arxiv: v4 [math.mg] 20 Apr 2017

Transcription

1 THE KESER POULSE COJECTURE FOR SPECIAL COTRACTIOS KÁROLY BEZDEK AD MÁRTO ASZÓDI arxiv: v4 math.mg] 0 Apr 017 Abstract. The Kneser Poulsen Conjecture states that if the centers of a family of unit balls in E d is contracted, then the volume of the union resp., intersection does not increase resp., decrease. We consider two types of special contractions. First, a uniform contraction is a contraction where all the pairwise distances in the first set of centers are larger than all the pairwise distances in the second set of centers. We obtain that a uniform contraction of the centers does not decrease the volume of the intersection of the balls, provided that 1 + d. Our result extends to intrinsic volumes. We prove a similar result concerning the volume of the union. Second, a strong contraction is a contraction in each coordinate. We show that the conjecture holds for strong contractions. In fact, the result extends to arbitrary unconditional bodies in the place of balls. 1. Introduction We denote the Euclidean norm of a vector p in the d-dimensional Euclidean space E d by p := p, p, where, is the standard inner product. For a positive integer, we use ] = {1,,..., }. Let A E d be a set, and k d]. We denote the k th intrinsic volume of A by V k A; in particular, V d A is the d dimensional volume. The closed Euclidean ball of radius ρ centered at p E d is denoted by Bp, ρ] := {q E d : p q ρ}, its volume is ρ d κ d, where κ d := V d Bo, 1]. For a set X E d, the intersection of balls of radius ρ around the points in X is BX, ρ] := x X Bx, ρ]; when ρ is omitted, then ρ = 1. The circumradius crx of X is the radius of the smallest ball containing X. Clearly, BX, ρ] is empty, if, and only if, crx > ρ. We denote the unit sphere centered at the origin o E d by S d 1 := {u E d : u = 1}. It is convenient to denote the finite point configuration consisting of points p 1, p,..., p in E d by p = p 1,..., p, also considered as a point in E d. ow, if p = p 1,..., p and q = q 1,..., q are two configurations of points in E d such that for all 1 i < j the inequality q i q j p i p j holds, then we say that q is a contraction of p. If q is a contraction of p, then there may or may not be a continuous motion pt = p 1 t,..., p t, with p i t E d for all 0 t 1 and 1 i such that p0 = p and p1 = q, and p i t p j t is monotone decreasing for all 1 i < j. When there is such a motion, we say that q is a continuous contraction of p. In 1954 Poulsen Pou54] and in 1955 Kneser Kne55] independently conjectured the following. 010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 5A0,5A. Key words and phrases. Kneser Poulsen conjecture, Alexander s contraction, ball-polyhedra, volume of intersections of balls, volume of unions of balls, Blaschke Santalo inequality. 1

2 Conjecture 1. If q = q 1,..., q is a contraction of p = p 1,..., p in E d, then V d Bp i ] V d Bq i ]. A similar conjecture was proposed by Gromov Gro87] and also by Klee and Wagon KW91]. Conjecture. If q = q 1,..., q is a contraction of p = p 1,..., p in E d, then V d Bp i ] V d Bq i ]. In fact, both conjectures have been stated for the case of non-congruent balls. Conjecture 1 is false in dimension d = when the volume V is replaced by V 1 : Habicht and Kneser gave an example see details in BC0] where the centers of a finite family of unit disks on the plane is contracted, and the union of the second family is of larger perimeter than the union of the first. On the other hand, Alexander Ale85] conjectured that under any contraction of the center points of a finite family of unit disks in the plane, the perimeter of the intersection does not decrease. We pose the following more general problem. Problem 1. Is it true that whenever q = q 1,..., q is a contraction of p = p 1,..., p in E d, then V k Bp i ] V k Bq i ] holds for any k d]? For a recent comprehensive overview on the status of Conjectures 1 and, which are often called the Kneser Poulsen conjecture in short, we refer the interested reader to Bez13]. Here, we mention the following two results only, which briefly summarize the status of the Kneser Poulsen conjecture. In Csi98], Csikós proved Conjectures 1 and for continuous contractions in all dimensions. On the other hand, in BC0] the first named author jointly with Connelly proved Conjectures 1 and for all contractions in the Euclidean plane. However, the Kneser Poulsen conjecture remains open in dimensions three and higher The Kneser-Poulsen conjecture for uniform contractions. We will investigate Conjectures 1 and and Problem 1 for special contractions of the following type. We say that q E d is a uniform contraction of p E d with separating value λ > 0, if UC q i q j λ p i p j for all i, j ], i j. Our first main result is the following. Theorem 1.1. Let d, Z +, k d], and let q E d be a uniform contraction of p E d with some separating value λ 0, ]. If 1 + d then 1 V k Bp i ] V k Bq i ].

