Minkowski Content The Next CEO of Stack OverflowHow to understand the Minkowski content?Calculating the upper Minkowski dimension of the set $0,1,frac12, frac13, ldots $Is the Hausdorff outer measure regular?Two Definitions of Minkowski DimensionHausdorff Measure and Hausdorff DimensionEqualities for the Upper and Lower Minkowski dimension definitionBounded function on $m(E) = 0$ is measurableShow that there exists a continuous function $f$ such that $int |chi_A-f| dlambdalt epsilon$Questions about Hausdorff measure and general metric outer measures.How to prove that : $mathcalH^n-2(Bbb S_v^n-2)=|Bbb S^n-2|$Intuition behind the Minkowski dimension and measure
Is HostGator storing my password in plaintext?
Unreliable Magic - Is it worth it?
Sending manuscript to multiple publishers
What exact does MIB represent in SNMP? How is it different from OID?
What connection does MS Office have to Netscape Navigator?
Is micro rebar a better way to reinforce concrete than rebar?
If/When UK leaves the EU, can a future goverment conduct a referendum to join the EU?
What is ( CFMCC ) on ILS approach chart?
Is it my responsibility to learn a new technology in my own time my employer wants to implement?
Why did we only see the N-1 starfighters in one film?
What is the result of assigning to std::vector<T>::begin()?
What can we do to stop prior company from asking us questions?
How to make a variable always equal to the result of some calculations?
Why does the UK parliament need a vote on the political declaration?
Interfacing a button to MCU (and PC) with 50m long cable
Do I need to enable Dev Hub in my PROD Org?
How to start emacs in "nothing" mode (`fundamental-mode`)
Would this house-rule that treats advantage as a +1 to the roll instead (and disadvantage as -1) and allows them to stack be balanced?
How to solve a differential equation with a term to a power?
What does "Its cash flow is deeply negative" mean?
Preparing Indesign booklet with .psd graphics for print
SQL Server 2016 - excessive memory grant warning on poor performing query
Why do airplanes bank sharply to the right after air-to-air refueling?
Is "for causing autism in X" grammatical?
Minkowski Content
The Next CEO of Stack OverflowHow to understand the Minkowski content?Calculating the upper Minkowski dimension of the set $0,1,frac12, frac13, ldots $Is the Hausdorff outer measure regular?Two Definitions of Minkowski DimensionHausdorff Measure and Hausdorff DimensionEqualities for the Upper and Lower Minkowski dimension definitionBounded function on $m(E) = 0$ is measurableShow that there exists a continuous function $f$ such that $int |chi_A-f| dlambdalt epsilon$Questions about Hausdorff measure and general metric outer measures.How to prove that : $mathcalH^n-2(Bbb S_v^n-2)=|Bbb S^n-2|$Intuition behind the Minkowski dimension and measure
$begingroup$
Could someone provide some intuition behind the $n$-dimensional Minkowski Contentthe $n$-dimensional upper Minkowski Content of $mathcalA$ as
$$mathfrakM^*m (mathcalA) : = lim_epsilon to 0 sup fracmu(mathcalA)_epsilon - mu(mathcalA)alpha_n-m epsilon^n-m$$
we define the $n$-dimensional lower Minkowski Content of $mathcalA$ as
$$mathfrakM^m_* (mathcalA) : = lim_epsilon to 0 inf fracmu(mathcalA)_epsilon - mu(mathcalA)alpha_n-m epsilon^n-m$$
where $alpha_n-m$ is a $n-m$ dimensional sphere and $mu$ is the standard Lebesgue Measure.
Could someone please provide some intuition for this definition?
What does it mean to talk about the Minkowski content of a natural object, i.e. a sphere in euclidean space? What would be the Minkowski content for such an object?
Still looking for a clear answer from someone...
measure-theory intuition geometric-measure-theory lebesgue-measure
edited Dec 16 '13 at 13:28
Davide Giraudo
128k17154268
asked Dec 10 '13 at 5:09
Anthony PeterAnthony Peter
3,27611653
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Could someone provide some intuition behind the $n$-dimensional Minkowski Contentthe $n$-dimensional upper Minkowski Content of $mathcalA$ as
$$mathfrakM^*m (mathcalA) : = lim_epsilon to 0 sup fracmu(mathcalA)_epsilon - mu(mathcalA)alpha_n-m epsilon^n-m$$
we define the $n$-dimensional lower Minkowski Content of $mathcalA$ as
$$mathfrakM^m_* (mathcalA) : = lim_epsilon to 0 inf fracmu(mathcalA)_epsilon - mu(mathcalA)alpha_n-m epsilon^n-m$$
where $alpha_n-m$ is a $n-m$ dimensional sphere and $mu$ is the standard Lebesgue Measure.
