thread and pull back to define the map uniquely given the allocations. ∎
If by
[TABLE]
then . Hence, for every positive the dumbbell is a factor of .
For a positive number, we define the factor map by
[TABLE]
The map is one-to-one except over the endpoints which are lifted to periodic orbits of period . By using the identification defined by (1.6) and the functoriality of the suspension operation we obtain a natural factor map whenever, is a divisor of . That is, is the -fold suspension of the map .
In the language of [4] the threads become spirals.
Let be the disjoint union of disjoint copies of the -fold suspension of . By decomposing the collection of copies in by sets of size and then using with a common range on each set of copies, we obtain a an inverse sequence of maps . Let be the inverse limit. By choosing homeomorphisms to a common space , we can regard for .
Theorem 4.6**.**
If is the union of the conjugacy classes of for then is a conjugacy invariant collection of simple homeomorphisms which is dense in . The homeomorphism is a conjugacy transitive point for .
Proof.
By Proposition 4.1 every surjective relation on an element of is a factor of a finite union of dumbbells and every finite union of dumbbells is a factor of for sufficiently large. Hence, . By Theorem 3.12 (e) is dense in .
Since every is a factor of it follows that So is a conjugacy transitive homeomorphism. ∎
Let . Choose and let and define by
[TABLE]
Thus, is a surjective map and that every point except the fixed point is eventually mapped to the fixed point .
Let be the disjoint union of disjoint copies of the -fold suspension of . Again we can choose homeomorphisms to a common space and regard for .
Theorem 4.7**.**
If is the union of the conjugacy classes of for then is a conjugacy invariant collection of very simple mappings which is dense in .
Proof.
Just as in Theorem 4.6. ∎
Recall that for , . So, for example, has a fixed point iff , in which case . By Proposition 1.6 the set
[TABLE]
is a closed, conjugacy invariant subset of for any . Recall that we write for . So is the closed set of maps which admit a fixed point.
Theorem 4.8**.**
For any , the set is a conjugacy transitive subset of . With the set has a conjugacy transitive element of residual type.
Proof.
Recall that if is a factor of then . Hence, if then . Conversely, if then Theorem 3.2 implies that is dense in . It follows that consists exactly of the surjective relations on members of such that . Since is open, the Baire Category Theorem implies that is a conjugacy transitive set.
Now consider the fixed point case. It is clear from Proposition 4.1 that every surjective relation with is a factor of a disjoint union of dumbbells together with a single extra vertex which is related only to itself. Now we adjust the Shimomura sequence of Theorem 4.4 to obtain as follows: At every level we obtain we adjoin a single new pair . We alter so that it maps at level and the dumbbell both to at level . Above at level there is and dumbbells. So if is any map from level onto level we can allocate to the level dumbbells mapped to and to at level , all of the dumbbells at level which are mapped by down to at .
Again we leave the details to the reader.
The result is an invertible Shimomura sequence satisfying the factoring property and with limit have a unique fixed point over the ’s and with containing arbitrarily large unions of large dumbbells. It follows that is a conjugacy transitive point for which is of residual type. ∎
Example 2 - and :
Recall that and are the closed, conjugacy invariant subsets of chain recurrent elements of and of chain transitive elements of , respectively. By Proposition 4.1 is generated by the finite disjoint unions of loops and is generated by the loops.
Theorem 4.9**.**
(a) is a conjugacy transitive subset of with a transitive element of residual type.
(b) For chain recurrent, let be isomorphic to disjoint copies of the -fold suspension of . If is the union of the conjugacy classes of , then is a dense subset of .
(c) If is the set of with a dense set of periodic points, is a dense subset of .
(d) For any , the set is a conjugacy transitive subset of .The set of chain recurrent maps admitting a fixed point has a conjugacy transitive point of residual type.
Proof.
(a) Theorem 3.2 implies that for any recurrent relation on an element of , the set is open and dense. As there are countably many such relations , it follows from the Baire Category Theorem that is a transitive set.
Let be an increasing sequence with and such that . For , let be disjoint -loops with a chosen point of , and let be their disjoint union. Let with . Define be the map uniquely defined by
[TABLE]
Using the now familiar allocation argument and Lemma 4.3(a), it is easy to check that this defines an invertible Shimomura sequence which satisfies the factoring property. The inverse limit is clearly chain recurrent. If we choose then every finite disjoint union of loops is a factor of for sufficiently large, and so the resulting inverse limit is a transitive element of of residual type.
(b) If is chain recurrent then every is chain recurrent and any finite disjoint union of loops is a factor of for sufficiently large. By Theorem 3.12 (e) is dense in .