3 The strength of this result is its independence of the separating value λ. The idea of considering uniform contractions came from a conversation with Peter Pivovarov, who pointed out that such conditions arise naturally when sampling the point-sets p and q randomly. If one could find distributions for p and q that satisfy the reversal of 1 for k = d, while simultaneously satisfying UC with some positive probability, it would lead to a counter-example to Conjecture. Related problems, isoperimetric inequalities for the volume of random ball polyhedra, were studied in PP16]. Our second main result is the proof of Conjecture 1 under conditions analogous to those in Theorem 1.1. Theorem 1.. Let d, Z +, and let q E d be a uniform contraction of p E d with some separating value λ 0, ]. If 1 + d 3 d then V d Bp i ] V d Bq i ]. Again, the strength of this result is its independence of the separating value λ. Most likely, a more careful computation than the one presented here will give a condition d cd with a universal constant c below 3. It would be very interesting to see an exponential condition, that is, one of the form e cd. We note that if d, Z +, and q E d is a uniform contraction of p E d with some separating value λ, +, then holds trivially. 1.. The Kneser-Poulsen conjecture for strong contractions. Let us refer to the coordinates of the point x E d by writing x = x 1,..., x d. ow, if p = p 1,..., p and q = q 1,..., q are two configurations of points in E d such that for all 1 k d and 1 i < j the inequality q k i q k j p k i p k j holds, then we say that q is a strong contraction of p. Clearly, if q is a strong contraction of p, then q is a contraction of p as well. We describe a non-trivial example of strong contractions. Let H := {x = x 1,..., x d E d : x i = h} be a hyperplane of E d orthogonal to the ith coordinate axis in E d. Moreover, let R H : E d E d denote the reflection about H in E d. Furthermore, let H + := {x = x 1,..., x d E d : x i > h} and H := {x = x 1,..., x d E d : x i < h} be the two open halfspaces bounded by H in E d. ow, let us introduce the one-sided reflection about H + as the mapping C H + : E d E d defined as follows: If x H H, then let C H +x := x, and if x H +, then let C H +x := R H x. Clearly, for any point configuration p = p 1,..., p of points in E d the point configuration q := C H +p 1,..., C H +p is a strong contraction of p in E d. Clearly, if H 1,..., H k is a sequence of hyperplanes in E d each being orthogonal to some of the d coordinate axis of E d, then the composite mapping C H + k... C H + C H + 1 is a strong contraction of E d. We note that the converse of this statement does not hold. Indeed, q = 100, 1, 0, 99 is a strong contraction of the point configuration p = 100, 1, 1, 100 in E 1, which cannot be obtained in the form C H + k... C H + C H + 1 in E 1. The question whether Conjectures 1 and hold for strong contractions, is a natural one. In what follows we give an affirmative answer to that question. We do a bit more. Recall that a convex body in E d is a compact convex set with non-empty interior. A convex body K is 3

