DOCSLIB.ORG

A BRIEF INTRODUCTION to ERGODIC THEORY 1. Dynamics

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A BRIEF INTRODUCTION to ERGODIC THEORY 1. Dynamics A BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO ERGODIC THEORY ALEX FURMAN Abstract. These are expanded notes from four introductory lectures on Er- godic Theory, given at the Minerva summer school Flows on homogeneous spaces at the Technion, Haifa, Israel, in September 2012. 1. Dynamics on a compact metrizable space Given a compact metrizable space X, denote by C(X) the space of continuous functions f : X ! C with the uniform norm kfku = max jf(x)j: x2X This is a separable Banach space (see Exs 1.2.(a)). Denote by Prob(X) the space of all regular probability measures on the Borel σ-algebra of X. By Riesz represen- tation theorem, the dual C(X)∗ is the space Meas(X) of all finite signed regular Borel measures on X with the total variation norm, and Prob(X) ⊂ Meas(X) is the subset of Λ 2 C(X)∗ that are positive (Λ(f) ≥ 0 whenever f ≥ 0) and normalized (Λ(1) = 1). Thus Prob(X) is a closed convex subset of the unit ball of C(X)∗, it is compact and metrizable with respect to the weak-* topology defined by weak∗ Z Z µn −! µ iff f dµn−! f dµ (8f 2 C(X)): X X Definition 1.1. Let X be a compact metrizable space and µ 2 Prob(X). 1 1 A sequence fxngn=0 is µ-equidistributed if n (δx0 +δx1 +···+δxn−1 ) weak-* converge to µ, that is if N−1 1 X Z lim f(xn) = f dµ (f 2 C(X)): N!1 N n=0 X Let T : X ! X be a continuous map and µ 2 Prob(X). We say that a point x 2 X n 1 is µ-generic if the sequence fT xgn=0 is µ-equidistributed. Exercise 1.2. Prove that (a) If X is compact metrizable then C(X) is separable. (b) In the definitions of weak-* convergence and in the definition of µ-equidistribution, one can reduce the verification of the convergence "for all f 2 C(X)" to "for all f from a subset with a dense linear span in C(X)". (c) If x 2 X is µ-generic, then µ is a T -invariant measure. (d) If A ⊂ X is Borel set, and µ(@A) = 0 then for any µ-generic point x 2 X #f0 ≤ n < N j T nx 2 Ag ! µ(A): N 1 2 ALEX FURMAN 1.1. Irrational rotation of the circle. We consider the example of the circle T = R=Z (or the one-dimensional torus). 1 Lemma 1.3 (Weyl). A sequence fxngn=0 of points in T is equidistributed with respect to the Lebesgue measure m on T if and only if for every k 2 Z − f0g N−1 1 X lim e2πikxn = 0: N!1 N n=0 Proof. We only need to prove the "if" direction, as the "only if" is obvious. By Stone-Weierstrass theorem, trigonometric polynomials (same as that is finite linear 2πikx combinations of ek(x) = e , k 2 Z), are dense in C(T). So the proof is completed by Exercise 1.2.(b). Next consider the transformation on the circle T (x) = x + α, where α 2 T is irrational, that is kα 6= 0 for all non-zero integers k. Theorem 1.4. Let T (x) = x + α be an irrational rotation on X = R=Z. Then every x 2 T is equidistributed for the Lebesgue measure m on T. Proof. By Lemma 1.3 it suffices to check that N−1 1 X e2πik(x+nα) −! 0 (k 2 n f0g) N Z n=0 Denoting w = e2πikx and z = e2πikα the LHS above is just N−1 1 X w 1 − zN wzn = · ! 0 N N 1 − z n=0 because jzj = 1 and z 6= 1 due to the irrationality of α. 1.2. More on invariant measures. Recall (Exercise 1.2.(c)) that that one can talk about µ-generic points only of T -invariant measures. The set of all T -invariant measures Pinv(X) = fµ 2 Prob(X) j T∗µ = µg is a closed convex subset. Hence it is compact in the weak-* topology. Crucially, this set is never empty as the following classical result shows: Theorem 1.5 (Krylov-Bogoloubov, Markov-Kakutani?). The set Pinv(X) is non-empty for any continuous map T : X ! X of a compact metrizable space X. In fact, for any sequence xn 2 X and Nn ! 