Kakeya problem: Difference between revisions

From Polymath Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
 
(22 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
Define a '''Kakeya set''' to be a subset <math>A</math> of <math>[3]^n\equiv{\mathbb F}_3^n</math> that contains an [[algebraic line]] in every direction; that is, for every <math>d\in{\mathbb F}_3^n</math>, there exists <math>a\in{\mathbb F}_3^n</math> such that <math>a,a+d,a+2d</math> all lie in <math>A</math>.  Let <math>k_n</math> be the smallest size of a Kakeya set in <math>{\mathbb F}_3^n</math>.
A '''Kakeya set''' in <math>{\mathbb F}_3^n</math> is a subset <math>E\subset{\mathbb F}_3^n</math> that contains an [[algebraic line]] in every direction; that is, for every <math>d\in{\mathbb F}_3^n</math>, there exists <math>e\in{\mathbb F}_3^n</math> such that <math>e,e+d,e+2d</math> all lie in <math>E</math>.  Let <math>k_n</math> be the smallest size of a Kakeya set in <math>{\mathbb F}_3^n</math>.


Clearly, we have <math>k_1=3</math>, and it is easy to see that <math>k_2=7</math>. Using a computer, I also found <math>k_3=13</math> and <math>k_4\le 27</math>. I suspect that, indeed, <math>k_4=27</math> holds (meaning that in <math>{\mathbb F}_3^4</math> one cannot get away with just <math>26</math> elements), and I am very curious to know whether <math>k_5=53</math>: notice the pattern in
Clearly, we have <math>k_1=3</math>, and it is easy to see that <math>k_2=7</math>. Using a computer, it is not difficult to find that <math>k_3=13</math> and <math>k_4\le 27</math>. Indeed, it seems likely that <math>k_4=27</math> holds, meaning that in <math>{\mathbb F}_3^4</math> one cannot get away with just <math>26</math> elements.


:<math>3,7,13,27,53,\ldots</math>
== Basic Estimates ==


we have the trivial inequalities
Trivially, we have


:<math>k_n\le k_{n+1}\le 3k_n</math>
:<math>k_n\le k_{n+1}\le 3k_n</math>.


The Cartesian product of two Kakeya sets is another Kakeya set; this implies that <math>k_{n+m} \leq k_m k_n</math>.  This implies that <math>k_n^{1/n}</math> converges to a limit as n goes to infinity.
Since the Cartesian product of two Kakeya sets is another Kakeya set, the upper bound can be extended to  


== General lower bounds ==
:<math>k_{n+m} \leq k_m k_n</math>;


[http://arxiv.org/abs/0901.2529 Dvir, Kopparty, Saraf, and Sudan] showed that <math>k_n \geq 3^n / 2^n</math>.
this implies that <math>k_n^{1/n}</math> converges to a limit as <math>n</math> goes to infinity.  


We have
== Lower Bounds ==
 
To each of the <math>(3^n-1)/2</math> directions in <math>{\mathbb F}_3^n</math> there correspond at least three pairs of elements in a Kakeya set, determining this direction. Therefore, <math>\binom{k_n}{2}\ge 3\cdot(3^n-1)/2</math>, and hence
 
:<math>k_n\ge 3^{(n+1)/2}.</math>
 
One can derive essentially the same conclusion using the "bush" argument, as follows. Let <math>E\subset{\mathbb F}_3^n</math> be a Kakeya set, considered as a union of <math>N := (3^n-1)/2</math> lines in all different directions. Let <math>\mu</math> be the largest number of lines that are concurrent at a point of <math>E</math>. The number of point-line incidences is at most <math>|E|\mu</math> and at least <math>3N</math>, whence <math>|E|\ge 3N/\mu</math>. On the other hand, by considering only those points on the "bush" of lines emanating from a point with multiplicity <math>\mu</math>, we see that <math>|E|\ge 2\mu+1</math>. Comparing the two last bounds one obtains
<math>|E|\gtrsim\sqrt{6N} \approx 3^{(n+1)/2}</math>.
 
The better estimate


:<math>k_n(k_n-1)\ge 3(3^n-1)</math>
:<math>k_n\ge (9/5)^n</math>  


since for each <math>d\in {\mathbb F}_3^r\setminus\{0\}</math> there are at least three ordered pairs of elements of a Kakeya set with difference <math>d</math>.
is obtained in [http://arxiv.org/abs/0901.2529 a paper of Dvir, Kopparty, Saraf, and Sudan]. (In general, they show that a Kakeya set in the <math>n</math>-dimensional vector space over the <math>q</math>-element field has at least <math>(q/(2-1/q))^n</math> elements).
(I actually can improve the lower bound to something like <math>k_r\gg 3^{0.51r}</math>.)


