0
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

Chaos and mixing homeomorphisms on fans

, , , &
Received 01 Jan 2024, Accepted 14 Jul 2024, Published online: 30 Jul 2024

Abstract

We construct a mixing homeomorphism on both the Lelek fan and the Cantor fan. We also construct a family of uncountably many pairwise non-homeomorphic smooth (and non-smooth) fans that admit mixing homeomorphisms.

2020 Mathematics Subject Classifications:

1. Introduction

In this paper we study mixing homeomorphisms on compact metric spaces. By mixing, in this paper, we mean topologically mixing. First, we study how one can use Mahavier products of closed relations on compact metric spaces to construct dynamical systems (X,f), where f is a mixing homeomorphism. Next, we study quotients of dynamical systems. We start with a dynamical system (X,f) and define an equivalence relation ∼ on X. Then we discuss when the mixing of (X,f) implies the mixing of (X/,f). Finally, we use these techniques

  1. to obtain a mixing homeomorphism on the Lelek fan,

  2. to obtain a mixing homeomorphism on the Cantor fan, and

  3. to construct a family of uncountably many pairwise non-homeomorphic smooth (non-smooth) fans that admit a mixing homeomorphism.

In addition, we show that

  1. there are continuous functions f,h:LL on the Lelek fan L such that

    1. h is a homeomorphism and f is not,

    2. (L,f) and (L,h) are both mixing as well as chaotic in the sense of Robinson but not in the sense of Devaney.

  2. there are continuous functions f,h:CC on the Cantor fan C such that

    1. h is a homeomorphism and f is not,

    2. (C,f) and (C,h) are both mixing as well as chaotic in the sense of Devaney, and

  3. there are continuous functions f,h:CC on the Cantor fan C such that

    1. h is a homeomorphism and f is not,

    2. (C,f) and (C,h) are both mixing as well as chaotic in the sense of Robinson but not in the sense of Devaney.

Note that the example which is mixing and chaotic in the sense of Knudsen, but not in the sense of Devaney, is not possible since mixing implies transitivity.

We proceed as follows. In Section 2, we introduce the definitions, notation and the well-known results that will be used later in the paper. In Section 3, we study mixing of Mahavier dynamical systems and mixing of quotients of dynamical systems. Then, we use these results in Sections 4– 6 to produce mixing homeomorphisms on various examples of fans.

2. Definitions and notation

The following definitions, notation and well-known results are needed in the paper.

Definition 2.1

Let X be a metric space, xX and ε>0. We use B(x,ε) to denote the open ball centered at x with radius ε.

Definition 2.2

We use N to denote the set of positive integers and Z to denote the set of integers.

Definition 2.3

Let (X,d) be a compact metric space. Then we define 2X by 2X={AX|A is a non-empty closed subset of X}.Let ε>0 and let A2X. Then we define Nd(ε,A) by Nd(ε,A)=aAB(a,ε).Let A,B2X. The function Hd:2X×2XR, defined by Hd(A,B)=inf{ε>0|ANd(ε,B),BNd(ε,A)},is called the Hausdorff metric. The Hausdorff metric is in fact a metric and the metric space (2X,Hd) is called a hyperspace of the space (X,d).

Remark 2.1

Let (X,d) be a compact metric space, let A be a non-empty closed subset of X, and let (An) be a sequence of non-empty closed subsets of X. When we say A=limnAn, we mean A=limnAn in (2X,Hd).

Definition 2.4

A continuum is a non-empty compact connected metric space. A subcontinuum is a subspace of a continuum, which is itself a continuum.

Definition 2.5

Let X be a continuum.

  1. The continuum X is unicoherent if for any subcontinua A and B of X such that X=AB, the compactum AB is connected.

  2. The continuum X is hereditarily unicoherent provided that each of its subcontinua is unicoherent.

  3. The continuum X is a dendroid if it is an arcwise connected hereditarily unicoherent continuum.

  4. Let X be a continuum. If X is homeomorphic to [0,1], then X is an arc.

  5. A point x in an arc X is called an endpoint of the arc X if there is a homeomorphism φ:[0,1]X such that φ(0)=x.

  6. Let X be a dendroid. A point xX is called an endpoint of the dendroid X if for every arc A in X that contains x, x is an endpoint of A. The set of all endpoints of X will be denoted by E(X).

  7. A continuum X is a simple triod if it is homeomorphic to ([1,1]×{0})({0}×[0,1]).

  8. A point x in a simple triod X is called the top-point or just the top of the simple triod X if there is a homeomorphism φ:([1,1]×{0})({0}×[0,1])X such that φ(0,0)=x.

  9. Let X be a dendroid. A point xX is called a ramification point of the dendroid X if there is a simple triod T in X with the top x. The set of all ramification points of X will be denoted by R(X).

  10. The continuum X is a fan if it is a dendroid with at most one ramification point v, which is called the top of the fan X (if it exists).

  11. Let X be a fan. For all points x and y in X, we define AX[x,y] to be the arc in X with endpoints x and y if xy. If x=y, then we define AX[x,y]={x}.

  12. Let X be a fan with top v. We say that that the fan X is smooth if for any xX and for any sequence (xn) of points in X, limnxn=xlimnAX[v,xn]=AX[v,x].

  13. Let X be a fan. We say that X is a Cantor fan if X is homeomorphic to the continuum cCSc,where C[0,1] is the standard Cantor set and for each cC, Sc is the straight line segment in the plane from (0,0) to (c,1). See Figure  where a Cantor fan is pictured.

    Figure 1. A Cantor fan and a Lelek fan.

    Figure 1. A Cantor fan and a Lelek fan.

  14. Let X be a fan. We say that X is a Lelek fan if it is smooth and Cl(E(X))=X. See Figure where a Lelek fan is pictured.

Observation 2.6

The Cantor fan is universal for smooth fans, i.e. every smooth fan embeds into it (for details see [Citation12, Theorem 9, p. 27], [Citation17, Corollary 4], and [Citation15]).

Also, note that a Lelek fan was constructed by A. Lelek in [Citation19]. An interesting property of the Lelek fan L is that the set of its endpoints is a dense one-dimensional set in L. It is also unique, i.e. any two Lelek fans are homeomorphic, for the proofs see [Citation11,Citation13].

In this paper, X will always be a non-empty compact metric space.

Definition 2.7

Let X be a non-empty compact metric space and let f:XX be a continuous function. We say that (X,f) is a dynamical system.

Definition 2.8

Let (X,f) be a dynamical system and let xX. The sequence x=(x,f(x),f2(x),f3(x),)is called the trajectory of x. The set Of(x)={x,f(x),f2(x),f3(x),}is called the forward orbit set of x.

Definition 2.9

Let (X,f) be a dynamical system and let xX. If Cl(Of(x))=X, then x is called a transitive point in (X,f). Otherwise it is an intransitive point in (X,f). We use tr(f) to denote the set tr(f)={xX|xis a transitive point in(X,f)}.

Definition 2.10

Let (X,f) be a dynamical system. We say that (X,f) is transitive if for all non-empty open sets U and V in X, there is a non-negative integer n such that fn(U)V. We say that the mapping f is transitive if (X,f) is transitive.

The following theorem is a well-known result. See [Citation18] for more information about transitive dynamical systems.

Theorem 2.11

Let (X,f) be a dynamical system. Then the following hold.

(1)

If (X,f) is transitive, then for each xtr(f) and for each positive integer n, fn(x)tr(f).

(2)

If (X,f) is transitive, then tr(f) is dense in X.

Definition 2.12

Let (X,f) be a dynamical system. We say that (X,f) is mixing if for all non-empty open sets U and V in X, there is a non-negative integer n0 such that for each positive integer n, nn0fn(U)V.We say that the mapping f is mixing if (X,f) is mixing.