(c) In (b) use with dense periodic points, e. g. the shift homeomorphism on . Then every element of has dense periodic points, i.e. .
(d) Again Theorem 3.2 implies that is a conjugacy transitive subset of .
In the fixed point case we proceed exactly as in Theorem 4.8. We define by adjoining at every level with . The we alter the map so that
[TABLE]
but is otherwise unchanged. Again it is easy to check that the sequence satisfies the factoring property. It is clear that is generated by finite unions of loops together with a single disjoint fixed point. Hence, when the limit is a conjugacy transitive element of . ∎
Call a divisibility sequence when it is an increasing sequence of positive integers such that for all ., For such a sequence the sequence of group homomorphisms
[TABLE]
defines an inverse sequence of loops where each is translation by . Let for sufficiently large . The inverse limit is a minimal system which maps onto a -loop iff . It is called the adding machine or odometer associated with the sequence although it really depends only on the set . When , e.g. when , then the system is called the universal adding machine. It factors onto every loop.
It is easy to see that the homeomorphism constructed in part (a) above is the product of the identity on a Cantor set with the adding machine associated with the sequence . In particular, as noted by Shimomura, [17], the product of the identity on a Cantor set with the universal adding machine is a transitive element of residual type for .
Theorem 4.10**.**
(a) If is a divisibility sequence then
[TABLE]
is an invertible Shimomura sequence satisfying the factoring property and so the associated adding machine is of residual type.
(b) is a conjugacy transitive subset of with a the universal adding machine transitive element of residual type.
(c) For chain transitive, let be isomorphic to the -fold suspension of . If is the union of the conjugacy classes of , then is a dense subset of .
Proof.
It is easy to check the factoring property for the inverse sequence associated with a divisibility sequence. For the universal adding machine every loop is a factor and so it is a transitive element for . This proves (a) and (b). Finally, (c) is proved just like (b) of Theorem 4.9. ∎
Part (b) was first shown by Hochman in [11].
Corollary 4.11**.**
If is a conjugacy transitive element of or then admits no periodic points, i. e. for all .
Proof.
If is a closed, conjugacy invariant condition. So if it is true for , then it is true for every element of the closure of the conjugacy class of . In particular, since the adding machines have no periodic points, they cannot be the in the closure of such a conjugacy class. ∎
Example 3 - One Point Compactification of Incomparable Adding Machines:
It can happen that an element of residual type is the inverse limit of a sequence which does not satisfy the factoring condition. This shows that the factoring property is a property of the sequence itself and not just of the inverse limit.
Let be the prime number in counted in increasing order. Observe that for a loop cannot map to a if .Fix a positive number . Let .
Now let . For let be the disjoint union of and a loop for . The map maps as follows:
- •
is mapped to the trivial loop in .
- •
The loop is mapped to for and .
- •
The loop is mapped to the loop for .
For every the inverse sequence is an invertible Shimomura sequence and the inverse limits are all the same. The common limit is the one-point compactification of the disjoint union of adding machines.
For it is easy to check that the inverse sequence satisfies the factoring property. Suppose and maps to . Then must map the loop to the loop for and the remaining loops and the point must map to . From this, the factoring is easy to obtain. It follows that the inverse limit is of residual type.
On the other hand, for any the sequence does not satisfy the factoring property. The map can only factor when for with , the loop is mapped to . But if does this then we can compose with a nontrivial permutation of to obtain a map which does not factor. Similarly, no subsequence satisfies the factoring property.
Example 4 - and :
In general, a continuous surjective map on a compact metric space is chain mixing iff it is chain transitive and in addition it has no nontrivial loop as a factor. See [1] Chapter 8, Exercise 22, as well as [14]. In particular, if is chain transitive and has a fixed point then it is chain mixing. Thus, is the set of chain mixing maps which admit a fixed point.
We recall a standard numerical lemma.
Lemma 4.12**.**
Given a pair of relatively prime, positive integers, every sufficiently large positive integer is a positive mixture of these two. In detail, for if with and then there exist such that .
Proof.
For an integer there are unique integers such that , and . Then . ∎
Recall that an wedge is a system isomorphic to a dumbbell. We extend Proposition 4.1.
Proposition 4.13**.**
(a) If is a mixing system with then there exists such that it is the factor of any wedge with .
(b) For an wedge with relatively prime there exists such that it is a factor of any loop of length .
(c) If is an wedge with relatively prime then is mixing.
Proof.
(a) There exists so that for any . There exists a loop of length which maps onto . It is then easy to see that if and then there are loops of length and each of which maps onto via maps which send an arbitrary point in each to . We can put these together to map the wedge onto .
