To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
When the motion of a viscous fluid around a gas bubble is discussed, it is frequently assumed, especially for flows at low Reynolds numbers, that the bubble takes on a spherical shape in three dimensions or a circular cross-section in a two-dimensional flow. If this assumption is made, arid the gas within the bubble is assumed to have negligible density and viscosity, then the problem of finding the exterior flow is mathematically overdetermined and it is not obvious that a solution to the problem exists. Moreover, if such a solution does exist, then the over-determination of the system should, in general, give rise to relationships between the flow parameters, that is, certain conditions must be satisfied to ensure the existence of a solution. It is the purpose of this paper to derive these conditions in the case of a two-dimensional Stokes flow. The problem is generalised to the extent that part of the circular boundary is taken to be rigid, on which the no-slip condition is to be satisfied and part is to be a free streamline, on which stress conditions are to be satisfied. The conditions for the existence of a solution to this problem are derived and the solution is found in closed form. The method of solution is that of reducing the problem to one of a mixed boundary-value problem in analytic function theory. The classical solutions for the Stokes flow around a circular bubble and around a rigid circle are then easily derived as limiting cases.
The problem of estimating accurately the order of magnitude of the least primitive root g(p) to a large prime modulus p is as yet unsolved. The first non-trivial estimate was obtained by I. M. Vinogradov (see [5]) who in about 1919 showed that
occurs in the theory of the motion of an electrically conducting fluid, occupying the space between two electrodes at different potentials, in the presence of a strong magnetic fluid [Hunt and Malcolm 1]. In this theory a solution is required in which
and one of the principal properties of the solution to be determined is
Christoffel's problem, in its classical form, asks for the determination of necessary and sufficient conditions on a function φ, defined over the unit spherical surface Ω, in order that there exist a convex body K for which φ (u) is the sum of the principal radii of curvature at that boundary point of K where the outer unit normal is u. The figures Ω and K are in Euclidean n-dimensional space (n ≥ 3). It is assumed that φ is continuously differentiable and that K is of sufficient smoothness. A solution of Christoffe's problem was given in [6]. Yet that treatment is rather unsatisfactory in that the smoothness restrictions are set by the method rather than the problem, cf. [5; p. 60]. The present paper overcomes this defect. To do this it is first necessary to generalize the original problem so as to seek conditions on a measure M, defined over the Borel sets of Ω, in order that M be a first order area function for a convex body K. When K has sufficient smoothness, then φ is the Radon-Nikodym derivative of M with respect to surface area measure on Ω. It is this generalized Christoffel problem which is solved in what follows.
If θ is a real algebraic number of degree r ≥ 2, there is a computable number c = c(θ) > 0 such that
for all rational numbers p/q (q > 0). This follows directly from the definition of an algebraic number, as was shown by Liouville in 1843; and if r = 2 there is no more to be said. Axel Thue was the first to prove a stronger result when r ≥ 3; he showed that if
there are at most finitely many rational numbers p/q that satisfy
The Poincaré problem for the normal modes of oscillations of an inviscid, incompressible fluid contained in an infinitely long cylinder rotating about a direction perpendicular to its axis is investigated.
In this paper, we consider a class of spaces for which the convolutions with any set of regularizes converge in the topology of the space. We have already dealt with this matter in [2], but the conditions on the topology were unnecessarily restrictive and the proof somewhat unnatural. The present theorem is not only substantially more general, but is also more satisfying in that the argument reveals an unexpected connection between two topics; namely, the approximation of Lebesgue integrals by means of Riemann sums, and the uniqueness of certain types of locally convex topologies in vector lattices.
A graph G (finite, undirected, and without loops or multiple lines) is n-connected if the removal of fewer than n points from G neither disconnects it nor reduces it to the trivial graph consisting of a single point. We present in this note a sufficient set of conditions on the degrees (valences) of the points of a graph G so that G is n-connected.
Let S be a set of points in n-dimensional space, and suppose that an open sphere of unit radius is centred at each point of S. Suppose that no point of space is an inner point of more than two spheres. We say that S provides a double packing for spheres of unit radius. We define δ2(S), the density of this double packing, to be
where Jn is the volume of a sphere of unit radius, and Nt(S) is the number of points of S inside a cube of side 2t, centred at the origin O. We define δ2, the density of closest double packing, to be
where the supremum is taken over all sets S with the property described above.
The purpose of this paper is to give a short proof of an important recent theorem of Bombieri [2] on the mean value of the remainder term in the prime number theorem for arithmetic progressions. Applications of the theorem have been made by Bombieri and Davenport [3], Rodriques [9], and Elliott and Halberstam [5]. For earlier versions of the theorem and a survey of other applications, see Barban [1], and Halberstam and Roth [7, Chapter 4].
Helly's theorem asserts that if W is a family of compact convex sets in a j-dimensional linear space, and if any j + 1 members of ℱ have a non-empty intersection, then there is a point common to all members of ℱ. If one attempts to generalise this result to the case when ℱ consists of sets which are expressible as the union of at most n disjoint compact convex sets then, in general, one finds that there is no number h(n, j) such that if any h(n, j) members of ℱ have a non-empty intersection, then there is a point common to all members of ℱ. The difficulty lies in the fact that, in general, the intersections of members of ℱ are more complicated in structure than are the members of ℱ.
A sequence {xn} is a collection of objects occurring in order; thus there is a first member x1, a second member x2, and so on indefinitely. For every positive integer k, there is a corresponding kth member of the sequence. The members of such a sequence need not be all different. We can have a sequence all of whose members are the same; such a sequence is called a constant sequence.
If {kn} is a strictly increasing sequence of positive integers, the sequence {xkn} is called a subsequence of {xn}. The definition implies that {xn} is a subsequence of itself.
A sequence {xn} of real numbers is said to converge to the limit x if, for every positive value of ∈, all but a finite number of members of the sequence lie between x – ∈ and x + ∈. If a sequence {xn} of real numbers converges, every subsequence converges to the same limit. A sequence of real numbers which converges to zero is called a null-sequence. Thus if {xn} converges to x, the sequence {xn − x) is a null-sequence.
It is often convenient to represent real numbers by points on a line, and to speak of the point of abscissa x simply as the point x. The distance between the points x and y is |x − y|. To say that the sequence of real numbers {xn} converges to x is thus the same thing as saying that the sequence of points {xn} converges to the point x, or that the distance between the point xn and the point x tends to zero as n → ∞.
The sequence of points {an} in a metric space M is said to converge to a point a of M if the distance ρ(an, a) tends to zero as n → ∞, that is, if for every positive value of ∈ there exists an integer n0, depending on ∈, such that
whenever n ≥ n0. The point a is called the limit of the sequence. We say the limit, because no sequence can converge to two limits; for if {an} converged to a and to b, we should have
as n → ∞, and so ρ(a, b) = 0 which is impossible since a and b are distinct.
In particular, if an = a for all but a finite number of values of n, the sequence {an} converges to a.
If {kn} is a strictly increasing sequence of positive integers, so
that kn ≥ n and kn → ∞ as n → ∞, the sequence {akn} is called a subsequence of {an}; and if an → a.
We recall that a sequence is not a set. The elements in a sequence are ordered and are not necessarily distinct; the elements in a set are not ordered and are distinct. For example, we could define a sequence by a2n = b, a2n+1 = c where b ≠ c; the values taken by an form a set with only two members.
Let f(x) be a real function of the real variable x continuous at each point of the closed interval [a, b]. Then for every positive value of ε and for each point ξ of [a, b], it is possible to find an open interval N(ξ; δ) such that |f(x) – f(ξ)| < ε whenever the point x of [a,b] lies in N(ξ δ); indeed for each ξ there are an infinite number of such open intervals since, if N(ξ; δ1) is one such interval, so also is N(ξ; δ) for every δ < δ1 The infinite family {N(ξ δ):ξ ∈ [a, b]} of all these open intervals corresponding to all the points ξ of [a,b] is called an infinite open covering of [a, b]; every point of [a, b] belongs to at least one open interval of the family.
The Heine–Borel Theorem asserts that, from this infinite open covering of [a, b], we can select a finite number of open intervals of the family, which also covers [a, b]. Every point of [a, b] belongs to at least one of the open intervals of this finite open covering. From this follows the uniform continuity property, that, for every positive value of ∈, there exists a positive number Δ, depending on ∈, such that |f(x1) – f(x2)| < ε whenever the distance between the points x1 and x2 is less than Δ. We return to this in a more general context later.
This book, based on lectures given in the University of St Andrews, is intended to give honours students the background and training necessary before they start to study functional analysis.
There are many books on functional analysis; and some of them seem to go over the preliminaries to the subject far too quickly. The aim here is to provide a more leisurely approach to the theory of the topology of metric spaces, a subject which is not only the basis of functional analysis but also unifies many branches of classical analysis. The applications of the theory in Chapter 8 to problems in classical algebra and analysis show how much can be done without ever defining a normed vector space, a Banach space or a Hilbert space.
The reader is not expected to know much more classical analysis than is contained in Hardy's Pure Mathematics or Burkill's First Course in Mathematical Analysis. A knowledge of the elements of the theory of uniform convergence is assumed. Analytic functions and Lebesgue integrals are mentioned occasionally; their introduction provides more advanced applications of the theory of metric spaces, but adds nothing to the theory.
I am most grateful to Professor Arthur Erdélyi and to the Editors of the series of Cambridge Mathematical Tracts for their kindly criticisms and suggestions.
I wish to thank Mr Frank Gerrish and Professor Edwin Hewitt for many corrections, which have proved invaluable to me in the preparation of the second impression of this book.