Timeline for A Rokhlin lemma with a prescribed height function?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 31, 2017 at 12:47 | comment | added | Anthony Quas | Interesting comment: I would have thought the non-invertible case would be done in the same way as the invertible case, or to follow as a straightforward consequence of the invertible case, but I can't make it work. | |
| Aug 27, 2017 at 14:45 | comment | added | Jairo Bochi | Your proof should also work if T is only assumed to be aperiodic instead of ergodic (that is, almost every point is non-periodic). I wonder what happens if T is not-invertible. | |
| Aug 27, 2017 at 11:49 | history | bounty ended | Jairo Bochi | ||
| Aug 27, 2017 at 11:49 | vote | accept | Jairo Bochi | ||
| Aug 27, 2017 at 9:20 | history | edited | Anthony Quas | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1040 characters in body
|
| Aug 26, 2017 at 15:10 | history | answered | Anthony Quas | CC BY-SA 3.0 |