Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

In this question, I recently asked if there were free subgroups of rank 3 or higher of the group of rotations in $\mathbb{R}^3$. From the answers, it follows that any free subgroup of rank 2 admits subgroups of arbitrary countable rank.

My question now is whether this can be used to extend the Banach-Tarski Paradox to show that the sphere cannot only be duplicated (leveraging the subgroup of rotations of rank 2), but may be done in a way to produce $n$ copies using a finite number of disjoint subsets of the original unit sphere (leveraging a subgroup of rotations of rank $n$). All I have seen in this vein is re-applying the original statement $n$ times in order to create $n$ spheres, but it seems they could be created all at once using a free subgroup of rank $n$, correct?

share|improve this question
    
Not in a trivial way. Why not carry it out yourself to see if it works? –  GEdgar Aug 4 '11 at 18:47
    
Great to know!! Thank you! –  Rachel Aug 4 '11 at 19:40
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 7 down vote accepted

This question is answered in the affirmative in Chapter 6 of Stan Wagon's book on the Banach-Tarski Paradox, "Free Groups of Large Rank: Getting a Continuum of Spheres from One."

Using the free subgroups of rank $n$ (of a free group of rank 2), one can extend BT to $n$ copies at once.

Furthermore, as stated in the comments of the above-referenced question, one can use the fact that a free group of rank 2 has a subgroup of countably infinite rank to produce a countably infinite number of copies of the original sphere.

Moreover, it is possible to produce copies of the ball with cardinality of the continuum, though I do not understand the development presented in the text well enough to summarize here.

share|improve this answer
1  
Wagon's book is excellent. It is very clearly written. –  Ross Millikan Aug 8 '11 at 13:43
    
@Ross - Agreed. I'm looking forward to digging into Chs. 4-6 to really see what is happening here. –  Rachel Aug 8 '11 at 15:32
    
Hi Rachel! This is just to make sure you saw this question, and this answer, and who wrote it. –  Pierre-Yves Gaillard Aug 11 '11 at 4:19
    
@Pierre, thank you! The link you reference is precisely the talk I gave at MathFest in Kentucky last week, using Stan Wagon's book as a guide (though I only looked at chapters 1-3). The motivation for my question above was from a question posed tome by another student, asking why it only deals with 2 balls at the final state, which prompted me to think about methods of extending this. –  Rachel Aug 11 '11 at 12:34
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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