On unique determination of domains in Euclidean spaces
The paper is devoted to two new directions in developing the classical geometric subjects related to studying the problem of unique determination of closed convex surfaces by their intrinsic metrics. The first of these directions is the study of unique determination of domains (i.e., open connected sets) in Euclidean spaces by relative metrics of the boundaries of these domains. It appeared about 25–30 years ago and was developed owing to the efforts of Russian scientists. The first part of the paper (Secs. 3–7) contains an overview of the results referring to this direction.
The foundations of the second direction are presented in the second part of the paper, i.e., in Sec. 8, for the first time. This direction is closely related with the first one and consists of studying the problem of unique determination of conformal type. The main result of the section is the theorem on the unique determination of bounded convex domains by relative conformal moduli of their boundary conductors.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.A. D. Aleksandrov, Intrinsic Geometry of Convex Surfaces [in Russian], Gostekhizdat, Moscow-Leningrad (1948).Google Scholar
- 2.V. A. Aleksandrov, “Isometry of domains in ℝn and the relative isometry of their boundaries,” Sib. Mat. Zh., 25, No. 3, 3–13 (1984).Google Scholar
- 3.V. A. Aleksandrov, “Isometry of domains in ℝn and the relative isometry of their boundaries, II,” Sib. Mat. Zh., 26, No. 6, 3–8 (1985).Google Scholar
- 4.V. A. Aleksandrov, “On domains uniquely determined by the relative metrics of their boundaries,” in: Studies in Geometry and Mathematical Analysis, Proceedings of the Institute of Mathematics of the USSR Academy of Sciences, Siberian Branch [in Russian], 7, 5–19 (1987).Google Scholar
- 5.V. A. Aleksandrov, “Unique determination of domains with non-Jordan boundaries,” Sib. Mat. Zh., 30, No. 1, 3–12 (1989).Google Scholar
- 7.V. A. Aleksandrov, “On isometry of polyhedral domains whose boundaries are locally isometric in the relative metrics,” Sib. Mat. Zh., 33, No. 2, 3–9 (1992).Google Scholar
- 12.A. V. Pogorelov, Extrinsic Geometry of Convex Surfaces [in Russian], Nauka, Moscow (1969).Google Scholar
- 13.A. V. Pogorelov, Unique Determination of General Convex Surfaces [in Russian], Akad. Nauk USSR (1951).Google Scholar
- 15.Yu. G. Reshetnyak, Spatial Mapping with Bounded Distortion [in Russian], Nauka, Novosibirsk (1982).Google Scholar
- 17.S. Saks, Theory of Integrals [Russian translation], Moscow (1949).Google Scholar
- 20.D. A. Trotsenko, “Unique determination of bounded domains by the metric of the boundary induced by the metric of the domain,” in: All-Union Conference on Geometry “in the Large,” Abstracts of Reports [in Russian], Institute of Mathematics, Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Novosibirsk (1987), p. 122.Google Scholar
- 22.J. Väisälä, “On quasiconformal mappings in space,” Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. A I, 298, 1–36 (1961).Google Scholar
- 23.Yu. A. Volkov, “Estimate of the deformation of a convex surface depending on the variation of its intrinsic metric,” Ukr. Geom. Sb., Nos. 5/6, 44–69 (1968).Google Scholar