1 every weak-* limit point of the sequence N 1 Xn µ = δ n n N T xn n n=0 of atomic measures is in Pinv(X). A BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO ERGODIC THEORY 3 Proof. Suppose µn ! µ in weak-* topology. Then for every f 2 C(X) Z Z Z f dµ − f dT∗µ = lim (f − f ◦ T ) dµn n!1 Nn−1 1 X n n+1 = lim (f(T xn) − f(T xn)) n!1 N n n=0 1 Nn = lim (f(xn) − f(T xn)) = 0: n!1 Nn Theorem 1.6 (Uniquely ergodicity). Let T : X ! X be a continuous map of a compact metrizable space. TFAE: (a) There is µ 2 Prob(X) so that every x 2 X is µ-generic. (b) There is only one T -invariant measure: Pinv(X) = fµg. (c) For every f 2 C(X) the averages n−1 1 X A f(x) = f(T kx) n n k=0 converge uniformly to a constant, which is R f dµ. Such systems (X; T ) are called uniquely ergodic. To clarify: such µ is unique, it is T -invariant and ergodic (see Theorem 1.6 and Definition 1.8 below), and the setting can also be characterized by saying that there is only one T -ergodic probability measure on X, useing Proposition 1.9 and Krein-Milman's theorem below. Proof. (a) =) (b). Take any ν 2 Pinv(X) and arbitrary f 2 C(X). The sequence Anf(x) of averages is uniformly bounded by kfku, and for every x 2 X converges to the constant R f dµ. Using T -invariance of ν and Lebesgue's dominated convergence theorem, gives: Z Z Z Z Z f dν = Anf(x) dν(x) −! ( f dµ) dν = f dµ. X X X X X R (b) =) (c). Consider the function f0 = f − f dµ and the linear subspace B = fg − g ◦ T j g 2 C(X)g: Let Λ 2 C(X)∗ be an arbitrary functional vanishing on B. By Riesz' representa- tion theorem, Λ is given by integration of a signed measure, which has a unique representation as λ = (a1µ1 − a2µ2) + i(b1ν1 − b2ν2) with a1; a2; b1; b2 ≥ 0, µ1; µ2; ν1; ν2 2 Prob(X) and µ1 ? µ2, ν1 ? ν2. As Λ vanishes R R on B, we have g dλ = g ◦ T dλ for all g 2 C(X), meaning λ = T∗λ and (a1µ1 − a2µ2) + i(b1ν1 − b2ν2) = (a1T∗µ1 − a2T∗µ2) + i(b1T∗ν1 − b2T∗ν2): Hence µ1; µ2; ν1; ν2 are T -invariant, and therefore equal to µ. Thus λ = cµ for some c 2 C and Z Λ(f0) = c · f0 dµ = 0: 4 ALEX FURMAN We just showed that every functional vanishing on B, vanishes on f0, hence f0 2 B by Hahn-Banach theorem. Given any > 0 there is g 2 C(X) so that kf0 −hku < for h = (g − g ◦ T ). Hence for n > 2kgku/ one has Z 2kgk kA f − f dµk = kA (f )k ≤ kA hk + ≤ u + < 2. n u n 0 u n u n (c) =) (a). Note that if the averages Anf converges to a constant a(f), then for any T -invariant probability measure ν one has Z Z Z f dν = Anf dν −! a(f) dν = a(f): X X X R It follows that Pinv(X) is a singleton fµg, and a(f) = f dµ. Exercise 1.7. Prove the implication (b) =) (c) using Theorem 1.5. Definition 1.8. Let µ be an invariant probability measure for a transformation T : X ! X. We say that µ is T -ergodic if for every Borel set E ⊂ X one has µ(E 4 T −1E) = 0 =) µ(E) = 0 or µ(E) = 1: Recall that if C ⊂ V is a convex set in some (real) vector space V , a point c 2 C is called extremal if it is not an interior point of a segment contained in C, that is if c = tc1 + (1 − t)c2; with 0 < t < 1; c1; c2 2 C =) c1 = c2 = c: The set of extremal points of C is denoted ext(C). By Krein-Milman theorem, any convex compact subset C in a locally convex topological vector space V , is the closure of the convex hull of the extremal points C = conv(ext(C)): In particular, any non-empty convex compact set has extremal points. Proposition 1.9. Let T : X ! X be a continuous map of a compact metrizable space X. Then the set ext(Pinv(X)) is precisely the set Perg(X) of T -ergodic measures. −1 Proof. If µ 2 Pinv(X) n Perg(X), then there is E 2 B with µ(E4T E) = 0 and 0 < µ(E) < 1. The probability measures −1 −1 µE = µ(E) · µjE; µXnE = (1 − µ(E)) · µjXnE are T -invariant. Since µ = µ(E) · µE + (1 − µ(E)) · µXnE, it follows that µ is not extremal: µ 62 ext(Pinv(X)). Conversely, if µ is not extremal in Pinv(X), write µ = tµ1 + (1 − t)µ2 with 0 < t < 1 and µ1 6= µ2 2 Pinv(X).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • WHAT IS a CHAOTIC ATTRACTOR? 1. Introduction J. Yorke Coined the Word 'Chaos' As Applied to Deterministic Systems. R. Devane
    WHAT IS A CHAOTIC ATTRACTOR? CLARK ROBINSON Abstract. Devaney gave a mathematical definition of the term chaos, which had earlier been introduced by Yorke. We discuss issues involved in choosing the properties that characterize chaos. We also discuss how this term can be combined with the definition of an attractor. 1. Introduction J. Yorke coined the word `chaos' as applied to deterministic systems. R. Devaney gave the first mathematical definition for a map to be chaotic on the whole space where a map is defined. Since that time, there have been several different definitions of chaos which emphasize different aspects of the map. Some of these are more computable and others are more mathematical. See [9] a comparison of many of these definitions. There is probably no one best or correct definition of chaos. In this paper, we discuss what we feel is one of better mathematical definition. (It may not be as computable as some of the other definitions, e.g., the one by Alligood, Sauer, and Yorke.) Our definition is very similar to the one given by Martelli in [8] and [9]. We also combine the concepts of chaos and attractors and discuss chaotic attractors. 2. Basic definitions We start by giving the basic definitions needed to define a chaotic attractor. We give the definitions for a diffeomorphism (or map), but those for a system of differential equations are similar. The orbit of a point x∗ by F is the set O(x∗; F) = f Fi(x∗) : i 2 Z g. An invariant set for a diffeomorphism F is an set A in the domain such that F(A) = A.
    [Show full text]
  • MA427 Ergodic Theory
    MA427 Ergodic Theory Course Notes (2012-13) 1 Introduction 1.1 Orbits Let X be a mathematical space. For example, X could be the unit interval [0; 1], a circle, a torus, or something far more complicated like a Cantor set. Let T : X ! X be a function that maps X into itself. Let x 2 X be a point. We can repeatedly apply the map T to the point x to obtain the sequence: fx; T (x);T (T (x));T (T (T (x))); : : : ; :::g: We will often write T n(x) = T (··· (T (T (x)))) (n times). The sequence of points x; T (x);T 2(x);::: is called the orbit of x. We think of applying the map T as the passage of time. Thus we think of T (x) as where the point x has moved to after time 1, T 2(x) is where the point x has moved to after time 2, etc. Some points x 2 X return to where they started. That is, T n(x) = x for some n > 1. We say that such a point x is periodic with period n. By way of contrast, points may move move densely around the space X. (A sequence is said to be dense if (loosely speaking) it comes arbitrarily close to every point of X.) If we take two points x; y of X that start very close then their orbits will initially be close. However, it often happens that in the long term their orbits move apart and indeed become dramatically different.
