1
$\begingroup$

I am currently reading this paper https://blms.oxfordjournals.org/content/35/5/624.abstract and I have some difficulties to understand two steps of the proof of the main theorem.

Let $G$ be a non discrete topological group.

First of all, the authors indicate by $w(X_1,...,X_n)$ a free word. They don't say what it means exactly but I suppose the correct definition is the following:

$\textbf {Definition}$ A free word $w(X_1,...,X_n)$ is a function $w:G^n\to G$ such that $w(X_1,...,X_n)=X_{i_1}^{a_1}...X_{i_k}^{a_k}$ where $k\ge 1$, $i_1,...,i_k\in \{1,...,n\}$ and $a_1,...,a_k$ are integers different from $0$.

Now define for every $n\ge 2$: $F_n=\{ (g_1,...,g_n) \in G^n: \{g_1,...,g_n\}$ freely generates a free subgroup of G}, $F_\infty=\{(g_i)_1^\infty \in G^\infty: \{g_i\}_1^\infty $freely generates a free subgroup of G }

$\textbf {Warning}$ The ranks of the free groups generated by the elements of $F_n$ and $F_\infty$ are respectively $\textbf {at most } n$ and $\textbf{at most } \infty$. About this see If I say $\{g_1,\dots,g_n\}$ freely generates a subgroup of $G$, does that mean the elements $g_i$ are all distinct?

Now for every word $w$ define $C(w)=\{(g_1,...,g_n)\in G^n: w(g_1,...,g_n)=1\}$ and for every $n$-uple$ K=(k_1,...,k_n) $, where $ k_i$ are naturals,define $C(w,K)=\{(g_i)_1^\infty \in G^\infty: w(g_{k_1},...,g_{k_n})=1 $and the $g_{k_j} $are all distinct}.

$\textbf {Problem 1} $Prove that $F_n=G^n\setminus\bigcup_w C(w)$

$\textbf {Problem 2}$ Prove that $F_\infty=G^\infty\setminus\bigcup_{w,K} C(w,K)$

I know that the idea is that if the word is $1$ then we can in some way deny the definition of free group but I need your help for the details.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If for example $\;g_1=g_2\;$ then the reduced word $\;g_1g_2^{-1}=1\;$ , which means the group fulfills a non-trivial relation on its generatos and it thus cannot be free on them. $\endgroup$ – DonAntonio Jul 19 '16 at 10:53
  • $\begingroup$ About your comment, please see the linked question. $\endgroup$ – Richard Jul 19 '16 at 12:17
  • $\begingroup$ Well, up to some agreement in the objections that were rised there, I'd say it still follows that we're assuming the elements $\;g_i\;$ to be different, otherwise things could be too heavy imo. $\endgroup$ – DonAntonio Jul 19 '16 at 12:20
  • $\begingroup$ Indeed, but I think the authors do not consider the $g_i$ distinct and so I need help exactly because the things are heavy. $\endgroup$ – Richard Jul 19 '16 at 12:23
  • $\begingroup$ The paper is 14 years old. Odds are at least one of the authors is still alive. Have you considered writing them/him? $\endgroup$ – DonAntonio Jul 19 '16 at 12:30
1
$\begingroup$

[Warning: I do not have access to the article itself and am basing everything below only on what you have written.]

First, a minor point: your definition of "free word" isn't quite right: you need to also require that $i_j\neq i_{j+1}$ for each $j$.

In context it seems clear that $F_n$ is meant to be defined as the set of tuples $(g_1,\dots,g_n)\in G^n$ such that $\{g_1,\dots,g_n\}$ freely generates a subgroup and the $g_i$ are all distinct (that is, in the language of my answer to the previous question, $(g_1,\dots,g_n)$ freely generates a subgroup). Indeed, with your interpretation the claim is not true: if for instance $g\in G$ generates a free subgroup then $(g,g)$ would be in $F_2$ by your interpretation, but it is in $C(w)$ where $w(X_1,X_2)=X_1X_2^{-1}$.

