Interesting examples of non-locally compact topological groups Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?Fourier Transform on Locally compact quantum groupsLocally Compact Quantum Groups applicationFinite index subgroups of locally compact groupsMatched pair of locally compact groupsAn example for the Convolution on not compact topological groupsTauberian measures on a locally compact abelian groupLaplace Transform in the context of Gelfand/PontryaginWiener algebra for nonabelian locally compact groupsBest constant for maximal function for locally compact groupsInterior of fundamental domains of lattices in locally compact groups

Interesting examples of non-locally compact topological groups



Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?Fourier Transform on Locally compact quantum groupsLocally Compact Quantum Groups applicationFinite index subgroups of locally compact groupsMatched pair of locally compact groupsAn example for the Convolution on not compact topological groupsTauberian measures on a locally compact abelian groupLaplace Transform in the context of Gelfand/PontryaginWiener algebra for nonabelian locally compact groupsBest constant for maximal function for locally compact groupsInterior of fundamental domains of lattices in locally compact groups










10












$begingroup$


Harmonic analysis is concentrated mostly on studying locally compact groups. I would like to ask people about examples of non-locally compact topological groups that are interesting in connection with some applications in mathematics (or physics). I must confess that I know only two examples:



  • topological vector spaces are studied as examples of topological groups (with the additive group operation) to which Pontryagin duality is sometimes transferred from the class of locally compact abelian groups,


  • the groups of diffeomorphisms of smooth manifolds are studied in the theory of infinite dimensional manifolds.


Can people enlighten me about other similar subjects? (If possible, with motivations.)










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Sergei, i think it might be a good idea (for the visibility of the question) to add the mathematical physics tag here.
    $endgroup$
    – Konstantinos Kanakoglou
    Apr 14 at 14:48






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Konstantinos, thank you, I did it!
    $endgroup$
    – Sergei Akbarov
    Apr 14 at 14:49






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    I don't think that harmonic analysis studies locally compact groups, but rather that locally compact groups is a natural setting for harmonic analysis. Also many people study locally compact groups and are not involved in harmonic analysis.
    $endgroup$
    – YCor
    Apr 14 at 16:46






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    A huge well-studied class of topological groups is Banach spaces. Since continuous group homomorphisms between Banach spaces are bounded operators, it can really be considered as a subclass. Another (not disjoint) class is that of automorphism group of relational structures, that is, closed subgroups of symmetric groups. The very first example is the group of permutations of an infinite countable set (whose Polish group topology was introduced by L. Onofri in 1927).
    $endgroup$
    – YCor
    Apr 14 at 16:50






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @SergeiAkbarov Presumably the standard one, induced by inclusion in $mathbb R$
    $endgroup$
    – Wojowu
    Apr 15 at 6:17















10












$begingroup$


Harmonic analysis is concentrated mostly on studying locally compact groups. I would like to ask people about examples of non-locally compact topological groups that are interesting in connection with some applications in mathematics (or physics). I must confess that I know only two examples:



  • topological vector spaces are studied as examples of topological groups (with the additive group operation) to which Pontryagin duality is sometimes transferred from the class of locally compact abelian groups,


  • the groups of diffeomorphisms of smooth manifolds are studied in the theory of infinite dimensional manifolds.


Can people enlighten me about other similar subjects? (If possible, with motivations.)










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Sergei, i think it might be a good idea (for the visibility of the question) to add the mathematical physics tag here.
    $endgroup$
    – Konstantinos Kanakoglou
    Apr 14 at 14:48






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Konstantinos, thank you, I did it!
    $endgroup$
    – Sergei Akbarov
    Apr 14 at 14:49






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    I don't think that harmonic analysis studies locally compact groups, but rather that locally compact groups is a natural setting for harmonic analysis. Also many people study locally compact groups and are not involved in harmonic analysis.
    $endgroup$
    – YCor
    Apr 14 at 16:46






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    A huge well-studied class of topological groups is Banach spaces. Since continuous group homomorphisms between Banach spaces are bounded operators, it can really be considered as a subclass. Another (not disjoint) class is that of automorphism group of relational structures, that is, closed subgroups of symmetric groups. The very first example is the group of permutations of an infinite countable set (whose Polish group topology was introduced by L. Onofri in 1927).
    $endgroup$
    – YCor
    Apr 14 at 16:50






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @SergeiAkbarov Presumably the standard one, induced by inclusion in $mathbb R$
    $endgroup$
    – Wojowu
    Apr 15 at 6:17













10












10








10


3



$begingroup$


Harmonic analysis is concentrated mostly on studying locally compact groups. I would like to ask people about examples of non-locally compact topological groups that are interesting in connection with some applications in mathematics (or physics). I must confess that I know only two examples:



  • topological vector spaces are studied as examples of topological groups (with the additive group operation) to which Pontryagin duality is sometimes transferred from the class of locally compact abelian groups,


  • the groups of diffeomorphisms of smooth manifolds are studied in the theory of infinite dimensional manifolds.


Can people enlighten me about other similar subjects? (If possible, with motivations.)










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




Harmonic analysis is concentrated mostly on studying locally compact groups. I would like to ask people about examples of non-locally compact topological groups that are interesting in connection with some applications in mathematics (or physics). I must confess that I know only two examples:



  • topological vector spaces are studied as examples of topological groups (with the additive group operation) to which Pontryagin duality is sometimes transferred from the class of locally compact abelian groups,


  • the groups of diffeomorphisms of smooth manifolds are studied in the theory of infinite dimensional manifolds.


Can people enlighten me about other similar subjects? (If possible, with motivations.)







fa.functional-analysis soft-question mp.mathematical-physics harmonic-analysis






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Apr 14 at 14:49


























community wiki





Sergei Akbarov








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Sergei, i think it might be a good idea (for the visibility of the question) to add the mathematical physics tag here.
    $endgroup$
    – Konstantinos Kanakoglou
    Apr 14 at 14:48






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Konstantinos, thank you, I did it!
    $endgroup$
    – Sergei Akbarov
    Apr 14 at 14:49






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    I don't think that harmonic analysis studies locally compact groups, but rather that locally compact groups is a natural setting for harmonic analysis. Also many people study locally compact groups and are not involved in harmonic analysis.
    $endgroup$
    – YCor
    Apr 14 at 16:46






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    A huge well-studied class of topological groups is Banach spaces. Since continuous group homomorphisms between Banach spaces are bounded operators, it can really be considered as a subclass. Another (not disjoint) class is that of automorphism group of relational structures, that is, closed subgroups of symmetric groups. The very first example is the group of permutations of an infinite countable set (whose Polish group topology was introduced by L. Onofri in 1927).
    $endgroup$
    – YCor
    Apr 14 at 16:50






