Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Ok I had a question I think I can almost answer it but I miss one step:

Let $\partial M$ be a closed surface in $\mathbb{R}^3$, $x_0 \in \partial M$ than show this limit: $$\lim_{\substack{x\rightarrow x_0 \\ x\in M}} \int_{\partial M} \frac{1}{||y-x||} n_y \cdot \nabla_y \frac{-1}{||y-x||} dS_y = \lim_{\substack{x\rightarrow x_0 \\ x\in M}} \int_{\partial M} \frac{n_y \cdot (y-x)}{||y-x||^4} dS_y = \infty$$

The condition on $\partial M$ is free to choose. So suppose that it is smooth as much as you need. But ideally I would like to prove it for piece wise $C^1$ surface.

So has anybody idea how to show this limit?

Edit: Ok my best shot when $\partial M$ is convex. But I can't prove it yet, I'm experiencing the same problem as when I show that $\int_0^1 \frac{1}{t^\alpha} dt$ diverge(for $\alpha > 1 $) by this technique:

$$ \int_0^1 \frac{1}{t^\alpha} dt \geq \int_0^x \frac{1}{t^\alpha} dt \geq \frac{x}{x^\alpha} \rightarrow \infty$$

as $x$ goes to zero. But IT doesn't work for $\alpha =1$ yet the integral diverge.

So here goes my try, I need two lemmas about convex surfaces.

Lemma1: It is bound on how big can be angle between $n_y$ and $y-x$.

Let $\partial M$ is convex surface in $\mathbb{R}^n$. Than for every $x$ in interior of $\partial M$ ie $x\in M$. This inequality holds: $$ \forall y\in \partial M: n_y\cdot \frac{y-x}{\|y-x\|} \geq \frac{\min_{z\in \partial M} \|x-z\|}{\max_{z\in \partial M} \|x-z\|}\geq \frac{\text{dist}(x,\partial M)}{\text{diam}(\partial M)}$$ $n_y$ is outer normal at point $y$

This lemma is quite straight forward just draw a picture in 2d and you'll see it.

Lemma2: This is bound on how small can get and surface area of convex surface at vicinity of some point $x$

Let $\partial M$ is convex surface in $\mathbb{R}^n$ and $x$ is point in interior of $\partial M$ ie $x\in M$. Denote $\rho = \text{dist}(x,\partial M) = \text{dist}(x,x_0)$ for some $x_0 \in \partial M$. Than: $$\int_{\partial M \cap B(x_0,2\rho)} 1 \, dS \geq \alpha_{n-1} \left(\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2} \rho \right)^{n-1} $$ where $\alpha_n$ is volume of unit ball in $\mathbb{R}^n$.

Again draw this in 2d and you'll see it. Maybe I will add pictures if I find out how.

Now to the limit:"

denote $\rho = \text{dist}(x,\partial M)=\|x-x_0\|$, $D = \text{diam}(\partial M)$

$$ \int_{\partial M} \frac{1}{||y-x||} n_y \cdot \nabla_y \frac{-1}{||y-x||} dS_y = \int_{\partial M} \frac{n_y \cdot (y-x)}{||y-x||^4} dS_y \geq$$

$$ \int_{\partial M} \frac{n_y \cdot (y-x)}{||y-x||^4} dS_y \geq \int_{\partial M} \frac{\rho \|y-x\|}{D\|y-x\|^4} dS_y \geq $$

$$ \int_{\partial M \cap B(x_0,2\rho)} \frac{\rho \|y-x\|}{D\|y-x\|^4} dS_y \geq \int_{\partial M \cap B(x_0,2\rho)} \frac{\rho^2}{D 2^4 \rho^4} dS_y \geq$$

$$ \frac{\rho^2}{D 2^4 \rho^4} \int_{\partial M \cap B(x_0,2\rho)} dS_y \geq \frac{\rho^2}{D 2^4 \rho^4} \pi \left(\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2} \rho \right)^{2} = \frac{1}{D 2^4 } \pi \frac{3}{4}$$

But that does not got to infinity :((

I have one minor interesting observation. Let $\Gamma$ be any surface in $\mathbb{R}^3$. $\Gamma$ can be self intersecting for example: embedded Klein bottle in $\mathbb{R}^3$.