    [Show full text]
  • ROTATION THEORY These Notes Present a Brief Survey of Some
    ROTATION THEORY MICHALMISIUREWICZ Abstract. Rotation Theory has its roots in the theory of rotation numbers for circle homeomorphisms, developed by Poincar´e. It is particularly useful for the study and classification of periodic orbits of dynamical systems. It deals with ergodic averages and their limits, not only for almost all points, like in Ergodic Theory, but for all points. We present the general ideas of Rotation Theory and its applications to some classes of dynamical systems, like continuous circle maps homotopic to the identity, torus homeomorphisms homotopic to the identity, subshifts of finite type and continuous interval maps. These notes present a brief survey of some aspects of Rotation Theory. Deeper treatment of the subject would require writing a book. Thus, in particular: • Not all aspects of Rotation Theory are described here. A large part of it, very important and deserving a separate book, deals with homeomorphisms of an annulus, homotopic to the identity. Including this subject in the present notes would make them at least twice as long, so it is ignored, except for the bibliography. • What is called “proofs” are usually only short ideas of the proofs. The reader is advised either to try to fill in the details himself/herself or to find the full proofs in the literature. More complicated proofs are omitted entirely. • The stress is on the theory, not on the history. Therefore, references are not cited in the text. Instead, at the end of these notes there are lists of references dealing with the problems treated in various sections (or not treated at all).
    [Show full text]
  • January 3, 2019 Dynamical Systems B. Solomyak LECTURE 11
    January 3, 2019 Dynamical Systems B. Solomyak LECTURE 11 SUMMARY 1. Hyperbolic toral automorphisms (cont.) d d d Let A be d × d integer matrix, with det A = ±1. Consider T = R =Z (the d- dimensional torus). d Definition 1.1. The map TA(x) = Ax (mod Z ) is called the toral automorphism asso- ciated with A. d Proposition 1.2. TA is a group automorphism; in fact, every automorphism of T has such a form. Definition 1.3. The automorphism is called hyperbolic if A is hyperbolic, that is, A has no eigenvalues of absolute value one. " # 2 1 Example 1.4 (Arnold's \cat map"). This is TA for A = . 1 1 Theorem 1.5 (see [1, x2.4]). Every hyperbolic toral automorphism is chaotic. We will see the proof for d = 2, for simplicity, following [1, 2]. The proof will be broken into lemmas. The first one was already covered on December 27. m n 2 Lemma 1.6. The points with rational coordinates f( k ; k ); m; n; k 2 Ng (mod Z ) are 2 dense in T , and they are all periodic for TA. Lemma 1.7. Let A be a hyperbolic 2×2 matrix. Thus it has two real eigenvalues: jλ1j > 1 and jλ2j < 1. Then the eigenvalues are irrational and the eigenvectors have irrational slopes. Let Es, Eu be the stable and unstable subspaces for A, respectively; they are one- dimensional and are spanned by the eigenvectors. s u Consider the point 0 = (0; 0) on the torus; it is fixed by TA.
    [Show full text]
  • Dynamical Systems and Ergodic Theory
    MATH36206 - MATHM6206 Dynamical Systems and Ergodic Theory Teaching Block 1, 2017/18 Lecturer: Prof. Alexander Gorodnik PART III: LECTURES 16{30 course web site: people.maths.bris.ac.uk/∼mazag/ds17/ Copyright c University of Bristol 2010 & 2016. This material is copyright of the University. It is provided exclusively for educational purposes at the University and is to be downloaded or copied for your private study only. Chapter 3 Ergodic Theory In this last part of our course we will introduce the main ideas and concepts in ergodic theory. Ergodic theory is a branch of dynamical systems which has strict connections with analysis and probability theory. The discrete dynamical systems f : X X studied in topological dynamics were continuous maps f on metric spaces X (or more in general, topological→ spaces). In ergodic theory, f : X X will be a measure-preserving map on a measure space X (we will see the corresponding definitions below).→ While the focus in topological dynamics was to understand the qualitative behavior (for example, periodicity or density) of all orbits, in ergodic theory we will not study all orbits, but only typical1 orbits, but will investigate more quantitative dynamical properties, as frequencies of visits, equidistribution and mixing. An example of a basic question studied in ergodic theory is the following. Let A X be a subset of O+ ⊂ the space X. Consider the visits of an orbit f (x) to the set A. If we consider a finite orbit segment x, f(x),...,f n−1(x) , the number of visits to A up to time n is given by { } Card 0 k n 1, f k(x) A .
