Geometric and isoperimetric properties of sets of positive reach in E d
|
|
- Walter Daniel
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Geometric and isoperimetric properties of sets of positive reach in E d Andrea Colesanti and Paolo Manselli Abstract Some geometric facts concerning sets of reach R > 0 in the n dimensional Euclidean space are proved, and in particular we look for geometric properties that, as R, parallel corresponding properties of convex sets. Moreover, in the two dimensional case, an isoperimetric problem for sets as above is studied. AMS 2000 Subject Classification: 52A30. 1 Introduction Sets of positive reach were introduced by Federer in [2]. This class of sets can be viewed as an extension of that of convex sets. It is well known that every point x external to a closed convex set C in E d admits a unique projection on C, i.e. a point which minimizes the distance from x among all points in C. Sets of positive reach are those for which the projection is unique for the points of a parallel neighborhood of the set (and not necessarily for all external points). Along with their definition, Federer provided the main fundamental properties of sets of positive reach. Namely, the validity of global and local Steiner formulas and consequently the existence of curvature measures and many relevant properties of such measures. The study of properties of sets with positive reach has been continued by several authors and along various directions. Let us mention the contributions given by Zähle [9] and Rataj and Zähle [8] on integral representation of curvature measures, the results by Hug [4], and Hug and the first author [1] on singular points of sets with positive reach and the extensions of Steiner type formulas by Hug, Last and Weil [5]. Moreover, in [3] Fu proved several interesting connections between sets of positive reach and semi-convex functions. Further contributions are contained in [6] and [7]. As stated by Federer, closed convex sets represent a limit case of sets of positive reach, as the reach tends to. The following question was at the origin of the research carried out in this paper. Is it possible to see (at least some of) the geometric properties of convex sets as limit case of suitable geometric properties of sets of positive reach? The first property that we analyse is the very definition of convex set: if x 1 and x 2 belong to a convex set C, then the segment joining them is entirely contained in C. In 3 we prove a possible counterpart of this fact for sets of positive reach. For two points x 1 and x 2 in E d and R > 0 we denote by H(x 1, x 2, R) the intersection of all closed balls of 1
2 radius R containing x 1 and x 2. The set H(x 1, x 2, R) is a rugby ball-shaped set with cusps in x 1 and x 2 ; moreover for R, H(x 1, x 2, R) tends to the segment with endpoints x 1 and x 2. Theorem 3.8 states that reach(k) R if and only if for every x 1, x 2 K such that x 1 x 2 < 2R, H(x 1, x 2, R) K is connected. The proof of this result is geometric, in fact it is based only on the very definiton of reach of a set. As a corollary (see Theorem 3.10) we have the following fact: if reach(k) R > 0 and D is a closed ball of radius less than or equal to R, intersecting K, then reach(k D) R. The latter property can be seen as a counterpart, for sets with positive reach, of the well-known fact that the intersection of a convex set with an half-space is convex (if it is non-empty). We point out that Theorems 3.8 and 3.10 have been proved also by Rataj in [6] and [7], in a different way. Next, we consider the following problem: given a set A and a number R > 0 is it possible to find the minimal set (with respect to inclusion) containing A and having reach greater than or equal to R? The corresponding problem in the context of convexity (R = ) has an affirmative answer: every set admits a least convex cover, i.e. its convex hull. We will see through simple examples that this is not the case for arbitrary A and R and we will find necessary and sufficient conditions so that A admits a minimal cover of reach greater than or equal to R. In the final part of the paper we prove a result of isoperimetric type for sets with positive reach in the plane. More precisely, given a set K E 2 with reach(k) R > 0 and contained in a disk of radius g > 0, we find an explicit upper bound for the boundary measure of K in terms of R and g. The bound is sharp when g R. The paper is organized as follows: in 2 we introduce some notations; in 3 we prove Theorem 3.8 and some related results; in 4 we deal with the least cover with prescribed reach of a given set. In 5 we prove the isoperimetric inequality in the planar case. 2 Notations Let E d be the d-dimensional Euclidean space; for a, b E d, let b a be their distance and let (, ) denote the usual scalar product. If A is a subset of E d, then int(a), cl(a) and A c will denote the interior, the closure and the complement set of A, respectively. For x 0 E d and r > 0 we set B(x 0, r) = {x E d : x x 0 < r}, and D(x 0, r) = cl(b(x 0, r)). For A E d and a E d, the distance of a from A is given by δ A (a) = inf{ a x : x A}. Let us recall the definition of set of positive reach, introduced in [2]. Let K E d be closed; let Unp(K) be the set of points having a unique projection (or foot point) on K: Unp(K) := {a E d :! x K s.t. δ K (x) = a x }. This definition implies the existence of a projection mapping ξ K : Unp(K) K which assigns to x Unp(K) the unique point ξ K (x) K such that δ K (x) = x ξ K (x). For a point a K we set: reach(k, a) = sup{r > 0 : B(a, r) Unp(K)}. 2
3 The reach of K is then defined by: reach(k) = inf reach(k, a), a K and K is said to be of positive reach if reach(k) > 0. If K E d is compact and x K, the tangent and the normal spaces to K at a are: { Tan(K, a) = {0} u : ǫ > 0 b K s.t. 0 < b a < ǫ, b a b a u } u < ǫ, Nor(K, a) = {v : (u, v) 0, u Tan(K, a)}. Notice in particular that Nor(K, a) is a closed convex cone. Let reach(k) > 0; for a K we set: P a = {v : ξ K (a + v) = a}, Q a = {v : δ K (a + v) = v }. 3 Characterization and geometrical properties of sets with positive reach The following definition will be useful later. Definition 3.1 Let a, b E d, a b, R > 0, a b < 2R. Let We set D(a, b, R) = {D(x, R) : a x, b x R}. H(a, b, R) = D D(a,b,R) It is clear from the definition that H(a, b, R) is a compact convex set, containing a and b. The boundary of H(a, b, R) is obtained rotating an arc of circle of radius R joining a and b, about the line through a and b. Lemma 3.2 Let a, b E d be such that 0 < b a < 2R where R > 0. If c, d H(a, b, R), then H(c, d, R) H(a, b, R). Proof. If D D(a, b, R), then c, d D so that D D(c, d, R). The conclusion follows from Definition 3.1. A set is convex if and only if given any two points belonging to it, it contains the line segment joining them. In this section we prove (see Theorem 3.8) a characterization of sets of positive reach that somehow resembles the above characterization of convex sets. The proof of this result requires various lemmas. The next proposition is Theorem 4.8 (7) of [2]. Proposition 3.3 Let K E d be closed, x Unp(K) and reach(k, ξ K (x)) > 0. Then, for every b K (x ξ K (x), ξ K (x) b) ξ k(x) b 2 x ξ K (x). (1) 2 reach(k, ξ K (x)) 3 D.
