Affinely Prime Dynamical Systems

Hillel FURSTENBERG Eli GLASNER Benjamin WEISS

(Dedicated to Professor Haim Brezis on the occasion of his 70th birthday)

1 Introduction

The classical theory of group representations deals with representing a group as automorphisms of vector spaces.In principle,one can take any category with its morphisms and study representing a group by automorphisms of objects in this category.In what follows,we shall do this for the category of compact convex spaces with morphisms preserving the affine structure.There is particular interest in the “irreducible” representations where no proper “subobject”is invariant under the action.A pleasant aspect of this theory is that for any group,there is a “universal” irreducible representation from which all others can be derived.Moreover,for many groups,the universal irreducible representation can be described explicitly.Following our preliminary discussion,we focus on the group PSL(2,R),or equivalently,on the M?bius group of analytic maps preserving the unit disc of the complex plane.Denote the latter group by G.We show,following[3],that each bounded harmonic function on the disc leads to an irreducible representation of G on a compact,convex subset of L∞(G).Since there is an abundance of bounded harmonic functions on the disc,we might expect to find a great variety of non-equivalent irreducible representations of PSL(2,R).This was our initial guess and the motivation for the ensuing research.As it turns out,the universal irreducible representation of the M?bius group is given by the natural action on probability measures on the unit circle.Moreover,we show that this representation is “prime”,meaning that no other irreducible representation can be derived from this one.This means,in particular,that all non-constant harmonic functions lead to equivalent irreducible representations.

In Section 2,we develop the rudiments of the theory of irreducible affine dynamical systems and introduce the notion of an affinely prime dynamical system.In Section 3,we consider the group G of M?bius transformations preserving the unit disk D ? C,which is topologically isomorphic to the group PSL(2,R).As was shown in[3],the action of G on the boundary S1of D is minimal and strongly proximal,and moreover the system(S1,G)is the universal minimal and strongly proximal G-action,denoted asΠs(G).This is the same as saying that the induced action of G on the space M(S1)of probability measures on S1is the universal irreducible affine action of G.We prove that in fact,up to affine isomorphism,the irreducible affine system(M(Πs(G)),G)=(M(S1),G)is the unique irreducible affine G-system.In the last section we show,following[3],that there is a one-to-one correspondence between bounded harmonic functions h on the unit disk D～=G/K(where K?G is the subgroup of rotations of D)and irreducible affine systems(Qh,G)in L∞(G),where each such irreducible system contains a unique K invariant function which is the lift of h from G/K to G.Moreover,as a consequence of the analysis of the previous section,all the affine systems Qhare isomorphic to the universal irreducible affine system(M(S1),G)=(M(Πs(G)),G).

We thank David Kazhdan and Erez Lapid for several helpful conversations that,eventually,led us to a simpler and more elegant proof of Theorem 3.1.

2 Affinely Prime Dynamical Systems

A dynamical system(X,G,ψ)is a triple consisting of a compact metric space X,a topological group G and a continuous homomorphismψ:G→Homeo(X),the Polish group of homeomorphisms of X equipped with the compact open topology.As a rule,we will suppress the homomorphismψand,given x∈X and g∈G,write gx forψ(g)(x).A dynamical system is nontrivial when it contains more than one point.Given two G dynamical systems,a homomorphismπ:(X,G)→(Y,G)is a continuous map of X into Y which intertwines the G-actions.Whenπis surjective we say that it is a factor map and that Y is a factor of X.A dynamical system(X,G)is prime if every factor mapπ:(X,G)→(Y,G)with Y nontrivial is one-to-one.

If(X,G)is a dynamical system and Y?X is an invariant closed subset,we say that(Y,G),the restriction of the action of G to Y,is a subsystem.When(X,G)has no proper subsystems,we say that it is minimal.This is of course the case if and only if the orbit Gx of every point x∈X is dense.We say that two points x,y in a system X are proximal,if there exists a point z∈X and a sequence gn∈G such that lim gnx=lim gny=z.The system(X,G)is proximal,if every pair of points in X is proximal.

Lemma 2.1A nontrivial prime dynamical system is either minimal,or it has a unique fixed point,and every other point has a dense orbit.

ProofLet(X,G)be a nontrivial prime dynamical system.If X properly contains a closed G-invariant subset,which contains more than one point,form the set

This is an icer(i.e.,an invariant closed equivalence relation)on X,and the corresponding homomorphismπ:X→X/R is non-trivial,contradicting primality.

