1

This is a followup question to this Math Stack Question where it was shown that $S^1\cong G\leq\text{Aut}(\mathbb{N})$ for some subgroup $G$ of $\text{Aut}(\mathbb{N})$(although I admittedly don't follow the whole discussion). I wanted to answer the question by constructing an isomorphism, but failed along the way. I want to see if my method would work, or find some other explicit isomorphism. Here is my thought process. $$$$ Consider the sequence of the first $n$ primes $(p_1=2,p_2=3,p_3,\ldots,p_n)$ and let $N=\prod_{i=1}^n p_i$. Now consider the group under addition $\mod(2\pi)$ (which by the given construction is a subgroup of $S^1$)(note that $\frac{2\pi}{4}$, for instance, is not in this set): $$\left\{ 2\pi\left(\sum_{i=1}^{n} \frac{a_i}{p_i}\right): a_i\in\mathbb{Z} \right\}\equiv_{2\pi} \left\{ 2\pi\frac{a}{N}: a\in\mathbb{Z}, 0\leq a<N\right\}$$ Which is isomorphic to some subgroup of $S_N$, $G_n$. So here is where I am not sure how to tackle this problem, can we show in some sense that $\lim_{n\to\infty}G_n$ converges to some group $G$ and that $G\cong [\{2\pi a/p: p \text{ is a product of finitely many distinct primes, and } a\in\mathbb{Z}\}\mod(2\pi)]\leq S^1$? If this is the case, can we further conclude that there is some form of completion of $G$, in the sense of 'Cauchy' infinite compositions of permutations, which is isomorphic to $S^1$?

$$$$ If you have some other explicit isomorphism which actually works, please do share! $$$$ EDIT: It would appear that there is a much more straightforward approach. Consider the cyclic permutation in $\text{Perm}(\mathbb{N})$: $$\sigma_{a+1} = (a(a+1)/2,\ldots,(a+1)(a+2)/2-1)$$ for $a\in \mathbb{N}$ and $\sigma_1=id$. Consider the subgroup $A$ of $\text{Perm}(\mathbb{N})$ where $\sigma\in A$ if $$\sigma = \circ_{i=1}^{\infty}(\sigma_{b_i})^{c_i}$$ for some convergent series $$\sum_{i=1}^{\infty}\frac{c_i}{b_i}$$ where $c:\mathbb{N}\longrightarrow \mathbb{Z}$ and $b:\mathbb{N}\longrightarrow \mathbb{N}$. Let $B<A$ be the subgroup such that $\sigma\in A$ is in $B$ if the corresponding Cauchy sequence is congruent to $0$ modulo $1$. I think it seems intuitive that $A/B\cong S^1$.

EDIT2: I will first engage in a discussion about sequences of permutations, then attempt to prove the claim that $A/B\cong S^1$. First, we will define convergence of a sequence of permutations as follows: $\sigma:\mathbb{N}\longrightarrow \text{Perm}(\mathbb{N})$ converges to $\pi\in \text{Perm}(\mathbb{N})$ if $$(\forall M)(\exists N)(\forall n>N)(\forall 1\leq m<M)\text{ }\sigma_{n}(m) = \pi(m)$$ Next, we will say that a sequence of permutations has the 'Cauchy Property' if $$(\forall M)(\exists N)(\forall n,p>N)(\forall 1\leq m<M)\text{ }\sigma_{p}^{-1}\circ\sigma_{n}(m) = m$$ We can quite easily demonstrate equivalence: \begin{align*} (\implies): &\text{ let $(\sigma_n)$ converge to $\pi$, then}\\ &(\forall M)(\exists N)(\forall n,p>N)(\forall 1\leq m<M)\sigma_{p}^{-1}\circ\sigma_{n}(m) = \pi^{-1}\circ\pi(m) = m.\\ (\impliedby): &\text{ let $(\sigma_n)$ have the Cauchy Property, but suppose $(\sigma_n)$ does not converge, then}\\ &(\forall \pi)(\exists M)(\forall N)(\exists n>N)(\exists 1\leq m<M)\sigma_n(m)\neq \pi(m) \text{ so}\\ &(\exists M)(\forall N)(\exists n,p>N)(\exists 1\leq m<M)\sigma_n(m)\neq \sigma_p(m)\\ &\text{ So $(\sigma_n)$ does not have the Cauchy Property, which is a contradiction.} \end{align*}

$$$$

Now we will demonstrate that sequences of partial compositions of elements in $A$ have the Cauchy Property. From here on out we are reserving the permutation $\sigma_n$ as notation for the cycle: $$\sigma_{a+1} = (a(a+1)/2,\ldots,(a+1)(a+2)/2-1)$$ for $a\in \mathbb{N}$ and $\sigma_1=id$. Let $\sigma \in A$ where $\sigma = \circ_{i=1}^{\infty}(\sigma_{b_i})^{c_i} = \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\circ_{i=1}^{n}(\sigma_{b_i})^{c_i}$, let $\pi_n = \circ_{i=1}^{n}(\sigma_{b_i})^{c_i}$. It is given that $$\sum_{i=1}^{\infty}\frac{c_i}{b_i}$$ converges (in $\mathbb{R}$) where $c:\mathbb{N}\longrightarrow \mathbb{Z}$ and $b:\mathbb{N}\longrightarrow \mathbb{N}$. Thus $(c_i/b_i)\to 0$ so either $(\exists N)(\forall i\geq N)$, $c_i=0$ (in which case $\pi_n\to \pi_N$) or $$(\forall \varepsilon=(1/M) >0)(\exists N)(\forall i>N)b_i>\frac{|c_i|}{\varepsilon}\geq\frac{1}{\varepsilon}>M \text{ or }c_i = 0$$ Thus $(\forall M'=M(M+1)/2)(\exists N)(\forall n,p>N)(\forall 1\leq m<M')$ \begin{align*} \pi_p^{-1}\circ \pi_n(m) &=[\circ_{i=1}^{p}(\sigma_{b_i})^{c_i}]^{-1}\circ [\circ_{i=1}^{n}(\sigma_{b_i})^{c_i}](m)\\ &= [\circ_{i=1}^{N}(\sigma_{b_i})^{c_i}]^{-1}\circ [\circ_{i=1}^{N}(\sigma_{b_i})^{c_i}](m) \text{(using $N$ such that $b_i > M'$, or $c_i=0$ when $i>N$)}\\ &= m \end{align*} So for every $\sigma\in A$, the associated sequence of partial compositions has the Cauchy Property and thus converges. Next we will show that composition in $A$ converges and equals component wise ccomposition. Let $\kappa, \kappa' \in A$, $\kappa= \lim_{n\to\infty}\pi_n = \lim_{n\to\infty}\circ_{i=1}^{n}(\sigma_{b_i})^{c_i}$ and $\kappa'= \lim_{n\to\infty}\pi'_n = \lim_{n\to\infty}\circ_{i=1}^{n}(\sigma_{b'_i})^{c'_i}$, $(\forall M)[(\exists N)(\forall n>N)(\forall 1\leq m<M) \pi_n(m) = \kappa(m)$ and $(\exists N')(\forall n'>N')(\forall 1\leq m<M) \pi'_{n'}(m) = \kappa'(m)]$ thus $(\forall p>P=\max\{N,N'\})(\forall 1\leq m<M)$ \begin{align*} \kappa'\circ\kappa(m)&= \pi'_p\circ\pi_p(m)\\ &= [\circ_{i=1}^{P}(\sigma_{b'_i})^{c'_i}] \circ [\circ_{i=1}^{P}(\sigma_{b_i})^{c_i}](m)\\ &=\circ_{i=1}^{P}[(\sigma_{b'_i})^{c'_i} \circ (\sigma_{b_i})^{c_i}] \text{ (by commutativity of $\sigma_l$)} \end{align*} From this, we can immediately conclude $\kappa^{-1} = \lim_{n\to\infty}\circ_{i=1}^{n}(\sigma_{b_i})^{-c_i}$.