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @SergeiAkbarov Presumably the standard one, induced by inclusion in $mathbb R$
    $endgroup$
    – Wojowu
    Apr 15 at 6:17












  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Sergei, i think it might be a good idea (for the visibility of the question) to add the mathematical physics tag here.
    $endgroup$
    – Konstantinos Kanakoglou
    Apr 14 at 14:48






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Konstantinos, thank you, I did it!
    $endgroup$
    – Sergei Akbarov
    Apr 14 at 14:49






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    I don't think that harmonic analysis studies locally compact groups, but rather that locally compact groups is a natural setting for harmonic analysis. Also many people study locally compact groups and are not involved in harmonic analysis.
    $endgroup$
    – YCor
    Apr 14 at 16:46






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    A huge well-studied class of topological groups is Banach spaces. Since continuous group homomorphisms between Banach spaces are bounded operators, it can really be considered as a subclass. Another (not disjoint) class is that of automorphism group of relational structures, that is, closed subgroups of symmetric groups. The very first example is the group of permutations of an infinite countable set (whose Polish group topology was introduced by L. Onofri in 1927).
    $endgroup$
    – YCor
    Apr 14 at 16:50






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @SergeiAkbarov Presumably the standard one, induced by inclusion in $mathbb R$
    $endgroup$
    – Wojowu
    Apr 15 at 6:17







2




2




$begingroup$
Sergei, i think it might be a good idea (for the visibility of the question) to add the mathematical physics tag here.
$endgroup$
– Konstantinos Kanakoglou
Apr 14 at 14:48




$begingroup$
Sergei, i think it might be a good idea (for the visibility of the question) to add the mathematical physics tag here.
$endgroup$
– Konstantinos Kanakoglou
Apr 14 at 14:48




2




2




$begingroup$
Konstantinos, thank you, I did it!
$endgroup$
– Sergei Akbarov
Apr 14 at 14:49




$begingroup$
Konstantinos, thank you, I did it!
$endgroup$
– Sergei Akbarov
Apr 14 at 14:49




3




3




$begingroup$
I don't think that harmonic analysis studies locally compact groups, but rather that locally compact groups is a natural setting for harmonic analysis. Also many people study locally compact groups and are not involved in harmonic analysis.
$endgroup$
– YCor
Apr 14 at 16:46




$begingroup$
I don't think that harmonic analysis studies locally compact groups, but rather that locally compact groups is a natural setting for harmonic analysis. Also many people study locally compact groups and are not involved in harmonic analysis.
$endgroup$
– YCor
Apr 14 at 16:46




2




2




$begingroup$
A huge well-studied class of topological groups is Banach spaces. Since continuous group homomorphisms between Banach spaces are bounded operators, it can really be considered as a subclass. Another (not disjoint) class is that of automorphism group of relational structures, that is, closed subgroups of symmetric groups. The very first example is the group of permutations of an infinite countable set (whose Polish group topology was introduced by L. Onofri in 1927).
$endgroup$
– YCor
Apr 14 at 16:50




$begingroup$
A huge well-studied class of topological groups is Banach spaces. Since continuous group homomorphisms between Banach spaces are bounded operators, it can really be considered as a subclass. Another (not disjoint) class is that of automorphism group of relational structures, that is, closed subgroups of symmetric groups. The very first example is the group of permutations of an infinite countable set (whose Polish group topology was introduced by L. Onofri in 1927).
$endgroup$
– YCor
Apr 14 at 16:50




1




1




$begingroup$
@SergeiAkbarov Presumably the standard one, induced by inclusion in $mathbb R$
$endgroup$
– Wojowu
Apr 15 at 6:17




$begingroup$
@SergeiAkbarov Presumably the standard one, induced by inclusion in $mathbb R$
$endgroup$
– Wojowu
Apr 15 at 6:17










6 Answers
6






active

oldest

votes


















7












$begingroup$

There are two quite popular areas related to "big" or "large" groups. One concerns extreme amenability and fixed point properties (see Pestov), and the other concerns harmonic analysis and the representation theory (see Borodin - Olshanski).






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    R W as far as I can see, they change the definition of topological group. In their considerations the operation of multiplication should not be jointly continuous, but separately continuous, is it?
    $endgroup$
    – Sergei Akbarov
    Apr 14 at 17:08










  • $begingroup$
    @Sergei Akbarov - Where do you see this?
    $endgroup$
    – R W
    Apr 14 at 17:32






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Sergei Akhbarov The multiplication in the unitary group is jointly continuous in the operator topology.
    $endgroup$
    – user95282
    Apr 14 at 18:17






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Sergei Akhbarov Not so much representations of $U(ell^2)$, but group representations in $U(ell^2)$. See G.W. Mackey, Bull AMS 3,1 (1980) 543-698.
    $endgroup$
    – user95282
    Apr 14 at 20:35






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Sergei Akbarov: See my comment to Peter Michor's answer.
    $endgroup$
    – André Henriques
    2 days ago


















7












$begingroup$


  • Infinite-dimensional Lie groups; e.g. locally convex groups, pro-Lie groups, ind-groups.

  • Central extensions thereof; e.g. Virasoro group.


  • Loop groups, Current groups.

  • Central extensions thereof, Kac-Moody groups.





share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Francois, could you, please, say a few words on where this is used?
    $endgroup$
    – Sergei Akbarov
    Apr 15 at 5:09






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @SergeiAkbarov As with all groups, one studies their homogeneous symplectic manifolds, resp. (projective) unitary representations as potential models of classical, resp. quantum systems. Pressley-Segal (1986, introduction) cite some such successes, but beyond that I see mainly hope and l’art pour l’art fun...
    $endgroup$
    – Francois Ziegler
    Apr 15 at 6:05



















5












$begingroup$

A couple of common classes of examples you may have overlooked:



  • The rationals $mathbbQ$ with their usual topology. More generally, any non-closed subgroup of a locally compact Hausdorff group will be a non-locally compact group (in its subspace topology). There are lots of situations where it's convenient to prove something about a locally compact group by working on a dense subgroup.


