• Keine Ergebnisse gefunden

Gromov’s a-T-menability and free-by-free groups Fran¸cois Gautero

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2022

Aktie "Gromov’s a-T-menability and free-by-free groups Fran¸cois Gautero"

Copied!
1
0
0

Wird geladen.... (Jetzt Volltext ansehen)

Volltext

(1)

Gromov’s a-T-menability and free-by-free groups Fran¸ cois Gautero

Abstract: While trying to prove the “metric-approximation property” (aC-algebra property) for free groups, at the end of the seventies Haagerup proved that any finitely generated free group admits a proper conditionnally negative definite func- tion. This property appeared to have some interest on its own and was then called

“Haagerup property”. It was later rediscovered by Gromov as a kind of converse to the more famous Kazhdan property (T) (a group having both Haagerup and Kazh- dan properties is a compact group) and was then termed Gromov’s a-T-menability.

Amenable groups are a-T-menable. Since then a-T-menability has been intensively studied, however not so many thing are known about its preservation under ex- tension: there are examples of abelian-by-(free non abelian groups) which are not Haagerup (Burger, de la Harpe-Valette) whereas any (a-T-menable)-by-amenable group is (Jolissaint). A natural question is whether the semi-direct product of two free non abelian groups is a-T-menable. The aim of this talk is to give a first non- trivial example of such an a-T-menable group. The main ingredient of the proof is the construction of a space with walls structure as introduced by Haglund-Paulin. If time permits we will try to show why we can hope to prove that any such extension over polynomially growing automorphisms of the free group is a-T-menable.

1

Referenzen

ÄHNLICHE DOKUMENTE

Instead, we follow a different strategy in order to construct an explicit measure-valued solution for the compressible Euler equations which can not be generated by a sequence

If all nonzero finite dimensional rational representations of G are semisimple, i.e., every subrepresentation has a G-stable linear complement, then the ring of invariants R G

Unfortunately, it is unclear whether Steup thinks that Albert is a paradigm case for unfree will or for unfree belief, or maybe for both. What exactly is the freedom undermining

Abstract: We discuss Rips and Segev’s construction of a torsion- free group without unique product property.. This is interesting in connection with Kaplansky’s zero-divisor

We discuss various (still open) questions on approximation of infinite discrete groups.. We focus on finite-dimensional approximations such as residual finiteness

There is a precise account of how the causal pictures relate according to the two perspectives. We may represent the causal relations according to the empirical perspective

Somehow, I sense only insufficient awareness of the fact, outlined above, that the causal relations are to be judged differently in the two perspectives, that is, of the

A main ingredient in the proof of Theorem 1.2 is the solution of a noncommutative mo- ment problem via rank preserving extensions of multivariate Hankel matrices.. It is described