Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vfjqv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T20:30:00.890Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Some new rigidity results for stable orbit equivalence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2008

Scot Adams
Scot Adams
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, Vincent Hall 206 Church St, SE University of Minnesota Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Broadly speaking, we prove that an action of a group with very little commutativity cannot be stably orbit equivalent to an action of a group with enough commutativity, assuming both actions are free and finite measure preserving. For example, one group may be SL2(ℝ) and the other a group with infinite discrete center (e.g., the universal cover of SL2(ℝ)); I believe this is the first rigidity result of this type for a pair of simpleLie groups both of split rank one. Another example: one group may be any nonelementary word hyperbolic group, the other any group with infinite discrete center.

Type
Research Article
Information
Ergodic Theory and Dynamical Systems , Volume 15 , Issue 2 , April 1995 , pp. 209 - 219
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

Access options

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

References

REFERENCES

[Ad1]Adams, S.. Indecomposability of treed equivalence relations. Israel J. Math. 64:3 (1988), 362–380.Google Scholar
[Ad2]Adams, S.. Indecomposability of equivalence relations generated by word hyperbolic groups. To appear.Google Scholar
[Ad3]Adams, S.. Boundary amenability for word hyperbolic groups and an application to smooth dynamics of simple groups. Topology. To appear.Google Scholar
[Ad4]Adams, S.. Generalities on amenable actions. Preprint.Google Scholar
[Arv1]Arveson, W.. Invitation to C*-algebras. Springer: New York, 1976.Google Scholar
[Ch1]Champetier, C.. Propriétŕs statistiques des groupes de présentation finie. Preprint. 1992.Google Scholar
[FHM1]Feldman, J., Hahn, P. and Moore, C.. Orbit structure and countable sections for actions of continuous groups. Adv. Math. 28 (1978), 186–230.Google Scholar
[FSZ1]Feldman, J., Sutherland, C. and Zimmer, R.. Subrelations of ergodic equivalence relations. Ergod. Th. & Dynam. Sys. 9 (1989), 239–269.Google Scholar
[Fur1]Furstenberg, H.. Recurrence in Ergodic Theory and Combinatorial Number Theory. Princeton University Press: Princeton, 1981.Google Scholar
[GH1]Ghys, E., de la Harpe, P., Troyanov, M., Salem, E., Ballman, W., Haefliger, A. and Strebel, R.. Sur les Groupes Hyperboliques d' après Mikhael Gromov. Ghys, E. and de la Harpe, P., eds. Birkhäuser: Boston, 1990.Google Scholar
[Kec1]Kechris, A.. Countable sections for locally compact group actions. Ergod. Th. & Dynam. Sys. 12 (1992), 283–295.Google Scholar
[Munk1]Munkres, J.. Topology, a First Course. Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, 1975.Google Scholar
[Zim1]Zimmer, R.. Strong rigidity for ergodic actions of semisimple Lie groups. Ann. Math. 112 (1980), 511–529.Google Scholar
[Zim2]Zimmer, R.. Ergodic Theory and Semisimple Groups. Birkhäuser: Boston, 1984.Google Scholar
[Zim3]Zimmer, R.. Ergodic actions of semisimple groups and product relations. Ann. Math. 118 (1983), 9–19.Google Scholar
[Zim4]Zimmer, R.. Ergodic theory, semisimple Lie groups and foliations by manifolds of negative curvature. Publ. Math. IHES 55 (1982), 37–62.Google Scholar