  • Infinite products of non-compact groups with their product topology. Some of these are topological vector spaces like $mathbbR^omega$, but for instance, $mathbbZ^omega$ is another simple example (it's homeomorphic to Baire space, and to the set of irrationals in $mathbbR$). Products arise naturally any time you want to say "give me a whole sequence of these". The failure of such groups to have a Haar measure is a frequent sticking point in analysis and probability.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Nate, to tell the truth, I don't understand how can separating $mathbb Q$ from $mathbb R$ be useful if the topology is preserved.
    $endgroup$
    – Sergei Akbarov
    Apr 15 at 19:30










  • $begingroup$
    @SergeiAkbarov, perhaps you might ask a number theorist …?
    $endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Apr 15 at 19:50


















4












$begingroup$

Quantum mechanics: The unitary group $U$ of a Hilbert space. If you use the norm topology, then it is a Banach Lie group with bounded skew hermitian operators as Lie algebra. But unbounded self-adjoint operators $A$ (Schrödinger operators) lead to 1-parameter semigroups $e^itA$ in $U$, where now the strong operator topology plays a role.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Some relevant facts about $U(H)$ in its strong operator topology (SOT) can be found here: arxiv.org/abs/1309.5891. In particular it is a topological group (as explained in the linked paper, a number of prominent references explicitly state that $(U(H),$SOT$)$ is not a topological group!). More precisely, it is a Polish group. Even more, when restricted to $U(H)subset B(H)$, the strong operator topology, the weak operator topology, the ultra-strong topology, the ultra-weak topology, and the compact open topology all agree.
    $endgroup$
    – André Henriques
    2 days ago



















2












$begingroup$

This is far from the use of topological groups in analysis, but:



In homotopy theory a basic background fact that is that a (based connected) space is always the classifying space of a topological group. In a little more detail: the following four categories (with suitable notions of weak homotopy equivalence) are equivalent for purposes of homotopy theory.



  1. Based path-connected spaces

  2. Based connected simplicial sets

  3. Simplicial groups

  4. Topological groups

So in some sense arbitrary topology groups play a role in homotopy theory.



In practice homotopy-theorists work with 2 as a substitute for 1, and with 3 as a tool for 2, but 4 is part of the picture. Roughly speaking, the topological group associated with a based space $X$ is the space of based loops in $X$, but in order to represent this homotopy type by an actual topological group one ordinarily goes through simplicial groups.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$




















    1












    $begingroup$

    The question mentions topological vector spaces, but aren't Banach spaces a special case of sufficient interest to merit explicit mention? Every infinite dimensional Banach space is a non-locally compact topological group under addition and the norm topology.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function()
      var channelOptions =
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "504"
      ;
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
      createEditor();
      );

      else
      createEditor();

      );

      function createEditor()
      StackExchange.prepareEditor(
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: true,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: 10,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader:
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      ,
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      );



      );













      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function ()
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f328037%2finteresting-examples-of-non-locally-compact-topological-groups%23new-answer', 'question_page');

      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      6 Answers
      6






      active

      oldest

      votes








      6 Answers
      6






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      7












      $begingroup$

      There are two quite popular areas related to "big" or "large" groups. One concerns extreme amenability and fixed point properties (see Pestov), and the other concerns harmonic analysis and the representation theory (see Borodin - Olshanski).






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$












      • $begingroup$
        R W as far as I can see, they change the definition of topological group. In their considerations the operation of multiplication should not be jointly continuous, but separately continuous, is it?
        $endgroup$
        – Sergei Akbarov
        Apr 14 at 17:08










      • $begingroup$
        @Sergei Akbarov - Where do you see this?
        $endgroup$
        – R W
        Apr 14 at 17:32






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @Sergei Akhbarov The multiplication in the unitary group is jointly continuous in the operator topology.
        $endgroup$
        – user95282
        Apr 14 at 18:17






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @Sergei Akhbarov Not so much representations of $U(ell^2)$, but group representations in $U(ell^2)$. See G.W. Mackey, Bull AMS 3,1 (1980) 543-698.
        $endgroup$
        – user95282
        Apr 14 at 20:35






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @Sergei Akbarov: See my comment to Peter Michor's answer.
        $endgroup$
        – André Henriques
        2 days ago















      7












      $begingroup$

      There are two quite popular areas related to "big" or "large" groups. One concerns extreme amenability and fixed point properties (see Pestov), and the other concerns harmonic analysis and the representation theory (see Borodin - Olshanski).






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$












      • $begingroup$
        R W as far as I can see, they change the definition of topological group. In their considerations the operation of multiplication should not be jointly continuous, but separately continuous, is it?
        $endgroup$
        – Sergei Akbarov
        Apr 14 at 17:08










      • $begingroup$
        @Sergei Akbarov - Where do you see this?
        $endgroup$
        – R W
        Apr 14 at 17:32






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @Sergei Akhbarov The multiplication in the unitary group is jointly continuous in the operator topology.
        $endgroup$
        – user95282
        Apr 14 at 18:17






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @Sergei Akhbarov Not so much representations of $U(ell^2)$, but group representations in $U(ell^2)$. See G.W. Mackey, Bull AMS 3,1 (1980) 543-698.
        $endgroup$
        – user95282
        Apr 14 at 20:35






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @Sergei Akbarov: See my comment to Peter Michor's answer.
        $endgroup$
        – André Henriques
        2 days ago













      7












      7








      7





      $begingroup$

      There are two quite popular areas related to "big" or "large" groups. One concerns extreme amenability and fixed point properties (see Pestov), and the other concerns harmonic analysis and the representation theory (see Borodin - Olshanski).






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$



      There are two quite popular areas related to "big" or "large" groups. One concerns extreme amenability and fixed point properties (see Pestov), and the other concerns harmonic analysis and the representation theory (see Borodin - Olshanski).







      share|cite|improve this answer














      share|cite|improve this answer



      share|cite|improve this answer








      answered Apr 14 at 15:06


























      community wiki





      R W












      • $begingroup$
        R W as far as I can see, they change the definition of topological group. In their considerations the operation of multiplication should not be jointly continuous, but separately continuous, is it?
        $endgroup$
        – Sergei Akbarov
        Apr 14 at 17:08










      • $begingroup$
        @Sergei Akbarov - Where do you see this?
        $endgroup$
        – R W
        Apr 14 at 17:32






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @Sergei Akhbarov The multiplication in the unitary group is jointly continuous in the operator topology.
        $endgroup$
        – user95282
        Apr 14 at 18:17






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @Sergei Akhbarov Not so much representations of $U(ell^2)$, but group representations in $U(ell^2)$. See G.W. Mackey, Bull AMS 3,1 (1980) 543-698.
        $endgroup$
        – user95282
        Apr 14 at 20:35






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @Sergei Akbarov: See my comment to Peter Michor's answer.
        $endgroup$
        – André Henriques
        2 days ago
















      • $begingroup$
        R W as far as I can see, they change the definition of topological group. In their considerations the operation of multiplication should not be jointly continuous, but separately continuous, is it?
        $endgroup$
        – Sergei Akbarov
        Apr 14 at 17:08










      • $begingroup$
        @Sergei Akbarov - Where do you see this?
        $endgroup$
        – R W
        Apr 14 at 17:32






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @Sergei Akhbarov The multiplication in the unitary group is jointly continuous in the operator topology.
        $endgroup$
        – user95282
        Apr 14 at 18:17






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @Sergei Akhbarov Not so much representations of $U(ell^2)$, but group representations in $U(ell^2)$. See G.W. Mackey, Bull AMS 3,1 (1980) 543-698.
        $endgroup$
        – user95282
        Apr 14 at 20:35






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @Sergei Akbarov: See my comment to Peter Michor's answer.
        $endgroup$
        – André Henriques
        2 days ago















      $begingroup$
      R W as far as I can see, they change the definition of topological group. In their considerations the operation of multiplication should not be jointly continuous, but separately continuous, is it?
      $endgroup$
      – Sergei Akbarov
      Apr 14 at 17:08




      $begingroup$
      R W as far as I can see, they change the definition of topological group. In their considerations the operation of multiplication should not be jointly continuous, but separately continuous, is it?
      $endgroup$
      – Sergei Akbarov
      Apr 14 at 17:08












      $begingroup$
      @Sergei Akbarov - Where do you see this?
      $endgroup$
      – R W
      Apr 14 at 17:32




      $begingroup$
      @Sergei Akbarov - Where do you see this?
      $endgroup$
      – R W
      Apr 14 at 17:32




      1




      1




      $begingroup$
      @Sergei Akhbarov The multiplication in the unitary group is jointly continuous in the operator topology.
      $endgroup$
      – user95282
      Apr 14 at 18:17




      $begingroup$
      @Sergei Akhbarov The multiplication in the unitary group is jointly continuous in the operator topology.
      $endgroup$
      – user95282
      Apr 14 at 18:17




      1




      1




      $begingroup$
      @Sergei Akhbarov Not so much representations of $U(ell^2)$, but group representations in $U(ell^2)$. See G.W. Mackey, Bull AMS 3,1 (1980) 543-698.
      $endgroup$
      – user95282
      Apr 14 at 20:35




      $begingroup$
      @Sergei Akhbarov Not so much representations of $U(ell^2)$, but group representations in $U(ell^2)$. See G.W. Mackey, Bull AMS 3,1 (1980) 543-698.
      $endgroup$
      – user95282
      Apr 14 at 20:35




      1




      1




      $begingroup$
      @Sergei Akbarov: See my comment to Peter Michor's answer.
      $endgroup$
      – André Henriques
      2 days ago




      $begingroup$
      @Sergei Akbarov: See my comment to Peter Michor's answer.
      $endgroup$
      – André Henriques
      2 days ago











      7












      $begingroup$


      • Infinite-dimensional Lie groups; e.g. locally convex groups, pro-Lie groups, ind-groups.

      • Central extensions thereof; e.g. Virasoro group.


      • Loop groups, Current groups.

      • Central extensions thereof, Kac-Moody groups.





      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$












      • $begingroup$
        Francois, could you, please, say a few words on where this is used?
        $endgroup$
        – Sergei Akbarov
        Apr 15 at 5:09






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @SergeiAkbarov As with all groups, one studies their homogeneous symplectic manifolds, resp. (projective) unitary representations as potential models of classical, resp. quantum systems. Pressley-Segal (1986, introduction) cite some such successes, but beyond that I see mainly hope and l’art pour l’art fun...
        $endgroup$
        – Francois Ziegler
        Apr 15 at 6:05
















      7












      $begingroup$


      • Infinite-dimensional Lie groups; e.g. locally convex groups, pro-Lie groups, ind-groups.

      • Central extensions thereof; e.g. Virasoro group.


      • Loop groups, Current groups.

      • Central extensions thereof, Kac-Moody groups.





      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$












      • $begingroup$
        Francois, could you, please, say a few words on where this is used?
        $endgroup$
        – Sergei Akbarov
        Apr 15 at 5:09






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @SergeiAkbarov As with all groups, one studies their homogeneous symplectic manifolds, resp. (projective) unitary representations as potential models of classical, resp. quantum systems. Pressley-Segal (1986, introduction) cite some such successes, but beyond that I see mainly hope and l’art pour l’art fun...
        $endgroup$
        – Francois Ziegler
        Apr 15 at 6:05














      7












      7








      7





      $begingroup$


      • Infinite-dimensional Lie groups; e.g. locally convex groups, pro-Lie groups, ind-groups.

      • Central extensions thereof; e.g. Virasoro group.


      • Loop groups, Current groups.

      • Central extensions thereof, Kac-Moody groups.





      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$




      • Infinite-dimensional Lie groups; e.g. locally convex groups, pro-Lie groups, ind-groups.

      • Central extensions thereof; e.g. Virasoro group.


      • Loop groups, Current groups.

      • Central extensions thereof, Kac-Moody groups.






      share|cite|improve this answer














      share|cite|improve this answer



      share|cite|improve this answer








      answered Apr 15 at 4:46


























      community wiki





      Francois Ziegler












      • $begingroup$
        Francois, could you, please, say a few words on where this is used?
        $endgroup$
        – Sergei Akbarov
        Apr 15 at 5:09






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @SergeiAkbarov As with all groups, one studies their homogeneous symplectic manifolds, resp. (projective) unitary representations as potential models of classical, resp. quantum systems. Pressley-Segal (1986, introduction) cite some such successes, but beyond that I see mainly hope and l’art pour l’art fun...
        $endgroup$
        – Francois Ziegler
        Apr 15 at 6:05

















      • $begingroup$
        Francois, could you, please, say a few words on where this is used?
        $endgroup$
        – Sergei Akbarov
        Apr 15 at 5:09






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @SergeiAkbarov As with all groups, one studies their homogeneous symplectic manifolds, resp. (projective) unitary representations as potential models of classical, resp. quantum systems. Pressley-Segal (1986, introduction) cite some such successes, but beyond that I see mainly hope and l’art pour l’art fun...
        $endgroup$
        – Francois Ziegler
        Apr 15 at 6:05
















      $begingroup$
      Francois, could you, please, say a few words on where this is used?
      $endgroup$
      – Sergei Akbarov
      Apr 15 at 5:09




      $begingroup$
      Francois, could you, please, say a few words on where this is used?
      $endgroup$
      – Sergei Akbarov
      Apr 15 at 5:09




      1




      1




      $begingroup$
      @SergeiAkbarov As with all groups, one studies their homogeneous symplectic manifolds, resp. (projective) unitary representations as potential models of classical, resp. quantum systems. Pressley-Segal (1986, introduction) cite some such successes, but beyond that I see mainly hope and l’art pour l’art fun...
      $endgroup$
      – Francois Ziegler
      Apr 15 at 6:05





      $begingroup$
      @SergeiAkbarov As with all groups, one studies their homogeneous symplectic manifolds, resp. (projective) unitary representations as potential models of classical, resp. quantum systems. Pressley-Segal (1986, introduction) cite some such successes, but beyond that I see mainly hope and l’art pour l’art fun...
      $endgroup$
      – Francois Ziegler
      Apr 15 at 6:05












      5












      $begingroup$

      A couple of common classes of examples you may have overlooked:



      • The rationals $mathbbQ$ with their usual topology. More generally, any non-closed subgroup of a locally compact Hausdorff group will be a non-locally compact group (in its subspace topology). There are lots of situations where it's convenient to prove something about a locally compact group by working on a dense subgroup.


      • Infinite products of non-compact groups with their product topology. Some of these are topological vector spaces like $mathbbR^omega$, but for instance, $mathbbZ^omega$ is another simple example (it's homeomorphic to Baire space, and to the set of irrationals in $mathbbR$). Products arise naturally any time you want to say "give me a whole sequence of these". The failure of such groups to have a Haar measure is a frequent sticking point in analysis and probability.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$












      • $begingroup$
        Nate, to tell the truth, I don't understand how can separating $mathbb Q$ from $mathbb R$ be useful if the topology is preserved.
        $endgroup$
        – Sergei Akbarov
        Apr 15 at 19:30










      • $begingroup$
        @SergeiAkbarov, perhaps you might ask a number theorist …?
        $endgroup$
        – LSpice
        Apr 15 at 19:50















      5












      $begingroup$

      A couple of common classes of examples you may have overlooked:



      • The rationals $mathbbQ$ with their usual topology. More generally, any non-closed subgroup of a locally compact Hausdorff group will be a non-locally compact group (in its subspace topology). There are lots of situations where it's convenient to prove something about a locally compact group by working on a dense subgroup.


      • Infinite products of non-compact groups with their product topology. Some of these are topological vector spaces like $mathbbR^omega$, but for instance, $mathbbZ^omega$ is another simple example (it's homeomorphic to Baire space, and to the set of irrationals in $mathbbR$). Products arise naturally any time you want to say "give me a whole sequence of these". The failure of such groups to have a Haar measure is a frequent sticking point in analysis and probability.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$












      • $begingroup$
        Nate, to tell the truth, I don't understand how can separating $mathbb Q$ from $mathbb R$ be useful if the topology is preserved.
        $endgroup$
        – Sergei Akbarov
        Apr 15 at 19:30










      • $begingroup$
        @SergeiAkbarov, perhaps you might ask a number theorist …?
        $endgroup$
        – LSpice
        Apr 15 at 19:50













      5












      5








      5





      $begingroup$

      A couple of common classes of examples you may have overlooked:



      • The rationals $mathbbQ$ with their usual topology. More generally, any non-closed subgroup of a locally compact Hausdorff group will be a non-locally compact group (in its subspace topology). There are lots of situations where it's convenient to prove something about a locally compact group by working on a dense subgroup.


      • Infinite products of non-compact groups with their product topology. Some of these are topological vector spaces like $mathbbR^omega$, but for instance, $mathbbZ^omega$ is another simple example (it's homeomorphic to Baire space, and to the set of irrationals in $mathbbR$). Products arise naturally any time you want to say "give me a whole sequence of these". The failure of such groups to have a Haar measure is a frequent sticking point in analysis and probability.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$



      A couple of common classes of examples you may have overlooked:



      • The rationals $mathbbQ$ with their usual topology. More generally, any non-closed subgroup of a locally compact Hausdorff group will be a non-locally compact group (in its subspace topology). There are lots of situations where it's convenient to prove something about a locally compact group by working on a dense subgroup.


      • Infinite products of non-compact groups with their product topology. Some of these are topological vector spaces like $mathbbR^omega$, but for instance, $mathbbZ^omega$ is another simple example (it's homeomorphic to Baire space, and to the set of irrationals in $mathbbR$). Products arise naturally any time you want to say "give me a whole sequence of these". The failure of such groups to have a Haar measure is a frequent sticking point in analysis and probability.







      share|cite|improve this answer














      share|cite|improve this answer



      share|cite|improve this answer








      answered Apr 15 at 15:06


























      community wiki





      Nate Eldredge












      • $begingroup$
        Nate, to tell the truth, I don't understand how can separating $mathbb Q$ from $mathbb R$ be useful if the topology is preserved.
        $endgroup$
        – Sergei Akbarov
        Apr 15 at 19:30










      • $begingroup$
        @SergeiAkbarov, perhaps you might ask a number theorist …?
        $endgroup$
        – LSpice
        Apr 15 at 19:50
















      • $begingroup$
        Nate, to tell the truth, I don't understand how can separating $mathbb Q$ from $mathbb R$ be useful if the topology is preserved.
        $endgroup$
        – Sergei Akbarov
        Apr 15 at 19:30










      • $begingroup$
        @SergeiAkbarov, perhaps you might ask a number theorist …?
        $endgroup$
        – LSpice
        Apr 15 at 19:50















      $begingroup$
      Nate, to tell the truth, I don't understand how can separating $mathbb Q$ from $mathbb R$ be useful if the topology is preserved.
      $endgroup$
      – Sergei Akbarov
      Apr 15 at 19:30




      $begingroup$
      Nate, to tell the truth, I don't understand how can separating $mathbb Q$ from $mathbb R$ be useful if the topology is preserved.
      $endgroup$
      – Sergei Akbarov
      Apr 15 at 19:30












      $begingroup$
      @SergeiAkbarov, perhaps you might ask a number theorist …?
      $endgroup$
      – LSpice
      Apr 15 at 19:50




      $begingroup$
      @SergeiAkbarov, perhaps you might ask a number theorist …?
      $endgroup$
      – LSpice
      Apr 15 at 19:50











      4












      $begingroup$

      Quantum mechanics: The unitary group $U$ of a Hilbert space. If you use the norm topology, then it is a Banach Lie group with bounded skew hermitian operators as Lie algebra. But unbounded self-adjoint operators $A$ (Schrödinger operators) lead to 1-parameter semigroups $e^itA$ in $U$, where now the strong operator topology plays a role.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$








      • 2




        $begingroup$
        Some relevant facts about $U(H)$ in its strong operator topology (SOT) can be found here: arxiv.org/abs/1309.5891. In particular it is a topological group (as explained in the linked paper, a number of prominent references explicitly state that $(U(H),$SOT$)$ is not a topological group!). More precisely, it is a Polish group. Even more, when restricted to $U(H)subset B(H)$, the strong operator topology, the weak operator topology, the ultra-strong topology, the ultra-weak topology, and the compact open topology all agree.
        $endgroup$
        – André Henriques
        2 days ago
















      4












      $begingroup$

      Quantum mechanics: The unitary group $U$ of a Hilbert space. If you use the norm topology, then it is a Banach Lie group with bounded skew hermitian operators as Lie algebra. But unbounded self-adjoint operators $A$ (Schrödinger operators) lead to 1-parameter semigroups $e^itA$ in $U$, where now the strong operator topology plays a role.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$








      • 2




        $begingroup$
        Some relevant facts about $U(H)$ in its strong operator topology (SOT) can be found here: arxiv.org/abs/1309.5891. In particular it is a topological group (as explained in the linked paper, a number of prominent references explicitly state that $(U(H),$SOT$)$ is not a topological group!). More precisely, it is a Polish group. Even more, when restricted to $U(H)subset B(H)$, the strong operator topology, the weak operator topology, the ultra-strong topology, the ultra-weak topology, and the compact open topology all agree.
        $endgroup$
        – André Henriques
        2 days ago














      4












      4








      4





      $begingroup$

      Quantum mechanics: The unitary group $U$ of a Hilbert space. If you use the norm topology, then it is a Banach Lie group with bounded skew hermitian operators as Lie algebra. But unbounded self-adjoint operators $A$ (Schrödinger operators) lead to 1-parameter semigroups $e^itA$ in $U$, where now the strong operator topology plays a role.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$



      Quantum mechanics: The unitary group $U$ of a Hilbert space. If you use the norm topology, then it is a Banach Lie group with bounded skew hermitian operators as Lie algebra. But unbounded self-adjoint operators $A$ (Schrödinger operators) lead to 1-parameter semigroups $e^itA$ in $U$, where now the strong operator topology plays a role.







      share|cite|improve this answer














      share|cite|improve this answer



      share|cite|improve this answer








      edited Apr 15 at 19:58


























      community wiki





      2 revs, 2 users 67%
      Peter Michor








      • 2




        $begingroup$
        Some relevant facts about $U(H)$ in its strong operator topology (SOT) can be found here: arxiv.org/abs/1309.5891. In particular it is a topological group (as explained in the linked paper, a number of prominent references explicitly state that $(U(H),$SOT$)$ is not a topological group!). More precisely, it is a Polish group. Even more, when restricted to $U(H)subset B(H)$, the strong operator topology, the weak operator topology, the ultra-strong topology, the ultra-weak topology, and the compact open topology all agree.
        $endgroup$
        – André Henriques
        2 days ago













      • 2




        $begingroup$
        Some relevant facts about $U(H)$ in its strong operator topology (SOT) can be found here: arxiv.org/abs/1309.5891. In particular it is a topological group (as explained in the linked paper, a number of prominent references explicitly state that $(U(H),$SOT$)$ is not a topological group!). More precisely, it is a Polish group. Even more, when restricted to $U(H)subset B(H)$, the strong operator topology, the weak operator topology, the ultra-strong topology, the ultra-weak topology, and the compact open topology all agree.
        $endgroup$
        – André Henriques
        2 days ago








      2




      2




      $begingroup$
      Some relevant facts about $U(H)$ in its strong operator topology (SOT) can be found here: arxiv.org/abs/1309.5891. In particular it is a topological group (as explained in the linked paper, a number of prominent references explicitly state that $(U(H),$SOT$)$ is not a topological group!). More precisely, it is a Polish group. Even more, when restricted to $U(H)subset B(H)$, the strong operator topology, the weak operator topology, the ultra-strong topology, the ultra-weak topology, and the compact open topology all agree.
      $endgroup$
      – André Henriques
      2 days ago





      $begingroup$
      Some relevant facts about $U(H)$ in its strong operator topology (SOT) can be found here: arxiv.org/abs/1309.5891. In particular it is a topological group (as explained in the linked paper, a number of prominent references explicitly state that $(U(H),$SOT$)$ is not a topological group!). More precisely, it is a Polish group. Even more, when restricted to $U(H)subset B(H)$, the strong operator topology, the weak operator topology, the ultra-strong topology, the ultra-weak topology, and the compact open topology all agree.
      $endgroup$
      – André Henriques
      2 days ago












      2












      $begingroup$

      This is far from the use of topological groups in analysis, but:



      In homotopy theory a basic background fact that is that a (based connected) space is always the classifying space of a topological group. In a little more detail: the following four categories (with suitable notions of weak homotopy equivalence) are equivalent for purposes of homotopy theory.



      1. Based path-connected spaces

      2. Based connected simplicial sets

      3. Simplicial groups

      4. Topological groups

      So in some sense arbitrary topology groups play a role in homotopy theory.



      In practice homotopy-theorists work with 2 as a substitute for 1, and with 3 as a tool for 2, but 4 is part of the picture. Roughly speaking, the topological group associated with a based space $X$ is the space of based loops in $X$, but in order to represent this homotopy type by an actual topological group one ordinarily goes through simplicial groups.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$

















        2












        $begingroup$

        This is far from the use of topological groups in analysis, but:



        In homotopy theory a basic background fact that is that a (based connected) space is always the classifying space of a topological group. In a little more detail: the following four categories (with suitable notions of weak homotopy equivalence) are equivalent for purposes of homotopy theory.



        1. Based path-connected spaces

        2. Based connected simplicial sets

        3. Simplicial groups

        4. Topological groups

        So in some sense arbitrary topology groups play a role in homotopy theory.



        In practice homotopy-theorists work with 2 as a substitute for 1, and with 3 as a tool for 2, but 4 is part of the picture. Roughly speaking, the topological group associated with a based space $X$ is the space of based loops in $X$, but in order to represent this homotopy type by an actual topological group one ordinarily goes through simplicial groups.