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to Rotation Theory
    An Introduction to Rotation Theory Christian Kuehn [email protected] Abstract This tutorial introduces one of the most fundamental dynamical systems by studying maps of the circle to itself. We are mainly going to investigate homeomorphisms of the circle. Homeomorphisms look easy at first sight, but this tutorial should convince you that this first impression is not quite correct. Indeed, we shall meet several surprising phenomena and discuss results, which demonstrate the complications arising already in 1-dimensional dynamics. Even in higher-dimensional problems it often turns out that we can reduce our system to a 1-dimensional setup, so that we are also trying to give major tools and results, which should be helpful even if you are not planning to stay in the 1-dimensional world. The theory associated with self-maps on the circle sometimes goes by the name “Rotation Theory” and as we shall see: This name is justified. Contents 1 Preface 3 2 Circle maps 5 3 Weyl’s Theorem 9 4 Ergodic Theory 13 5 Rotation numbers 16 6 Rational Rotation Numbers 19 7 Limit Sets 24 8 Wandering Intervals 27 9 Families of Diffeomorphisms 31 10 Further Steps and References... 37 11 Hints 41 12 Answers 53 1 Preface The tutorial is set up so that a beginning junior or senior undergraduate student from mathematics or a mathematics-related field with a basic course in analysis should be able to follow the main line of argument. Also, beginning graduate students with little background in dynamical systems beyond differential equations are hopefully able to benefit.
    [Show full text]
  • Algorithmic Analysis of Irrational Rotations in a Single Neuron Model$
    Journal of Complexity 19 (2003) 132–152 http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jco Algorithmic analysis of irrational rotations in a single neuron model$ Hayato Takahashia,* and Kazuyuki Aiharab,c a Department of Statistical Science, The Graduate University for Advanced Studies, The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, 4-6-7 Minami-Azabu, Minato-ku, Tokyo 106-8569, Japan b Department of Mathematical Engineering and Information Physics, Graduate School of Engineering, University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8656, Japan c CREST, Japan Science and Technology Corporation (JST), 4-1-8 Hon-Cho, Kawaguchi, Saitama 332-0012, Japan Received 1 June 2002; accepted 11 September 2002 Abstract We study computability of real-valued functions and the information needed for simulation of dynamical systems. In particular, we describe application of Kolmogorov complexity theory to computer simulation of irrational rotations in a single neuron model. We deduce the information needed for a parameter in simulating the dynamics by showing a difference in Kolmogorov complexity between a computable parameter and a non-computable parameter. Finally, we show that all trajectories generated by irrational rotations are non-computable iff its parameter is non-computable. r 2002 Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved. Keywords: Kolmogorov complexity; Algorithmic information theory; Computability; Bayes code; MDL code; Nagumo–Sato model; Single neuron model; Irrational rotation; Sturmian sequence; Symbolic dynamics 1. Introduction Although continuous analysis has been greatly progressing in mathematics and physics, there is just a paucity of studies (for example, see [25,30]) on computability $Revised from ‘‘Asymptotic evaluation of Kolmogorov complexity of pulse sequences generated by a single neuron model’’.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1908.05954V3 [Math.NT] 29 Aug 2020 Contents 3.1
