Next Article in Journal
On Equilibrium Problem for T-Shape Elastic Structure
Next Article in Special Issue
The Orlicz Electrostatic q-Capacity Minkowski Problem
Previous Article in Journal
Regularizing Effects for a Singular Elliptic Problem
Previous Article in Special Issue
Spherical Steiner Symmetrizations
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Partitioning Functional of a Class of Convex Bodies

School of Mathematics, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin 150001, China
Axioms 2025, 14(1), 48; https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms14010048
Submission received: 21 November 2024 / Revised: 2 January 2025 / Accepted: 8 January 2025 / Published: 9 January 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Convex Geometry and Analysis)

Abstract

:
For each n-dimensional real Banach space X, each positive integer m, and each bounded set A X with diameter greater than 0, let β X ( A , m ) be the infimum of δ ( 0 , 1 ] such that A X can be represented as the union of m subsets of A, whose diameters are not greater than δ times the diameter of A. Estimating β X ( A , m ) is an important part of Chuanming Zong’s quantitative program for attacking Borsuk’s problem. However, estimating the partitioning functionals of general convex bodies in finite dimensional Banach spaces is challenging, so we will begin with the estimation of partitioning functionals for special convex bodies. In this paper, we prove a series of inequalities about partitioning functionals of convex cones. Several estimations of partitioning functionals of the convex hull of ( A + u ) ( A u ) and ( A + u ) ( A u ) are also presented, where A R n 1 × { 0 } is a convex body with the origin o in its interior, and u R n ( R n 1 × { 0 } ) . These results contribute to the study of Borsuk’s problem through Zong’s program.

1. Introduction

Let X = ( R n , · ) be an n-dimensional real Banach space with origino and unit ball B X . For two distinct points x , y X , denote by [ x , y ] : = { α x + ( 1 α ) y α [ 0 , 1 ] } the closed segment connecting x and y. For each A X , denote by conv A and int A the convex hull and the interior of A, respectively. Let A be nonempty and bounded; the diameter δ ( A ) of A is defined by
sup { x y x , y A } .
A compact convex subset of X with interior points is called a convex body. Let K n be the set of convex bodies in X. For each m Z + , set [ m ] : = { i Z + 1 i m } .
In 1933, Borsuk [1] posed the following problem:
Problem 1.
(Borsuk’s Problem). Is it possible to partition every bounded set in the n-dimensional Euclidean space into n + 1 subsets of smaller diameters?
The answer is positive when n 3 (cf. [2,3,4,5]). In 1993, J. Kahn and G. Kalai gave counterexamples to Borsuk’s problem in high dimensions (cf. [6]). In 2003, dimensions with counterexamples were reduced by A. Hinrichs and C. Richter to n 298 (cf. [7]). In 2014, A. Bondarenko presented a 65-dimensional counterexample (cf. [8]). In the same year, T. Jenrich and A. E. Brouwer [9] gave a 64-dimensional one. Up to now, this problem has been open for 4 n 63 . In 2021, C. Zong [10] proposed a quantitative program to attack it.
B. Grünbaum [11] extended Borsuk’s problem to Banach spaces. For a bounded set A X , let b X ( A ) be the smallest positive integer m such that A can be represented as the union of m sets with smaller diameters. Recently, J. Wang, F. Xue, and C. Zong [12] proved that
b X ( A ) 2 n ( n + 1 ) ( log ( n + 1 ) + log log ( n + 1 ) + 5 )
holds for every bounded set A X . For more information about Borsuk’s problem, we refer to [13,14].
In 2021, Y. Lian and S. Wu [15] studied Borsuk’s partition problem in finite dimensional Banach spaces by estimating
β X ( A , m ) = inf 1 δ ( A ) max k [ m ] δ ( A k ) | A = k [ m ] A k
for A B n and m Z + , and
β ( X , m ) = sup { β X ( A , m ) A B n } ,
where B n = { A R n A is bounded and δ ( A ) > 0 } . They obtained that β ( p 3 , 8 ) 0.925 , p [ 1 , ] . Later, L. Zhang, L. Meng, and S. Wu improved this result by showing that β ( p 3 , 8 ) 0.9 (cf. [16]). Recently, this result was reduced to 0.88185 in [17].
The map
β X : B n × Z + [ 0 , 1 ] ( A , m ) β X ( A , m )
is called the partitioning functional in X.
Compared to Borsuk’s problem in Euclidean space, Borsuk’s problem in finite dimensional Banach spaces is more difficult due to the influence of the norm of the space on the partitioning functional of bounded sets. In addition, Chuanming Zong proposed a reformulation for Borsuk’s problem, converting the estimation of Borsuk partition numbers into the estimation of partitioning functionals for bounded sets. Therefore, we study the estimation of partitioning functionals for special convex bodies in finite dimensional Banach spaces.
In the sequel, let A be a convex body in R n 1 × { 0 } with the origin o in its interior, and u be a point in R n ( R n 1 × { 0 } ) . Without loss of generality, we assume that δ ( A ) = 1 .
In Section 2, we obtain a series of results concerning partitioning functionals of convex cones (the convex hull of the union of A and { u } ). In Section 3, we show that
β X ( C , 2 m ) β X ( A , m ) 2 + 1 2 ,
where C is the sum of A and [ u , u ] . In Section 4, we show that β X ( T , 2 m ) β X ( A , m ) 2 + 1 2 , where T is the convex hull of A + u and A u .