4 called an unconditional or, 1-unconditional convex body if for any x = x 1,..., x d K also ±x 1,..., ±x d K holds. Clearly, if K is an unconditional convex body in E d, then K is symmetric about the origin o of E d. Our third main result is a generalization of the Kneser Poulsen-type results published in Bou8] and Reh80]. Theorem 1.3. Let K 1,..., K be not necessarily distinct unconditional convex bodies in E d, d. If q = q 1,..., q is a strong contraction of p = p 1,..., p in E d, then 3 V d p i + K i V d q i + K i, and 4 V d p i + K i V d q i + K i. We note that the assumption that the bodies are unconditional cannot be dropped in Theorem 1.3. Indeed, Figure 1 shows two families of translates of a triangle. Both configurations of the three translation vectors are a strong contraction of the other configuration. The intersection of the first family is a small triangle, while the intersection of the second is a point. Additionally, the union of the first family is of larger area resp., perimeter than the union of the second. Also note that in Theorem 1.3 we cannot replace volume by surface area. Indeed, Figure shows two families of translates of unconditional planar convex bodies. The second family is a contraction of the first, while the union of the second family is of larger perimeter than the union of the first. c a C b A c 1 C 1 B Figure 1. First family of translates of a triangle: A, B, C 1 ; second family: A, B, C, where, for the translation vectors, we have b = a, and c = c 1. Both configurations of the three translation vectors are a strong contraction of the other configuration. Figure. First family of unconditional sets: The two vertical rectangles, the two horizontal rectangles and the diamond in the middle; second family: The two vertical rectangles, the upper horizontal rectangle taken twice once as itself, and once as a translate of the lower horizontal rectangle and the diamond in the middle. We prove Theorem 1.1 in Section, Theorem 1. in Section 3, and finally, Theorem 1.3 in Section 4. 4

5 . Proof of Theorem 1.1 Theorem 1.1 clearly follows from the following Theorem.1. Let d, Z +, k d], and let q E d p E d with some separating value λ 0, ]. If a d, 1 + λ or b λ d, d and 1 + d+1 then 1 holds. be a uniform contraction of In this section, we prove Theorem.1. We may consider a point configuration p E d as a subset of E d, and thus, we may use the notation Bp] = i Bp i]. We define two quantities that arise naturally. For d, Z +, k d] and λ 0, ], let and f k d,, λ := min { V k Bq] : q E d, q i q j λ for all i, j ], i j }, g k d,, λ := max { V k Bp] : p E d, p i p j λ for all i, j ], i j }. In this paper, for simplicity, the maximum of the empty set is zero. Clearly, to establish Theorem.1, it will be sufficient to show that f k g k with the parameters satisfying the assumption of the theorem..1. Some easy estimates. We call the following estimate Jung s bound on f k. Lemma.. Let d, Z +, k d] and λ 0, ]. Then k d λ 5 f k d,, λ 1 V k Bo]. d + 1 Proof of Lemma.. Let q E d be a point configuration in the definition of f k. Then Jung s theorem Jun01, DGK63] implies that the circumradius of the set {q i } in E d is at d λ most. It follows that Bq] contains a ball of radius 1 d λ. By the monotonicity d+1 d+1 with respect to containment and the degree-k homogeneity of V k, the proof of the Lemma is complete. The following is a trivial packing bound on g k. Lemma.3. Let d, Z +, k d] and λ > 0. d λ 6 If 1 + λ d, then g k d,, λ = 0. Proof of Lemma.3. Let p E d be such that p i p j λ for all i, j ], i j. The balls of radius λ/ centered at the points {p i } form a packing. By the assumption, taking volume yields that the circumradius of the set {p i } is at least one. Hence, Bp] is a singleton or empty. We note that we could have a somewhat better estimate in Lemma.3 if we had a good upper bound on the maximum density of a packing of balls of radius λ in a ball of radius 1 + λ. 5