Definition 2.13

Let (X,f) and (Y,g) be dynamical systems. We say that

  1. (Y,g) is topologically conjugate to (X,f) if there is a homeomorphism φ:XY such that φf=gφ.

  2. (Y,g) is topologically semi-conjugate to (X,f) if there is a continuous surjection α:XY such that αf=gα.

Definition 2.14

Let X be a compact metric space. We say that X

  1. admits a transitive homeomorphism if there is a homeomorphism f:XX such that (X,f) is transitive.

  2. admits a mixing homeomorphism if there is a homeomorphism f:XX such that (X,f) is mixing.

Theorems 2.15 and 2.16 are well-known results. Their proofs may be found in [Citation1,Citation2,Citation18].

Theorem 2.15

Let (X,f) be a dynamical system such that f is a homeomorphism. Then the following hold.

(1)

(X,f1) is transitive if and only if (X,f) is transitive.

(2)

(X,f1) is mixing if and only if (X,f) is mixing.

Theorem 2.16

Let (X,f) and (Y,g) be dynamical systems.

(1)

If (X,f) is transitive and if (Y,g) is topologically semi-conjugate to (X,f), then (Y,g) is transitive.

(2)

If (X,f) is mixing and if (Y,g) is topologically semi-conjugate to (X,f), then (Y,g) is mixing.

Definition 2.17

Let X be a compact metric space and let f:XX be a continuous function. The inverse limit generated by (X,f) is the subspace lim(X,f)={(x1,x2,x3,)i=1X|for each positive integeri,xi=f(xi+1)}of the topological product i=1X. The function σ:lim(X,f)lim(X,f), defined by σ(x1,x2,x3,x4,)=(x2,x3,x4,)for each (x1,x2,x3,)lim(X,f), is called the shift map on lim(X,f).

Observation 2.18

Note that the shift map σ on the inverse limit lim(X,f) is a homeomorphism. Also, note that for each (x1,x2,x3,)lim(X,f), σ1(x1,x2,x3,)=(f(x1),x1,x2,x3,).

Theorem 2.19 is a well-known result. Its proof may be found in [Citation2] or in [Citation18].

Theorem 2.19

Let (X,f) be a mixing dynamical system such that f is surjective and let σ:lim(X,f)lim(X,f) be the shift map on lim(X,f). Then the following hold.

(1)

(X,f) is transitive if and only if (lim(X,f),σ) is transitive.

(2)

(X,f) is mixing if and only if (lim(X,f),σ) is mixing.

Definition 2.20

Let (X,f) be a dynamical system. We say that (X,f) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions if there is an ε>0 such that for each xX and for each δ>0, there are yB(x,δ) and a positive integer n such that d(fn(x),fn(y))>ε.

Observation 2.21

Let (X,f) be a dynamical system. Note that (X,f) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions if and only if there is ε>0 such that for each non-empty open set U in X, there is a positive integer n such that diam(fn(U))>ε. See [Citation8, Theorem 2.29] for more information.

Definition 2.22

Let (X,f) be a dynamical system and let A be a non-empty closed subset of X. We say that (X,f) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions with respect to A if there is ε>0 such that for each non-empty open set U in X, there are x,yU and a positive integer n such thatFootnote1 min{d(fn(x),fn(y)),d(fn(x),A)+d(fn(y),A)}>ε.

Proposition 2.23

Let (X,f) be a dynamical system and let A be a non-empty closed subset of X. If (X,f) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions with respect to A, then (X,f) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions.

Proof.

Suppose that (X,f) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions with respect to A and let ε>0 be such that for each non-empty open set U in X, there are x,yU and a positive integer n such that min{d(fn(x),fn(y)),d(fn(x),A)+d(fn(y),A)}>ε.To see that (X,f) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions, we use Observation 2.21. Let U be any non-empty open set in X and let x,yU and let n be a positive integer such that min{d(fn(x),fn(y)),d(fn(x),A)+d(fn(y),A)}>ε.Then diam(fn(U))d(fn(x),fn(y))min{d(fn(x),fn(y)),d(fn(x),A)+d(fn(y),A)}>εand we are done.

We use the following result.

Theorem 2.24

Let (X,f) be a dynamical system such that f is surjective, let A be a non-empty closed subset of X such that f(A)A, and let σ be the shift homeomorphism on lim(X,f). If f is surjective and (X,f) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions with respect to A, then (lim(X,f),σ1) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions with respect to lim(A,f|A).

Proof.

See [Citation8, Theorem 3.14].

We conclude this section by defining three different types of chaos. First, we define periodic points.

Definition 2.25

Let (X,f) be a dynamical system and pX. We say that p is a periodic point in (X,f) if there is a positive integer n such that fn(p)=p. We use P(f) to denote the set of periodic points in (X,f).

Definition 2.26

Let (X,f) be a dynamical system. We say that (X,f) is chaotic in the sense of Robinson [Citation20] if

  1. (X,f) is transitive, and

  2. (X,f) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions.

Definition 2.27

Let (X,f) be a dynamical system. We say that (X,f) is chaotic in the sense of Knudsen [Citation16] if

  1. P(f) is dense in X, and

  2. (X,f) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions.

Definition 2.28

Let (X,f) be a dynamical system. We say that (X,f) is chaotic in the sense of Devaney [Citation14], if

  1. (X,f) is transitive, and

  2. P(f) is dense in X.

Observation 2.29

Note that it is proved in [Citation10, Theorem] that for any dynamical system (X,f), (X,f) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions if (X,f) is transitive and if the set P(f) is dense in X.

We also use special kind of projections that are defined in the following definition.

Definition 2.30

For each (positive) integer i and for each x=(x1,x2,x3,)k=1X (or x=(,x2,x1,x0,x1,x2,)k=X or x=(x1,x2,x3,,xm)k=1mX), we use πi(x) or x(i) or xi to denote the ith coordinate xi of the point x.

We also use p1:X×XX and p2:X×XX to denote the standard projections defined by p1(s,t)=s and p2(s,t)=t for all (s,t)X×X.

3. Mixing, Mahavier dynamical systems and quotients of dynamical systems

We give new results about how Mahavier products of closed relations on compact metric spaces can be used to construct dynamical systems (X,f) such that f is a mixing homeomorphism. Then we study quotients of dynamical systems. Explicitly, we start with a dynamical system (X,f) and an equivalence relation ∼ on X. Then, we discuss when the mixing of (X,f) implies the mixing of (X/,f).

3.1. Mixing and Mahavier dynamical systems

First, we define Mahavier products of closed relations.

Definition 3.1

Let X be a non-empty compact metric space and let FX×X be a non-empty relation on X. If F is closed in X×X, then we say that F is a closed relation on X.

Definition 3.2

Let X be a non-empty compact metric space and let F be a closed relation on X. For each positive integer m, we call XFm={(x1,x2,,xm+1)i=1m+1X|for eachi{1,2,,m},(xi,xi+1)F}the mth Mahavier product of F; we call XF+={(x1,x2,x3,)i=1X|for each positive integeri,(xi,xi+1)F}the Mahavier product of F; and XF={(,x3,x2,x1,x0;x1,x2,x3,)i=X|for each integeri,(xi,xi+1)F}the two-sided Mahavier product of F.

Definition 3.3

Let X be a non-empty compact metric space and let F be a closed relation on X. The function σF+:XF+XF+, defined by σF+(x1,x2,x3,x4,)=(x2,x3,x4,)for each (x1,x2,x3,x4,)XF+, is called the shift map on XF+. The function σF:XFXF, defined by σF(,x3,x2,x1,x0;x1,x2,x3,)=(,x3,x2,x1,x0,x1;x2,x3,)for each (,x3,x2,x1,x0;x1,x2,x3,)XF, is called the shift map on XF.