    CHAPTER 3 S-ADIC SEQUENCES. A BRIDGE BETWEEN DYNAMICS, ARITHMETIC, AND GEOMETRY JORG¨ M. THUSWALDNER Abstract. A Sturmian sequence is an infinite nonperiodic string over two letters with minimal subword complexity. In two papers, the first written by Morse and Hedlund in 1940 and the second by Coven and Hedlund in 1973, a surprising correspondence was established between Sturmian sequences on one side and rotations by an irrational number on the unit circle on the other. In 1991 Arnoux and Rauzy observed that an induction process (invented by Rauzy in the late 1970s), related with the classical continued fraction algorithm, can be used to give a very elegant proof of this correspondence. This process, known as the Rauzy induction, extends naturally to interval exchange transformations (this is the setting in which it was first formalized). It has been conjectured since the early 1990s that these correspondences carry over to rotations on higher dimensional tori, generalized continued fraction algorithms, and so-called S-adic sequences generated by substitutions. The idea of working towards such a generalization is known as Rauzy's program. Recently Berth´e,Steiner, and Thuswaldner made some progress on Rauzy's program and were indeed able to set up the conjectured generalization of the above correspondences. Using a generalization of Rauzy's induction process in which generalized continued fraction algorithms show up, they proved that under certain natural conditions an S-adic sequence gives rise to a dynamical system which is measurably conjugate to a rotation on a higher dimensional torus. Moreover, they established a metric theory which shows that counterexamples like the one constructed in 2000 by Cassaigne, Ferenczi, and Zamboni are rare.
    [Show full text]
  • Quasiperiodicity: Rotation Numbers
    Chapter 7 Quasiperiodicity: Rotation Numbers Suddhasattwa Das, Yoshitaka Saiki, Evelyn Sander, and James A. Yorke Abstract A map on a torus is called “quasiperiodic” if there is a change of variables which converts it into a pure rotation in each coordinate of the torus. We develop a numerical method for finding this change of variables, a method that can be used effectively to determine how smooth (i.e., differentiable) the change of variables is, even in cases with large nonlinearities. Our method relies on fast and accurate estimates of limits of ergodic averages. Instead of uniform averages that assign equal weights to points along the trajectory of N points, we consider averages with a non-uniform distribution of weights, weighing the early and late points of the trajectory much less than those near the midpoint N=2.We provide a one-dimensional quasiperiodic map as an example and show that our weighted averages converge far faster than the usual rate of O.1=N/, provided f is sufficiently differentiable. We use this method to efficiently numerically compute rotation numbers, invariant densities, conjugacies of quasiperiodic systems, and to provide evidence that the changes of variables are (real) analytic. 7.1 Introduction Let X a topological space with a probability measure and T W X ! X be a measure preserving map. Let f W X ! E be an integrable function, where E is a finite-dimensional real vector space. Given a point x in X, we will refer to the S. Das () Department of Mathematics, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA e-mail: [email protected] Y.
    [Show full text]
  • Dynamical Systems [Micha L Misiurewicz] Basic Notions
    Dynamical Systems [Micha lMisiurewicz] Basic Notions, Examples The main objects studied in the theory of dynamical systems are maps f : X X, where X is a space with some structure. For instance, this structure can be topological,→ differentiable, or there may be a measure on X. Therefore three basic cases we will consider are: (a) X is a topological space (usually compact) and f is continuous, (b) X is a smooth (Cr, 1 r ) manifold (also usually compact) with or without boundary and f is smooth≤ (C≤r), ∞ (c) X is a space with a σ-field and a measure µ on it, the measure is a probability one, that is µ(X) = 1; f preservesF µ, that is µ(f −1(A)) = µ(A) for every A . Other way of saying that f preserves µ is that µ is f-invariant, or that f is an endomorphism∈ F of (X, ,µ). F 0 In each of cases (a)-(c), we consider the iterates of f, defined by induction: f = idX , and then f n+1 = f n f. Thus, f n = f f. This means that we look at the set of ◦ ◦···◦ n times n all iterates of f, f n∈Z+ . In other words, we look at the action of the semigroup Z+ on the space X.{ The} special case which| is{z considered} as often as the general one (and maybe even more often) is when the map f is invertible. We require then that f −1 is also within the class of maps we consider. That means that in case (a) f is a homeomorphism, in case (b) f is a diffeomorphism (of class Cr), and in case (c) f is an invertible measure preserving transformation (an automorphism) of X.
