Measure theoretical definition
📜
The statement of the theorem
A dynamical system may be defined formally as a measure-preserving transformation of a measure space, the triplet (T, (X, Σ, μ), Φ). Here, T is a monoid (usually the non-negative integers), X is a set, and (X, Σ, μ) is a probability space, meaning that Σ is a sigma-algebra on X and μ is a finite measure on (X, Σ). A map Φ: X → X is said to be Σ-measurable if and only if, for every σ in Σ, one has . A map Φ is said to preserve the measure if and only if, for every σ in Σ, one has . Combining the above, a map Φ is said to be a measure-preserving transformation of X, if it is a map from X to itself, it is Σ-measurable, and is measure-preserving. The triplet (T, (X, Σ, μ), Φ), for such a Φ, is then defined to be a dynamical system.
The map Φ embodies the time evolution of the dynamical system. Thus, for discrete dynamical systems the iterates for every integer n are studied . For continuous dynamical systems, the map Φ is understood to be a finite time evolution map and the construction is more complicated.
The measure theoretical definition assumes the existence of a measure-preserving transformation. Many different invariant measures can be associated to any one evolution rule. If the dynamical system is given by a system of differential equations the appropriate measure must be determined. This makes it difficult to develop ergodic theory starting from differential equations, so it becomes convenient to have a dynamical systems-motivated definition within ergodic theory that side-steps the choice of measure and assumes the choice has been made. A simple construction (sometimes called the Krylov–Bogolyubov theorem) shows that for a large class of systems it is always possible to construct a measure so as to make the evolution rule of the dynamical system a measure-preserving transformation. In the construction a given measure of the state space is summed for all future points of a trajectory, assuring the invariance.
Some systems have a natural measure, such as the Liouville measure in Hamiltonian systems, chosen over other invariant measures, such as the measures supported on periodic orbits of the Hamiltonian system. For chaotic dissipative systems the choice of invariant measure is technically more challenging. The measure needs to be supported on the attractor, but attractors have zero Lebesgue measure and the invariant measures must be singular with respect to the Lebesgue measure. A small region of phase space shrinks under time evolution.
For hyperbolic dynamical systems, the Sinai–Ruelle–Bowen measures appear to be the natural choice. They are constructed on the geometrical structure of stable and unstable manifolds of the dynamical system; they behave physically under small perturbations; and they explain many of the observed statistics of hyperbolic systems.