Could someone please provide some intuition for this definition?
What does it mean to talk about the Minkowski content of a natural object, i.e. a sphere in euclidean space? What would be the Minkowski content for such an object?
Still looking for a clear answer from someone...
measure-theory intuition geometric-measure-theory lebesgue-measure
edited Dec 16 '13 at 13:28
Davide Giraudo
128k17154268
asked Dec 10 '13 at 5:09
Anthony PeterAnthony Peter
3,27611653
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
The $m^th$ Minkowski content $mathfrakM(mathcalA)$ is something which when computed for regular enough $m$-dim object $mathcalA$ embedded in $mathbbR^n$, give you back the $m$-dim volume of $mathcalA$. Just think of them as a way to generalize length/area/volume to complex geometric shapes. To appreciate this, just compute it for some simple geometric objects. $mathfrakM^1$ for a line segment gives you its length. $mathfrakM^2$ for a planar polygon gives you its surface area. $mathfrakM^n-1$ for a $(n-1)$-dim sphere gives you its surface area and so on.
$endgroup$
– achille hui
Dec 14 '13 at 6:01
$begingroup$
@achillehui What then is meant by the Minkowski Content of a fractal object?
$endgroup$
– Anthony Peter
Dec 14 '13 at 18:43
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Could someone provide some intuition behind the $n$-dimensional Minkowski Contentthe $n$-dimensional upper Minkowski Content of $mathcalA$ as
$$mathfrakM^*m (mathcalA) : = lim_epsilon to 0 sup fracmu(mathcalA)_epsilon - mu(mathcalA)alpha_n-m epsilon^n-m$$
we define the $n$-dimensional lower Minkowski Content of $mathcalA$ as
$$mathfrakM^m_* (mathcalA) : = lim_epsilon to 0 inf fracmu(mathcalA)_epsilon - mu(mathcalA)alpha_n-m epsilon^n-m$$
where $alpha_n-m$ is a $n-m$ dimensional sphere and $mu$ is the standard Lebesgue Measure.
Could someone please provide some intuition for this definition?
What does it mean to talk about the Minkowski content of a natural object, i.e. a sphere in euclidean space? What would be the Minkowski content for such an object?
Still looking for a clear answer from someone...
measure-theory intuition geometric-measure-theory lebesgue-measure
edited Dec 16 '13 at 13:28
Davide Giraudo
128k17154268
asked Dec 10 '13 at 5:09
Anthony PeterAnthony Peter
3,27611653
$endgroup$
Could someone provide some intuition behind the $n$-dimensional Minkowski Contentthe $n$-dimensional upper Minkowski Content of $mathcalA$ as
$$mathfrakM^*m (mathcalA) : = lim_epsilon to 0 sup fracmu(mathcalA)_epsilon - mu(mathcalA)alpha_n-m epsilon^n-m$$
we define the $n$-dimensional lower Minkowski Content of $mathcalA$ as
$$mathfrakM^m_* (mathcalA) : = lim_epsilon to 0 inf fracmu(mathcalA)_epsilon - mu(mathcalA)alpha_n-m epsilon^n-m$$
where $alpha_n-m$ is a $n-m$ dimensional sphere and $mu$ is the standard Lebesgue Measure.
Could someone please provide some intuition for this definition?
What does it mean to talk about the Minkowski content of a natural object, i.e. a sphere in euclidean space? What would be the Minkowski content for such an object?
Still looking for a clear answer from someone...
measure-theory intuition geometric-measure-theory lebesgue-measure
measure-theory intuition geometric-measure-theory lebesgue-measure
edited Dec 16 '13 at 13:28
Davide Giraudo
128k17154268
asked Dec 10 '13 at 5:09
Anthony PeterAnthony Peter
3,27611653
edited Dec 16 '13 at 13:28
Davide Giraudo
128k17154268
asked Dec 10 '13 at 5:09
Anthony PeterAnthony Peter
3,27611653
edited Dec 16 '13 at 13:28
Davide Giraudo
128k17154268
edited Dec 16 '13 at 13:28
Davide Giraudo
128k17154268
edited Dec 16 '13 at 13:28
Davide Giraudo
128k17154268
128k17154268
asked Dec 10 '13 at 5:09
Anthony PeterAnthony Peter
3,27611653
asked Dec 10 '13 at 5:09
Anthony PeterAnthony Peter
3,27611653
asked Dec 10 '13 at 5:09
Anthony PeterAnthony Peter
3,27611653
3,27611653
3
$begingroup$
The $m^th$ Minkowski content $mathfrakM(mathcalA)$ is something which when computed for regular enough $m$-dim object $mathcalA$ embedded in $mathbbR^n$, give you back the $m$-dim volume of $mathcalA$. Just think of them as a way to generalize length/area/volume to complex geometric shapes. To appreciate this, just compute it for some simple geometric objects. $mathfrakM^1$ for a line segment gives you its length. $mathfrakM^2$ for a planar polygon gives you its surface area. $mathfrakM^n-1$ for a $(n-1)$-dim sphere gives you its surface area and so on.
$endgroup$
– achille hui
Dec 14 '13 at 6:01
$begingroup$
@achillehui What then is meant by the Minkowski Content of a fractal object?
$endgroup$
– Anthony Peter
Dec 14 '13 at 18:43
add a comment |
3
$begingroup$
The $m^th$ Minkowski content $mathfrakM(mathcalA)$ is something which when computed for regular enough $m$-dim object $mathcalA$ embedded in $mathbbR^n$, give you back the $m$-dim volume of $mathcalA$. Just think of them as a way to generalize length/area/volume to complex geometric shapes. To appreciate this, just compute it for some simple geometric objects. $mathfrakM^1$ for a line segment gives you its length. $mathfrakM^2$ for a planar polygon gives you its surface area. $mathfrakM^n-1$ for a $(n-1)$-dim sphere gives you its surface area and so on.
$endgroup$
– achille hui
Dec 14 '13 at 6:01
$begingroup$
@achillehui What then is meant by the Minkowski Content of a fractal object?
$endgroup$
– Anthony Peter
Dec 14 '13 at 18:43
3
3
$begingroup$
The $m^th$ Minkowski content $mathfrakM(mathcalA)$ is something which when computed for regular enough $m$-dim object $mathcalA$ embedded in $mathbbR^n$, give you back the $m$-dim volume of $mathcalA$. Just think of them as a way to generalize length/area/volume to complex geometric shapes. To appreciate this, just compute it for some simple geometric objects. $mathfrakM^1$ for a line segment gives you its length. $mathfrakM^2$ for a planar polygon gives you its surface area. $mathfrakM^n-1$ for a $(n-1)$-dim sphere gives you its surface area and so on.
$endgroup$
– achille hui
Dec 14 '13 at 6:01
$begingroup$
The $m^th$ Minkowski content $mathfrakM(mathcalA)$ is something which when computed for regular enough $m$-dim object $mathcalA$ embedded in $mathbbR^n$, give you back the $m$-dim volume of $mathcalA$. Just think of them as a way to generalize length/area/volume to complex geometric shapes. To appreciate this, just compute it for some simple geometric objects. $mathfrakM^1$ for a line segment gives you its length. $mathfrakM^2$ for a planar polygon gives you its surface area. $mathfrakM^n-1$ for a $(n-1)$-dim sphere gives you its surface area and so on.
$endgroup$
– achille hui
Dec 14 '13 at 6:01
$begingroup$
@achillehui What then is meant by the Minkowski Content of a fractal object?
$endgroup$
– Anthony Peter
Dec 14 '13 at 18:43
$begingroup$
@achillehui What then is meant by the Minkowski Content of a fractal object?
$endgroup$
– Anthony Peter
Dec 14 '13 at 18:43
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The Minkoswki content is a rather simplistic way to define an $m$-dimensional measure of an object immersed in the euclidean space (however mathematically speaking Minkowski content is not a measure).
