|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| In the [[mathematics|mathematical]] theory of [[conformal mapping|conformal]] and [[quasiconformal mapping]]s, the '''extremal length''' of a collection of [[curve]]s <math>\Gamma</math> is a [[conformal invariant]] of <math>\Gamma</math>. More specifically, suppose that
| | Surely the second option would be more beneficial for any website. You may discover this probably the most time-consuming part of building a Word - Press MLM website. The Word - Press Dashboard : an administrative management tool that supports FTP content upload 2. If you are using videos on your site then this is the plugin to use. All this is very simple, and the best thing is that it is totally free, and you don't need a domain name or web hosting. <br><br>Creating a website from scratch can be such a pain. While direct advertising is limited to few spots in your site and tied to fixed monthly payment by the advertisers, affiliate marketing can give you unlimited income as long as you can convert your traffic to sales. Which is perfect for building a mobile site for business use. Now, I want to anxiety that not every single query will be answered. For a Wordpress website, you don't need a powerful web hosting account to host your site. <br><br>But before choosing any one of these, let's compare between the two. To sum up, ensure that the tactics are aiming to increase the ranking and attracting the maximum intended traffic in the major search engines. If Gandhi was empowered with a blogging system, every event in his life would have been minutely documented so that it could be recounted to the future generations. The animation can be quite subtle these as snow falling gently or some twinkling start in the track record which are essentially not distracting but as an alternative gives some viewing enjoyment for the visitor of the internet site. Converting HTML to Word - Press theme for your website can allow you to enjoy the varied Word - Press features that aid in consistent growth your online business. <br><br>It has become a more prevalent cause of infertility and the fertility clinic are having more and more couples with infertility problems. But the Joomla was created as the CMS over years of hard work. Normally, the Word - Press developers make a thorough research on your website goals and then ingrain the most suitable graphical design elements to your website. There are many advantages of hiring Wordpress developers for Wordpress project development:. Word - Press offers constant updated services and products, that too, absolutely free of cost. <br><br>Under Settings —> Reading, determine if posts or a static page will be your home page, and if your home page is a static page, what page will contain blog posts. By using Word - Press MLM websites or blogs, an online presence for you and your MLM company can be created swiftly and simply. While deciding couple should consider the expertise of the doctor,clinics success rate,the costs of fertility treatment,including fertility tests and IVF costs and overall ones own financial budget. If you loved this write-up and you would certainly such as to get additional facts concerning [http://catchingtherain.com/s/wordpressbackupplugin835186 wordpress dropbox backup] kindly check out our internet site. Web developers and newbies alike will have the ability to extend your web site and fit other incredible functions with out having to spend more. Your topic is going to be the basis of your site's name. |
| <math>D</math> is an open set in the [[complex plane]] and <math>\Gamma</math> is a collection
| |
| of paths in <math>D</math> and <math>f:D\to D'</math> is a conformal mapping. Then the extremal length of <math>\Gamma</math> is equal to the extremal length of the image of <math>\Gamma</math> under <math> f</math>. For this reason, the extremal length is a useful tool in the study of conformal mappings. Extremal length can also be useful in dimensions greater than two,
| |
| but the following deals primarily with the two dimensional setting.
| |
| | |
| ==Definition of extremal length==
| |
| To define extremal length, we need to first introduce several related quantities.
| |
| Let <math>D</math> be an open set in the complex plane. Suppose that <math>\Gamma</math> is a
| |
| collection of [[rectifiable curve]]s in <math>D</math>. If <math>\rho:D\to [0,\infty]</math>
| |
| is [[Borel algebra|Borel-measurable]], then for any rectifiable curve <math>\gamma</math> we let
| |
| | |
| :<math>L_\rho(\gamma):=\int_\gamma \rho\,|dz|</math> | |
| | |
| denote the '''<math>\rho</math>-length of <math>\gamma</math>''', where <math>|dz|</math> denotes the
| |
| [[Euclidean distance|Euclidean]] element of length. (It is possible that <math>L_\rho(\gamma)=\infty</math>.)
| |
| What does this really mean?
| |
| If <math>\gamma:I\to D</math> is parameterized in some interval <math>I</math>, | |
| then <math>\int_\gamma \rho\,|dz|</math> is the integral of the Borel-measurable function | |
| <math>\rho(\gamma(t))</math> with respect to the Borel measure on <math>I</math>
| |
| for which the measure of every subinterval <math>J\subset I</math> is the length of the
| |
| restriction of <math>\gamma</math> to <math>J</math>. In other words, it is the
| |
| [[Lebesgue-Stieltjes integration|Lebesgue-Stieltjes integral]]
| |
| <math>\int_I \rho(\gamma(t))\,d{\mathrm{length}}_\gamma(t)</math>, where
| |
| <math>{\mathrm{length}}_\gamma(t)</math> is the length of the restriction of <math>\gamma</math>
| |
| to <math>\{s\in I:s\le t\}</math>.
| |
| Also set
| |
| | |
| :<math>L_\rho(\Gamma):=\inf_{\gamma\in\Gamma}L_\rho(\gamma).</math>
| |
| | |
| The '''area''' of <math>\rho</math> is defined as
| |
| :<math>A(\rho):=\int_D \rho^2\,dx\,dy,</math>
| |
| and the '''extremal length''' of <math>\Gamma</math> is | |
| | |
| :<math>EL(\Gamma):= \sup_\rho \frac{L_\rho(\Gamma)^2}{A(\rho)}\,,</math>
| |
| | |
| where the supremum is over all Borel-measureable <math>\rho:D\to[0,\infty]</math> with <math>0<A(\rho)<\infty</math>. If <math>\Gamma</math> contains some non-rectifiable curves and
| |
| <math>\Gamma_0</math> denotes the set of rectifiable curves in <math>\Gamma</math>, then
| |
| <math>EL(\Gamma)</math> is defined to be <math>EL(\Gamma_0)</math>.
| |
| | |
| The term '''modulus''' of <math>\Gamma</math> refers to <math>1/EL(\Gamma)</math>.
| |
| | |
| The '''extremal distance''' in <math>D</math> between two sets in <math>\overline D</math> is the extremal length of the collection of curves in <math>D</math> with one endpoint in one set and the other endpoint in the other set.
| |
| | |
| ==Examples==
| |
| | |
| In this section the extremal length is calculated in several examples. The first three of these examples are actually useful in applications of extremal length.
| |
| | |
| ===Extremal distance in rectangle===
| |
| Fix some positive numbers <math>w,h>0</math>, and let <math>R</math> be the rectangle
| |
| <math>R=(0,w)\times(0,h)</math>. Let <math>\Gamma</math> be the set of all finite
| |
| length curves <math>\gamma:(0,1)\to R</math> that cross the rectangle left to right,
| |
| in the sense that <math>\lim_{t\to 0}\gamma(t)</math> | |
| is on the left edge <math>\{0\}\times[0,h]</math> of the rectangle, and
| |
| <math>\lim_{t\to 1}\gamma(t)</math> is on the right edge <math>\{1\}\times[0,h]</math>.
| |
| (The limits necessarily exist, because we are assuming that <math>\gamma</math>
| |
| has finite length.) We will now prove that in this case
| |
| :<math>EL(\Gamma)=w/h</math>
| |
| | |
| First, we may take <math>\rho=1</math> on <math>R</math>. This <math>\rho</math>
| |
| gives <math>A(\rho)=w\,h</math> and <math>L_\rho(\Gamma)=w</math>. The definition
| |
| of <math>EL(\Gamma)</math> as a supremum then gives <math>EL(\Gamma)\ge w/h</math>.
