a subset @xmath3 of the plane @xmath4 is said to _ inscribe a square _ if it contains the four vertices of a square of positive sidelength .
note that despite the terminology , we do not require the solid square with these four vertices to lie in the `` interior '' of @xmath3 ( indeed we do not require @xmath3 to even have an interior ) ; see figure [ inscribed ] .
[ t ]     the following conjecture of toeplitz @xcite is usually referred to as the _ square peg problem _ or _ inscribed square problem _ :    [ spp]@xcite let @xmath5 be a simple closed curve
. then @xmath6 inscribes a square .    in this paper ,
a curve @xmath7 denotes a continuous map from a domain @xmath8 that is either an interval @xmath9 $ ] or a circle @xmath10 to a manifold @xmath11 , with the curve being called _ closed _ in the latter case .
such a curve is called _ simple _ if @xmath12 is injective .    a recent survey on this problem , together with an extensive list of further references may be found in @xcite ; the brief summary below is drawn from that survey .
thanks to arguments of a homological nature , the above conjecture is known assuming that the curve @xmath12 is sufficiently regular . for instance :    * toeplitz @xcite claimed conjecture [ spp ] for convex curves , but did not publish a proof .
this case was partially resolved by emch @xcite , @xcite and then fully resolved in @xcite , @xcite ; this case can also be deduced from the `` table theorem '' of fenn @xcite .
* hebbert @xcite gave a proof of conjecture [ spp ] for quadrilaterals .
a proof of conjecture [ spp ] for arbitrary polygons was given in @xcite ; see also @xcite , @xcite for some further `` discretisations '' of the conjecture .
see @xcite for some computer - assisted quantitative bounds on one such discretisation . *
emch @xcite established conjecture [ spp ] for piecewise analytic curves .
an alternate proof of the analytic case was obtained by jerrard @xcite . * schnirelman @xcite ( see also @xcite ) established conjecture [ spp ] for continuously twice differentiable curves ( and in fact was also able to treat some curves outside this class ) . an alternate argument treating continuously twice differentiable curves ( obeying an additional technical geometric condition )
was obtained by makeev @xcite . * nielsen and wright @xcite established conjecture [ spp ] for curves symmetric around a line or point .
* stromquist @xcite established conjecture [ spp ] for locally monotone curves .
an alternate treatment of this case was given in @xcite .
* cantarella , denne , mccleary @xcite established conjecture [ spp ] for @xmath13 curves , and also for bounded curvature curves without cusps . *
matschke @xcite established conjecture [ spp ] for an open dense class of curves ( namely , curves that did not contain small trapezoids of a certain form ) , as well as curves that were contained in annuli in which the ratio between the outer and inner radius is at most @xmath14 .
one can broadly classify the methods of proof in the above positive results as being `` homological '' in nature , in that they use algebraic topology tools such as intersection homology , bordism , equivariant obstruction theory , or more elementary parity arguments counting the number of intersections between curves .
in fact , many of these proofs establish the stronger claim that ( under some suitable genericity and regularity hypotheses ) there are an _ odd _ number of squares with vertices lying on the curve .
it is tempting to attack the general case of conjecture [ spp ] by approximating the curve @xmath12 by a curve in one of the above classes , applying an existing result to produce squares with vertices on the approximating curve , and then taking limits somehow ( e.g. by a compactness argument ) . however , in the absence of some additional regularity hypothesis on the curve , it could conceivably happen that the approximating inscribed squares degenerate to a point in the limit .
even if the original curve is smooth except for a single singular point , one could imagine that all squares in the approximating curves concentrate into that singular point in the limit .
this scenario of squares degenerating to a point is the primary reason for the inability to remove the regularity hypotheses in the known positive results on the problem .    in this paper
we propose to modify the homological approach to the inscribed square problem , by focusing not only on the parity of intersections between various geometric objects associated to the curve @xmath12 , but also on bounding certain integrals associated to these curves . as with previous works ,
one requires a certain amount of regularity ( such as rectifiability , lipschitz continuity , or piecewise linearity ) on the curves in order to initially define these integrals ; but the integrals enjoy more stability properties under limits than intersection numbers , and thus may offer a route to establish more cases of conjecture [ spp ] . as an instance of this
, we give the following positive result towards this conjecture , which appears to be new . for any @xmath15 and any function @xmath16
, we define the _ graph _ @xmath17 to be the function @xmath18 , so in particular @xmath19 is the set @xmath20 such a function @xmath21 is said to be _
@xmath22-lipschitz _ for some @xmath23 if one has @xmath24 for all @xmath25 .
similarly if @xmath21 is defined on a circle @xmath10 rather than an interval @xmath8 ( using the usual riemannian metric on @xmath10 ) .
[ main ] let @xmath9 $ ] be an interval , and let @xmath26 \to { \mathbb{r}}$ ] be @xmath27-lipschitz functions for some @xmath28 .
suppose also that @xmath29 , and @xmath30 for all @xmath31 .
then the set @xmath32 ) \cup \mathtt{graph}_g([t_0,t_1])\ ] ] inscribes a square .    in other words ,
conjecture [ spp ] holds for curves that traverse two lipschitz graphs , as long as the lipschitz constants are strictly less than one .
the condition of having lipschitz constant less than one is related to the property of being locally monotone , as considered in the references @xcite , @xcite above ; however , due to a potentially unbounded amount of oscillation at the endpoints @xmath33 and @xmath34 , the sets in theorem [ main ] are not necessarily locally monotone at the endpoints , and so the results in @xcite , @xcite do not seem to directly imply theorem [ main ] .
similarly for the other existing positive results on the square peg problem .
we prove theorem [ main ] in section [ pos - sec ] . a key concept in the proof
will be the notion of the ( signed ) area @xmath35 under a rectifiable curve @xmath12 ; see definition [ area - def ] .
this area can be used to construct a `` conserved integral of motion '' when one traverses the vertices of a continuous family of squares ; see lemma [ conserv ] .
theorem [ main ] will then follow by applying the contraction mapping theorem to create such a continuous family of squares to which the conservation law can be applied , and then invoking the jordan curve theorem to obtain a contradiction .
the hypothesis of @xmath36 having lipschitz constant less than one is crucially used to ensure that the curve one is applying the jordan curve theorem to is simple ; see proposition [ pro ] .    without the hypothesis of small lipschitz
constant , the jordan curve theorem is no longer available , and we do not know how to adapt the argument to prove conjecture [ spp ] in full generality . however , in later sections of the paper we present some related variants of conjecture [ spp ] which seem easier to attack by this method , including a periodic version ( conjecture [ pspp ] ) , an area inequality version ( conjecture [ area - ineq ] ) , and a combinatorial version ( conjecture [ adf ] ) .
in contrast to the original square problem , the periodic version remains open even when the curves are piecewise linear ( and this case seems to contain most of the essential difficulties of the problem ) .
conjecture [ area - ineq ] is the strongest of the new conjectures in this paper , implying all the other conjectures stated here except for the original conjecture [ spp ] ( although it would imply some new cases of that conjecture ) .
conjecture [ adf ] is a simplified version of conjecture [ area - ineq ] that is an almost purely combinatorial claim regarding the sign patterns of triple sums @xmath1 of numbers @xmath37 drawn from finite sets of real numbers .
it seems to be a particularly tractable `` toy model '' for the original problem , though the author was not able to fully resolve it .
the logical chain of dependencies between the conjectures discussed in this paper is summarised as follows : @xmath38    the author is supported by nsf grant dms-1266164 , the james and carol collins chair , and by a simons investigator award .
given a subset @xmath39 of a vector space @xmath40 and a shift @xmath41 , we define the translates @xmath42 given two subsets @xmath43 in a metric space @xmath44 , we define the distance @xmath45    we use the asymptotic notation @xmath46 to denote an estimate of the form @xmath47 for some implied constant @xmath22 ; in many cases we will explicitly allow the implied constant @xmath22 to depend on some of the ambient parameters .
if @xmath48 is an asymptotic parameter going to infinity , we use @xmath49 to denote an estimate of the form @xmath50 where @xmath51 is a quantity depending on @xmath48 ( and possibly on other ambient parameters ) that goes to zero as @xmath52 ( holding all other parameters fixed ) .
we will use the language of singular homology ( on smooth manifolds ) in this paper , thus for instance a @xmath53-chain in a manifold @xmath11 is a formal integer linear combination of curves @xmath54 , and a @xmath53-cycle is a @xmath53-chain that is zero boundary .
two @xmath55-cycles are homologous if they differ by a @xmath55-boundary , that is to say the boundary @xmath56 of a @xmath57-cycle .
we integrate ( continuous ) @xmath55-forms on ( piecewise linear ) @xmath55-chains in the usual fashion , for instance if @xmath58 is a @xmath53-chain that is an integer linear combination of curves @xmath59 , and @xmath60 is a @xmath53-form , then @xmath61 . see for instance @xcite for the formal definitions of these concepts and their basic properties .
we will not use particularly advanced facts from singular homology ; perhaps the most important fact we will use is the claim that if two ( piecewise linear ) cycles @xmath62 are homologous and intersect a ( flat ) submanifold @xmath40 transversely , then their intersections @xmath63 , @xmath64 are homologous cycles in @xmath40 .
we now prove theorem [ main ] . it will be convenient to give a name to the space of all squares .
[ sqdef ] we define @xmath65 to be the set of all quadruples of vertices of squares in @xmath4 traversed in anticlockwise order ; more explicitly , we have @xmath66 by abuse of notation we refer to elements of @xmath67 as ( non - degenerate ) squares .
thus we see that a set @xmath68 inscribes a square if and only if @xmath69 intersects @xmath67 .
we also form the closure @xmath70 in which the sidelength of the square is allowed to degenerate to zero ; this is a four - dimensional linear subspace of @xmath71 .
a quadruple @xmath72 of curves @xmath73 \to { \mathbb{r}}^2 $ ] is said to _ traverse squares _ if one has @xmath74 for all @xmath75 $ ] ; note that we allow the square traversed to degenerate to a point .
equivalently , @xmath72 traverses squares if and only if there exist functions @xmath76 \to { \mathbb{r}}^2 $ ] such that @xmath77    we will also need the notion of the area under a ( rectifiable ) curve :    [ area - def ] let @xmath78 \to { \mathbb{r}}^2 $ ] be a continuous rectifiable curve , and write @xmath79 for @xmath75 $ ] , thus @xmath80 \to { \mathbb{r}}$ ] are continuous functions of bounded variation .
area under @xmath12 _ , denoted by @xmath35 , is defined to be the real number @xmath81 where the integral on the right - hand side is in the riemann - stieltjes sense .
of course , if @xmath12 is piecewise smooth , this definition of @xmath35 agrees with the usual definition of @xmath35 as the integral of the @xmath53-form @xmath82 on @xmath12 ( now viewed as a @xmath53-chain ) .
[ integ ] if @xmath83 \to { \mathbb{r}}$ ] is continuous of bounded variation , then the area under the curve @xmath84 is just the usual riemann integral : @xmath85 in particular , if @xmath21 is positive , @xmath86 is the area of the region bounded by @xmath84 , the real axis , and the vertical lines @xmath87 .
if @xmath12 is not a graph , the area under @xmath12 is more complicated ; see figure [ area ] .
[ t ] , where @xmath88 is the area of the region @xmath89 , and similarly for @xmath90 , @xmath91 , @xmath92 ; the weights @xmath93 attached to @xmath94 here are the winding numbers of the spiral together with the horizontal and vertical line segments used to close up the curve.,title="fig:",width=480 ]    [ repo ] if @xmath12 is a simple closed anticlockwise rectifiable curve , then by the jordan curve theorem it encloses a bounded open region @xmath95 , and we claim that the area under the curve @xmath12 is then equal to the negative of the lebesgue measure of @xmath95 . in the case that @xmath12 is a polygonal path , this claim is clear from stokes theorem : @xmath96 the general case then follows by approximating the simple closed anticlockwise curve @xmath12 as the uniform limit of simple closed anticlockwise polygonal paths @xmath97 , noting ( as can be seen for instance by using the characterisation of @xmath95 as the set of points @xmath98 where the winding number of @xmath12 around @xmath98 is equal to @xmath53 ) that the interiors @xmath99 of @xmath97 converge in the hausdorff sense to @xmath95 .
in particular , if @xmath12 is a simple closed rectifiable curve ( of either orientation ) , then the area @xmath35 under @xmath12 is necessarily non - zero , with the sign of this area determined by the orientation of @xmath12 .
the relevance of this area concept to the square peg problem lies in the following simple identity .
[ conserv ] let @xmath100 \to { \mathbb{r}}^2 $ ] be rectifiable curves such that @xmath72 traverses squares ( as defined in definition [ sqdef ] ) .
then we have the identity @xmath101 where the functions @xmath76 \to { \mathbb{r}}$ ] are as in definition [ sqdef ] .    from definition
[ sqdef ] and definition [ area - def ] we have @xmath102 and hence after some canceling we may write the left - hand side of as @xmath103 writing @xmath104 and @xmath105 , we obtain the claim .    geometrically ,
this conserved integral reflects the following elementary fact : if a square with vertices @xmath106 ( traversed in anticlockwise order ) and sidelength @xmath107 is deformed to a nearby square with vertices @xmath108 , @xmath109 , @xmath110,@xmath111 and sidelength @xmath112 , then the difference of the areas of the two quadrilaterals with vertices @xmath113 and @xmath114 respectively add up to exactly half the difference between the areas @xmath115 , @xmath116 of the two squares ( see figure [ diffi ] ) .
[ t ] .,title="fig:",width=480 ]    [ homog ] one can interpret lemma [ conserv ] in the language of differential forms as follows . for @xmath117 ,
let @xmath118 be the @xmath119 coordinate projection , then we can pull back the @xmath53-form @xmath82 on @xmath4 by @xmath120 to create a @xmath53-form @xmath121 on the linear @xmath122-manifold @xmath123 .
then the identity may be rewritten as @xmath124 where @xmath125 is the @xmath126-form that takes a square @xmath127 to the quantity @xmath128 , and @xmath129 denotes the exterior derivative .
in particular , the @xmath53-form @xmath130 is exact .
now we prove theorem [ main ] .
let @xmath9 , f , g,{\varepsilon}$ ] be as in that theorem .
it is convenient to extend the functions @xmath131 \to { \mathbb{r}}$ ] by constants to the whole real line @xmath132 to form extended functions @xmath133 .
that is to say , we define @xmath134 for @xmath135 , @xmath136 for all @xmath137 , and @xmath138 and @xmath139 for @xmath140 .
clearly @xmath141 continue to be @xmath27-lipschitz and of bounded variation .    for any @xmath142 ,
the map @xmath143 is a strict contraction on @xmath4 ( with the usual euclidean metric ) with contraction constant at most @xmath144 .
hence , by the contraction mapping theorem , there is a unique solution @xmath145 to the fixed point equation @xmath146 furthermore , @xmath147 and @xmath148 depend in a lipschitz fashion on @xmath149 ( the lipschitz constant can be as large as @xmath150 , but this will not concern us ) . if we then define the functions @xmath151 \to { \mathbb{r}}$ ] by @xmath152 for all @xmath142 , then @xmath72 are a quadruple of lipschitz ( and thus locally rectifiable ) curves that traverse squares . from , , , we have @xmath153 for all @xmath142 . in particular , @xmath154 take values in @xmath155 , @xmath155 , and @xmath156 respectively ; see figure [ gammafig ] . as for @xmath157
, we can use the hypothesis of small lipschitz constant to establish the following key fact :    [ t ] , @xmath158 , and @xmath159 .
( in some cases , @xmath160 may lie on the enlargements @xmath161 of @xmath84 , @xmath162 , which are not shown here.),title="fig:",width=480 ]    [ pro ] the curve @xmath163 \to { \mathbb{r}}^2 $ ] is simple .
suppose that @xmath164 $ ] are such that @xmath165 , thus by we have @xmath166 applying the second coordinate of , we can write as @xmath167 which on combining with yields the identity @xmath168 on the other hand , by applying the first coordinate of , we can write instead as @xmath169 which on combining with yields the identity @xmath170 but as @xmath171 have lipschitz constant less than one , the identities , can only simultaneously hold if @xmath172 and @xmath173 , which by implies that @xmath174 , and so @xmath157 is simple as claimed .
geometrically , proposition [ pro ] can be interpreted as the assertion that if one rotates @xmath175 by @xmath176 clockwise around some point @xmath177 , then the resulting curve can intersect @xmath178 at most once ( in fact the two curves intersect exactly once ) .
when @xmath179 or @xmath180 , we have @xmath181 as the unique fixed point of . applying lemma [ conserv ] , we conclude the identity @xmath182 by and example [ integ ] we have @xmath183 from and a change of variables @xmath184 we also have @xmath185 note that @xmath186 may temporarily range outside of the interval @xmath9 $ ] ( or be temporarily decreasing instead of increasing ) as @xmath149 increases from @xmath187 to @xmath188 , but the net contributions of such excursions cancel out ( by the fundamental theorem of calculus , or equivalently because @xmath53-forms on a line are automatically exact ) .
similarly , from and the change of variables @xmath189 we have @xmath190 thus from we must have @xmath191 or equivalently @xmath192 where @xmath193 denotes the concatenation of @xmath157 with the reversal of the graph @xmath162 .
this is a closed curve , hence by example [ repo ] this curve can not be simple . since @xmath157 and @xmath162 are separately simple ( the former thanks to proposition [ pro ] ) , we conclude that there exists @xmath194 such that @xmath195 in particular , @xmath196 all lie in the set . since @xmath197 , we see from that @xmath147 and @xmath148 can not both vanish ; thus @xmath198 lie in @xmath67 , and the claim follows .
it is instructive to compare the above argument with the following homological argument , which requires additional regularity hypotheses on @xmath36 at the boundary points @xmath199 .
namely , suppose in addition to the hypotheses of theorem [ main ] that @xmath36 are differentiable at @xmath199 with @xmath200 and @xmath201 ; this corresponds the curve being `` locally monotone '' in the sense of @xcite or @xcite , even at the endpoints @xmath33 and @xmath34 .
a local analysis then reveals that the curve @xmath202 defined above lies in the interior of for @xmath149 close to @xmath187 , and in the exterior of for @xmath149 close to @xmath188 , and so it must cross at some point ; indeed , if all intersections were transversal , then it must cross this curve an odd number of times .
( actually , it is not difficult to use the lipschitz hypotheses to show that this curve can only cross @xmath162 and not @xmath84 . ) in contrast , the integral argument based on the conserved integral does not give any information on the parity of crossings ( indeed , if @xmath36 are not differentiable at the endpoints , one could conceivably have an infinite number of transverse crossings near the endpoints @xmath33 and @xmath34 ) , but do not require the functions @xmath36 to be so regular at the endpoints @xmath199 that a local analysis is possible there .
we now discuss periodic versions of the square peg problem , in which the plane @xmath4 is replaced by the cylinder @xmath203 for some fixed period @xmath204 .
there is an obvious projection map @xmath205 from the plane to the cylinder , which induces a projection @xmath206 ; we let @xmath207 and @xmath208 be the images of @xmath67 and @xmath123 under this latter projection .
more explicitly , we have @xmath209 and @xmath210 where we define the sum @xmath211 of an element @xmath212 and a real number @xmath213 in the obvious fashion . again
note that @xmath208 is a flat @xmath122-manifold in @xmath214 .
as before , a subset @xmath3 of @xmath215 is said to _ inscribe a square _ if @xmath69 intersects @xmath207 .
we give @xmath215 and @xmath214 the usual flat riemannian metric , which is then inherited by @xmath207 and @xmath208 .
we have a standard closed curve @xmath216 in @xmath215 defined by @xmath217 one can think of @xmath218 homologically as a @xmath53-cycle generating the first homology of @xmath215 .
any other closed curve @xmath219 will be homologous to @xmath218 if and only if it takes the form @xmath220 for some continuous lift @xmath221 of @xmath12 that obeys the equivariance property @xmath222 for all @xmath142 .
amongst all the curves @xmath12 in @xmath215 , we isolate the _ polygonal curves _ , in which @xmath12 is piecewise linear ( possibly after reparameterisation ) , that is to say @xmath12 is the concatenation of finitely many line segments in @xmath215 .
we now introduce the following variant of conjecture [ spp ] .
[ pspp ] let @xmath223 , and let @xmath224 be simple curves in @xmath215 homologous to @xmath218 .
suppose also that the sets @xmath225 and @xmath226 are disjoint .
then @xmath227 inscribes a square .
in contrast to conjecture [ spp ] , we do not know the answer to conjecture [ pspp ] even when @xmath228 are smooth or piecewise polygonal ( and we in fact suspect that resolving this case would soon resolve conjecture [ pspp ] in full generality , in analogy to corollary [ poly ] below ) . this is because the intersection numbers produced by homological arguments become _ even _ in the periodic setting , rather than _ odd_. of course , by rescaling we could normalise @xmath229 without loss of generality in conjecture [ pspp ] if desired , but we find it preferable to not enforce this normalisation .
we are able to relate conjecture [ spp ] to a special case of conjecture [ pspp ] .
to state this special case , we need a further definition :    let @xmath223 .
a closed subset @xmath3 of @xmath215 is said to _ inscribe infinitesimal squares _ if there exists a sequence of squares @xmath230 in @xmath207 converging to a degenerate square @xmath231 for some @xmath232 , such that @xmath233 as @xmath52 .
note that the property of infinitesimally inscribing squares is a purely local property : to show that a set @xmath3 does not infinitesimally inscribe squares , it suffices to show that for every @xmath234 , there is a set @xmath235 that agrees with @xmath3 in a neighbourhood of @xmath98 that does not infinitesimally inscribe squares .
we now give two examples of sets with the property of not inscribing infinitesimal squares .
[ inscribe ] let @xmath236 be @xmath22-lipschitz functions for some @xmath237 , such that the graphs @xmath238 for @xmath239 are all disjoint .
then the set @xmath240 does not inscribe infinitesimal squares .    by the local nature of infinitesimally inscribing squares
, it suffices to show that each @xmath238 does not infinitesimally inscribe squares .
suppose for contradiction that there was some @xmath239 and a sequence of squares with @xmath241 , @xmath242 , and all vertices staying within @xmath243 of @xmath238 .
as @xmath244 is @xmath22-lipschitz constant , this implies that the eight points @xmath245 , @xmath246 , @xmath247 , @xmath248 all lie in the double sector @xmath249 .
however , the arguments of these eight points ( viewed as complex numbers ) form a coset of the eighth roots of unity , while the double sector omits all the complex numbers of argument in @xmath250 $ ] if @xmath48 is large enough ; but these two facts are in contradiction .
if one rotates the standard unit square @xmath251 ^ 2 $ ] by @xmath252 , one obtains a square with the property that all its sides and diagonals have slope between @xmath253 and @xmath254 ; in particular , the vertices of this square can be traversed by the graph of a @xmath254-lipschitz function .
gluing together infinitely many rescaled copies of this function , it is not difficult to show that the condition @xmath255 in lemma [ inscribe ] can not be improved .
[ pat ] let @xmath256 be disjoint simple polygonal paths in @xmath4 ( either open or closed )
. then @xmath257 does not infinitesimally inscribe squares .
again it suffices to verify that a single @xmath258 does not inscribe squares .
suppose for contradiction that there was a sequence of squares with vertices with @xmath259 , @xmath242 , and all vertices staying within @xmath243 of @xmath258 .
we can translate so that @xmath260 .
the origin @xmath261 is either a vertex on the path @xmath258 or an interior point of an edge .
suppose first that @xmath261 is an interior point of an edge , which then lies on some line @xmath262 .
then for @xmath48 large enough , all four vertices stay within @xmath263 of this line . applying a suitable translation and rescaling , we can then obtain another family of squares of unit length , whose vertices are bounded and stay within @xmath264 of @xmath262 . using compactness to extract a limit , we obtain a unit square with all four vertices on @xmath262 , which is absurd .    now suppose that @xmath261 is a vertex of @xmath258 , which we may take to be the origin .
this origin is the meeting point of two edges of @xmath258 that lie on two distinct lines @xmath265 passing through the origin . if ( after passing through a subsequence ) all four vertices lie within @xmath263 of @xmath266 , then by rescaling and taking limits as before we obtain a unit square with all four vertices on @xmath266 , which is absurd ; similarly if all four vertices lie within @xmath263 of @xmath267 .
thus we must have at least one vertex within @xmath263 of @xmath266 and another within @xmath263 of @xmath267 , which forces the entire square to lie within @xmath268 of the origin . rescaling and taking limits again ,
we now obtain a unit square with all four vertices on the union @xmath269 of the two intersecting lines @xmath265 , which is again absurd regardless of what angle @xmath266 and @xmath267 make with each other .    for an example of a curve that does infinitesimally inscribe squares , one can consider any curve that has the local behaviour of a cusp such as @xmath270 .
we now isolate a special case of conjecture [ pspp ] :    [ pspps ] conjecture [ pspp ] is true under the additional hypothesis that @xmath227 does not inscribe infinitesimal squares .
the main result of this section is then    [ imp ] conjecture [ spp ] implies conjecture [ pspps ] . in particular ( by lemma [ pat ] ) , conjecture [ spp ] implies the special case of conjecture [ pspp ] when the curves @xmath228 are polygonal paths .    to put it another way , if one wished to disprove conjecture [ spp ] , it would suffice to produce a union @xmath271 of two disjoint periodic curves which did not inscribe any squares or infinitesimal squares .
proposition [ imp ] is then an immediate consequences of the following proposition :    [ period ] let @xmath3 be a compact subset of @xmath215 for some @xmath204 , and let @xmath272 be its lift to @xmath4 . for every large natural number @xmath48 ,
let @xmath273 denote the map in the complex plane , which `` gently pinches '' the periodic set to a bounded set in a manner that almost preserves squares .
one could also use other maps than @xmath274 here as long as they obeyed the above - mentioned qualitative features of approximate conformality and mapping periodic sets to bounded sets . ]
@xmath275 then at least one of the following three statements hold .    *
@xmath3 inscribes a square . *
@xmath3 inscribes infinitesimal squares . * for sufficiently large @xmath48
, @xmath276 does not inscribe a square .    indeed ,
to establish conjecture [ pspps ] assuming conjecture [ spp ] , one simply applies proposition [ period ] to the set @xmath277 ; the conclusion ( ii ) is ruled out by hypothesis and the conclusion ( iii ) is ruled out by conjecture [ spp ] , leaving ( i ) as the only possible option .
we will assume that ( iii ) fails and conclude that either ( i ) or ( ii ) holds .
by hypothesis , we can find a sequence of @xmath48 going to infinity , and a sequence of squares with vertices , such that each square is inscribed in @xmath278 .
the plan is to transform these squares into squares that either converge to a square inscribed in @xmath3 , or become an infinitesimal inscribed square in @xmath3 .
we first rule out a degenerate case when one of the points @xmath279 is one of the vertices .
suppose for instance that @xmath280 was equal to @xmath48 .
since @xmath3 is compact , we see that @xmath272 is contained in a strip of the form @xmath281 using the identity @xmath282 we conclude that @xmath278 is contained in the region @xmath283 if @xmath284 and the remaining three vertices of lie in @xmath278 , this forces @xmath285 to all have argument @xmath286 when viewed as complex numbers , which is absurd for @xmath48 large enough , since these arguments differ by @xmath287 or @xmath176 .
thus we have @xmath288 ( after passing to a subsequence of @xmath48 if necessary ) ; a similar argument precludes any of the vertices in being equal to @xmath289 or @xmath290 .
at least one of the four vertices in must have a @xmath291-coordinate of magnitude at least @xmath292 , since two of these @xmath291-coordinates differ by @xmath293 and the other two differ by @xmath294 .
applying , we conclude that the @xmath295-coordinate of that vertex lies at a distance at least @xmath296 from @xmath279 for some @xmath297 independent of @xmath48 ; by the triangle inequality , we conclude ( for @xmath48 large enough ) that all four vertices have this property .
in particular , we have @xmath298 observe that in the region , we may invert @xmath274 by the formula @xmath299 on , we can compute the partial derivatives @xmath300 and @xmath301 and so by taylor expansion we see that @xmath302 thus , if we set @xmath303 and @xmath304 , we see that @xmath305 , and the four vertices of the square @xmath306 all lie within @xmath307 of @xmath3 .    by passing to a subsequence , we may assume that @xmath308 converges to some pair @xmath309 , which may possibly be equal to @xmath261 . by compactness of @xmath3 , we may similarly assume that @xmath310 converges to a limit @xmath232 .
if @xmath311 , then on taking limits using the closed nature of @xmath3 we conclude that the non - degenerate square @xmath312 is inscribed in @xmath3 , giving ( i ) ; if instead @xmath313 then we obtain ( ii ) .
in contrast to the smooth cases of conjecture [ spp ] , there are no homological obstructions to establishing a counterexample to conjecture [ pspp ] . for instance , when the lipschitz constants of @xmath36 are strictly less than one , the arguments of the previous section can be used to produce a quadruplet @xmath72 of rectifiable curves @xmath314 traversing squares , with @xmath154 taking values in @xmath315 , @xmath315 , @xmath316 respectively , and all four curves homologous to the standard @xmath53-cycle @xmath218 .
in particular , @xmath157 would ( assuming sufficient transversality and regularity ) intersect the graphs @xmath315 and @xmath316 an even number of times per unit period , rather than an odd number of times .
this is of course consistent with the curve not intersecting these graphs at all .
the use of an infinite oscillation to switch the parity of intersection from odd to even is reminsicent of the `` eilenberg - mazur swindle '' ( see e.g. @xcite ) .
in conjecture [ pspp ] , the four vertices of the square could be distributed arbitrarily among the two graphs @xmath315 and @xmath316 .
it seems to be more natural to force each vertex to lie in just one of the two graphs . to formulate this
more precisely , we introduce a further definition :    [ joint - def ] let @xmath204 .
let @xmath317 be four sets in @xmath215 ( possibly overlapping ) .
we say that the quadruplet @xmath318 _ jointly inscribes a square _ if @xmath319 intersects @xmath208 , or equivalently if there exist @xmath212 and @xmath320 such that @xmath321 see figure [ joint ] .
[ t ]   jointly inscribing a square .
the order ( up to cyclic permutation ) is important ; for instance , in the given picture , the quadruple @xmath322 does _ not _ jointly inscribe a square.,title="fig:",width=480 ]    note in definition [ joint - def ] that we now permit the inscribed square to be degenerate .
conjecture [ pspp ] would then follow from    [ qpspp ] let @xmath204 , and let @xmath224 be simple closed curves homologous to @xmath218 . then the quadruplet @xmath323 jointly inscribes a square .    indeed ,
if @xmath228 are as in conjecture [ pspp ] , we can apply conjecture [ qpspp ] to obtain @xmath212 and @xmath320 with @xmath324 and @xmath325 . as @xmath225 and @xmath226
are assumed disjoint in conjecture [ pspp ] , we have @xmath311 , and conjecture [ pspp ] follows
.    we can reverse this implication in some cases :    conjecture [ pspp ] implies conjecture [ qpspp ] in the special case that @xmath326 does not inscribe squares for @xmath327 .    note that the hypothesis that @xmath326 does not inscribe squares is satisfied in many cases ; for instance , by modifying the proof of lemma [ inscribe ] we see that this is the the case if @xmath328 is the graph of a @xmath22-lipschitz function for some @xmath255 .
let @xmath228 be as in conjecture [ qpspp ] , and assume that @xmath225 and @xmath226 do not separately inscribe squares .
let @xmath329 be a sufficiently large natural number , then @xmath225 and @xmath330 will be disjoint . applying conjecture [ pspp ] , we may find a square @xmath312 inscribed in @xmath331 .
in particular we have @xmath332 \cup [ ml - c , ml+c]\ ] ] for some @xmath23 independent of @xmath329 .
if @xmath329 is large enough , this forces the quadruple @xmath333 to be of the form @xmath334 , the form @xmath335 , or some cyclic permutation of @xmath336 . in the first case
, we have a square inscribed in @xmath225 , and in the second case we have ( after translation by @xmath337 ) a square inscribed by @xmath226 ; both these cases are ruled out by hypothesis .
thus , after cyclic permutation , we may assume that @xmath338 which implies that the ( possibly degenerate ) square @xmath339 is jointly inscribed by @xmath340 , giving conjecture [ qpspp ] in this case .    because the squares in definition [ joint - def ] are now permitted to be degenerate , conjecture [ qpspp ] enjoys good convergence properties with respect to limits :    [ lim ] let @xmath223 .
let @xmath341 be sequences of simple closed curves which converge uniformly to simple closed curves @xmath224 respectively as @xmath52 .