Thus every proper closed invariant subset of X is a singleton.It follows that if X is not minimal,then it has a unique fixed point,and every other point has a dense orbit,as claimed.

The space M(X)of probability measures on X will be equipped with its natural weak?topology which is inherited from C(X)?where a measure is identified with the corresponding linear functional on C(X),the Banach algebra of real valued continuous functions on X.The compact metric space M(X)also supports an affine structure and the G-action on X induces a continuous affine action of G on M(X).In general,if Q is a compact convex metrisable subset of a locally convex topological vector space,and G acts on Q as a group of continuous affine maps(i.e.,each g∈G preserves convex combinations),we say that(Q,G)is an affine dynamical system.

For more details on the notions and results introduced below,see,e.g.,[6].

Definition 2.1(1)Let(X,G)be a dynamical system and(Q,G)be an affine dynamical system.We say that Q is an affine compactification of X,if there is a homomorphism?:X→Q such thatwhere fordenotes the closed convex hull of the set A.When?is one-to-one,we say that it is faithful(or that it is an affine embedding).

(2)An affine dynamical system(Q,G)is irreducible,if it does not contain properly any affine subsystem,i.e.,if whenever Q′? Q is a closed convex and G-invariant subset,then Q′=Q.

(3)An affine dynamical system(Q,G)is affinely prime,if it does not admit any proper factor affine system,i.e.,if wheneverπ:Q → Q′is an affine surjective homomorphism with Q′nontrivial,thenπis one-to-one.

(4)A dynamical system(X,G)is affinely prime,if with respect to the canonical faithful affine compactification ?:X →M(X)given by?(x)=δx,the associated affine system(M(X),G)is affinely prime.

(5)A dynamical system(X,G)is strongly proximal,if for everyμ∈M(X),there is a sequence of elements gn∈G and a point x∈X such that lim gnμ=δx,the point mass at x.

The next proposition follows easily from Choquet’s theory(see,e.g.,[8]).

Proposition 2.1(1)If Q is an affine dynamical system and(where ext(Q)denotes the set of extreme points of Q),then Q is a faithful affine compactification of X.

(2)For a dynamical system(X,G),the canonical affine compactification defined on(M(X),G)is universal,i.e.,for any affine compactification?:X→Q,there is a uniquely defined(barycenter)mapβ :M(X)→ Q withβ(δx)= ?(x)for every x∈ X.

Lemma 2.2If(Q,G)is an irreducible affine system and A?Q is any closed G-invariant subset,then A contains ext(Q).

ProofThe barycenter map takes M(A)onto Q,so,in particular,each extremal is the barycenter of a measure on A which by extremality must be the corresponding point mass.

Lemma 2.3For a dynamical system(X,G),the affine compactification M(X)is irreducible if and only if(X,G)is minimal and strongly proximal.

ProofIf Y?X is a proper closed invariant subset,then M(Y)(M(X).Thus irreducibility of M(X)implies minimality of X.Given any elementμ∈M(X),letandThe latter is an affine sub-system of M(X).If M(X)is irreducible,it follows that Qμ=M(X).From Lemma 2.2,we have Zμ? ext(M(X))={δx:x∈ X},whence X is strongly proximal.

Conversely,if(X,G)is minimal and strongly proximal,then it is easy to see that every Qμ=M(X),i.e.,M(X)is irreducible.

In the following lemma,we recall some basic facts about affine systems and also provide the short proofs.

Lemma 2.4(1)A proximal system contains exactly one minimal subsystem.

(2)A minimal proximal system admits no endomorphisms other than the identity automorphism.

(3)A system(X,T)is strongly proximal if and only if the system(M(X),G)is proximal.In particular,a strongly proximal system is proximal.

(4)For an affine irreducible system(Q,G),let X denote the closure of the extreme points of Q.Then X is the unique minimal subsystem of Q and the system(X,G)is strongly proximal.

(5)If there is a homomorphismπ:Q→P,where(Q,G)and(P,G)are irreducible affine systems then it is unique.In particular,the only affine endomorphism of an irreducible affine system is the identity.

Proof(1)By Zorn’s lemma,every dynamical system contains at least one minimal subsystem.But if x,y∈X belong to two distinct minimal subsystems,they can not be proximal.

(2)Suppose that(X,G)is minimal and proximal,and that?:X→X is an endomorphism.Since the pair(x,?(x))is proximal,there is a sequence gn∈ G with lim gn(x,?(x))=(z,z)for some z∈X,whence z=?(z).Since X is minimal,this implies that?=id.

(3)Clearly proximality of M(X)implies strong proximality of X.Conversely,let(X,G)be a strongly proximal system.Given x,y∈X,form the measure.There exists a point z∈ X and a sequence gn∈ G with lim gnμ = δz,and,asδzis an extreme point of M(X),it is easy to see that this implies that lim gnx=lim gny=z.Thus any two points in X are proximal,i.e.,X is a proximal system.It is now easy to see that M(X)is also proximal.

(4)By Proposition 2.1 there is an affine surjective homomorphismβ:M(X)→Q.Givenμ∈M(X),letThen,by the irreducibility of Q,we have β(Qμ)=Q.In particular,for every extreme point w ∈ext(Q)? X,there isν ∈Qμwith β(ν)=w.As w is an extreme point,this implies thatν = δw∈ X.It follows that X ? Qμ,whence Qμ=M(X).Thus M(X)isalso irreducible and an application of Lemma 2.3 concludes the proof.

(5)Supposethatπ:Q→P andσ:Q→P are two affine homomorphisms.LetandWe know that both X and Y are proximal and minimal systems.For every x ∈ X,we consider the pair(π(x),σ(x)).This is a proximal pair in Y and thus for some sequence gn∈ G,we have lim(gnπ(x),gnσ(x))=(y,y)for some y∈ Y.However,we can also assume that the limit lim gnx=z ∈ X exists,and then(y,y)=(π(z),σ(z)),henceπ(z)= σ(z).X being minimal,this implies that π(z′)= σ(z′)for every z′∈ X,and finally,as π and σ are affine maps,this leads to the conclusion thatπ=σ.

For any topological group G there exists a universal minimal strongly proximal system which we denote by Πs(G).Recalling the fact that a group G is amenable if and only if every compact dynamical system(X,G)admits an invariant probability measure,we see that a group G is amenable if and only if the space Πs(G)is a trivial one point space.The following is a consequence of(4).

Corollary 2.1The affine dynamical system(M(Πs(G)),G)is irreducible and it is the universal affine system for irreducible affine G systems,i.e.,for any irreducible affine G system Q,there is a unique surjective affine homomorphism Θ :M(Πs(G))→ Q.In particular,if Πs(G)is affinely prime,then M(Πs(G))is the only nontrivial irreducible affine G-system.

The next definition is reminiscent of the classical Stone-Weierstrass theorem.

Definition 2.2We say that a dynamical system(X,G)has the linear Stone-Weierstrass property(LSW),if for every non-constant function f∈C(X)the uniformly closed linear span Vfof the set{fg:g∈G}∪{1}is all of C(X)(here fg(x)=f(gx)).

Proposition 2.2A dynamical system has LSW if and only if it is affinely prime.ProofFor a function f∈C(X),we denote by∈Aff(M(X))the map

Suppose first that X has the LSW property,and letπ:M(X)→Q be an affine homomorphism with nontrivial Q.Let Aff(Q)denote the collection of continuous affine real valued functions on Q,and let

The LSW property implies that A(Q)=C(X).Suppose now that π(μ)= π(ν)andThen there is f ∈ C(X)withfor some F ∈ Aff(Q),we havea contradiction.Thusπ is indeed one-to-one.

Conversely,suppose that(X,G)is affinely prime,and let f be a non-constant function in C(X).Let Vfbe as in Definition 2.2.If Vfis a proper subspace of C(X),then the restriction mapμ→μ?Vf,M(X)→Q,where the latter is the state space of Vf,yields a non-injective affine homomorphism of M(X).

Proposition 2.3If(X,G)is affinely prime,then it is prime,whence it is either minimal or it has a unique fixed point and every other point has a dense orbit.

ProofObserve that ifπ:(X,G)→(Y,G)isa surjectivebut non-injective factor map,then the induced mapπ?:M(X)→ M(Y)is a surjective but non-injective affine homomorphism.Thus an affinely prime system is prime.The rest follows from Lemma 2.1.

Definition 2.3We say that a dynamical system(X,G)is completely uniquely ergodic,if it admits a unique G-invariant probability measure,say η,and{η}is the only irreducible affine subsystem of M(X).

Proposition 2.4If(X,G)is affinely prime,then the dynamical system(X,G)satisfies

(1)It is prime;

(2)It is either minimal,or it has a unique fixed point,and every other point has a dense orbit;

(3)It is either completely uniquely ergodic,or it is strongly proximal;

(4)For a minimal affinely prime system which is not completely uniquely ergodic,M(X)is irreducible.