Than I think that

$$-\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{\partial M} n_y \cdot \nabla_y \frac{1}{||y-x||} dS_y$$

is something like winding number of $\Gamma$ around $x$. Can anybody elaborate on that? What number would I get if $\Gamma$ would be Klein bottle? I think that Klein bottle doesn't have something like interior so is the integral zero everywhere? Therefore is it possible in 2D to have closed, regular $C^1$ curve that has empty interior?

share|cite|improve this question
I hope that you don't mind that I made a new question instead editing the old one. The old one was a mess. – tom Jun 19 '13 at 19:45
Quick question: Is $\nabla_y$ the usual gradient in $\mathbb{R}^3$ acting on the $y$ variable? – Jose27 Jun 19 '13 at 20:16
...Yes it is... – tom Jun 19 '13 at 22:09
@tom since $n_y$ is present, what are the conditions on $\partial M$? Is it of class $C^1$? – Andrew Jun 23 '13 at 21:11
$\nabla _y\left ( \frac{1}{\left \| \mathbf{y - x} \right \|} \right ) = \mathbf{-}\ \frac{\mathbf{y - x}}{\left \| \mathbf{y - x} \right \|^{3}}$ , there seems to be a ($-$) unaccounted for in the RHS. Looks like you fixed it. – Brett Hale Jun 23 '13 at 22:28
up vote 1 down vote accepted

Denote $\Gamma(x)=\frac1{|x|}$. For fixed $x\in M$ as a function of $y$ it is harmonic in $\mathbb R^3\backslash \bar M$. Integrating by parts yields $$ \int_{\mathbb R^3\backslash M}|\nabla_y\Gamma(x-y)|^2\,dy= \int_{\mathbb R^3\backslash M}\nabla_y\Gamma(x-y)\cdot\nabla_y\Gamma(x-y)\,dy= $$ $$ -\int_{\mathbb R^3\backslash M}\Gamma(x-y)\Delta \Gamma(x-y)\,dy+ \int_{\partial M}\Gamma(x-y)n_y\cdot\nabla_y\Gamma(x-y)\,dy= $$ $$ =\int_{\partial M}\Gamma(x-y)n_y\cdot\nabla_y\Gamma(x-y)\,dy $$ since $\Gamma\nabla_y\Gamma$ is vanishing at infinity fast enough, as $|y|^{-3}$. Here $n_y$ is an inner unit normal to $M$. So the integral in question is equal to (may be up to the sign, depending upon choice of $n_y$) $$ I(x)=\int_{\mathbb R^3\backslash M}|\nabla_y\Gamma(x-y)|^2\,dy. $$

Denote $d=d(x)=\mathrm{dist}(\partial M,x)$, $r=|x-y|$ and $B_d(x)$ a ball of radius $d$ centered at $x$. To get a grasp on the last integral near the boundary let's take an inversion relatively the ball's surface $S_d(x)$, $r\to \frac{d^2}r$. Let $\tilde M_x$ be the image of ${\mathbb R^3\backslash M}$ under the inversion.

Substituting this transform in the integral gives $$ I(x)=\int_{\mathbb R^3\backslash M}|\nabla_y\Gamma(x-y)|^2\,dy= \int_{\mathbb R^3\backslash M}r^{-4}\,dy= $$ $$ \int_{\mathbb R^3\backslash M}r^{-4} r^2\,\cos\theta\,d\theta d \varphi dr= $$ $$ \int_{\tilde M_x}\frac{1}{\frac{d^4}{r^2}}\cos\theta\, d\theta d \varphi\, \frac{d^2}{r^2}dr= $$ $$ \frac1{d^2}\int_{\tilde M_x}\cos\theta\, d\theta d \varphi dr= \frac1{d^2}\int_{\tilde M_x}\frac1{r^2}\,dy. $$ As is seen from the formula in the spherical coordinates the integral sums up solid angles $A(r)$ of intersections $\tilde M_x\cap\{r=\mathrm{const}\}$ as seen from $x$: $$ I(x)=\frac1{d^2}\int_0^d A(r)\,dr. $$

Roughly speaking, the more space $\tilde M_x$ is taking in the ball $B_d(x)$ the larger is $I(x)$. So for $I(x)$ to be blowing up as $d\to0$ $\tilde M_x$ should take large enough part of $B_d(x)$. If $x$ is near the boundary $\partial M$ then the largest contribution to $I(x)$ comes from the part of $\mathbb R^3\backslash M$ that is near to $x$.

Let's consider the case $\partial M\in C^1$. Then for small $d$ sphere $S_d(x)$ touching $\partial M$ looks in vicinity of $x$ as if it is touching a plane. The compliment of $M$ is looking like a half-space.

An inversion of a tangent half-space to a unit sphere is a ball of radius $1/2$ touching the sphere from inside. It is easy to see for the planar case as the tangent line turns into a circle and in the three-dimensional case there is a rotational symmetry. The integral for $I(x)$ can be evaluated explicitly here, since the equation of the ball in the spherical coordinates is $0<r<\sin\theta$, $0<\theta<\pi/2$, and $$ A(r)={\int_0^{2 \pi } \left(\int_{\arcsin r}^{\pi/2} \cos \theta \, d\theta \right) \, d\varphi }=2\pi(1-r), $$ $$ \int_0^1 A(r)\,dr=\pi. $$ For a ball of radius $d$ the answer is multiplied by $d$, so $$ \frac1{d^2}\int_0^d A(r)\,dr=\frac1{d^2}\pi d=\frac\pi{d}. $$ Hence for bounded domains from $C^1$ the asymptotic is $I(x)\sim\frac{\pi} d$ as $d\to0^+$. In particular $\lim_{x\to x_0}I(x)=\infty$.

For a convex domain the answer is evidently the same and for polyhedrons it should be too. For the class of piecewise $C^1$ domains I think the answer is negative if $x_0$ is a point of an inward spike (or a cusp). In such cases $A(r)$ could be small enough to get $\int_0^d A(r)\,dr\le Cd^2$ for some points $x_n$ s.t. $x_n\to x_0$.

Note. The condition for $\lim_{x\to x_0}I(x)=\infty$ written above seems alike conditions for the boundary point $x_0$ to be regular. Naturally the question arises if it exactly so. If yes, it would give some known sufficient conditions for $x_0$ to have the required property, such as the exterior sphere condition or the exterior cone condition.

share|cite|improve this answer
Is $\Gamma(x)$ really equal to $\frac1{|x-y|}$? – tom Jun 24 '13 at 12:57
@tom thanks, it should be $1/|x|$, fixed it. – Andrew Jun 24 '13 at 13:00
This will take me some time to read it. I got stucked at the beginning. There you say something like $\int_{\mathbb{R}^3\setminus \{0\}} \frac1{\|x\|} \Delta \frac1{\|x\|} dx = 0$. I know that $\Delta \frac1{\|x\|} = \delta(x)$ but $\frac1{\|x\|}$ is not test function so I'm not sure if that won't cause any trouble. – tom Jun 24 '13 at 13:20
@tom $x\in M$ so $\Gamma(x-y)$ is harmonic in $\mathbb R^3\backslash \bar M$. – Andrew Jun 24 '13 at 13:31
Very nice! I went through it and I like it. From couriosity the trick with inversion is it some standart method or no? – tom Jun 24 '13 at 14:03

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.