Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I am presently a learner of Hyperbolic Geometry and am using J. W. Anderson's book $Hyperbolic$ $Geometry$. Now the author presents a sketch proof of why every circle preserving homeomorphism in $\overline{\mathbb{C}}$ is an element of the general Möbius group, which is what I am struggling to understand.

First, a brief outline.

Let $f$ be an element of the set of all circle preserving homeomorphisms which we denote Homeo$^{C}(\overline{\mathbb{C}})$ and let $p$ be a Möbius transormations that maps the triples $(f(0),f(1),f(\infty))$ to $(0,1,\infty)$

Then we see that $p\circ f(0) = 0, p\circ f(1) = 1$ and $p \circ f(\infty)=\infty$, and since $p \circ f(\mathbb{R}) = \mathbb{R}$, either such a composition maps the upper half of the complex plane, $\mathbb{H}$ to itself or the lower half of the complex plane.

If $p \circ f(\mathbb{H}) = \mathbb{H}$, we take $ m =p$, while if $m \circ (\mathbb{H})$ goes to the lower half, we just take $m = W \circ p$, where $W(z) = \overline{z}$

Now here is the thing I don't understand:

  1. Let $A$ be an euclidean circle in $\mathbb{C}$ with euclidean centre $\frac{1}{2}$ and radius $\frac{1}{2}$. Let $V(0), V(1)$ be the vertical lines through the points $x=0$ and $x=1$.

Can anybody explain why as $V(0)$ and $V(1)$ are vertical tangents to the circle, then these lines under the map $m \circ f(z)$, namely $m \circ f\Big(V(0)\Big)$ and $m \circ f\Big(V(1)\Big)$ are again vertical tangents to the circle $m \circ f(A)$ at $m \circ f(0) = 0$ and $m \circ f(1) = 1$?

I am trying to conclude from here that $m \circ f = Id_z$ , the identity transformation.



share|improve this question
Hi David, Möbius transformations are conformal mappings. If you take a look at wikipedia, you will see that those transformations preserve angles, exactly what you need ! To see that they are indeed conformal I guess you could use Conway, Complex analysis. –  Leandro Mar 29 '11 at 3:57
One more detail, m will be a möbius transformation even if it map the upper half plane to the lower half plane. –  Leandro Mar 29 '11 at 3:59
@Leandro, I am just trying to show that every circle preserving homeomorphism is a mobius transform, please help me in trying to understand the above! –  fpqc Mar 29 '11 at 6:03
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 1 down vote accepted

I would assume that "circle-preserving" here means "preserving circles and straight lines"; that is, if $L$ is a straight line in the plane, then $L \cup \lbrace\infty \rbrace$ is a circle in $\overline{\mathbb{C}}$ (this is the usual definition in this context). I think that assuming this, all you really then need is that these maps are bijections: $m \circ f (V(0))$ and $m \circ f (V(1))$ are circles/straight lines, and since $m \circ f$ fixes $0$, $1$ and $\infty$, we see that $m \circ f (V(0))$ is a straight line through $0$, and $m \circ f (V(1))$ is a straight line through $1$. Then if $m \circ f (V(0))$ were not vertical, it would intersect $A$ at some point $w \neq 0$, which is a contradiction, because $(m \circ f)^{-1}(w) \neq 0$ would be another point of $V(0) \cap A$. Then $m \circ f (V(1))$ is vertical for similar reasons, or because it must be parallel to $m \circ f (V(0))$.

share|improve this answer
Ok thanks for your answer that makes things clear. –  fpqc Apr 20 '11 at 0:31
add comment

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.