Proof(1)Observe that ifπ:(X,G)→(Y,G)is a surjective but non-injective factor map,then the induced mapπ?:M(X)→ M(Y)is a surjective but non-injective affine homomorphism.Thus an affinely prime system is prime.

(2)This now follows from Lemma 2.1.

(3)Assume that X is not strongly proximal.Then there is a probability measureξ∈M(X)whose orbit closuredoes not meet X.It follows thatis a nonempty closed convex and G-invariant proper subset of M(X).

Now given any nonempty closed convex and G-invariant proper subset Q of M(X),set

Suppose first that L=C(X)?.Then in particular,every point mass δxis in L,and there is a sequencesuch that.Letwithand an,bn≥0.It follows that bnνn→ 0 and μn→ δx.We conclude that Q=M(X).Thus in this case X is minimal and strongly proximal.

Suppose next that L is a proper subspace of C(X)?.Fix some ? ∈ C(X)?L.By the Hahn-Banach separation theorem(see,e.g.,[2,Corollary 11,p.418]),there is a function f∈C(X)such that?(f)=1 andψ(f)≥ 0 for allψ ∈ L.Since L is a subspace,it follows thatψ(f)=0 for allψ∈L.

Thus f is an element of the norm closed G-invariant subspace L⊥?C(X)defined by

Next define V=L⊥⊕R1,where the latter stands for the space of constant functions.If V is a proper subspace of C(X),this contradicts the assumption that X has the LSW property.So we now assume that V=C(X).

Case 1There exists Q as above which contains more than one element.

Let ν1,ν2be two distinct elements of Q,and let F ∈ C(X)be such thatWe write F=h+c1 with h∈L⊥and c∈R,and then get

a contradiction.

Case 2Every closed G-invariant convex proper subset of M(X)is a singleton.

In this case,the collection K of G-invariant probability measures is a closed convex G-invariant subspace of M(X).Now,as we assume that(X,G)is not trivial,the case where K is not a singleton can be ruled out,as in Case 1 above,and we are left with the case,where K=Q={η}is the only closed convex G-invariant subset of M(X),which is,by definition,the case of complete unique ergodicity.

(4)This follows from part(3)and Lemma 2.3.

The following diagram sums up the various possible situations described in Proposition 2.4.

Table 1 Affinely prime systems

Remark 2.1The converse of Proposition 2.4(4),of course,does not hold.There are many minimal strongly proximal systems(so with M(X)irreducible)which are not even prime(see,e.g.,Examples 3.1 and 3.2 below).

Example 2.1(1)For every prime p,the map Tx=x+1(mod p)generatesa primesystem(Zp,T).It is affinely prime(over R)only for p=2,3.

(2)Let X be the Cantor set and G=Homeo(X),the group of self-homeomorphisms of X.The system(X,G)has LSW.

(3)Let X=S2,the two dimensional sphere in R3,and G=Homeo(X),the group of self-homeomorphisms of X.The system(X,G)has LSW.

(4)Take X=S2again,but now consider the action of H

(5)Let X=Z∪{∞}be the one point compactification of the integers,and T be the translation Tx=x+1 on Z which fixes the point at infinity.It is easy to check that X is prime and strongly proximal.However,it does not have the LSW property.

Proof(1)It is clear when one considers the associated Koopman representation on

(2)Let f be a non-constant function in C(X).Rescaling we can assume that 0≤f(x)≤1 for every x∈X,and that the values 0 and 1 are attained,say f(x0)=0 and f(x1)=1.

Suppose

Then there exists a functional 0μ ∈ C(X)?such thatμ(h)=0 for every h ∈ Vf.We think ofμas a signed measure and writeμ=μ0?μ1,whereμ0andμ1are non-negative measures,such that for some Borel set B ? X,μ0(B)= μ0(X)andμ1(XB)= μ1(X).Since 1∈ Vf,we haveμ(X)= μ0(X)? μ1(X)=0,whence μ0(X)= μ1(X)=a>0.Again without loss of generality,we assume thatμ0(X)= μ1(X)=a=1.

Given,we can find closed subsets K0?B and K1?XB,such thatμi(Ki)>(1??),i=0,1.

Next choose a sequence gn∈G,such that,1,in the sense that for every two open neighbourhoods Uiof xi,there is n0with gnKi?Vifor all n≥n0.

We also assume,as we may,that the limitsexist,and that νi=where(1??)

