Timeline for Measuring the distance of a convex set from a ball (Nikodym distance)
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 6, 2013 at 18:38 | comment | added | Sergei Ivanov | It is not immediately clear that the diameter is bounded. | |
| May 6, 2013 at 18:34 | comment | added | alex | You are correct that the statement follows, but with an estimate of order of $\epsilon^{1/n}$ for the distance from the ball. I was hoping that one can get a better estimate without using Hausdorff distance. | |
| May 6, 2013 at 18:29 | history | edited | Anton Petrunin | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 139 characters in body
|
| May 6, 2013 at 18:25 | comment | added | Anton Petrunin | Yes, I will make an update. | |
| May 6, 2013 at 18:14 | comment | added | alvarezpaiva | I think one just needs to add that every rotation is a composition of reflections and so the fact that the body $K$ or its gauge function is almost reflection invariant implies that is is almost invariant under rotations. | |
| May 6, 2013 at 18:04 | history | answered | Anton Petrunin | CC BY-SA 3.0 |