For instance, we can use the "bush" argument. There are <math>N := (3^n-1)/2</math> different directions.  Take a line in every direction, let E be the union of these lines, and let <math>\mu</math> be the maximum multiplicity of these lines (i.e. the largest number of lines that are concurrent at a point).  On the one hand, from double counting we see that E has cardinality at least <math>3N/\mu</math>.  On the other hand, by considering the "bush" of lines emanating from a point with multiplicity <math>\mu</math>, we see that E has cardinality at least <math>2\mu+1</math>. If we minimise <math>\max(3N/\mu, 2\mu+1)</math> over all possible values of <math>\mu</math> one obtains approximately <math>\sqrt{6N} \approx 3^{(n+1)/2}</math> as a lower bound of |E|, which is asymptotically better than <math>(3/2)^n</math>.
A still better bound follows by using the "slices argument". Let <math>A,B,C\subset{\mathbb F}_3^{n-1}</math> be the three slices of a Kakeya set <math>E\subset{\mathbb F}_3^n</math>. Form a bipartite graph <math>G</math> with the partite sets <math>A</math> and <math>B</math> by connecting <math>a</math> and <math>b</math> by an edge if there is a line in <math>E</math> through <math>a</math> and <math>b</math>. The restricted sumset <math>\{a+b\colon (a,b)\in G\}</math> is contained in the set <math>-C</math>, while the difference set <math>\{a-b\colon (a,b)\in G\}</math> is all of <math>{\mathbb F}_3^{n-1}</math>. Using an estimate from [http://front.math.ucdavis.edu/math.CO/9906097 a paper of Katz-Tao], we conclude that <math>3^{n-1}\le\max(|A|,|B|,|C|)^{11/6}</math>, leading to <math>|E|\ge 3^{6(n-1)/11}</math>. Thus,


Or, we can use the "slices" argument.  Let <math>A, B, C \subset ({\Bbb Z}/3{\Bbb Z})^{n-1}</math> be the three slices of a Kakeya set E.  We can form a graph G between A and B by connecting A and B by an edge if there is a line in E joining A and B.  The restricted sumset <math>\{a+b: (a,b) \in G \}</math> is essentially C, while the difference set <math>\{a-b: (a-b) \in G \}</math> is all of <math>({\Bbb Z}/3{\Bbb Z})^{n-1}</math>.  Using an estimate from [http://front.math.ucdavis.edu/math.CO/9906097 this paper of Katz-Tao], we conclude that <math>3^{n-1} \leq \max(|A|,|B|,|C|)^{11/6}</math>, leading to the bound <math>|E| \geq 3^{6(n-1)/11}</math>, which is asymptotically better still.
:<math>k_n \ge 3^{6(n-1)/11}.</math>


== General upper bounds ==
== Upper Bounds ==


We have
We have
Line 34: Line 42:
since the set of all vectors in <math>{\mathbb F}_3^n</math> such that at least one of the numbers <math>1</math> and <math>2</math> is missing among their coordinates is a Kakeya set.  
since the set of all vectors in <math>{\mathbb F}_3^n</math> such that at least one of the numbers <math>1</math> and <math>2</math> is missing among their coordinates is a Kakeya set.  


'''Question''': can the upper bound be strengthened to <math>k_{n+1}\le 2k_n+1</math>?
This estimate can be improved using an idea due to Ruzsa (seems to be unpublished). Namely, let <math>E:=A\cup B</math>, where <math>A</math> is the set of all those vectors with <math>r/3+O(\sqrt r)</math> coordinates equal to <math>1</math> and the rest equal to <math>0</math>, and <math>B</math> is the set of all those vectors with <math>2r/3+O(\sqrt r)</math> coordinates equal to <math>2</math> and the rest equal to <math>0</math>. Then <math>E</math>, being of size just about <math>(27/4)^{r/3}</math> (which is not difficult to verify using [[Stirling's formula]]), contains lines in a positive proportion of directions: for, a typical direction <math>d\in {\mathbb F}_3^n</math> can be represented as <math>d=d_1+2d_2</math> with <math>d_1,d_2\in A</math>, and then <math>d_1,d_1+d,d_1+2d\in E</math>. Now one can use the random rotations trick to get the rest of the directions in <math>E</math> (losing a polynomial factor in <math>n</math>).   
 