If $mathcal A$ is a regular $m$-dimensional surface in $mathbb R^n$ it is easy to understand that the Minkowski content (both lower and upper) gives the $m$-dimensional area of the surface. In fact the surface is locally close to its tangent plane, which is a $m$-dimensional affine space in $mathbb R^n$. The fattening of the $m$-plane gives a cylinder whose section is a $(n-m)$-dimensional ball of radius $epsilon$. So the volume of $(mathcal A)_epsilon$ is approximately given by the $m$-dimensional surface area of $mathcal A$ times the volume of the section, which is $alpha_n-m epsilon^n-m$.
To make a formal proof I think that a $C^2$ manifold $mathcal A$ with an upper bound on the curvature should be enough to get the result.
There is also a physical intuition behind the definition. Suppose you want to know how long is a rope. You can simply compute the volume occupied by the rope (either by its weight and density, or by immersing it in water) then you divide the volume by the area of the section (i.e. $pi r^2$ if $2r$ is the diameter of the section) to find the length. You may notice that bending the rope could change the volume, and that the rope is not exactly the set of points with distance less than $r$ by the transversal axis. However if $r$ goes to 0 you can imagine that this errors become negligible.
A similar experiment can be imagined to compute the surface area of a thick surface. Just compute the volume and divide by the thickness.
Actually in your definition you are subtracting the volume $mu(mathcal A)$ from the volume of the fattened object $mathcal A$. This makes the definition a little bit different in the case when $mu(mathcal A)>0$. For example if you have an $n$-dimensional object (let say a set with regular boundary) what you get is half the measure of the boundary, not the measure of the whole object. This because
$$
mu((mathcal A)_epsilon) - mu(mathcal A) = mu((mathcal A)_epsilon setminus mathcal A) = mu((partial mathcal A)_epsilon setminus mathcal A)
approx frac 1 2 mu((partial mathcal A)_epsilon).
$$
This also could be understand from a practical point of view. Imagine you want to measure the surface area of an irregular object. A possibility is to immerse the object in some dense paint an measure the mass of painting which remains attached to the object. This you expect to be proportional to the surface area of the object.
If the set $mathcal A$ is not regular you can get very bad results. Consider for example $mathcal A = mathbb Q^3 cap [0,1]^3$. Such a set is composed by a countable number of points, hence its Hausdorff dimension is $0$. Instead the Minkowski content (for any $m$) is the same of the cube $[0,1]^3$ since $(mathcal A)_epsilon supset [0,1]^3$ for all $epsilon>0$. This example shows that Minkowski content is not additive since $mathfrak M^m(mathcal A) = mathfrak M^m([0,1]^3setminus mathcal A) = mathfrak M^m([0,1]^3)$.
However in applications it might be true that Minkowski content makes sense even at an $epsilon$ level. For example consider the problem of computing the length of the coast of Great Britain (this is the example provided by Mandelbrot, leading to fractals). The problem, like this, does not make sense, because as you inspect the coast at smaller and smaller details, you always get a larger total length. However if you fix a scale $epsilon$, the Minkowski content gives you an answer. For example if you are interested in the length of the coast to know how long a road following the coast should be, you should take $epsilon$ to be approximately the distance of the road from the coast.
In general I expect that the Minkowski content should work also for fractal dimension. I'm not absolutely sure but I think that in many cases it should give the same result as Hausdorff measure, hence could be used to measure fractal dimension of objects. For example I expect that Minkowski content (both lower and upper) should correctly measure the dimension (and measure) of fractals like: Cantor-set, Sierpinksi carpet, Koch snowflake...
answered Dec 16 '13 at 11:50
Emanuele PaoliniEmanuele Paolini
17.9k22052
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
What is fattening of the m-plane ? My English is poor, can't understand it. Could you give a picture to describe it ? Thanks.
$endgroup$
– lanse7pty
yesterday
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f600947%2fminkowski-content%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The Minkoswki content is a rather simplistic way to define an $m$-dimensional measure of an object immersed in the euclidean space (however mathematically speaking Minkowski content is not a measure).
If $mathcal A$ is a regular $m$-dimensional surface in $mathbb R^n$ it is easy to understand that the Minkowski content (both lower and upper) gives the $m$-dimensional area of the surface. In fact the surface is locally close to its tangent plane, which is a $m$-dimensional affine space in $mathbb R^n$. The fattening of the $m$-plane gives a cylinder whose section is a $(n-m)$-dimensional ball of radius $epsilon$. So the volume of $(mathcal A)_epsilon$ is approximately given by the $m$-dimensional surface area of $mathcal A$ times the volume of the section, which is $alpha_n-m epsilon^n-m$.
