5
$\begingroup$

Consider the Vandermonde product $\prod_{1\le j < k \le n} |z_j - z_k|$. It is well-known that under the constraint $|z_j| \le 1$ for all $j$, the product is maximized at a picket fence configuration of the form $z_j = e^{2 \pi i j / n}$, with a maximum value of $n^{n/2}$; see here.

Now instead of the simple constraint above, I impose $|z_j| \le r_j$, with the convention that $0 < r_1 \le r_2 \le \ldots \le r_n$. The maximizing configuration is obviously going to be more complicated, but I conjecture the following upper bound on the maximum value: $$ \prod_{1 \le j < k \le n}|z_j - z_k| \le n^{n/2}\prod_{j=1}^n r_j^{j-1}.$$

Is this true? Any partial result (including weaker bound) is welcome.

Update: the case $n=2$ is trivially verified since the left hand side is $\le r_1 + r_2 \le 2 r_2$. For $n=3$, consider projecting the optimizing $z_j$'s radially to the outermost circle of radius $r_3$, and call them $\zeta_j$'s, so that $\zeta_3 = z_3$. One must have $|\zeta_j - \zeta_k| > r_3$. This ensures that the radial projection can only increase the product. But for higher $n$, this last condition does not necessarily hold, so one has to account for the tradeoff between the losses and gains from outward radial projection.

$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This question would be improved with results for n=2 and n=3. Do you have either? Also, is it possible that a configuration for n=3 can be built from a configuration for n=2? Gerhard "Say More What You Tried" Paseman, 2016.02.18. $\endgroup$ Feb 18, 2016 at 17:01
  • $\begingroup$ @GerhardPaseman: I have updated the answer in your request. Let me know if they are satisfying. I don't see an obvious induction approach here. $\endgroup$
    – John Jiang
    Feb 18, 2016 at 17:51

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

Due to homogeneity, we assume that $r_n=1$.

Set $B=\{z\in \colon |z|\leq 1\}$ and $T=\{z\colon |z|=1\}$. Consider the function $$ f(z_1,z_2,\dots,z_n)=\frac {\displaystyle \prod_{1\leq i<j\leq n}(z_i-z_j)} {\displaystyle \prod_{i=1}^n z_i^{i-1}} $$ on the set $S=\{(z_1,\dots,z_n)\in B^n\colon 0<|z_1|\leq\dots\leq |z_n|\}$ (yes, this set is not closed). We claim that the maximum of $|f|$ is attained at a point with $|z_i|=1$ for all $i$ (that is, at a point in $T^n$); the required result will follow, since this reduces the problem to the case of equal radii.

For any point $\mathbf z=(z_i)\in S$, set $\mu(\mathbf z)=\max\{m\leq n\colon |z_1|=|z_2|=\dots=|z_m|\}$. To prove our claim, we will show that any point $\mathbf z=(z_i)\in S\setminus T^n$ can be modified into a point $\mathbf w=(w_i)\in S$ such that $|f(\mathbf w)|\geq |f(\mathbf z)|$ and $\mu(\mathbf w)>\mu(\mathbf z)$. After a chain of such modifications, we will arrive at a point with $\mu(\mathbf w)=n$, which is what we need (by homogeneity again).

So, assume that $\mu(\mathbf z)=m<n$. Set $t_i=z_i/z_1$ for all $i\leq m$ (then $|t_i|=1$), and consider the function $g(z)=f(zt_1,zt_2,\dots,zt_m,z_{m+1},\dots,z_n)$ (so $g(z_1)=f(\mathbf z)$). Notice that the whole power of $z$ in the denominator cancels out, so this function is a polynomial in $z$. Therefore, the maximum of absolute value of $g$ on $\{z\colon |z|\leq |z_{m+1}|\}$ is attained at some point $z_0$ with $|z_0|=|z_{m+1}|$, and we may set $\mathbf w=(z_0t_1,\dots,z_0t_m,z_{m+1},\dots,z_n)$. This finishes the proof.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ That's a beautiful solution. Thank you Ilya! $\endgroup$
    – John Jiang
    Feb 19, 2016 at 4:16

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.