Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T16:16:28.309Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rigidity Properties for Hyperbolic Generalizations

Part of: Special aspects of infinite or finite groups

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 November 2019

Brendan Burns Healy
Brendan Burns Healy*
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, 3200 N Cramer St, Milwaukee, WI 53211, USA Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We make a few observations on the absence of geometric and topological rigidity for acylindrically hyperbolic and relatively hyperbolic groups. In particular, we demonstrate the lack of a well-defined limit set for acylindrical actions on hyperbolic spaces, even under the assumption of universality. We also prove a statement about relatively hyperbolic groups inspired by a remark by Groves, Manning, and Sisto about the quasi-isometry type of combinatorial cusps. Finally, we summarize these results in a table in order to assert a meta-statement about the decay of metric rigidity as the conditions on actions on hyperbolic spaces are loosened.

Keywords

acylindricalrelativehyperbolicityrigidityquasi-isometrygeneralized loxodromic

MSC classification

Primary: 20F65: Geometric group theory
Type
Article
Information
Canadian Mathematical Bulletin , Volume 63 , Issue 1 , March 2020 , pp. 66 - 76
Copyright
© Canadian Mathematical Society 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbott, C. R., Not all finitely generated groups have universal acylindrical actions. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 144(2016), 4151–4155. https://doi.org/10.1090/proc/13101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abbott, C., Balasubramanya, S., and Osin, D., Hyperbolic structures on groups. Algebr. Geom. Topol. 19(2019), no. 4, 1747–1835. https://doi.org/10.2140/agt.2019.19.1747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bridson, M. R. and Haefliger, A., Metric spaces of non-positive curvature. Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften, 319, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-12494-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowditch, B. H., Relatively hyperbolic groups. Internat. J. Algebra Comput. 22(2012), 1250016. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218196712500166Google Scholar
Croke, C. B. and Kleiner, B., Spaces with nonpositive curvature and their ideal boundaries. Topology 39(2000), 549–556. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0040-9383(99)00016-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caprace, P.-E. and Sageev, M., Rank rigidity for CAT(0) cube complexes. Geom. Funct. Anal. 21(2011), 851–891. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00039-011-0126-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geoghegan, R., Topological methods in group theory. Graduate Texts in Mathematics, 243, Springer, New York, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-74614-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Groves, D. and Manning, J. F., Dehn filling in relatively hyperbolic groups. Israel J. Math. 168(2008), 317–429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11856-008-1070-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Groves, D., Manning, J. F., and Sisto, A., Boundaries of dehn fillings. arxiv:1612.03497Google Scholar
Osin, D., Acylindrically hyperbolic groups. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 368(2016), 851–888. https://doi.org/10.1090/tran/6343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sisto, A., Contracting elements and random walks. J. Reine Angew. Math. 742(2018), 79–114. https://doi.org/10.1515/crelle-2015-0093CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thurston, W. P., Three-dimensional geometry and topology. Princeton Mathematical Series, 35, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar