Skip to main content
MathOverflow

Return to Question

MathSciNet link
Source Link
LSpice
LSpice
  • 12.9k
  • 4
  • 45
  • 69

In Chung and Yau's paper: "A combinatorial trace formula" (MSN), they proved a combinatorial version of Selberg's trace formula for lattice graphs. I learned also in the setup that it makes sense to define Laplacian, its eigenvalues, and heat kernel of a graph (could be infinite and with loops). It showed a strong analogue to Riemannian geometry!

On both sides, we can extract useful information from the objects' spectra. This was not overwhelmingly surprising to me, however, in the geometric case because I can sort of feel the picture of a laplacian and heat kernel based on my experience.

Questions

What's curious to me are the following:

  1. Having zero experience with graph theory, is there a better way to appreciate/interpret what those eigenvalues, heat kernel, ...… mean?
  2. There must be much more behind it. What are some updated important results? Do people understand this much better than they did 23 years ago?
  3. Most interestingly (to me), is there a way to extract a graph G$G$ from a given Riemannian manifold M$M$, so that the spectral theory on both sides agree?

Any pointers to related work will be highly appreciated.

In Chung and Yau's paper: "A combinatorial trace formula", they proved a combinatorial version of Selberg's trace formula for lattice graphs. I learned also in the setup that it makes sense to define Laplacian, its eigenvalues, and heat kernel of a graph (could be infinite and with loops). It showed a strong analogue to Riemannian geometry!

On both sides, we can extract useful information from the objects' spectra. This was not overwhelmingly surprising to me, however, in the geometric case because I can sort of feel the picture of a laplacian and heat kernel based on my experience.

Questions

What's curious to me are the following:

  1. Having zero experience with graph theory, is there a better way to appreciate/interpret what those eigenvalues, heat kernel, ... mean?
  2. There must be much more behind it. What are some updated important results? Do people understand this much better than they did 23 years ago?
  3. Most interestingly (to me), is there a way to extract a graph G from a given Riemannian manifold M, so that the spectral theory on both sides agree?

Any pointers to related work will be highly appreciated.

In Chung and Yau's paper: "A combinatorial trace formula" (MSN), they proved a combinatorial version of Selberg's trace formula for lattice graphs. I learned also in the setup that it makes sense to define Laplacian, its eigenvalues, and heat kernel of a graph (could be infinite and with loops). It showed a strong analogue to Riemannian geometry!

On both sides, we can extract useful information from the objects' spectra. This was not overwhelmingly surprising to me, however, in the geometric case because I can sort of feel the picture of a laplacian and heat kernel based on my experience.

Questions

What's curious to me are the following:

  1. Having zero experience with graph theory, is there a better way to appreciate/interpret what those eigenvalues, heat kernel, … mean?
  2. There must be much more behind it. What are some updated important results? Do people understand this much better than they did 23 years ago?
  3. Most interestingly (to me), is there a way to extract a graph $G$ from a given Riemannian manifold $M$, so that the spectral theory on both sides agree?

Any pointers to related work will be highly appreciated.

Source Link
Student
Student
  • 5.2k
  • 11
  • 33

Combinatorial Skeleton of a Riemannian manifold

In Chung and Yau's paper: "A combinatorial trace formula", they proved a combinatorial version of Selberg's trace formula for lattice graphs. I learned also in the setup that it makes sense to define Laplacian, its eigenvalues, and heat kernel of a graph (could be infinite and with loops). It showed a strong analogue to Riemannian geometry!

On both sides, we can extract useful information from the objects' spectra. This was not overwhelmingly surprising to me, however, in the geometric case because I can sort of feel the picture of a laplacian and heat kernel based on my experience.

Questions

What's curious to me are the following:

  1. Having zero experience with graph theory, is there a better way to appreciate/interpret what those eigenvalues, heat kernel, ... mean?
  2. There must be much more behind it. What are some updated important results? Do people understand this much better than they did 23 years ago?
  3. Most interestingly (to me), is there a way to extract a graph G from a given Riemannian manifold M, so that the spectral theory on both sides agree?

Any pointers to related work will be highly appreciated.