(b) If with then any loop of length maps onto an wedge. So the result follows from Lemma 4.12.
(c) Choose as in (b). Let . If then there is a path of length from to and there is a loop of length from to . Combine to get a path of length from to . ∎
Corollary 4.14**.**
(a) If is a sequence of relatively prime pairs of positive integers with as then the wedges generate .
(b) If is a positive integer and is a sequence of positive integers relatively prime to and as then the wedges generate .
Proof.
(a) From Proposition 4.13 (c) it follows that if are relatively prime then an wedge is mixing. From Theorem 3.1 and Proposition 4.13(a) it follows that is generated by the sequence of wedges.
(b) Assume is mixing with . If then there is a loop which maps into which begins and ends at . If is mixing then it is a factor of loops for sufficiently large . Hence, it is a factor of a wedge if is sufficiently large. Again Theorem 3.1 implies that any wedge with relatively prime represented by some mixing homeomorphism with . ∎
Recall that is weak mixing when is topologically transitive on . A factor of a weak mixing system is weak mixing. On the other hand, a nontrivial loop is not a weak mixing system. It follows that a weak mixing system does not have any nontrivial loop factors and so is chain transitive.
Theorem 4.15**.**
* is a conjugacy transitive subset of . There exists with minimal, which is a conjugacy transitive element of . If is a conjugacy transitive element for then does not admit any periodic points.*
The set of weak mixing, minimal homeomorphisms which are conjugacy transitive form a dense subset of .
Proof.
Again it follows from Theorem 3.2 that is conjugacy transitive. In detail for each mixing, the theorem implies that contains a dense set of topologically mixing homeomorphisms. Hence, the set is dense in . Intersecting over the countable set of mixing we obtain a set, dense in , each member of which is a transitive element of .
We will construct a conjugacy transitive element of which is minimal and so does not admit periodic points. Just as in Corollary 4.11 it follows that no transitive element admits periodic points.
Let and let be a matrix of positive integers with determinant . This implies that is an integer matrix. Inductively, let
[TABLE]
Clearly, and so . Since is an integer matrix it follows that if is a common divisor of and then it is a common divisor of and . So, by induction, is a relatively prime pair for each .
Let map each loop of the wedge onto the wedge with the common wedge point mapped to the wedge point. For example, the loop maps times around the loop and times around the loop. By starting both loops around and ending both around it follows that, with the other choices arbitrary, realizes a determined lift. Hence, we obtain an invertible, pointed Shimomura sequence whose inverse limit is a conjugacy transitive element of .
We show that for every is dense in . Let be the projection to the wedge at level . Either of is not at the wedge point. Then for maps at least onto one of the loops. Then maps onto both loops. It follows that is a minimal system.
By Proposition 1.6 the set of minimal maps on is a subset of . Such a map is chain transitive and so is chain mixing exactly when it does not factor over a nontrivial loop. Hence, is the set of such homeomorphisms. Since it is conjugacy invariant and contains as constructed above, it is dense in . Since is a dense subset of , the intersection is dense in . The conjugacy transitive elements is also a , dense since it is nonempty. Thus, is a dense subset of . ∎
Define to be the set of homeomorphisms on which admit a unique fixed point and if is not fixed by then the orbit is dense in . Since is perfect, it follows that such a homeomorphism is topologically transitive (see the Remark after Proposition 1.6). Since it has a fixed point it is chain mixing.
Theorem 4.16**.**
There exists which is a transitive element for . The set is a dense, subset of .
Proof.
As in Theorem 4.15, the set is a dense subset of by Theorem 3.2.
The wedge, or pointed loop of length , is given by with
[TABLE]
Let be a sequence in with and for all . We define so that
- •
for .
- •
has at least two elements for all .
That is, the loop at level is wrapped by at least twice around the loop at level . It follows from these two conditions that each realizes a directional lift. Hence, is an invertible, pointed Shimomura sequence. Let be the limit with the projection to the coordinate.
Let be the point with for all . Clearly, is a fixed point for . If then for some and so for all . It follows that maps onto for all . This implies that the orbit of is dense in . That is, .
Since for all , it follows from Corollary 4.14 (b) that and so is a conjugacy transitive element of .
By Proposition 1.6 the set is a subset of . Since it contains and is conjugacy invariant it is dense in . Hence, is dense in ∎
We did not bother considering because, as we will now see, is conjugacy minimal, i.e. every element of is conjugacy transitive for .
We call a map periodic when for some , , or, equivalently, .
Theorem 4.17**.**
(Shimomura) If is not periodic then the closure of the conjugacy class of contains .
Proof.
By Theorem 3.14 it suffices to show that . By Corollary 2.9 we can replace , if necessary, by its natural lift to a homeomorphism. Notice that if and is a lift of then . In particular, if is not periodic then is not.
So we assume is not periodic. We show that for every , there is a wedge in . By Corollary 4.14 (b) this will imply .
Since is not periodic, there exists a point such that
are distinct points and so there is a clopen set with such that are pairwise disjoint. Let with for and . Clearly, is the wedge. ∎
Remark: Using a more delicate proof, Shimomura shows, in [16], that if is not periodic and then is in the orbit closure of iff .
Corollary 4.18**.**
In the sets and are the only conjugacy minimal subsets.
Proof.
If is chain transitive then it is not periodic. In particular, the conjugacy class of every element of is dense in . That is, is a conjugacy minimal set.
The identity map commutes with every homeomorphism on and so is a fixed point for the action. It is therefore a conjugacy minimal set.
Clearly, . It follows that is in the orbit closure of iff for every positive integer there exists a decomposition of of cardinality with each member an invariant set.
Now suppose that that is periodic with for some . Let . This replaces with the topologically equivalent ultrametric and the latter is invariant, i.e. is an isometry. Choose small enough that the decomposition contains at least elements. Then, because is an isometry, is a decomposition containing at least elements each of which is invariant. Hence, if is periodic, then is in the closure of its conjugacy class.
Thus, every closed, conjugacy invariant set contains either or . It follows that these are the only two conjugacy minimal sets. ∎
Notice that in Theorems 4.15 and 4.16 We did not describe any residual transitive elements. I conjecture that they do not exist. In the construction of the former result there is such a wide range of choices that it is hard to imagine a construction can yield a Shimomura sequence which satisfies the factoring property. The attempt in the latter case leads to an interesting semigroup.
Let denote a finite word in the letters of length , denoted , so that . Let (and ) denote the number of letters (resp. the number of letters ) in the word . Define the affine function by . Let denote the set of words with . We define composition in by with . That is, substitute for every occurrence of in the word . If then determines a unique map which starts with a map of to . As one moves along the word, each indicates a map of a digit to and a move to the next digit in the domain, and each indicates a map of digits in order to followed by a move to the next digit, except that after the final letter of is a stop instead of a move to the next digit. Conversely, it is clear that if for any , then there is a unique word so that which implies . It is easy to see that
[TABLE]
For example, the word is the identity in with and the identity on .
Let be the subsemigroup consisting of words which begin and end with and with . Let be a sequence of not necessarily distinct elements of . Let and inductively define . Let . This defines an invertible, pointed Shimomura sequence. The condition that the words begin and end with is needed to get a directional lift. If the limit is then .
The factoring property for the Shimomura sequence associated with is equivalent to following factorization property in the semigroup:
For every and there exists and such that
[TABLE]
However, this is impossible for any sequence in . Consider the finite list of positive integers which occur as the length of a run of ’s in . Because begins and ends with it follows that for any these are exactly the length of runs in . In particular, given , if we choose so that some length of runs occurs in but not in then the factorization is not possible.
Nonetheless, the semigroup is of interest in studying .
Theorem 4.19**.**
With construct the pointed, invertible Shimomura sequence associated with the sequence for . Let denote the limit so that .
(a) If or then is topologically mixing.
(b) If , the simplest word in , or then is not weak mixing.
Proof.
Let be the power of the element in the semigroup. Let be the projection map from the inverse limit.
(a): For we have so that which implies .
Claim: In there occur between successive ’s runs of ’s of every length from [math] up to .
Proof of Claim: This is true by inspection for since contains runs of length and [math] between successive ’s. Since we replace the ’s in by ’s to get . This replaces each run of length by a run of length . Thus, we obtain runs of ’s of length . Within each occur runs of length [math] and . So the Claim follows by induction.
To show that is topologically mixing, it suffices to show that for every and every there exists so that the hitting time set contains every integer greater than where . Since contains the fixed point the result is clear for .
Let and let with for some . Consider the map In there is a run of ’s of length between two successive ’s. If is the location of the position in the first of the pair within then there exists with . Then and . In detail, iterating moves to position in where it then remains for for steps and then it is moved back to position around the other end of the loop. Thus, . Hence, is topologically mixing.
For , and so with odd for all . For , as in the Claim above, consists of blocks separated by runs of ’s of even length from to . If we have in two blocks of separated by a run of ’s of length , then at level we choose at position in the third of the first block of the pair. We have and are at position in the first and second ’s of the second block of the pair when and . Since is odd we can choose and proceed as above. We leave the details to the reader.
