Timeline for Furstenberg's Conjecture on 2-3-invariant continuous probability measures on the circle
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 20, 2016 at 7:33 | comment | added | Andreas Thom | Right, as I said, it is equivalent. | |
| Jun 20, 2016 at 6:30 | comment | added | Li Jingyang | Hi, Andreas. sorry, i can not understand your reply of my comment. I only want to say that Furstenberg's conjecture is about 2-3-invariant $\text{ergodic}$ probability measure but not 2-3-invariant probability measure. | |
| Jun 20, 2016 at 6:15 | comment | added | Andreas Thom | @LiJingyang: The only other ergodic 2-3-invariant measures are conjectured to be concentrated on periodic orbits. Since there are only countable many periodic orbits, this and absense of atoms already implies that the measure must be Lebesgue measure (and hence be ergodic). | |
| Jun 20, 2016 at 3:54 | comment | added | Li Jingyang | I think you missed ergodicity in Furstenberg's conjecture: Furstenberg's conjecture is about 2 -3-invariant $\text{ergodic}$ probability measure. | |
| Oct 31, 2010 at 10:07 | vote | accept | Andreas Thom | ||
| Oct 31, 2010 at 1:44 | answer | added | John Griesmer | timeline score: 21 | |
| Oct 30, 2010 at 12:00 | history | edited | Andreas Thom | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
corrected some typos
|
| Oct 30, 2010 at 11:53 | history | edited | Andreas Thom | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 131 characters in body; edited body
|
| Oct 30, 2010 at 10:54 | history | edited | Andreas Thom | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
edited body
|
| Oct 30, 2010 at 10:32 | history | asked | Andreas Thom | CC BY-SA 2.5 |