$$$$

Now to construct the isomorphism, Let $F:\mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Z}\longrightarrow A/B$, $$F(\theta+\mathbb{Z}) = F\left(\sum_{i=1}^{\infty}\frac{c_i}{b_i}+\mathbb{Z}\right) = [\circ_{i=1}^{\infty}(\sigma_{b_i})^{c_i}]\circ B$$ for any $c:\mathbb{N}\longrightarrow \mathbb{Z}$ and $b:\mathbb{N}\longrightarrow \mathbb{N}$ such that $\sum_{i=1}^{\infty}\frac{c_i}{b_i}\to \theta$. Now to show that $F$ is an isomorphism. Since the set of all convergent sequences if the form above converge to elements in $\mathbb{R}$, $F$ is trivially surjective. Suppose \begin{align*} F(\theta+\mathbb{Z}) &= F(\theta'+\mathbb{Z})\\ F\left(\sum_{i=1}^{\infty}\frac{c_i}{b_i}+\mathbb{Z}\right) &= F\left(\sum_{i=1}^{\infty}\frac{c'_i}{b'_i}+\mathbb{Z}\right)\\ [\circ_{i=1}^{\infty}(\sigma_{b_i})^{c_i}]\circ B &= [\circ_{i=1}^{\infty}(\sigma_{b'_i})^{'c_i}]\circ B\\ [\circ_{i=1}^{\infty}(\sigma_{b'_i})^{c'_i}]^{-1}\circ[\circ_{i=1}^{\infty}(\sigma_{b_i})^{c_i}]\circ B &= B\\ \circ_{i=1}^{\infty}[(\sigma_{b'_i})^{-c'_i}\circ(\sigma_{b_i})^{c_i}]\circ B &= B \\ \circ_{i=1}^{\infty}[(\sigma_{b'_i})^{-c'_i}\circ(\sigma_{b_i})^{c_i}] &\in B\\ \sum_{i}^{\infty}\frac{c_i}{b_i}-\frac{c'_i}{b'_i} &\equiv_1 0\\ \theta +Z &= \theta'+Z \end{align*} So $F$ is injective; additionally, $F$ is clearly a homomorphism. So now I am wondering where the mistakes are in my attempted proof? I'm sure there are several trivial mistakes, but I will edit those out as I find them. Can anyone find any nontrivial mistakes in my reasoning (or trivial mistakes/errors in notation)? Also I am beginning to understand Qiaochu Yuan's argument, so I will eventually add another edit to discuss how it relates to my argument.

RyanK
  • 647
  • Please stop editing your question. Decide what it is that you want to say first, then type it up. Every time you edit a question, that question is bumped to the top of the front page, and repeated editing can help to drive other questions down the list faster than they would otherwise. Moreover, once a question has been answered, editing can invalidate those answers. Please try to avoid making large numbers of edits. – Xander Henderson Oct 25 '20 at 21:34

1 Answers1

5

I believe it is impossible to write down an embedding $S^1 \to \text{Aut}(\mathbb{N})$ in ZF so if your construction doesn't use some form of the axiom of choice I don't think it can work. You are working with the torsion subgroup of $S^1$, which is isomorphic to $\mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z}$. This subgroup is countable so it's easy to write down an explicit embedding of it into $\text{Aut}(\mathbb{N})$: it acts on itself, and you can write down an explicit bijection $\mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z} \cong \mathbb{N}$.

But $S^1$ is much larger (uncountably larger) than its torsion subgroup, and this action is very far from continuous in any reasonable sense, so I don't think there's any hope of "completing" it and still getting an action on a countable set. Ask me questions about my construction if you don't understand it!


Edit (this has also been edited into my answer to the original question):

Okay, as suspected the answer to this question is independent of ZF. There's a model of ZF constructed by Shelah in which every set of real numbers has the Baire property. This implies, if I understand correctly, that there are no nonzero homomorphisms from $\mathbb{R}$ to any countable abelian group (since any countable abelian group with the discrete topology is a Polish group, so in this model any homomorphism from $\mathbb{R}$ to such a group is automatically measurable and so automatically continuous). So $\mathbb{R}$, and $SO(2)$, have no subgroups of countable index in this model.

