We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Scalar relative invariants play an important role in the theory of group actions on a manifold as their zero sets are invariant hypersurfaces. Relative invariants are central in many applications, where they often are treated locally since an invariant hypersurface may not be a locus of a single function. Our aim is to establish a global theory of relative invariants.
For a Lie algebra ${\mathfrak g}$ of holomorphic vector fields on a complex manifold M, any holomorphic ${\mathfrak g}$-invariant hypersurface is given in terms of a ${\mathfrak g}$-invariant divisor. This generalizes the classical notion of scalar relative ${\mathfrak g}$-invariant. Any ${\mathfrak g}$-invariant divisor gives rise to a ${\mathfrak g}$-equivariant line bundle, and a large part of this paper is therefore devoted to the investigation of the group $\mathrm {Pic}_{\mathfrak g}(M)$ of ${\mathfrak g}$-equivariant line bundles. We give a cohomological description of $\mathrm {Pic}_{\mathfrak g}(M)$ in terms of a double complex interpolating the Chevalley-Eilenberg complex for ${\mathfrak g}$ with the Čech complex of the sheaf of holomorphic functions on M.
We also obtain results about polynomial divisors on affine bundles and jet bundles. This has applications to the theory of differential invariants. Those were actively studied in relation to invariant differential equations, but the description of multipliers (or weights) of relative differential invariants was an open problem. We derive a characterization of them with our general theory. Examples, including projective geometry of curves and second-order ODEs, not only illustrate the developed machinery but also give another approach and rigorously justify some classical computations. At the end, we briefly discuss generalizations of this theory.
Hardin and Taylor proved that any function on the reals—even a nowhere continuous one—can be correctly predicted, based solely on its past behavior, at almost every point in time. They showed that one could even arrange for the predictors to be robust with respect to simple time shifts, and asked whether they could be robust with respect to other, more complicated time distortions. This question was partially answered by Bajpai and Velleman, who provided upper and lower frontiers (in the subgroup lattice of $\mathrm{Homeo}^+(\mathbb {R})$) on how robust a predictor can possibly be. We improve both frontiers, some of which reduce ultimately to consequences of Hölder’s Theorem (that every Archimedean group is abelian).
Furstenberg has associated to every topological group $G$ a universal boundary $\unicode[STIX]{x2202}(G)$. If we consider in addition a subgroup $H<G$, the relative notion of $(G,H)$-boundaries admits again a maximal object $\unicode[STIX]{x2202}(G,H)$. In the case of discrete groups, an equivalent notion was introduced by Bearden and Kalantar (Topological boundaries of unitary representations. Preprint, 2019, arXiv:1901.10937v1) as a very special instance of their constructions. However, the analogous universality does not always hold, even for discrete groups. On the other hand, it does hold in the affine reformulation in terms of convex compact sets, which admits a universal simplex $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E5}(G,H)$, namely the simplex of measures on $\unicode[STIX]{x2202}(G,H)$. We determine the boundary $\unicode[STIX]{x2202}(G,H)$ in a number of cases, highlighting properties that might appear unexpected.
A metric space $\text{M=}\left( M;\text{d} \right)$ is homogeneous if for every isometry $f$ of a finite subspace of $\text{M}$ to a subspace of $\text{M}$ there exists an isometry of $\text{M}$ onto $\text{M}$ extending $f$. The space $\text{M}$ is universal if it isometrically embeds every finite metric space $\text{F}$ with $\text{dist}\left( \text{F} \right)\subseteq \text{dist}\left( \text{M} \right)$ (with $\text{dist}\left( \text{M} \right)$ being the set of distances between points in $\text{M}$).
A metric space $U$ is a Urysohn metric space if it is homogeneous, universal, separable, and complete. (We deduce as a corollary that a Urysohn metric space $U$ isometrically embeds every separable metric space $\text{M}$ with $\text{dist}\left( \text{M} \right)\subseteq \text{dist}\left( U \right)$.)
The main results are: (1) A characterization of the sets $\text{dist}\left( U \right)$ for Urysohn metric spaces $U$. (2) If $R$ is the distance set of a Urysohn metric space and $\text{M}$ and $\text{N}$ are two metric spaces, of any cardinality with distances in $R$, then they amalgamate disjointly to a metric space with distances in $R$. (3) The completion of every homogeneous, universal, separable metric space $\text{M}$ is homogeneous.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.