6 .. Intersections of balls An additive Blaschke Santalo type inequality. Let X be a non-empty subset of E d with crx ρ. For ρ > 0, the ρ-spindle convex hull of X is defined as It is not hard to see that conv ρ X := BBX, ρ], ρ]. 7 BX, ρ] = Bconv ρ X, ρ]. We say that X is ρ-spindle convex, if X = conv ρ X. Fodor, Kurusa and Vígh FKV16, Theorem 1.1]. proved a Blaschke Santalo-type inequality for the volume of spindle convex sets. The main result of this section is an additive version of this inequality, which covers all intrinsic volumes. Theorem.4. Let Y E d be a ρ-spindle convex set with ρ > 0, and, k d]. Then 8 V k Y 1/k + V k BY, ρ] 1/k ρv k Bo] 1/k. Motivated by FKV16] we observe that Theorem.4 clearly follows from the following proposition combined with the Brunn Minkowski theorem for intrinsic volumes, cf. Gar0, equation 74]. Proposition.5. Let Y E d be a ρ-spindle convex set with ρ > 0. Then Y BY, ρ] = Bo, ρ]. Proposition.5 has been known cf. FKV16, equation 7], but only with some hint on its proof. For the sake of completeness, we present the relevant proof here with all the necessary references. We note that instead of Proposition.5, one could use a result of Capoyleas Cap96], according to which, for any ρ-spindle convex set Y, we have that Y + BY, ρ] is a set of constant width ρ, and then combine it with the fact that the ball of radius ρ is of the largest k th intrinsic volume among sets of constant width ρ cf. Sch14, Section 7.4]. Proof of Proposition.5. Lemma 3.1 of BLP07] implies in a straighforward way that Y slides freely inside Bo, ρ]. Thus, Theorem 3.. of Sch14, Section 3.] yields that Y is a summand of Bo, ρ] and so, using Lemma of Sch14, Section 3.1] we get right away that Y + Bo, ρ] Y = Bo, ρ], where refers to the Minkowski difference with Bo, ρ] Y := y Y Bo, ρ] y. Thus, we are left to observe that y Y Bo, ρ] y = BY, ρ]. We will need the following fact later, the proof is an exercise for the reader. ] 9 Bq] B Bq i, µ], 1 + µ, for any q E d and µ > 0. 6

7 .3. A non-trivial bound on g. The key in the proof of Theorem.1 is the following lemma. Lemma.6. Let d, Z +, k d] and λ 0, ]. Then { 10 g k d,, λ max 0, 1 1/d 1 k λ V k Bo]}. Proof of Lemma.6. Let p E d be such that p i p j λ for all i, j ], i j. We will assume that crp 1, otherwise, Bp] =, and there is nothing to prove. To denote the union of non-overlapping that is, interior-disjoint convex sets, we use the operator. Using 9 with µ = λ/, we obtain V k Bp] V k B V k B B p i, λ ] ], 1 + λ conv 1+λ/ 1 + λ V k Bo] 1/k V k conv 1+λ/ = using crp 1, and 7 B p i, λ ] ], 1 + λ by 8 B p i, λ ] 1/k k 1 + λ V k Bo] 1/k λ ] k 1/d V k Bo] 1/k, where, in the last step, we used the following. We have V d conv 1+λ/ B p i, λ ] V d 1/d λ/bo]. Thus, by a general form of the isoperimetric inequality cf. Sch14, Section 7.4.] stating that among all convex bodies of given positive volume precisely the balls have the smallest k th intrinsic volume for k = 1,..., d 1, we have V k conv 1+λ/ B p i, λ ] V k 1/d λ/bo]. Finally, 10 follows..4. Proof of Theorem.1. a follows from Lemma.3. To prove b, we assume that λ. By 5, we have 11 1/k fk d,, λ d 1 V k Bo] d λ.

8 On the other hand, 10 yields that either g k d,, λ = 0, or 1 1/k gk d,, λ 1 1/d 1 λ V k Bo]. Comparing 11 and 1 completes the proof of b, and thus, the proof of Theorem Proof of Theorem 1. Theorem 1. clearly follows from the next theorem. For the statement we shall need the following notation and formula. Take a regular d-dimensional simplex of edge length in E d and then draw a d-dimensional unit ball around each vertex of the simplex. Let σ d denote the ratio of the volume of the portion of the simplex covered by balls to the volume of the simplex. It is well known that σ d = 1+o1 e d d, cf. Rog64]. Theorem 3.1. Let d, Z +, and let q E d be a uniform contraction of p E d with some separating value λ 0,. a If λ, and 1 + λ d d+, then holds. b If λ 0, and 1 + λ d 1 σd = + d 1+o1 d, then holds. λ e c If λ 0, 1/d 3 and d + 1 d, then holds. In this section, we prove Theorem 3.1. The diameter of Bq i] is at most + λ. Thus, the isodiametric inequality cf. Sch14, Section 7..] implies that 13 V d Bq i ] 1 + λ d κ d. On the other hand, {Bp i, λ/] : i = 1,..., } is a packing of balls To prove part a in Theorem 3.1, we note that Theorem of BL15] implies in a straightforward way that holds for all λ,. Thus, we have 14 λ d κd d + V d Bp i] κ d d + V d Bp i ]. d λ. As 1 + λ d d+, the inequalities 13 and 14 finish the proof of part a. 8

9 3.. For the proof of part b, we use a theorem of Rogers, discussed in the introduction of BL15], according to which λ d κd σ d. V d Bp i] holds for all λ 0,. Thus, we have λ d κd 15 V d Bp i ]. σ d As 1 + λ d 1 σd = + d 1+o1 d, the inequalities 13 and 15 finish the proof λ e of part b We turn to the proof of part c. ote that 1/d 1 d. Thus, d λ V d Bp i, λ/] = κ d V d Bo, d + 1/λ]. Thus, by the isodiametric inequality, there are two points p j and p k, with 1 j < k, such that p j p k d λ. Set h := p j p k / d λ. ow, Bp j ] Bp k ] is symmetric about the perpendicular bisector hyperplane H of p j p k, and D := Bp j ] H = Bp k ] H is a d 1-dimensional ball of radius 1 h. Let H + denote the half-space bounded by H containing p k. Consider the sector i.e., solid cap S := Bp j ] H +, and the cone T := conv{p j } D. We have two cases. Case 1, when h 1 d. Then clearly, V d Bp i ] V d Bp j ] Bp k ] = κ d V d T + V d S + V d T κ d + V d T = κ d + h d 1 h d 1/ κ d 1. The latter expression as a function of h is increasing on the interval d λ, 1/ d]. Thus, it is at least κ d + d λ d 1 d4 λ d 1/ κ d 1 κ d 1 + dλe d5 λ ]. By 13, if dλe d5 λ 1 + λ d holds, then follows. Using λ d 3, we obtain 16, and thus, Case 1 follows. Case, when h > 1 d. Then V d Bp i ] V d Bp j ] Bp k ] κ d V d T + V d S. 9

10 Using a well known estimate on the volume of a spherical cap see e.g. BW03], we obtain that the latter expression is at least ] κ d 1 1 ] h d 1/ 1 1/dd 1/ κ d 1 1.1κ d. πd 1h π As in Case 1, we compare this with 13, and obtain Case. This completes the proof of Theorem Proof of Theorem 1.3 We prove only 3, as 4 can be obtained in the same way. Let us start with the point configuration p = p 1,..., p in E d having coordinates p 1 = p 1 1,..., p d 1, p = p 1,..., p d,..., p = p 1,..., pd. It is enough to consider the case when q = q 1,..., q is such that for each 1 i and each j d, we have q j i = p j i. In other words, we may assume that all the coordinates of q i, except for the first coordinate, are equal to the corresponding coordinate of p i. Indeed, if we prove 3 in this case, then, by repeating it for the other d 1 coordiantes, one completes the proof. Let l be an arbitrary line parallel to the first coordinate axis. Consider the sets l p := l p i + K i and l q := l q i + K i. Both sets are the union of not necessarily disjoint intervals on l, where the corresponding intervals are of the same length. Moreover, since each K i is unconditional, the sequence of centers of these intervals in l q is a contraction of the sequence of centers of these intervals in l p. ow, 3 is easy to show in dimension 1 see also KW91], and thus, for the total length 1-dimensional measure of l p and l q, we have 17 length l p length l q. Let H := {x = 0, x, x 3,..., x d E d } denote the coordinate hyperplane orthogonal to the first axis, and for x H, let lx denote the line parallel to the first coordiante axis that intersects H at x. V d p i + K i = H H length lx p i + K i dx by 17 length lx q i + K i dx = V d q i + K i, completing the proof of Theorem

11 Acknowledgements We thank Peter Pivovarov and Ferenc Fodor for our discussions. Károly Bezdek was partially supported by a atural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada Discovery Grant. Márton aszódi was partially supported by the ational Research, Development and Innovation Office KFIH grants: KFI-K and KFI-PD and by the János Bolyai Research Scholarship of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. Part of his research was carried out during a stay at EPFL, Lausanne at János Pach s Chair of Discrete and Computational Geometry supported by the Swiss ational Science Foundation Grants and References Ale85] R. Alexander, Lipschitzian mappings and total mean curvature of polyhedral surfaces. I, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc , no., MR BC0] K. Bezdek and R. Connelly, Pushing disks apart the Kneser-Poulsen conjecture in the plane, J. Reine Angew. Math , MR Bez13] K. Bezdek, Lectures on sphere arrangements the discrete geometric side, Fields Institute Monographs, vol. 3, Springer, ew York; Fields Institute for Research in Mathematical Sciences, Toronto, O, 013. MR BL15] K. Bezdek and Z. Lángi, Density bounds for outer parallel domains of unit ball packings, Proc. Steklov Inst. Math , no. 1, MR BLP07] K. Bezdek, Z. Lángi, M. aszódi, and P. Papez, Ball-polyhedra, Discrete Comput. Geom , no., MR Bou8] G. Bouligand, Ensembles impropres et nombre dimensionnel, Bull. Sci. Math , BW03] K. Böröczky Jr. and G. Wintsche, Covering the sphere by equal spherical balls, Discrete and computational geometry, 003, pp Cap96] V. Capoyleas, On the area of the intersection of disks in the plane, Comput. Geom , no. 6, MR Csi98] B. Csikós, On the volume of the union of balls, Discrete Comput. Geom , no. 4, MR DGK63] L. Danzer, B. Grünbaum, and V. Klee, Helly s theorem and its relatives, Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., Vol. VII, 1963, pp MR FKV16] F. Fodor, Á. Kurusa, and V. Vígh, Inequalities for hyperconvex sets, Adv. Geom , no. 3, MR Gar0] R. J. Gardner, The Brunn-Minkowski inequality, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc..S , no. 3, MR Gro87] M. Gromov, Monotonicity of the volume of intersection of balls, Geometrical aspects of functional analysis 1985/86, 1987, pp MR Jun01] H. Jung, Über die kleinste Kugel, die eine räumliche Figur einschliesst, J. Reine Angew. Math , MR Kne55] M. Kneser, Einige Bemerkungen über das Minkowskische Flächenmass, Arch. Math. Basel , MR KW91] V. Klee and S. Wagon, Old and new unsolved problems in plane geometry and number theory, The Dolciani Mathematical Expositions, vol. 11, Mathematical Association of America, Washington, DC, MR Pou54] E. T. Poulsen, Problem 10, Math. Scand. 1954, 346. PP16] G. Paouris and P. Pivovarov, Random ball-polyhedra and inequalities for intrinsic volumes, Monatshefte für Mathematik 016, 1 1. Reh80] W. Rehder, On the volume of unions of translates of a convex set, Amer. Math. Monthly , no. 5, MR

12 Rog64] C. A. Rogers, Packing and covering, Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics and Mathematical Physics, o. 54, Cambridge University Press, ew York, MR Sch14] R. Schneider, Convex bodies: the Brunn-Minkowski theory, expanded, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, vol. 151, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 014. MR Károly Bezdek, Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Calgary, Canada, and Department of Mathematics, University of Pannonia, Veszprém, Hungary. address: Márton aszódi, Dept. of Geometry, Lorand Eötvös University, Budapest. address: 1