Non-separability of the Lipschitz distance (Q740120)

From MaRDI portal
Revision as of 02:40, 10 December 2024 by Import241208061232 (talk | contribs) (Normalize DOI.)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
scientific article
Language Label Description Also known as
English
Non-separability of the Lipschitz distance
scientific article

    Statements

    Non-separability of the Lipschitz distance (English)
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    12 August 2016
    0 references
    Let \((X, d_{X})\) and \((Y, d_{Y})\) be metric spaces and \(\epsilon \geq 0\). A mapping \(f:X\rightarrow Y\) is said to be an \(\epsilon\)-isometry if \(f\) is a homeomorphism, \(f\) and \(f^{-1}\) are Lipschitz mappings, and \(|\log \text{dil}(f)| + |\log \text{dil}(f^{-1}) | \leq \epsilon\), where dil\((f) = \sup{\frac{d_{Y}(f(x),f(y))}{d_{X}(x,y)}}{x, y \in X, x \neq y}\) and dil\((f^{-1})\) is defined analogously. The Lipschitz distance \(d_{L}\) between \((X, d_{X})\) and \((Y, d_{Y})\) is defined to be the infimum of all \(\epsilon \geq 0\) such that there exists an \(\epsilon\)-isometry \(f:X\rightarrow Y\), or \(\infty\) if no \(\epsilon\)-isometry \(f:X\rightarrow Y\) exists. It was introduced by \textit{M. Gromov} in [Metric structures for Riemannian and non-Riemannian spaces. Boston, MA: Birkhäuser (1999; Zbl 0953.53002)]. It is well known that if \(\mathcal{M}\) is the collection of all isometry classes of compact metric spaces, then \((\mathcal{M}, d_{L})\) is a metric space that is complete but too big to be separable. Therefore the authors consider the following question: If \(X\) is a fixed compact metric space and \(\mathcal{M}_{X}\) is the collection of isometry classes of compact metric spaces \(Y\) such that \(d_{L}(X,Y) < \infty\), then is the metric space \((\mathcal{M}_{X}, d_{L})\) separable? They answer this question negatively by proving that, for two compact subsets \(X\) of the reals, \((\mathcal{M}_{X}, d_{L})\) is not separable. One of them is the unit interval, and the other one is an infinite union of shrinking closed intervals. Reviewer's remark: From a formal set-theoretic point of view, \(\mathcal{M}\) and \(\mathcal{M}_{X}\) are not sets. However, it can be shown that by choosing one representative from each isometry class one obtains a set.
    0 references
    compact metric space
    0 references
    separable metric space
    0 references
    Lipschitz distance
    0 references

    Identifiers