From the Mahler conjecture to Gauss linking integrals Greg Kuperberg∗ Department of Mathematics, University of California, Davis, CA 95616 Dedicated to my father, on no particular occasion We establish a version of the bottleneck conjecture, which in turn implies a partial solution to the Mahler conjecture on the product v(K) = (Vol K)(Vol K ) of the volume of a symmetric convex body K Rn and its ◦ ∈ polar body K◦. The Mahler conjecture asserts that the Mahler volume v(K) is minimized (non-uniquely) when K is an n-cube. The bottleneck conjecture (in its least general form) asserts that the volume of a certain domain π nγ K♦ K K◦ is minimized when K is an ellipsoid. It implies the Mahler conjecture up to a factor of 4 n, ⊆ × 4 where γn is a monotonic factor that begins at π and converges to √2. This strengthens a result of Bourgain and Milman, who showed that there is a constant c such that the Mahler conjecture is true up to a factor of cn. The proof uses a version of the Gauss linking integral to obtain a constant lower bound on Vol K♦, with equality when K is an ellipsoid. It applies to a more general conjecture concerning the join of any two necks of the pseudospheres of an indefinite inner product space. Because the calculations are similar, we will also n 1 n 1 analyze traditional Gauss linking integrals in the sphere S − and in hyperbolic space H − . 1. INTRODUCTION Theorem 1.3 (Bourgain, Milman). There is a constant c > 0 such that for any n and any centrally-symmetric convex body n K of dimension n, If K R is a centrally symmetric convex body, let K◦ de- note its⊂ dual or polar body. (It is also the unit ball of the norm n v(K) c v(Cn). dual to the one defined by K.) The product of the volumes ≥ The proof of Theorem 1.3 has been simplified by Pisier [16] v(K) = (Vol K)(Vol K◦) and independently by Milman. Although all of the proofs technically construct the constant c, no good value for it is is known as the Mahler volume of K. Since it is both contin- currently known. Note that the Mahler volume of a sphere uous in K and affinely invariant, it achieves a finite maximum and a cube differ only by a factor of cn. So the Bourgain- and a non-zero minimum in each dimension n. Mahler [15] Milman theorem says that all Mahler volumes in n dimensions conjectured an upper bound and a lower bound for the value only differ by some exponential factor. (Indeed, the Bourgain- of v(K) in each fixed dimension. The upper bound was proven Milman theorem also holds without central symmetry; see be- by Santal´oand is known as the Blaschke-Santal´oinequality low.) [3, 19, 20]: In this article, we will establish a better value of the con- stant c by comparing the Mahler volume with another volume. Theorem 1.1 (Blaschke, Santal´o). In any fixed dimension n, We will minimize the volume of a certain body K K K . v(K) is uniquely maximized by ellipsoids. ♦ ◦ Define the subsets ⊂ × The lower bound is still a conjecture: K± = (~x,~y) K K◦ ~x ~y = 1 { ∈ × · ± } Conjecture 1.2 (Mahler). In any fixed dimension n, v(K) is of the hyperboloids minimized among centrally symmetric convex bodies by the n H± = (~x,~y) ~x ~y = 1 cube Cn = [ 1,1] . { · ± } − n n in R R . Suppose that K and K◦ are both positively curved. arXiv:math/0610904v3 [math.MG] 2 Jul 2008 The minimization problem is considered harder because (I.e.,× they have no boundary points with zero extrinsic cur- the conjectured minimum (or the real minimum) is a much vature in any direction.) We previously showed that K+ is more complicated shape than a round sphere. For instance, + a spacelike section of H , that K− is a timelike section of Saint-Raymond [19] observed that the Mahler volume of an H−, and that their inclusions are homotopy equivalences [13]. n-cube Cn is tied not only by the volume of the dual C , a + n∗ Submanifolds of H and H− of this type are called necks. cross-polytope, but also by other polytopes when n is large. The body K♦ is the filled join, defined in Section 2, of the two (Nonetheless, the Mahler conjecture has been established in + necks K and K−. (In Reference 13, K♦ was the convex hull some special cases, including 1-unconditional convex bodies + of K and K− and K♥ was the filled join. Since the filled join [19] and zonoids [9, 17].) is the real object of study, we have renamed it K♦. We do not In a noted paper, Bourgain and Milman showed that the know if it is ever non-convex.) Mahler conjecture is true up to an exponential factor [5]: + Theorem 1.4 (Main theorem). Let N and N− by any two necks of the positive and negative unit pseudospheres H+ and (a,b) H− in any indefinite inner product space R , andletN♦ be + ∗This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foun- their filled join. Then Vol N♦ is minimized when N and N− dation under Grant No. 0606795 are flat, orthogonal, and centered at the origin. 2 + Because of the geometryof the necks N and N−, we previ- Conjecture 1.7 (Mahler). In any fixed dimension n, v(K) is ously called Theorem 1.4 “the bottleneck conjecture”. We will minimized among convex bodies K, whose interiors contain interpret Theorem 1.4 as a new isoperimetric-type inequality the origin, by a centered simplex ∆n. for convex bodies: Although we will only directly study centrally symmetric Corollary 1.5. If K Rn is a centrally symmetric convex ⊂ convex bodies, Corollary 1.6 yields a corollary for general body, then Vol K♦ is minimized when K is an ellipsoid. convex bodies using a standard technique. Corollary 1.5 follows immediately from Theorem 1.4 when Corollary 1.8. If K Rn is a convex body with the origin in K and K are positively curved, because necks K+ and K that ◦ − its interior, then ⊂ come from a symmetric convex body K are flat, orthogonal, and centered when K is an ellipsoid. By continuity, the bound 4n(n!)4πn π n must also hold for arbitrary K. v(K) = δn v(∆n), ≥ (2n)!2(n/2)!2 2e On the one hand, Vol K♦ is minimized when the Mahler volume v(K) is maximized. On the other hand, K♦ is only where moderately exponentially smaller than its superset K K◦. n × n 6 n Explicitly, let Bn be the round unit ball in R . Then 2e 8 n! e 2π δ = . π n 2n !2 n 2 !2 n 1 n+1 e 2n(n!)2πn ≤ ( ) ( / ) ( + ) → Vol Bn♦ = (2n)!(n/2)!2 Thus, our value for the Bourgain-Milman constant in the asymmetric case is π . because Bn is the join of two round, orthogonal n-balls of ra- 2e dius √2 and Remark. Even though the Bourgain-Milman inequality holds πn/2 in the asymmetric case, the bound in Corollary 1.6 does not. Vol Bn = . In particular, (n/2)! v(∆ ) 1/n e π In comparison, lim n = < . n ∞ v(C ) 4 4 4n → n v(Cn)= . n! The proof fails because when K is not centrally symmetric, + In conclusion: only K exists as a subset of K K◦. The region K♦ can be formed but its volume may be larger× than v(K). Nonetheless n Corollary 1.6. If K R is a centrally symmetric convex Theorem 1.4 does say something about asymmetric convex body, then ⊂ + + bodies. We can let N = K1 for one convex body K1, and + n let N be a natural isometric image of K for another convex 2n(n!)2πn π − 2 v(K) = γn v(Cn), body K . Then the statement is that Vol N is minimized ≥ (2n)!(n/2)!2 4 2 ♦ when K1 and K2 coincide, and are a centered ellipsoid. where 3 n Proof. Given a convex body K, then K K is its difference 4 n! 2 body, by definition the set of differences− between points in K. γn = √2. π ≤ (2n)!(n/2)!2 → It is a centrally symmetric convex body. Rogers and Shephard [18] showed that π Thus, our value of c in Theorem 1.3 is /4. Since the 2n Bourgain-Milman theorem is also often phrased in terms of Vol K K Vol K, − ≤ n v(Bn), the Mahler volume of a round ball, we can also write Corollary 1.6 as with equality if and only if K is a simplex. The polar body of 2n n! 2 K K is best described by a relation between the correspond- ( ) n − n v(K) v(Bn) > 2− v(Bn). ing norms on R : ≥ (2n)! ~x = ~x + ~x . Thus, our value for the Bourgain-Milmanconstant in this form (K K)◦ K◦ K◦ 1 2 || || − || || || ||− is 2 . Mahler’s conjecture would imply π . Corollary 1.6 also improves a previous non-asymptotic es- Since timate which was inspired by the bottleneck conjecture [12]. 1 There we established that if K Rn and n 4, then Vol K = d~x, n 1 n ⊂ ≥ ZS − n ~x K n || || v(K) (log2 n)− v(Bn). ≥ and since the integrand is convex, Jensen’s inequality tells us Corollary 1.6 is strictly better for all n 4.