4 Let R > 0 and a, b E d be such that 0 < a b < 2R. We define the cone { ( ) } v C(a, b, R) = v 0 : v, b a b a >. b a 2R A geometric version of the above proposition follows. Corollary 3.4 Let K be a closed subset of E d such that reach(k) R > 0. Let x Unp(K) \ K, a = ξ K (x) K and b K such that 0 < a b < 2R. Then x a / C(a, b, R). We proceed with some geometric considerations in the plane. Given v and w vectors in E 2, v, w 0, we set S(v, w) = {z : z = tv + τw, t, τ > 0}. Remark 3.5 Let R > 0 and z 1, z 2, z 3, z 4 E 2 be such that z 1 z 2 = z 2 z 3 = z 3 z 4 = z 4 z 1 = R, 0 < z 1 z 3 < 2R. We have C(z 1, z 3, R) = S(z 2 z 1, z 4 z 1 ). Lemma 3.6 Let R > 0, b 1, b 2 E 2 with 0 < b 1 b 2 < 2R, Γ j = B(b j, R), j = 1, 2, b 3, b 4 E 2 such that {b 3, b 4 } = Γ 1 Γ 2. Let (i) Σ Γ 1 be the closed arc joining b 3 and b 4, of smaller length; (ii) Σ Γ 1 be the closed arc having length πr and such that Σ Σ = {b 4 }. For every a B(b 4, R) \ D(b 3, R) there exist c Σ, c b 3, c b 4, and c Σ, uniquely determined, such that b 1 c = c a = a c = c b 1 = R. Σ c a b 4 b 1 c b 2 Σ b 5 b 3 Figure 1 4
5 Proof. We have a b 3 > R and a b 4 < R. Let us notice that b 3 and b 4 are the endpoints of Σ. By continuity, there exists c Σ such that a c = R. Let b 5 be the endpoint of Σ which does not coincide with b 4 ; we have b 4 b 5 = 2R and a b 5 + a b 4 b 4 b 5 = 2R; thus a b 5 2R a b 4 > R. By continuity, there exists c Σ such that a c = R. The points c and c are uniquely determined as intersection of Γ 1 and B(a, R). Lemma 3.7 Let R > 0, b 1, b 2 E 2, 0 < b 1 b 2 < 2R, B i = B(b i, R), Γ i = B i, i = 1, 2. Let b 3, b 4 be such that {b 3, b 4 } = Γ 1 Γ 2, B i = B(b i, R), i = 3, 4. Assume that a B 3 B 4 \ H(b 1, b 2, R) and c i, c i are such that b i c i = c i a = a c i = c i b i = R, for i = 1, 2, and let S i = S(c i a, c i a), for i = 1, 2. Then: S 1 S 2 S(b 2 a, b 1 a). (2) In particular 1 2 (b 1 + b 2 ) int(s 1 S 2 ). (3) c 1 a b 4 c 2 c 2 b 1 b 2 c 1 a b 3 Figure 2 Proof. S 1, S 2 and S(b 2 a, b 1 a) are open convex cones with apex in a; moreover b i a S i for i = 1, 2 so that {b 1 a, b 2 a} S 1 S 2. Let Σ 1 = Γ 1 D(b 2, R) and Σ 2 = Γ 2 D(b 1, R). By Lemma 3.6 we may assume that c i Σ i \ {b 3, b 4 } for i = 1, 2. This in turn implies c 1 c 2 < 2R (as c 1, c 2 H(b 3, b 4, R)). Hence it is uniquely determined a a such that {a, a } = B(c 1, R) B(c 2, R). The straight line through a and a bounds two open half-planes such that b 2 and c 1 (resp. b 1 and c 2 ) are in the same half-plane. Thus a a S 1 S 2. (4) This implies that S 1 S 2 is a convex cone and, since it contains b 1 and b 2, (2) follows. Theorem 3.8 If K E d is closed then reach(k) R > 0 if and only if for every b 1, b 2 K, b 1 b 2 < 2R, K H(b 1, b 2, R) is connected. 5
6 Proof. Let us assume that reach(k) R > 0. By contradiction, assume that K := K H(b 1, b 2, R) is not connected; then there exist K 1, K 2 K, closed, such that K = K 1 K 2 and K 1 K 2 =. By compactness, there exist c i K i for i = 1, 2 such that ρ := c 1 c 2 = inf{ x y : x K 1, y K 2 } > 0. As c 1, c 2 H(b 1, b 2, R), ρ R. We have B(c 1, ρ) B(c 2, ρ) K =. On the other hand it is easy to check that H(c 1, c 2, R) [B(c 1, ρ) B(c 2, ρ)] {c 1, c 2 }. By Lemma 3.2, H(c 1, c 2, R) H(b 1, b 2, R), so that H(c 1, c 2, R) K = {c 1, c 2 }. (5) In particular, c := c 1 + c 2 / K; as δ K (c) < R, c Unp(K)\K. Let c 3 = ξ K (c) K. Notice 2 that if c 3 H(c 1, c 2, R) then either c 3 = c 1 or c 3 = c 2 so that δ K (c) = c c 1 = c c 2 in contradiction with c Unp(K). Consequently, c 3 K \ H(c 1, c 2, R). We also observe that, for i = 1, 2, c i c 3 c i c + c c 3 < 2R as c c 3 = δ K (c) < R. We recall the definitions of the cones: { ( ) v C i (c 3, c i, R) = v 0 : v, c i c 3 > c } i c 3, i = 1, 2. c i c 3 2R By Corollary 3.4 we have that c c 3 / C 1 C 2. (6) Apply Remark 3.5 and Lemma 3.7 to the (uniquely determined) 2-dimensional plane containing c, c 1, c 2, c 3 to obtain a contradiction with (6). Vice versa, assume that for every b 1, b 2 K, b 1 b 2 < 2R, the set K H(b 1, b 2, R) is connected. If, by contradiction, reach(k) < R, then there exists x K c such that δ K (x) = r < R and x b 1 = x b 2 = r for some b 1, b 2 K, b 1 b 2. As b 1 b 2 < 2R, H(b 1, b 2, R) K is connected. On the other hand, r < R implies that H(b 1, b 2, R) B(x, r) {b 1, b 2 } so that there exists b K B(x, r) i.e. a contradiction. Remark 3.9 If reach(k) R > 0 and b 1, b 2 K are such that b 1 b 2 = 2R, then K H(b 1, b 2, R) is not necessarily connected. Any set consisting of two points at distance 2R is an example. Theorem 3.10 Let K be a closed set such that reach(k) R > 0. If D is a closed set such that for every b 1, b 2 D, H(b 1, b 2, R) D, then reach(k D) R. Proof. The argument is similar to the one used in the second part of the proof of Theorem 3.8. Let a (K D) c such that r = δ K D (a) < R; let us show that a Unp(K D). Assume by contradiction that there exist b 1, b 2 (K D) such that b 1 b 2 and a b 1 = a b 2 = r. 6
7 In particular b 1 b 2 < 2R. Clearly, H(b 1, b 2, R) D; consequently, by Theorem 3.8, H(b 1, b 2, R) (K D) is connected. Also, notice that (H(b 1, b 2, R) \ {b 1, b 2 }) B(a, r). Then there exists b K D such that a b < r, i.e. a contradiction. Corollary 3.11 If reach(k) R > 0, a, b K, a b 2R, then reach(k H(a, b, R)) R. It is well known that, if K is a closed convex set in E d and H is an open half space, satisfying H K =, then H K is either empty or a convex subset of H. Let us show that a similar property holds for sets of reach R > 0. Definition 3.12 Let S be a sphere of radius R > 0 in E d ; let K be a closed subset of S. We say that K is convex in S if x 1 K, x 2 K, dist(x 1, x 2 ) < 2R imply that the arc of great circle of S joining x 1 and x 2, and having smaller length, is contained in K. Theorem 3.13 Let K be a closed set in E d and reach(k) R > 0. Let B be an open ball of radius R satisfying B K =. Then B K is either empty or a convex subset of B. Proof. Theorem 3.10 implies that (B B) K = B K has reach R. Then, by theorem 3.8, if b 1, b 2 K B, b 1 b 2 < 2R, then K B H(b 1, b 2, R) is connected. Now K B H(b 1, b 2, R) is exactly the arc of great circle of B, joining b 1 and b 2 and having smaller length. 4 On the R-hull of a set Let A be a subset of E d and let R > 0. In this section we analyze the problem of finding K such that reach(k) R, K A and K is the minimal set (with respect to inclusion) having these properties. In other words we look for a sort of hull of reach R of A. Intuitively, when R = we are dealing with the convex hull of A which exists for every A. On the other hand, for finite R > 0 not every set A admits a hull of reach R (see the examples below). Our aim is to give necessary and sufficient conditions for A to have this property (see Theorems 4.4 and 4.6). Definition 4.1 Let A E d, R > 0. We say that A admits a R-hull if there exists  Ed such that: (i) A Â; (ii) reach(â) R; (iii) if reach(k) R and A K, then  K. If such a set exists, we call it the R-hull of A. 7
8 Example 1. For an arbitrary R > 0 we may construct an example of set which does not admit a R-hull. Let n = 2 and A = {a, b} with a b = R/2. Assume by contradiction that there exists the R-hull of A, and denote it by Â. Let Â1 be the closed line segment joining a and b: reach(â1) = so that Â1 Â. Let Γ be a circle of radius R passing through a and b and let Â2 Γ be the closed arc of smaller length joining a and b. We have reach(â2) = R so that Â2 Â. As Â1 Â2 = A, we must have  = A; on the other hand reach(a) = R/2 so we have a contradiction. Example 2. In E d consider a half-line L with endpoint in the origin. For every i = 1, 2,..., let a i be the point of L such that a i = 1/i. The set A = {a 1, a 2,... } does not admit a R-hull for any R (0, ). For an arbitrary set A E d and R > 0, we set A R = {x Ed : δ A (x) R}. The proof of the following proposition is an easy application of Theorem 3.8. Proposition 4.2 Let A E d, R > 0; reach(a R ) R if and only if for every a and b such that δ A (a), δ A (b) R and B(a, R) B(b, R), there exists a continuous arc Γ joining a and b, Γ H(a, b, R), such that δ A (x) R for every x Γ. Lemma 4.3 Let K E d, then (i) K (K R ) R {z Ed : δ K (z) < R}, (ii) if reach(k) R > 0 then reach(k R ) R and K = (K R ) R. Proof. If x K, then x y R for every y K R so that δ K R (x) R and x (K R ) R. On the other hand, if z (K R ) R then z / K R so that δ K(z) < R. Claim (i) is proved. For s 0 set K s = {x E d : δ K (x) s}. Corollary 4.9 in [2] implies that reach(k R 1/i ) R 1/i for every i = 1, 2,.... Moreover, the sequence K R 1/i converges to K R in the Hausdorff metric. On the other hand, the by Remark 4.14 in [2], for every ǫ > 0 the family {A E d : reach(a) R ǫ} is closed with respect to the Hausdorff metric. Then reach(k R ) R ǫ for every ǫ > 0. Now let us prove that if reach(k) R then (K R ) R \ K is empty. Let z (K R ) R \ K; (i) implies that z Unp(K). Let x = ξ K (z) and y t = x + t z x, t 0. Note that z x Nor(K, x) z x z x so that, by claim (12) of Theorem 4.8 of [2], if 0 < t < R, then δ K (y t ) = t and by continuity δ K (y R ) = R. Then y R K R and z y R < R, i.e. a contradiction. Theorem 4.4 Let A E d and R > 0. If reach(a R ) R then A admits R-hull  and  = (A R) R. 8
9 Proof. Let A 1 = (A R ) R ; we prove that A 1 is the R-hull of A. The inclusion A A 1 is part (i) in Lemma 4.3. By the same lemma, as reach(a R ) R we have reach(a 1) R. It remains to show that A 1 satisfies (iii) in Definition 4.1. Let K be such that K A and reach(k) R. Then K R A R and, by Lemma 4.3, K = (K r ) R (A R ) R = A 1. Corollary 4.5 Let A E d and R > 0. If for every a and b such that δ A (a), δ A (b) R and a b < 2R, there exists a continuous arc Γ, joining a and b such that δ A (x) R for every x Γ, Γ H(a, b, R), then A admits R-hull  and  = (A R) R. Theorem 4.6 Let K E d and R > 0. Assume that K admits R-hull ˆK. Then reach(k R ) R. Proof. We argue by contradiction: assume that reach(k r ) < R. By using Theorem 3.8, there exist b 1 and b 2 K R satisfying b 1 b 2 < 2R and such that H(b 1, b 2, R) K R is not connected. Then, as we saw in the proof of Theorem 3.8, there exist c 1 and c 2 K R such that c 1 c 2 < 2R and H(c 1, c 2, R) K R = {c 1, c 2 }. (7) For j = 1, 2 we have reach(b(c j, R) c ) = R and B(c j, R) c K thus B(c j, R) c ˆK. This implies in particular that c 1, c 2 ( ˆK) R. As reach( ˆK) R, by Lemma 4.3, reach[( ˆK) R ] R, then H(c 1, c 2, R) ˆK R is connected. Let a [H(c 1, c 2, R) \ {c 1, c 2 }] ( ˆK) R. We have B a (R) K B a (R) ˆK = then a K R which contradicts (7). From the above theorem another connection between convex sets and sets of positive reach can be deduced. The convex hull of a closed set C is the intersection of all the closed half-spaces containing C. Let us prove that if K admits R-hull ˆK, then ˆK is the intersection of the complement sets of all open balls that do not meet K. Note that for an arbitrary, non-empty, subset K of E d we have (K R) R = B x (R) c. δ K (x) R This remark and Theorem 4.6 lead to the following result. Corollary 4.7 Let K E d, R 0. Assume that K admits an R-hull ˆK. Then ˆK = B x (R) c. δ K (x) R The following result is a sufficient condition for a set to admit a R-hull. Theorem 4.8 Let A E 2 be a connected subset of B x0 (R), R > 0. Then A admits R-hull. Proof. We argue by contradiction. As in Theorem 4.6, there exists c 1 and c 2 A R such that: H(c 1, c 2, R) A R = {c 1, c 2 }. 9
10 Thus every x H(c 1, c 2, R) \ {c 1, c 2 } satisfies δ A (x) < R. Let {c 3, c 4 } = D R (c 1 ) D R (c 2 ); the above property of H(c 1, c 2, R) \ {c 1, c 2 } implies that there must be a j A (D R (c 1 ) D R (c 2 )) c close to c j+2 (j = 1, 2). On the other hand no connected subset of E 2 exists containing a 1 and a 2 and contained in an open disk of radius R. Remark 4.9 If A E 2 is a connected subset of D R (x 0 ), it may not admit an R-hull. Let 0 < b 1 b 2 > 2R, A = D R (b 1 ) \ B R (b 2 ). Assume that A admits R-hull Â. A is closed and connected, and A D R (B 1 ) and the sets A 1 = D R (b 1 ) \ B R (b 2 ) and A 2 = D R (b 1 ) have reach greater than or equal to R. Thus A 1, A 2 Â. We deduce that A = Â but this contradicts the fact that reach(a) < R. 5 An isoperimetric inequality for sets with positive reach in the plane For R, g > 0 let us introduce the set K (R) g = {K E 2 : reach(k) R, K D g }, where D g is a closed disk of radius g. We consider the following variational problem S (R) g Here M(K) is the Minkowski content of K, i.e. = sup{m(k) : K K (R) g }. M(K) = lim r 0 + K r K r and stands for the two-dimensional Lebesgue measure. The condition that K has positive reach implies that M(K) is well defined, as K obeys a Steiner formula (see [2]). Note that by virtue of Remark 5.10 in [2], S g (R) <. The aim of this section is to provide an explicit upper bound for S g (R), which is in fact its exact value for g R, in terms of R and g. Theorem 5.1 If, in the above notations, 0 < g R, then S (R) g = max{m(k) : K K (R) g } = 2πg. In particular, if g < R then D g is the unique maximizer, while if R = g there are infinitely many maximizers (and D g is one of them). In the general case the situation is less neat and we can only prove upper and lower bounds for S (R) g. Theorem 5.2 In the above notations we have π 2 R ( g 2 3) 3 R 2 S (R) g 4π2 R ( g ) R + 3. (8) 10
