Timeline for Ergodicity and mixing of geodesic and horocyclic flows
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 31, 2017 at 12:30 | vote | accept | Markiff | ||
| Mar 26, 2017 at 21:13 | comment | added | Yemon Choi | @Asaf not every undergrad group theory class is like the one you are thinking of (same goes for complex analysis) | |
| Mar 26, 2017 at 19:17 | review | Close votes | |||
| Mar 26, 2017 at 22:16 | |||||
| Mar 26, 2017 at 19:10 | answer | added | coudy | timeline score: 10 | |
| Mar 26, 2017 at 18:56 | comment | added | Asaf | (at least basic mixing, I'm not sure about mixing of all orders). This apply to the geodesic flow, The argument for the horocyclic flow follows by the re-normalization relations (this whats goes into Mautner's proof by the way). | |
| Mar 26, 2017 at 18:56 | comment | added | Asaf | Step 0-1-2 are redundant in my opinion (everyone learns about mobius transformations and action of SL2 on the upper half plane in undergrad group theory/complex analysis class). The representation theoretical (Howe-Moore thm, Mautner phenomenon and extensions by HC etc) approach is highly fruitful (as it leads to quantitative estimates), but historically it is not the first one to be used. The first argument (by Hopf) using just the Anosov property of the geodesic flow, hence generalizing to other situation, and you can probably refine this argument to get mixing | |
| Mar 26, 2017 at 14:17 | review | First posts | |||
| Mar 26, 2017 at 14:29 | |||||
| Mar 26, 2017 at 14:16 | history | asked | Markiff | CC BY-SA 3.0 |