Extremal length explained

In the mathematical theory of conformal and quasiconformal mappings, the extremal length of a collection of curves

\Gamma

is a measure of the size of

\Gamma

that is invariant under conformal mappings. More specifically, suppose that

D

is an open set in the complex plane and

\Gamma

is a collectionof paths in

D

and

f:D\toD'

is a conformal mapping. Then the extremal length of

\Gamma

is equal to the extremal length of the image of

\Gamma

under

f

. One also works with the conformal modulus of

\Gamma

, the reciprocal of the extremal length. The fact that extremal length and conformal modulus are conformal invariants of

\Gamma

makes them useful tools in the study of conformal and quasi-conformal mappings. One also works with extremal length in dimensions greater than two and certain other metric spaces, but the following deals primarily with the two dimensional setting.

Definition of extremal length

To define extremal length, we need to first introduce several related quantities.Let

D

be an open set in the complex plane. Suppose that

\Gamma

is acollection of rectifiable curves in

D

. If

\rho:D\to[0,infty]

is Borel-measurable, then for any rectifiable curve

\gamma

we let

L\rho(\gamma):=\int\gamma\rho|dz|

denote the

\rho

–length of

\gamma

, where

|dz|

denotes theEuclidean element of length. (It is possible that

L\rho(\gamma)=infty

.)What does this really mean? If

\gamma:I\toD

is parameterized in some interval

I

,then

\int\gamma\rho|dz|

is the integral of the Borel-measurable function

\rho(\gamma(t))

with respect to the Borel measure on

I

for which the measure of every subinterval

J\subsetI

is the length of therestriction of

\gamma

to

J

. In other words, it is theLebesgue-Stieltjes integral

\intI\rho(\gamma(t))d{length

}_\gamma(t), where

{length

}_\gamma(t) is the length of the restriction of

\gamma

to

\{s\inI:s\let\}

.Also set

L\rho(\Gamma):=inf\gamma\in\GammaL\rho(\gamma).

The area of

\rho

is defined as

A(\rho):=\intD\rho2dxdy,

and the extremal length of

\Gamma

is

EL(\Gamma):=\sup\rho

2
L
\rho(\Gamma)
A(\rho)

,

where the supremum is over all Borel-measureable

\rho:D\to[0,infty]

with

0<A(\rho)<infty

. If

\Gamma

contains some non-rectifiable curves and

\Gamma0

denotes the set of rectifiable curves in

\Gamma

, then

EL(\Gamma)

is defined to be

EL(\Gamma0)

.

The term (conformal) modulus of

\Gamma

refers to

1/EL(\Gamma)

.

The extremal distance in

D

between two sets in

\overlineD

is the extremal length of the collection of curves in

D

with one endpoint in one set and the other endpoint in the other set.

Examples

In this section the extremal length is calculated in several examples. The first three of these examples are actually useful in applications of extremal length.

Extremal distance in rectangle

Fix some positive numbers

w,h>0

, and let

R

be the rectangle

R=(0,w) x (0,h)

. Let

\Gamma

be the set of all finite length curves

\gamma:(0,1)\toR

that cross the rectangle left to right, in the sense that

\limt\to\gamma(t)

is on the left edge

\{0\} x [0,h]

of the rectangle, and

\limt\to\gamma(t)

is on the right edge

\{w\} x [0,h]

.(The limits necessarily exist, because we are assuming that

\gamma

has finite length.) We will now prove that in this case

EL(\Gamma)=w/h

First, we may take

\rho=1

on

R

. This

\rho

gives

A(\rho)=wh

and

L\rho(\Gamma)=w

. The definition of

EL(\Gamma)

as a supremum then gives

EL(\Gamma)\gew/h

.

The opposite inequality is not quite so easy. Consider an arbitrary Borel-measurable

\rho:R\to[0,infty]

such that

\ell:=L\rho(\Gamma)>0

.For

y\in(0,h)

, let

\gammay(t)=iy+wt

(where we are identifying

\R2

with the complex plane).Then

\gammay\in\Gamma

, and hence

\ell\leL\rho(\gammay)

.The latter inequality may be written as

\ell\le

1
\int
0

\rho(iy+wt)wdt.