    [Show full text]
  • Arnold: Swimming Against the Tide / Boris Khesin, Serge Tabachnikov, Editors
    ARNOLD: Real Analysis A Comprehensive Course in Analysis, Part 1 Barry Simon Boris A. Khesin Serge L. Tabachnikov Editors http://dx.doi.org/10.1090/mbk/086 ARNOLD: AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Photograph courtesy of Svetlana Tretyakova Photograph courtesy of Svetlana Vladimir Igorevich Arnold June 12, 1937–June 3, 2010 ARNOLD: Boris A. Khesin Serge L. Tabachnikov Editors AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Providence, Rhode Island Translation of Chapter 7 “About Vladimir Abramovich Rokhlin” and Chapter 21 “Several Thoughts About Arnold” provided by Valentina Altman. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 01A65; Secondary 01A70, 01A75. For additional information and updates on this book, visit www.ams.org/bookpages/mbk-86 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Arnold: swimming against the tide / Boris Khesin, Serge Tabachnikov, editors. pages cm. ISBN 978-1-4704-1699-7 (alk. paper) 1. Arnold, V. I. (Vladimir Igorevich), 1937–2010. 2. Mathematicians–Russia–Biography. 3. Mathematicians–Soviet Union–Biography. 4. Mathematical analysis. 5. Differential equations. I. Khesin, Boris A. II. Tabachnikov, Serge. QA8.6.A76 2014 510.92–dc23 2014021165 [B] Copying and reprinting. Individual readers of this publication, and nonprofit libraries acting for them, are permitted to make fair use of the material, such as to copy select pages for use in teaching or research. Permission is granted to quote brief passages from this publication in reviews, provided the customary acknowledgment of the source is given. Republication, systematic copying, or multiple reproduction of any material in this publication is permitted only under license from the American Mathematical Society. Permissions to reuse portions of AMS publication content are now being handled by Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service.
    [Show full text]
  • Dissertation Discrete-Time Topological Dynamics
    DISSERTATION DISCRETE-TIME TOPOLOGICAL DYNAMICS, COMPLEX HADAMARD MATRICES, AND OBLIQUE-INCIDENCE ION BOMBARDMENT Submitted by Francis Charles Motta Department of Mathematics In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado Summer 2014 Doctoral Committee: Advisor: Patrick D. Shipman Gerhard Dangelmayr Chris Peterson R. Mark Bradley Copyright by Francis Charles Motta 2014 All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT DISCRETE-TIME TOPOLOGICAL DYNAMICS, COMPLEX HADAMARD MATRICES, AND OBLIQUE-INCIDENCE ION BOMBARDMENT The topics covered in this dissertation are not unified under a single mathematical dis- cipline. However, the questions posed and the partial solutions to problems of interest were heavily influenced by ideas from dynamical systems, mathematical experimentation, and simulation. Thus, the chapters in this document are unified by a common flavor which bridges several mathematical and scientific disciplines. The first chapter introduces a new notion of orbit density applicable to discrete-time dynamical systems on a topological phase space, called the linear limit density of an orbit. For a fixed discrete-time dynamical system, Φ(x): M ! M defined on a bounded metric space, : t we introduce a function E : fγx : x 2 Mg ! R[f1g on the orbits of Φ, γx = fΦ (x): t 2 Ng, and interpret E(γx) as a measure of the orbit's approach to density; the so-called linear limit density (LLD) of an orbit. We first study the family of dynamical systems Rθ : [0; 1) ! [0; 1) (θ 2 (0; 1)) defined by Rθ(x) = (x + θ) mod 1. Utilizing a formula derived from the Three- t Distance theorem, we compute the exact value of E(fRφ(x): t 2 Ng; x 2 [0; 1)), where p t φ = 5 − 1 =2.
    [Show full text]