5
$\begingroup$

In the 1954 paper Continuous Functions From Spheres to Euclidean Spaces, author Chung-Tao Yang cites the following problem:

Problem 1: Given a (continuous) map $f$ of an $(m+n-2)$-sphere $S^{m+n-2}$ into $\mathbb{R}^m$ and $n$ distinct points $y_1,\ldots,y_n\in S^{m+n-2}$, do there exist $n$ points of $S^{m+n-2}$ which are congruent to $y_1,\ldots, y_n$ and are mapped into a single point by $f$?

As of the writing of the paper, the problem was apparently open, with only scattered partial results shown:

  • The case $n=2,m=1$ is very easy to resolve using the intermediate value theorem.

  • The case $n=2$ where the points are antipodal is just the Borsuk–Ulam theorem; I expect it has been generalized to other distances between $y_1$ and $y_2$, but I don't know of a source offhand.

  • In 1950, Yamabe-Yujobô generalized a result of Kakutani to show the result in the case where $m=1$ and the $y_i$ are orthogonal.

  • In 1955, E. E. Floyd showed the result for $n=3,m=1$.

  • I believe that I can use the basic argument from the paper of Yamabe and Yujobô to show that in the $m=1$ case, the result for $y_1,\ldots,y_n$ on $S^{n-1}$ implies the result for $y_1,\ldots,y_{n+1}$ on $S^n$ if $y_{n+1}$ is of equal distance to all previous $y_i$. (This for instance gives the result for every isosceles triangle on $S^2$, as Floyd notes was apparently done in a master's thesis of R.D. Johnson.)

I'm curious about further progress that has been made on the problem in the last 60 years; lacking a nice term to search for this conjecture under, I haven't turned up much, but I'd be surprised if there weren't new results or indeed if it had been fully resolved. I'm particularly curious about the $m=1$ case, but would be interested to hear about any pieces of the problem.

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

7
$\begingroup$

After happening to stumble across this MO thread, I've learned that this conjecture is known as Knaster's Conjecture and is known to be false, as shown in this paper of Hinrich and Richter for $m=1$ and $n\in\{61,63,65\}$ or $n\ge 67$. (The counterexampling function is very simple - $f(x_1,\ldots,x_n)=\max(|x_1|,\ldots,|x_n|)$ - and the difficulty is in characterizing the problematic point set and proving its inadmissibility.)

The state of affairs as of the 2003 publication of the paper is summarized in this table (their $k$ is this post's $n$):

enter image description here

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

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