Integrating this inequality over

y\in(0,h)

implies

h\ell\le

1\rho(iy+wt)wdtdy
\int
0
.Now a change of variable

x=wt

and an application of the Cauchy–Schwarz inequality give

h\ell\le

w\rho(x+iy)dxdy
\int
0

\lel(\intR

1/2
\rho
Rdxdyr)

=l(whA(\rho)r)1/2

. This gives

\ell2/A(\rho)\lew/h

.Therefore,

EL(\Gamma)\lew/h

, as required.

As the proof shows, the extremal length of

\Gamma

is the same as the extremal length of the much smaller collection of curves

\{\gammay:y\in(0,h)\}

.

It should be pointed out that the extremal length of the family of curves

\Gamma'

that connect the bottom edge of

R

to the top edge of

R

satisfies

EL(\Gamma')=h/w

, by the same argument. Therefore,

EL(\Gamma)EL(\Gamma')=1

.It is natural to refer to this as a duality property of extremal length, and a similar duality property occurs in the context of the next subsection. Observe that obtaining a lower bound on

EL(\Gamma)

is generally easier than obtaining an upper bound, since the lower bound involves choosing a reasonably good

\rho

and estimating
2/A(\rho)
L
\rho(\Gamma)
, while the upper bound involves proving a statement about all possible

\rho

. For this reason, duality is often useful when it can be established: when we know that

EL(\Gamma)EL(\Gamma')=1

, a lower bound on

EL(\Gamma')

translates to an upper bound on

EL(\Gamma)

.

Extremal distance in annulus

Let

r1

and

r2

be two radii satisfying

0<r1<r2<infty

. Let

A

be the annulus

A:=\{z\inC:r1<|z|<r2\}

and let

C1

and

C2

be the two boundary components of

A

:

C1:=\{z:|z|=r1\}

and

C2:=\{z:|z|=r2\}

. Consider the extremal distance in

A

between

C1

and

C2

; which is the extremal length of the collection

\Gamma

of curves

\gamma\subsetA

connecting

C1

and

C2

.

To obtain a lower bound on

EL(\Gamma)

, we take

\rho(z)=1/|z|

. Then for

\gamma\in\Gamma

oriented from

C1

to

C2

\int\gamma|z|-1ds\ge\int\gamma|z|-1d|z|=\int\gammadlog|z|=log(r2/r1).

On the other hand,

A(\rho)=\intA|z|-2dxdy=

2\pi
\int
0
r2
\int
r1

r-2rdrd\theta=2\pilog(r2/r1).

We conclude that

EL(\Gamma)\ge

log(r2/r1)
2\pi

.

We now see that this inequality is really an equality by employing an argument similar to the one given above for the rectangle. Consider an arbitrary Borel-measurable

\rho

such that

\ell:=L\rho(\Gamma)>0

. For

\theta\in[0,2\pi)

let

\gamma\theta:(r1,r2)\toA

denote the curve
i\theta
\gamma
\theta(r)=e

r

. Then
\ell\le\int
\gamma\theta

\rhods

r2
=\int
r1

\rho(ei\thetar)dr.

We integrate over

\theta

and apply the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, to obtain:

2\pi\ell\le\intA\rhodrd\theta\lel(\intA\rho2rdrd\thetar)1/2

2\pi
l(\int
0
r2
\int
r1
1
rdrd\thetar)

1/2.

Squaring gives

4\pi2\ell2\leA(\rho) ⋅ 2\pilog(r2/r1).

This implies the upper bound

EL(\Gamma)\le(2\pi)-1log(r2/r1)

.When combined with the lower bound, this yields the exact value of the extremal length:
EL(\Gamma)=log(r2/r1)
2\pi

.

Extremal length around an annulus

Let

r1,r2,C1,C2,\Gamma

and

A

be as above, but now let

\Gamma*

be the collection of all curves that wind once around the annulus, separating

C1

from

C2

. Using the above methods, it is not hard to show that
*)=2\pi
log(r2/r1)
EL(\Gamma

=EL(\Gamma)-1.

This illustrates another instance of extremal length duality.

