14
$\begingroup$

Edit: I revise the question based on the comment conversations

Let $\mathcal{F}$ be the set of all equivalence classes of finite groups under the "Isomorphism" equivalence relation. We define a pseudo metric $d$ on $\mathcal{F}$ as follows:

$$d(G,H)= \inf \{Hd(\tilde {G}_{n},\tilde{H}_{n})\} $$

where $\inf$ is taken over all arbitrary isomorphic copies $\tilde{G}_{n}$ and $\tilde{H}_{n}$ of $G$ and $H$ in $Gl(n,\mathbb{R})$, respectively, while $Hd$ is the Hausdorff distance in $GL(n,\mathbb{R})$ induced by its standard left invariant metric.

The definition of this metric is motivated by the Hausdorff Gromov metric on the space of compact Riemannian manifolds.

Is $d$ a metric on $\mathcal{F}$? If the answer is yes, we denote by $\bar{\mathcal{F}}$ the completion of $\mathcal{F}$. What can be said about an object $Z$ in $\bar{\mathcal{F}}$?

Can one consider the unit circle, in some reasonable sense, as an object in this completion? Is there a natural group structure on every element $Z\in \bar{\mathcal{F}}$? Is there a natural topology on $Z$?

Is $\bar{\mathcal{F}}$ a compact space?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I'm not sure what you call "standard left-invariant metric" on $GL_n(\mathbf{R})$. I'm not aware of such a metric (there are plenty of left-invariant Riemannian metric and also some non-Riemannian ones, you have to simultaneously choose one for each $n$) $\endgroup$ – YCor Apr 17 '17 at 15:25
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ @YCor the invariant Riemannian metric on $GL(n,\mathbb{R})$ as a Lie group which restrict to $tr(AB^{tr})$ on the tangent space at neutral element. $\endgroup$ – Ali Taghavi Apr 17 '17 at 15:43
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ The usual way of generalizing Gromov--Hausdorff convergence to groups is via the Grigorchuk--Gromov space of marked groups. A marked group is a group together with a chosen finite generating set. A marked group corresponds canonically to a normal subgroup of a free group $F_n$. The space of marked groups of rank $n$ is the space of all normal subgroups of $F_n$, with the topology restricted from the natural product topology on the power set of $F_n$. In this topology, the closure of the space of finite groups is the space of groups that are locally emeddable in finite groups (LEF). $\endgroup$ – HJRW Apr 17 '17 at 19:50
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ You can certainly define it as a direct limit, though all the papers I know consider fixed $n$. The set of finite groups is always discrete in this topology, since any finitely presented group has a neighbourhood consisting only of (marked) quotients. Here's a reference: arxiv.org/abs/math/0401042 . $\endgroup$ – HJRW Apr 18 '17 at 12:31
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ There is a subtlety in the Gromov-Hausdorff definition for spaces I think you are overlooking: the triangle inequality only holds because of the flexibility of metric spaces. Namely, given metric spaces $Y_1,Y_2$ and a compact metric space $X$ that isometrically embeds into both, there is a metric space $Y$ given by gluing $Y_1$ to $Y_2$ along $X$ with the property that $Y_1, Y_2$ isometrically embed. One needs to apply this gluing construction with $X$ the middle space in the triangle inequality in order to verify it. Without such a construction for groups, the triangle inequality need't hold $\endgroup$ – JHance Apr 18 '17 at 15:13
11
$\begingroup$

i don't think it's a metric. Take a large prime $p$. By embedding $\mathbb Z/p\mathbb Z$ and $\mathbb Z/(p^2+p)\mathbb Z$ in the circle $S^1 \subseteq GL(2,\mathbb R)$, one sees that the distance between them is at most $O(1/p)$. By embedding $\mathbb Z/p \mathbb Z \times \mathbb Z/p \mathbb Z$ and $\mathbb Z/p \mathbb Z \times \mathbb Z/(p+1)\mathbb Z$ in the torus $S^1 \times S^1 \subseteq GL(4,\mathbb R)$, one again sees that the distance between them is at most $O(1/p)$.