Another construction uses the "slices" idea and a construction of Imre Ruzsa.  Let <math>A, B \subset [3]^n</math> be the set of strings with <math>n/3+O(\sqrt{n})</math> 1's, <math>2n/3+O(\sqrt{n})</math> 0's, and no 2's; let <math>C \subset [3]^n</math> be the set of strings with <math>2n/3+O(\sqrt{n})</math> 2's, <math>n/3+O(\sqrt{n})</math> 0's, and no 1's, and let <math>E = \{0\} \times A \cup \{1\} \times B \cup \{2\} \times C</math>. From Stirling's formula we have <math>|E| = (27/4 + o(1))^{n/3}</math>.  Now I claim that for most <math>t \in [3]^{n-1}</math>, there exists an algebraic line in the direction (1,t).  Indeed, typically t will have <math>n/3+O(\sqrt{n})</math> 0s, <math>n/3+O(\sqrt{n})</math> 1s, and <math>n/3+O(\sqrt{n})</math> 2s, thus <math>t = e + 2f</math> where e and f are strings with <math>n/3 + O(\sqrt{n})</math> 1s and no 2s, with the 1-sets of e and f being disjoint.  One then checks that the line <math>(0,f), (1,e), (2,2e+2f)</math> lies in E.
 
This is already a positive fraction of directions in E.  One can use the random rotations trick to get the rest of the directions in E (losing a polynomial factor in n).   


Putting all this together, I think we have
Putting all this together, we seem to have


:<math>(3^{6/11} + o(1))^n \leq k_n \leq ( (27/4)^{1/3} + o(1))^n</math>
:<math>(3^{6/11} + o(1))^n \le k_n \le ( (27/4)^{1/3} + o(1))^n</math>


or  
or  


:<math>(1.8207\ldots+o(1))^n \leq k_n \leq (1.88988+o(1))^n</math>
:<math>(1.8207+o(1))^n \le k_n \le (1.8899+o(1))^n.</math>

Latest revision as of 23:35, 4 June 2009

A Kakeya set in [math]\displaystyle{ {\mathbb F}_3^n }[/math] is a subset [math]\displaystyle{ E\subset{\mathbb F}_3^n }[/math] that contains an algebraic line in every direction; that is, for every [math]\displaystyle{ d\in{\mathbb F}_3^n }[/math], there exists [math]\displaystyle{ e\in{\mathbb F}_3^n }[/math] such that [math]\displaystyle{ e,e+d,e+2d }[/math] all lie in [math]\displaystyle{ E }[/math]. Let [math]\displaystyle{ k_n }[/math] be the smallest size of a Kakeya set in [math]\displaystyle{ {\mathbb F}_3^n }[/math].

Clearly, we have [math]\displaystyle{ k_1=3 }[/math], and it is easy to see that [math]\displaystyle{ k_2=7 }[/math]. Using a computer, it is not difficult to find that [math]\displaystyle{ k_3=13 }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ k_4\le 27 }[/math]. Indeed, it seems likely that [math]\displaystyle{ k_4=27 }[/math] holds, meaning that in [math]\displaystyle{ {\mathbb F}_3^4 }[/math] one cannot get away with just [math]\displaystyle{ 26 }[/math] elements.

Basic Estimates

Trivially, we have

[math]\displaystyle{ k_n\le k_{n+1}\le 3k_n }[/math].

Since the Cartesian product of two Kakeya sets is another Kakeya set, the upper bound can be extended to

[math]\displaystyle{ k_{n+m} \leq k_m k_n }[/math];

this implies that [math]\displaystyle{ k_n^{1/n} }[/math] converges to a limit as [math]\displaystyle{ n }[/math] goes to infinity.

Lower Bounds

To each of the [math]\displaystyle{ (3^n-1)/2 }[/math] directions in [math]\displaystyle{ {\mathbb F}_3^n }[/math] there correspond at least three pairs of elements in a Kakeya set, determining this direction. Therefore, [math]\displaystyle{ \binom{k_n}{2}\ge 3\cdot(3^n-1)/2 }[/math], and hence

[math]\displaystyle{ k_n\ge 3^{(n+1)/2}. }[/math]

One can derive essentially the same conclusion using the "bush" argument, as follows. Let [math]\displaystyle{ E\subset{\mathbb F}_3^n }[/math] be a Kakeya set, considered as a union of [math]\displaystyle{ N := (3^n-1)/2 }[/math] lines in all different directions. Let [math]\displaystyle{ \mu }[/math] be the largest number of lines that are concurrent at a point of [math]\displaystyle{ E }[/math]. The number of point-line incidences is at most [math]\displaystyle{ |E|\mu }[/math] and at least [math]\displaystyle{ 3N }[/math], whence [math]\displaystyle{ |E|\ge 3N/\mu }[/math]. On the other hand, by considering only those points on the "bush" of lines emanating from a point with multiplicity [math]\displaystyle{ \mu }[/math], we see that [math]\displaystyle{ |E|\ge 2\mu+1 }[/math]. Comparing the two last bounds one obtains [math]\displaystyle{ |E|\gtrsim\sqrt{6N} \approx 3^{(n+1)/2} }[/math].

The better estimate

[math]\displaystyle{ k_n\ge (9/5)^n }[/math]

is obtained in a paper of Dvir, Kopparty, Saraf, and Sudan. (In general, they show that a Kakeya set in the [math]\displaystyle{ n }[/math]-dimensional vector space over the [math]\displaystyle{ q }[/math]-element field has at least [math]\displaystyle{ (q/(2-1/q))^n }[/math] elements).

A still better bound follows by using the "slices argument". Let [math]\displaystyle{ A,B,C\subset{\mathbb F}_3^{n-1} }[/math] be the three slices of a Kakeya set [math]\displaystyle{ E\subset{\mathbb F}_3^n }[/math]. Form a bipartite graph [math]\displaystyle{ G }[/math] with the partite sets [math]\displaystyle{ A }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ B }[/math] by connecting [math]\displaystyle{ a }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ b }[/math] by an edge if there is a line in [math]\displaystyle{ E }[/math] through [math]\displaystyle{ a }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ b }[/math]. The restricted sumset [math]\displaystyle{ \{a+b\colon (a,b)\in G\} }[/math] is contained in the set [math]\displaystyle{ -C }[/math], while the difference set [math]\displaystyle{ \{a-b\colon (a,b)\in G\} }[/math] is all of [math]\displaystyle{ {\mathbb F}_3^{n-1} }[/math]. Using an estimate from a paper of Katz-Tao, we conclude that [math]\displaystyle{ 3^{n-1}\le\max(|A|,|B|,|C|)^{11/6} }[/math], leading to [math]\displaystyle{ |E|\ge 3^{6(n-1)/11} }[/math]. Thus,

[math]\displaystyle{ k_n \ge 3^{6(n-1)/11}. }[/math]

Upper Bounds

We have

[math]\displaystyle{ k_n\le 2^{n+1}-1 }[/math]

since the set of all vectors in [math]\displaystyle{ {\mathbb F}_3^n }[/math] such that at least one of the numbers [math]\displaystyle{ 1 }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ 2 }[/math] is missing among their coordinates is a Kakeya set.

This estimate can be improved using an idea due to Ruzsa (seems to be unpublished). Namely, let [math]\displaystyle{ E:=A\cup B }[/math], where [math]\displaystyle{ A }[/math] is the set of all those vectors with [math]\displaystyle{ r/3+O(\sqrt r) }[/math] coordinates equal to [math]\displaystyle{ 1 }[/math] and the rest equal to [math]\displaystyle{ 0 }[/math], and [math]\displaystyle{ B }[/math] is the set of all those vectors with [math]\displaystyle{ 2r/3+O(\sqrt r) }[/math] coordinates equal to [math]\displaystyle{ 2 }[/math] and the rest equal to [math]\displaystyle{ 0 }[/math]. Then [math]\displaystyle{ E }[/math], being of size just about [math]\displaystyle{ (27/4)^{r/3} }[/math] (which is not difficult to verify using Stirling's formula), contains lines in a positive proportion of directions: for, a typical direction [math]\displaystyle{ d\in {\mathbb F}_3^n }[/math] can be represented as [math]\displaystyle{ d=d_1+2d_2 }[/math] with [math]\displaystyle{ d_1,d_2\in A }[/math], and then [math]\displaystyle{ d_1,d_1+d,d_1+2d\in E }[/math]. Now one can use the random rotations trick to get the rest of the directions in [math]\displaystyle{ E }[/math] (losing a polynomial factor in [math]\displaystyle{ n }[/math]).

Putting all this together, we seem to have

[math]\displaystyle{ (3^{6/11} + o(1))^n \le k_n \le ( (27/4)^{1/3} + o(1))^n }[/math]

or

[math]\displaystyle{ (1.8207+o(1))^n \le k_n \le (1.8899+o(1))^n. }[/math]