(b): Since we see that and so . In particular, every is even for . In there occur between successive ’s runs of ’s only of even length from [math] to .
For any level let . Assume that and . Let . If with and then at level , neither nor lies in the portion of labeled by the last in because this is followed by copies of . This means that the pairs and all lie in positions of ’s in . But the length to which each maps via is even and the number of ’s between them are even. This implies that and are even and so is odd. It follows that and so is not weak mixing.
For , and so with odd for all . The runs of ’s in between two successive ’s have odd length from to . Since each is odd, the number of steps is even between the same location not equal to in different ’s. Proceed as above. Details to the reader. ∎
**Example 5 - Non Residual Factor **
We conclude by observing that a factor of a homeomorphism of residual type need not be of residual type.
We showed in Proposition 4.5 that which extends to the two-point compactification of is of residual type. If we let be the extension to the one-point compactification then is a chain transitive homeomorphism with a fixed point and so its conjugacy class is dense in the minimal set . The system is obviously a factor of . On the other hand, it is not topologically transitive and so its conjugacy class is disjoint from the set of topologically transitive maps with fixed points. By Theorem 4.16 the latter set is dense in . By the Baire category theorem dense subsets meet. Hence, the dense conjugacy class of cannot be . That is, is not of residual type.
Index
-
adding machine §4
-
universal §4
-
chain mixing §1
-
chain recurrent §1
-
chain relation 3rd item
-
chain transitive §1
-
Condition Definition 3.10
-
conjugacy transitive §4
-
conjugacy transitive element Introduction
-
connecting path §4
-
decomposition §2
-
associated §2
-
refinement §2
-
discrete suspension §1
-
divisibility sequence §4
-
dumbbell §4
-
dynamical system §1
-
factoring property Definition 3.20
-
generates §4
-
homeomorphism
-
simple §4
-
very simple §4
-
in-loop §4
-
indexed partition Introduction
-
inverse limit §1
-
inverse sequence of spaces §1
-
inverse sequence of systems §1
-
Lebesgue number §2
-
lift
-
directional Definition 3.6
-
directional Definition 3.6
-
induced Definition 3.6
-
map
-
minimal §1
-
mesh §2
-
minimal map §1
-
mixing §1
-
chain §1
-
weak §1
-
orbit relation 1st item
-
out-loop §4
-
partition §2
-
indexed §2, Introduction
-
pointed loop §4
-
pointed Shimomura Sequence §3
-
recurrent §1
-
chain §1
-
topologcially §1
-
relation
-
surjective §1
-
representing §2
-
Rohlin Property Introduction
-
Strong Introduction
-
sample path space §1
-
sequence bifurcates §1
-
Shimomura Condition Definition 1.3
-
Shimomura Sequence Definition 3.4
-
invertible Definition 3.4
-
pointed §3
-
Strong Rohlin Property Introduction
-
surjective relation §1, Introduction
-
thickness §2
-
topologically recurrent §1
-
topologically transitive §1
-
transitive §1
-
chain §1
-
topologically §1
-
transitive element Introduction
-
transitive element of residual type Introduction
-
Uniqueness of Cantor §2
-
wandering relation 2nd item
-
wedge §4
-
Condition Definition 3.10
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] E. Akin, The general topology of dynamical systems , Graduate Studies in Mathematics, 1 , American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1993.
- 2[2] E. Akin, Good measures on Cantor space , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 357 (2004), 2681–2722.
- 3[3] E. Akin, M. Hurley and J. A. Kennedy, Dynamics of topologically generic homeomorphisms , Memoirs Amer. Math. Soc. 783 , American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2003.
- 4[4] E. Akin, E. Glasner and B. Weiss, Generically there is but one self-homeomorphism of the Cantor set , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 360 (2008), 3613–3630.
- 5[5] E. Akin and J. D. Carleson, Conceptions of topological transitivity ,Topology and its Applications 159 (2012), 2815–2830.
- 6[6] T. C. Batista, J. d.S. Gonschorowski and F. A. Tal, Density of the set of symbolic dynamics with all ergodic measures supported on periodic orbits , Fund. Math. 231 (2015), 81-92.
- 7[7] N. C. Bernardes Jr. and U. B. Darji, Graph theoretic structure of maps of the Cantor space , Advances in Mathematics, 231 (2012), 1655–1680.
- 8[8] S. Bezuglyi, A. H. Dooley and J. Kwiatkoski, Topologies on the group of homeomorphisms of the Cantor set , (2004) Ar Xiv 0410507.