2. Partitioning Functionals of Convex Cones

For 0 α β 1 , and each subset B of A, we put
D α , β ( B ) = { μ x + ( 1 μ ) u x B , μ [ α , β ] } .
Lemma 1.
Let 0 α β 1 . Then,
δ ( D α , β ( B ) ) max β δ ( B ) , α δ ( B ) + ( β α ) sup y B u y .
Proof. 
For every pair of points x , y D α , β ( B ) , there exist two numbers μ 1 , μ 2 [ α , β ] and two points x 1 , y 1 B such that
x = μ 1 x 1 + ( 1 μ 1 ) u and y = μ 2 y 1 + ( 1 μ 2 ) u .
Assume, without loss of generality, that μ 2 μ 1 . Then,
x y =   μ 1 x 1 μ 2 y 1 + ( μ 2 μ 1 ) u =   μ 1 ( x 1 y 1 ) + ( μ 2 μ 1 ) ( u y 1 ) μ 1 x 1 y 1 + ( μ 2 μ 1 ) u y 1 μ 1 δ ( B ) + ( μ 2 μ 1 ) sup y B u y μ 1 δ ( B ) + ( β μ 1 ) sup y B u y = β sup y B u y + μ 1 δ ( B ) sup y B u y .
If δ ( B ) sup y B u y , then δ ( D α , β ( B ) ) β δ ( B ) .
If δ ( B ) sup y B u y , then
δ ( D α , β ( B ) ) α δ ( B ) + ( β α ) sup y B u y .
Therefore,
δ ( D α , β ( B ) ) max β δ ( B ) , α δ ( B ) + ( β α ) sup y B u y .
Lemma 2.
Let α ( 0 , 1 ] . Then,
δ ( D 0 , α ( B ) ) = max α δ ( B ) , α sup y B u y .
Proof. 
By Lemma 1,
δ ( D 0 , α ( B ) ) max α δ ( B ) , α sup y B u y .
Since α B + ( 1 α ) u D 0 , α ( B ) and
δ ( D 0 , α ( B ) )   α y + ( 1 α ) u u   = α y u , y B ,
we have δ ( D 0 , α ( B ) ) α δ ( B ) and δ ( D 0 , α ( B ) ) α sup y B y u . It follows that
δ ( D 0 , α ( B ) ) max α δ ( B ) , α sup y B y u .
Remark 1.
Lemma 2 provides the diameter of convex cones, which is an indispensable step for estimating partitioning functionals of convex cones.
Put D = conv ( A { u } ) ; then, D is a cone with apex u and base A.
Theorem 1.
Let m be a positive integer satisfying β X ( A , m ) < 1 , and λ = sup y A y u . Then,
β X ( D , m + 1 ) λ 2 λ β X ( A , m ) , λ 1 , λ 1 + λ β X ( A , m ) , β X ( A , m ) < λ < 1 , β X ( A , m ) , λ β X ( A , m ) .
Proof. 
For each ϵ ( 0 , 1 β X ( A , m ) ) , there exists a collection { A k k [ m ] } of subsets of A such that
A = { A k k [ m ] }
and
max k [ m ] δ ( A k ) β X ( A , m ) + ϵ .
Let α ( 0 , 1 ] . It is not difficult to verify that D = D 0 , 1 ( A ) = D 0 , α ( A ) D α , 1 ( A ) . Moreover,
D α , 1 ( A ) = { μ x + ( 1 μ ) u x A , μ [ α , 1 ] } = μ x + ( 1 μ ) u x k [ m ] A k , μ [ α , 1 ] = k [ m ] { μ x + ( 1 μ ) u x A k , μ [ α , 1 ] } = k [ m ] D α , 1 ( A k ) .
By Lemmas 1 and 2,
δ ( D ) = max 1 , sup y A y u , δ ( D 0 , α ( A ) ) = α δ ( D ) ,
and
δ ( D α , 1 ( A k ) ) max δ ( A k ) , α δ ( A k ) + ( 1 α ) sup y A k y u max β X ( A , m ) + ϵ , α ( β X ( A , m ) + ϵ ) + ( 1 α ) sup y A y u .
We consider the following three cases.
Case 1: λ 1 . Put α = λ 2 λ β X ( A , m ) ϵ . Then, δ ( D ) = sup y A y u = λ , and
1 δ ( D ) max { max { δ ( D α , 1 ( A k ) ) k [ m ] } , δ ( D 0 , α ( A ) ) } max max β X ( A , m ) + ϵ λ , α β X ( A , m ) + ϵ λ + 1 α , α = max α β X ( A , m ) + ϵ λ + 1 α , α = λ 2 λ β X ( A , m ) ϵ .
It follows that
β X ( D , m + 1 ) λ 2 λ β X ( A , m ) .
Case 2: β X ( A , m ) < λ < 1 . In this case, we require further that ϵ ( 0 , λ β X ( A , m ) ) . Put α = λ 1 + λ β X ( A , m ) ϵ . Then, δ ( D ) = δ ( A ) = 1 and
1 δ ( D ) max { max { δ ( D α , 1 ( A k ) ) k [ m ] } , δ ( D 0 , α ( A ) ) } max max β X ( A , m ) + ϵ , α ( β X ( A , m ) + ϵ ) + ( 1 α ) λ , α = max α ( β X ( A , m ) + ϵ ) + ( 1 α ) λ , α = λ 1 + λ β X ( A , m ) ϵ .
It follows that
β X ( D , m + 1 ) λ 1 + λ β X ( A , m ) .
Case 3: λ β X ( A , m ) < 1 . Put α = β X ( A , m ) + ϵ . Then, δ ( D ) = δ ( A ) = 1 and
1 δ ( D ) max { max { δ ( D α , 1 ( A k ) ) k [ m ] } , δ ( D 0 , α ( A ) ) } max { β X ( A , m ) + ϵ , α } = β X ( A , m ) + ϵ .
It follows that
β X ( D , m + 1 ) β X ( A , m ) .
This completes the proof. □
Remark 2.
In Theorem 1, a partition method for convex cones is presented, from which an estimate of the partitioning functional of convex cones is derived. It is evident from Theorem 1 that the value of the partitioning functional of a bounded set in a Banach space is closely related to the properties of the set itself.
Corollary 1.
Let m be a positive integer satisfying β X ( A , m ) < 1 . Then,
β X ( D , m + 1 ) 1 2 β X ( A , m ) .
Proof. 
Set
f ( λ ) = λ 2 λ β X ( A , m ) , λ 1 ,
and
g ( λ ) = λ 1 + λ β X ( A , m ) , β X ( A , m ) < λ < 1 .
Then, f ( λ ) is decreasing on [ 1 , ) and g ( λ ) is increasing on ( β X ( A , m ) , 1 ) . Hence,
f ( λ ) f ( 1 ) = 1 2 β X ( A , m ) and g ( λ ) lim λ 1 g ( λ ) = 1 2 β X ( A , m ) .
By Theorem 1,
β X ( D , m + 1 ) max 1 2 β X ( A , m ) , β X ( A , m ) .
Since β X ( A , m ) < 1 , β X ( D , m + 1 ) 1 2 β X ( A , m ) . □
Proposition 1.
Let 1 3 = ( R 3 , · 1 ) , A = B 1 2 × { 0 } , u = ( 0 , 0 , 1 ) , and D = conv ( A { u } ) . Then,
β 1 3 ( D , 5 ) = 1 2 β 1 3 ( A , 4 ) = 2 3 .
Proof. 
It is clear that δ ( D ) = δ ( A ) = max y A y u = 2 . It follows from Proposition 4 in [15] that β 1 3 ( A , 4 ) = 1 2 . By Theorem 1,
β 1 3 ( D , 5 ) 1 2 β 1 3 ( A , 4 ) = 2 3 .
Suppose the contrary that β 1 3 ( D , 5 ) < 2 3 . Then, there exist five subsets D 1 , D 2 , D 3 , D 4 , and D 5 of D such that D = i [ 5 ] D i and max { δ ( D i ) i [ 5 ] } < 4 3 . Denote by { x 1 , x 2 , x 3 , x 4 } the set of extreme points of A. We may assume that u D 5 and x i D i , i [ 4 ] . The partition is shown in Figure 1. Since p = 1 3 , 1 3 , 1 3 D ,
p x i   4 3 , i [ 4 ] ,
and p u = 4 3 , we have p i [ 5 ] D i , a contradiction. Therefore, β 1 3 ( D , 5 ) = 2 3 . □
It follows from Theorem 1 and Proposition 1 that estimations of partitioning functionals of convex cones, which are the best possible for certain pairs of m and D, are obtained.
Furthermore, when m and λ are sufficiently large, by (1), the above result is not optimal. Proposition 2 will give a better estimation in this situation.
For α < β , and each subset B of A, we put
