[FOM] Banach Tarski Paradox/Line
David Roberts
david.roberts at adelaide.edu.au
Sun Nov 27 23:39:53 EST 2011
The Banach-Tarski 'paradox' arises because SO(3) x |R^3 < Aut(S^2)
contains a free group on 2 letters
(or more accurately, it is not amenable) and similarly for SO(n) for all n > 2.
To arrive at the version for B^3 I believe one can take a
decomposition of the ball into concentric spheres
and somehow take a limit, but this shouldn't be necessary.
Terry Tao has a nice blog post on this:
http://terrytao.wordpress.com/2009/01/08/245b-notes-2-amenability-the-ping-pong-lemma-and-the-banach-tarski-paradox-optional/
in which he makes the distinction between 'finitely equidecomposable'
and 'infinitely equidecomposable'.
The BT paradox falls into the former case, and it turns out that [0,1]
is the latter but _not_ the former.
Note that one must also specify the group of automorphisms under which
one wants to
'move around' the pieces.
David Roberts
On 28 November 2011 07:57, <pax0 at seznam.cz> wrote:
> Is the Banach Tarski paradox provable for the unit real interval;
> i.e. is there a possibility for duplicating [0,1].
> If not, where is the obstacle?
> Jan Pax
> _______________________________________________
> FOM mailing list
> FOM at cs.nyu.edu
> http://www.cs.nyu.edu/mailman/listinfo/fom
>
More information about the FOM
mailing list