11 The proof of Theorem 5.1 requires some preliminary steps. We start with a simple observation. Remark 5.3 Let a 1, a 2 E 2 be such that a 2 a 1 < 2R. For arbitrary x, y H(a 1, a 2, R) denote by Γ x,y the length of the shortest arc of a circle of radius R joining x and y. Then for every a H(a 1, a 2, R) Γ a1,a 2 Γ a1,a + Γ a,a2. (9) This inequality can be equivalently written in the form: ( ) ( ) ( ) a1 a 2 a1 a a a2 2R arcsin 2R arcsin + 2R arcsin. (10) 2R 2R 2R Lemma 5.4 Let K E 2 with reach(k) R > 0. Consider x 1, x 2 K such that x 1 x 2 = 2l < 2R and assume that K is contained in one of the half planes bounded by the straight line r through x 1 and x 2. Set K 1 = K H(x 1, x 2, R). Then every straight line which intersects orthogonally the segment joining x 1 and x 2, meets K 1 in at most two points. Proof. Let s be a straight line straight line which intersects orthogonally the segment joining x 1 and x 2 and let y 1, y 2, y 3 s K 1 ; assume that y 3 is contained in the segment with endpoints y 1 and y 2. Then H(x i, y j, R) K 1 is connected, for every i, j = 1, 2, moreover, y 3 / H(x i, y j, R) for i, j = 1, 2. Consequently, the connected component of the complement set of 2 i,j=1(h(x i, y j, R) K 1 ) which contains y 3 is contained in K 1. Then y 3 is an interior point of K 1 and this is a contradiction. In the notation of the previous lemma, let us fix an orthogonal coordinates frame Oξη with origin O in x 1 + x 2 and ξ-axes coinciding with the line through x 1 and x 2, oriented 2 toward x 2. Let Θ = {(ξ, η) : ξ l, η = max{y : (ξ, y) K 1 }}. (11) Lemma 5.5 In the assumptions of Lemma 5.4 and with the notation introduced before, if K is of class C 1, Θ is the graph of a C 1 function defined in [ l, l] and ( ) H 1 x1 x 2 (Θ) 2 arcsin. (12) 2R Proof. From Lemma 5.4 we have that Θ is a subarc of K 1, and consequently is of class C 1. Set K 2 = {(ξ, y) : ξ l, y η for every η such that (ξ, η) Θ}. (13) Assume by contradiction that (12) is not true; then for some Q > 1 we have l ( ) x1 b 1 + (η (ξ)) 2 2 dξ 2Q arcsin. 2R l Using Remark 5.3 and a standard bisection argument, we can find two sequences of points, k N, such that for every k ξ k and ξ k ξ k ξ k = 1 ( ξ k 1 2 ) ξ k 1 11
12 and ξ k ξ k ( ) bk a 1 + (η (ξ)) 2 k dξ 2QR arcsin, (14) 2R where a k = (ξ k, η(ξ k )), b k = (ξ k, η(ξ k )). Notice that in particular this implies a k, b k H(a k 1, b k 1, R) H(a k 2, b k 2, R) H(a 1, b 1, R), k. Without loss of generality, we may assume that ξ k converges to some ξ as k tends to infinity, so that we also have ξ k ξ and a k, b k c = ( ξ, η( ξ)) H(a 1, b 1, R). Now it is easy to see that ( ) 1 bk a k lim k ξ k 2R arcsin = 1 + (η ξ k 2R ( ξ)) 2. Hence, dividing both terms of (14) by (ξ k ξ k ) and letting k tend to infinity we obtain a contradiction. Consider a compact convex set C, with non-empty interior and with boundary of class C 1 and assume that C is contained in the ball D g centered at the origin and with radius g. For each point p C the normal cone Nor(C, x) consists of a half-line. In particular it is uniquely determined the point α(x) = (x + Nor(C, x)) D g. The map α : C D g is a homeomorphism. Moreover, its inverse is the restriction to D g of the metric projection on C. As the metric projection is non-expansive, i.e. is Lipschitzian, with Lipschitz constant smaller than or equal to one, this implies in particular the following fact. Lemma 5.6 In the above notations, for every Borel subset η of C we have that H 1 (η) H 1 (α(η)). Proof of Theorem 5.1. We first prove that we can reduce to sets with C 1 boundary. Let ǫ > 0, K (ǫ) = K D g ǫ (0) and (K (ǫ) ) ǫ/2 = {x R 2 : δ K (ǫ) ǫ/2}, where δ K (ǫ) is the distance from K (ǫ). We have that and consequently, using [2, Corollary 4.9], reach(k (ǫ) ) R reach((k (ǫ) ) ǫ/2 ) R ǫ 2. Moreover ((K (ǫ) ) ǫ/2 ) converges to K in the Hausdorff metric as ǫ 0 + and, for every fixed ǫ > 0, its boundary is of class C 1,1 (see [2]). Consequently, by Theorem 4.10 in [2], lim ǫ 0 + M((K(ǫ) ) ǫ/2 ) = M(K). 12
13 Hence, if the claim of the present theorem holds for ((K (ǫ) ) ǫ/2 ), i.e. ( M((K (ǫ) ) ǫ/2 ) 2π R ǫ ), 2 then letting ǫ tend to 0 + we get that the same is valid for K. From now on we assume that K is of class C 1 ; moreover let C be the convex hull of K and α be the map defined (on C) as in Lemma 5.6. The boundary of C can be decomposed as follows: ( ) C = ( C K) γ i, where {γ i } is a countable family of segments with end-points belonging to K. The above union is disjoint. Associated to each γ i there is a sub-arc Γ i of K having the same end-points as γ i and such that ( ) K = ( C K) Γ i. In particular H 1 ( K) H 1 ( K C) + i For each i, let γ i = α(γ i ) B g. By Lemma 5.5, H 1 (Γ i ) H 1 ( γ i ). On the other hand, by elementary geometric considerations we have H 1 ( γ i ) H 1 (α(γ i )). This bound is sharp if g < R. Hence by Lemma 5.6 i i H 1 (Γ i ). (15) H 1 ( K) H 1 (α( K C)) + i H 1 (α(γ i )) = H 1 (α( C)) = H 1 ( B g ) = 2πg. When g = R it is easy to check that there are infinitely many maximizers. For instance, let t (0, R) and let D t be a closed disk with radius R and center at distance t from the center of D g. Then D g \ D t is a maximizer. Remark 5.7 Let R > 0; recall that K (g) R is the collection of sets of reach at least R, contained in a closed disk of radius g. By Theorem 5.1 we have However for every ǫ > 0 S (R) R = max{m(k) : K K(R) R } = 2πR. S (R) R+ǫ 4π(R + ǫ). Indeed, let K η = D R+ǫ η \ B R+ǫ 2η where 0 < η < ǫ/2; we have that reach(k η ) R and M(K η ) = 4π(R + ǫ) 6πη. The claim follows as η can be arbitrarily small. 13
14 Proof of Theorem 5.2. Let z 1 = ( 3R, 0), z 2 = (3R/2, 3R/2) so that (0, 0), z 1 and z 2 are the vertices of an equilateral triangle of side length 3R. Consider the set of points Z = {hz 1 + kz 2 h, k Z} and let D = {D R (z) z Z}. The union of the elements of D covers the entire plane; in particular we have that K = {K D R (z) z D D g }. Moreover, if D D then reach(d K) R and, by Theorem 5.1, M(K D) 2πR. Thus, by the subadditivity of the Minkowski content M(K) 2πf(g), where f(g) is the cardinality of Z D g. In order to get an upper bound for f(g), notice that each z D D g is the lower left corner of a parallelogram, with sides of length 3R parallel to the straight lines though the origin and z 1 and z 2 respectively. These parallelograms have disjoint interiors; moreover each of them is contained in D g+3r. From the these facts it follows the inequality f(g) 2π ( g ) R + 3, which concludes the proof of the right inequality in (8). In order to prove the left inequality we proceed as follows. Let b = (2R, 0), c = (R, 3R) and let T be the equilateral triangle with vertices a = (0, 0), b and c. We set C = T \ (B R (a) B R (b) B R (c)). Note that reach(c) = R and M(C) = πr. Now let K = {C + hb + kc h, k Z, C + hb + kc D g }. We have K D g, reach(k) R and M(K) 2πRf 1 (g) where f 1 (g) is the cardinality of the set {hb + kc h, k Z, hb + kc 2 3R}. Arguing as above we find the following lower bound f 1 (g) π ( g 2 3) 2 3 R 2 which concludes the proof. References [1] A. Colesanti and D. Hug, Steiner type formulae and weighted measures of singularities for semi-convex functions, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 352 (2000), (electronic). [2] H. Federer, Curvature measures, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 93 (1959),
15 [3] J. H. Fu, Tubular neighborhoods in Euclidean spaces, Duke Math. J. 52 (1985), [4] D. Hug, Generalized curvature measures and singularities of sets with positive reach, Forum Math. 10 (1998), [5] D. Hug, G. Last and W. Weil, A local Steiner-type formula for general closed sets and applications, Math. Z. 246 (2004), [6] J. Rataj Determination of spherical area measures by means of dilation volumes, Math. Nach. 235 (2002), [7] J. Rataj On estimation of the Euler number by projections of thin slabs, Adv. Appl. Prob. 36 (2004), [8] J. Rataj and M. Zähle, Mixed curvature measures for sets of positive reach and a translative integral formula, Geom. Dedicata 57 (1995), [9] M. Zḧale, Integral and current representation of Federer s curvature measures, Arch. Math. (Basel) 46 (1986), Andrea Colesanti, Dipartimento di Matematica U. Dini, Viale Morgagni 67/a, Firenze, Italy. colesant@math.unifi.it Paolo Manselli, Dipartimento di Matematica e Applicazioni per l Architettura, via dell Agnolo 14, Firenze, Italy. manselli@unifi.it 15
Course 212: Academic Year Section 1: Metric Spaces
Course 212: Academic Year 1991-2 Section 1: Metric Spaces D. R. Wilkins Contents 1 Metric Spaces 3 1.1 Distance Functions and Metric Spaces............. 3 1.2 Convergence and Continuity in Metric Spaces.........
More informationTopological properties
CHAPTER 4 Topological properties 1. Connectedness Definitions and examples Basic properties Connected components Connected versus path connected, again 2. Compactness Definition and first examples Topological
More informationHow circular are generalized circles
How circular are generalized circles Mario Ponce A plane circle is defined as the locus of points that have constant distance (radius) from a distinguished point (center). In this short note we treat with
More informationMathematics for Economists
Mathematics for Economists Victor Filipe Sao Paulo School of Economics FGV Metric Spaces: Basic Definitions Victor Filipe (EESP/FGV) Mathematics for Economists Jan.-Feb. 2017 1 / 34 Definitions and Examples
More informationConvex Analysis and Economic Theory Winter 2018
Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences Ec 181 KC Border Convex Analysis and Economic Theory Winter 2018 Supplement A: Mathematical background A.1 Extended real numbers The extended real number
More informationLecture Notes in Advanced Calculus 1 (80315) Raz Kupferman Institute of Mathematics The Hebrew University
Lecture Notes in Advanced Calculus 1 (80315) Raz Kupferman Institute of Mathematics The Hebrew University February 7, 2007 2 Contents 1 Metric Spaces 1 1.1 Basic definitions...........................
More informationIntroduction to Real Analysis Alternative Chapter 1
Christopher Heil Introduction to Real Analysis Alternative Chapter 1 A Primer on Norms and Banach Spaces Last Updated: March 10, 2018 c 2018 by Christopher Heil Chapter 1 A Primer on Norms and Banach Spaces
More information4 Countability axioms
4 COUNTABILITY AXIOMS 4 Countability axioms Definition 4.1. Let X be a topological space X is said to be first countable if for any x X, there is a countable basis for the neighborhoods of x. X is said
More informationChapter 2 Metric Spaces
Chapter 2 Metric Spaces The purpose of this chapter is to present a summary of some basic properties of metric and topological spaces that play an important role in the main body of the book. 2.1 Metrics
More informationAustin Mohr Math 730 Homework. f(x) = y for some x λ Λ
Austin Mohr Math 730 Homework In the following problems, let Λ be an indexing set and let A and B λ for λ Λ be arbitrary sets. Problem 1B1 ( ) Show A B λ = (A B λ ). λ Λ λ Λ Proof. ( ) x A B λ λ Λ x A
More information1 Topology Definition of a topology Basis (Base) of a topology The subspace topology & the product topology on X Y 3
Index Page 1 Topology 2 1.1 Definition of a topology 2 1.2 Basis (Base) of a topology 2 1.3 The subspace topology & the product topology on X Y 3 1.4 Basic topology concepts: limit points, closed sets,
More informationProblem Set 2: Solutions Math 201A: Fall 2016
Problem Set 2: s Math 201A: Fall 2016 Problem 1. (a) Prove that a closed subset of a complete metric space is complete. (b) Prove that a closed subset of a compact metric space is compact. (c) Prove that
More informationGAUSSIAN MEASURE OF SECTIONS OF DILATES AND TRANSLATIONS OF CONVEX BODIES. 2π) n
GAUSSIAN MEASURE OF SECTIONS OF DILATES AND TRANSLATIONS OF CONVEX BODIES. A. ZVAVITCH Abstract. In this paper we give a solution for the Gaussian version of the Busemann-Petty problem with additional
More informationLECTURE 15: COMPLETENESS AND CONVEXITY
LECTURE 15: COMPLETENESS AND CONVEXITY 1. The Hopf-Rinow Theorem Recall that a Riemannian manifold (M, g) is called geodesically complete if the maximal defining interval of any geodesic is R. On the other
More informationDef. A topological space X is disconnected if it admits a non-trivial splitting: (We ll abbreviate disjoint union of two subsets A and B meaning A B =
CONNECTEDNESS-Notes Def. A topological space X is disconnected if it admits a non-trivial splitting: X = A B, A B =, A, B open in X, and non-empty. (We ll abbreviate disjoint union of two subsets A and
More informationChapter 1. Measure Spaces. 1.1 Algebras and σ algebras of sets Notation and preliminaries
Chapter 1 Measure Spaces 1.1 Algebras and σ algebras of sets 1.1.1 Notation and preliminaries We shall denote by X a nonempty set, by P(X) the set of all parts (i.e., subsets) of X, and by the empty set.
More informationB. Appendix B. Topological vector spaces
B.1 B. Appendix B. Topological vector spaces B.1. Fréchet spaces. In this appendix we go through the definition of Fréchet spaces and their inductive limits, such as they are used for definitions of function
More informationMaths 212: Homework Solutions
Maths 212: Homework Solutions 1. The definition of A ensures that x π for all x A, so π is an upper bound of A. To show it is the least upper bound, suppose x < π and consider two cases. If x < 1, then
More informationIntroduction to Topology
Introduction to Topology Randall R. Holmes Auburn University Typeset by AMS-TEX Chapter 1. Metric Spaces 1. Definition and Examples. As the course progresses we will need to review some basic notions about
More information7 Complete metric spaces and function spaces
7 Complete metric spaces and function spaces 7.1 Completeness Let (X, d) be a metric space. Definition 7.1. A sequence (x n ) n N in X is a Cauchy sequence if for any ɛ > 0, there is N N such that n, m
More informationPolishness of Weak Topologies Generated by Gap and Excess Functionals
Journal of Convex Analysis Volume 3 (996), No. 2, 283 294 Polishness of Weak Topologies Generated by Gap and Excess Functionals Ľubica Holá Mathematical Institute, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Štefánikovà
More informationg 2 (x) (1/3)M 1 = (1/3)(2/3)M.
COMPACTNESS If C R n is closed and bounded, then by B-W it is sequentially compact: any sequence of points in C has a subsequence converging to a point in C Conversely, any sequentially compact C R n is
More informationMath 201 Topology I. Lecture notes of Prof. Hicham Gebran
Math 201 Topology I Lecture notes of Prof. Hicham Gebran hicham.gebran@yahoo.com Lebanese University, Fanar, Fall 2015-2016 http://fs2.ul.edu.lb/math http://hichamgebran.wordpress.com 2 Introduction and
More informationB 1 = {B(x, r) x = (x 1, x 2 ) H, 0 < r < x 2 }. (a) Show that B = B 1 B 2 is a basis for a topology on X.
Math 6342/7350: Topology and Geometry Sample Preliminary Exam Questions 1. For each of the following topological spaces X i, determine whether X i and X i X i are homeomorphic. (a) X 1 = [0, 1] (b) X 2
More informationDiscrete Geometry. Problem 1. Austin Mohr. April 26, 2012
Discrete Geometry Austin Mohr April 26, 2012 Problem 1 Theorem 1 (Linear Programming Duality). Suppose x, y, b, c R n and A R n n, Ax b, x 0, A T y c, and y 0. If x maximizes c T x and y minimizes b T
More informationA Brunn Minkowski theory for coconvex sets of finite volume
A Brunn Minkowski theory for coconvex sets of finite volume Rolf Schneider Abstract Let C be a closed convex cone in R n, pointed and with interior points. We consider sets of the form A = C \ K, where
More informationCOMPLETELY INVARIANT JULIA SETS OF POLYNOMIAL SEMIGROUPS
Series Logo Volume 00, Number 00, Xxxx 19xx COMPLETELY INVARIANT JULIA SETS OF POLYNOMIAL SEMIGROUPS RICH STANKEWITZ Abstract. Let G be a semigroup of rational functions of degree at least two, under composition
More informationTopology, Math 581, Fall 2017 last updated: November 24, Topology 1, Math 581, Fall 2017: Notes and homework Krzysztof Chris Ciesielski
Topology, Math 581, Fall 2017 last updated: November 24, 2017 1 Topology 1, Math 581, Fall 2017: Notes and homework Krzysztof Chris Ciesielski Class of August 17: Course and syllabus overview. Topology
More informationThus, X is connected by Problem 4. Case 3: X = (a, b]. This case is analogous to Case 2. Case 4: X = (a, b). Choose ε < b a
Solutions to Homework #6 1. Complete the proof of the backwards direction of Theorem 12.2 from class (which asserts the any interval in R is connected). Solution: Let X R be a closed interval. Case 1:
More informationFuchsian groups. 2.1 Definitions and discreteness
2 Fuchsian groups In the previous chapter we introduced and studied the elements of Mob(H), which are the real Moebius transformations. In this chapter we focus the attention of special subgroups of this
More information(x 1, y 1 ) = (x 2, y 2 ) if and only if x 1 = x 2 and y 1 = y 2.
1. Complex numbers A complex number z is defined as an ordered pair z = (x, y), where x and y are a pair of real numbers. In usual notation, we write z = x + iy, where i is a symbol. The operations of
More informationPartial cubes: structures, characterizations, and constructions
Partial cubes: structures, characterizations, and constructions Sergei Ovchinnikov San Francisco State University, Mathematics Department, 1600 Holloway Ave., San Francisco, CA 94132 Abstract Partial cubes
More informationSolutions to Tutorial 8 (Week 9)
The University of Sydney School of Mathematics and Statistics Solutions to Tutorial 8 (Week 9) MATH3961: Metric Spaces (Advanced) Semester 1, 2018 Web Page: http://www.maths.usyd.edu.au/u/ug/sm/math3961/
More informationSETS OF CONSTANT DISTANCE FROM A JORDAN CURVE
Annales Academiæ Scientiarum Fennicæ Mathematica Volumen 39, 2014, 211 230 SETS OF CONSTANT DISTANCE FROM A JORDAN CURVE Vyron Vellis and Jang-Mei Wu University of Illinois, Department of Mathematics 1409
More informationMid Term-1 : Practice problems
Mid Term-1 : Practice problems These problems are meant only to provide practice; they do not necessarily reflect the difficulty level of the problems in the exam. The actual exam problems are likely to
More informationTopology Exercise Sheet 2 Prof. Dr. Alessandro Sisto Due to March 7
Topology Exercise Sheet 2 Prof. Dr. Alessandro Sisto Due to March 7 Question 1: The goal of this exercise is to give some equivalent characterizations for the interior of a set. Let X be a topological
More information1 Directional Derivatives and Differentiability
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 1 Directional Derivatives and Differentiability Let E R N, let f : E R and let x 0 E. Given a direction v R N, let L be the line through x 0 in the direction v, that is, L :=
More informationSet, functions and Euclidean space. Seungjin Han
Set, functions and Euclidean space Seungjin Han September, 2018 1 Some Basics LOGIC A is necessary for B : If B holds, then A holds. B A A B is the contraposition of B A. A is sufficient for B: If A holds,
More informationOn bisectors in Minkowski normed space.
On bisectors in Minkowski normed space. Á.G.Horváth Department of Geometry, Technical University of Budapest, H-1521 Budapest, Hungary November 6, 1997 Abstract In this paper we discuss the concept of
More informationIntersections and translative integral formulas for boundaries of convex bodies
to appear in Math. Nachr. (199?), Intersections translative integral formulas for boundaries of convex bodies By Daniel Hug Reiner Schätzle of Freiburg (Received November 06, 1998) Abstract. Let K, L IR
More informationON A PROBLEM RELATED TO SPHERE AND CIRCLE PACKING
ON A PROBLEM RELATED TO SPHERE AND CIRCLE PACKING THEMIS MITSIS ABSTRACT We prove that a set which contains spheres centered at all points of a set of Hausdorff dimension greater than must have positive
More informationTopological properties of Z p and Q p and Euclidean models
Topological properties of Z p and Q p and Euclidean models Samuel Trautwein, Esther Röder, Giorgio Barozzi November 3, 20 Topology of Q p vs Topology of R Both R and Q p are normed fields and complete
More informationCHAPTER 7. Connectedness
CHAPTER 7 Connectedness 7.1. Connected topological spaces Definition 7.1. A topological space (X, T X ) is said to be connected if there is no continuous surjection f : X {0, 1} where the two point set
More informationPart III. 10 Topological Space Basics. Topological Spaces
Part III 10 Topological Space Basics Topological Spaces Using the metric space results above as motivation we will axiomatize the notion of being an open set to more general settings. Definition 10.1.
More informationReal Analysis Math 131AH Rudin, Chapter #1. Dominique Abdi
Real Analysis Math 3AH Rudin, Chapter # Dominique Abdi.. If r is rational (r 0) and x is irrational, prove that r + x and rx are irrational. Solution. Assume the contrary, that r+x and rx are rational.
More informationMATH 54 - TOPOLOGY SUMMER 2015 FINAL EXAMINATION. Problem 1
MATH 54 - TOPOLOGY SUMMER 2015 FINAL EXAMINATION ELEMENTS OF SOLUTION Problem 1 1. Let X be a Hausdorff space and K 1, K 2 disjoint compact subsets of X. Prove that there exist disjoint open sets U 1 and
More informationExercises for Unit V (Introduction to non Euclidean geometry)
Exercises for Unit V (Introduction to non Euclidean geometry) V.1 : Facts from spherical geometry Ryan : pp. 84 123 [ Note : Hints for the first two exercises are given in math133f07update08.pdf. ] 1.
More informationLocal semiconvexity of Kantorovich potentials on non-compact manifolds
Local semiconvexity of Kantorovich potentials on non-compact manifolds Alessio Figalli, Nicola Gigli Abstract We prove that any Kantorovich potential for the cost function c = d / on a Riemannian manifold
More informationSHORTEST PERIODIC BILLIARD TRAJECTORIES IN CONVEX BODIES
SHORTEST PERIODIC BILLIARD TRAJECTORIES IN CONVEX BODIES MOHAMMAD GHOMI Abstract. We show that the length of any periodic billiard trajectory in any convex body K R n is always at least 4 times the inradius
More informationTopology. Xiaolong Han. Department of Mathematics, California State University, Northridge, CA 91330, USA address:
Topology Xiaolong Han Department of Mathematics, California State University, Northridge, CA 91330, USA E-mail address: Xiaolong.Han@csun.edu Remark. You are entitled to a reward of 1 point toward a homework
More informationFinal. due May 8, 2012
Final due May 8, 2012 Write your solutions clearly in complete sentences. All notation used must be properly introduced. Your arguments besides being correct should be also complete. Pay close attention
More informationII - REAL ANALYSIS. This property gives us a way to extend the notion of content to finite unions of rectangles: we define
1 Measures 1.1 Jordan content in R N II - REAL ANALYSIS Let I be an interval in R. Then its 1-content is defined as c 1 (I) := b a if I is bounded with endpoints a, b. If I is unbounded, we define c 1
More informationConvex Geometry. Carsten Schütt
Convex Geometry Carsten Schütt November 25, 2006 2 Contents 0.1 Convex sets... 4 0.2 Separation.... 9 0.3 Extreme points..... 15 0.4 Blaschke selection principle... 18 0.5 Polytopes and polyhedra.... 23
More informationMath 426 Homework 4 Due 3 November 2017
Math 46 Homework 4 Due 3 November 017 1. Given a metric space X,d) and two subsets A,B, we define the distance between them, dista,b), as the infimum inf a A, b B da,b). a) Prove that if A is compact and
More informationIntroduction to Convex Analysis Microeconomics II - Tutoring Class
Introduction to Convex Analysis Microeconomics II - Tutoring Class Professor: V. Filipe Martins-da-Rocha TA: Cinthia Konichi April 2010 1 Basic Concepts and Results This is a first glance on basic convex
More informationOn the cells in a stationary Poisson hyperplane mosaic
On the cells in a stationary Poisson hyperplane mosaic Matthias Reitzner and Rolf Schneider Abstract Let X be the mosaic generated by a stationary Poisson hyperplane process X in R d. Under some mild conditions
More informationA NICE PROOF OF FARKAS LEMMA
A NICE PROOF OF FARKAS LEMMA DANIEL VICTOR TAUSK Abstract. The goal of this short note is to present a nice proof of Farkas Lemma which states that if C is the convex cone spanned by a finite set and if
More informationLozi-like maps. M. Misiurewicz and S. Štimac. May 13, 2017
Lozi-like maps M. Misiurewicz and S. Štimac May 13, 017 Abstract We define a broad class of piecewise smooth plane homeomorphisms which have properties similar to the properties of Lozi maps, including
More informationCentre for Mathematics and Its Applications The Australian National University Canberra, ACT 0200 Australia. 1. Introduction
ON LOCALLY CONVEX HYPERSURFACES WITH BOUNDARY Neil S. Trudinger Xu-Jia Wang Centre for Mathematics and Its Applications The Australian National University Canberra, ACT 0200 Australia Abstract. In this
More informationKUIPER S THEOREM ON CONFORMALLY FLAT MANIFOLDS
KUIPER S THEOREM ON CONFORMALLY FLAT MANIFOLDS RALPH HOWARD DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA COLUMBIA, S.C. 29208, USA HOWARD@MATH.SC.EDU 1. Introduction These are notes to that show
More informationAnalysis-3 lecture schemes
Analysis-3 lecture schemes (with Homeworks) 1 Csörgő István November, 2015 1 A jegyzet az ELTE Informatikai Kar 2015. évi Jegyzetpályázatának támogatásával készült Contents 1. Lesson 1 4 1.1. The Space
More informationMath 421, Homework #6 Solutions. (1) Let E R n Show that = (E c ) o, i.e. the complement of the closure is the interior of the complement.
Math 421, Homework #6 Solutions (1) Let E R n Show that (Ē) c = (E c ) o, i.e. the complement of the closure is the interior of the complement. 1 Proof. Before giving the proof we recall characterizations
More informationBRUNN MINKOWSKI AND ISOPERIMETRIC INEQUALITY IN THE HEISENBERG GROUP
Annales Academiæ Scientiarum Fennicæ Mathematica Volumen 28, 23, 99 19 BRUNN MINKOWSKI AND ISOPERIMETRIC INEQUALITY IN THE HEISENBERG GROUP Roberto Monti Universität Bern, Mathematisches Institut Sidlerstrasse
More informationReal Analysis Notes. Thomas Goller
Real Analysis Notes Thomas Goller September 4, 2011 Contents 1 Abstract Measure Spaces 2 1.1 Basic Definitions........................... 2 1.2 Measurable Functions........................ 2 1.3 Integration..............................
More informationGeometry and topology of continuous best and near best approximations
Journal of Approximation Theory 105: 252 262, Geometry and topology of continuous best and near best approximations Paul C. Kainen Dept. of Mathematics Georgetown University Washington, D.C. 20057 Věra
More informationAfter taking the square and expanding, we get x + y 2 = (x + y) (x + y) = x 2 + 2x y + y 2, inequality in analysis, we obtain.
Lecture 1: August 25 Introduction. Topology grew out of certain questions in geometry and analysis about 100 years ago. As Wikipedia puts it, the motivating insight behind topology is that some geometric
More informationAnalysis Finite and Infinite Sets The Real Numbers The Cantor Set
Analysis Finite and Infinite Sets Definition. An initial segment is {n N n n 0 }. Definition. A finite set can be put into one-to-one correspondence with an initial segment. The empty set is also considered
More informationMA651 Topology. Lecture 10. Metric Spaces.
MA65 Topology. Lecture 0. Metric Spaces. This text is based on the following books: Topology by James Dugundgji Fundamental concepts of topology by Peter O Neil Linear Algebra and Analysis by Marc Zamansky
More informationContents. 1. Introduction
DIASTOLIC INEQUALITIES AND ISOPERIMETRIC INEQUALITIES ON SURFACES FLORENT BALACHEFF AND STÉPHANE SABOURAU Abstract. We prove a new type of universal inequality between the diastole, defined using a minimax
More informationThe Minimum Speed for a Blocking Problem on the Half Plane
The Minimum Speed for a Blocking Problem on the Half Plane Alberto Bressan and Tao Wang Department of Mathematics, Penn State University University Park, Pa 16802, USA e-mails: bressan@mathpsuedu, wang
More information3 (Due ). Let A X consist of points (x, y) such that either x or y is a rational number. Is A measurable? What is its Lebesgue measure?
MA 645-4A (Real Analysis), Dr. Chernov Homework assignment 1 (Due ). Show that the open disk x 2 + y 2 < 1 is a countable union of planar elementary sets. Show that the closed disk x 2 + y 2 1 is a countable
More informationHyperbolicity of mapping-torus groups and spaces
Hyperbolicity of mapping-torus groups and spaces François Gautero e-mail: Francois.Gautero@math.unige.ch Université de Genève Section de Mathématiques 2-4 rue du Lièvre, CP 240 1211 Genève Suisse July
More informationSolve EACH of the exercises 1-3
Topology Ph.D. Entrance Exam, August 2011 Write a solution of each exercise on a separate page. Solve EACH of the exercises 1-3 Ex. 1. Let X and Y be Hausdorff topological spaces and let f: X Y be continuous.