| |
| | |
| The opposite inequality is not quite so easy. Consider an arbitrary
| |
| Borel-measurable <math>\rho:R\to[0,\infty]</math> such that
| |
| <math>\ell:=L_\rho(\Gamma)>0</math>.
| |
| For <math>y\in(0,h)</math>, let <math>\gamma_y(t)=i\,y+w\,t</math> | |
| (where we are identifying <math>\R^2</math> with the complex plane).
| |
| Then <math>\gamma_y\in\Gamma</math>, and hence <math>\ell\le L_\rho(\gamma_y)</math>.
| |
| The latter inequality may be written as
| |
| :<math> \ell\le \int_0^1 \rho(i\,y+w\,t)\,w\,dt .</math>
| |
| Integrating this inequality over <math>y\in(0,h)</math> implies
| |
| :<math> h\,\ell\le \int_0^h\int_0^1\rho(i\,y+w\,t)\,w\,dt\,dy</math>.
| |
| Now a change of variable <math>x=w\,t</math> and an application of the [[Cauchy-Schwarz inequality]] give
| |
| :<math> h\,\ell \le \int_0^h\int_0^w\rho(x+i\,y)\,dx\,dy \le \Bigl(\int_R \rho^2\,dx\,dy\int_R\,dx\,dy\Bigr)^{1/2} = \bigl(w\,h\,A(\rho)\bigr)^{1/2}</math>. This gives <math>\ell^2/A(\rho)\le w/h</math>.
| |
| Therefore, <math>EL(\Gamma)\le w/h</math>, as required.
| |
| | |
| As the proof shows, the extremal length of <math>\Gamma</math> is the same as the extremal
| |
| length of the much smaller collection of curves <math>\{\gamma_y:y\in(0,h)\}</math>.
| |
| | |
| It should be pointed out that the extremal length of the family of curves <math>\Gamma\,'</math>
| |
| that connect the bottom edge of <math> R</math> to the top edge of <math>R</math> satisfies
| |
| <math>EL(\Gamma\,')=h/w</math>, by the same argument. Therefore, <math>EL(\Gamma)\,EL(\Gamma\,')=1</math>.
| |
| It is natural to refer to this as a duality property of extremal length, and a similar duality property
| |
| occurs in the context of the next subsection. Observe that obtaining a lower bound on
| |
| <math>EL(\Gamma)</math> is generally easier than obtaining an upper bound, since the lower bound involves
| |
| choosing a reasonably good <math>\rho</math> and estimating <math>L_\rho(\Gamma)^2/A(\rho)</math>,
| |
| while the upper bound involves proving a statement about all possible <math>\rho</math>. For this reason,
| |
| duality is often useful when it can be established: when we know that <math>EL(\Gamma)\,EL(\Gamma\,')=1</math>,
| |
| a lower bound on <math>EL(\Gamma\,')</math> translates to an upper bound on <math>EL(\Gamma)</math>.
| |
| | |
| ===Extremal distance in annulus===
| |
| Let <math>r_1</math> and <math>r_2</math> be two radii satisfying
| |
| <math> 0<r_1<r_2<\infty</math>. Let <math>A</math> be the
| |
| annulus <math>A:=\{z\in\mathbb C:r_1<|z|<r_2\}</math> and let
| |
| <math>C_1</math> and <math>C_2</math> be the two boundary components
| |
| of <math>A</math>: <math>C_1:=\{z:|z|=r_1\}</math>
| |
| and <math>C_2:=\{z:|z|=r_2\}</math>. Consider the extremal distance
| |
| in <math>A</math> between <math>C_1</math> and <math>C_2</math>;
| |
| which is the extremal length of the collection <math>\Gamma</math> of | |
| curves <math>\gamma\subset A</math> connecting <math>C_1</math>
| |
| and <math>C_2</math>.
| |
| | |
| To obtain a lower bound on <math>EL(\Gamma)</math>,
| |
| we take <math>\rho(z)=1/|z|</math>. Then for <math>\gamma\in\Gamma</math>
| |
| oriented from <math>C_1</math> to <math>C_2</math>
| |
| :<math>\int_\gamma |z|^{-1}\,ds \ge \int_\gamma |z|^{-1}\,d|z| = \int_\gamma d\log |z|=\log(r_2/r_1).</math>
| |
| On the other hand,
| |
| :<math>A(\rho)=\int_A |z|^{-2}\,dx\,dy= \int_{0}^{2\pi}\int_{r_1}^{r_2} r^{-2}\,r\,dr\,d\theta = 2\,\pi \,\log(r_2/r_1).</math>
| |
| We conclude that
| |
| :<math>EL(\Gamma)\ge \frac{\log(r_2/r_1)}{2\pi}.</math>
| |
| | |
| We now see that this inequality is really an equality by employing an argument similar to the one given above for the rectangle. Consider an arbitrary Borel-measurable <math>\rho</math> such that <math>\ell:=L_\rho(\Gamma)>0</math>. For <math>\theta\in[0,2\,\pi)</math> let <math>\gamma_\theta:(r_1,r_2)\to A</math> denote the curve <math>\gamma_\theta(r)=e^{i\theta}r</math>. Then
| |
| :<math>\ell\le\int_{\gamma_\theta}\rho\,ds =\int_{r_1}^{r_2}\rho(e^{i\theta}r)\,dr.</math>
| |
| We integrate over <math>\theta</math> and apply the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, to obtain:
| |
| :<math>2\,\pi\,\ell \le \int_A \rho\,dr\,d\theta \le \Bigl(\int_A \rho^2\,r\,dr\,d\theta \Bigr)^{1/2}\Bigl(\int_0^{2\pi}\int_{r_1}^{r_2} \frac 1 r\,dr\,d\theta\Bigr)^{1/2}.</math>
| |
| Squaring gives
| |
| :<math>4\,\pi^2\,\ell^2\le A(\rho)\cdot\,2\,\pi\,\log(r_2/r_1).</math>
| |
| This implies the upper bound <math>EL(\Gamma)\le (2\,\pi)^{-1}\,\log(r_2/r_1)</math>.
| |
| When combined with the lower bound, this yields the exact value of the extremal length:
| |
| :<math>EL(\Gamma)=\frac{\log(r_2/r_1)}{2\pi}.</math>
| |
| | |
| ===Extremal length around an annulus===
| |
| Let <math>r_1,r_2,C_1,C_2,\Gamma</math> and <math>A</math> be as above, but now let <math>\Gamma^*</math> be the collection of all curves that wind once around the annulus, separating <math>C_1</math> from <math>C_2</math>. Using the above methods, it is not hard to show that
| |
| :<math>EL(\Gamma^*)=\frac{2\pi}{\log(r_2/r_1)}=EL(\Gamma)^{-1}.</math>
| |
| This illustrates another instance of extremal length duality.
| |
| | |
| ===Extremal length of topologically essential paths in projective plane===
| |
| In the above examples, the extremal <math>\rho</math> which maximized the
| |
| ratio <math>L_\rho(\Gamma)^2/A(\rho)</math> and gave the extremal length corresponded to a flat metric. In other words, when the [[Euclidean distance|Euclidean]] [[Riemannian metric]] of the corresponding planar domain is scaled by <math>\rho</math>, the resulting metric is flat. In the case of the rectangle, this was just the original metric, but for the annulus, the extremal metric identified is the metric of a [[cylinder (geometry)|cylinder]]. We now discuss an example where an extremal metric is not flat. The projective plane with the spherical metric is obtained by identifying [[antipodal point]]s on the unit sphere in <math>\R^3</math> with its Riemannian spherical metric. In other words, this is the quotient of the sphere by the map <math>x\mapsto -x</math>. Let <math>\Gamma</math> denote the set of closed curves in this projective plane that are not [[null-homotopic]]. (Each curve in <math>\Gamma</math> is obtained by projecting a curve on the sphere from a point to its antipode.) Then the spherical metric is extremal for this curve family.<ref>Ahlfors (1973)</ref> (The definition of extremal length readily extends to Riemannian surfaces.) Thus, the extremal length is <math>\pi^2/(2\,\pi)=\pi/2</math>.
| |
| | |
| ===Extremal length of paths containing a point===
| |
| If <math>\Gamma</math> is any collection of paths all of which have positive diameter and containing a point <math>z_0</math>, then <math>EL(\Gamma)=\infty</math>. This follows, for example, by taking
| |
| :<math>\rho(z):= \begin{cases}(-|z-z_0|\,\log |z-z_0|)^{-1} & |z-z_0|<1/2,\\ | |
| 0 & |z-z_0|\ge 1/2,\end{cases}</math>
| |
| which satisfies <math>A(\rho)<\infty</math> and <math>L_\rho(\gamma)=\infty</math> for every rectifiable <math>\gamma\in\Gamma</math>.
| |
| | |
| ==Elementary properties of extremal length==
| |
| The extremal length satisfies a few simple monotonicity properties. First, it is clear that if <math>\Gamma_1\subset\Gamma_2</math>, then <math>EL(\Gamma_1)\ge EL(\Gamma_2)</math>.
| |
| Moreover, the same conclusion holds if every curve <math>\gamma_1\in\Gamma_1</math> contains a curve <math>\gamma_2\in \Gamma_2</math> as a subcurve (that is, <math>\gamma_2</math> is the restriction of <math>\gamma_1</math> to a subinterval of its domain). Another sometimes useful inequality is
| |
| :<math>EL(\Gamma_1\cup\Gamma_2)\ge \bigl(EL(\Gamma_1)^{-1}+EL(\Gamma_2)^{-1}\bigr)^{-1}.</math>
| |
| This is clear if <math>EL(\Gamma_1)=0</math> or if <math>EL(\Gamma_2)=0</math>, in which case the right hand side is interpreted as <math>0</math>. So suppose that this is not the case and with no loss of generality assume that the curves in <math>\Gamma_1\cup\Gamma_2</math> are all rectifiable. Let <math>\rho_1,\rho_2</math> satisfy <math>L_{\rho_j}(\Gamma_j)\ge 1</math> for <math>j=1,2</math>. Set <math>\rho=\max\{\rho_1,\rho_2\}</math>. Then <math>L_\rho(\Gamma_1\cup\Gamma_2)\ge 1</math> and <math>A(\rho)=\int\rho^2\,dx\,dy\le\int(\rho_1^2+\rho_2^2)\,dx\,dy=A(\rho_1)+A(\rho_2)</math>, which proves the inequality.
| |
| | |
| ==Conformal invariance of extremal length==
| |
| Let <math>f:D\to D^*</math> be a [[conformal map|conformal]] [[homeomorphism]]
| |
| (a [[bijective]] [[holomorphic]] map) between planar domains. Suppose that
| |
| <math>\Gamma</math> is a collection of curves in <math>D</math>,
| |
| and let <math>\Gamma^*:=\{f\circ \gamma:\gamma\in\Gamma\}</math> denote the | |
| image curves under <math>f</math>. Then <math>EL(\Gamma)=EL(\Gamma^*)</math>.
| |
| This conformal invariance statement is the primary reason why the concept of
| |
| extremal length is useful.
