arXiv:1607.04915v2 [] 27 Apr 2017

THOMPSON’S GROUP F IS NOT STRONGLY
AMENABLE
YAIR HARTMAN, KATE JUSCHENKO, OMER TAMUZ,
AND POOYA VAHIDI FERDOWSI
Abstract. We show that Thompson’s group F has a topological
action on a compact metric space that is proximal and has no fixed
points.

1. Introduction
In his book “Proximal Flows” [9, Section II.3, p. 19] Glasner defines
the notion of a strongly amenable group: A group is strongly amenable
if each of its proximal actions on a compact space has a fixed point.
A continuous action G y X of a topological group on a compact
Hausdorff space is proximal if for every x, y ∈ X there exists a net
{gn } of elements of G such that limn gn x = limn gn y.
Glasner shows that virtually nilpotent groups are strongly amenable
and that non-amenable groups are not strongly amenable. He also
gives examples of amenable — in fact, solvable — groups that are not
strongly amenable. Glasner and Weiss [7] construct proximal minimal
actions of the group of permutations of the integers, and Glasner constructs proximal flows of Lie groups [8]. To the best of our knowledge
there are no other such examples known. Furthermore, there are no
other known examples of minimal proximal actions that are not also
strongly proximal. An action G y X is strongly proximal if the orbit closure of every Borel probability measure on G contains a point
mass measure. This notion, as well as that of the related Furstenberg
boundary [4–6], have been the object of a much larger research effort, in
particular because a group is amenable if and only if all of its strongly
proximal actions on compact spaces have fixed points.
Richard Thompson’s group F has been alternatively “proved” to
be amenable and non-amenable (see, e.g., [2]), and the question of its
amenability is currently unresolved. In this paper we pursue the less
ambitious goal of showing that is it not strongly amenable, and do
so by directly constructing a proximal action that has no fixed points.
Date: April 28, 2017.
1

2

Y. HARTMAN, K. JUSCHENKO, O. TAMUZ, AND P. VAHIDI FERDOWSI

This action does admit an invariant measure, and thus does not provide
any information about the amenability of F . It is a new example of a
proximal action which is not strongly proximal.
The authors would like to thank Eli Glasner and Benjamin Weiss for
enlightening and encouraging conversations.
2. Proofs
Let F denote Thompson’s group F . In the representation of F as a
group of piecewise linear transformations of R (see, e.g., [10, Section
2.C]), it is generated by a and b which are given by
a(x) = x − 1


x≤0
x
b(x) = x/2
0≤x≤2

x − 1 2 ≤ x.
The set of dyadic rationals Γ = Z[ 21 ] is the orbit of 0. The Schreier
graph of the action G y Γ with respect to the generating set {a, b}
is shown in Figure 1 (see [10, Section 5.A, Figure 6]). The solid lines
denote the a action and the dotted lines denote the b action; self-loops
(i.e., points stabilized by a generator) are omitted. This graph consists
of a tree-like structure (the blue and white nodes) with infinite chains
attached to each node (the red nodes).
Equipped with the product topology, {−1, 1}Γ is a compact space
on which F acts continuously by shifts:
(2.1)

[f x](γ) = x(f −1 γ).

Proposition 2.1. Let c−1 , c+1 ∈ {−1, 1}Γ be the constant functions.
Then for any x ∈ {−1, 1}Γ it holds that at least one of c−1 , c+1 is in
the orbit closure F x.
Proof. It is known that the action F y Γ is highly-transitive (Lemma
4.2 in [3]), i.e. for every finite V, W ⊂ Γ of the same size there exists
a f ∈ F such that f (V ) = W . Let x ∈ {−1, 1}Γ . There is at least
one of -1 and 1, say α, for which we have infinitely many γ ∈ Γ with
x(γ) = α. Given a finite W ⊂ Γ choose a V ⊂ Γ of the same size and
such that x(γ) = α for all γ ∈ V . Then there is some f ∈ F with
f (V ) = W , and so f x takes the value α on W . Since W is arbitrary
we have that cα is in the orbit closure of x.


