2
$\begingroup$

Preliminaries

Suppose that $\Gamma$ is a simple (sufficiently smooth) closed curve in $\mathbb{R}^2$ with length $L$ and enclosing an area $A$. Suppose furthermore that $\gamma:[0,L]\rightarrow\mathbb{R}^2$ is a parametrization-by-arclength for $\Gamma$ so that $|\gamma '(s)|=1$ for every s, i.e.

$$L = \int_0^{L} |\gamma'(s)| $$

The total (absolute) curvature can be defined by

$$C = \int_0^{L} |\gamma''(s)| = \int_0^{L} \kappa(s)$$

It can be shown that $C\ge 2\pi$. Equality holds iff $\Gamma$ is convex.

The isoperimetry inequality

$$4\pi A\le L^2$$

(equality holds iff $\Gamma$ is a circle) can be stated using another derivative of $\gamma$

$$\Omega = \int_0^{L} ||\gamma''(s)|'| = \int_0^{L} |\kappa'(s)|$$

A closed curve $\Gamma$ is a circle $\mathsf{O}$ iff $\Omega = 0$. (Edit: Pietro correctly pointed out that the initial formula $\int_0^{L} |\gamma'''(s)|$ would not make sense.) This implies

$$\left(( L_{\Gamma} = L_{\mathsf{O}}) \wedge (C_{\Gamma} = C_{\mathsf{O}}) \wedge (\Omega_{\Gamma} \ge \Omega_{\mathsf{O}})\right) \rightarrow (A_{\Gamma} \le A_{\mathsf{O}})$$

for all closed curves $\Gamma$ and circles $\mathsf{O}$.

Question

I wonder if and how it could be shown that a generalization of the last proposition holds:

$$ \left((L_{\Gamma} = L_{\Gamma'}) \wedge (C_{\Gamma} = C_{\Gamma'}) \wedge (\Omega_{\Gamma} \ge \Omega_{\Gamma'})\right) \rightarrow (A_{\Gamma} \le A_{\Gamma'}) $$

for all closed curves $\Gamma, \Gamma'$, i.e. of two curves of the same length and the same absolute curvature the one with greater change rate of curvature has the smaller area.

How would this – probably using Fourier analysis – be shown for ellipses with the same perimeter?

$\endgroup$
9
  • $\begingroup$ Is the formula for Ω what you really mean? Here Ω=0 implies γ′′′=0 , that is $\gamma(s)=as^2+bs+c$, right? $\endgroup$ Dec 30, 2012 at 19:57
  • $\begingroup$ $\Omega = 0$ is supposed to mean "constant curvature". $\endgroup$ Dec 30, 2012 at 20:58
  • $\begingroup$ Did I understand your question correctly (I edited it according to my understanding:-) ? $\endgroup$ Dec 30, 2012 at 21:09
  • $\begingroup$ @Alexandre: Absolutely, thanks for the improvement! $\endgroup$ Dec 31, 2012 at 10:48
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Your formula for $\Omega$ is still not good. You are integrating a full derivative (and singularities are only at points where the curvature is zero), so the result is always 0. $\endgroup$ Dec 31, 2012 at 17:06

0

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.