Extremal length of topologically essential paths in projective plane

In the above examples, the extremal

\rho

which maximized the ratio
2/A(\rho)
L
\rho(\Gamma)
and gave the extremal length corresponded to a flat metric. In other words, when the Euclidean Riemannian metric of the corresponding planar domain is scaled by

\rho

, the resulting metric is flat. In the case of the rectangle, this was just the original metric, but for the annulus, the extremal metric identified is the metric of a cylinder. We now discuss an example where an extremal metric is not flat. The projective plane with the spherical metric is obtained by identifying antipodal points on the unit sphere in

\R3

with its Riemannian spherical metric. In other words, this is the quotient of the sphere by the map

x\mapsto-x

. Let

\Gamma

denote the set of closed curves in this projective plane that are not null-homotopic. (Each curve in

\Gamma

is obtained by projecting a curve on the sphere from a point to its antipode.) Then the spherical metric is extremal for this curve family.[1] (The definition of extremal length readily extends to Riemannian surfaces.) Thus, the extremal length is

\pi2/(2\pi)=\pi/2

.

Extremal length of paths containing a point

If

\Gamma

is any collection of paths all of which have positive diameter and containing a point

z0

, then

EL(\Gamma)=infty

. This follows, for example, by taking

\rho(z):=\begin{cases}(-|z-z0|log

-1
|z-z
0|)

&|z-z0|<1/2,\\ 0&|z-z0|\ge1/2,\end{cases}

which satisfies

A(\rho)<infty

and

L\rho(\gamma)=infty

for every rectifiable

\gamma\in\Gamma

.

Elementary properties of extremal length

The extremal length satisfies a few simple monotonicity properties. First, it is clear that if

\Gamma1\subset\Gamma2

, then

EL(\Gamma1)\geEL(\Gamma2)

.Moreover, the same conclusion holds if every curve

\gamma1\in\Gamma1

contains a curve

\gamma2\in\Gamma2

as a subcurve (that is,

\gamma2

is the restriction of

\gamma1

to a subinterval of its domain). Another sometimes useful inequality is

EL(\Gamma1\cup\Gamma2)\ge

-1
l(EL(\Gamma
1)
-1
+EL(\Gamma
2)

r)-1.

This is clear if

EL(\Gamma1)=0

or if

EL(\Gamma2)=0

, in which case the right hand side is interpreted as

0

. So suppose that this is not the case and with no loss of generality assume that the curves in

\Gamma1\cup\Gamma2

are all rectifiable. Let

\rho1,\rho2

satisfy
L
\rhoj

(\Gammaj)\ge1

for

j=1,2

. Set

\rho=max\{\rho1,\rho2\}

. Then

L\rho(\Gamma1\cup\Gamma2)\ge1

and
2)dxdy=A(\rho
A(\rho)=\int\rho
1)+A(\rho

2)

, which proves the inequality.

Conformal invariance of extremal length

Let

f:D\toD*

be a conformal homeomorphism(a bijective holomorphic map) between planar domains. Suppose that

\Gamma

is a collection of curves in

D

,and let

\Gamma*:=\{f\circ\gamma:\gamma\in\Gamma\}

denote theimage curves under

f

. Then

EL(\Gamma)=EL(\Gamma*)

.This conformal invariance statement is the primary reason why the concept ofextremal length is useful.

Here is a proof of conformal invariance. Let

\Gamma0

denote the set of curves

\gamma\in\Gamma

such that

f\circ\gamma

is rectifiable, and let
*=\{f\circ\gamma:\gamma\in\Gamma
\Gamma
0\}
, which is the set of rectifiablecurves in

\Gamma*

. Suppose that

\rho*:D*\to[0,infty]

is Borel-measurable. Define

\rho(z)=|f'(z)|\rho*l(f(z)r).

A change of variables

w=f(z)

gives

A(\rho)=\intD\rho(z)2dzd\barz=\intD\rho*(f(z))2|f'(z)|2dzd\barz=

\int
D*

\rho*(w)2dwd\barw=A(\rho*).

Now suppose that

\gamma\in\Gamma0

is rectifiable, and set

\gamma*:=f\circ\gamma

. Formally, we may use a change of variables again:

L\rho(\gamma)=\int\gamma\rho*l(f(z)r)|f'(z)||dz|=

\int
\gamma*
\rho(w)|dw|=L
\rho*

(\gamma*).