With the interpretation that the $g_i$ must all be distinct, the claim is easy to prove. Indeed, fix $(g_1,\dots,g_n)\in G^n$ and let $H$ be the free group on generators $x_1,\dots,x_n$. There is then a unique homomorphism $\varphi:H\to G$ that sends $x_i$ to $g_i$. Since $H$ is freely generated by the $x_i$, each free word on the $x_i$ is a non-identity element of $H$ (and conversely each non-identity element of $H$ can be represented uniquely as a free word on the $x_i$). Since $\varphi(w(x_1,\dots,x_n))=w(g_1,\dots,x_n)$, the set of non-identity elements of the kernel of $\varphi$ is in bijection with the set of $w$ such that $(g_1,\dots,g_n)\in C(w)$. But $(g_1,\dots,g_n)$ freely generates a subgroup iff $\varphi$ is injective (and hence an isomorphism between $H$ and the subgroup generated by the $g_i$). Thus $(g_1,\dots,g_n)$ freely generates a subgroup iff it is not in any $C(w)$.

For $F_\infty$, your interpretation does make the equation $F_\infty=G^\infty\setminus\bigcup_{w,K} C(w,K)$ true, since the definition of $C(w,K)$ only considers the case that the $g_{k_j}$ are all distinct. However, it seems rather strange to me that this would be intended. I would guess that the definition of $F_\infty$ is meant to require the $g_i$ to all be distinct, and that in defining $C(w,K)$ you should require the $k_j$ to be distinct rather than the $g_{k_j}$. With this interpretation, the proof of the second claim is nearly identical to the proof of the first claim: you now take $H$ to be free on $x_1,x_2,\dots$, and define $\varphi:H\to G$ sending $x_i$ to $g_i$. For any $(w,K)$ (with the $k_j$ all distinct), the element $w(x_{k_1},\dots,x_{k_n})\in H$ is not the identity (and conversely every non-identity element of $H$ has a unique representation of this form). So there is a nontrivial element of the kernel of $\varphi$ iff there is a $w$ and $K$ such that $(g_i)\in C(w,K)$.

Alternatively, it is plausible that actually your interpretation is the intended one for both the $F_n$ and for $F_\infty$, in which case the definition of $C(w)$ should be changed to require that for all $i$ such that $X_i$ appears in $w$, the $g_i$ are distinct. I can't say for sure without seeing the context in the article.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I really thank you for your help. I really need it. However I still have some doubts. 1) In order to have uniqueness of representation as free word,is my definition ok or should I add that $X_{i_j}\not=X_{i_{j+1}}$? 2) About the infinity case, if I consider the $g_i$ as not distinct, what is a counterexample? The $\infty$-uple $(g,g,....)$ does not work because of the definition of $C(w,K)$. Moreover note that we can have the situation where some $g_i$ are equal but at the same time the set of all the $g_i$ still generates a free subgroup of infinity rank. $\endgroup$ – Richard Jul 19 '16 at 21:56
  • $\begingroup$ Personally I prefer an edited answer instead of comments if it is possible. Thank you again $\endgroup$ – Richard Jul 19 '16 at 21:58
  • $\begingroup$ The context is about "almost freeness". They also extended a result by Dixon, who studied the finite case and actually he said explicitly that the rank of the elements of $F_n$ must be $n$. I copied the definitions from the article ( also C(w) and C(w,K)). So I'd say to use the interpretations that make the two claims true. We are ok for the finite case.For the infinity, so the intepretation is: the elements of $F_\infty$ generate a free subgroup of rank at most $\infty$, right? So in theory also finite rank can be obtained. I m sorry but I need to ask you how can I prove the second claim? $\endgroup$ – Richard Jul 20 '16 at 7:16
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ 5) That's correct, the equation $C(w,K)=\pi_K^{-1}[C(w)\cap G^{(n)}]$ is only true for the original definition of $C(w,K)$. Nevertheless, I still seriously doubt that this is what the authors really meant, since the corresponding definition of $F_\infty$ is quite unnatural and not analogous with the definition of $F_n$ that makes the first claim true. For what it's worth, while I can't access the paper in question, in the paper arxiv.org/pdf/1103.1099.pdf that appears to build on its results I can definitely say that my interpretation is the intended one. $\endgroup$ – Eric Wofsey Jul 20 '16 at 15:17
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If $X_1X_1^{-1}$ counts as a free word, then any tuple is in $C(X_1X_1^{-1})$, so $G^n\setminus\bigcup_w C(w)$ would be empty. My proof breaks down because you need to know that $w(x_1,\dots,x_n)\neq 1$ in $H$ for any $w$ in order to obtain a nontrivial element of the kernel of $\varphi$. $\endgroup$ – Eric Wofsey Jul 20 '16 at 22:20
0
$\begingroup$

To Eric Wofsey: this answer needs to me to see if I have understood everything of your ideas. Please tell me if there are some mistakes in proofs or definitions and feel free to edit my answer or to make corrections. I put some questions at the end. $\textbf{The first one is fundamental for me}$. After your answers and corrections I will mark your answer as the official one.

$\textbf{Def 1}$ A free word is a function $w:G^n\to G$ such that $w(X_1,...,X_n)=X_{i_1}^{a_1}...X_{i_k}^{a_k}$ with $k\ge 1, a_1,...,a_k$ are integers different from $0$, $i_1,...,i_k\in \{1,...,n\}$ and $i_j\not=i_{j+1}$ for every $j$

$\textbf{Def 2}$ For every $n\ge 2$ let $F_n=\{ (g_1,...,g_n) \in G^n: \{g_1,...,g_n\}$ freely generates a free subgroup of G and all the $g_i$ are distinct}

$\textbf{Def 3} F_\infty=\{(g_i)_1^\infty \in G^\infty: \{g_i\}_1^\infty $freely generates a free subgroup of G and all the $g_i$ are distinct}

$\textbf{Def 4}$ For every free word $w$ define $C(w)=\{(g_1,...,g_n)\in G^n: w(g_1,...,g_n)=1\}$

$\textbf{Def 5}$ For every $n$-uple $K=(k_1,...,k_n) $, where $k_i$ are strictly positive integers and $\textbf{all distinct},$ define $C(w,K)=\{(g_i)_1^\infty \in G^\infty: w(g_{k_1},...,g_{k_n})=1 $}.

$\textbf{Def 6}$ For every $n$-uple$ K=(k_1,...,k_n) $ with the $k_j$ $\textbf{all distinct}$, define $\pi_K(g_1,g_2,...)=(g_{k_1},...,g_{k_n})$

$\textbf {Prop 1}$ $F_n=G^n\setminus\bigcup_w C(w)$

Proof. Fix $(g_1,...,g_n)\in G^n$. Let $H$ be the free group of rank $n$ and generators $x_1,...,x_n$. Then there exists a unique isomorphism $f:H\to G $ such that it send every $x_i$ in $g_i$.

$\textbf{Notation}$ I will indicate by $w'$ the free words defined on $H^n$ and by $w$ the "same" words defined on $G^n$ ( I mean replacin $h_i$ by $g_i$). I will indicate by $T*$ the set $T$ minus the identity.

By definition of free group, we know that for every element in $H*$ there exists a unique free word $w'_h$ such that $w'_h(x_1,...,x_n)=h$. Note also that $f(h)=f(w'_h(x_1,...,.x_n))=w_h(g_1,...,g_n)$.

$\textbf{Fact 1}$ $\alpha:ker f*\to \{w':(g_1,...,g_n)\in C(w)\}=M$ such that $\alpha(t)=w'_t$ is a bijection

It is easy to prove that $\alpha$ is well defined, namely that $\alpha(t)\in M$

Surjectivity: Let $w'\in M$. We have $w(g_1,...,g_n)=1$. Let $t=w'(x_1,...,x_n)$. By definition of free word and free group, we have that $w'(x_1,...,x_n)\not=1$ and $f(w'(x_1,...,x_n))=w(g_1,...,g_n)=1$, namely $t\in ker f*$. By construction and uniqueness we have $\alpha(t)=\alpha(w'(x_1,...,x_n))=w'.$

Injectivity: $\alpha(t_1)=\alpha(t_2)$ iff $w'_{t_1}=w'_{t_2}$ iff $t_1=t_2$ by the uniqueness of representation of the $t_i$ as free words.

$\textbf{Fact 2}$ $(g_1,...,g_n)\in F_n$ iff $f$ is injective

Indeed: if $(g_1,...,g_n)\in F_n$ then the $g_i$ are all distinct and for every $w$ we have $w(g_1,...,g_n)\not =1$. Hence $ ker f*=\{h\in H*:f(h)=1\}=\{h\in H*: f(w'_h(x_1,...,x_n))=1\}=\{h\in H*:w_h(g_1,...,g_n)=1\}=\emptyset$.

On the other hand, if $f$ is injective, then the $g_i$ are all distinct and $H$ is isomorphic to $Im f$. So $Im f$ is the free group of rank $n$. Moreover generators are sent to generators, so the $g_1$ generate $Im f$. Note that $Im f*=\{w_h(g_1,...,g_n):h=w'_h(x_1,...,x_n)\in H*\}$ and if $h_1\not=h_2$ then $w_{h_1}(g_1,...,g_n)\not=w_{h_2}(g_1,...,g_n)$ since $f$ is injective. So by definition of free group we have that $Im f$ is free on the $g_1$.

Now $(g_1,...,g_n)\in F_n$ iff $f$ is injective iff $ker f *=\emptyset=M$ iff $(g_1,...,g_n)$ is not in $C(w)$ for every free word $w$, namely the thesis.

$\textbf {Prop 2}$ $F_\infty=G^\infty\setminus\bigcup_{w,K}C(w,K)$

Proof. Fix $(g_i)\in G^\infty$. Let $H$ be the free group of rank $|\mathbb N|$ on the generators $x_1,x_2,...$. Then there exists a unique homomorphism $f:H\to G$ such that $f(x_i)=g_i$. Moreover we know that for every $h\in H*$ there exists a unique $(w_h,K_h)$ with the $k_j$ all distinct such that $w'_h(x_{k_1},...,x_{k_n})=h$.

$\textbf {Notation}$ Same of the previous proposition and $(g_i)_1^\infty=(g_i)$.

$\textbf {Fact 3}$ $\alpha:ker f*\to \{(w',K):(g_i)\in C(w,K)\}=N$ such that $t\mapsto (w'_t,K_t)$ is a bijection.

It is easy to prove that $\alpha$ is well defined, namely that $\alpha(t)\in N$

Surjectivity: Let $(w',K)\in N$. Now $w(g_{k_1},...,g_{k_n})=1$ with the $k_j$ distinct. Let $t=w'(x_{k_1},...,x_{k_n})$. We have $t\not=1$ and $f(t)=w(g_{k_1},...,g_{k_n})=1$, namely $t\in ker f*$ and clearly $\alpha(t)=(w',K)$.

Injectivity: $\alpha(t_1)=\alpha(t_2)$ iff $(w'_{t_1},K_{t_1})=(w'_{t_2},K_{t_2})$ iff $K_{t_1}=K_{t_2}$ and $w'_{t_1}=w'_{t_2}$. By the uniqueness of the couples $(w'_{t_i}, K_{t_i})$ we have $t_1=t_2$.

$\textbf {Fact 4}$ $(g_i)\in F_\infty$ iff $f$ is injective

Indeed: if $(g_i)\in F_\infty$ then all the $g_i$ are distinct and for every $(w,K)$ with the $k_j$ all distinct we have $w(g_{k_1},...,g_{k_n})\not =1$. So $ker f*=\{h=w'_h(x_{k_1},...,x_{k_n})\in H*:f(h)=w_h(g_{k_1},...,g_{k_n})=1$ and all the $k_j$ are distinct}$=\emptyset$, which implies $f$ is injective.

On the other hand, if $f$ is injective then all the $g_i$ are distinct and $H$ is isomorphic to $Im f$, so $Im f$ is the free group of rank $|\mathbb N|$. It is also generated by the $g_i$ and note that $Im f*=\{w_h(g_{k_1},...,g_{k_n}):h=w'_h(x_{k_1},...,x_{k_n})\in H*$ with all the $k_j$ distinct} and that if $h_1\not=h_2$ then $w_{h_1}(g_{s_1},...,g_{s_n})\not=w_{h_2}(g_{r_1},...,g_{r_n})$, since $f$ is injective (and with the $s_i$ distinct and $r_j$ distinct). So by definition of free group, we deduce that $Im f$ is free on the $g_i$.

Finally we have that $(g_i)\in F_\infty$ iff $f$ is injective iff $ker f*=\emptyset=N$ iff $(g_i)$ is not in $C(w,K)$ for every free word $w$ and every $K$ with the $k_j$ all distinct.

$\textbf {Prop 3}$ $ C(w,K)=\pi_K^{-1}(C(w))$.

Proof. Consider $(g_i)\in C(w,K)$. Then there exists (w,K) with the $k_j$ distinct such that $w(g_{k_1},...,g_{k_n})=1$. On the other hand $\pi_K(g_i)=(g_{k_1},...,g_{k_n})$ and so we have an inclusion. For the other one, note that if $(g_i)\in \pi_K^{-1}(C(w))$ then $\pi_K(g_i)=(g_{k_1},...,g_{k_n})\in C(w)$ and so $w(g_{k_1},...,g_{k_n})=1$ and we have the thesis since the $k_j$ are distinct.

$\textbf{Questions}$ 1) If I consider the definition of $F_\infty$ of this answer but the original definition of C(w,K), namely all the $g_{k_i}$ are distinct which part of my proof breaks down? Note that $g_{k_i}$ distinct implies $k_i$ distinct. Do you have a counterexample about this? 2) If I want $\pi_K$ to be an open function, is it important to require in its definition that all the $k_j$ are distinct?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ @Eric wofsey please see this answer. Thank you very much $\endgroup$ – Richard Jul 23 '16 at 12:11
  • $\begingroup$ 1) Fact 3 can fail. Indeed, $\alpha(t)$ need not even be an element of $N$ for every $t\in\ker(f*)$. If $g_i=g_j$, then $t=x_ix_j^{-1}$ is in $\ker(f*)$ but $\alpha(t)$ is not in $N$. 2) Yes. If $k_i=k_j$, then the image of $\pi_K$ is contained in the set of points whose $i$th coordinate equals their $j$th coordinate, which has empty interior if $G$ has no isolated points. $\endgroup$ – Eric Wofsey Jul 23 '16 at 14:47
  • $\begingroup$ 1)Why not? Consider $K=(i,j)$ and note that $w'_t=w_t=X_iX_j^{-1}$. We have that $w_t(g_j,g_i)=1$, namely $(w'_t,K)\in N$. 2) In your comments you said that with the original definition prop 3 fails. Were you wrong? 3) do you agree with the proofs and definitions of my answer? $\endgroup$ – Richard Jul 23 '16 at 15:07
  • $\begingroup$ 1) By definition of $C(w,K)$, $(g_i)$ cannot be in $C(w,K)$ if $g_i=g_j$. 2) Prop 3 does indeed fail with the orignal definition. 3) They look correct, though I may have overlooked a small detail or two. $\endgroup$ – Eric Wofsey Jul 23 '16 at 15:17
  • $\begingroup$ 1)sorry why not? You just need that in K the indices are distinct and we actually have $i\not =j$. Moreover the evaluation through $w$ is $1$. Could you give me more details please? 2) which part of the prop 3 fails and why? $\endgroup$ – Richard Jul 23 '16 at 15:26

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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