Observation 3.4

Note that σF is always a homeomorphism while σF+ may not be a homeomorphism.

Definition 3.5

Let X be a compact metric space and let F be a closed relation on X. The dynamical system

  1. (XF+,σF+) is called a Mahavier dynamical system.

  2. (XF,σF) is called a two-sided Mahavier dynamical system.

Observation 3.6

Let X be a compact metric space and let F be a closed relation on X such that p1(F)=p2(F)=X. Note that (XF+,σF+) is semi-conjugate to (XF,σF): for α:XFXF+, defined by α(x)=(x(1),x(2),x(3),) for any xXF, ασF=σF+α.

Theorems 3.7 and 3.8 are proved in [Citation7] (Theorems 4.1 and 4.4, respectively). We use these theorems to prove Theorems 3.9 and 3.13.

Theorem 3.7

Let X be a compact metric space and let F be a closed relation on X. Then

(1)

lim(XF+,σF+) is homeomorphic to the two-sided Mahavier product XF.

(2)

The inverse σF1 of the shift map σF on XF is topologically conjugate to the shift map σ on lim(XF+,σF+).

Theorem 3.8

Let X be a compact metric space and let F be a closed relation on X such that p1(F)=p2(F)=X. Then the following statements are equivalent.

(1)

(XF+,σF+) is transitive.

(2)

(XF,σF) is transitive.

Next, we show that if p1(F)=p2(F)=X, then (XF+,σF+) is mixing if and only if (XF,σF) is mixing.

Theorem 3.9

Let X be a compact metric space and let F be a closed relation on X such that p1(F)=p2(F)=X. Then the following statements are equivalent.

(1)

(XF+,σF+) is mixing.

(2)

(XF,σF) is mixing.

Proof.

Let σ be the shift map on lim(XF+,σF+). First, suppose that (XF+,σF+) is mixing. It follows from p1(F)=p2(F)=X that σF+ is surjective. By Theorem 2.19, (lim(XF+,σF+),σ) is also mixing. By Theorem 3.7, σ is topologically conjugate to σF1, therefore, (XF,σF1) is mixing. It follows from Theorem 2.15 that (XF,σF) is mixing.

Next, suppose that (XF,σF) is mixing. By Theorem 2.15, (XF,σF1) is also mixing and it follows from Theorem 3.7 that (lim(XF+,σF+),σ) is mixing. Since σF+ is surjective, it follows from Theorem 2.19 that (XF+,σF+) is mixing.

Definition 3.10

Let X be a compact metric space. We use ΔX to denote the diagonal set ΔX={(x,x)|xX}.

We use the following lemma to prove Theorem 3.12, where we prove that for each transitive system (XF+,σF+) if ΔXF, then (XF+,σF+) is mixing.

Lemma 3.11

Let X be a compact metric space, let F be a closed relation on X and let U be a non-empty open set in XF+. Then for each xU, there is a positive integer n0 such that for each yXF+, (for each integernn0,πn(y)=πn(x))yU.

Proof.

Let k be a positive integer and let U1, U2, U3, …, Uk be open sets in X such that xU1×U2×U3××Uk×i=k+1XU.Let n0=k and let yXF+ be such that for each positive integer nn0, πn(y)=πn(x). Then yU1×U2×U3××Uk×i=k+1X and since U1×U2×U3××Uk×i=k+1XU, it follows that yU.

Theorem 3.12

Let X be a compact metric space and let F be a closed relation on X. If

(1)

(XF+,σF+) is transitive, and

(2)

ΔXF,

then (XF+,σF+) is mixing.

Proof.

Let U and V be non-empty open sets in XF+. Since (XF+,σF+) is transitive, it follows from Theorem 2.11 that tr(σF+) is dense in XF+. Therefore, tr(σF+)U. Let xtr(σF+)U. By Lemma 3.11, there is a positive integer m0 such that for each yXF+, (for each positive integernm0,πn(y)=πn(x))yU.Choose and fix such a positive integer m0. Next, let m be a positive integer such that m>m0 and such that (σF+)m(x)V, and let x1=(x(1),x(2),x(3),,x(m1),x(m),x(m)2,x(m+1),x(m+2),x(m+3),).Then for each positive integer nm, πn(x1)=πn(x). Therefore, x1U. Also, note that (σF+)m+1(x1)=(σF+)m(x), therefore, (σF+)m+1(x1)V. It follows that (σF+)m+1(U)V.

Next, let x2=(x(1),x(2),x(3),,x(m1),x(m),x(m),x(m)3,x(m+1),x(m+2),x(m+3),).Then for each positive integer nm, πn(x2)=πn(x). Therefore, x2U. Also, note that (σF+)m+2(x2)=(σF+)m(x), therefore, (σF+)m+2(x2)V. It follows that (σF+)m+2(U)V.

In general, let k be any positive integer and let xk=(x(1),x(2),x(3),,x(m1),x(m),x(m),,x(m)k,x(m+1),x(m+2),x(m+3),).Then for each positive integer nm, πn(xk)=πn(x). Therefore, xkU. Also, note that (σF+)m+k(xk)=(σF+)m(x), therefore, (σF+)m+k(xk)V. It follows that (σF+)m+k(U)V. This proves that for any positive integer n, nm(σF+)n(U)V,therefore, (XF+,σF+) is mixing.

Theorem 3.13 is a variant of Theorem 3.12 where (XF+,σF+) from Theorem 3.12 is replaced by (XF,σF).

Theorem 3.13

Let X be a compact metric space and let F be a closed relation on X. If

(1)

(XF,σF) is transitive, and

(2)

ΔXF,

then (XF,σF) is mixing.

Proof.

Suppose that (XF,σF) is transitive, and that ΔXF. Note that p1(F)=p2(F)=X since ΔXF. By Theorem 3.8, (XF+,σF+) is transitive. Since ΔXF, it follows from Theorem 3.12 that (XF+,σF+) is mixing. By Theorem 3.9, (XF,σF) is mixing since ΔXF.

In Theorem 3.14, we show that adding the diagonal to the closed relation, preserves the transitivity of the Mahavier dynamical system.

Theorem 3.14

Let X be a compact metric space, let G be a closed relation on X such that p1(G)=p2(G)=X and let F=GΔX. Then the following hold.

(1)

If (XG+,σG+) is transitive, then (XF+,σF+) is transitive.

(2)

If (XG,σG) is transitive, then (XF,σF) is transitive.

Proof.

To prove Theorem 3.14(1), suppose that (XG+,σG+) is transitive, let m and n be positive integers, let U1, U2, U3, …, Um, V1, V2, V3, …, Vn be non-empty open sets in X, and let U=U1×U2×U3××Um×k=m+1Xand V=V1×V2×V3××Vn×k=n+1Xbe such that UXF+ and VXF+. To see that (XF+,σF+) is transitive, we prove that there is a non-negative integer ℓ such that (σF+)(UXF+)(VXF+).

First, let yUXF+ be such that (σF+)m1(y)XG+, and let D={k{1,2,3,,m1}|y(k)y(k+1)}.Next, let s{1,2,3,,m1} and let k1,k2,k3,,ks{1,2,3,,m1} be such that

  1. for each i{1,2,3,,s}, ki<ki+1 and

  2. D={k1,k2,k3,,ks}.

Also, let U^=(i=1k1Ui)×(i=1k1Ui)×(i=1k1Ui)××(i=1k1Ui)k1×(i=k1+1k2Ui)×(i=k1+1k2Ui)×(i=k1+1k2Ui)××(i=k1+1k2Ui)k2k1××(i=ks1+1ksUi)×(i=ks1+1ksUi)×(i=ks1+1ksUi)××(i=ks1+1ksUi)ksks1××(i=ks+1mUi)×(i=ks+1mUi)×(i=ks+1mUi)××(i=ks+1mUi)mks×k=m+1Xand let U¯=(i=1k1Ui)×(i=k1+1k2Ui)×(i=k2+1k3Ui)××(i=ks1+1ksUi)×(i=ks+1mUi)×k=s+2X.Then, let zVXF+ be such that (σF+)n1(z)XG+, and let E={k{1,2,3,,n1}|z(k)z(k+1)}.Next, let t{1,2,3,,m1} and let l1,l2,l3,,lt{1,2,3,,m1} be such that

  1. for each i{1,2,3,,t}, li<li+1 and

  2. D={l1,l2,l3,,lt}.

Also, let V^=(i=1l1Vi)×(i=1l1Vi)×(i=1l1Vi)××(i=1l1Vi)l1×(i=l1+1l2Vi)×(i=l1+1l2Vi)×(i=l1+1l2Vi)××(i=l1+1l2Vi)l2l1××(i=lt1+1ltVi)×(i=lt1+1ltVi)×(i=lt1+1ltVi)××(i=lt1+1ltVi)ltlt1××(i=lt+1nVi)×(i=lt+1nVi)×(i=lt+1nVi)××(i=lt+1nVi)nlt×k=n+1Xand let V¯=(i=1l1Vi)×(i=l1+1l2Vi)×(i=l2+1l3Vi)××(i=lt1+1ktVi)×(i=lt+1nVi)×k=t+2X.Note that

  1. U^ and V^ are both open in k=1X such that yU^U and zV^V, and

  2. U¯ and V¯ are both open in k=1X such that (y(1),y(k1+1),y(k2+1),,y(ks+1),y(ks+2),y(ks+3),)U¯XG+and (z(1),z(l1+1),z(l2+1),,z(lt+1),z(lt+2),z(lt+3),)V¯XG+.

Next, let ℓ be a positive integer such that >m and (σG+)(U¯XG+)(V¯XG+) and let x¯U¯XG+ be such that (σG+)(x¯)V¯XG+. Note that such an integer ℓ does exist by Theorem 2.11. Finally, let x=(x¯(1),x¯(1),x¯(1),,x¯(1)k1,x¯(2),x¯(2),x¯(2),,x¯(2)k2k1,,x¯(s+1),x¯(s+1),x¯(s+1),,x¯(s+1)mks,x¯(s+2),x¯(s+3),,x¯(),x¯(+1),x¯(+1),x¯(+1),,x¯(+1)l1,x¯(+2),x¯(+2),x¯(+2),,x¯(+2)l2l1,,x¯(+t+1),x¯(+t+1),x¯(+t+1),,x¯(+t+1)nls,x¯(+t+1),x¯(+t+1),x¯(+t+1),,x¯(+t+1)nlsx¯(+t+2),x¯(+t+3),)Note that xUXF+ and that σF(x)VXF+. Therefore, (σF+)(UXF+)(VXF+) and it follows that (XF+,σF+) is transitive.

To prove Theorem 3.14(2), suppose that (XG,σG) is transitive. By Theorem 3.8, (XG+,σG+) is transitive, therefore, by Theorem 3.14(1), so is (XF+,σF+). Finally, it follows from Theorem 3.8 that (XF,σF) is transitive.

Corollary 3.15

Let X be a compact metric space, let G be a closed relation on X such that p1(G)=p2(G)=X and let F=GΔX. Then the following hold.

  1. If (XG+,σG+) is transitive, then (XF+,σF+) is mixing.

  2. If (XG,σG) is transitive, then (XF,σF) is mixing.

Proof.

To prove Corollary 3.15(1), suppose that (XG+,σG+) is transitive. By Theorem 3.14, (XF+,σF+) is transitive. Therefore, by Theorem 3.12, (XF+,σF+) is mixing since ΔXF.

To prove Corollary 3.15(2), suppose that (XG,σG) is transitive. By Theorem 3.14, (XF,σF) is transitive. Therefore, by Theorem 3.13, (XF,σF) is mixing since ΔXF.

3.2. Mixing and quotients of dynamical systems

Theorem 3.22 is the main result of this section. First, we introduce quotients of dynamical systems and recall some of their properties.

Definition 3.16

Let X be a compact metric space and let ∼ be an equivalence relation on X. For each xX, we use [x] to denote the equivalence class of the element x with respect to the relation ∼. We also use X/ to denote the quotient space X/={[x]|xX}.

Observation 3.17

Let X be a compact metric space, let ∼ be an equivalence relation on X, let q:XX/ be the quotient map that is defined by q(x)=[x] for each xX, and let UX/. Then Uis open inX/q1(U)is open inX.

Definition 3.18

Let X be a compact metric space, let ∼ be an equivalence relation on X, and let f:XX be a function such that for all x,yX, xyf(x)f(y).Then we let f:X/X/ be defined by f([x])=[f(x)] for any xX.

Proposition 3.19

Let X be a compact metric space, let ∼ be an equivalence relation on X, and let f:XX be a function such that for all x,yX, xyf(x)f(y).Then the following hold.

(1)

f is a well-defined function from X/ to X/.

(2)

If f is continuous, then f is continuous.

(3)

If f is a homeomorphism, then f is a homeomorphism.

(4)

If (X,f) is transitive and X/ is metrizable, then (X/,f) is transitive.

Proof.

See [Citation7, Theorem 3.4].

Definition 3.20

Let (X,f) be a dynamical system and let ∼ be an equivalence relation on X such that for all x,yX, xyf(x)f(y).Then we say that (X/,f) is a quotient of the dynamical system (X,f) or it is the quotient of the dynamical system (X,f) that is obtained from the relation ∼.

Observation 3.21

Let (X,f) be a dynamical system. Note that we have defined a dynamical system as a pair consisting of a compact metric space and a continuous function and that in this case, X/ is not necessarily metrizable. So, if X/ is metrizable, then also (X/,f) is a dynamical system. Note that for the quotient map q:XX/, qf=fq. Therefore, (X/,f) is semi-conjugate to (X,f).

Theorem 3.22

Let X be a compact metric space, let ∼ be an equivalence relation on X, and let f:XX be a function such that for all x,yX, xyf(x)f(y).If (X,f) is mixing and X/ is metrizable, then (X/,f) is mixing.

Proof.

Suppose that (X,f) is mixing and that X/ is metrizable. It follows from Theorem 2.16 and Observations 3.21 that (X/,f) is mixing.

4. Mixing on the Lelek fan

In this section, we produce on the Lelek fan a mixing homeomorphism as well as a mixing mapping, which is not a homeomorphism.

Definition 4.1

In this section, we use X to denote X=[0,1]. For each (r,ρ)(0,)×(0,), we define the sets Lr, Lρ and Lr,ρ as follows: Lr={(x,y)X×X|y=rx}, Lρ={(x,y)X×X|y=ρx}, and Lr,ρ=LrLρ. We also define the set Mr,ρ by Mr,ρ=XLr,ρ+.

Definition 4.2

Let (r,ρ)(0,)×(0,). We say that r and ρ never connect or (r,ρ)NC if

  1. r<1, ρ>1 and

  2. for all integers k and ℓ, rk=ρk==0.

In [Citation5], the following theorem is the main result.

Theorem 4.3

Let (r,ρ)NC. Then Mr,ρ is a Lelek fan with top (0,0,0,).

Proof.

See [Citation5, Theorem 14].

Definition 4.4

Let (r,ρ)NC. We use Fr,ρ to denote the following closed relation on X: Fr,ρ=Lr,ρ{(t,t)|tX},see Figure .

Figure 2. The relation F from Definition 3.14.

Figure 2. The relation F from Definition 3.14.

Theorem 4.5

Let (r,ρ)NC. Then XFr,ρ+ and XFr,ρ are both Lelek fans.

Proof.

