2
$\begingroup$

I have found the following derivation of the Schwarzian derivatives in the book of Ovsienko and Tabachnikov:

For a diffeomorphism $\gamma$ which acts on 4 points $t_1,t_2,t_3,t_4 \in \mathbb{RP}_1$, We assume that the 4 points are spread so that $t_2,t_3,t_4$ can be defined by their distances to $t_1$ as a function of $\epsilon\in\mathbb{R}$: $t_2 = t_1 + \epsilon$, $t_3 = t_1 + 2\epsilon$ and $t_4 = t_1 + 3\epsilon$. So, the 4 points become $t_1, t_1 + \epsilon, t_1 + 2\epsilon, t_1 + 3\epsilon$ and they are related by the variable $\epsilon$. The Schwarzian derivative measures the effect of $\gamma$ on the cross-ratio as $\epsilon$ tends to zero. In other words, the Schwarzian derivative measures the cross-ratio of the points when they are infinitesimally close. To obtain the Schwarzian derivative one forms the Taylor expansion of $\Phi$ when $\epsilon$ goes to zero and keeps the first non-zero term of the expansion:

$$\Phi(\gamma(t_1),\gamma(t_2),\gamma(t_3),\gamma(t_4))= \Phi(t_1,t_2,t_3,t_4) - \epsilon^2 S[\gamma](t_1) + O(\epsilon^3) \tag 1$$

In the above equation $S[\gamma]$ is the Schwarzian derivative for $\mathbb{RP}_1$, defined by: $ S[\gamma]=\frac{\gamma'''}{\gamma'}-\frac{3}{2} \left (\frac{\gamma''}{\gamma'}\right )^2$

By construction when $\gamma$ is a linear-fractional function, $S[\gamma]$ and all the higher order terms are zero as linear-fractional exactly preserves the cross-ratio.

According to the book, the converse is also true i.e. if $S[\gamma]=0$, $\gamma$ is a linear-fractional. But I cannot see why, because in equation (1), there are higher order terms of $\epsilon$. Could anyone please tell know what I am missing here?

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Not an answer, but an analogy: A functions has derivative 0 everywhere if $f(x+h)=f(x)+o(h)$ for all $x$. If a function has derivative 0, it's constant. But why's it constant if there's an $o(h)$ term? Answer: because you need a theorem like Rolle's theorem to say that if the infinitesimal condition is satisfied everywhere, then the error term is actually 0. $\endgroup$ Jul 3, 2014 at 11:29
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Check out mathoverflow.net/questions/38105/… $\endgroup$
    – Igor Rivin
    Jul 3, 2014 at 14:46

2 Answers 2

5
$\begingroup$

$S[f]=0$ is a third order ordinary differential equation, and all fractional-linear functions are solutions. This is a $3$-parametric family. You can match any initial conditions with a fractional-linear function, then uniqueness theorem says that all solutions are fractional-linear.

$\endgroup$
3
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ This is wrong: Only Moebius transformations are solutions. The equation $Sf=2q$ is equivalent to the equation $u" +qu=0$. The space of solutions of the latter is 2-dimensional, ratios of solutions $f=u_1/u_2$ are exactly the solutions of $Sf=2q$. If you set $q=0$ you get that all solutions are ratios of linear functions, hence, are linear-fractional. $\endgroup$
    – Misha
    Jul 3, 2014 at 21:24
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Sorry. I corrected. $\endgroup$ Jul 4, 2014 at 6:27
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry for my delayed reply and thank you for your answers. I don't understand how your proof, using ratios of solutions of $u''+qu=0$, extends to general functions where it may not be possible to express them as the ratio of two solutions of $u''+qu=0$. $\endgroup$
    – odvut
    Jul 18, 2014 at 12:22
2
$\begingroup$

The Schwatzian derivative measures the deviation of $\phi$ (which I take here as an orientation preserving diffeomorphism of $\mathbb R$, for simplicity's sake) from being a Moebius transformation; here is a direct computational proof. Of course, Alexandre Eremenko's proof is more elegant. $$ S(\phi)=0 \iff \phi(x)=\frac{ax+b}{cx+d}\text{ for } \begin{pmatrix} a & b \\ c & d\end{pmatrix} \in SL(2,\mathbb R). $$ Indeed, $S(\phi)=0$ if and only if $g=\log(\phi')'=\frac{\phi''}{\phi'}$ satisfies the differential equation $g'= g^2/2$, so that $\frac{2\,dg}{g^2}=dx$ or $\frac{-2}{g}=x+\frac dc$ which means $\log(\phi')'(x)=g(x)=\frac{-2}{x+d/c}$ or again $$\log(\phi'(x))=\int\frac{-2dx}{x+d/c}=-2\log(x+d/c)-2\log(c)=\log(\frac 1{(cx+d)^{2}}).$$ Therefore, $\phi'(x)= \frac 1{(cx+d)^{2}}=\partial_x\frac{ax+b}{cx+d}$.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

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

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.