To justify this formal calculation, suppose that

\gamma

is defined in some interval

I

, let

\ell(t)

denote the length of the restriction of

\gamma

to

I\cap(-infty,t]

,and let

\ell*(t)

be similarly defined with

\gamma*

in place of

\gamma

. Then it is easy to see that

d\ell*(t)=|f'(\gamma(t))|d\ell(t)

, and this implies

L\rho(\gamma)=L

\rho*

(\gamma*)

, as required. The above equalities give,

EL(\Gamma0)\ge

*)=EL(\Gamma
EL(\Gamma
0

*).

If we knew that each curve in

\Gamma

and

\Gamma*

was rectifiable, this wouldprove

EL(\Gamma)=EL(\Gamma*)

since we may also apply the above with

f

replaced by its inverseand

\Gamma

interchanged with

\Gamma*

. It remains to handle the non-rectifiable curves.

Now let

\hat\Gamma

denote the set of rectifiable curves

\gamma\in\Gamma

such that

f\circ\gamma

isnon-rectifiable. We claim that

EL(\hat\Gamma)=infty

.Indeed, take

\rho(z)=|f'(z)|h(|f(z)|)

, where

h(r)=l(rlog(r+2)r)-1

.Then a change of variable as above gives

A(\rho)=

\int
D*

h(|w|)2dwd\barw\le

2\pi
\int
0
infty
\int
0

(rlog(r+2))-2rdrd\theta<infty.

For

\gamma\in\hat\Gamma

and

r\in(0,infty)

such that

f\circ\gamma

is contained in

\{z:|z|<r\}

, we have

L\rho(\gamma)\geinf\{h(s):s\in[0,r]\}length(f\circ\gamma)=infty

.On the other hand, suppose that

\gamma\in\hat\Gamma

is such that

f\circ\gamma

is unbounded.Set
t
H(t):=\int
0

h(s)ds

. Then

L\rho(\gamma)

is at least the length of the curve

t\mapstoH(|f\circ\gamma(t)|)

(from an interval in

\R

to

\R

). Since

\limt\toinftyH(t)=infty

,it follows that

L\rho(\gamma)=infty

.Thus, indeed,

EL(\hat\Gamma)=infty

.

Using the results of the previous section, we have

EL(\Gamma)=EL(\Gamma0\cup\hat\Gamma)\geEL(\Gamma0)

.We have already seen that

EL(\Gamma0)\geEL(\Gamma*)

. Thus,

EL(\Gamma)\geEL(\Gamma*)

.The reverse inequality holds by symmetry, and conformal invariance is therefore established.

Some applications of extremal length

By the calculation of the extremal distance in an annulus and the conformalinvariance it follows that the annulus

\{z:r<|z|<R\}

(where

0\ler<R\leinfty

)is not conformally homeomorphic to the annulus

\{w:r*<|w|<R*\}

if
Rr\ne
R*
r*
.

Extremal length in higher dimensions

The notion of extremal length adapts to the study of various problems in dimensions 3 and higher, especially in relation to quasiconformal mappings.

Discrete extremal length

Suppose that

G=(V,E)

is some graph and

\Gamma

is a collection of paths in

G

. There are two variants of extremal length in this setting. To define the edge extremal length, originally introduced by R. J. Duffin,[2] consider a function

\rho:E\to[0,infty)

. The

\rho

-length of a path is defined as the sum of

\rho(e)

over all edges in the path, counted with multiplicity. The "area"

A(\rho)

is defined as

\sume\in\rho(e)2

. The extremal length of

\Gamma

is then defined as before. If

G

is interpreted as a resistor network, where each edge has unit resistance, then the effective resistance between two sets of vertices is precisely the edge extremal length of the collection of paths with one endpoint in one set and the other endpoint in the other set. Thus, discrete extremal length is useful for estimates in discrete potential theory.

Another notion of discrete extremal length that is appropriate in other contexts is vertex extremal length, where

\rho:V\to[0,infty)

, the area is

A(\rho):=\sumv\in\rho(v)2

, and the length of a path is the sum of

\rho(v)

over the vertices visited by the path, with multiplicity.

Notes and References

  1. Ahlfors (1973)
  2. Duffin 1962