More informationMetric Spaces and Topology
Chapter 2 Metric Spaces and Topology From an engineering perspective, the most important way to construct a topology on a set is to define the topology in terms of a metric on the set. This approach underlies
More informationJORDAN CONTENT. J(P, A) = {m(i k ); I k an interval of P contained in int(a)} J(P, A) = {m(i k ); I k an interval of P intersecting cl(a)}.
JORDAN CONTENT Definition. Let A R n be a bounded set. Given a rectangle (cartesian product of compact intervals) R R n containing A, denote by P the set of finite partitions of R by sub-rectangles ( intervals
More informationMath 730 Homework 6. Austin Mohr. October 14, 2009
Math 730 Homework 6 Austin Mohr October 14, 2009 1 Problem 3A2 Proposition 1.1. If A X, then the family τ of all subsets of X which contain A, together with the empty set φ, is a topology on X. Proof.
More informationLECTURE 6. CONTINUOUS FUNCTIONS AND BASIC TOPOLOGICAL NOTIONS
ANALYSIS FOR HIGH SCHOOL TEACHERS LECTURE 6. CONTINUOUS FUNCTIONS AND BASIC TOPOLOGICAL NOTIONS ROTHSCHILD CAESARIA COURSE, 2011/2 1. The idea of approximation revisited When discussing the notion of the
More informationMath 341: Convex Geometry. Xi Chen
Math 341: Convex Geometry Xi Chen 479 Central Academic Building, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2G1, CANADA E-mail address: xichen@math.ualberta.ca CHAPTER 1 Basics 1. Euclidean Geometry
More informationTopological Graph Theory Lecture 4: Circle packing representations
Topological Graph Theory Lecture 4: Circle packing representations Notes taken by Andrej Vodopivec Burnaby, 2006 Summary: A circle packing of a plane graph G is a set of circles {C v v V (G)} in R 2 such
More informationHomework 1 Real Analysis
Homework 1 Real Analysis Joshua Ruiter March 23, 2018 Note on notation: When I use the symbol, it does not imply that the subset is proper. In writing A X, I mean only that a A = a X, leaving open the
More information1 Lesson 1: Brunn Minkowski Inequality
1 Lesson 1: Brunn Minkowski Inequality A set A R n is called convex if (1 λ)x + λy A for any x, y A and any λ [0, 1]. The Minkowski sum of two sets A, B R n is defined by A + B := {a + b : a A, b B}. One
More informationBodies of constant width in arbitrary dimension
Bodies of constant width in arbitrary dimension Thomas Lachand-Robert, Edouard Oudet To cite this version: Thomas Lachand-Robert, Edouard Oudet. Bodies of constant width in arbitrary dimension. Mathematische
More informationFunctional Analysis. Franck Sueur Metric spaces Definitions Completeness Compactness Separability...
Functional Analysis Franck Sueur 2018-2019 Contents 1 Metric spaces 1 1.1 Definitions........................................ 1 1.2 Completeness...................................... 3 1.3 Compactness......................................
More informationAppendix B Convex analysis
This version: 28/02/2014 Appendix B Convex analysis In this appendix we review a few basic notions of convexity and related notions that will be important for us at various times. B.1 The Hausdorff distance
More informationIn English, this means that if we travel on a straight line between any two points in C, then we never leave C.
Convex sets In this section, we will be introduced to some of the mathematical fundamentals of convex sets. In order to motivate some of the definitions, we will look at the closest point problem from
More informationFrom the Brunn-Minkowski inequality to a class of Poincaré type inequalities
arxiv:math/0703584v1 [math.fa] 20 Mar 2007 From the Brunn-Minkowski inequality to a class of Poincaré type inequalities Andrea Colesanti Abstract We present an argument which leads from the Brunn-Minkowski
More informationMATH 722, COMPLEX ANALYSIS, SPRING 2009 PART 5
MATH 722, COMPLEX ANALYSIS, SPRING 2009 PART 5.. The Arzela-Ascoli Theorem.. The Riemann mapping theorem Let X be a metric space, and let F be a family of continuous complex-valued functions on X. We have
More informationMATH 31BH Homework 1 Solutions
MATH 3BH Homework Solutions January 0, 04 Problem.5. (a) (x, y)-plane in R 3 is closed and not open. To see that this plane is not open, notice that any ball around the origin (0, 0, 0) will contain points
More informationConvergence of a Generalized Midpoint Iteration
J. Able, D. Bradley, A.S. Moon under the supervision of Dr. Xingping Sun REU Final Presentation July 31st, 2014 Preliminary Words O Rourke s conjecture We begin with a motivating question concerning the
More informationOptimization and Optimal Control in Banach Spaces
Optimization and Optimal Control in Banach Spaces Bernhard Schmitzer October 19, 2017 1 Convex non-smooth optimization with proximal operators Remark 1.1 (Motivation). Convex optimization: easier to solve,
More informationDeviation Measures and Normals of Convex Bodies
Beiträge zur Algebra und Geometrie Contributions to Algebra Geometry Volume 45 (2004), No. 1, 155-167. Deviation Measures Normals of Convex Bodies Dedicated to Professor August Florian on the occasion
More informationCHAPTER 9. Embedding theorems
CHAPTER 9 Embedding theorems In this chapter we will describe a general method for attacking embedding problems. We will establish several results but, as the main final result, we state here the following:
More informationGeneralized metric properties of spheres and renorming of Banach spaces
arxiv:1605.08175v2 [math.fa] 5 Nov 2018 Generalized metric properties of spheres and renorming of Banach spaces 1 Introduction S. Ferrari, J. Orihuela, M. Raja November 6, 2018 Throughout this paper X
More informationarxiv: v2 [math.mg] 29 Sep 2015
ON BODIES WITH DIRECTLY CONGRUENT PROJECTIONS AND SECTIONS arxiv:1412.2727v2 [math.mg] 29 Sep 2015 M. ANGELES ALFONSECA, MICHELLE CORDIER, AND DMITRY RYABOGIN Abstract. Let K and L be two convex bodies
More informationAnalysis III Theorems, Propositions & Lemmas... Oh My!
Analysis III Theorems, Propositions & Lemmas... Oh My! Rob Gibson October 25, 2010 Proposition 1. If x = (x 1, x 2,...), y = (y 1, y 2,...), then is a distance. ( d(x, y) = x k y k p Proposition 2. In
More informationTHE STEINER FORMULA FOR EROSIONS. then one shows in integral geometry that the volume of A ρk (ρ 0) is a polynomial of degree n:
THE STEINER FORMULA FOR EROSIONS. G. MATHERON Abstract. If A and K are compact convex sets in R n, a Steiner-type formula is valid for the erosion of A by K if and only if A is open with respect to K.
More informationMath 117: Topology of the Real Numbers
Math 117: Topology of the Real Numbers John Douglas Moore November 10, 2008 The goal of these notes is to highlight the most important topics presented in Chapter 3 of the text [1] and to provide a few
More informationIntroduction to Dynamical Systems
Introduction to Dynamical Systems France-Kosovo Undergraduate Research School of Mathematics March 2017 This introduction to dynamical systems was a course given at the march 2017 edition of the France
More informationMeasures and Measure Spaces
Chapter 2 Measures and Measure Spaces In summarizing the flaws of the Riemann integral we can focus on two main points: 1) Many nice functions are not Riemann integrable. 2) The Riemann integral does not
More informationLebesgue Measure on R n
8 CHAPTER 2 Lebesgue Measure on R n Our goal is to construct a notion of the volume, or Lebesgue measure, of rather general subsets of R n that reduces to the usual volume of elementary geometrical sets
More information