It follows from the proof of [Citation4, Theorem 3.1] that XFr,ρ+ is a Lelek fan. To see that XFr,ρ is a Lelek fan, let Ba,b={(,b(2)b(1)t,b(1)t,t;a(1)t,a(2)a(1)t,)|t[0,1]}and Aa,b=Ba,bXFfor each a=(a(1),a(2),a(3),){1,r,ρ}N and each b=(b(1),b(2),b(3),){1,1r,1ρ}N. Note that for each a{1,r,ρ}N and each b{1,1r,1ρ}N, Ba,b is a straight line segment in the Hilbert cube k=1[0,rk]×k=0[0,ρk] from (,0,0,0;0,0,) to (,b(2)b(1)1,b(1)1,1;a(1)1,a(2)a(1)1,), and that for all a1,a2{1,r,ρ}N and all b1,b2{1,1r,1ρ}N, Ba1,b1Ba2,b2={(,0,0,0;0,0,)}(a1,b1)(a2,b2).Since {(,b(2)b(1)1,b(1)1,1;a(1)1,a(2)a(1)1,)|a{1,r,ρ}N,b{1,1r,1ρ}N}is a Cantor set, it follows that C=(a,b){1,r,ρ}N×{1,1r,1ρ}NBa,bis a Cantor fan. Therefore, XFr,ρ is a subcontinuum of the Cantor fan C. Note that for each a{1,r,ρ}N and each b{1,1r,1ρ}N, Aa,b is either degenerate or it is an arc from (,0,0,0;0,0,) to some other point, denote it by ea,b. Let U={(a,b){1,r,ρ}N×{1,1r,1ρ}N|Aa,bis an arc}.Then XFr,ρ=(a,b)UAa,bandE(XFr,ρ)={ea,b|(a,b)U}.Next, we show that for each xXFr,ρ, xE(XFr,ρ)sup{x(k)|kis an integer}=1.Let xXFr,ρ. We treat the following possible cases.

Case 1.

For each integer k, there are integers 1 and 2 such that 1<k<2 and x(k){x(1),x(2)}. The proof that in this case xE(XFr,ρ)sup{x(k)|kis an integer}=1follows from [Citation3, Theorem 3.5] by using the obvious homeomorphism from XLr,ρ to the inverse limit M=lim(Mr,ρ,σr,ρ), which is used in [Citation3, Section 5] to prove that M is a Lelek fan.

Case 2.

There is an integer k0 such that for each positive integer j, x(k0j)=x(k0) and for each integer k, there is an integer 0 such that k<0 and x(k)x(0). The proof that in this case xE(XFr,ρ)sup{x(k)|kis an integer}=1,is analogous to the proof of [Citation3, Theorem 3.5].

Case 3.

There is an integer k0 such that for each positive integer j, x(k0+j)=x(k0) and for each integer k, there is an integer 0 such that k>0 and x(k)x(0). This case is analogous to the previous case.

Case 4.

There are integers k1 and k2 such that k1k2 and such that for each positive integer ℓ, x(k1)=x(k1) and x(k2+)=x(k2). In this case, sup{x(k)|kis an integer}=max{x(k)|kis an integer}.Let xE(XFr,ρ) and suppose that sup{x(k)|ktextrmisaninteger}=m<1. Also, let k0 be an integer such that x(k0)=m and let (a,b){1,r,ρ}N×{1,1r,1ρ}N be such that x=(,b(2)b(1)m,b(1)m,m=x(k0),a(1)m,a(2)a(1)m,).Then x{(,b(2)b(1)t,b(1)t,t,a(1)t,a(2)a(1)t,)|t[0,m]},and {(,b(2)b(1)t,b(1)t,t,a(1)t,a(2)a(1)t,)|t[0,m]}is a proper subarc of the arc {(,b(2)b(1)t,b(1)t,t,a(1)t,a(2)a(1)t,)|t[0,1]}in XFr,ρ and is, therefore, not an endpoint of XFr,ρ. It follows that the supremum sup{x(k)|kis an integer} equals 1. To prove the other implication, suppose that sup{x(k)|kis an integer}=1. Then x is the endpoint of some arc Aa,b in XFr,ρ, which is not equal to (,0,0;0,0,0,). Therefore, it is an endpoint of XFr,ρ.

We have just proved that xE(XFr,ρ)sup{x(k)|kis an integer}=1.To see that XFr,ρ is a Lelek fan, let xXFr,ρ be any point and let ε>0. We prove that there is a point eE(XFr,ρ) such that eB(x,ε). Without loss of generality, we assume that x(,0,0;0,0,0,). Let k0 be a positive integer such that k=k012k<ε. It follows from [Citation5, Theorem 9] that there is a sequence (a1,a2,a3,){r,ρ}N such that sup{(a1a2a3an)x(k0)|nis a positive integer}=1.Choose and fix such a sequence (a1,a2,a3,). Let e=(,x(1),x(0),x(1),,x(k0),a1x(k0),a2a1x(k0),a3a2a1x(k0),).Then eE(XFr,ρ) since sup{e(k)|ktextrmisaninteger}=1 and D(e,x)k=k012k<ε,where D is the metric on XFr,ρ. This proves that also XFr,ρ is a Lelek fan.

Theorem 4.6

Let (r,ρ)NC. The dynamical systems (XFr,ρ+,σFr,ρ+) and (XFr,ρ,σFr,ρ) are both mixing.

Proof.

It follows from [Citation3, Theorem 4.3 and Observation 5.3] that (XLr,ρ+,σLr,ρ+) and (XLr,ρ,σLr,ρ) are transitive. Since Fr,ρ=Lr,ρΔX, it follows from Corollary 3.15 that (XFr,ρ+,σFr,ρ+) and (XFr,ρ,σFr,ρ) are both mixing.

Theorem 4.7

The following hold for the Lelek fan L.

(1)

There is a continuous mapping f on the Lelek fan L, which is not a homeomorphism, such that (L,f) is mixing.

(2)

There is a homeomorphism h on the Lelek fan L such that (L,h) is mixing.

Proof.

Let (r,ρ)NC. We prove each part of the theorem separately.

  1. Let L=XFr,ρ+ and let f=σF+. Note that f is a continuous function which is not a homeomorphism. By Theorem 4.6, (L,f) is mixing.

  2. Let L=XFr,ρ and let h=σF. Note that h is a homeomorphism. By Theorem 4.6, (L,h) is mixing.

5. Mixing on the Cantor fan

In this section, we produce on the Cantor fan a mixing homeomorphism as well as a mixing mapping, which is not a homeomorphism. Furthermore, we produce

  1. continuous functions f,h:CC on the Cantor fan C such that

    1. h is a homeomorphism and f is not,

    2. (C,f) and (C,h) are both mixing as well as chaotic in the sense of Devaney, and

  2. continuous functions f,h:CC on the Cantor fan C such that

    1. h is a homeomorphism and f is not,

    2. (C,f) and (C,h) are both mixing as well as chaotic in the sense of Robinson but not in the sense of Devaney

Note that for every dynamical system (X,f), it holds that if (X,f) is mixing, then (X,f) is transitive. Therefore, there are no continuous functions, and hence no homeomorphisms, f:CC on the Cantor fan C such that (C,f) is mixing and chaotic in the sense of Knudsen but not chaotic in the sense of Devaney.

We use the following theorems to prove results about periodic points.

Theorem 5.1

Let (X,f) be a dynamical system, let A be a nowhere dense closed subset of X such that f(A)A and f(XA)XA, and let ∼ be the equivalence relation on X, defined by xyx=yorx,yAfor all x,yX. Then the following statements are equivalent.

(1)

The set P(f) of periodic points in (X,f) is dense in X.

(2)

The set P(f) of periodic points in the quotient (X/,f) is dense in X/.

Proof.

See [Citation8, Theorem 3.16].

Theorem 5.2

Let X be a compact metric space and let F be a closed relation on X. If for each (x,y)F, there are a positive integer n and a point zXFn such that z(1)=y and z(n+1)=x, then the set of periodic points P(σF+) is dense in XF+.

Proof.

See [Citation8, Theorem 2.21].

Theorem 5.3

Let (X,f) be a dynamical system and let σ be the shift homeomorphism on lim(X,f). The following statements are equivalent.

(1)

The set P(f) of periodic points in (X,f) is dense in X.

(2)

The set P(σ1) of periodic points in (lim(X,f),σ1) is dense in lim(X,f).

Proof.

[Citation8, Theorem 2.22].

We use Theorem 5.5 to prove results about transitive dynamical systems on the Cantor fan.

Definition 5.4

Let X be a compact metric space, let F be a closed relation on X and let xX. Then we define UF(x)={yX|there arenNandxXFnsuch thatx(1)=x,x(n)=y}and we call it the forward impression of x by F.

Theorem 5.5

Let X be a compact metric space, let F be a closed relation on X and let {fα|αA} and {gβ|βB} be non-empty collections of continuous functions from X to X such that F1=αAΓ(fα)andF=βBΓ(gβ).If there is a dense set D in X such that for each sD, Cl(UF(s))=X, then (XF+,σF+) is transitive.

Proof.

See [Citation7, Theorem 4.8].

Finally, we use the following theorem when studying sensitive dependence on initial conditions.

Theorem 5.6

Let (X,f) be a dynamical system, let A be a nowhere dense closed subset of X such that f(A)A and f(XA)XA, and let ∼ be the equivalence relation on X, defined by xyx=yorx,yAfor all x,yX. The following statements are equivalent.

(1)

(X,f) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions with respect to A.

(2)

(X/,f) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions.

Proof.

See [Citation8, Theorem 3.15].

5.1. Mixing and Devaney's chaos on the Cantor fan

Here, we study functions f on the Cantor fan C such that (C,f) is mixing as we well as chaotic in the sense of Devaney.

Definition 5.7

In this subsection, we use X to denote X=[0,1][2,3][4,5][6,7][8,9], and we let f1,f2,f3:XX to be the homeomorphisms from X to X that are defined by f1(x)=x, f2(x)={x;x[8,9]x+2;x[0,1][4,5]x2)2;x[2,3](x6)3+4;x[6,7],f3(x)={x;x[0,1]x+2;x[2,3][6,7](x4)12+2;x[4,5](x8)13+6;x[8,9]for each xX. Then we use F to denote the relation F=Γ(f1)Γ(f2)Γ(f3); see Figure .

Figure 3. The relation F from Definition 5.7.

Figure 3. The relation F from Definition 5.7.

Definition 5.8

We define two equivalence relations.

  1. For all x,yXF+, we define the relation + as follows: x+yx=yor for each positive integerk,{x(k),y(k)}{0,2,4,6,8}.

  2. For all x,yXF, we define the relation ∼ as follows: xyx=yor for each integerk,{x(k),y(k)}{0,2,4,6,8}.

Observation 5.9

Essentially the same proof as the one from [Citation7, Example 4.14] shows that the quotient spaces XF+/+ and XF/ are both Cantor fans. Also, note that (σF+) is not a homeomorphism on XF+/+ while σF is a homeomorphism on XF/.

Theorem 5.10

The following hold for the sets of periodic points in (XF+/+,(σF+)) and (XF/,σF).

(1)

The set P((σF+)) of periodic points in the quotient (XF+/+,(σF+)) is dense in XF+/+.

(2)

The set P(σF) of periodic points in the quotient (XF/,σF) is dense in XF/.

Proof.

Using Theorem 5.1, we prove each of the statements separately.

  1. We use Theorem 5.2 to prove the first part of the theorem. Let (x,y)F be any point. We show that there are a positive integer n and a point zXFn such that z(1)=y and z(n+1)=x. We consider the following cases for x.

    1. x[0,1]. If y=x, then let n=1 and z=(x,x). If y=x+2, then let n=3 and z=(x+2,x+4,x12+2,x).

    2. x[2,3]. If y=(x2)2, then let n=3 and z=((x2)2,(x2)2+2,(x2)2+4,x). If y=x, then let n=1 and z=(x,x). If y=x+2, then let n=3 and z=(x+2,(x2)12+2,x2,x).

    3. x[4,5]. If y=(x4)12+2, then let n=3 and z=((x4)12+2,x4,x2,x). If y=x, then let n=1 and z=(x,x). If y=x+2, then let n=3 and z=(x+2,x+4,(x4)13+6,x).

    4. x[6,7]. If y=(x6)3+4, then let n=3 and z=((x6)3+4,(x6)3+6,(x6)3+8,x). If y=x, then let n=1 and z=(x,x). If y=x+2, then let n=3 and z=(x+2,(x6)13+6,x2,x).

    5. x[8,9]. If y=(x8)13+6, then let n=3 and z=((x8)13+6,x4,x2,x). If y=x, then let n=1 and z=(x,x).

  2. It follows from Theorem 5.10(1) and from Theorem 5.3 that the set P(σ1) of periodic points in (lim(XF+,σF+),σ1) is dense in lim(XF+,σF+). By Theorem 3.7, the set P(σF) of periodic points in the quotient (XF/,σF) is dense in XF/.

Theorem 5.11

The dynamical systems (XF+/+,(σF+)) and (XF/,σF) are both transitive.

Proof.

To prove that (XF+/+,(σF+)) is transitive, we prove that (XF+,σF+) is transitive. Note that both F and F1 are unions of three graphs of homeomorphisms. Hence, all the initial conditions from Theorem 5.5 are satisfied. To see that (XF+,σF+) is transitive, we prove that there is a dense set D in X such that for each sD, Cl(UH(s))=X. Let D=(0,1)(2,3)(4,5)(6,7)(8,9). Then D is dense in X. Let sD be any point. We consider the following cases for s.

  1. s[8,9]. Then s,(s8)13+6,s4,(s8)12+2,s8UH(s).

  2. s[6,7]. Then s,(s6)3+4,(s6)32+2,(s6)3UH(s).

  3. s[4,5]. Then s,(s4)12+2,s4UH(s).

  4. s[2,3]. Then s,(s2)2UH(s).

Depending on the case, denote s8,(s6)3,s4 or (s2)2 with t. Then t(0,1). It follows from the definition of F that for all integers m, n and for each k{0,1,2,3,4}, t2m3n+k2UF(t).It follows from Theorem [Citation7, Lemma 4.9] that {t2m3n+k2|m,nZ,k{0,1,2,3,4}} is dense in X. Since {t2m3n+k2|m,nZ,k{0,1,2,3,4}}UF(t)UF(s),it follows that UF(s) is dense in X. Therefore, by Theorem 5.5, (XF+,σF+) is transitive and it follows from Theorem 3.8 that (XF,σF) is transitive since p1(F)=p2(F)=X. It follows from Theorem 3.19 that (XF+/+,(σF+)) and (XF/,σF) are both transitive.

Theorem 5.12

The dynamical systems (XF+/+,(σF+)) and (XF/,σF) both have sensitive dependence on initial conditions.

Proof.

The dynamical systems (XF+/+,(σF+)) and (XF/,σF) are both transitive by Theorem 5.11. Also, by Theorem 5.10, the set P((σF+)) of periodic points in the quotient (XF+/+,(σF+)) is dense in XF+/+, and the set P(σF) of periodic points in the quotient (XF/,σF) is dense in XF/. It follows from [Citation10, Theorem] that (XF+/+,(σF+)) and (XF/,σF) both have sensitive dependence on initial conditions.

Theorem 5.13

The following hold for the Cantor fan C.

(1)

There is a continuous mapping f on the Cantor fan C, which is not a homeomorphism, such that (C,f) is mixing as well as chaotic in the sense of Devaney.

(2)

There is a homeomorphism h on the Cantor fan C such that (C,h) is mixing as well as chaotic in the sense of Devaney.

Proof.

We prove each part of the theorem separately.

  1. Let C=XF+/+ and let f=(σF+). Note that f is a continuous function which is not a homeomorphism. By Theorem 5.12, (C,f) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions, by Theorem 5.11, (C,f) is transitive, and by Theorem 5.10, the set P(f) of periodic points in (C,f) is dense in C. Therefore, (C,f) is chaotic in the sense of Devaney.

    It follows from Theorem 3.12 that (XF+,σF+) is mixing since ΔXF. It follows from Theorem 3.22 that (C,f) is also mixing.

  2. Let C=XF/ and let h=σF. Note that h is a homeomorphism. By Theorem 5.12, (C,h) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions, by Theorem 5.11, (C,h) is transitive, and by Theorem 5.10, the set P(h) of periodic points in (C,h) is dense in C. Therefore, (C,h) is chaotic in the sense of Devaney.

    It follows from Theorem 3.13 that (XF,σF) is mixing since ΔXF. It follows from Theorem 3.22 that (C,h) is also mixing.

5.2. Mixing and Robinson's chaos but not Devaney's chaos on the Cantor fan

Here, we study functions f on the Cantor fan C such that (C,f) is mixing as we well as chaotic in the sense of Robinson but not in the sense of Devaney.

Definition 5.14

In this subsection, we use X to denote X=[0,1][2,3][4,5]and we let f1,f2,f3:XX to be the homeomorphisms from X to X that are defined by f1(x)=x, f2(x)={x+2;x[0,1](x2)2;x[2,3]x;x[4,5],f3(x)={x;x[0,1]x+2;x[2,3](x4)13+2;x[4,5]for each xX. Then we use F to denote the relation F=Γ(f1)Γ(f2)Γ(f3); see Figure .

Figure 4. The relation F from Definition 5.14.

Figure 4. The relation F from Definition 5.14.

Definition 5.15

We define two equivalence relations.

  1. For all x,yXF+, we define the relation + as follows: x+yx=yor for each positive integerk,{x(k),y(k)}{0,2,4}.

  2. For all x,yXF, we define the relation ∼ as follows: xyx=yor for each integerk,{x(k),y(k)}{0,2,4}.

Observation 5.16

Note that it follows from [Citation7, Example 4.14] that the quotient spaces XF+/+ and XF/ are both Cantor fans. Also, note that (σF+) is not a homeomorphism on XF+/+ while σF is a homeomorphism on XF/.

First, we prove the following theorems about sensitive dependence on initial conditions.

Theorem 5.17

Let A={xXF+|for each positive integerk,x(k){0,2,4}}. Then

(1)

σF+(A)A and σF+(XF+A)XF+A, and

(2)

(XF+,σF+) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions with respect to A.

Proof.

First, note that σF+(A)A and σF+(XF+A)XF+A. Next, let f=σF+ and let ε=14. We show that for each basic open set U of the product topology on k=1X such that UXF+, there are x,yUXF+ such that for some positive integer m, min{d(fm(x),fm(y)),d(fm(x),A)+d(fm(y),A)}>ε,where d is the product metric on k=1X, defined by d((x1,x2,x3,),(y1,y2,y3,))=max{|ykxk|2k|kis a positive integer}for all (x1,x2,x3,),(y1,y2,y3,)k=1X. Let U be a basic set of the product topology on k=1X such that UXF+. Also, let n be a positive integer and for each i{1,2,3,,n}, let Ui be an open set in X such that U=U1×U2×U3××Un×k=n+1X.Next, let z=(z1,z2,z3,)UXF+ be any point such that zn{0,1,2,3,4,5}. We consider the following possible cases for the coordinate zn of the point z.

  1. zn(0,1). Then let x=(x1,x2,x3,)XF+ be defined by (x1,x2,x3,,xn)=(z1,z2,z3,,zn)and for each positive integer k, xn+k=zn. Also, we define y=(y1,y2,y3,)XF+ as follows. First, let (y1,y2,y3,,yn)=(z1,z2,z3,,zn).Next, we define (yn+1,yn+2,yn+3,)=(zn+2,zn+4,zn13+2,zn13+4,zn132+2,zn132+4,zn133+2,zn133+4,).Note that limkyn+4+2k=5andlimkyn+3+2k=3.Let k0 be an even positive integer such that for each positive integer k, kk05yn+4+2k<110and3yn+3+2k<110.Let m=n+k0+1. Then, d(fm(x),fm(y))=max{|ykxk|2km+1|k{m,m+1,m+2,m+3,}}1>εand d(fm(x),A)+d(fm(y),A)d(fm(y),A)=min{d(fm(y),a)|aA}=min{max{|a(k)yk+m|2k|k{1,2,3,}}|aA}yk+m42920>ε

  2. zn(0,1). Then there is an integer j{1,2,3} such that zn(2j,2j+1). In this case, the proof is analogous to the proof of the previous case. We leave the details to the reader.

This proves that (XF+,σF+) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions with respect to A.

Corollary 5.18

Let B={xXF|for each integerk,x(k){0,2,4}}. Then

(1)

σF(B)B and σF(XFB)XFB, and

(2)

(XF,σF) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions with respect to B.

Proof.

First, note that σF(B)B and σF(XFB)XFB. Next, let A={xXF+|for each positive integerk,x(k){0,2,4,6}}.By Theorem 5.17,

  1. σF+(A)A and σF+(XF+A)XF+A, and

  2. (XF+,σF+) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions with respect to A.

Note that σF+ is surjective. By Theorem 2.24, (lim(XF+,σF+),σ1) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions with respect to lim(A,σF+|A), where σ is the shift homeomorphism on lim(XF+,σF+). By Theorem 3.7, the inverse limit lim(XF+,σF+) is homeomorphic to the two-sided Mahavier product XF and the inverse of the shift homeomorphism σF on XF is topologically conjugate to the shift homeomorphism σ on lim(XF+,σF+). Let φ:lim(XF+,σF+)XF be the homeomorphism, used to prove Theorem 3.7 in [Citation7, Theorem 4.1]. Then φ(lim(A,σF+|A))=B. Therefore, (XF,σF) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions with respect to B.

Theorem 5.19

The dynamical systems (XF+/+,(σF+)) and (XF/,σF) both have sensitive dependence on initial conditions.

Proof.

For each of the dynamical systems, we prove separately that it has sensitive dependence on initial conditions.

  1. Let C=XF+/+ and let f=(σF+), i.e. for each xXF, f([x])=[σF+(x)]. We show that (C,f) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions. Let A={xXF+|for each positive integerk,x(k){0,2,4}}.By Theorem 5.17,

    1. σF(A)A and σF(XF+A)XF+A and

    2. (XF+,σF+) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions with respect to A.

    Since A is a closed nowhere dense set in XF+, it follows from Theorem 5.6 that (C,f) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions.

  2. Let C=XF/ and let h=σF, i.e. for each xXF, h([x])=[σF(x)]. We show that (C,h) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions. The rest of the proof is analogous to the proof above – instead of the set A, the set B={xXF|for each integerk,x(k){0,2,4}}is used in the proof. We leave the details to a reader.

Theorem 5.20

The following hold for the sets of periodic points in (XF+/+,(σF+)) and in (XF/,σF).

(1)

The set P((σF+)) of periodic points in the quotient (XF+/+,(σF+)) is not dense in XF+/+.

(2)

The set P(σF) of periodic points in the quotient (XF/,σF) is not dense in XF/.

Proof.

We prove each of the statements separately.

  1. Let U=(0,1)×(2,3)×k=3X. Then U is open in k=1X and UXF+. However, note that UP(σF+)=. This is true since for each x(0,1), for each x=(x1,x2,x3,)XF+ such that x1=x, and for each positive integer n>1, xn(0,1)there are positive integerskandsuch thatxn=x2k3,and such an xn is not equal to x. It follows that the set P(σF+) of periodic points in (XF+,σF+) is not dense in XF+. Therefore, by Theorem 5.1, the set P(σF+) of periodic points in (XF+,σF+) is not dense in XF+.

  2. Suppose that the set P(σF) of periodic points in the quotient (XF/,σF) is dense in XF/. Therefore, by Theorem 5.1, the set P(σF) of periodic points in (XF,σF) is dense in XF. It follows from Theorem 3.7, the set P(σ1) of periodic points in (lim(XF+,σF+),σ1) is dense in lim(XF+,σF+). By Theorem 5.3, the set P(σF+) of periodic points in (XF+,σF+) is dense in XF+, which contradicts with Theorem 5.20(1).

Theorem 5.21

The dynamical systems (XF+/+,(σF+)) and (XF/,σF) are both transitive.

Proof.

The proof of this theorem is analogous to the proof of Theorem 5.11. We leave the details to a reader.

Theorem 5.22

The following hold for the Cantor fan C.

(1)

There is a continuous mapping f on the Cantor fan C, which is not a homeomorphism, such that (C,f) is mixing as well as chaotic in the sense of Robinson but not in the sense of Devaney.

(2)

There is a homeomorphism h on the Cantor fan C such that (C,h) is mixing as well as chaotic in the sense of Robinson but not in the sense of Devaney.

Proof.

We prove each part of the theorem separately.

  1. Let C=XF+/+ and let f=(σF+). Note that f is a continuous function which is not a homeomorphism. By Theorem 5.19, (C,f) has sensitive dependence on initial conditions. By Theorem 5.21, (C,f) is transitive. It follows from Theorem 5.20 that the set P(f) of periodic points in the quotient (C,f) is not dense in C. Therefore, (C,f) is chaotic in the sense of Robinson but it is not chaotic in the sense of Devaney.

    It follows from Theorem 3.12 that (XF+,σF+) is mixing since ΔXF. It follows from Theorem 3.22 that (C,f) is also mixing.

  2. Let C=XF/ and let h=σF. Note that h is a homeomorphism. The rest of the proof is analogous to the proof above. We leave the details to a reader.

6. Uncountable family of (non-)smooth fans that admit mixing homeomorphisms

In this section, an uncountable family G of pairwise non-homeomorphic smooth fans that admit mixing homeomorphisms is constructed. Our construction of the family G follows the idea from [Citation6], where an uncountable family F of pairwise non-homeomorphic smooth fans that admit transitive homeomorphisms is constructed: every step of the construction of family F from [Citation6] is essentially copied here to construct the family G. The only difference is a small modification of the relation H on X that is used in [Citation6, Definition 4.13] to obtain the family F: in H, the graph in (I1×I1)(I2×I2) is replaced with the graph in (I2×I1)(I3×I2) and the graph in (I2×I1)(I3×I2) is replaced with the graph in (I1×I1)(I2×I2); see [Citation6, Figure 5] and Figure . Therefore, in this section, we omit the details and simply state our first theorem.

Figure 5. The relation H on X.

Figure 5. The relation H on X.

Theorem 6.1

There is a family G of uncountable many pairwise non-homeomorphic smooth fans that admit mixing homeomorphisms.

In [Citation9], a family of uncountably many pairwise non-homeomorphic non-smooth fans that admit transitive homeomorphisms is constructed from the family F from [Citation6]. This is done in such a way that for each smooth fan FF, a special equivalence relation ∼ on F is defined in such a way that F/ is a non-smooth fan that admits a transitive homeomorphism. The same procedure as the one from [Citation9] for the family F, works also for our family G. It transforms every smooth fan FG to a non-smooth fan F/ that admits a mixing homeomorphism. The following theorem is, therefore, a good place to finish the paper. Since its proof is essentially the same as the proof of [Citation9, Theorem 3.23], we leave the details to a reader.

Theorem 6.2

There is a family of uncountable many pairwise non-homeomorphic non-smooth fans that admit mixing homeomorphisms.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the anonymous referees for their careful reading. The suggestions of the referees have helped to improve the paper.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work is supported in part by the Slovenian Research Agency (research projects J1-4632, BI-HR/23-24-011, BI-US/22-24-086 and BI-US/22-24-094, and research program P1-0285).

Notes

1 For each zX, d(z,A)=inf{d(z,a)|aA}.

References

  • E. Akin, General Topology of Dynamical Systems, Graduate Studies in Mathematics Series Vol. 1, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1993.
  • N. Aoki, Topological dynamics, in Topics in General Topology, K. Morita and J. Nagata, eds., Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1989, pp. 625–740.
  • I. Banič, G. Erceg, and J. Kennedy, A transitive homeomorphism on the Lelek fan, J. Differ. Equ. Appl. 23 (2023), pp. 393–418. https://doi.org/10.1080/10236198.2023.2208242.
  • I. Banič, G. Erceg, and J. Kennedy, An embedding of the Cantor fan into the Lelek fan (2024). Available at https://web.math.pmf.unizg.hr/duje/∼radhazumz/preprints/banic-erceg-kennedy-preprint.pdf
  • I. Banič, G. Erceg, and J. Kennedy, The Lelek fan as the inverse limit of intervals with a single set-valued bonding function whose graph is an arc, Mediterr. J. Math. 20 (2023), pp. 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00009-023-02323-3.
  • I. Banič, G. Erceg, J. Kennedy, C. Mouron, and V. Nall, An uncountable family of smooth fans that admit transitive homeomorphisms (2023). Available at https://arxiv.org/pdf/2309.04003.
  • I. Banič, G. Erceg, J. Kennedy, C. Mouron, and V. Nall, Transitive mappings on the Cantor fan (2023).  Available at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2304.03350.
  • I. Banič, G. Erceg, J. Kennedy, and V. Nall, Quotients of dynamical systems and chaos on the Cantor fan (2023). Available at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2310.19129.
  • I. Banič, J. Kennedy, C. Mouron, and V. Nall, An uncountable family of non-smooth fans that admit transitive homeomorphisms (2023). Available at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2310.08711.
  • J. Banks, J. Brooks, G. Cairns, G. Davis, and P. Stacey, On Devaney's definition of chaos, Am. Math. Mon. 99 (1992), pp. 332–334.
  • W.D. Bula and L. Oversteegen, A characterization of smooth Cantor Bouquets, Proc. Am. Math. Soc.108 (1990), pp. 529–534.
  • J.J. Charatonik, On fans, Diss. Math. 54 (1967), pp. 1–40.
  • W.J. Charatonik, The Lelek fan is unique, Houston J. Math. 15 (1989), pp. 27–34.
  • R.L. Devaney, A First Course in Chaotic Dynamical Systems: Theory and Experiments, Perseus Books, Reading, MA, 1992.
  • C. Eberhart, A note on smooth fans, Colloq. Math. 20 (1969), pp. 89–90.
  • C. Knudsen, Chaos without nonperiodicity, Am. Math. Mon.101 (1994), pp. 563–565.
  • R.J. Koch, Arcs in partially ordered spaces, Pacific J. Math. 20 (1959), pp. 723–728.
  • S. Kolyada and L. Snoha, Topological transitivity, Scholarpedia 4(2) (2009), pp. 5802.
  • A. Lelek, On plane dendroids and their endpoints in the classical sense, Fund. Math. 49 (1960/1961), pp. 301–319.
  • C. Robinson, Dynamical Systems: Stability, Symbolic Dynamics, and Chaos, 2nd ed., CRC Press Inc., Boca Raton, FL, 1999.