Wiki
Wiki

Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.

Updated


Claim. For every d≥4d\ge4 there is n0(d)n_0(d) such that for every n≥n0(d)n\ge n_0(d), every set of nn points of Rd\mathbb R^d in which the unit distance occurs fd(n)f_d(n) times is a Lenz configuration of a specified type: its points lie on ⌊d/2⌋\lfloor d/2\rfloor circles in mutually orthogonal planes, with one circle replaced by a two-sphere when dd is odd, whose radii rir_i satisfy ri2+rj2=1r_i^2+r_j^2=1. As a corollary, the exact value of fd(n)f_d(n) in Problem 1085 is determined for every even d≥6d\ge6 and every n≥n0(d)n\ge n_0(d).

Covers. The exact value of fd(n)f_d(n), with the extremal configurations, for every even d≥6d\ge6 and every nn sufficiently large in terms of dd. For odd d≥5d\ge5 the structure theorem holds but the exact value is not determined: it depends on the maximum number of unit distances among nn points of a two-sphere, which is open. Nothing is claimed about d=2d=2, d=3d=3, d=4d=4 (Brass's exact value, a pending claim on its own claim page in this folder) or small nn.

Depends on. No page of this wiki.

The argument. The proof is a stability analysis of the Lenz configuration combined with extremal graph theory, refining the asymptotic (p−12p+o(1))n2(\frac{p-1}{2p}+o(1))n^2 of Erdős's 1960 paper and the additive-constant estimate of his 1967 paper, both on their own claim pages in this folder. The library's [[../library/distance_problems/swanepoel_2009_unit_distances_diameters_euclidean_spaces/_index|card for the paper]] states the two structure theorems and the corollary on exact values; the same paper's diameter theorem is the accepted claim for the higher dimensions of Problem 223.

Acceptance. Refereed: K. J. Swanepoel, Unit distances and diameters in Euclidean spaces, Discrete & Computational Geometry 41 (2009), no. 1, 1–27, published online 2008-05-08; the preprint is arXiv:0707.0213, posted 2007-07-02. Not reviewed: the site's remarks say that this paper determined fd(n)f_d(n) exactly for even d≥6d\ge6, but the site labels the problem OPEN, so the remark is not an acceptance of the problem or of a part.