But of course $\mathbb Z/(p^2+p)$ and $\mathbb Z/p \mathbb Z \times \mathbb Z/(p+1)\mathbb Z$ are isomorphic, so one would be forced to conclude by the triangle inequality that the distance between $\mathbb Z/p\mathbb Z$ and $\mathbb Z/p \mathbb Z \times \mathbb Z/p\mathbb Z$ is $O(1/p)$.

But this is false. If they had that distance in some $GL(n,\mathbb R)$, then by pidgeonhole, $p$ different elements of $\mathbb Z/p \mathbb Z \times \mathbb Z/p\mathbb Z$ would have to be within $O(1/p)$ of some element of $\mathbb Z/p\mathbb Z$ and hence within $O(1/p)$ of each other. By left invariance, $p$ different elements of $\mathbb Z/p \mathbb Z \times \mathbb Z/p\mathbb Z$ would have to be within $O(1)$ of the identity.

But in any representation of $\mathbb Z/p\mathbb Z \times \mathbb Z/p\mathbb Z$, only $o(p)$ elements have eigenvalues within $o(1/\sqrt{p})$ of the identity, since we can write the representation as a sum of characters, the eigenvalues on each character must be $p$th roots of unity, and each element is determined by its eigenvalues on two independent characters.

So we just need to check that every element within $O(1/p)$ of the identity has eigenvalues within $o(1/\sqrt{p})$ of the identity.

In fact we can show more is true, and an element within $d$ of the identity matrix can't move any vector of length one by a distance of greater than $e^{d}-1$. Since $e^{O(1/p)}-1 = O(1/p) = o(1/\sqrt{p})$, we obtain the desired conclusion. To check this, differentiate $Mv$ with respect to $M$ and observe that its operator norm with respect to your metric is the operator norm of $M$, so if $f(x)$ is the maximum total distance moved a vector of length one by a matrix within $x$ of the identity, $df/dx \leq 1+f$ so $f(x) \leq e^x-1$.

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Thank you very much for your answer. I think you are proving that $d$ is not well defined, since your change an equivalent member. I am surprised:Because I think it is an immediate consequence of the definition that $d$ is well defined.Let $G, G', H $ be three groups with $G \simeq G'$. then $d(G,H)\leq d(G',H)$ and $d(G',H) \leq d(G,H)$. Am I mistaken? $\endgroup$ – Ali Taghavi Apr 18 '17 at 8:44
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ @AliTaghavi No, I am proving that it does not satisfy the triangle inequality and hence is not a metric. $\endgroup$ – Will Sawin Apr 18 '17 at 14:27
  • $\begingroup$ May I ask you to more explain on "$p$ different elements of $\mathbb Z/p \mathbb Z$ would have to be within $O(1)$ of the identity"? $\endgroup$ – Ali Taghavi Apr 24 '17 at 14:11
  • $\begingroup$ @AliTaghavi This follows from left invariance of the metric on $GL_n$. We establish that there is a set $S$ in $\mathbb Z/p \mathbb Z \times \mathbb Z/p \mathbb Z$ of size $p$ where every element is within a distance $d=O(1/p)$ of some element of $GL_n(\mathbb R)$, hence every pair of elements is within a distance $2d$ by each other, hence translating by a fixed element $g \in S$, every element in $g^{-1} S \subseteq \mathbb Z/p \mathbb Z \times \mathbb Z/p \mathbb Z$ is in distance $2d$ of the identity. $\endgroup$ – Will Sawin Apr 24 '17 at 14:15
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @AliTaghavi Probably not. It's easy to prove this if you work in $O(n)$ instead of $GL_n(\mathbb R)$, because then the metric is both left and right invariant, but it should still be true in general - one just needs the right inequality. $\endgroup$ – Will Sawin Apr 24 '17 at 18:29

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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