C α , β ( B ) = B + [ α u , β u ] .
Lemma 3.
Let α < β . Then,
δ ( C α , β ( B ) ) = sup x , y B x y + ( β α ) u .
Proof. 
For every pair of points x , y C α , β ( B ) , there exist two numbers μ 1 , μ 2 [ 0 , 1 ] and two points x 1 , y 1 B such that
x = x 1 + μ 1 α u + ( 1 μ 1 ) β u
and
y = y 1 + μ 2 α u + ( 1 μ 2 ) β u .
Assume, without loss of generality, that μ 2 μ 1 . Then,
x y =   x 1 y 1 + ( μ 2 μ 1 ) ( β α ) u =   ( 1 μ 2 + μ 1 ) ( x 1 y 1 ) + ( μ 2 μ 1 ) ( x 1 y 1 + ( β α ) u ) ( 1 μ 2 + μ 1 ) x 1 y 1 + ( μ 2 μ 1 ) x 1 y 1 + ( β α ) u max { x 1 y 1 , x 1 y 1 + ( β α ) u } max δ ( B ) , sup x , y B x y + ( β α ) u .
Therefore,
δ ( C α , β ( B ) ) max δ ( B ) , sup x , y B x y + ( β α ) u .
Clearly, δ ( C α , β ( B ) ) δ ( B ) . Since x + β u C α , β ( B ) and y + α u C α , β ( B ) for any two points x , y B , δ ( C α , β ( B ) ) x y + ( β α ) u . Thus,
δ ( C α , β ( B ) ) max δ ( B ) , sup x , y B x y + ( β α ) u .
Since, for arbitrary two points x , y B ,
  x y = x y 2 + β α 2 u + x y 2 β α 2 u 1 2 x y + ( β α ) u + 1 2 y x + ( β α ) u sup x , y B x y + ( β α ) u ,
we have
δ ( B ) sup x , y B x y + ( β α ) u .
It follows that
δ ( C α , β ( B ) ) = max δ ( B ) , sup x , y B x y + ( β α ) u = sup x , y B x y + ( β α ) u .
Proposition 2.
Let m be a positive integer satisfying β X ( A , m ) < 1 , and λ = sup y A y u > 1 . Then,
β X ( D , m ) 1 m + 1 λ .
Proof. 
It is clear that
D = conv ( A { u } ) A + [ 0 , u ] = i = 1 m A + i 1 m u , i m u = i = 1 m C i 1 m , i m ( A ) .
By Lemma 3, for each i [ m ] ,
δ C i 1 m , i m ( A ) = sup x , y A x y + 1 m u δ ( A ) + 1 m u .
Then,
1 δ ( D ) max i [ m ] δ C i 1 m , i m ( A ) 1 δ ( D ) δ ( A ) + 1 m u 1 λ 1 + 1 m λ = 1 λ + 1 m .
Therefore,
β X ( D , m ) 1 λ + 1 m .
When λ is sufficiently small, we have the following result.
Proposition 3.
Let m be a positive integer satisfying β X ( A , m ) < 1 . If λ = max y A y u β X ( A , m ) , then
β X ( D , m ) = β X ( A , m ) .
Proof. 
Since max y A y u β X ( A , m ) , δ ( D ) = δ ( A ) = 1 . For each ϵ > 0 , there exists a collection { D i i [ m ] } of subsets of D such that
D = { D i i [ m ] } and max i [ m ] δ ( D i ) β X ( D , m ) + ϵ .
Then, A = A D = i [ m ] ( A D i ) . Thus,
β X ( A , m ) max { δ ( A D i ) i [ m ] } β X ( D , m ) + ϵ .
It follows that β X ( A , m ) β X ( D , m ) .
For each ϵ > 0 , there exists a collection { A i i [ m ] } of subsets of A such that
A = { A i i [ m ] } and max i [ m ] δ ( A i ) β X ( A , m ) + ϵ .
Then,
D = D 0 , 1 ( A ) = { μ x + ( 1 μ ) u x A , μ [ 0 , 1 ] } = μ x + ( 1 μ ) u x i [ m ] A i , μ [ 0 , 1 ] = i [ m ] { μ x + ( 1 μ ) u x A i , μ [ 0 , 1 ] } = i [ m ] D 0 , 1 ( A i ) .
Thus, by Lemma 2,
β X ( D , m ) max i [ m ] δ ( D 0 , 1 ( A i ) ) = max i [ m ] max δ ( A i ) , sup y A i y u β X ( A , m ) + ϵ .
It follows that β X ( D , m ) β X ( A , m ) . □

3. Estimations of β X ( A + [ u , u ] , 2 m )

Theorem 2.
Let m be a positive integer satisfying β X ( A , m ) < 1 . Then,
β X ( A + [ u , u ] , 2 m ) β X ( A , m ) 2 + 1 2 .
Proof. 
For each ϵ ( 0 , 1 β X ( A , m ) ) , there exists a collection { A i i [ m ] } of subsets of A such that
A = { A i i [ m ] }
and
max i [ m ] δ ( A i ) β X ( A , m ) + ϵ .
Put C = C 1 , 1 ( A ) = A + [ u , u ] . Then,
C = A + ( [ u , o ] [ o , u ] ) = ( A + [ u , o ] ) ( A + [ o , u ] ) = i [ m ] A i + [ u , o ] i [ m ] A i + [ o , u ] = i [ m ] ( A i + [ u , o ] ) i [ m ] ( A i + [ o , u ] ) = i [ m ] C 1 , 0 ( A i ) i [ m ] C 0 , 1 ( A i ) ,
By Lemma 3,
δ ( C ) = sup x , y A x y + 2 u ,
and
δ ( C 1 , 0 ( A i ) ) = δ ( C 0 , 1 ( A i ) ) = sup x , y A i x y + u .
Since, for two arbitrary points x , y A i ,
x y + u = 1 2 x y + x y + 2 u 1 2 x y + 1 2 x y + 2 u 1 2 δ ( A i ) + 1 2 sup x , y A i x + 2 u y ,
we have
sup x , y A i x y + u 1 2 δ ( A i ) + 1 2 sup x , y A i x + 2 u y .
Put λ = sup x , y A x + 2 u y . Then, λ 1 and
δ ( C 0 , 1 ( A i ) ) δ ( C ) δ ( A i ) 2 λ + sup x , y A i x + 2 u y 2 λ β X ( A , m ) + ϵ 2 λ + 1 2 , i [ m ] .
Since δ ( C 1 , 0 ( A i ) ) = δ ( C 0 , 1 ( A i ) ) , we have
δ ( C 1 , 0 ( A i ) ) δ ( C ) β X ( A , m ) + ϵ 2 λ + 1 2 , i [ m ] .
Therefore,
β X ( C , 2 m ) β X ( A , m ) 2 + 1 2 .
This completes the proof. □

4. Estimations of β X ( conv ( ( A + u ) ( A u ) ) , 2 m )

Put
T = conv ( ( A + u ) ( A u ) ) .
It is clear that T is a centrally symmetric convex body in R n .
Lemma 4.
Let T K n + 1 , defined as above. Then,
δ ( T ) = sup x , y A x + y + 2 u .
Proof. 
For every pair of points x , y T , there exist two numbers α , β [ 0 , 1 ] and four points x 1 , x 2 , y 1 , y 2 A such that
x = ( 1 α ) ( x 1 + u ) + α ( x 2 u )
and
y = ( 1 β ) ( y 1 + u ) + β ( y 2 u ) .
Without loss of generality, we assume that α β . Then,
x y = x 1 y 1 + β y 1 α x 1 α x 2 + β y 2 + 2 ( β α ) u = ( 1 β ) ( x 1 y 1 ) + ( β α ) ( x 1 + y 2 + 2 u ) + α ( y 2 x 2 ) ( 1 β ) x 1 y 1 + ( β α ) x 1 + y 2 + 2 u + α x 2 y 2 ( 1 β ) δ ( A ) + ( β α ) sup x , y A x + y + 2 u + α δ ( A ) = ( 1 + α β ) δ ( A ) + ( β α ) sup x , y A x + y + 2 u max δ ( A ) , sup x , y A x + y + 2 u .
Therefore,
δ ( T ) max δ ( A ) , sup x , y A x + y + 2 u .
Since A + u T and x + u ( y u ) δ ( T ) for all x , y A , δ ( A ) δ ( T ) and sup x , y A x + y + 2 u δ ( T ) . Thus,
δ ( T ) max δ ( A ) , sup x , y A x + y + 2 u .
Suppose that sup x , y A x + y + 2 u < δ ( A ) . Since, for each x A ,
sup x , y A x + y + 2 u 2 x + u .
we have x + u < δ ( A ) 2 . It follows that A + u int δ ( A ) 2 B X . Thus,
δ ( A ) = δ ( A + u ) < δ ( A ) ,
which is impossible. Therefore,
δ ( T ) = max δ ( A ) , sup x , y A x + y + 2 u = sup x , y A x + y + 2 u .
Theorem 3.
Let T K n , defined as above, and m be a positive integer such that β X ( A , m ) < 1 . Then,
β X ( T , 2 m ) β X ( A , m ) 2 + 1 2 .
Proof. 
For each ϵ ( 0 , 1 β X ( A , m ) ) , there exists a collection { A i i [ m ] } of subsets of A such that
A = { A i i [ m ] } ,
and
max i [ m ] δ ( A i ) β X ( A , m ) + ϵ .
Then, A + u = { A i + u i [ m ] } = { S i i [ m ] } and A u = { A i u i [ m ] } = { S i i [ m ] } , where S i = A i + u . Put
H + = { ( x 1 , x 2 , , x n ) x n 0 } ,
and
H = { ( x 1 , x 2 , , x n ) x n 0 } .
Without loss of generality, we assume that u H + . Then,
T = ( conv ( ( A + u ) ( A u ) ) H + ) ( conv ( A + u ( A u ) ) H ) = conv i [ m ] S i ( A u ) H + conv ( A + u ) i [ m ] ( S i ) H = i [ m ] ( ( conv ( S i ( A u ) ) ) H + ) i [ m ] ( ( conv ( ( S i ) ( A + u ) ) H ) = i [ m ] C i i [ m ] D i ,
where
C i = ( conv ( ( A i + u ) ( A u ) ) ) H + , i [ m ] ,
and
D i = ( conv ( ( A i u ) ( A + u ) ) ) H , i [ m ] .
For every pair of points x , y C i , there exist two numbers α , β [ 0 , 1 2 ] , two points x 1 , y 1 conv A i , and two points x 2 , y 2 A such that
x = ( 1 α ) ( x 1 + u ) + α ( x 2 u )
and
y = ( 1 β ) ( y 1 + u ) + β ( y 2 u ) .
Without loss of generality, we assume that α β . Then,
x y = x 1 y 1 + β y 1 α x 1 α x 2 + β y 2 + 2 ( β α ) u = ( 1 β ) ( x 1 y 1 ) + ( β α ) ( x 1 + y 2 + 2 u ) + α ( y 2 x 2 ) ( 1 β ) x 1 y 1 + ( β α ) x 1 + y 2 + 2 u + α x 2 y 2 ( 1 β ) δ ( conv A i ) + ( β α ) sup x , y A x + y + 2 u + α δ ( A ) = ( 1 β ) δ ( A i ) + ( β α ) sup x , y A x + y + 2 u + α ( 1 β ) ( β X ( A , m ) + ϵ ) + ( β α ) sup x , y A x + y + 2 u + α .
By Lemma 4,
sup x , y A x + y + 2 u δ ( A ) = 1 > β X ( A , m ) + ϵ .
Then, for each i [ m ] ,
δ ( C i ) ( 1 β ) ( β X ( A , m ) + ϵ ) + α + ( β α ) sup x , y A x + y + 2 u = β X ( A , m ) + ϵ + β sup x , y A x + y + 2 u β X ( A , m ) ϵ + α 1 sup x , y A x + y + 2 u β X ( A , m ) + ϵ 2 + sup x , y A x + y + 2 u 2 .
By Lemma 4, δ ( T ) = sup x , y A x + y + 2 u 1 . Put λ = sup x , y A x + y + 2 u . Then, for i [ m ] ,
δ ( C i ) δ ( T ) β X ( A , m ) + ϵ 2 λ + 1 2 .
For every pair of points x , y D i , there exist two numbers α , β [ 1 2 , 1 ] , two points x 1 , y 1 conv A i , and two points x 2 , y 2 A such that
x = α ( x 1 u ) + ( 1 α ) ( x 2 + u )
and
y = β ( y 1 u ) + ( 1 β ) ( y 2 + u ) .
Without loss of generality, we assume that α β . Then,
x y = x 2 y 2 + β y 1 α x 1 α x 2 + β y 2 + 2 ( β α ) u = ( 1 β ) ( x 2 y 2 ) + ( β α ) ( x 2 + y 1 + 2 u ) + α ( y 1 x 1 ) ( 1 β ) x 2 y 2 + ( β α ) x 2 + y 1 + 2 u + α y 1 x 1 1 β + ( β α ) sup x , y A x + y + 2 u + α δ ( A i ) 1 β + ( β α ) sup x , y A x + y + 2 u + α ( β X ( A , m ) + ϵ ) .
By Lemma 4,
sup x , y A x + y + 2 u δ ( A ) = 1 > β X ( A , m ) + ϵ .
Then, for each i [ m ] ,
δ ( D i ) 1 + β sup x , y A x + y + 2 u 1 + α β X ( A , m ) + ϵ sup x , y A x + y + 2 u β X ( A , m ) + ϵ 2 + sup x , y A x + y + 2 u 2 .
Thus,
δ ( D i ) δ ( T ) β X ( A , m ) + ϵ 2 λ + 1 2 , i [ m ] .
It follows that β X ( T , 2 m ) β X ( A , m ) 2 λ + 1 2 β X ( A , m ) 2 + 1 2 . This completes the proof. □

