Notes on Integral Geometry Uga, Fall 2011
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
NOTES ON INTEGRAL GEOMETRY UGA, FALL 2011 Contents 1. Introduction 1 1.1. Goals of the subject and the course 1 1.2. Buffon needle problem 2 1.3. Integral geometry of the euclidean plane 2 1.4. Relaxation of smoothness conditions. 6 2. Classical integral geometry 6 2.1. Steiner's formula 6 2.2. Statement of Hadwiger's theorem, and its integral geometric consequences 10 2.3. Support functions, the cosine transform and zonoids 14 2.4. Proof of Hadwiger's theorem 17 2.5. Even valuations: Klain functions, Crofton measures and the Alesker Fourier transform 19 2.6. The McMullen decomposition 20 2.7. Nijenhuis's theorem 20 2.8. The Alesker product, part I 23 2.9. Review of differential forms 24 2.10. Integration of differential forms and the normal cycle 28 2.11. Curvature measures and valuations. First variation and the kernel theorem 31 2.12. Kinematic formulas for invariant curvature measures 34 2.13. The transfer principle 37 2.14. Integral geometry of real space forms 40 3. Alesker theory for affine spaces 46 3.1. Alesker irreducibility and its consequences 46 3.2. Convolution 49 3.3. Constant coefficient valuations 52 n 4. Integral geometry of (C ;U(n)) 54 4.1. Hermitian intrinsic volumes and Tasaki valuations 54 4.2. On kU(n)(χ) 56 4.3. Algebraic structure of ValU(n) 57 4.4. Dictionaries 61 n 4.5. Global kinematic formulas in C 63 4.6. Two dualities 64 References 66 1. Introduction 1.1. Goals of the subject and the course. Geometric probability. Rota: \continuous combi- natorics" Geometry of singular spaces: language of valuations and curvature measures is natural. Date: December 5, 2011. 1 2 NOTES ON INTEGRAL GEOMETRY UGA, FALL 2011 To give an account of the basic vocabulary, which (as usual in geometry) includes a variety of complementary approaches. To describe and (partially) prove recent results about the integral geometry of the unitary group. 1.2. Buffon needle problem. Reference: [21] Imagine the euclidean plane ruled by a system of parallel lines one inch apart. Drop a needle of length ` ≤ one inch in a random position on the plane. What is the probability that the needle crosses one of the lines? First we reframe the question as: what is the expectation E(`) of the number of lines crossed by a needle of unrestricted length? If ` ≤ 1 then this is the same as the first question. Observe that E(`1 +`2) = E(`1)+E(`2): for we may think of the long needle as the concatenation of the two shorter ones. Although the two crossing events are not independent, dropping one of the needles at random also gives a random position for the other. In fact it is not even necessary that the two needles be colinear, and furthermore one may concatenate any number of needles and the same additivity will result. Finally, (by continuity and perhaps a leap of faith) the needle may even be curved. So the function E(`) is linear, and gives the expected number of crossings of any rectifiable curve of length `. Thus E(`) = c` for some constant c. To evaluate the constant c, take the curve to be a circle C of diameter 1. In this case C crosses exactly two lines regardless of its position. Thus 2 cπ = E(π) = 2 =) c = : π This argument is an instance of the \template method": once we know that an integral-geometric formula of a certain kind exists, in order to specify the constants one finds one or more convenient geometric objects for which everything is directly computable. Then the constants can be computed by working out the resulting linear equations. Ideally the templates can be chosen so that the system is diagonal. 1.3. Integral geometry of the euclidean plane. 2 2 1.3.1. Haar measures on Gr1(R ) and SO(2). It is convenient to identify R ' C. The euclidean 1 iθ group SO(2) is diffeomorphic to S × C by identifying (e ; z0) to the map iθ z 7! z0 + e z: iθ Thus z0 is the image of the origin and e is the (constant) derivative of the map. 3 Consider the the measure on SO(2) given by identifying it locally with R via the coordinates θ; x; y and taking Lebesgue measure there. Since iθ i i(θ+ ) iθ (e ; z0) · (e ; w0) = (e ; e w0 + z0) Fubini's theorem shows that this measure is invariant under the action of the group on itself: if E ⊂ SO(2) 3 g then m(gE) = m(E). The affine Grassmannian Gr1(C) is a 2-dimensional manifold. It can be viewed as a quotient of SO(2) as follows. Clearly SO(2) acts transitively on Gr1(C). The subgroup H := {±1g×R ⊂ SO(2) is the stabilizer of R ⊂ C. Hence the map g 7! gR gives an identification of the left coset space SO(2) =H ' Gr1(C). iθ −iθ The locally defined functions (e ; z0) 7! θ; =(e z0) on SO(2) are invariant, up to sign, under the right action of H. Therefore they are lifts of locally defined functions θ; p on Gr1. Geometrically, θ is the angle that the line makes with the x-axis. Exercise 1.1. Show that p = ± the distance from the line to the origin. Exercise 1.2. θ; p give local coordinates on Gr1. The resulting measure dpdθ is invariant under the action of SO(2). NOTES ON INTEGRAL GEOMETRY UGA, FALL 2011 3 1.3.2. Crofton's formula for the length of a rectifiable plane curve. Recall that a continuous curve 2 γ : [0; 1] ! R is rectifiable if N X jγj := sup jγ(ti) − γ(ti−1j < 1: P=ft0<···<tN g i=1 Here the sup is taken over all partitions P of [0; 1] and #(γ \ `) := #fs : γ(s) 2 `g. Lemma 1.3. Let f : R ! R. Then the set of all local extreme values of f is countable. Proof. A point x 2 R is a local max if there is an open interval (p; q) 3 x such that f(x) = maxp;q f. Clearly p; q may be taken to be rational. Thus the set of all local maximum values is contained in the countable set fsup f : p; q 2 Qg: (p;q) The set of local minimum values is likewise countable. Lemma 1.4. Let f : R ! R be continuous. Suppose that c is not a local extreme value of f, and that f(x0) = c. Let > 0 be given. Then for any sufficiently fine partition P of R there are points a1; a2 2 P, with jx − aij < , such that f(a1) < c < f(a2). 2 Theorem 1.5. Let γ ⊂ R be a rectifiable curve. Then Z jγj = 4 #(γ \ `(θ; p)) dθdp: Gr1 Proof. Given a partition P, let γP denote the corresponding piecewise linear path, with vertices at the points γ(t); t 2 P. On the other hand, one easily calculates that for a line segments σ Z #(σ \ `(θ; p)) dθdp = 4jσj Gr1 and therefore Z #(γP \ `(θ; p)) dθdp = 4jγP j: Gr1 Thus Z sup #(γP \ `(θ; p)) dθdp = 4jγj: (1) P Gr1 and it remains to show that the left hand side equals R #(γ \ `(θ; p)) dθdp. Gr1 Let P1; P2;::: be a sequence of successive refinements with mesh ! 0. By the intermediate value theorem, given any line ` #(` \ γPi ) ≤ #(` \ γPi+1 ) ≤ #(` \ γ): By (1) and the dominated convergence theorem, #(` \ γP ) ≤ N(`) := lim #(` \ γP ) < 1 i i!1 i for all i. Let u be a unit vector and consider the continuous function f; = u · γ. The level sets f −1(c) correspond to the intersections between γ and the lines ? to u. By Lemma 1.3, among these lines ` only countably many correspond to local extreme values c. By Lemma 1.4, if ` is one of the generic lines that do not, then for sufficiently large i #(` \ γPi ) = #(` \ γ): Thus the functions ` 7! #(γPi \ `) increase to ` 7! #(γ \ `) at a.e. line `, which with (1) and dominated convergence concludes the proof. 4 NOTES ON INTEGRAL GEOMETRY UGA, FALL 2011 1.3.3. Poincar´eformula. Theorem 1.6. Let β; γ be C1 curves in the plane. Then Z #(β \ gγ) dg = 4jβjjγj (2) SO(2) Proof. Consider the map F : S1 × β × γ ! SO(2); (eiθ; p; q) 7! (eiθ; β(s) − eiθγ(t)): Clearly F (p; q; eiθ)q = p, and the cardinality of F −1(g) is #(β \ gγ). Thus the change of variables formula gives Z Z #(β \ gγ) dg = jdet DF j (3) SO(2) S1×β×γ | though strictly speaking we should replace F in the right hand integral by its expression in local coordinates (θ ◦ F; x ◦ F; y ◦ F ). For simplicity of notation we abbreviate this as (θ; x; y). Let s; t be the respective arclength coordinates on β; γ and the angular parameter on the S1 factor in the domain. Then @θ = 1 @ @θ @θ = = 0 @x @y so the determinant in question is @x @x @s @t 0 iθ 0 0 iθ 0 0 iθ 0 det @y @y = <β =(e γ ) − =β <(e γ ) = hβ ; ie γ i: @s @t The integral with respect to θ of the absolute value of this expression is clearly independent of s; t, so by (3) the formula (2) holds for some value of the constant. To evaluate the constant we use the template method, taking β; γ to be circles of radius 1.