To make a formal proof I think that a $C^2$ manifold $mathcal A$ with an upper bound on the curvature should be enough to get the result.
There is also a physical intuition behind the definition. Suppose you want to know how long is a rope. You can simply compute the volume occupied by the rope (either by its weight and density, or by immersing it in water) then you divide the volume by the area of the section (i.e. $pi r^2$ if $2r$ is the diameter of the section) to find the length. You may notice that bending the rope could change the volume, and that the rope is not exactly the set of points with distance less than $r$ by the transversal axis. However if $r$ goes to 0 you can imagine that this errors become negligible.
A similar experiment can be imagined to compute the surface area of a thick surface. Just compute the volume and divide by the thickness.
Actually in your definition you are subtracting the volume $mu(mathcal A)$ from the volume of the fattened object $mathcal A$. This makes the definition a little bit different in the case when $mu(mathcal A)>0$. For example if you have an $n$-dimensional object (let say a set with regular boundary) what you get is half the measure of the boundary, not the measure of the whole object. This because
$$
mu((mathcal A)_epsilon) - mu(mathcal A) = mu((mathcal A)_epsilon setminus mathcal A) = mu((partial mathcal A)_epsilon setminus mathcal A)
approx frac 1 2 mu((partial mathcal A)_epsilon).
$$
This also could be understand from a practical point of view. Imagine you want to measure the surface area of an irregular object. A possibility is to immerse the object in some dense paint an measure the mass of painting which remains attached to the object. This you expect to be proportional to the surface area of the object.
If the set $mathcal A$ is not regular you can get very bad results. Consider for example $mathcal A = mathbb Q^3 cap [0,1]^3$. Such a set is composed by a countable number of points, hence its Hausdorff dimension is $0$. Instead the Minkowski content (for any $m$) is the same of the cube $[0,1]^3$ since $(mathcal A)_epsilon supset [0,1]^3$ for all $epsilon>0$. This example shows that Minkowski content is not additive since $mathfrak M^m(mathcal A) = mathfrak M^m([0,1]^3setminus mathcal A) = mathfrak M^m([0,1]^3)$.
However in applications it might be true that Minkowski content makes sense even at an $epsilon$ level. For example consider the problem of computing the length of the coast of Great Britain (this is the example provided by Mandelbrot, leading to fractals). The problem, like this, does not make sense, because as you inspect the coast at smaller and smaller details, you always get a larger total length. However if you fix a scale $epsilon$, the Minkowski content gives you an answer. For example if you are interested in the length of the coast to know how long a road following the coast should be, you should take $epsilon$ to be approximately the distance of the road from the coast.
In general I expect that the Minkowski content should work also for fractal dimension. I'm not absolutely sure but I think that in many cases it should give the same result as Hausdorff measure, hence could be used to measure fractal dimension of objects. For example I expect that Minkowski content (both lower and upper) should correctly measure the dimension (and measure) of fractals like: Cantor-set, Sierpinksi carpet, Koch snowflake...
answered Dec 16 '13 at 11:50
Emanuele PaoliniEmanuele Paolini
17.9k22052
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
What is fattening of the m-plane ? My English is poor, can't understand it. Could you give a picture to describe it ? Thanks.
$endgroup$
– lanse7pty
yesterday
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The Minkoswki content is a rather simplistic way to define an $m$-dimensional measure of an object immersed in the euclidean space (however mathematically speaking Minkowski content is not a measure).
If $mathcal A$ is a regular $m$-dimensional surface in $mathbb R^n$ it is easy to understand that the Minkowski content (both lower and upper) gives the $m$-dimensional area of the surface. In fact the surface is locally close to its tangent plane, which is a $m$-dimensional affine space in $mathbb R^n$. The fattening of the $m$-plane gives a cylinder whose section is a $(n-m)$-dimensional ball of radius $epsilon$. So the volume of $(mathcal A)_epsilon$ is approximately given by the $m$-dimensional surface area of $mathcal A$ times the volume of the section, which is $alpha_n-m epsilon^n-m$.
To make a formal proof I think that a $C^2$ manifold $mathcal A$ with an upper bound on the curvature should be enough to get the result.
There is also a physical intuition behind the definition. Suppose you want to know how long is a rope. You can simply compute the volume occupied by the rope (either by its weight and density, or by immersing it in water) then you divide the volume by the area of the section (i.e. $pi r^2$ if $2r$ is the diameter of the section) to find the length. You may notice that bending the rope could change the volume, and that the rope is not exactly the set of points with distance less than $r$ by the transversal axis. However if $r$ goes to 0 you can imagine that this errors become negligible.
A similar experiment can be imagined to compute the surface area of a thick surface. Just compute the volume and divide by the thickness.
Actually in your definition you are subtracting the volume $mu(mathcal A)$ from the volume of the fattened object $mathcal A$. This makes the definition a little bit different in the case when $mu(mathcal A)>0$. For example if you have an $n$-dimensional object (let say a set with regular boundary) what you get is half the measure of the boundary, not the measure of the whole object. This because
$$
mu((mathcal A)_epsilon) - mu(mathcal A) = mu((mathcal A)_epsilon setminus mathcal A) = mu((partial mathcal A)_epsilon setminus mathcal A)
approx frac 1 2 mu((partial mathcal A)_epsilon).
$$
This also could be understand from a practical point of view. Imagine you want to measure the surface area of an irregular object. A possibility is to immerse the object in some dense paint an measure the mass of painting which remains attached to the object. This you expect to be proportional to the surface area of the object.
If the set $mathcal A$ is not regular you can get very bad results. Consider for example $mathcal A = mathbb Q^3 cap [0,1]^3$. Such a set is composed by a countable number of points, hence its Hausdorff dimension is $0$. Instead the Minkowski content (for any $m$) is the same of the cube $[0,1]^3$ since $(mathcal A)_epsilon supset [0,1]^3$ for all $epsilon>0$. This example shows that Minkowski content is not additive since $mathfrak M^m(mathcal A) = mathfrak M^m([0,1]^3setminus mathcal A) = mathfrak M^m([0,1]^3)$.
However in applications it might be true that Minkowski content makes sense even at an $epsilon$ level. For example consider the problem of computing the length of the coast of Great Britain (this is the example provided by Mandelbrot, leading to fractals). The problem, like this, does not make sense, because as you inspect the coast at smaller and smaller details, you always get a larger total length. However if you fix a scale $epsilon$, the Minkowski content gives you an answer. For example if you are interested in the length of the coast to know how long a road following the coast should be, you should take $epsilon$ to be approximately the distance of the road from the coast.
In general I expect that the Minkowski content should work also for fractal dimension. I'm not absolutely sure but I think that in many cases it should give the same result as Hausdorff measure, hence could be used to measure fractal dimension of objects. For example I expect that Minkowski content (both lower and upper) should correctly measure the dimension (and measure) of fractals like: Cantor-set, Sierpinksi carpet, Koch snowflake...
answered Dec 16 '13 at 11:50
Emanuele PaoliniEmanuele Paolini
17.9k22052
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
What is fattening of the m-plane ? My English is poor, can't understand it. Could you give a picture to describe it ? Thanks.
$endgroup$
– lanse7pty
yesterday
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The Minkoswki content is a rather simplistic way to define an $m$-dimensional measure of an object immersed in the euclidean space (however mathematically speaking Minkowski content is not a measure).
If $mathcal A$ is a regular $m$-dimensional surface in $mathbb R^n$ it is easy to understand that the Minkowski content (both lower and upper) gives the $m$-dimensional area of the surface. In fact the surface is locally close to its tangent plane, which is a $m$-dimensional affine space in $mathbb R^n$. The fattening of the $m$-plane gives a cylinder whose section is a $(n-m)$-dimensional ball of radius $epsilon$. So the volume of $(mathcal A)_epsilon$ is approximately given by the $m$-dimensional surface area of $mathcal A$ times the volume of the section, which is $alpha_n-m epsilon^n-m$.
To make a formal proof I think that a $C^2$ manifold $mathcal A$ with an upper bound on the curvature should be enough to get the result.