if each of the quadruples @xmath342 jointly inscribe a square , then so does @xmath343    by hypothesis , one can find a sequence @xmath344 such that @xmath345 for all @xmath48 .
as @xmath346 converge uniformly to @xmath347 , the @xmath348 are bounded and thus have at least one limit point @xmath98 , which must lie in both @xmath207 and @xmath349 , giving the claim .    as one application of this proposition
, we have    [ poly ] in order to prove conjecture [ qpspp ] , it suffices to do so in the case that the simple closed curves @xmath224 are polygonal paths .
this can be compared with the situation with conjecture [ spp ] , which is known to be true for polygonal paths , but for which one can not take limits to conclude the general case , due to the possibility of the inscribed squares degenerating to zero .    by proposition [ lim ]
, it suffices to show that any simple closed curve @xmath219 can be uniformly approximated to any desired accuracy @xmath350 for @xmath28 by a simple polygonal closed curve @xmath351 ( note from a winding number argument that if @xmath12 is homologous to @xmath218 , then @xmath352 will be also if @xmath353 is small enough ) . by uniform continuity , there exists a natural number @xmath354 such that @xmath355 whenever @xmath356 , where @xmath357 denote the riemannian distance functions on @xmath358 respectively ; as @xmath12 is simple and continuous , a compactness argument shows that there also exists @xmath359 such that @xmath360 whenever @xmath361 .
finally , by uniform continuity again , there exists a natural number @xmath362 such that @xmath363 whenever @xmath364 .
let @xmath365 be the polygonal path such that @xmath366 for every @xmath367 , with @xmath368 linear on each interval @xmath369 $ ] . from the triangle inequality
we see that @xmath370 for all @xmath142 .
unfortunately , @xmath368 need not be simple .
however , if @xmath371 are such that @xmath372 , then by the triangle inequality we have @xmath373 , and hence @xmath356 . using a greedy algorithm to iteratively remove loops from the polygonal path @xmath368 ( with each removal decreasing the number of edges remaining in @xmath368 in a unit period ) , we may thus find a finite family @xmath374 of disjoint closed intervals in @xmath10 , each of length at most @xmath375 , such that paths @xmath376 is closed for each @xmath377 ( i.e. @xmath368 evaluates to the same point at the left and right endpoints of @xmath378 ) , and such that @xmath368 becomes simple once each of the intervals @xmath378 is contracted to a point .
note also that all of the loops of @xmath368 removed by this process have diameter @xmath350 .
if one then chooses a sufficiently small neighbourhood interval @xmath379 for each @xmath378 , and defines @xmath352 to equal @xmath368 outside @xmath380 , and linear on each of the @xmath379 , then we see that @xmath352 is a simple @xmath381-equivariant polygonal path that lies within @xmath350 of @xmath12 , as required .
we in fact believe the following stronger claim than conjecture [ qpspp ] to hold :    [ area - ineq ] let @xmath204 , and let @xmath382 be simple closed polygonal paths homologous to @xmath218 .
if @xmath383 does not jointly inscribe a square , then @xmath384    note that the @xmath53-form @xmath82 is well defined on @xmath215 and @xmath385 can be viewed as @xmath53-cycles , so the integrals in make sense as integration of differential forms ( but one could also use definition [ area - def ] with the obvious modifications if desired ) .
one can also simplify the left - hand side of as @xmath386 where @xmath387 is interpreted as a @xmath53-cycle .
viewed contrapositively , conjecture [ area - ineq ] then asserts that @xmath383 must inscribe a square whenever the integral vanishes .
clearly , conjecture [ qpspp ] follows from conjecture [ area - ineq ] by first using corollary [ poly ] to reduce to the case where @xmath347 are polygonal paths , and then applying conjecture [ area - ineq ] with @xmath388 replaced by @xmath389 .
conjecture [ area - ineq ] is somewhat strong compared with the other conjectures in this paper .
nevertheless , we can repeat the arguments in section [ pos - sec ] to obtain some evidence for it :    [ ook ] conjecture [ area - ineq ] holds when @xmath390 and @xmath391 for some @xmath27-lipschitz functions @xmath392 for some @xmath28 .
of course , by cyclic permutation one can replace the role of @xmath393 here by @xmath394 .
write @xmath395 . for any @xmath396 ,
the map @xmath397 is a contraction on @xmath4 with constant at most @xmath144 , hence by the contraction mapping theorem there exist unique continuous functions @xmath398 such that @xmath399 for all @xmath396 . as @xmath400 are polygonal paths , @xmath401 are piecewise linear functions , which implies that @xmath402 are also piecewise linear .
we then set @xmath314 to be the polygonal paths @xmath403 clearly @xmath72 traverses squares .
applying lemma [ conserv ] , we conclude that @xmath404 since @xmath405 and @xmath406 are homologous to @xmath407 and @xmath408 respectively , and all @xmath53-forms on curves such as @xmath409 or @xmath410 are automatically closed , we have @xmath411 for @xmath412 . thus it suffices to show that @xmath413 the argument in proposition [ pro ] shows that @xmath157 is simple , and the graph @xmath414 is of course also simple .
as we are assuming @xmath383 to not jointly inscribe squares , @xmath415 and @xmath416 must stay disjoint .
the curve @xmath157 is homotopic to @xmath417 and thus also homologous to @xmath218 .
applying the jordan curve theorem , we see that the closed polygonal paths @xmath418 enclose some non - empty polygonal region @xmath95 in @xmath215 . by stokes theorem ,
we conclude that the left - hand side of is equal to some sign times the lebesgue measure of @xmath95 , giving as required .
we also have an analogue of corollary [ poly ] :    [ lim2 ] let @xmath223 .
suppose that @xmath419 are simple closed polygonal paths which converge uniformly to simple closed polygonal paths @xmath382 respectively .
if conjecture [ area - ineq ] holds for each of the quadruples @xmath420 for all sufficiently small @xmath421 and all @xmath422 , then it also holds for @xmath423
.    this proposition will be useful for placing the polygonal paths @xmath424 in `` general position '' .
we can of course assume that @xmath383 does not jointly inscribe a square , as the claim is trivial otherwise .
by proposition [ lim ] applied in the contrapositive , we see that there exists an @xmath28 and @xmath425 such that @xmath426 does not jointly inscribe squares for any @xmath427 and @xmath428 . applying the hypothesis ( and shrinking @xmath353 if necessary )
, we conclude that @xmath429 for @xmath428 and @xmath430 , and hence @xmath431 taking limits as @xmath52 we conclude that @xmath432 giving the claim .    in the remainder of this section ,
we discuss how to interpret the area inequality conjecture ( conjecture [ area - ineq ] ) using the language of homology .
let @xmath223 , and let @xmath382 be simple closed polygonal paths .
we say that @xmath433 are in _ general position _ if the following hold for any distinct @xmath434 :    * for any edge @xmath435 of @xmath328 and any edge @xmath21 of @xmath436 , the angle between the direction of @xmath435 and the direction of @xmath21 is not an integer multiple of @xmath287 . * for any vertices @xmath437 of @xmath438 respectively ,
there does not exist a square with @xmath437 as three of its four vertices .
it is easy to see that one can perturb @xmath385 by an arbitrarily small amount to be in general position ( e.g. a random perturbation will almost surely work ) ; furthermore one can ensure that this general position will persist even after shifting @xmath408 vertically by an arbitrary amount .
hence by proposition [ lim2 ] , to prove conjecture [ area - ineq ] it suffices to do so under the hypothesis of general position .
the cartesian product @xmath439 can be viewed as a ( polyhedral ) @xmath440-cycle in @xmath214 ; by the hypotheses of general position , this cycle intersects the flat @xmath122-manifold @xmath208 transversely ( and in a compact set ) , giving rise to a @xmath53-cycle @xmath441 in @xmath208 . for @xmath442 ,
let @xmath443 be the projection map to the @xmath444 coordinate . because the @xmath440-cycle @xmath439 is homologous to the @xmath440-cycle @xmath445 , we see on restricting to @xmath208 that the @xmath53-cycle @xmath441 is homologous to the @xmath53-cycle @xmath446 ( with the usual orientation ) , and hence the pushforwards @xmath447 ( which are polygonal @xmath53-cycles on @xmath215 ) are homologous to @xmath218 and thus to @xmath436 for @xmath442 . for @xmath448
, @xmath449 takes values in the curve @xmath450 ; as @xmath82 is closed on that curve , we thus have @xmath451 for @xmath448 . on the other hand , from remark [ homog ] ( adapted to the cylinder @xmath215 in the obvious fashion ) , the @xmath53-form @xmath452 is exact on @xmath208 , and hence @xmath453 putting all this together , we see that the claim can be rewritten as @xmath454 meanwhile , the hypothesis that @xmath455 do not jointly inscribe squares is equivalent to the assertion that the @xmath53-cycles @xmath157 and @xmath456 are disjoint .    the @xmath122-manifold @xmath208 is homeomorphic to @xmath457 , and so its first homology is generated by @xmath458 .
one can decompose the @xmath53-cycle @xmath441 as an integer linear combination of finitely many closed polygonal curves in @xmath208 ( which are allowed to intersect each other ) ; as @xmath441 is homologous to @xmath458 , one of these curves , call it @xmath459 , must be homologous to @xmath460 for some nonzero integer @xmath329 . by multiplying the period @xmath381 by @xmath461 , we may assume without loss of generality that @xmath462 , and by reversing the orientation of @xmath463 if necessary we may then take @xmath464
. thus @xmath463 is homologous to @xmath458 and contained ( as a set ) in @xmath441 , and @xmath465 is a @xmath53-boundary , thus @xmath466 for some @xmath467-cycle @xmath468 in @xmath208 .
we can then define curves @xmath469 for @xmath442 by @xmath470 ; these curves are the analogues of the curves @xmath471 from section [ pos - sec ] .
as the @xmath53-form @xmath82 is closed on the curves @xmath450 , we have @xmath472 for @xmath448 , while from the exact nature of gives @xmath473 and hence @xmath474 hence one can also express as @xmath475 the @xmath53-cycle @xmath476 is homologous to @xmath477 and thus can be expressed as a @xmath53-boundary @xmath478 for some @xmath467-cycle @xmath95 in @xmath215 . by stokes theorem
, can now be expressed as @xmath479 in the case when the @xmath480 were graphs of lipschitz functions of constant less than @xmath53 , the closed path @xmath481 was necessarily simple ; if @xmath482 did not jointly inscribe squares , then @xmath483 avoided @xmath456 , and so by the jordan curve theorem the @xmath467-cycle @xmath95 had a definite sign which yielded and thus , , .
unfortunately , in the general case it is possible for the @xmath467-cycle @xmath95 to contain both positive and negative components , even after stripping out the @xmath53-boundaries @xmath56 from @xmath441 and working just with @xmath484 .
however , from working with numerous examples , it appears to the author that there is always an imbalance between the positive and negative components of @xmath95 that leads to the inequality and hence to conjecture [ area - ineq ] .
unfortunately , the author was unable to locate an argument to establish this claim rigorously
.    the jordan curve theorem does imply that the curve @xmath414 partitions the cylinder @xmath215 into two connected components , the region `` above '' @xmath414 ( which contains all the points in @xmath215 with sufficiently large positive @xmath291 coordinate ) and the region `` below '' @xmath414 ( which contains all the points in @xmath215 with sufficiently large negative @xmath291 coordinate ) .
suppose that @xmath485 does not jointly inscribe a square , so that @xmath157 avoids @xmath456 .
if we let @xmath486 denote the connected component of @xmath157 ( viewed as a subset of @xmath215 ) that contains ( the image of ) @xmath481 , then @xmath486 must then either lie entirely in the region above @xmath414 or the region below @xmath414 .
we conjecture that this determines the sign in ( or , , ) .
namely , if @xmath486 is in the region above @xmath414 , we conjecture that left - hand side of ( or , , ) must be strictly positive , and if @xmath486 is in the region below @xmath414 , then these left - hand sides must be strictly negative .
an equivalent statement of this is that if @xmath487 are simple closed polygonal paths that traverse the upper and lower boundary of @xmath486 respectively ( by which we mean the portions of the boundary of @xmath486 that can be connected by a path to points in @xmath215 with arbitrarily large positive or negative @xmath291 coordinate respectively ) , then we have the inequalities @xmath488 this claim , which implies conjecture [ area - ineq ] , is an assertion about the relative sizes of the `` holes '' in @xmath486 ; see figure [ kfig ] .
[ t ]   ( drawn as a solid line ) , together with some additional @xmath53-boundaries @xmath489 ( dashed lines ) .
here , @xmath486 is @xmath481 together with the cycle intersecting @xmath481
. the paths @xmath490 and @xmath491 are drawn ( somewhat inaccurately ) as dotted lines .
the area inequalities can then be written as @xmath492 , where @xmath88 denotes the lebesgue measure of the region @xmath89 in the figure , and similarly for @xmath493 .
each @xmath53-boundary gives a zero contribution to the area under @xmath157 , so one also has @xmath494 . in the depicted scenario ,
the first area inequality is automatically true , but the second one is not necessarily so.,title="fig:",width=480 ]
we now consider the special case of conjecture [ area ] when the polygonal path @xmath417 is the reference cycle @xmath218 :    [ area-1d ] conjecture [ area ] holds when @xmath495 .    in this case , conjecture [ area - ineq ] turns out to collapse from a two - dimensional problem to a more tractable one - dimensional one .
suppose that @xmath496 does not jointly inscribing a square , with @xmath495 .
that is to say , there does not exist @xmath212 and @xmath320 with @xmath497 the first condition @xmath498 simply asserts that @xmath499 .
if one now defines the linearly transformed closed polygonal curves @xmath500 by the formulae @xmath501 where @xmath502 are the components of @xmath328 for @xmath117 , then @xmath503 remain simple , and ( on setting @xmath504 ) we see that the property of @xmath496 not jointly inscribing squares is equivalent to the non - existence of real numbers @xmath505 such that @xmath506 also , from the change of variables we see that @xmath507 for @xmath508 .
relabeling @xmath503 as @xmath509 , and writing @xmath510 as @xmath2 respectively , we thus see that conjecture [ area-1d ] is equivalent to the following more symmetric version :    [ sai ] let @xmath204 , and let @xmath511 be simple closed polygonal paths homologous to @xmath218 , such that there does not exist points @xmath512 with @xmath513 and @xmath514
. then one has @xmath515    in this section we show that conjecture [ sai ] is equivalent to an almost purely combinatorial statement .
to formulate it , we need some definitions . recall that the _ signum function _ @xmath516
\to \{-1,+1\}$ ] on the extended real line @xmath517 $ ] is defined to equal @xmath518 of @xmath519 , @xmath126 on @xmath126 , and @xmath520 on @xmath521 $ ] .
[ ncs - def ] let @xmath522 , and for each @xmath523 , let @xmath524 $ ] be extended reals .
we say that the pairs @xmath525 for @xmath526 have _ non - crossing sums _ if the following axioms are obeyed :    * either all of the @xmath527 avoid @xmath528 , or they all avoid @xmath529 .
* for any @xmath530 , the sum @xmath531 ( which is well defined by ( i ) ) is non - zero .
* one has the cancellation @xmath532 or equivalently ( by ( ii ) ) @xmath533 that is to say , there are as many positive sums @xmath534 with the index sum @xmath535 even as there are positive sums @xmath534 with @xmath535 odd ( and similarly with `` positive '' replaced by `` negative '' ) .    otherwise , we say that the pairs @xmath536 for @xmath526 have _ crossing sums_.    [ inv ] the notion of non - crossing sums is invariant with respect to interchanges between @xmath537 and @xmath538 for @xmath526 , or between the pairs @xmath539 for @xmath526 , or by replacing each of the @xmath540 with their negations @xmath541 .
one could define this concept for other values of @xmath329 than @xmath522 , but these are the only two values of @xmath329 we will need here .
[ ncs ] let @xmath542 be distinct elements of @xmath543 .
then the pairs @xmath544 and @xmath545 have non - crossing sums if and only if the number of pairs @xmath546 with @xmath547 is even , thus for instance @xmath544 and @xmath545 will have non - crossing sums if @xmath548 or @xmath549 but not if @xmath550 in particular , if @xmath551 , @xmath552 and @xmath545 have non - crossing sums if and only if @xmath553 lies outside of @xmath554 $ ] .    in a more topological form : the pairs @xmath544 and @xmath545 have non - crossing sums iff it is possible to connect @xmath555 and @xmath556 ( resp . @xmath557 and @xmath558 ) by a curve @xmath559 ( resp .
@xmath560 ) in the ( one - point compactification of the ) right half - plane @xmath561 , in such a manner that @xmath559 and @xmath560 do not cross .    the pairs @xmath562 have non - crossing sums because there are as many positive sums @xmath563 with an even index sum as there are positive sums @xmath564 , @xmath565 with an odd index sum . on the other hand ,
the pairs @xmath566 have crossing sums because there are fewer positive sums @xmath567 with an even index sum than positive sums @xmath568 with an odd index sum .
as we shall see later , the notion of @xmath536 for @xmath569 having non - crossing sums also has a topological interpretation ( assuming axiom ( i ) ) , namely that there are curves @xmath59 in the one - point compactification of @xmath561 connecting @xmath570 to @xmath571 for @xmath569 such that there do not exist @xmath513 with @xmath514 and @xmath572 in @xmath59 for @xmath569 .
this may help explain the terminology `` non - crossing sums '' .
[ diff ] suppose that @xmath573 and @xmath574 are real numbers such that @xmath575 have non - crossing sums .
the @xmath576 sums formed from this triplet may be almost completely ordered as @xmath577 ( the reader may wish to first see this in the case @xmath578 ) .
the sums @xmath579 have even index sum , and the other four sums have odd index sum .
therefore , @xmath580 has non - crossing sums precisely when the origin @xmath126 falls in one of the five intervals @xmath581 ( with the third interval deleted if @xmath582 ) .
in particular , we see that pair @xmath583 with the smallest difference has no influence on the sign of the triple sums , that is to say @xmath584 for @xmath585 and @xmath586 .
conversely , if this pair has no influence on the sign of triple sums then the pairs @xmath575 have non - crossing sums .
this lack of influence by the pair with the smallest difference can thus be used as an alternate definition of non - crossing sums in the @xmath587 case ( and it also works in the @xmath588 case ) .
one corollary of this analysis is that if @xmath589 has no influence on the sign of the triple sums , then neither does @xmath583 ; similarly , if @xmath590 has no influence on the non - crossing sums , then neither does @xmath589 .
we are now ready to give the combinatorial formulation of conjecture [ sai ] .
[ adf ] let @xmath591 be odd natural numbers , and for each @xmath569 , let @xmath592 be distinct real numbers . adopt the convention that @xmath593 . assume the following axioms :    * ( non - crossing ) for any @xmath594 and @xmath595 with @xmath596 the same parity , the pairs @xmath597 and @xmath598 have non - crossing sums .
* ( non - crossing sums ) for any @xmath599 , @xmath600 , @xmath601 with @xmath602 the same parity , the pairs @xmath603 , @xmath604 , @xmath605 have non - crossing sums .
then one has the inequality @xmath606    the main result of this section is then    [ aqv ] conjecture [ sai ] ( and hence conjecture [ area-1d ] ) is equivalent to conjecture [ adf ] .
let us first assume conjecture [ sai ] and see how it implies conjecture [ adf ] .
let @xmath591 and @xmath540 obey the assumptions of conjecture [ adf ] , but suppose for contradiction that failed .
the plan is then to use the quantities @xmath540 to build simple closed polygonal paths @xmath607 for some @xmath204 to which conjecture [ sai ] may be applied .    by perturbing one of the @xmath540 slightly ( noting that all the hypotheses on the @xmath540 are open conditions )
we may assume that the quantity @xmath608 is strictly positive .
similarly , we may assume that the differences @xmath609 with @xmath569 and @xmath610 are all distinct .
we will need a strictly monotone decreasing function @xmath611 $ ] ; the exact choice of @xmath612 is unimportant , but for concreteness one can take for instance @xmath613 .
let @xmath223 be a sufficiently large quantity to be chosen later .
we will also need a certain large and negative quantity @xmath614 ( depending on @xmath615 , and the @xmath540 ) whose precise value will be specified later .    by applying conjecture [ adf](ii ) with @xmath616 , we see that @xmath617 have non - crossing sums , which implies that @xmath618 similarly if we apply conjecture [ adf](ii ) with @xmath619 , @xmath620 , @xmath621 , we see that @xmath622 as a consequence , we may find piecewise linear continuous functions @xmath623 \to { \mathbb{r}}$ ] such that @xmath624 for @xmath569 , and such that @xmath625 for all @xmath626 .
for instance , we can set @xmath627 to be the linear functions given by the boundary conditions .
but we can also subtract an arbitrary positive multiple of @xmath628 from any of @xmath627 and obey the above requirements .
in particular , there is a quantity @xmath629 ( independent of @xmath381 ) such that if the quantity @xmath614 mentioned previously is less than or equal to @xmath629 , one can find @xmath627 solving the above conditions such that @xmath630 henceforth we fix @xmath627 with these properties .
let @xmath569 .
we construct some polygonal paths @xmath631 in @xmath215 by the following recipes :    [ recipe ]     * @xmath632 is the rightward horizontal line segment from @xmath633 to @xmath570 , projected to @xmath215 . * for any odd @xmath610 , @xmath634 is the piecewise linear path traversing the vertices @xmath635 in that order ( that is to say , the concatenation of a rightward horizontal line segment , a vertical line segment , and a leftward horizontal line segment , if @xmath381 is large enough ) , and then projected to @xmath215 . * for any even @xmath636 , @xmath637 is the piecewise linear path traversing the vertices @xmath638 in that order ( that is to say , the concatenation of a leftward horizontal line segment , a vertical line segment , and a rightward horizontal line segment , if @xmath381 is large enough ) , and then projected to @xmath215 .
* @xmath639 is the rightward horizontal line segment from @xmath640 to @xmath641 , projected to @xmath215 .
* @xmath642 is the graph @xmath643 traversed from left to right and then projected to @xmath215 , thus it begins at @xmath644 and ends at @xmath645 .
see figure [ jam ] .
[ t ] , in the case @xmath646 .
notice the interlacing between the @xmath647 with @xmath98 odd and the @xmath647 with @xmath98 even , and the alternating orientations of @xmath59 at these locations.,title="fig:",width=480 ]    clearly , one can concatenate the paths @xmath631 to form a closed polygonal path @xmath59 in @xmath215 ( which one can parameterise by @xmath10 after a suitable rescaling ) . using the convex fundamental domain @xmath648 \times { \mathbb{r}}$ ] of @xmath215
, we see that @xmath59 is homotopic in this domain to the horizontal line segment from @xmath649 to @xmath650 , and hence @xmath59 is homologous in @xmath215 to @xmath218 .    using conjecture [ adf](i ) ,
we can show    suppose @xmath381 is sufficiently large .
then for any @xmath651 , the path @xmath59 is simple .
each of the components @xmath631 of @xmath59 are separately simple , and the endpoints are all distinct except for the endpoints of adjacent paths , so it suffices to show that no two of these components meet in the interior .
the interior of the path @xmath642 lies in the strip @xmath652 ( viewed as a subset of @xmath215 ) , while the interior of the other paths lie in either @xmath653 or @xmath654 , again only touching the boundary at endpoints .
so it suffices to show that there are no crossings in @xmath653 or @xmath654 .
we just verify the claim for @xmath653 , as the case of @xmath654 is completely analogous .
the only path components here are @xmath632 and @xmath634 for @xmath636 even .
to check that @xmath632 and @xmath634 do not cross , it suffices from definitions [ recipe](i ) , ( iii ) to show that @xmath537 does not lie between @xmath655 and @xmath656 .
but from conjecture [ adf](i ) we see that @xmath657 and @xmath658 have non - crossing sums , which gives the claim by example [ ncs ] .
now we need to check that @xmath634 and @xmath659 do not cross when @xmath660 are even and distinct . by conjecture [ adf](i ) , the pairs @xmath597 and @xmath598 have non - crossing sums ; thus the interval spanned by @xmath661 either is disjoint from , contains , or is contained in the interval spanned by @xmath662 . in the former case , the paths
@xmath634 and @xmath659 are clearly disjoint because from definition [ recipe](iithe @xmath291 coordinate of any point on the first path lies in the interval spanned by @xmath662 , and the @xmath291 coordinate on any point on the second path lies in the interval spanned by @xmath663 . by symmetry
, the only remaining case to check is when the interval spanned by @xmath662 is contained in the interval spanned by @xmath663 .
but in this case , we have @xmath664 , so by definition [ recipe](iii ) and the monotone decreasing nature of @xmath612 , the vertical segment of the curve @xmath634 lies to the right of that of @xmath665 . from this
we see that the two curves are disjoint .
this concludes the demonstration of simplicity in @xmath666 ; the case of @xmath667 is similar .    in a similar fashion , we can use conjecture [ adf](ii ) , we can show    there does not exist @xmath212 and @xmath668 with @xmath514 such that @xmath669 for all @xmath569 .
suppose for contradiction that @xmath670 exist with the stated properties .
first suppose that @xmath295 lies in @xmath671 $ ] ( projected to @xmath10 ) .
then from definition [ recipe](v ) we have @xmath672 for @xmath569 , but then from we can not have @xmath673 , a contradiction .
we now treat the case when @xmath295 lies in @xmath674 $ ] ( projected to @xmath10 ) ; the remaining case when @xmath295 lies in @xmath675 $ ] is similar and will be omitted . by definition
[ recipe ] , we see that each of the @xmath572 lies either on @xmath639 or on @xmath676 for some odd @xmath677 .
suppose first that each of the @xmath572 lie on @xmath678 . by hypothesis ,
the quantities @xmath679 for @xmath569 are distinct ; by cyclic permutation we may assume that @xmath680 is the smallest of these quantities , or equivalently that @xmath681 is minimised at @xmath682 . by definition [ recipe](ii )
, the @xmath295 coordinate of @xmath683 does not exceed @xmath680 , which implies that @xmath684 and hence by further application of definition [ recipe](ii ) we have @xmath685 and @xmath686 for some @xmath687 and @xmath688 ; furthermore @xmath689 lies between @xmath690 and @xmath691 inclusive . since @xmath673
, this implies that the sums @xmath692 and @xmath693 do not have the same sign . because @xmath682 minimises @xmath681 , we conclude ( from example [ diff ] ) that the pairs @xmath694 , @xmath695 , @xmath696 do not have non - crossing sums , contradicting conjecture [ adf](ii ) .
the case when one or more of the @xmath572 lies on @xmath639 is treated similarly , with @xmath697 now playing the role of @xmath698 ( and recalling the convention @xmath699 .
this concludes the treatment of the case @xmath700 $ ] , and the case @xmath701 $ ] is similar .    from the previous two lemmas and conjecture [ sai ] ,
we conclude that @xmath702 we work in the fundamental domain @xmath703 \times { \mathbb{r}}$ ] of @xmath215 . on the strip @xmath671 \times { \mathbb{r}}$ ] ,
the contribution to @xmath704 is @xmath705 thanks to definition [ recipe](v ) and . on the strip @xmath706 \times { \mathbb{r}}$ ] ,
the curve @xmath59 for @xmath569 is simply the union of the line segments @xmath706 \times \{y_{i , p}\}$ ] for @xmath707 ( traversed from left to right for odd @xmath98 , and right to left for even @xmath98 ) , so the contribution to @xmath704 here is @xmath708 thanks to . finally , the contribution of the remaining strips @xmath709 \times { \mathbb{r}}\cup [ \frac{l}{2}-2 , -\frac{l}{2}-1 ] \times { \mathbb{r}}$ ] is some quantity @xmath710 independent of @xmath381 and @xmath711 , as can be seen by translating these strips by @xmath712 .
the inequality thus becomes @xmath713 but as @xmath714 is positive , we can make this quantity vanish by choosing @xmath381 large enough and then setting @xmath715 ; note for @xmath381 large enough that this value of @xmath614 will be less than the threshold @xmath629 needed so that one can arrange the function @xmath627 to obey .
this yields the desired contradiction .
now we assume conjecture [ adf ] and see how it implies conjecture [ sai ] .    by applying ( a slight variant of ) proposition [ lim2 ] ,
we see that to prove conjecture [ sai ] , it suffices to do so under the additional nondegeneracy hypothesis that all the vertices of @xmath509 have distinct @xmath295-coordinates ( in particular , these curves do not contain any vertical edges ) .
write @xmath716 for some piecewise linear @xmath717 and @xmath718 . as @xmath59 is homologous to @xmath218
, we can find a continuous lift @xmath719 of @xmath720 with @xmath721 for all @xmath142 ; we also let @xmath722 be the periodic lift of @xmath723 .
as @xmath724 is periodic and continuous , it is bounded ; by multiplying the period @xmath381 by a large integer if necessary , we may assume that latexmath:[\[\label{x - stable }    @xmath142 and @xmath569 .
using the nondegeneracy hypothesis , we see that for any @xmath569 and any @xmath726 , the fibre @xmath727 consists of a finite number @xmath728 of real numbers , where the function @xmath697 is odd , periodic in @xmath381 and locally constant for all @xmath295 outside of finitely many residue classes mod @xmath381 .
we can enumerate these real numbers as @xmath729 where @xmath730 are those real numbers @xmath149 with @xmath731 , arranged in increasing order , thus @xmath732 for all @xmath726 , @xmath569 , and @xmath733 . for @xmath295 outside of finitely
many residue classes mod @xmath381 , the functions @xmath734 are locally linear , and have the @xmath381-equivariance property @xmath735 for all @xmath726 , @xmath569 , and @xmath733 .
also , from the nondegeneracy hypothesis we see from the intermediate value theorem that outside of finitely many residue classes mod @xmath381 , @xmath734 is increasing for odd @xmath736 and decreasing for even @xmath736 .
the analogue of the set @xmath737 in this context is the flat @xmath738-dimensional submanifold @xmath739 of @xmath740 defined by @xmath741 the hypotheses of conjecture [ sai ] then assert that the @xmath738-cycle @xmath742 in @xmath740 does not intersect @xmath739 .
we view @xmath739 as a submanifold of the @xmath122-manifold @xmath743 defined by @xmath744 as we assumed the vertices of @xmath745 to have distinct @xmath295 coordinates , the @xmath122-cycle @xmath742 intersects @xmath40 transversely in some @xmath53-cycle @xmath746 . as @xmath745
are homologous to @xmath218 , @xmath746 is homologous to the @xmath53-cycle @xmath747 with the standard orientation .
now we argue as in the previous section .
the @xmath122-manifold @xmath40 is homeomorphic to @xmath457 and thus has first homology generated by @xmath458 . by the greedy algorithm
can express the @xmath53-cycle @xmath746 as a finite integer linear combination of closed paths contained ( as a set ) in @xmath746 , each of which is either simple or a @xmath53-boundary ; one of these , say @xmath748 , is homologous to @xmath460 for some non - zero integer @xmath329 , and is thus simple . by multiplying the period @xmath381 by @xmath461
we may assume that @xmath462 , and by reversing the orientation of @xmath749 we can then assume that @xmath464 , thus @xmath749 is homologous to @xmath458 and is contained ( as a set ) in @xmath746 ; in particular , it avoids @xmath739 . if we write @xmath750 then @xmath751 , @xmath752 are piecewise linear continuous functions with @xmath753 homologous to the identity function ( in the sense that @xmath753 lifts to a function @xmath754 with @xmath755 for all @xmath142 ) , with the properties that @xmath756 and @xmath757 for all @xmath396 and @xmath569 .
[ dyn ] one can view the functions @xmath758 from a dynamical perspective by thinking of @xmath759 as the trajectory of a particle @xmath760 that is constrained to lie in @xmath761 , and with all three particles @xmath762 constrained to lie on a vertical line .
we can also constrain the particles @xmath762 to have a constant horizontal speed ; the particles move in one horizontal direction until one of the particles @xmath760 can not move any further due to it hitting a vertex @xmath763 of @xmath59 with both edges adjacent to @xmath763 lying on the same side of the vertical line containing @xmath763 .
whenever such a collision occurs , the horizontal velocity reverses sign , @xmath760 moves from one edge of @xmath59 to the next , and the other two particles reverse themselves and retrace their steps ; see figure [ collide ] .
note from our hypotheses that only one collision occurs at a time .
because the paths @xmath745 have only finitely many edges , these trajectories must be periodic ; the above homological considerations ensure that at least one of these trajectories is homologous to @xmath458 ( possibly after enlarging the period @xmath381 ) .
[ t ] .,title="fig:",width=336 ]    recall that @xmath751 lifts to a function @xmath754 such that @xmath755 for all @xmath142 , thus @xmath764 is periodic and therefore bounded .
we also lift @xmath765 periodically to @xmath766 . by lifting and
, we can then find unique continuous functions @xmath767 with @xmath768 for all @xmath142 , such that @xmath769 for all @xmath142 . by replacing @xmath381 with a large multiple if necessary
, we may assume that @xmath770 for all @xmath142 and @xmath569 .    by continuity and
, we see that the expression @xmath771 is either positive for all @xmath149 , or negative for all @xmath149 . by applying the reflection @xmath772 on @xmath215
we may assume the latter case occurs , thus @xmath773 for all @xmath396 . to establish conjecture [ sai ] , it suffices to show that @xmath774 integrating fibre by fibre , it will suffice to show that @xmath775 for almost every @xmath726 .
fix @xmath726 ; we may assume that @xmath295 avoids all the @xmath295 coordinates of vertices of @xmath745 .
we abbreviate @xmath776 and @xmath777 for @xmath569 and @xmath778 , adopting the conventions @xmath593 . applying conjecture [ adf ] , it will suffice to verify the hypotheses ( i ) , ( ii ) of that conjecture .
let @xmath779 denote the largest time @xmath780 for which @xmath781 ( such a time exists thanks to and continuity ) . we claim that @xmath782 for all @xmath569 .
suppose for contradiction that this failed for some @xmath569 , then from one has @xmath783 for some @xmath610 . from and the intermediate value theorem we must then have @xmath784 for some @xmath785 , which by , gives @xmath786 , contradicting the maximality of @xmath787 .
similarly , if @xmath788 is the smallest time @xmath789 for which @xmath790 , then @xmath791 for @xmath569 . from applied at the times @xmath792 we have the inequalities @xmath793 and @xmath794 having obtained these inequalities , we will have no further need of the functions @xmath795 or the curves @xmath749 , although we will introduce a variant of these functions shortly .
we now verify the non - crossing property ( i ) for any given @xmath569 .
we just verify the claim when @xmath596 are odd , as the claim when @xmath596 are even is completely analogous .
first suppose that @xmath796 .
let @xmath797 denote the restriction of path @xmath798 to the interval @xmath799 $ ] ; define @xmath800 similarly .
the path @xmath797 traces out a piecewise linear curve in @xmath4 that starts at @xmath801 , ends at @xmath802 , and does not encounter the vertical line @xmath803 at any point in between ; also , it moves to the right for @xmath149 near @xmath804 ( and to the left for @xmath149 near @xmath805 ) .
thus , this curve @xmath797 must stay in the right half - plane @xmath806 ; actually , by we see that it stays in the strip @xmath807 \times { \mathbb{r}}$ ] ( say ) . similarly for @xmath800 . on the other hand ,
as @xmath59 is simple and @xmath808 , the two paths @xmath797 and @xmath800 can not meet . from the jordan curve theorem and example [ ncs ] , this forces the endpoints @xmath597 and @xmath661 of these paths to be non - crossing , giving ( i ) in this case .
now suppose that @xmath809 . in this case
we define @xmath800 to be the restriction of @xmath798 to the interval @xmath810 $ ] ( this interval is well - defined by ) .
this is a path from @xmath811 to @xmath812 that does not cross @xmath813 except at endpoints , and hence lies in the strip @xmath814 \times { \mathbb{r}}$ ] .
it can not cross @xmath797 , which also lies in this strip , avoids the right edge , and starts and ends at the points @xmath815 on the left edge . by the jordan curve theorem
, this implies that @xmath816 can not lie between @xmath655 and @xmath656 , which by example [ ncs ] implies ( since @xmath817 ) that @xmath662 and @xmath818 are non - crossing .
this concludes the establishment of ( i ) when @xmath596 are odd ; the case when @xmath596 are even is analogous ( working to the left of @xmath819 rather than to the right , and using the convention @xmath820 rather than @xmath699 ) and is omitted .
now we verify ( ii ) for @xmath599 , @xmath600 , @xmath601 with @xmath602 the same parity .
we just establish the claim when @xmath602 are all odd , as the case when @xmath602 are all even is completely analogous .    in the case
@xmath821 , we see from and the conventions @xmath822 that the pairs @xmath823 , @xmath824 , @xmath825 .
thus we may assume that @xmath826 for at least one @xmath827 ; say @xmath828 .
as in the proof of ( i ) , we can form the curves @xmath829 for @xmath569 , which lie in the strip @xmath830 \times { \mathbb{r}}$ ] , with initial point @xmath831 and final point @xmath832 . for @xmath569 ,
let @xmath720 denote the maximum @xmath295 coordinate attained by @xmath829 , thus @xmath833 ; furthermore @xmath834 if @xmath835 and @xmath836 otherwise , in particular @xmath837 .
as the vertices of @xmath59 have distinct @xmath295 coordinates , the @xmath720 are distinct in the interval @xmath838 $ ] ; without loss of generality we may then take @xmath839 . for @xmath569 , define @xmath840 to be the connected component of @xmath841 \times { \mathbb{r}}$ ] that contains @xmath842 ; thus @xmath843 , and for @xmath844 , @xmath840 is a piecewise path connecting @xmath842 to some point on the vertical line @xmath845 .
consider the set @xmath846 the set @xmath847 a union of line segments in @xmath848 .
it contains the point @xmath849 with exactly one line segment emenating from it ; @xmath847 similarly contains the point @xmath850 with exactly line segment emenating from it . a local analysis
( using the non - degeneracy hypothesis that the vertices of @xmath745 all have distinct @xmath295 coordinates ) then reveals that every other point @xmath851 in @xmath847 is either an interior point of a line segment in @xmath847 ( and avoids all other line segments comprising @xmath847 ) , or else is a vertex that is the endpoint of exactly two edges in @xmath847 ; this claim is most delicate in the case where @xmath852 , in which the curves @xmath853 and @xmath854 have terminated , but @xmath855 leaves @xmath856 in two leftward directions , thus again forming two edges in @xmath847 ( see figure [ turning ] ) . because of this , there must be a path @xmath857 in @xmath847 from @xmath849 to @xmath850 ( cf .
remark [ dyn ] ) . by the hypothesis of conjecture [ sai
] , we must have @xmath858 for all @xmath149 .
in particular , we conclude that the sums @xmath859 have the same sign . a similar argument ( using the connected component of @xmath840 containing @xmath860 rather than @xmath842 as appropriate ) shows more generally that the sums @xmath861 have the same sign for @xmath687 and @xmath862 ( this claim is trivially true when @xmath863 or @xmath864 . by definition [ ncs - def ] ,
we conclude that the pairs @xmath603 , @xmath604 , @xmath605 have non - crossing sums , giving ( ii ) in the case that @xmath602 are all odd ; the claim when @xmath602 are all even are proven similarly ( using the convention @xmath865 instead of @xmath866 , working to the left of @xmath819 rather than to the right , and using in place of ) and is omitted .
this completes the derivation of conjecture [ sai ] from conjecture [ adf ] , and establishes theorem [ aqv ] .
[ t ]   in @xmath847 when @xmath867 equals @xmath868.,title="fig:",width=288 ]
from theorem [ aqv ] , we see that any counterexample to conjecture [ adf ] can be converted to counterexamples for conjectures [ sai ] , [ area-1d ] , and [ area - ineq ] , and we believe it likely that such counterexamples , should they exist , could then be modified to give counterexamples to conjectures [ qpspp ] , [ pspp ] , [ pspps ] , and hence the original square peg conjecture ( conjecture [ spp ] ) . on the other hand , after extensive testing of examples , the author is now inclined to believe that conjecture [ adf ] is true , and a proof of this conjecture is likely to lead to an approach to establish conjecture [ area ] ( and hence conjectures [ qpspp ] , [ pspp ] , [ pspps ] ) and perhaps even conjecture [ spp ] .
we do not have a proof of conjecture [ adf ] in full generality , however we can verify some special cases .
firstly , we can handle the case when one of the odd integers @xmath697 , say @xmath869 , is equal to @xmath53 . using the construction in theorem [ aqv ] , we see that this case is equivalent to the special case of conjecture [ sai ] when @xmath157 is a horizontal line @xmath870 for some real number @xmath871 and all @xmath149 . by subtracting @xmath872 from @xmath157 and adding @xmath872 to ( say ) @xmath873
, we may thus normalise @xmath874 , so that @xmath875 . the hypothesis of conjecture [ sai ] then ensures that the reflection @xmath876 of @xmath873 across the @xmath295 axis is disjoint from @xmath368 , hence by the jordan curve theorem and stokes theorem as before we have @xmath877 giving conjecture [ sai ] in this case since @xmath878 .
of course , one expects to also be able to verify the @xmath879 case of conjecture [ adf ] by a direct combinatorial argument , without explicit invocation of the jordan curve theorem .
we can do this by developing some combinatorial analogues of the jordan curve theorem that are valid even when @xmath880 . for any @xmath881 and @xmath882 $ ] , define the _ winding number _ @xmath883 by the alexander numbering rule @xmath884 ( where we use the hypothesis that @xmath697 is odd ) ,
thus @xmath885 is a half - integer on @xmath592 , a locally constant integer outside of these points , and jumps by @xmath886 when one perturbs off of one of the @xmath540 in either direction .
also observe that @xmath883 equals @xmath126 near @xmath528 , and @xmath53 near @xmath529 . from fubini s theorem
we can relate the winding number to the alternating sum @xmath887 by the identity @xmath888 which holds for all sufficiently large @xmath889 .
a similar argument gives @xmath890 again for sufficiently large @xmath889 .
[ cjct ] suppose that the hypotheses of conjecture [ adf ] hold .
let @xmath569 .
then one has @xmath891 for all @xmath892 , and @xmath893 for all @xmath291 in @xmath517 \backslash \{y_{i,1},\dots , y_{i , k+1}\}$ ] .
because @xmath885 is locally constant away from @xmath894 and jumps by @xmath886 when it reaches any of the @xmath540 , it suffices to establish the first claim .
let @xmath610 .
from conjecture [ adf](i ) we have @xmath895 for all @xmath896 distinct from @xmath98 with the same parity as @xmath98 ( using the conventions @xmath897 ) .
direct inspection shows that the claim also holds for @xmath898 .
summing over @xmath899 , and noting that the contributions of @xmath900 or @xmath901 are the same on both sides , we conclude that @xmath902 and hence @xmath903 for all @xmath610 .
direct computation also shows that @xmath904 when @xmath905 maximises @xmath655 , and the claim follows .
next , for distinct @xmath906 and @xmath882 $ ] , we define the further winding number @xmath907 by the similar formula @xmath908 as before , @xmath907 will be a locally constant integer away from the sums @xmath909 , that equals @xmath126 for sufficiently large positive @xmath291 and @xmath53 for sufficiently large negative @xmath291 . from fubini s theorem
we have the analogue @xmath910 for sufficiently large @xmath889 .
curiously , one has the convolution identity @xmath911 where the primes denote distributional derivatives , although the author was not able to make much use of this identity .
the winding numbers @xmath912 also have some resemblance to the steinberg formula @xcite for the multiplicity of irreducible representations in a tensor product , although this is likely to be just a coincidence .          by permutation we may set @xmath682 , @xmath926 , @xmath927 .
suppose that @xmath599 , @xmath600 , @xmath601 have the same parity . by conjecture [ adf](ii ) we have @xmath928 summing over @xmath929 and noting that the contributions of @xmath930 are the same on both sides we see that @xmath931 for all @xmath601 ; since @xmath932 , we conclude ( i ) .
now suppose @xmath933 and @xmath934 have the same parity and @xmath935 , and let @xmath936 have the same parity as @xmath98 and @xmath899 . from conjecture [ adf](ii )
we see that the pairs @xmath937 , @xmath938 , @xmath939 have non - crossing sums , which by example [ diff ] implies that at least one of the pairs @xmath937 , @xmath939 have no influence on the triple sums .
this implies that @xmath940 for @xmath921 ; summing in @xmath941 we obtain .
the claim is proven similarly .
this proposition is already enough to reprove the @xmath879 case of conjecture [ adf ] as follows . by adding @xmath871 to all of the @xmath942 and then sending @xmath871 to zero
, we may assume that @xmath943 .
then we have @xmath944 and @xmath945 for all @xmath291 , and hence by proposition [ inclusion ] we have @xmath946 for @xmath947 and @xmath948 for @xmath949 .
we conclude that on the set @xmath950 , the function @xmath951 is locally constant and vanishes at the endpoints , thus we have the inclusion @xmath952 this inclusion is strict because the endpoints @xmath953 of the former set can not match any of the endpoints @xmath954 of the latter set due to the non - vanishing of the sums @xmath955 .
we conclude ( using lemma [ cjct ] ) that for sufficiently large @xmath889 , we have @xmath956 and the desired claim then follows from , .
the above arguments crucially used the hypothesis in conjecture [ adf](i ) .
indeed , the conjecture is false without this hypothesis ; a simple counterexample is when @xmath957 , @xmath958 , @xmath959 , @xmath960 , @xmath961 , and @xmath962 .
we can partially extend these arguments to cover the cases @xmath880 as follows .
we use lemma [ cjct ] to partition @xmath963 where @xmath964 ( resp .
@xmath965 ) consists of those pairs @xmath966 for which @xmath967 ( resp .
@xmath968 ) . we will work primarily on @xmath964 , although much of the analysis below also applies to @xmath965 .
the set @xmath965 is a combinatorial analogue of the compact set @xmath486 in the end of section [ quad ] , while @xmath964 plays the role of the @xmath53-boundaries @xmath489 that avoid this compact set .
the set @xmath964 avoids the boundary of @xmath969 and is thus actually a subset of @xmath970 .
we place a directed graph @xmath971 on the vertex set @xmath964 as follows . if @xmath933 and @xmath934 have the same parity and @xmath972 , we connect @xmath973 to @xmath974 whenever @xmath975 is odd with @xmath976 , and connect @xmath974 to @xmath973 whenever @xmath975 is even with @xmath976 .
if instead @xmath596 have the same parity and @xmath977 , we connect @xmath978 to @xmath979 whenever @xmath980 is odd with @xmath981 and connect @xmath979 to @xmath978 whenever @xmath980 is even with @xmath981 . by lemma [ inclusion](ii )
, this construction only produces edges that start and end in @xmath964 ; indeed , every point @xmath309 in @xmath982 will be connected to another point in this set , either by an outgoing edge ( if @xmath983 has the opposite parity to @xmath98 or @xmath899 ) or an incoming edge ( if @xmath983 has the same parity as @xmath98 or @xmath899 ) . applying this procedure to each square @xmath984 with @xmath933 and
@xmath934 the same parity , one obtains a directed graph @xmath971 in which each vertex has exactly one outgoing edge and one incoming edge ; thus @xmath985 decomposes into disjoint simple directed cycles .
any one of these cycles @xmath12 can enter a vertical line @xmath986 from the left only when the second coordinate is odd , and from the right only when the second coordinate is even ; thus @xmath12 will intersect such a vertical line at odd second coordinates the same number of times as at even second coordinates ; that is to say @xmath987 similarly for every horizontal line , thus @xmath988 for all @xmath989 . as a consequence , we have @xmath990 for each cycle @xmath12 , and hence on summing in @xmath12 @xmath991 and hence by @xmath992    next , we claim the identity @xmath993 for all @xmath994 .
this is certainly the case for @xmath995 , so it suffices to show that @xmath996 for all @xmath936 .
fix such a @xmath941 . by breaking up @xmath964 into squares
, it suffices to show that @xmath997 whenever @xmath933 and @xmath934 have the same parity as @xmath941 .
suppose first that @xmath998 , then by lemma [ inclusion](ii ) , the set @xmath999 is the union of horizontal lines @xmath1000 .
it then suffices to show that for each such line , we have @xmath1001 for all @xmath1002 with the same parity as @xmath596 ; but from conjecture [ adf](ii ) and example [ diff ] , the sign of the triple sums of @xmath937 , @xmath938 , @xmath1003 are not influenced by one of @xmath937 or @xmath1003 , giving .
the case when @xmath1004 is treated similarly ( using vertical lines in place of horizontal lines ) .
if we now define the modified winding number @xmath1005 then we see from and proposition [ inclusion ] that @xmath1006 for all @xmath994 . from and
fubini s theorem we see that @xmath1007 and @xmath1008 for sufficiently large @xmath889 .    on the set @xmath1009 , we now see that the function @xmath1010 is locally constant ( since , by definition of @xmath1010 , all the discontinuities @xmath1011 of @xmath1010 lie in the set @xmath1012 ) and equal to @xmath126 on the boundary ( thanks to ) .
this gives the inclusion @xmath1013 which generalises ( a permutation of ) .
this gives some ( but not all ) cases of conjecture [ adf ] :        the inclusion is strict , because the endpoints of the set @xmath1015 can not agree with any of the endpoints of @xmath1016 .
we conclude ( using lemma [ cjct ] and the hypothesis @xmath1017 ) that for sufficiently large @xmath889 that @xmath1018 and the desired inequality then follows from , .
this observation can handle several further cases of conjecture [ adf ] ( e.g. the perturbative regime in which the @xmath1019 are very small compared to the differences between the @xmath1020 ) .
unfortunately it is possible for @xmath1010 to exceed @xmath53 , which means that one can not resolve conjecture [ adf ] purely on the strength of the inclusion .
however , it appears from numerous examples that whenever this occurs , a significant portion of the set @xmath1021 is `` closed off '' from @xmath1022 , in that the set @xmath1023 is prohibited from entering that portion , which restores the truth of conjecture [ adf ] ; the author was able to make this statement rigorous in the case @xmath1024 by a rather lengthy and _ ad hoc _ argument , which unfortunately does not seem to extend to the general case .
rather than present this ( somewhat unenlightening ) argument here , we give an example to illustrate this `` closing off '' phenomenon .
we will take @xmath1025 and @xmath1026 and @xmath1027 ( this ordering is consistent with the non - crossing hypothesis ( i ) ) .
we will assume that we are in the `` almost perturbative setting '' in which the nine sums @xmath1028 for @xmath1029 are ordered by the relations @xmath1030 thus the only uncertainty in the ordering of these nine sums arises from the relative positions of @xmath1031 and @xmath1032 ; clearly both orderings are possible .
these relations imply the further inequalities @xmath1033 by this and many applications of proposition [ inclusion](ii ) we can see that @xmath968 for all @xmath1034 , hence @xmath964 is empty and @xmath1035 in this case .
first suppose one is in the `` fully perturbative '' setting where @xmath1036 ( this for instance occurs when all the @xmath1037 are small compared to the differences @xmath1038 and @xmath1039 ) .
in this case the winding number @xmath1040 only takes the values @xmath126 and @xmath53 , with the former occurring on the intervals @xmath1041 and proposition [ tap ] gives in this case . in this case
one can make the error in arbitrarily small ; for instance if one takes @xmath1042 and @xmath1043 for some sufficiently small @xmath1044 , one can check that the hypotheses of conjecture [ adf ] hold , and the left and right - hand sides of differ by @xmath1045 ; see figure [ good ] .
[ t ] , where @xmath1046 lies on a simple curve passing through @xmath1047 , and @xmath1048 lies on a simple curve passing through @xmath1049 . note how the entire region ( viewed as a subset of the @xmath291-axis , drawn here as a dashed line ) lies above the solid line , in the sense that it is connected to @xmath1050 for arbitrarily large and negative @xmath1051 .
the points @xmath1052 for @xmath1053 ( not pictured ) lie just above curve in this region.,title="fig:",width=480 ]    now suppose that @xmath1054 . in this case
, @xmath1040 now takes the value of @xmath126 on the intervals @xmath1055 but is additionally equal to @xmath1056 on the interval @xmath1057 . the argument used to prove proposition [ tap ] then fails to establish , incurring instead an additional additive error of @xmath1058 .
however , in this case the portion @xmath1059 of @xmath1060 now becomes `` closed off '' from the points @xmath1061 , in the sense that none of the @xmath1062 can lie in this interval , which also implies that @xmath1063 can not equal @xmath53 in this interval either .
this lets one improve the bound arising from by a factor of @xmath1064 , which exceeds the loss of @xmath1065 incurred previously because @xmath1066 .
this restores conjecture [ adf ] in this case . to see why none of the @xmath1062 lie in @xmath1059 , suppose for contradiction that this were not the case , and let @xmath1067 be the largest index such that @xmath1068
this index @xmath98 can not equal @xmath869 , because this would imply that the pairs @xmath1069 , @xmath1070 and @xmath1071 have crossing sums ( only one of the eight sums from these pairs is positive ) , contradicting conjecture [ adf](ii ) .
the same argument excludes the case when @xmath98 is odd and less than @xmath869 , since in this case @xmath1072 avoids @xmath1059 by hypothesis , and also avoids @xmath1073 since @xmath1010 equals @xmath520 there ( here is where we use @xmath1054 ) , so one has an odd number of positive sums in this case .
finally , the index @xmath98 can not be even , because @xmath1074 lies outside @xmath1075 and also outside @xmath1076 ( as @xmath1077 equals @xmath520 there ) and hence the triple @xmath1078 , @xmath1079 , @xmath1080 would be crossing ( this has an odd number of positive sums ) , again contradicting conjecture [ adf](ii ) . thus conjecture [ adf ]
holds in all of these cases .
more generally , the author has observed numerically that every creation of a region where @xmath1010 exceeds @xmath53 will invariably be accompanied by a larger region of @xmath1081 which is now `` closed off '' from @xmath1022 , and was able to verify this claim rigorously when @xmath957 or @xmath1082 by _ ad hoc _ methods , but was unable to see how to establish such a claim in general .
[ t ]   between @xmath1032 and @xmath1031 .
but to compensate for this , the region between @xmath1083 and @xmath1084 , which still has a winding number of @xmath126 , has been cut off from @xmath1050 for large @xmath889 .
this cut - off region is necessarily larger ( as measured as a portion of the @xmath291-axis ) than the region of winding number @xmath1056.,title="fig:",width=480 ]