Qiaochu Yuan
  • 468,795
  • Thanks for the response!! To be honest my algebraic knowledge is limited and I am not familiar with some of the notation used in your answer, although maybe I could come up with a few questions. I have to leave now and won't be able to engage in discussion until sometime tomorrow. Could you maybe elaborate on why such a 'completion' could not exist; I was trying to come up with a way to define convergence of infinite sequences of compositions of permutations, but wouldn't want to waist my time... – RyanK Oct 22 '20 at 23:43
  • 2
    @Ryan: it's just not at all true in general that an action of a dense subgroup of a topological group extends to an action of its closure. You need some kind of continuity of the action and some kind of completeness / compactness of the space being acted on to get results like this, and the action above is very discontinuous and the space it's acting on is neither complete nor compact in any reasonable sense. – Qiaochu Yuan Oct 22 '20 at 23:49
  • Well, maybe I will come back to this when I have more knowledge as I have yet to take a course in topology. Trying not to sound too naive, could you come up with a topology in which the action is continuous? – RyanK Oct 22 '20 at 23:51
  • 2
    Yes, the action of $\mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z}$ on itself is continuous with the subspace topology inherited from $S^1$. But $\mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z}$ is very far from being complete (say with the metric inherited from $S^1$) so still there's no reason this action should extend to an action of $S^1$ by continuity, and of course if you complete it it's not countable anymore. – Qiaochu Yuan Oct 22 '20 at 23:58
  • Okay I think I see what you are saying, since $\text{Aut}(\mathbb{N})$ acts faithfully on $\mathbb{N}$, the problem is finding a countable set that $S^1$ acts faithfully on, does that sound about right? Also could you check out the edit I made to the post and see if you agree with it? – RyanK Oct 23 '20 at 16:12
  • @Ryan: yes, the problem is finding a countable set that $S^1$ acts faithfully on. I don’t think your construction is well-defined - there’s no such thing as an infinite composition in general. – Qiaochu Yuan Oct 23 '20 at 19:04
  • I agree, however it is not hard to establish some definition for it, IE it converges if $\forall M$ $\exists N$ $\forall n>N, m<M$ the sequence of $n$ partial compositions agree when evaluated at $m$. or something like this. – RyanK Oct 23 '20 at 19:16
  • @RyanK: then you need to check convergence! Again, I believe it’s impossible to write down an embedding in ZF so no construction that does not use some choice can possibly work. – Qiaochu Yuan Oct 23 '20 at 19:17
  • Yes, I implicitly did as it follows from the convergence of the associated Cauchy sequence, but I agree it requires a more rigorous verification. Also, I am not sure in what sense choice is required. I will look into this. – RyanK Oct 23 '20 at 19:18
  • I will type up an attempt of a proof of my claim sometime in the next few days, maybe I will catch some mistake. I believe that in my construction, letting this subgroup of $\text{Aut}(\mathbb{N})$ act on itself, we can easily establish an isomorphism with $S^1$. Further I have a hunch that this isomorphism induces a faithful action of $S^1$ on $\mathbb{N}$ but I am not too confident in this. I will also try to understand your point about the necessity of choice. Thanks for discussing this with me! – RyanK Oct 23 '20 at 20:52
  • 1
    @Ryan: I have found a result implying that this result is independent of ZF, so again, if you don't use any form of the axiom of choice in your argument it cannot possibly work. (This is not to discourage you from checking the argument and seeing where the error is, which I imagine will be educational. But there must be such an error.) – Qiaochu Yuan Oct 24 '20 at 06:41
  • I am in the process now, I will post what I have, would you look at it? And thanks!! I don't think I have an error yet, but might have just overlooked an important detail. maybe I am using choice without being aware of it. – RyanK Oct 24 '20 at 06:42
  • @Ryan: I haven't gone through all the details but you don't seem to have shown anywhere that $A/B$ acts on $\mathbb{N}$? To do that you'd need to show that the action of $B$ is trivial and I don't see any reason to expect this. – Qiaochu Yuan Oct 24 '20 at 19:57
  • I guess I'm not sure why this needs to be the case, this is true if we want to verify the action on $\mathbb{N}$ is faithful, but need this be the case to show isomorphism between the groups? Also the action of $B$ on $\mathbb{N}$ is in largely the identity, and when it is not the identity, I think it acts trivially on a subset of $P(\mathbb{N})$ – RyanK Oct 24 '20 at 20:00
  • @Ryan: the question is to exhibit a faithful action of $S^1$ on $\mathbb{N}$, or equivalently on any countable set. If you've shown that $A$ acts on $\mathbb{N}$ and $A/B \cong S^1$ (neither of which I've checked carefully) it doesn't follow that $A/B$ acts faithfully on $\mathbb{N}$ unless $B$ is exactly the kernel of this action, so that's what you'd need to show (and I don't believe this). – Qiaochu Yuan Oct 24 '20 at 20:03
  • Correct me if I'm wrong, but your argument is that choice is required to find a faithful action of $S^1$ on a countable set, but not to establish an isomorphism between $S^1$ and a subgroup of $\text{Aut}(\mathbb{N})$? If this is true (and the presented isomorphism is accurate) then it might be the case that choice is required to established the induced action of $S^1$ on a countable set. Again, I'm not too sure on any of this... – RyanK Oct 24 '20 at 20:08
  • @Ryan: those problems are equivalent and my claim is that the answer to either of them is independent of ZF. I think it is possible to show, in ZF, that $B$ is not the kernel of the action you've written down. – Qiaochu Yuan Oct 24 '20 at 20:13