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$















          2












          2








          2





          $begingroup$

          This is far from the use of topological groups in analysis, but:



          In homotopy theory a basic background fact that is that a (based connected) space is always the classifying space of a topological group. In a little more detail: the following four categories (with suitable notions of weak homotopy equivalence) are equivalent for purposes of homotopy theory.



          1. Based path-connected spaces

          2. Based connected simplicial sets

          3. Simplicial groups

          4. Topological groups

          So in some sense arbitrary topology groups play a role in homotopy theory.



          In practice homotopy-theorists work with 2 as a substitute for 1, and with 3 as a tool for 2, but 4 is part of the picture. Roughly speaking, the topological group associated with a based space $X$ is the space of based loops in $X$, but in order to represent this homotopy type by an actual topological group one ordinarily goes through simplicial groups.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          This is far from the use of topological groups in analysis, but:



          In homotopy theory a basic background fact that is that a (based connected) space is always the classifying space of a topological group. In a little more detail: the following four categories (with suitable notions of weak homotopy equivalence) are equivalent for purposes of homotopy theory.



          1. Based path-connected spaces

          2. Based connected simplicial sets

          3. Simplicial groups

          4. Topological groups

          So in some sense arbitrary topology groups play a role in homotopy theory.



          In practice homotopy-theorists work with 2 as a substitute for 1, and with 3 as a tool for 2, but 4 is part of the picture. Roughly speaking, the topological group associated with a based space $X$ is the space of based loops in $X$, but in order to represent this homotopy type by an actual topological group one ordinarily goes through simplicial groups.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          answered Apr 15 at 15:26


























          community wiki





          Tom Goodwillie






















              1












              $begingroup$

              The question mentions topological vector spaces, but aren't Banach spaces a special case of sufficient interest to merit explicit mention? Every infinite dimensional Banach space is a non-locally compact topological group under addition and the norm topology.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$

















                1












                $begingroup$

                The question mentions topological vector spaces, but aren't Banach spaces a special case of sufficient interest to merit explicit mention? Every infinite dimensional Banach space is a non-locally compact topological group under addition and the norm topology.






                share|cite|improve this answer











                $endgroup$















                  1












                  1








                  1





                  $begingroup$

                  The question mentions topological vector spaces, but aren't Banach spaces a special case of sufficient interest to merit explicit mention? Every infinite dimensional Banach space is a non-locally compact topological group under addition and the norm topology.






                  share|cite|improve this answer











                  $endgroup$



                  The question mentions topological vector spaces, but aren't Banach spaces a special case of sufficient interest to merit explicit mention? Every infinite dimensional Banach space is a non-locally compact topological group under addition and the norm topology.







                  share|cite|improve this answer














                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer








                  answered Apr 15 at 20:10


























                  community wiki





                  Nik Weaver




























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded
















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to MathOverflow!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid


                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function ()
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f328037%2finteresting-examples-of-non-locally-compact-topological-groups%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      getting Checkpoint VPN SSL Network Extender working in the command lineHow to connect to CheckPoint VPN on Ubuntu 18.04LTS?Will the Linux ( red-hat ) Open VPNC Client connect to checkpoint or nortel VPN gateways?VPN client for linux machine + support checkpoint gatewayVPN SSL Network Extender in FirefoxLinux Checkpoint SNX tool configuration issuesCheck Point - Connect under Linux - snx + OTPSNX VPN Ububuntu 18.XXUsing Checkpoint VPN SSL Network Extender CLI with certificateVPN with network manager (nm-applet) is not workingWill the Linux ( red-hat ) Open VPNC Client connect to checkpoint or nortel VPN gateways?VPN client for linux machine + support checkpoint gatewayImport VPN config files to NetworkManager from command lineTrouble connecting to VPN using network-manager, while command line worksStart a VPN connection with PPTP protocol on command linestarting a docker service daemon breaks the vpn networkCan't connect to vpn with Network-managerVPN SSL Network Extender in FirefoxUsing Checkpoint VPN SSL Network Extender CLI with certificate

                      NetworkManager fails with “Could not find source connection”Trouble connecting to VPN using network-manager, while command line worksHow can I be notified about state changes to a VPN adapterBacktrack 5 R3 - Refuses to connect to VPNFeed all traffic through OpenVPN for a specific network namespace onlyRun daemon on startup in Debian once openvpn connection establishedpfsense tcp connection between openvpn and lan is brokenInternet connection problem with web browsers onlyWhy does NetworkManager explicitly support tun/tap devices?Browser issues with VPNTwo IP addresses assigned to the same network card - OpenVPN issues?Cannot connect to WiFi with nmcli, although secrets are provided

                      대한민국 목차 국명 지리 역사 정치 국방 경제 사회 문화 국제 순위 관련 항목 각주 외부 링크 둘러보기 메뉴북위 37° 34′ 08″ 동경 126° 58′ 36″ / 북위 37.568889° 동경 126.976667°  / 37.568889; 126.976667ehThe Korean Repository문단을 편집문단을 편집추가해Clarkson PLC 사Report for Selected Countries and Subjects-Korea“Human Development Index and its components: P.198”“http://www.law.go.kr/%EB%B2%95%EB%A0%B9/%EB%8C%80%ED%95%9C%EB%AF%BC%EA%B5%AD%EA%B5%AD%EA%B8%B0%EB%B2%95”"한국은 국제법상 한반도 유일 합법정부 아니다" - 오마이뉴스 모바일Report for Selected Countries and Subjects: South Korea격동의 역사와 함께한 조선일보 90년 : 조선일보 인수해 혁신시킨 신석우, 임시정부 때는 '대한민국' 국호(國號) 정해《우리가 몰랐던 우리 역사: 나라 이름의 비밀을 찾아가는 역사 여행》“남북 공식호칭 ‘남한’‘북한’으로 쓴다”“Corea 대 Korea, 누가 이긴 거야?”국내기후자료 - 한국[김대중 前 대통령 서거] 과감한 구조개혁 'DJ노믹스'로 최단기간 환란극복 :: 네이버 뉴스“이라크 "韓-쿠르드 유전개발 MOU 승인 안해"(종합)”“해외 우리국민 추방사례 43%가 일본”차기전차 K2'흑표'의 세계 최고 전력 분석, 쿠키뉴스 엄기영, 2007-03-02두산인프라, 헬기잡는 장갑차 'K21'...내년부터 공급, 고뉴스 이대준, 2008-10-30과거 내용 찾기mk 뉴스 - 구매력 기준으로 보면 한국 1인당 소득 3만弗과거 내용 찾기"The N-11: More Than an Acronym"Archived조선일보 최우석, 2008-11-01Global 500 2008: Countries - South Korea“몇년째 '시한폭탄'... 가계부채, 올해는 터질까”가구당 부채 5000만원 처음 넘어서“‘빚’으로 내몰리는 사회.. 위기의 가계대출”“[경제365] 공공부문 부채 급증…800조 육박”“"소득 양극화 다소 완화...불평등은 여전"”“공정사회·공생발전 한참 멀었네”iSuppli,08年2QのDRAMシェア・ランキングを発表(08/8/11)South Korea dominates shipbuilding industry | Stock Market News & Stocks to Watch from StraightStocks한국 자동차 생산, 3년 연속 세계 5위자동차수출 '현대-삼성 웃고 기아-대우-쌍용은 울고' 과거 내용 찾기동반성장위 창립 1주년 맞아Archived"중기적합 3개업종 합의 무시한 채 선정"李대통령, 사업 무분별 확장 소상공인 생계 위협 질타삼성-LG, 서민업종인 빵·분식사업 잇따라 철수상생은 뒷전…SSM ‘몸집 불리기’ 혈안Archived“경부고속도에 '아시안하이웨이' 표지판”'철의 실크로드' 앞서 '말(言)의 실크로드'부터, 프레시안 정창현, 2008-10-01“'서울 지하철은 안전한가?'”“서울시 “올해 안에 모든 지하철역 스크린도어 설치””“부산지하철 1,2호선 승강장 안전펜스 설치 완료”“전교조, 정부 노조 통계서 처음 빠져”“[Weekly BIZ] 도요타 '제로 이사회'가 리콜 사태 불러들였다”“S Korea slams high tuition costs”““정치가 여론 양극화 부채질… 합리주의 절실””“〈"`촛불집회'는 민주주의의 질적 변화 상징"〉”““촛불집회가 민주주의 왜곡 초래””“국민 65%, "한국 노사관계 대립적"”“한국 국가경쟁력 27위‥노사관계 '꼴찌'”“제대로 형성되지 않은 대한민국 이념지형”“[신년기획-갈등의 시대] 갈등지수 OECD 4위…사회적 손실 GDP 27% 무려 300조”“2012 총선-대선의 키워드는 '국민과 소통'”“한국 삶의 질 27위, 2000년과 2008년 연속 하위권 머물러”“[해피 코리아] 행복점수 68점…해외 평가선 '낙제점'”“한국 어린이·청소년 행복지수 3년 연속 OECD ‘꼴찌’”“한국 이혼율 OECD중 8위”“[통계청] 한국 이혼율 OECD 4위”“오피니언 [이렇게 생각한다] `부부의 날` 에 돌아본 이혼율 1위 한국”“Suicide Rates by Country, Global Health Observatory Data Repository.”“1. 또 다른 차별”“오피니언 [편집자에게] '왕따'와 '패거리 정치' 심리는 닮은꼴”“[미래한국리포트] 무한경쟁에 빠진 대한민국”“대학생 98% "외모가 경쟁력이라는 말 동의"”“특급호텔 웨딩·200만원대 유모차… "남보다 더…" 호화病, 고질병 됐다”“[스트레스 공화국] ① 경쟁사회, 스트레스 쌓인다”““매일 30여명 자살 한국, 의사보다 무속인에…””“"자살 부르는 '우울증', 환자 중 85% 치료 안 받아"”“정신병원을 가다”“대한민국도 ‘묻지마 범죄’,안전지대 아니다”“유엔 "학생 '성적 지향'에 따른 차별 금지하라"”“유엔아동권리위원회 보고서 및 번역본 원문”“고졸 성공스토리 담은 '제빵왕 김탁구' 드라마 나온다”“‘빛 좋은 개살구’ 고졸 취업…실습 대신 착취”원본 문서“정신건강, 사회적 편견부터 고쳐드립니다”‘소통’과 ‘행복’에 목 마른 사회가 잠들어 있던 ‘심리학’ 깨웠다“[포토] 사유리-곽금주 교수의 유쾌한 심리상담”“"올해 한국인 평균 영화관람횟수 세계 1위"(종합)”“[게임연중기획] 게임은 문화다-여가활동 1순위 게임”“영화속 ‘영어 지상주의’ …“왠지 씁쓸한데””“2월 `신문 부수 인증기관` 지정..방송법 후속작업”“무료신문 성장동력 ‘차별성’과 ‘갈등해소’”대한민국 국회 법률지식정보시스템"Pew Research Center's Religion & Public Life Project: South Korea"“amp;vwcd=MT_ZTITLE&path=인구·가구%20>%20인구총조사%20>%20인구부문%20>%20 총조사인구(2005)%20>%20전수부문&oper_YN=Y&item=&keyword=종교별%20인구& amp;lang_mode=kor&list_id= 2005년 통계청 인구 총조사”원본 문서“한국인이 좋아하는 취미와 운동 (2004-2009)”“한국인이 좋아하는 취미와 운동 (2004-2014)”Archived“한국, `부분적 언론자유국' 강등〈프리덤하우스〉”“국경없는기자회 "한국, 인터넷감시 대상국"”“한국, 조선산업 1위 유지(S. Korea Stays Top Shipbuilding Nation) RZD-Partner Portal”원본 문서“한국, 4년 만에 ‘선박건조 1위’”“옛 마산시,인터넷속도 세계 1위”“"한국 초고속 인터넷망 세계1위"”“인터넷·휴대폰 요금, 외국보다 훨씬 비싸”“한국 관세행정 6년 연속 세계 '1위'”“한국 교통사고 사망자 수 OECD 회원국 중 2위”“결핵 후진국' 한국, 환자가 급증한 이유는”“수술은 신중해야… 자칫하면 생명 위협”대한민국분류대한민국의 지도대한민국 정부대표 다국어포털대한민국 전자정부대한민국 국회한국방송공사about korea and information korea브리태니커 백과사전(한국편)론리플래닛의 정보(한국편)CIA의 세계 정보(한국편)마리암 부디아 (Mariam Budia),『한국: 하늘이 내린 한 폭의 그림』, 서울: 트랜스라틴 19호 (2012년 3월)대한민국ehehehehehehehehehehehehehehWorldCat132441370n791268020000 0001 2308 81034078029-6026373548cb11863345f(데이터)00573706ge128495