Interesting examples of non-locally compact topological groups












9












$begingroup$


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
    yesterday






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Konstantinos, thank you, I did it!
    $endgroup$
    – Sergei Akbarov
    yesterday






  • 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
    yesterday






  • 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
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @SergeiAkbarov Presumably the standard one, induced by inclusion in $mathbb R$
    $endgroup$
    – Wojowu
    19 hours ago
















9












$begingroup$


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
    yesterday






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Konstantinos, thank you, I did it!
    $endgroup$
    – Sergei Akbarov
    yesterday






  • 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
    yesterday






  • 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
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @SergeiAkbarov Presumably the standard one, induced by inclusion in $mathbb R$
    $endgroup$
    – Wojowu
    19 hours ago














9












9








9


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 yesterday


























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
    yesterday






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Konstantinos, thank you, I did it!
    $endgroup$
    – Sergei Akbarov
    yesterday






  • 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
    yesterday






  • 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
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @SergeiAkbarov Presumably the standard one, induced by inclusion in $mathbb R$
    $endgroup$
    – Wojowu
    19 hours ago














  • 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
    yesterday






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Konstantinos, thank you, I did it!
    $endgroup$
    – Sergei Akbarov
    yesterday






  • 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
    yesterday






  • 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
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @SergeiAkbarov Presumably the standard one, induced by inclusion in $mathbb R$
    $endgroup$
    – Wojowu
    19 hours ago








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
yesterday




$begingroup$
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
yesterday




2




2




$begingroup$
Konstantinos, thank you, I did it!
$endgroup$
– Sergei Akbarov
yesterday




$begingroup$
Konstantinos, thank you, I did it!
$endgroup$
– Sergei Akbarov
yesterday




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
yesterday




$begingroup$
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
yesterday




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
yesterday




$begingroup$
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
yesterday




1




1




$begingroup$
@SergeiAkbarov Presumably the standard one, induced by inclusion in $mathbb R$
$endgroup$
– Wojowu
19 hours ago




$begingroup$
@SergeiAkbarov Presumably the standard one, induced by inclusion in $mathbb R$
$endgroup$
– Wojowu
19 hours ago










6 Answers
6






active

oldest

votes


















6












$begingroup$

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
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    @Sergei Akbarov - Where do you see this?
    $endgroup$
    – R W
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    In the paper by Vladimir Pestov: the multiplication in $U(ell^2)$ is separately continuous with respect to the pointwise convergence, not jointly.
    $endgroup$
    – Sergei Akbarov
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Sergei Akhbarov The multiplication in the unitary group is jointly continuous in the operator topology.
    $endgroup$
    – user95282
    yesterday






  • 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
    yesterday



















6












$begingroup$



  • 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
    20 hours ago






  • 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
    20 hours ago





















5












$begingroup$

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




  • The rationals $mathbb{Q}$ 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 $mathbb{R}^omega$, but for instance, $mathbb{Z}^omega$ is another simple example (it's homeomorphic to Baire space, and to the set of irrationals in $mathbb{R}$). 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
    6 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @SergeiAkbarov, perhaps you might ask a number theorist …?
    $endgroup$
    – LSpice
    6 hours 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












    $begingroup$

    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











    $endgroup$





















      0












      $begingroup$

      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









        6












        $begingroup$

        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
          yesterday










        • $begingroup$
          @Sergei Akbarov - Where do you see this?
          $endgroup$
          – R W
          yesterday










        • $begingroup$
          In the paper by Vladimir Pestov: the multiplication in $U(ell^2)$ is separately continuous with respect to the pointwise convergence, not jointly.
          $endgroup$
          – Sergei Akbarov
          yesterday






        • 1




          $begingroup$
          @Sergei Akhbarov The multiplication in the unitary group is jointly continuous in the operator topology.
          $endgroup$
          – user95282
          yesterday






        • 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
          yesterday
















        6












        $begingroup$

        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
          yesterday










        • $begingroup$
          @Sergei Akbarov - Where do you see this?
          $endgroup$
          – R W
          yesterday










        • $begingroup$
          In the paper by Vladimir Pestov: the multiplication in $U(ell^2)$ is separately continuous with respect to the pointwise convergence, not jointly.
          $endgroup$
          – Sergei Akbarov
          yesterday






        • 1




          $begingroup$
          @Sergei Akhbarov The multiplication in the unitary group is jointly continuous in the operator topology.
          $endgroup$
          – user95282
          yesterday






        • 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
          yesterday














        6












        6








        6





        $begingroup$

        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 yesterday


























        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
          yesterday










        • $begingroup$
          @Sergei Akbarov - Where do you see this?
          $endgroup$
          – R W
          yesterday










        • $begingroup$
          In the paper by Vladimir Pestov: the multiplication in $U(ell^2)$ is separately continuous with respect to the pointwise convergence, not jointly.
          $endgroup$
          – Sergei Akbarov
          yesterday






        • 1




          $begingroup$
          @Sergei Akhbarov The multiplication in the unitary group is jointly continuous in the operator topology.
          $endgroup$
          – user95282
          yesterday






        • 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
          yesterday


















        • $begingroup$
          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
          yesterday










        • $begingroup$
          @Sergei Akbarov - Where do you see this?
          $endgroup$
          – R W
          yesterday










