Arxiv:2010.05101V1 [Math.MG] 10 Oct 2020 in This Paper, We Prove the Following
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
EVERY JORDAN CURVE INSCRIBES UNCOUNTABLY MANY RHOMBI ANTONY T.H. FUNG Abstract. We prove that every Jordan curve in R2 inscribes uncountably many rhombi. No regularity condition is assumed on the Jordan curve. 1. Introduction The inscribed square problem is a famous open problem due to Otto Toeplitz in 1911 [7], which asks whether all Jordan curves in R2 inscribe a square. By “inscribe”, it means that all four vertices lie on the curve. There are lots of results for the case when the Jordan curve is “nice” [2] [3] [4] [6]. However, other than Vaughan’s result stating that every Jordan curve in R2 inscribes a rectangle (see [5]), little progress has been done on the general case. One of the earliest results was Arnold Emch’s work [1]. In 1916, he proved that all piecewise analytic Jordan curves in R2 with only finitely many “bad” points in- scribe a square. Emch’s approach was that given a direction τ, construct the set of medians Mτ , defined as (roughly speaking) the set of midpoints of pairs of points on the curve that lie on the same line going in direction τ. When the Jordan curve is nice enough, Mτ is a nice path. Now consider an orthogonal direction σ and sim- ilarly construct Mσ. The paths Mτ and Mσ must intersect, and their intersections correspond to quadrilaterals with diagonals perpendicularly bisecting each other, i.e. rhombi. Then by rotating and using the intermediate value theorem, he showed that at some direction, one of those rhombi is a square. In this paper, we will follow a similar approach to show the existence of rhombi. However, without assuming analyticity, Mτ may not necessarily be a path. To get around this, we will define a new class of object called a pseudopath that has prop- erties similar to a path. Then we will show that Mτ is a pseudopath, and use those properties of pseudopath to proceed the argument. arXiv:2010.05101v1 [math.MG] 10 Oct 2020 In this paper, we prove the following: Theorem 1.1. Let γ : S1 ! R2 be a Jordan curve. Then there exists an open interval of angles such that there exists inscribed rhombi of all these angles. Furthermore, if γ does not contain a special corner, then there exists inscribed rhombi of all angles. In this section, we will define what is a rhombus of an angle and what is a special corner. In this paper, an inscribed rhombus is a set of 4 distinct points in im(γ) such that those 4 points are the vertices of a rhombus in R2. Date: October 13, 2020. 1 2 ANTONY T.H. FUNG A corollary of Theorem 1.1 is that every Jordan curve in R2 inscribes uncountably many rhombi. Definition 1.2 (line of angle θ). A line of angle θ means a line in the form x sin θ − y cos θ =constant. i.e. a line making angle θ with the x-axis in an anti-clockwise manner. Definition 1.3 (special corner of angle θ). Let γ : S1 ! R2 be a Jordan curve. A special corner of γ of angle θ is a point p 2 im(γ) such that both the line of angle θ π through p and the line of angle θ + through p only intersect im(γ) at p. 2 Figure 1: p is a special corner of angle θ Definition 1.4 (special corner). Let γ : S1 ! R2 be a Jordan curve. A point p is a special corner of γ if it is a special corner of γ of at least one angle θ. Intuitively, a special corner is a point on im(γ) such that translating to the origin and rotating, the entire curve lies within a single quadrant. Definition 1.5 (rhombus of angle θ). We say that a rhombus in R2 is a rhombus of π angle θ if the two diagonals are lines with angles θ and θ + respectively. 2 π Clearly, “rhombus of angle θ” and “rhombus of angle θ + 2 ” are the same concept. Now we can state Theorem 1.1 again in a more precise manner. We divide it into three separate statements. Proposition 1.6. Let γ : S1 ! R2 be a Jordan curve and θ 2 R. If there is no special corner of angle θ, then there exists an inscribed rhombus of angle θ. In particular, this implies that Jordan curves with no special corners have inscribed rhombi of all angles, and hence satisfying Theorem 1.1. Proposition 1.7. Let γ : S1 ! R2 be a Jordan curve with exactly one special corner. Then 9θ0 and > 0 such that 8θ 2 (θ0 − , θ0 + ), there is no special corner of angle θ. Together with Proposition 1.6, this implies that Jordan curves with exactly one special corner satisfy Theorem 1.1. Proposition 1.8. Let γ : S1 ! R2 be a Jordan curve with at least two special corners. Let p and q be distinct special corners of γ, and suppose that the line passing through p and q is a line of angle θ0 for some θ0. Then 9 > 0 such that 8θ 2 (θ0 − , θ0 + ), there exists an inscribed rhombus of angle θ. EVERY JORDAN CURVE INSCRIBES UNCOUNTABLY MANY RHOMBI 3 This implies that Jordan curves with at least two special corners satisfy Theorem 1.1. Together, Propositions 1.6, 1.7, 1.8 imply Theorem 1.1. We will quickly prove Proposition 1.7 first. Then in Section 2 we will develop some machinery in point-set topology to prove Proposition 1.6. In Section 3 we will prove Proposition 1.6. In Section 4 we will refine the arguments used in Section 3 to prove Proposition 1.8, and hence completing the proof of Theorem 1.1. Proof of Proposition 1.7. Suppose p is the unique special corner of a Jordan curve 1 2 γ : S ! R . Let q1; q2 be two other points in im(γ) such that p; q1; q2 are not collinear. Let q be the mid-point of q1 and q2. For each θ, let lθ be the line of angle θ through p. Let θ0 be such that lθ0 passes through q. Let = min(\q2pq; \qpq1). Then 8θ 2 (θ0 − , θ0 + ), q1 and q2 are on opposite sides of the lθ. Since im(γ)nfpg is path-connected, im(γ) must intersect lθ at a point other than p, and hence p is not a special corner of angle θ. Since p is the unique special corner of γ, there is no special corners of angle θ. Figure 2: Proof of Proposition 1.7 2. Some point-set topology We begin with our key concept. Definition 2.1 (pseudopath). Let X be a topological space, and p; q 2 X. A pseu- dopath between p and q is a compact set C ⊆ X such that p; q 2 C and 8 open set U containing C, 9 a path γ from p to q satisfying im(γ) ⊆ U. Intuitively, a pseudopath is a compact set that is arbitrarily close to containing a path. We note some properties of pseudopaths. First of all, clearly the image of a path is a pseudopath. So pseudopath is a gener- alization of path. Another straightforward property of pseudopath is that the image of a pseudopath is a pseudopath: Lemma 2.2. Let f : X ! Y be a continuous function between topological spaces. If C be a pseudopath between the points p; q 2 X, then f(C) is a pseudopath between f(p); f(q). 4 ANTONY T.H. FUNG Proof. Since C is compact, f(C) is also compact. Since p; q 2 C, f(p) and f(q) must be in f(C). Suppose U is open in Y and contains f(C). Then f −1(U) is open in X and contains C, and hence contains the image of a path γ from p to q. Then f ◦ γ is our desired path from f(p) to f(q) with image lying within U. Now we prove the most crucial property of pseudopath in this paper. Lemma 2.3. Let A; B; C; D be 4 distinct points on @D2 = S1 labeled in that order (i.e. A; C lie in different path components in @D2nfB; Dg). Let K be a compact set in D2 that intersects @D2 at B and D, and only at B and D. If A; C lie in different path components in D2nK, then K is a pseudopath in D2 between B and D. Figure 3: An example of Lemma 2.3 Note that K does not necessarily contain the image of a path from B to D. For example, if we consider the example given in Figure 3 where K is a set that looks 1 like the graph of y = sin( x ), x 6= 0, with the hole at x = 0 being filled. It does not contain the image of a path going from B to D. That is precisely the reason why we have to deal with pseudopaths instead of just paths. The key to proving Lemma 2.3 is Alexander duality, which requires local contractibil- ity. Regarding the comment above on the example given in Figure 3, the graph of 1 y = sin( x ) is not locally contractible at 0, which prevents us from using Alexander duality directly. Our strategy of proving Lemma 2.3 is that we first construct a lo- cally contractible set, and then we apply Alexander duality. Now we prove Lemma 2.3.