Now

But,as f∈Vf,these two limits are equal,and we arrive at the absurd inequality

(3)As in the previous proof,given f a non-constant function is C(X),we rescale f,form the space Vfand proceed as above.When we choose the closed disjoint sets K0,K1,we can assume that they are Cantor sets.We claim that there is a smooth closed simple Jordan curve with A ? ins(γ)and B ? out(γ).In fact,this follows easily e.g.from[1,Proposition 1.8,p.4].Now we again proceed as in part(2)above,and choose the homeomorphisms gn,so that their restriction to a sufficiently small neighborhood ofγis the identity.The rest of the proof goes verbatim as in part(2).

(4)A similar argument.

(5)In order to see this observe first that C(X)～=c(Z),the Banach space of converging sequences in RZ.It is now sufficient to show that the closed Banach subspace c0(Z)(consisting of those sequences whose limit is zero)contains a closed T-invariant proper subspace.However,such(even symmetric,i.e.,S∞(Z)-invariant)subspaces exist in abundance(see,e.g.,[4–5]).

Remark 2.2(1)For the case where X=S1and G=Homeo(S1),see Corollary 3.2 below.

(2)With some more work,one can show that,with X=Sn,n=3,4,···,or X=Q,the Hilbert cube,the systems(X,Homeo(X))are affinely prime.

Problem 2.1Is there a non-trivial,minimal,weakly mixing,uniquely ergodic cascade(X,T)which is affinely prime?

Remark 2.3We note that if a cascade(X,T)as in Problem 2.1 exists and μ is its unique invariant measure,then the ergodic measure preserving system(X,μ,T)has necessarily simple spectrum.

3 The Group of M?bius Transformations Preserving the Unit Disc

Let G be the group of M?bius transformations preserving the unit disk D={z ∈ C:|z|<1}(see,e.g.,[7,p.72]),

G also acts on the circle S1={ζ∈ C:|ζ|=1}.As was shown in[3],the system(S1,G)is the universal minimal strongly proximal G-system,Πs(G).Another representation of this system is as the group PSL(2,R)acting on the projective line P1comprising the lines through the origin in R2.

Theorem 3.1The system(P1,PSL(2,R))is affinely prime.Equivalently,the group G of M?bius transformations preserving the unit disk acting on the circle S1has the LSW property.

ProofWe will work with the version,where G is the M?bius group acting on X=S1.

We begin by analyzing the case of complex valued functions.Let V be a closed linear subspace of C(S1,C)invariant under G that contains a non-constant function f.For all 0n∈Z,the convolution of f with einθ

is also contained in V.Therefore,ifit follows that the function einθis in V.As f is not a constant,there is somefor which.We fix such an n,and,applying the transformationwe see that for all t,the functionbelongs to V.Upon differentiating with respect to t at t=0,we see that the function,and hence also the functions,are all in V.

This procedure can be iterated,and we conclude that V contains either Of course in the latter case,we have V=C(S1,C).

The first alternative happens when V consists of the boundary values of analytic functions in D which are continuous onthe second happens,when V consists of the boundary values of anti-analytic functions in D which are continuous on

Now,for real valued functions,these first two cases do not apply since a non-constant analytic function cannot map the boundary to the real line.Thus starting with a G-invariant closed subspace U?C(S1,R)which contains a non-constant function and considering its complexification,we conclude that U=C(S1,R)as claimed.

From Corollary 2.1,we now get the following result.

Corollary 3.1For G=PSL(2,R),the affine system M(Πs(G))=M(P1)is the only nontrivial irreducible affine G-system.

Another immediate consequence of Theorem 3.1 is the following.

Corollary 3.2The dynamical system(S1,Homeo(S1))is affinely prime.

Example 3.1As was shown in[3],Πs(G),the universal minimal strongly proximal dynamical system for the group G=PSL(3,R)is the flag manifold,

The dynamical system(F,G)however is not affinely prime,since it admits(up to conjugacy)two(isomorphic)proper factors,namely the actions of G on the Grassman varieties Gr(3,1)and Gr(3,2)consisting of the lines and planes through the origin in R3,respectively(both are copies of the projective plane P2).More generally,the corresponding flag manifold is the universal minimal strongly proximal dynamical system for all the groups G=PSL(d+1,R),d≥2 and a similar situation occurs.See Remark 3.1 below.

Remark 3.1Let G=PSL(d+1,R),d≥2 and X=Pdbe the projective space.With the natural action of G on X,the system(X,G)is minimal,strongly proximal and prime.In fact,we can show that these actions as well are affinely prime.We plan to return to this in a future work.

Example 3.2Let X denotetheone-sided reduced sequenceson the symbols{a,a?1,b,b?1},and let G=F2,the free group on the symbols a and b,act on X by concatenation and cancelation.The dynamical system(X,G)is minimal and strongly proximal(see,e.g.,[6,pp.26,41]).However,it is not prime and a fortiori,not affinely prime.To see this,let x=a∞=aaa···andand consider the set

It is easy to see that this is a closed G-invariant equivalence relation on X,and consequently the induced mapπ:X→X/R yields a proper factor of X.

4 Harmonic Functions and Irreducible Affine Dynamical Systems

Let G be the group of M?bius transformations which preserve the unit disk D={z∈C:|z|<1},as in Theorem 3.1.We let K denote the subgroup of rotations in G.The disk D can be identified with the quotient G/K by the map g 7→ g(0)∈ D.G is a locally compact,unimodular group with Haar measure dg,and we can associate G with the Banach spaces L1(G)and its dual L∞(G).With respect to the weak?topology,BR,the ball of radius R centered at the origin in L∞(G),is compact and metrizable.The group G operates on BRbywhere

Recall that a real valued function h on D is harmonic,if it satisfies the mean value property:

We will show that a harmonic function f(z),z∈D,|f(z)|≤R induces an irreducible affine dynamical system(Qf,G)with Qf?BR.Moreover,we will see that any irreducible affine subsystem Q?BRcontains a unique function arising from a bounded harmonic function on D.For more background and details on the topic of this section,see[3].

Given f bounded harmonic on D,defineThat is,is the function on G obtained by lifting f from G/K to G.The mean value property of harmonic functions implies that for z′∈ D,

Setting z′=g′(0),we have

and since for any g∈G,f?g is again harmonic

or

Now let Qfdenote the closed,convex span ofEquation(4.1)implies that for any F∈Qf,

Thusbelongs to the closed convex span of{kF:k∈K}for any F∈Qf.This shows that(Qf,G)is an irreducible affine system.

Now let Q?L∞(G)be any invariant closed convex subset,such that(Q,G)is irreducible.The universal minimal strongly proximal space,Πs(G)is the unit circle S1and so,by Corollary 2.1,(M(S1),G)is the universal irreducible affine system for G.In M(S1),there is a unique K-invariant measure,and it follows that in Q as well,there is a unique K-invariant point.As Q is a space of functions on G,its unique K fixed point is a function H(g)satisfying H(gk)=H(g)for g∈G,k∈K.Thus H depends on gK and is the pullback of a function h on D.For any fixed g′∈ G,consider the function

We have H′∈ Q and for k ∈ K,H′(gk)=H′(g).So H′is K-invariant.But this function is unique.So H′=H.We have H(g)=∫KH(gkg′)d k or

for any z′∈ D.But,in fact,equation(4.2)characterises harmonic functions.

This discussion,combined with Theorem 3.1 proves the following result.

Theorem 4.1There is a one-to-one correspondence between bounded(non-constant)harmonic functions h on D and irreducible affine subsystems(Q,G)of L∞(G).Namely,

wherethe lift of h to G,is the unique K-invariant function in Q.Moreover,all the affine systems Qhare isomorphic to the universal irreducible affine system

[1]Conway,J.B.,Functions of one complex variable.II,Graduate Texts in Mathematics,159,Springer-Verlag,New York,1995.

[2]Dunford,N.and Schwartz,J.,Linear Operators,Part I,3rd printing,Interscience,New York,1966.

[3]Furstenberg,H.,A Poisson formula for semi-simple Lie groups,Ann.of Math.,77,1963,335–386.

[4]Garling,D.J.H.,On symmetric sequence spaces,Proc.London Math.Soc.,16(3),1966,85–106.

[5]Garling,D.J.H.,On ideals of operators in Hilbert space,Proc.London Math.Soc.,17(3),1967,115–138.

[6]Glasner,S.,Proximal flows,Lecture Notes in Math.,517,Springer-Verlag,New York,1976.

[7]Lehner,J.,Discontinuous groups and automorphic functions,Mathematical Surveys,No.VIII,American Mathematical Society,Providence,RI,1964.

[8]Phelps,R.R.,Choquet’s theorem,2nd edition,Lecture Notes in Mathematics,1757,Springer-Verlag,Berlin,2001.