        • $begingroup$
          In the paper by Vladimir Pestov: the multiplication in $U(ell^2)$ is separately continuous with respect to the pointwise convergence, not jointly.
          $endgroup$
          – Sergei Akbarov
          yesterday






        • 1




          $begingroup$
          @Sergei Akhbarov The multiplication in the unitary group is jointly continuous in the operator topology.
          $endgroup$
          – user95282
          yesterday






        • 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
          yesterday
















        $begingroup$
        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
        yesterday




        $begingroup$
        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
        yesterday












        $begingroup$
        @Sergei Akbarov - Where do you see this?
        $endgroup$
        – R W
        yesterday




        $begingroup$
        @Sergei Akbarov - Where do you see this?
        $endgroup$
        – R W
        yesterday












        $begingroup$
        In the paper by Vladimir Pestov: the multiplication in $U(ell^2)$ is separately continuous with respect to the pointwise convergence, not jointly.
        $endgroup$
        – Sergei Akbarov
        yesterday




        $begingroup$
        In the paper by Vladimir Pestov: the multiplication in $U(ell^2)$ is separately continuous with respect to the pointwise convergence, not jointly.
        $endgroup$
        – Sergei Akbarov
        yesterday




        1




        1




        $begingroup$
        @Sergei Akhbarov The multiplication in the unitary group is jointly continuous in the operator topology.
        $endgroup$
        – user95282
        yesterday




        $begingroup$
        @Sergei Akhbarov The multiplication in the unitary group is jointly continuous in the operator topology.
        $endgroup$
        – user95282
        yesterday




        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
        yesterday




        $begingroup$
        @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
        yesterday











        6












        $begingroup$



        • 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
          20 hours ago






        • 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
          20 hours ago


















        6












        $begingroup$



        • 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
          20 hours ago






        • 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
          20 hours ago
















        6












        6








        6





        $begingroup$



        • 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 21 hours ago


























        community wiki





        Francois Ziegler













        • $begingroup$
          Francois, could you, please, say a few words on where this is used?
          $endgroup$
          – Sergei Akbarov
          20 hours ago






        • 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
          20 hours ago




















        • $begingroup$
          Francois, could you, please, say a few words on where this is used?
          $endgroup$
          – Sergei Akbarov
          20 hours ago






        • 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
          20 hours ago


















        $begingroup$
        Francois, could you, please, say a few words on where this is used?
        $endgroup$
        – Sergei Akbarov
        20 hours ago




        $begingroup$
        Francois, could you, please, say a few words on where this is used?
        $endgroup$
        – Sergei Akbarov
        20 hours ago




        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
        20 hours ago






        $begingroup$
        @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
        20 hours ago













        5












        $begingroup$

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




        • The rationals $mathbb{Q}$ 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 $mathbb{R}^omega$, but for instance, $mathbb{Z}^omega$ is another simple example (it's homeomorphic to Baire space, and to the set of irrationals in $mathbb{R}$). 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
          6 hours ago










        • $begingroup$
          @SergeiAkbarov, perhaps you might ask a number theorist …?
          $endgroup$
          – LSpice
          6 hours ago
















        5












        $begingroup$

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




        • The rationals $mathbb{Q}$ 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 $mathbb{R}^omega$, but for instance, $mathbb{Z}^omega$ is another simple example (it's homeomorphic to Baire space, and to the set of irrationals in $mathbb{R}$). 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
          6 hours ago










        • $begingroup$
          @SergeiAkbarov, perhaps you might ask a number theorist …?
          $endgroup$
          – LSpice
          6 hours ago














        5












        5








        5





        $begingroup$

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




        • The rationals $mathbb{Q}$ 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 $mathbb{R}^omega$, but for instance, $mathbb{Z}^omega$ is another simple example (it's homeomorphic to Baire space, and to the set of irrationals in $mathbb{R}$). 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 $mathbb{Q}$ 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 $mathbb{R}^omega$, but for instance, $mathbb{Z}^omega$ is another simple example (it's homeomorphic to Baire space, and to the set of irrationals in $mathbb{R}$). 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 11 hours ago


























        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
          6 hours ago










        • $begingroup$
          @SergeiAkbarov, perhaps you might ask a number theorist …?
          $endgroup$
          – LSpice
          6 hours ago


















        • $begingroup$
          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
          6 hours ago










        • $begingroup$
          @SergeiAkbarov, perhaps you might ask a number theorist …?
          $endgroup$
          – LSpice
          6 hours ago
















        $begingroup$
        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
        6 hours ago




        $begingroup$
        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
        6 hours ago












        $begingroup$
        @SergeiAkbarov, perhaps you might ask a number theorist …?
        $endgroup$
        – LSpice
        6 hours ago




        $begingroup$
        @SergeiAkbarov, perhaps you might ask a number theorist …?
        $endgroup$
        – LSpice
        6 hours 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 10 hours ago


























            community wiki





            Tom Goodwillie
























                2












                $begingroup$

                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












                  $begingroup$

                  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












                    2








                    2





                    $begingroup$

                    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 6 hours ago


























                    community wiki





                    2 revs, 2 users 67%
                    Peter Michor
























                        0












                        $begingroup$

                        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











                        $endgroup$


















                          0












                          $begingroup$

                          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











                          $endgroup$
















                            0












                            0








                            0





                            $begingroup$

                            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 5 hours ago


























                            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

                                How did Captain America manage to do this?

                                迪纳利

                                南乌拉尔铁路局