Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T03:47:26.792Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Subrelations of ergodic equivalence relations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2008

J. Feldman
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720, USA
C. E. Sutherland
Affiliation:
Mathematics Department, University of New South Wales, Kensington, NSW, 2033, Australia
R. J. Zimmer
Affiliation:
Mathematics Department, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60637, USA
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

We introduce a notion of normality for a nested pair of (ergodic) discrete measured equivalence relations of type II1. Such pairs are characterized by a group Q which serves as a quotient for the pair, or by the ability to synthesize the larger relation from the smaller and an action (modulo inner automorphisms) of Q on it; in the case where Q is amenable, one can work with a genuine action. We classify ergodic subrelations of finite index, and arbitrary normal subrelations, of the unique amenable relation of type II1. We also give a number of rigidity results; for example, if an equivalence relation is generated by a free II1-action of a lattice in a higher rank simple connected non-compact Lie group with finite centre, the only normal ergodic subrelations are of finite index, and the only strongly normal, amenable subrelations are finite.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

References

REFERENCES

[1]Brown, R. G.. Fibrations of groupoids. Journal of Algebra 15 (1) (1970), 103132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Chevalley, C.. Theory of Lie Groups (Princeton University Press: Princeton, 1946).Google Scholar
[3]Connes, A., Feldman, J. & Weiss, B.. An amenable equivalence relation is generated by a single transformation. Ergod. Th. & Dynam. Sys. I (1981), 431450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Connes, A. & Jones, V.. Property T for von Neumann Algebras. Bull. Lon. Math. Soc. 17 (1985), 5762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5]Dye, H. A.. On groups of measure preserving transformations I and II. Amer. J. Math. 81 (1959), 119159Google Scholar
and Amer. J. Math. 85 (1963), 551576.Google Scholar
[6]Eberlein, P.. Geodesic flows on negatively curved manifolds I, II. Ann. Math. 95 (1972), 492510Google Scholar
and T.A.M.S. 1978 (1973), 5782.Google Scholar
[7]Eberlein, P.. Lattices in spaces of non-positive curvature. Ann. Math. III (1980), 455467.Google Scholar
[8]Effros, E.. Transformation groups and C*-algebras. Ann. Math. 81 (1965), 3855.Google Scholar
[9]Fabec, R. C.. Normal Ergodic actions and Extensions. Israel J. Math. 40 (2) (1981), 175186.Google Scholar
[10]Feldman, J. & Moore, C. C.. Ergodic equivalence relations, cohomology and von Neumann algebras I and II. T.A.M.S. 234 (1977) 289–324 and 325–359.Google Scholar
[11]Gerber, M.. Classifying the finite extensions of an ergodic transformation up to factor orbit equivalence. Preprint.Google Scholar
[12]Golodets, V. Ya. & Sinelchikov, S. I.. Existence and uniqueness of cocycles of an ergodic automorphism with dense ranges in amenable groups. Preprint 19–83, FTINT AN USSR, Kharkov, 1–21.Google Scholar
[13]Jones, V. F. R.. Index for subfactors. Inventiones Math. 72 (1983), 125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14]Mackey, G. W.. Borel spaces for groups and their duals. T.A.M.S. 85 (1957), 134165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15]Mackey, G. W.. Infinite dimensional group representations. B.A.M.S. 69 (1963), 628686.Google Scholar
[16]Margulis, G. A.. Finiteness of quotient groups of discrete subgroups. Funct. Anal. Appl. 13 (1979), 178187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[17]Ocneanu, A.. Actions of discrete amenable groups on von Neumann algebras. Springer Lecture Notes in Math. 1138 (Springer-Verlag: New York, 1985).Google Scholar
[18]Ornstein, D. & Weiss, B.. Ergodic theory of amenable group actions. Preprint.Google Scholar
[19]Ramsay, A.. Virtual groups and group actions. Adv. Math. 6 (1971), 253322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[20]Schmidt, K.. Strong ergodicity and quotients of equivalence relations. To appear in Proc. of the Centre for Mathematical Analysis (Australian National University, Canberra).Google Scholar
[21]Sutherland, C. E.. Sub-equivalence relations and subalgebras of von Neumann algebras. In preparation.Google Scholar
[22]Sutherland, C. E.. A Borel parametrization of Polish groups. R.I.M.S. Kyoto University 21 (6) (1985), 10671086.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[23]Varadarajan, V. S.. The Geometry of Quantum Theory. Vol II (van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1970).Google Scholar
[24]Zimmer, R. J.. Ergodic Theory and Semi-simple groups (Birkhauser, 1984).Google Scholar
[25]Zimmer, R. J.. Extensions of ergodic group actions. Illinois J. Math. 20 (1976), 373409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[26]Zimmer, R. J.. Normal ergodic actions. J.F.A. 25 (3) (1977), 281305.Google Scholar
[27]Zimmer, R. J.. Ergodic Theory, Semi-simple Groups and foliations by manifolds of negative curvature. Pub. Math. I.H.E.S. 55 (1982), 3761.Google Scholar
[28]Bezuglyi, S. I. & Golodets, V. Ya.. Outer conjugation of actions of countable groups on a measure space. Preprint 2–84, F.T.I.N.T. AN U.S.S.R., Kharkov.Google Scholar
[29]Bezuglyi, S. I. & Golodets, V. Ya.. Groups of measure space transformations and invariants of outer conjugation for automorphisms from normalizers of type III full groups. J.F.A. 60 (1985), 341369.Google Scholar
[30]Bezuglyi, S. I. & Golodets, V. Ya.. Measure space transformations and outer conjugacy of countableamenable automorphism groups. Preprint 28–85, F.T.I.N.T. AN, U.S.S.R., Kharkov.Google Scholar