Timeline for Circumscribing simplex to convex body?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
15 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sep 6, 2014 at 17:38 | comment | added | Joseph O'Rourke | Atsushi (above) proved: There is a simplex $S$ with Vol$(S) \le \;d^{d-1}$Vol$(K)$. | |
Sep 6, 2014 at 13:32 | comment | added | Joseph O'Rourke | @PietroMajer: I think what's missing here is that indeed the polar dual w.r.t. the simplex centroid maps to a simplex inscribed in the dual shape, but not all convex bodies can be obtained through this duality. | |
Sep 6, 2014 at 11:58 | history | edited | Joseph O'Rourke | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Answered notice.
|
Sep 6, 2014 at 7:55 | comment | added | Pietro Majer | Precisely: it is not obvious (to me) that a simplex growing inside $L$ can in fact keep growing till all its vertices have reached the boundary of $L$. But the positive answer to Q implies a positive answer to Q' by duality, right? | |
Sep 6, 2014 at 7:49 | comment | added | Pietro Majer | Note the dual question: Q' Does every compact convex body $L$ in $\mathbb{R}^d$ admit an inscribed regular simplex, each vertex of which lies in the boundary of $L$ ? While Q admits the simple construction by moving planes described above, it is not obvious to me how the dual construction should work for the answer of Q'. | |
Sep 6, 2014 at 4:43 | comment | added | Atsushi Kanazawa | I gave a bound for the volume of such a simplex in link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00013-014-0616-6 It is interesting to ask about regular simplex case. | |
Sep 6, 2014 at 2:43 | comment | added | Joseph O'Rourke | @WlodzimierzHolsztynski: I like to believe that Thales would be pleased to be cited in this context, 2,500 years later. :-) | |
Sep 6, 2014 at 2:40 | comment | added | Włodzimierz Holsztyński | Thank you Joseph. Indeed, in $\ \mathbb R^n,\ $ when one vertex is fixed, and we move the opposite opposite plane then according to Thales we get a homothetic simplex (hence regular if we started with a regular simplex). | |
Sep 6, 2014 at 2:29 | comment | added | Joseph O'Rourke | @WlodzimierzHolsztynski: "the simplex stays regular": Very nice!! | |
Sep 6, 2014 at 2:23 | comment | added | José Hdz. Stgo. | I've just edited the link... | |
Sep 6, 2014 at 2:21 | comment | added | José Hdz. Stgo. | You may want to take a look at the references mentioned by Prof. Hatcher in his answer to the following question of mine: mathoverflow.net/questions/26318/points-on-a-sphere | |
Sep 6, 2014 at 2:19 | history | edited | Joseph O'Rourke | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 108 characters in body
|
Sep 6, 2014 at 2:17 | comment | added | Włodzimierz Holsztyński | The same must be true in dimension $n$. When you move faces (each independently) of a regular simplex in parallel, the simplex stays regular (just make sure that the intersection of the chosen open half-spaces stays non-empty). | |
Sep 6, 2014 at 2:06 | comment | added | Włodzimierz Holsztyński | In $\ \mathbb R^2\ $ just move the lines till they touch the convex body. You can position your regular simplex (equilateral triangle) in every possible direction. | |
Sep 6, 2014 at 2:00 | history | asked | Joseph O'Rourke | CC BY-SA 3.0 |