3
−1
1
2

5
2

0

− 12

3
2
1
2

11
4

− 14

7
4

9
4

1
4

3
4

23
8

15
8

− 18
7
8

− 43

5
4

19
8

11
8

− 85
3
8

21
8

13
8

− 83
5
8

17
8

9
8

− 78
1
8

Figure 1. The action of F on Γ.
Given x1 , x2 ∈ {−1, 1}Γ , let d be their pointwise product, given by
d(γ) = x1 (γ) · x2 (γ). By Proposition 2.1 there exists a sequence {fn } of
elements in F such that either limn fn d = c+1 or limn fn d = c−1 . In the
first case limn fn x1 = limn fn x2 , while in the second case limn fn x1 =
− limn fn x2 , and so this action resembles a proximal action. In fact, by
identifying each x ∈ {−1, 1}Γ with −x one attains a proximal action,
and indeed we do this below. However, this action has a fixed point —
the constant functions — and therefore does not suffice to prove our
result. We spend the remainder of this paper in deriving a new action
from this one. The new action retains proximality but does not have
fixed points.
Consider the path (1/2 , 1/4 , 1/8 , . . . , 1/2n , . . .) in the Schreier graph of
Γ (Figure 1); it starts in the top blue node and follows the dotted
edges through the blue nodes on the rightmost branch of the tree. The
pointed Gromov-Hausdorff limit of this sequence of rooted graphs1 is
given in Figure 2, and hence is also a Schreier graph of some transitive
F -action F y F/K. In terms of the topology on the space SubF ⊂
1The

limit of a sequence of rooted graphs (Gn , vn ) is a rooted graph (G, v) if
each ball of radius r around vn in Gn is, for n large enough, isomorphic to the ball
of radius r around v in G (see, e.g., [1, p. 1460]).

4

Y. HARTMAN, K. JUSCHENKO, O. TAMUZ, AND P. VAHIDI FERDOWSI

{0, 1}F of the subgroups of F , the subgroup K is the limit of the
subgroups Kn , where Kn is the stabilizer of 1/2n . It is easy to verify
that K is the subgroup of F consisting of the transformations that
stabilize 0 and have right derivative 1 at 0 (although this fact will not
be important). Let Λ = F/K.

Figure 2. The action of F on Λ.
We can naturally identify with Z the chain black nodes at the top
of Λ (see Figure 2). Let Λ0 be the subgraph of Λ in which the dotted
edges connecting the black nodes have been removed. Given a black
node n ∈ Z, denote by Tn the connected component of n in Λ0 ; this
includes the black node n, the chain that can be reached from it using
solid edges, and the entire tree that hangs from it. Each graph Tn is
isomorphic to the Schreier graph of Γ, and so the graph Λ is a covering
graph of Γ (in the category of Schreier graphs). Let
Ψ: Λ → Γ
be the covering map. That is, Ψ is a graph isomorphism when restricted
to each Tn , with the black nodes in Λ mapped to the black node 0 ∈ Γ.
Using the map Ψ we give names to the nodes in Λ. Denote the nodes
in T0 as {(0, γ) : γ ∈ Γ} so that Ψ(0, γ) = γ. Likewise, in each Tn
denote by (n, γ) the unique node in Tn that Ψ maps to γ. Hence we
identify Λ with
Z × Γ = {(n, γ) : n ∈ Z, γ ∈ Γ}
and the F -action is given by
(2.2)
(2.3)

a(n, γ) = (n, aγ)
(
(n, bγ)
if γ =
6 0
b(n, γ) =
(n + 1, 0) if γ = 0

5

Equip {−1, 1}Λ with the product topology to get a compact space.
As usual, the F -action on Λ (given explicitly in 2.2 and 2.3) defines a
continuous action on {−1, 1}Λ .
Consider π : {−1, 1}Γ → {−1, 1}Λ , given by π(x)(n, γ) = (−1)n x(γ).
Let Y = π({−1, 1}Γ ) ⊆ {−1, 1}Λ .
Claim 2.2. Y is compact and F -invariant.
Proof. π is injective and continuous, so Y = π({−1, 1}Γ ) ⊆ {−1, 1}Λ is
compact and isomorphic to {−1, 1}Γ . Moreover, Y is invariant to the
±1
±1
±1
±
action of
( F , because a π(x) = π(a x) and b π(x) = π(b x̄) where
x(γ)
if γ 6= 0
x̄(γ) =
.

−x(γ) if γ = 0
The last F -space we define is Z, the set of pairs of mirror image
configurations in Y :
(2.4)

Z = {{y, −y} : y ∈ Y } .

Now it is clear that equipped with the quotient topology, Z is a
compact and Hausdorff F -space. Furthermore, we now observe that Z
admits an invariant measure. Consider the i.i.d. Bernoulli 1/2 measure
on {−1, 1}Γ , i.e. the unique Borel measure on {−1, 1}Γ , for which

x(γ) + 1
2
are independent Bernoulli 1/2 random variables for all γ ∈ Γ. Clearly,
it is an invariant measure and hence it is pushed forward to an invariant
measure on Y , and then on Z. In particular, this shows that Z is not
strongly proximal.
Xγ : {−1, 1}Γ → {0, 1},

x 7→

Claim 2.3. The action F y Z does not have any fixed points.
Proof. Pick ŷ = {y, −y} ∈ Z. We have [by](0, −1) = y(0, −1) =
6
−y(0, −1), so by 6= −y. Similarly, [by](0, 0) = y(−1, 0) = −y(0, 0) =
6
y(0, 0), and so by 6= y. Hence bŷ 6= ŷ.

Proposition 2.4. The action F y Z is proximal.
Proof. Let yˆ1 = {y1 , −y1 } and yˆ2 = {y2 , −y2 } be two points in Z, and
let yi = π(xi ).
Let x1 · x2 denote the pointwise product of x1 and x2 . Now by
Proposition 2.1 there is a sequence of elements {fn }n in F such that
{fn (x1 ·x2 )}n tends to either c−1 or c+1 in {−1, 1}Γ . Since Y is compact,
we may assume that {fn y1 }n and {fn y2 }n have limits, by descending
to a subsequence if necessary.

6

Y. HARTMAN, K. JUSCHENKO, O. TAMUZ, AND P. VAHIDI FERDOWSI

It is straightforward to check that fn y1 · fn y2 = fn π(x1 ) · fn π(x2 ) =
π(fn x1 ) · π(fn x2 ). So:
[fn y1 · fn y2 ](n, γ) = [π(fn x1 ) · π(fn x2 )](n, γ)

= (−1)2n [fn x1 ](γ) [fn x2 ](γ)
= [fn x1 · fn x2 ](γ) = [fn (x1 · x2 )](γ)

So limn fn y1 = ± limn fn y2 , which implies limn fn yˆ1 = limn fn yˆ2 .



Theorem 2.5. Thompson’s group F is not strongly amenable.
Proof. Since the space Z we constructed above is proximal (Proposition 2.4), and has no fixed points (Claim 2.3), we conclude that F has a
proximal action with no fixed points, so F is not strongly amenable. 
References
[1] David Aldous and Russell Lyons, Processes on unimodular random networks,
Electronic Journal of Probability 12 (2007), no. 54, 1454–1508. MR2354165
(2008m:60012)
[2] JW Cannon and WJ Floyd, What is... Thompson’s group?, Notices of the AMS
58 (2011), no. 8, 1112–1113.
[3] JW Cannon, WJ Floyd, and WR Parry, Notes on Richard Thompson’s groups
F and T, L’Enseignement Mathématique. Zbl 42 (1996), no. 3, 215–256.
[4] Alex Furman, On minimal, strongly proximal actions of locally compact groups,
Israel Journal of Mathematics 136 (2003), no. 1, 173–187.
[5] Harry Furstenberg, A poisson formula for semi-simple Lie groups, Annals of
Mathematics (1963), 335–386.
[6]
, Boundary theory and stochastic processes on homogeneous spaces, Harmonic analysis on homogeneous spaces, 1972, pp. 193–229.
[7] Eli Glasner and Benjamin Weiss, Minimal actions of the group S(Z) of permutations of the integers, Geometric & Functional Analysis 12 (2002), no. 5,
964–988.
[8] S Glasner, Proximal flows of Lie groups, Israel Journal of Mathematics 45
(1983), no. 2, 97–99.
[9] Shmuel Glasner, Proximal flows, Springer, 1976.
[10] Vadim A Kaimanovich, Thompson’s group F is not Liouville, arXiv preprint
arXiv:1602.02971 (2016).

(Y. Hartman, K. Juschenko) Northwestern University
(O. Tamuz, P. Vahidi Ferdowsi) California Institute of Technology

