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

                      Cannot Extend partition with GParted The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern) 2019 Community Moderator Election ResultsCan't increase partition size with GParted?GParted doesn't recognize the unallocated space after my current partitionWhat is the best way to add unallocated space located before to Ubuntu 12.04 partition with GParted live?I can't figure out how to extend my Arch home partition into free spaceGparted Linux Mint 18.1 issueTrying to extend but swap partition is showing as Unknown in Gparted, shows proper from fdiskRearrange partitions in gparted to extend a partitionUnable to extend partition even though unallocated space is next to it using GPartedAllocate free space to root partitiongparted: how to merge unallocated space with a partition

                      Marilyn Monroe Ny fiainany manokana | Jereo koa | Meny fitetezanafanitarana azy.