Fourier series

We have seen that a measure-preserving transformation T on a probability space (X,B,μ) induces an isometry of the space L2(X,B,μ) by composition. That is, if f belongs to L2(X,B,μ) then so too does Tf=fT and moreover ||Tf||2=||f||2.

We restrict now our attention to the special case where our probability space is [0,1) equipped with Lebesgue measure λ. By paying the small price of working with complex instead of real-valued functions, we will produce an orthonormal basis of L2(X,B,μ) that will allow us to more easily verify dynamical properties of measure-preserving transformations on the unit interval.

An orthonormal basis

Write L2,C([0,1)) for the collection of functions f:[0,1)C that are Borel measurable and for which |f|2dλ< where we identify two complex-valued functions f,g if |fg|2dλ holds. Next, define for each kZ the function χk(x)=e2πikx=cos(2πkx)+isin(2πkx) for each x[0,1). Since |χk|=1 for each kZ and λ([0,1))=1 each of the functions χk belongs to L2,C([0,1)).

In dealing with complex-valued functions we must modify slightly the inner product we work with. Define f,g=fgdλ whenever f,g belong to L2,C([0,1)). With respect to this inner product we have χk,χj=χkχjdλ=01e2πi(kj)xdx={1j=k0jk which is to say that the collection {χk:kZ} of functions is an orthonormal system. In fact it is a basis of L2,C([0,1)) in the sense that f=n=1f,χkχk for every f in L2,C([0,1)). Note that this is distinct from the meaning of basis in linear algebra: we are not asserting that every f is a finite linear combination of functions from our orthonormal family; instead we are using the norm to say that limNfn=NNf,χnχn2=0 for every f in L2,C([0,1)).

Theorem

The χk form a basis of L2,C([0,1)).

Proof:

We will take this for granted. The key ingredients in the proof are Bessel's inequality, the fact the continuous functions are dense in L2,C([0,1)), and the fact that every continuous function on [0,1) is a uniform limit of linear combinations of our orthonormal system.

Ergodicity via Fourier series

Proposition

Every irrational rotation is ergodic.

Proof:

Write T(x)=x+αmod1 for some irrational α. Fix f in L2,C([0,1)) that is T invariant. We can write f=nZc(n)χn and calculate that Tf=nZc(n)Tχn=nZc(n)e2πinαχn and conclude that c(n)=c(n)e2πinα for all nZ. As α is irrational we must have c(n)=0 for all non-zero n. Thus f=c(0) is constant.

Proposition

The map T(x)=2xmod1 on [0,1) is ergodic.

Proof:

Fix f in L2,C([0,1)) that is T invariant. We can write f=nZc(n)χn and calculate that Tf=nZc(n)Tχn=nZc(n)χ2n and conclude that c(n)=c(2n) for all nZ. Calculating ||f||22=f,f=nZ|c(n)|2 it is not possible for c to take the same non-zero value infinitely often. Thus c(n)=0 for all n0 and f=c(0) is constant.

Discrete spectrum and mixing

For the irrational rotation T(x)=x+α each of the functions χn is an eigenfunction. We define the class of dynamical systems with this property.

Definition

A measure-preserving transformation T on a probability space (X,B,μ) has discrete spectrum when L2,C(X,B,μ) has an orthonormal basis consisting of eigenfunctions.

Ergodic transformations with discrete spectrum can be modelled by systems that look like irrational rotations.

Theorem

If a measure-preserving transformation T is ergodic and has discrete spectrum then it is isomorphic to a measure-preserving transformation S on a compact, Abelian group defined by S(g)=g+a for some a in G with the property that {na:nZ} is dense.

Can the doubling map T(x)=2xmod1 be modelled by an irrational rotation? Perhaps it is, in disguise, a system with discrete spectrum. In fact, the doubling map is mixing and systems that are ergodic and mixing cannot have non-constant eigenfunctions.

Proposition

The doubling map T(x)=2xmod1 on [0,1) is mixing.

Proof:

Fix f,g in L2,C([0,1)). Write f=kZc(k)χkg=sZd(s)χs and fix ϵ>0. There are K,MN such that f|k|Kc(k)χk2<ϵg|m|Md(m)χm2<ϵ both hold. Write fK and gM respectively for the truncated sums above. Now |f,TngfM,TngK|<ϵ(||f||2+||g||2) for all nN using the Hölder inequality. Choose N with 2N>M. For all nN we have fM,TngK=|m|M|k|Kc(m)d(k)ψm,ψ2nk=c(0)d(0) because 2nk=m only happens when m=0 and k=0. Thus |f,Tngc(0)d(0)|<ϵ(||f||2+||g||2) for all nN and we are done.

We can now distinguish the irrational rotation and the doubling map using the Koopman operator. Indeed, suppose that f is an eigenfunction for the doubling map T with eigenvalue η. Then |f,Tnf|=|f,ηnf|=|ηn|||f||22=||f||22 whereas mixing gives f,Tnff,11,f=0 if η1 because eigenfunctions with distinct eigenvalues are orthogonal. Thus ||f||2=0 which is not possible and T has no eigenfunctions.