| |
| | |
| Here is a proof of conformal invariance. Let <math>\Gamma_0</math> denote the set of curves
| |
| <math>\gamma\in\Gamma</math> such that <math>f\circ \gamma</math> is rectifiable, and let
| |
| <math>\Gamma_0^*=\{f\circ\gamma:\gamma\in\Gamma_0\}</math>, which is the set of rectifiable
| |
| curves in <math>\Gamma^*</math>. Suppose that <math>\rho^*:D^*\to[0,\infty]</math> is Borel-measurable. Define
| |
| :<math>\rho(z)=|f\,'(z)|\,\rho^*\bigl(f(z)\bigr).</math>
| |
| A [[change of variable]]s <math>w=f(z)</math> gives
| |
| :<math>A(\rho)=\int_D \rho(z)^2\,dz\,d\bar z=\int_D \rho^*(f(z))^2\,|f\,'(z)|^2\,dz\,d\bar z = \int_{D^*} \rho^*(w)^2\,dw\,d\bar w=A(\rho^*).</math>
| |
| Now suppose that <math>\gamma\in \Gamma_0</math> is rectifiable, and set <math>\gamma^*:=f\circ\gamma</math>. Formally, we may use a change of variables again:
| |
| :<math>L_\rho(\gamma)=\int_\gamma \rho^*\bigl(f(z)\bigr)\,|f\,'(z)|\,|dz| = \int_{\gamma^*} \rho(w)\,|dw|=L_{\rho^*}(\gamma^*).</math>
| |
| To justify this formal calculation, suppose that <math>\gamma</math> is defined in some interval <math>I</math>, let
| |
| <math>\ell(t)</math> denote the length of the restriction of <math>\gamma</math> to <math>I\cap(-\infty,t]</math>,
| |
| and let <math>\ell^*(t)</math> be similarly defined with <math>\gamma^*</math> in place of <math>\gamma</math>. Then it is easy to see that <math>d\ell^*(t)=|f\,'(\gamma(t))|\,d\ell(t)</math>, and this implies <math>L_\rho(\gamma)=L_{\rho^*}(\gamma^*)</math>, as required. The above equalities give, | |
| :<math>EL(\Gamma_0)\ge EL(\Gamma_0^*)=EL(\Gamma^*).</math>
| |
| If we knew that each curve in <math>\Gamma</math> and <math>\Gamma^*</math> was rectifiable, this would
| |
| prove <math>EL(\Gamma)=EL(\Gamma^*)</math> since we may also apply the above with <math>f</math> replaced by its inverse
| |
| and <math>\Gamma</math> interchanged with <math>\Gamma^*</math>. It remains to handle the non-rectifiable curves.
| |
| | |
| Now let <math>\hat\Gamma</math> denote the set of rectifiable curves <math>\gamma\in\Gamma</math> such that <math>f\circ\gamma</math> is
| |
| non-rectifiable. We claim that <math>EL(\hat\Gamma)=\infty</math>.
| |
| Indeed, take <math>\rho(z)=|f\,'(z)|\,h(|f(z)|)</math>, where <math>h(r)=\bigl(r\,\log (r+2)\bigr)^{-1}</math>.
| |
| Then a change of variable as above gives
| |
| :<math>A(\rho)= \int_{D^*} h(|w|)^2\,dw\,d\bar w \le \int_0^{2\pi}\int_0^\infty (r\,\log (r+2))^{-2} \,r\,dr\,d\theta<\infty.</math> | |
| For <math>\gamma\in\hat\Gamma</math> and <math>r\in(0,\infty)</math> such that <math>f\circ \gamma</math>
| |
| is contained in <math>\{z:|z|<r\}</math>, we have
| |
| :<math>L_\rho(\gamma)\ge\inf\{h(s):s\in[0,r]\}\,\mathrm{length}(f\circ\gamma)=\infty</math>.{{Dubious|date=November 2008}}
| |
| On the other hand, suppose that <math>\gamma\in\hat\Gamma</math> is such that <math>f\circ\gamma</math> is unbounded.
| |
| Set <math>H(t):=\int_0^t h(s)\,ds</math>. Then
| |
| <math>L_\rho(\gamma)</math> is at least the length of the curve <math>t\mapsto H(|f\circ \gamma(t)|)</math>
| |
| (from an interval in <math>\R</math> to <math>\R</math>). Since <math>\lim_{t\to\infty}H(t)=\infty</math>,
| |
| it follows that <math>L_\rho(\gamma)=\infty</math>.
| |
| Thus, indeed, <math>EL(\hat\Gamma)=\infty</math>.
| |
| | |
| Using the results of the [[#Elementary properties of extremal length|previous section]], we have
| |
| :<math>EL(\Gamma)=EL(\Gamma_0\cup\hat\Gamma)\ge EL(\Gamma_0)</math>.
| |
| We have already seen that <math>EL(\Gamma_0)\ge EL(\Gamma^*)</math>. Thus, <math>EL(\Gamma)\ge EL(\Gamma^*)</math>.
| |
| The reverse inequality holds by symmetry, and conformal invariance is therefore established.
| |
| | |
| ==Some applications of extremal length== <!-- Reimann mapping theorem links here -->
| |
| By the [[#Extremal distance in annulus|calculation]] of the extremal distance in an annulus and the conformal
| |
| invariance it follows that the annulus <math>\{z:r<|z|<R\}</math> (where <math>0\le r<R\le\infty</math>)
| |
| is not conformally homeomorphic to the annulus <math>\{w:r^*<|w|<R^*\}</math> if <math>\frac Rr\ne \frac{R^*}{r^*}</math>.
| |
| | |
| ==Extremal length in higher dimensions==
| |
| The notion of extremal length adapts to the study of various problems in dimensions 3 and higher, especially in relation to [[quasiconformal]] mappings.
| |
| {{Expand section|date=June 2008}}
| |
| | |
| ==Discrete extremal length==
| |
| Suppose that <math>G=(V,E)</math> is some [[graph (mathematics)|graph]] and <math>\Gamma</math> is a collection of paths in <math>G</math>. There are two variants of extremal length in this setting. To define the '''edge extremal length''', originally introduced by [[R. J. Duffin]],<ref>Duffin 1962</ref> consider a function <math>\rho:E\to[0,\infty)</math>. The <math>\rho</math>-length of a path is defined as the sum of <math>\rho(e)</math> over all edges in the path, counted with multiplicity. The "'''area'''" <math>A(\rho)</math> is defined as <math>\sum_{e\in E}\rho(e)^2</math>. The extremal length of <math>\Gamma</math> is then defined as before. If <math>G</math> is interpreted as a [[resistor network]], where each edge has unit resistance, then the [[effective resistance]] between two sets of veritces is precisely the edge extremal length of the collection of paths with one endpoint in one set and the other endpoint in the other set. Thus, discrete extremal length is useful for estimates in discrete [[potential theory]].
| |
| | |
| Another notion of discrete extremal length that is appropriate in other contexts is '''vertex extremal length''', where <math>\rho:V\to[0,\infty)</math>, the area is <math>A(\rho):=\sum_{v\in V}\rho(v)^2</math>, and the length of a path is the sum of <math>\rho(v)</math> over the vertices visited by the path, with multiplicity.
| |
| | |
| ==Notes==
| |
| {{reflist|2}}
| |
| | |
| ==References==
| |
| *{{Citation | author1-link=Lars Ahlfors | last1=Ahlfors | first1=Lars V. | title=Conformal invariants: topics in geometric function theory | publisher=McGraw-Hill Book Co. | location=New York | mr=0357743 | year=1973}}
| |
| *{{Citation | last1=Duffin | first1=R. J. | title= The extremal length of a network | year=1962 | journal=Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications | volume=5 | pages=200–215 | doi=10.1016/S0022-247X(62)80004-3 | issue=2}}
| |
| *{{Citation | last1=Lehto | first1=O. | last2=Virtanen | first2=K. I. | title=Quasiconformal mappings in the plane | publisher=[[Springer-Verlag]] | location=Berlin, New York | edition=2nd | year=1973}}
| |
| | |
| {{DEFAULTSORT:Extremal Length}}
| |
| [[Category:Conformal mapping]]
| |
| [[Category:Potential theory]]
| |