5. Discussion

Estimating partitioning functionals of special convex bodies plays an important role in Chuanming Zong’s proof program to attack Borsuk’s problem. In this paper, when a convex body D is constructed from a convex body A, for example, D R n is a convex cone with A R n 1 × { 0 } as the base, using a partition of A, we obtain a partition of D; it follows that a relationship between the partitioning functional of D and partitioning functional of A is given.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Borsuk, K. Drei Sätze über die n-dimensionale euklidische Sphäre. Fund. Math. 1933, 20, 177–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Eggleston, H. Covering a three-dimensional set with sets of smaller diameter. J. London Math. Soc. 1955, 30, 11–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Grünbaum, B. A simple proof of Borsuk’s conjecture in three dimensions. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 1957, 53, 776–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Heppes, A. On the partitioning of three-dimensional point-sets into sets of smaller diameter (Hungarian). Magyar Tud. Akad. Mat. Fiz. Oszt. Közl. 1957, 7, 413–416. [Google Scholar]
  5. Perkal, J. Sur la subdivision des ensembles en parties de diamètre inférieur. Colloq. Math. 1947, 1, 45. [Google Scholar]
  6. Kahn, J.; Kalai, G. A counterexample to Borsuk’s conjecture. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 1993, 29, 60–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Hinrichs, A.; Richter, C. New sets with large Borsuk numbers. Discrete Math. 2003, 270, 137–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Bondarenko, A. On Borsuk’s conjecture for two-distance sets. Discrete Comput. Geom. 2014, 51, 509–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Jenrich, T.; Brouwer, A. A 64-dimensional counterexample to Borsuk’s conjecture. Electron. J. Combin. 2014, 21, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Zong, C. Borsuk’s partition conjecture. Jpn. J. Math. 2021, 16, 185–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Grünbaum, B. Borsuk’s partition conjecture in Minkowski planes. Bull. Res. Council Israel 1957, 7, 25–30. [Google Scholar]
  12. Wang, J.; Xue, F.; Zong, C. On Boltyanski and Gohberg’s partition conjecture. Bull. Lond. Math. Soc. 2023, 56, 140–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Boltyanski, V.G.; Gohberg, I.T. Results and Problems in Combinatorial Geometry; Nauka: Moscow, Russia, 1965; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1985. [Google Scholar]
  14. Boltyanski, V.; Martini, H.; Soltan, P.S. Excursions into Combinatorial Geometry; Universitext; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  15. Lian, Y.; Wu, S. Partition bounded sets into sets having smaller diameters. Results Math. 2021, 76, 116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Zhang, L.; Meng, L.; Wu, S. Banach-Mazur distance from p 3 to 3 . Math. Notes. 2023, 114, 1045–1051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Zhang, X.; He, C. Partitioning bounded sets in symmetric spaces into subsets with reduced diameter. Math. Inequalities Appl. 2024, 27, 703–713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. A partition of Proposition 1.
Figure 1. A partition of Proposition 1.
Axioms 14 00048 g001
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhang, X. Partitioning Functional of a Class of Convex Bodies. Axioms 2025, 14, 48. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms14010048

AMA Style

Zhang X. Partitioning Functional of a Class of Convex Bodies. Axioms. 2025; 14(1):48. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms14010048

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhang, Xinling. 2025. "Partitioning Functional of a Class of Convex Bodies" Axioms 14, no. 1: 48. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms14010048

APA Style

Zhang, X. (2025). Partitioning Functional of a Class of Convex Bodies. Axioms, 14(1), 48. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms14010048

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop