On Mori’s theorem for quasiconformal maps in the n-space

Notation. For t>0, x,y \in \mathbf{B}^n\,, we write

By the triangle inequality we have

Proof of Theorem 1.6. (1) The inequality (1.6) follows easily from the inequality (2.17).

(2) We see that the function h has a local minimum at t_1= (3 \alpha)^{\alpha} \lambda_n^{\alpha-1} (\beta-\alpha)^{-\alpha} \,. If t_1 \ge 1\,, then the inequality (2.17) yields the desired conclusion. The upper bound for T(n,K) follows by substituting the argument t_1 in the expression of h\,.

We next show that the value K_1=4/3 will do. Fix K\in(1,K_1)\,. Then \alpha= K^{1/(1-n)}\ge 3/4 and \alpha/(1- \alpha^2)>1.

Because \lambda_n^{ \alpha-1}\ge 2^{1/K -1} K^{-1} by [vuobook, Lemma 7.50(1)], with d=(6/K)^{1/K}/2K we have

It suffices to observe that t_1>1 certainly holds if 2r(K)(\frac{\alpha}{1-\alpha^2})>1 which holds for \alpha > 1/(r(4/3)+ \sqrt{1+r(4/3)^2})= 0.53...\,, in particular, t_1>1 holds in the present case \alpha>3/4\,.

For the proof of (1.6) we give the following inequalities

see [vuobook, Lemma 7.50(1)]. The formula (1.6) for h(t_1) has two terms. We estimate separately each term as follows

by inequality (3.1),

here we assume that \beta\in(1,2) which implies that \alpha\in(1/2,1). Also the inequalities (K-1)^{-(K-1)}\leq\exp((2/e)\sqrt{K-1}) and (3.1) were used, and we get

Because (\beta-\alpha)\in(0,\frac{3}{2}) this implies that \frac{2}{3}(\beta-\alpha)\in(0,1) and \alpha^2\in(\frac{1}{4},1) and further (\frac{2}{3}(\beta-\alpha))^ {\alpha^2}\leq (\frac{2}{3}(\beta-\alpha))^{1/4}, and finally

Next we prove that

This inequality is equivalent to

This last inequality holds because the left hand side is negative. Now from (3.1) and (3.1) we get the desired inequality (1.6). \square

Graphical and numerical comparison of various bounds. The above bounds involve the Grötzsch ring constant \lambda_n, which is known only for n=2, \lambda_2=4. Therefore only for n=2 we can compute the values of the bounds. Solving numerically the equation {4\cdot16}^{1-1/K}=h(t_1) for K we obtain K=1.3089\,. We give numerical and graphical comparison of the various bounds for the Mori constant.

Tabulation of the various upper bounds for Mori’s constant when n=2 and \lambda_2=4 as a function of K: (a) Mori’s conjectured bound 16^{1-1/K}, (b) the Anderson-Vamanamurthy bound 4 \cdot 16^{1-1/K}, (c) the bound from (1.6). For K\in (1, 1.3089) the upper bound in (1.6) is better than the Anderson-Vamanamurthy bound. Note that the upper bound T(n,K)\le h(t_1) in (1.6) is proved only for K \in (1,K_1), K_1= 4/3\,. We do not know whether it holds for larger values of K but just comparing the values of h(t_1) and the bound of Fehlmann and Vuorinen for K >1.5946 we see that h(t_1) is the smaller one of these two. Numerical values of the [fv] bound given in the table were computed with the help of the algorithm for \varphi_{K,2}(r) attached with [avvb, p. 92, 439].

Note that according to Theorem 1.6 the inequality (1.6) involving h(t_1) holds for \,K\in(1,K_1) where the number K_1>1 may be smaller than 2.

For graphing and tabulation purposes we use the logarithmic scale. Note that the upper bound for M(2,K) given in [fv, Theorem 2.29] also has the desirable property that it converges to 1 when K\to 1\,, see Figure 3.

Comparison of estimates for the Hölder quotient. For a K-quasiconformal mapping f:\mathbf{B}^n\to f\mathbf{B}^n=\mathbf{B}^n\, , we call the expression

the Hölder coefficient of f. Clearly HQ(f)\leq M(n,K). Theorem 2.13 yields, after dividing the both sides of the inequality in 2.13 by |x-y|^{\alpha}\,, the upper bound HQ(f)\le HQ(K) for the Hölder quotient with

For n=2 we compare HQ(K) to several other bounds (a) Mori’s conjectured bound, (b) the FV bound, (c) the AV bound and give the results as a table and Figure 3. Because the supremum and infimum in (3.7) cannot be explicitly found we use numerical methods that come with Mathematica software. For the numerical tests we used for the supremum a sample of 100,000 random points of the unit disk.

Proof of Theorem 1.10. The maximum value of the function considered in Lemma 4.8 is c(K)=2{\rm arth}(\varphi_K({\rm th}\frac{1}{2})). The inequality now follows from Theorem 4.4.\qquad\square

Bounds for the constant c(K). In order to give upper and lower bounds for c(K)\,, we observe that the identity [avvb, Theorem 10.5(2)] yields the following formula

A simplification leads to

Next, from the inequality \varphi_{1/K}(r) \geq 2^{1-K}(1+r^{'})^{1-K}r^K for K\ge 1, r\in (0,1) (cf. [avvb, Corollary 8.74(2)]) we get with v=\log(2(1+\sqrt{1-1/e^2}))<1.3507

In order to estimate the constant c(K) from below we need an upper bound for \varphi_{1/K,2}(r),\; K>1, from above. For this purpose we prove the following lemma.