Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

The following questions might be trivial, however, I couldn't solve them:

Let $G$ be generated by a finite symmetric set $S.$ Suppose that $\Gamma(G,S)$ is the corresponding right Cayley graph of $G.$ $X$ is a metric space(or, maybe a topological space with some nice structure).

(1) Is there a way to check the following property of a space $X:$ $X$ is not quasi-isometric to a space $Z$ which is quasi-isometric to a(hence, every) Carley graph $\Gamma(G,S)$ of some f.g group $G.$

I.e, If we partition the space of spaces upto quasi-isometric equivalence then does every equivalence class contain a space which is quasi-isometric to a Cayley graph of some f.g group $G?$

(2) By Stalling's theorem, # of ends is a geometric property of the group. Does this mean that # of ends is a quasi-isometric invariant of the spaces which are quasi-isometric to Cayley graphs?

If the answer of question #2 is affirmative and equivalence class question above fails; i.e, there is an equivalence class whose elements are not quasi-iso. to any Cayley graph ; then what is the example of spaces $W_1, W_2$ which are not quasi-iso. to any Cayley graph but $W_1$ is quasi-isometric to $W_2$ ,however, # of ends of $W_1$ is different than the # of ends of $W_2.$

Thank you.

share|improve this question
1  
There are a lot of conditions missing in order for these questions to make a little sense. Make the spaces geodesic, "almost homogeneous" and of bounded geometry for a start. –  Theo Buehler Feb 25 '11 at 7:43
    
Could you precise what definition of the number of ends of a metric space you use? –  Benoît Kloeckner Feb 25 '11 at 7:56
    
@Buehler: Yes, I couldn't figure out the minimal conditions on $X.$ I am interested in the invariance of number of ends. And the end is the number of components of $X-B(n)$ as n->\infity. I know that it doesn't make sense for general metric spaces. But, according to answer given below, this number should make sense for a large collection of spaces also. –  Niyazi Feb 25 '11 at 9:32
1  
@Niyazi: the problem is that the number of ends defined in your way is infinite for an unbounded discrete space (in particular it sis far from being a quasi-isometric invariant, even for spaces quasi-isometric to a Cayley graph), so you should really make explicit the conditions on $X$, as asked by Theo Buehler. –  Benoît Kloeckner Feb 25 '11 at 15:43
2  
Niyazi, Stallings's Theorem does not say that the number of Ends is a quasi-isometric invariant of the group. It gives a condition under which a fg group has infinitely many ends. –  HJRW Feb 25 '11 at 16:07
add comment

2 Answers

up vote 4 down vote accepted

I guess that a star (a tree with $n$ infinite branches issued from a single vertex) should answer at least your first question. It should have $n$ ends, whatever meaningful definition you use, an we know that a group has $1$, $2$ or an infinity of ends.

Since quasi-isometry is an equivalence relation, you do not need to invoke a space $Z$ in your first question and the answer of your second question is obviously positive.

share|improve this answer
1  
My comment was intended to exclude such examples as you give in the first paragraph (among other things). With any of the definitions I know, $n$ parallel lines in $\mathbb{R}^2$ with the Euclidean metric will have $2n$ ends. –  Theo Buehler Feb 25 '11 at 8:24
    
@Kloeckner: So, if $Z$ is quasi-isometric to 5-star then can we conclude that Z has 5 ends? I know that the number of ends is a quasi-iso. invariant only for cayley graphs, is it again an invariant of non-Cayley but quasi-isometric spaces? Also, according to your answer examples of $W_1$ and $W_2$ exist. Is it correct? Thank you. –  Niyazi Feb 25 '11 at 9:24
    
Benoit answers both questions. E.g. the union of the $x$ and $y$ axes in the plane is a metric space with 4 ends. It is therefore not q-i to any group (which must have 0, 1, 2, or infinity ends). It is also not q-i to the union of the $x$, $y$, and $z$ axes in $R^3$, which has 6 ends. In other words, yes, the number of ends is a q-i invariant of metric spaces, not just of groups. (It is easy to prove: a q-i induces a bijection on the ends.) –  aaron Feb 25 '11 at 12:45
1  
@aaron: Either you're working with a coarse notion of ends which I don't know or you're a bit simplistic here. I agree with your argument for proper geodesic spaces. Could you please elucidate your argument with a precise definition of your notion of an end? With the usual topological definition of an end, a quasi-geodesic doesn't need to lie in a single end, see my first comment to this answer. –  Theo Buehler Feb 25 '11 at 14:10
1  
Oh right, certainly one needs a coarse notion of ends. The integers should have 2 ends regardless of whether or not you draw in the edges connecting $n$ to $n+1$. –  aaron Feb 25 '11 at 21:39
show 4 more comments

There was a conjecture by Woess that every infinite vertex-transitive graph is quasi-isometric to a Cayley graph. A slightly more sophisticated counter-example for your first question is the counter-example to this conjecture that was proposed by R.Diestel and I. Leader in "A conjecture concerning a limit of non-Cayley graphs". It was later proved by A. Eskin, D. Fisher, and K. Whyte in "Quasi-isometries and rigidity of solvable groups".

share|improve this answer
    
@Zaimi: Does it make sense to define number of edges for Diestel-Leader graphs,or, for their quasi-isometric copies? Is this number again invariant? –  Niyazi Feb 25 '11 at 12:40
    
Do you mean "ends" for D-L graphs? If so then they have infinitely many ends, which is clear from their construction as horocycle products of homogeneous trees. –  Gjergji Zaimi Feb 25 '11 at 13:24
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.