5
$\begingroup$

As the title suggests, I am trying to find something like an isoperimetric inequality for smooth immersions of the 2-sphere into $\mathbb{R}^3$ that relates the surface area to the enclosed 3d-volume. There are a couple of issues here: firstly, does it make sense to talk about an 'inside' and 'outside' of a possibly self-intersecting surface in $\mathbb{R}^3$? My solution to this was to just consider the algebraic volume [1,2]: $$ V=\frac{1}{3}\int_M\langle N, x\rangle dM, $$ where $x:M\rightarrow\mathbb{R}^3$ is the immersion and $N$ is the orientation. I would like to show some kind of inequality relating $V$ to the surface area of the immersion, $$ A=\int_M d\Sigma $$ where $d\Sigma$ is the induced area element. My idea so far has been to try and modify Gromov's proof of the isoperimetric inequality using Stokes' theorem [3], but I haven't made much progress. Any helpful references would be appreciated.

EDIT:
In [4] and [5] the following isoperimetric inequality is presented: $$ \left(\sum_{k} n_k \mathscr L(W_k)\right)^2\leq \left(\sum_{k} |n_k| \mathscr L(W_k)\right)^2 \leq (36\pi)^{-1}A^3 $$ where $W_k$ denote the various connected components of $\mathbb{R}\setminus x(M)$, and $n_k$ are the (generalised) winding numbers of $W_k$. Here, $\mathscr L(W_k)$ denotes the 3d-Lebesgue volume of $W_k$.

References:

[1] López, Rafael. Constant mean curvature surfaces with boundary. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013. (Chapter 2)

[2] Andrews, Ben, et al. Extrinsic Geometric Flows. American Mathematical Society, 2020. (Chapter 5)

[3] Berger, Marcel. Geometry II. Springer Science & Business Media, 2009. (12.11.4)

[4] Osserman, Robert. "The isoperimetric inequality." Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society 84.6 (1978): 1182-1238.

[5] Rado, Tibor. "The isoperimetric inequality and the Lebesgue definition of surface area." Transactions of the American Mathematical Society 61.3 (1947): 530-555.

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

We can assume that immersed surface divides the space into finite number of regions. Then your formula gives volume of of these regions counted with muliplicity.

enter image description here

Subdivide your surface into singular surfaces such that each cuts only one region. Summing up the isoperimetric inequalities for some of these surfaces implies the inequality that you are looking for.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ How do we show that the surface divides space into finitely many regions? $\endgroup$
    – sobol
    Commented Jan 16, 2023 at 19:24
  • $\begingroup$ @sobol, it is not true in general, but it is true after a small perturbation. (So we can assume it is true.) $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 16, 2023 at 19:32

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .