0
$\begingroup$

Recently, some convergence problems I have been considering led me to look at additive maps of the torus (which for me is the additive group $T := \mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Z}$).

A map $f:\ T \to T$ is additive if $f(\alpha + \beta) = f(\alpha) + f(\beta)$. Other names that seem to make sense would be $\mathbb{Z}$-linear map or group homomorphism, depending on how one wants to view things. The simplest examples are of course the linear maps $f(\alpha) = c \alpha$, $c \in \mathbb{Z}$.

If we were talking about additive maps $f:\ \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$, then the situation is fairly well understood. One can show that there exists a basis of $\mathbb{R}$ as a $\mathbb{Q}$-linear space. Let $\{\alpha\}_{i \in I}$ be such a basis, and choose arbitrary reals $\{\beta\}_{i \in I}$ : then there is a unique additive map $f$ such that $f(\alpha_i ) = \beta_i$ (more explicitly, $f(\sum_{i \in I} q_i \alpha_i) = \sum_{i \in I} q_i \beta_i$, where $q_i \in \mathbb{Q}$ and $q_i = 0$ except finitely many $i$). Moreover, any additive map arises in this way, so we have a complete characterisation (modulo the fact that a $\mathbb{Q}$-linear basis of $\mathbb{R}$ is not something easy to come by).

If we consider an additive map $f:\ \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$ such that $f(1) \in \mathbb{Z}$, then $f$ factors through the quotient with $\mathbb{Z}$, giving rise to the additive map $[f] :\ T \to T$ given by $[f]([\alpha]) = [f(\alpha)]$. Hence, there exists a fair number of additive maps of the torus.

Question: Does every additive map $T \to T$ arise in the way just described? Is there a general description of additive maps $T \to T$, like the one for $\mathbb{R}$? [Affirmative answer to the second question probably resolves both].

Note: if $f:\ T \to T$ is additive, and $\{\alpha\}_{i \in I}$ is a basis of $\mathbb{R}$ over $\mathbb{Q}$ as above, then clearly $f(\sum_i a_i \alpha_i) = \sum_i a_i f(\alpha_i)$ as long as $a_i$ are integers. However, it is not the case that one can select $\alpha_i$ such that each $\beta \in T$ is a unique integral combination of $\alpha_i$ (in other words, $T$ is not a free group). It is true that $f(\sum_i q_i \alpha_i) = \sum_i q_i f(\alpha_i) + Q$ with $q_i \in \mathbb{Q}$ and some $Q \in \mathbb{Q}$ dependent on $q_i$ (since we have the additional rational term anyway, we may understand rational multiplication $q_i f(\alpha_i)$ in any way we like.).

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

If we have $A<T$ and an additive map $f\colon A\to T$, then the set of additive maps $g\colon G\to T$ with $A\le G$ and $g|_A=f$ has a maximal element $m\colon M\to T$ by Zorn's lemma. Assume there exists $a\in T\setminus M$. The kernel of $\mathbb Z\to T/M$, $k\mapsto ka+M$ has the form $n\mathbb Z$. If $n>0$, select $b\in T$ with $nb=m(na)$. Then $h\colon\langle a\rangle + M\to T$, $ka+x\mapsto kb+m(x)$ defines an additive map contradicting maximality. If $n=0$, we get the same contradiction with $na+x\mapsto m(x)$. Therefore, $M=T$, i.e. any additive map on a subgroup can be extended to all of $T$.

Now for $n\in\mathbb N_0$ let $A_n$ be the kernel of $T\to T$, $x\mapsto 2^nx$. Given an additive map $f_{n-1}\colon A_{n-1}\to T$, we find $f_{n}\colon A_{n}\to T$ with $f_{n}|_{A_{n-1}}=f_{n-1}$ and $f_{n}(2^{-n}+\mathbb Z)\in[\frac14,\frac34]+\mathbb Z$ because we have the choice among two values that differ by $\frac12$. In the limit be get an additive map $ f\colon \bigcup A_n\to T$ and from that an extension to $T\to T$, that does not come from an additive map $F\colon\mathbb R\to\mathbb R$ because there would have to be arbitrarily small rational numbers $x=2^{-n}$ with $|F(x)|\ge\frac14$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I don't understand this argument. The definition of $f_n$ given here does not seem to necessarily satisfy the requirement that its restriction to $A_{n-1}$ is equal to $f_{n-1}$. But it is true that, for each $f_{n-1}$ there are two possible $f_n$, so is the point rather that there are uncountably many possible $f$ using this construction, but only countably many values of $f(1)$ in a possible lift to ${\mathbb R}$? $\endgroup$ – Derek Holt May 6 '13 at 10:48

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.