There is also a physical intuition behind the definition. Suppose you want to know how long is a rope. You can simply compute the volume occupied by the rope (either by its weight and density, or by immersing it in water) then you divide the volume by the area of the section (i.e. $pi r^2$ if $2r$ is the diameter of the section) to find the length. You may notice that bending the rope could change the volume, and that the rope is not exactly the set of points with distance less than $r$ by the transversal axis. However if $r$ goes to 0 you can imagine that this errors become negligible.
A similar experiment can be imagined to compute the surface area of a thick surface. Just compute the volume and divide by the thickness.
Actually in your definition you are subtracting the volume $mu(mathcal A)$ from the volume of the fattened object $mathcal A$. This makes the definition a little bit different in the case when $mu(mathcal A)>0$. For example if you have an $n$-dimensional object (let say a set with regular boundary) what you get is half the measure of the boundary, not the measure of the whole object. This because
$$
mu((mathcal A)_epsilon) - mu(mathcal A) = mu((mathcal A)_epsilon setminus mathcal A) = mu((partial mathcal A)_epsilon setminus mathcal A)
approx frac 1 2 mu((partial mathcal A)_epsilon).
$$
This also could be understand from a practical point of view. Imagine you want to measure the surface area of an irregular object. A possibility is to immerse the object in some dense paint an measure the mass of painting which remains attached to the object. This you expect to be proportional to the surface area of the object.
If the set $mathcal A$ is not regular you can get very bad results. Consider for example $mathcal A = mathbb Q^3 cap [0,1]^3$. Such a set is composed by a countable number of points, hence its Hausdorff dimension is $0$. Instead the Minkowski content (for any $m$) is the same of the cube $[0,1]^3$ since $(mathcal A)_epsilon supset [0,1]^3$ for all $epsilon>0$. This example shows that Minkowski content is not additive since $mathfrak M^m(mathcal A) = mathfrak M^m([0,1]^3setminus mathcal A) = mathfrak M^m([0,1]^3)$.
However in applications it might be true that Minkowski content makes sense even at an $epsilon$ level. For example consider the problem of computing the length of the coast of Great Britain (this is the example provided by Mandelbrot, leading to fractals). The problem, like this, does not make sense, because as you inspect the coast at smaller and smaller details, you always get a larger total length. However if you fix a scale $epsilon$, the Minkowski content gives you an answer. For example if you are interested in the length of the coast to know how long a road following the coast should be, you should take $epsilon$ to be approximately the distance of the road from the coast.
In general I expect that the Minkowski content should work also for fractal dimension. I'm not absolutely sure but I think that in many cases it should give the same result as Hausdorff measure, hence could be used to measure fractal dimension of objects. For example I expect that Minkowski content (both lower and upper) should correctly measure the dimension (and measure) of fractals like: Cantor-set, Sierpinksi carpet, Koch snowflake...
answered Dec 16 '13 at 11:50
Emanuele PaoliniEmanuele Paolini
17.9k22052
$endgroup$
The Minkoswki content is a rather simplistic way to define an $m$-dimensional measure of an object immersed in the euclidean space (however mathematically speaking Minkowski content is not a measure).
If $mathcal A$ is a regular $m$-dimensional surface in $mathbb R^n$ it is easy to understand that the Minkowski content (both lower and upper) gives the $m$-dimensional area of the surface. In fact the surface is locally close to its tangent plane, which is a $m$-dimensional affine space in $mathbb R^n$. The fattening of the $m$-plane gives a cylinder whose section is a $(n-m)$-dimensional ball of radius $epsilon$. So the volume of $(mathcal A)_epsilon$ is approximately given by the $m$-dimensional surface area of $mathcal A$ times the volume of the section, which is $alpha_n-m epsilon^n-m$.
To make a formal proof I think that a $C^2$ manifold $mathcal A$ with an upper bound on the curvature should be enough to get the result.
There is also a physical intuition behind the definition. Suppose you want to know how long is a rope. You can simply compute the volume occupied by the rope (either by its weight and density, or by immersing it in water) then you divide the volume by the area of the section (i.e. $pi r^2$ if $2r$ is the diameter of the section) to find the length. You may notice that bending the rope could change the volume, and that the rope is not exactly the set of points with distance less than $r$ by the transversal axis. However if $r$ goes to 0 you can imagine that this errors become negligible.
A similar experiment can be imagined to compute the surface area of a thick surface. Just compute the volume and divide by the thickness.
Actually in your definition you are subtracting the volume $mu(mathcal A)$ from the volume of the fattened object $mathcal A$. This makes the definition a little bit different in the case when $mu(mathcal A)>0$. For example if you have an $n$-dimensional object (let say a set with regular boundary) what you get is half the measure of the boundary, not the measure of the whole object. This because
$$
mu((mathcal A)_epsilon) - mu(mathcal A) = mu((mathcal A)_epsilon setminus mathcal A) = mu((partial mathcal A)_epsilon setminus mathcal A)
approx frac 1 2 mu((partial mathcal A)_epsilon).
$$
This also could be understand from a practical point of view. Imagine you want to measure the surface area of an irregular object. A possibility is to immerse the object in some dense paint an measure the mass of painting which remains attached to the object. This you expect to be proportional to the surface area of the object.
If the set $mathcal A$ is not regular you can get very bad results. Consider for example $mathcal A = mathbb Q^3 cap [0,1]^3$. Such a set is composed by a countable number of points, hence its Hausdorff dimension is $0$. Instead the Minkowski content (for any $m$) is the same of the cube $[0,1]^3$ since $(mathcal A)_epsilon supset [0,1]^3$ for all $epsilon>0$. This example shows that Minkowski content is not additive since $mathfrak M^m(mathcal A) = mathfrak M^m([0,1]^3setminus mathcal A) = mathfrak M^m([0,1]^3)$.
However in applications it might be true that Minkowski content makes sense even at an $epsilon$ level. For example consider the problem of computing the length of the coast of Great Britain (this is the example provided by Mandelbrot, leading to fractals). The problem, like this, does not make sense, because as you inspect the coast at smaller and smaller details, you always get a larger total length. However if you fix a scale $epsilon$, the Minkowski content gives you an answer. For example if you are interested in the length of the coast to know how long a road following the coast should be, you should take $epsilon$ to be approximately the distance of the road from the coast.
In general I expect that the Minkowski content should work also for fractal dimension. I'm not absolutely sure but I think that in many cases it should give the same result as Hausdorff measure, hence could be used to measure fractal dimension of objects. For example I expect that Minkowski content (both lower and upper) should correctly measure the dimension (and measure) of fractals like: Cantor-set, Sierpinksi carpet, Koch snowflake...
answered Dec 16 '13 at 11:50
Emanuele PaoliniEmanuele Paolini
17.9k22052
edited Dec 18 '13 at 8:50
answered Dec 16 '13 at 11:50
Emanuele PaoliniEmanuele Paolini
17.9k22052
answered Dec 16 '13 at 11:50
Emanuele PaoliniEmanuele Paolini
17.9k22052
answered Dec 16 '13 at 11:50
Emanuele PaoliniEmanuele Paolini
17.9k22052
17.9k22052
$begingroup$
What is fattening of the m-plane ? My English is poor, can't understand it. Could you give a picture to describe it ? Thanks.
$endgroup$
– lanse7pty
yesterday
add a comment |
$begingroup$
What is fattening of the m-plane ? My English is poor, can't understand it. Could you give a picture to describe it ? Thanks.
$endgroup$
– lanse7pty
yesterday
$begingroup$
What is fattening of the m-plane ? My English is poor, can't understand it. Could you give a picture to describe it ? Thanks.
$endgroup$
– lanse7pty
yesterday
$begingroup$
What is fattening of the m-plane ? My English is poor, can't understand it. Could you give a picture to describe it ? Thanks.
$endgroup$
– lanse7pty
yesterday
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f600947%2fminkowski-content%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
3
$begingroup$
The $m^th$ Minkowski content $mathfrakM(mathcalA)$ is something which when computed for regular enough $m$-dim object $mathcalA$ embedded in $mathbbR^n$, give you back the $m$-dim volume of $mathcalA$. Just think of them as a way to generalize length/area/volume to complex geometric shapes. To appreciate this, just compute it for some simple geometric objects. $mathfrakM^1$ for a line segment gives you its length. $mathfrakM^2$ for a planar polygon gives you its surface area. $mathfrakM^n-1$ for a $(n-1)$-dim sphere gives you its surface area and so on.
$endgroup$
– achille hui
Dec 14 '13 at 6:01
$begingroup$
@achillehui What then is meant by the Minkowski Content of a fractal object?
$endgroup$
– Anthony Peter
Dec 14 '13 at 18:43