3
$\begingroup$

Let $(X, T, \mathcal F, \mu)$ be an ergodic measure preserving system with finite measure.

Suppose $T$ is uniformly recurrent, in the following sense:

For every $A \in \mathcal F$, there exists an $M \in \mathbb N$ such that for almost every $x \in A$, we have $T^{n(x)} \, (x) \in A$ for some $n(x) \leq M$.

Question: Does it follow that the convergence of the Birkhoff sums is essentially uniform? That is, for every $f \in L^1 (X)$, there exists a measurable set $E$ of full measure such that

$$\frac{1}{N}\sum_{i = 0}^{N-1} f(T^n (x)) \to \int f \, d\mu$$

uniformly on $E$ as $N \to \infty$.

$\endgroup$
4
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Is there any reason not to consider here minimal systems? By classical results (i.e. Furstenberg's book) in a minimal system, the set of return times is syndetic. The converse actually holds under the assumption of transitivity. P.S. For a uniquely ergodic system, the convergence is uniform (at least for continuous functions, dealing with $L^{1}$ in that respect is tricky). $\endgroup$
    – Asaf
    Commented Jul 14, 2022 at 18:24
  • $\begingroup$ Yes I was thinking that one could try to test this out for continuous functions first, in which case the conclusion is equivalent to unique ergodicity. What precisely is meant by the return times being syndetic by the way? $\endgroup$
    – Nate River
    Commented Jul 14, 2022 at 18:26
  • $\begingroup$ A set is syndetic if it has bounded gaps. It is a basic fact that if $(X,T)$ is minimal, then for all $U\subset X$ open, for all $x\in U$, the set of return times $R(x,U)$ is syndetic (in particular, one can take $M$ to be the gap + 1 or so). I am a bit worried about your condition of taking $F$ any general set from your sigma algebra. Is there any particular example in mind? Is your sigma algebra complete or not? $\endgroup$
    – Asaf
    Commented Jul 14, 2022 at 21:08
  • $\begingroup$ I see, so it applies to open sets - that would make sense. We can assume standard probability space, so yeah it would be complete. $\endgroup$
    – Nate River
    Commented Jul 15, 2022 at 0:11

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

This is just a comment on your definition of "uniformly recurrent". Can you give an example of a system you'd consider uniformly recurrent?

If this notion is standard, the following must be nonsense, but it seems to me that your notion does not make much sense.

Lemma. If $T$ is ergodic and uniformly recurrent, then it is a single finite cycle.

Proof. Suppose first that the measure of points with an eventual period is $0$. Then by the Rokhlin lemma for noninvertible transformations [1], there exists an $n$-tower for $f$ of measure at least $1 - \epsilon$ for each $\epsilon > 0$, meaning a set $B_{(n)}$ such that for some base $B$, $B_{(n)} = \bigcup_{0 \leq k < n} T^{-k}(B)$ is disjoint and has measure at least $1 - \epsilon$ and the sets $f^{-1}_k(B)$ are disjoint.

From this it is easy to see that there also exist arbitrarily small such sets, just take small subsets of $B$. From this we obtain that we can find for each $n \geq 1$ pick an $n$-tower $B_{(n)}$ such that these towers are disjoint for distinct $n$. Now denoting by $B^n$ is the base of $B_{(n)}$, define $A = \bigcup_{n > 1} B^n \cup T^{-n+1}(B^n)$.

Note that $B^n$ and $T^{-n+1}(B^n)$ have equal measure, so if you pick a random point $x$ in $A$, it will be in in a set of the form $T^{-n+1}(B^n)$ (for some $n$) with probability $0.5$. But then the minimal $n$ of $T$ such that $T^n(x) \in A$ is $n-1$. It follows that $T$ is not uniformly recurrent.

We conclude that there must exist $n, p$ such that the probability that $T^n(x) = T^{n+p}(x)$ is positive. In particular, the shift-invariant set of points satisfying $T^p(x) = x$ has positive measure, so this measure must be $1$. It is well-known that in this case, we can find a cross-section $S$ such that $X = S \cup T(s) \cup \cdots T^{n-1}(S)$ and the union is disjoint (assuming this is on a standard Lebesgue space $[0, 1]$, I think the usual construction is to pick the minimal point on each orbit).

Ergodicity implies that $S$ must be a singleton, as otherwise we can split it in two. Square.

Of course in this case, the answer to your question is "yes".

[1] Avila, Artur; Candela, Pablo, Towers for commuting endomorphisms, and combinatorial applications, Ann. Inst. Fourier 66, No. 4, 1529-1544 (2016). ZBL1360.28012.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Hmm, how do you ensure the towers are disjoint? It seems to check out otherwise. $\endgroup$
    – Nate River
    Commented Jul 14, 2022 at 18:22
  • $\begingroup$ I was guessing that an irrational rotation would be uniformly recurrent, but maybe I am wrong.. $\endgroup$
    – Nate River
    Commented Jul 14, 2022 at 18:33
  • $\begingroup$ I was just thinking you take set differences and the sets get small real fast. $\endgroup$
    – Ville Salo
    Commented Jul 14, 2022 at 18:33

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .