I have a task to give an example of a $K$-flow with a finite positive entropy. I am studying a book called "Ergodic Theory" by Kornfeld, Sinai, Fomin. I found a statement there that for every $K$-flow $T$ its entropy $h(T)>0$. But i can't come up with an example of a finite one. I know how to count entropy for Bernoulli K-automorphisms but i don't know what to do in a continious case. Thank you for any help
2026-04-01 16:04:46.1775059486
K-flow with a finite positive entropy
267 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in PROBABILITY-THEORY
- Is this a commonly known paradox?
- What's $P(A_1\cap A_2\cap A_3\cap A_4) $?
- Another application of the Central Limit Theorem
- proving Kochen-Stone lemma...
- Is there a contradiction in coin toss of expected / actual results?
- Sample each point with flipping coin, what is the average?
- Random variables coincide
- Reference request for a lemma on the expected value of Hermitian polynomials of Gaussian random variables.
- Determine the marginal distributions of $(T_1, T_2)$
- Convergence in distribution of a discretized random variable and generated sigma-algebras
Related Questions in DYNAMICAL-SYSTEMS
- Stability of system of parameters $\kappa, \lambda$ when there is a zero eigenvalue
- Stability of stationary point $O(0,0)$ when eigenvalues are zero
- Determine $ \ a_{\max} \ $ and $ \ a_{\min} \ $ so that the above difference equation is well-defined.
- Question on designing a state observer for discrete time system
- How to analyze a dynamical system when $t\to\infty?$
- The system $x' = h(y), \space y' = ay + g(x)$ has no periodic solutions
- Existence of unique limit cycle for $r'=r(μ-r^2), \space θ' = ρ(r^2)$
- Including a time delay term for a differential equation
- Doubts in proof of topologically transitive + dense periodic points = Devaney Chaotic
- Condition for symmetric part of $A$ for $\|x(t)\|$ monotonically decreasing ($\dot{x} = Ax(t)$)
Related Questions in ENTROPY
- Relation between Shanon entropy via relation of probabilities
- How to maximise the difference between entropy and expected length of an Huffman code?
- Appoximation of Multiplicity
- Two questions about limits (in an exercise about the axiomatic definition of entropy)
- Computing entropy from joint probability table
- Joint differential entropy of sum of random variables: $h(X,X+Y)=h(X,Y)$?
- What is the least prime which has 32 1-bits?
- Eggs, buildings and entropy
- Markov chains, entropy and mutual information
- Entropy and Maximum Mutual Information
Related Questions in ERGODIC-THEORY
- the mathematics of stirring
- Kac Lemma for Ergodic Stationary Process
- Ergodicity of a skew product
- Is every dynamical system approaching independence isomorphic to a Bernoulli system?
- Infinite dimensional analysis
- Poincaré's Recurrence Theorem
- Chain recurrent set is the set of fixed points?
- Is this chaotic map known?
- A complex root of unity and "dense" property of the its orbit on the unit circle
- Books on ergodic operators
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
The short answer is: Classical systems have finite entropy. Bernoulli systems have the $K$-property. Geodesic flow on a closed manifold with negative sectional curvature is a classical system that is Bernoulli (by a now classical result by Ornstein and Weiss (see their paper "Geodesic flows are Bernoullian")); hence it's an example of a $K$-flow with finite (and positive) entropy.
I'd like to offer a more constructive approach for a longer answer.
There are two approaches to the matter of finiteness of entropy: one from the point of view of abstract ergodic theory and the other from the point of view of ergodic theory of topological/smooth dynamical systems. There doesn't seem to be general principles that guarantee finiteness of entropy from the point of view of abstract ergodic theory, but under fairly general conditions finiteness of entropy is guaranteed.
All of the results I'm citing below are by now standard in (smooth) ergodic theory circles; their proofs can be found in the books of Walters, Petersen, Mañé, Brin-Stuck or Katok-Hasselblatt (or Cornfeld-Fomin-Sinai). Also Katok's survey "Fifty Years of Entropy in Dynamics: 1958-2007" (https://www.personal.psu.edu/axk29/pub/E50-aspublished.pdf) and Kawan's survey "Topological Entropy - A Survey" (https://www.christophkawan.de/img/Entropy_v30.pdf) are worth taking a look. I hope what I write below will be useful at least for navigation purposes.
Let us first consider the case of cascades (i.e. $\mathbb{Z}$-actions); we'll extrapolate to the case of flows (i.e. $\mathbb{R}$-actions) later, as the entropy of a flow is by definition the entropy of its time-$1$ map (as in Def.6 on p. 254 of Cornfeld-Fomin-Sinai).
First we have that topological entropy bounds any metric entropy from above:
Theorem (Goodwyn): Let $X$ be a compact metrizable space, $f:X\to X$ be continuous. Then for any $f$-invariant Borel probability measure $\mu$ on $X$, we have
$$0\leq\operatorname{ent}_\mu(f)\leq \operatorname{topent}(f)\leq\infty.$$
(Of course it is true that topological entropy is approximated my metric entropies arbitrarily well (which statement is the content of the Variational Principle, e.g. as discussed in Relation between topological entropy and metric entropy), but we don't need this to bound entropy from above.)
Thus to bound metric entropy from above it is sufficient to bound topological entropy from above. The most general such upper bound is this:
Theorem: Let $(X,d)$ be a compact metric space. If $f:X\to X$ is Lipschitz, then
$$0\leq\operatorname{topent}(f)\leq \underline{\operatorname{boxdim}}(X,d)\, \max\{0,\log(\operatorname{Lip}_d(f))\}\leq\infty,$$
where $\underline{\operatorname{boxdim}}(X,d)$ is the lower box dimension of $X$ and $\operatorname{Lip}_d(f)=\sup_{x\neq y}\dfrac{d(f(x),f(y))}{d(x,y)}$ is the Lipschitz constant of $f$.
(For a proof of this see p. 7-12 of https://www.math.stonybrook.edu/~jack/DYNOTES/dn7.pdf .)
In particular we have our first fairly general upper bound for entropy:
Corollary (Kushnirenko): Let $M$ is a compact Riemannian $C^1$ manifold. If $f: M\to M$ is $C^1$, then
$$0\leq\operatorname{topent}(f)\leq \dim(M)\, \max\{0,\log(\Vert Tf\Vert)\}<\infty,$$
where $\Vert Tf\Vert=\sup_{x\in M} |T_xf: T_x M\to T_{f(x)}M|$ is the global operator norm of the derivative of $f$.
Kushnirenko's bound is typically referred to by the motto "Classical systems have finite entropy".
Let us end this section with an explicit example:
Example: Let $d\in\mathbb{Z}_{\geq1}$, and take $f: \mathbb{T}^d\to \mathbb{T}^d$ to be a surjective topological group homomorphism of the $d$-torus. In an earlier answer (https://math.stackexchange.com/a/4320757/169085) I've established that $f$ preserves the Haar probability measure on $\mathbb{T}^d$ and that $f$ is represented by a $d\times d$ matrix $A$ with integer entries. If $\mu$ is an anonymous $f$-invariant Borel probability measure on $\mathbb{T}^d$, then
$$0\leq \operatorname{ent}_\mu(f)\leq \operatorname{topent}(f)=\operatorname{ent}_{\operatorname{haar}}(f)=\sum_{\substack{\lambda\in\operatorname{Spec_\mathbb{C}(A)}\\|\lambda|>1}}\log(\lambda)<\infty.$$
Note that for $d=1$ taking the doubling map on the circle recovers $\log(2)$ as the upper bound, which is, as expected, the metric entropy of shift on the sequence space with two symbols (with respect to the product measure).
Next, let us relate flows to cascades. According to p.254 of Cornfeld-Fomin-Sinai, if $\phi_\bullet:\mathbb{R}\to \operatorname{Aut}(X,\mu)$ is a measurable flow by bimeasurable measure preserving automorphisms of a standard probability space (the measurability of the flow refers to the measurability of the map $\mathbb{R}\times X\to X, (t,x)\mapsto \phi_t(x)$), then its entropy is defined as the entropy of the time-$1$ map of $\phi_\bullet$, i.e.,
$$\operatorname{ent}_\mu(\phi_\bullet):= \operatorname{ent}_\mu(\phi_1).$$
The reason behind this definition is that the entropy of the time-$t$ map of $\phi_\bullet$ relates nicely to the entropy of the time-$1$ map (Theorem 3 on the next page of CFS):
Theorem (Abramov): Let $(X,\mu)$ be a standard probability space, $\phi_\bullet:\mathbb{R}\to \operatorname{Aut}(X,\mu)$ be a measurable measure-preserving flow. Then
$$\forall t\in\mathbb{R}: \operatorname{ent}_\mu(\phi_t)=|t|\, \operatorname{ent}_\mu(\phi_1).$$
(In fact there is also a first-principles reason, apparent in the topological setting, as to why the entropy of a flow ought to be defined as the entropy of its time-$1$ map.)
Finally recall that the suspension construction (= "special flows" in the language of CFS) allows one to start with a cascade and construct a flow from it. More specifically, let $(X,\mu)$ be a standard probability space, $f:(X,\mu)\to (X,\mu)$ be a measure theoretical automorphism, $\alpha:X\to \mathbb{R}_{>0}$ be a measurable function with $\mathbb{E}_\mu(\alpha)=1$. Then $\alpha$ generates a (real-valued additive) measurable cocycle $A$ over $f$ defined by
$$A:\mathbb{Z}\times X\to \mathbb{R},\quad A(1,x)=\alpha(x),\quad A(n+m,x)=A(n,f^m(x))+A(m,x).$$
Explicitly, this last condition means that for $n\in\mathbb{Z}_{\geq1}$:
\begin{align*} A(n,x)&=\alpha\circ f^{n-1}(x)+\alpha\circ f^{n-2}(x)+\cdots+\alpha\circ f(x)+\alpha(x)\\ A(-n,x)&=-\alpha\circ f^{-n}(x)-\alpha\circ f^{-n+1}(x)-\cdots-\alpha\circ f^{-2}(x)-\alpha\circ f^{-1}(x). \end{align*}
Using $A$ we have a diagonal cascade on $\mathbb{R}\times X$ generated by $^{A}f:(t,x)\mapsto (t-\alpha(x),f(x))$ (The time-$n$ map of this cascade is $\left( ^{A}f\right)^n:(t,x)\mapsto (t-A(n,x),f^n(x))$.). Quotienting out the orbits we get the suspension space $\mathbb{R}\otimes_{f,A} X$, which is a standard probability space when endowed with the measure $\operatorname{leb}\otimes_{f,A}\,\mu$. (A straightforward way of seeing how to integrate w/r/t this measure is to note that the hypograph (or more accurately "sinistergraph", based on my conventions) $\{(t,x)\in\mathbb{R}\times X\,|\, 0\leq t\leq\alpha(x)\}$ of $\alpha$ is a fundamental domain for the canonical projection $\mathbb{R}\times X\to \mathbb{R}\otimes_{f,A} X$).
The left addition flow $l_s:(t,x)\mapsto (s+t,x)$ on $\mathbb{R}\times X$ commutes with the canonical projection, hence descends to a measurable measure-preserving flow $\hbar^{f,A}_\bullet$ on the suspension space $(\mathbb{R}\otimes_{f,A}X,\operatorname{leb}\otimes_{f,A}\,\mu)$. The flow $\hbar^{f,A}_\bullet$ is called the suspension (or special flow made out) of the automorphism $f$ and cocycle $A$.
(In CFS as well as other classical ergodic theory books the original space is typically considered to be the first (hence horizontal) component, but in more general settings it seems to me that thinking of the original space as the second (hence vertical) component is more beneficial; hence the discrepancy between my notation and what's written in CFS. In particular "$\hbar$" denotes a horizontal flow here.)
Let us suppress $A$ if it is generated by $\alpha:x\mapsto 1$. Note that in the case of $\alpha=1$, if $n$ is an integer, then $\hbar^f_n[0,x]=[n+0,x]=[0+n,x]=[0,f^{-n}(x)]$, thus the subset $X_0=\{[0,x]\,|\, x\in X\}$ of the suspension space is invariant under the time-$1$ map $\hbar^f_1$ of the suspension flow, and the systems $f:(X,\mu) \to (X,\mu)$ and $\hbar^f_1:(X_0,\mu_0)\to (X_0,\mu_0)$ are measure theoretically isomorphic. Here $\mu_0$ is the conditional measure of $\operatorname{leb}\otimes_{f,A}\,\mu$ along the projection $\mathbb{R}\otimes_{f,A}X\to \mathbb{T}$ to the first coordinate, supported on $X_0$. Explicitly, this means that $\mu_0=\delta_0\times \mu$.
(In the general $\alpha$ case there is a similar statement that I'll leave to you to formulate.)
To sum up, the suspension construction not only produces a flow out of a cascade; we also have automatically that the time-$1$ map of the suspension flow is conjugate to the original automorphism (As discussed in CFS, a theorem by Ambrose and Kakutani establishes that all measurable, measure preserving flows (with no fixed points) is in fact the suspension flow of an automorphism and a cocycle, but we won't need this to construct examples.). Since metric entropy is an invariant of conjugacy, we have the following:
Corollary (Abramov): Let $(X,\mu)$ be a standard probability space, $f:(X,\mu)\to (X,\mu)$ be an automorphism. Then
$$\forall t\in\mathbb{R}: \operatorname{ent}_{\operatorname{leb}\otimes_f\mu}(\hbar^f_t)=|t|\, \operatorname{ent}_\mu(f).$$
In particular, a suspension flow over an automorphism $f$ has finite positive entropy if and only if the automorphism $f$ has finite positive entropy.
(Actually, originally the Abramov Theorem above was the corollary of the Abramov Corollary; I'm following CFS's order here. Accordingly, the Abramov Corollary is true for an arbitrary cocycle $A$.)
Finally let us recall the definition of the $K$-property for measurable cascades and flows. Note that heuristically the $K$-property captures the Kolmogorov zero-one law from probability theory.
Definition: Let $(X,\mathcal{B}(X),\mu)$ be a standard probability space, $f:(X,\mathcal{B}(X),\mu)\to (X,\mathcal{B}(X),\mu)$ be a measure theoretical automorphism. Then $f$ is said to have the $K$-property if there is a sub-$\sigma$-algebra $\mathcal{K}$ of $\mathcal{B}(X)$ such that
Definition: Let $(X,\mathcal{B}(X),\mu)$ be a standard probability space, $\phi_\bullet:\mathbb{R}\to\operatorname{Aut}(X,\mathcal{B}(X),\mu)$ be a measurable measure-preserving flow. Then $\phi_\bullet$ is said to have the $K$-property if there is a sub-$\sigma$-algebra $\mathcal{K}$ of $\mathcal{B}(X)$ such that
The sentence right after this definition in CFS (p. 280) together with Theorem 2 in CFS (p. 288) relates the $K$-property for a flow and the $K$-property for its time-$t$ maps:
Theorem: Let $(X,\mathcal{B}(X),\mu)$ be a standard probability space, $\phi_\bullet:\mathbb{R}\to\operatorname{Aut}(X,\mathcal{B}(X),\mu)$ be a measurable measure-preserving flow. Then the following are equivalent:
[This is wrong; see the discussion at https://mathoverflow.net/q/412526/66883. More precisely, it is not true that the suspension of a $K$-automorphism with a constant cocycle is a $K$-flow. I will correct this part. I apologize for the mistake.]
Assembling everything, we have what we need: If $f:(X,\mu)\to (X,\mu)$ is a measure theoretical automorphism that has the $K$-property, and if $\operatorname{ent}_\mu(f)<\infty$, then the suspension flow $\hbar^f_\bullet:\mathbb{R}\to \operatorname{Aut}(\mathbb{R}\otimes_f X, \operatorname{leb}\otimes_f \mu)$ is a measurable measure-preserving flow that has the $K$-property whose metric entropy is finite.
(As you have mentioned $K$-property guarantees positivity of entropy.)
You seem to have no issues with automorphisms with $K$-property, so I'm leaving it to you to generate examples.
As a final note, observe that the first example I've mentioned is not covered by the long answer I gave. Indeed, giving examples of flows with $K$-property is one thing, verifying whether a flow has the $K$-property is another, especially if the flow is coming from differential geometry.
As a further exercise, it might be interesting to think about flows that have the $K$-property but are not Bernoulli.