Self-intersections of Laurent polynomials and the density of Jordan curves
Sergei Kalmykov, Leonid V. Kovalev

TL;DR
This paper extends bounds on self-intersections from polynomial to Laurent polynomial curves and demonstrates that circle embeddings are dense among all planar circle maps.
Contribution
It generalizes Quine's bound to Laurent polynomials and proves the density of circle embeddings in the space of all circle-to-plane maps.
Findings
Extended Quine's bound to Laurent polynomial curves
Proved density of circle embeddings among all circle maps
Applicable to understanding curve self-intersections and embeddings
Abstract
We extend Quine's bound on the number of self-intersection of curves with polynomial parameterization to the case of Laurent polynomials. As an application, we show that circle embeddings are dense among all maps from a circle to a plane with respect to an integral norm.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Self-intersections of Laurent polynomials and the density of Jordan curves
Sergei Kalmykov
School of mathematical sciences, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 800 Dongchuan RD, Shanghai 200240, China;
Institute of applied mathematics FEB RAS, Vladivostok, 7 Radio str., Russia.
and
Leonid V. Kovalev
215 Carnegie, Mathematics Department, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY 13244, USA
Abstract.
We extend Quine’s bound on the number of self-intersection of curves with polynomial parameterization to the case of Laurent polynomials. As an application, we show that circle embeddings are dense among all maps from a circle to a plane with respect to an integral norm.
Key words and phrases:
Jordan curves, Laurent polynomials, trigonometric polynomials, self-intersections, Bezout theorem, resultant, intersection multiplicity
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary 30B60; Secondary 12D10, 42A05
First author supported by SJTU start-up grant program WF220407115 and partially by Russian Foundation for Basic Research (grant 18-31-00101)
Second author supported by the National Science Foundation grants DMS-1362453 and DMS-1764266.
1. Introduction
In 1973 Quine [7] proved that, with few exceptions, the restriction of a complex polynomial of degree to the unit circle is a closed curve with at most self-intersections, and this upper bound is best possible. The exceptional case is the polynomial being of the form where is a polynomial and .
In the context of continuous circle maps it is natural to consider Laurent polynomials , which can approximate uniformly. Our main result (Theorem 2.1) asserts, in part, that the closed curve has at most self-intersections when , unless is of the form where is a Laurent polynomial and . This estimate is sharp when , as is shown in Section 3. It also matches Quine’s bound which corresponds to .
As a consequence of the finiteness of self-intersections, we obtain the density of circle embeddings in norms for finite .
Theorem** (Theorem 4.1).**
For , every function can be approximated in the norm by orientation-preserving -smooth embeddings of into .
When , it follows that one can obtain no quantitative estimates for the Fourier coefficients based on the fact that is an embedding, even if its orientation is known. Such estimates are available under additional geometric conditions such as convexity or starlikeness of : e.g., the Radó-Kneser-Choquet theorem [2, p. 29] implies that for positively oriented convex curves. The relation between and the shape of was considered in [4, 5].
2. Self-intersections of Laurent polynomials
Consider a Laurent polynomial
[TABLE]
where , , and . On the unit circle this can be written as a trigonometric polynomial,
[TABLE]
We are interested in the self-intersections of the closed parametric curve . By definition, a self-intersection of on is a two-point subset where and . For example, the image of under passes through [math] three times, which counts as three self-intersections, namely , , and . To motivate this way of counting, observe that the image of under a perturbed function with close to has three distinct self-intersections near [math].
Replacing by if necessary, we make sure that . Also, since the constant term does not affect self-intersections, we may assume . Thus, the case of algebraic polynomials considered by Quine [7] corresponds to . It should be noted that Quine considers the vertices of , which are the values attained more than once. The number of vertices may be smaller than the number of self-intersections, but Quine’s argument applies to both. The main result of this paper is the following theorem.
Theorem 2.1**.**
If and , the number of self-intersections of the Laurent polynomial (2.1) on is at most
[TABLE]
with the following exceptions: (a) can be written as for some Laurent polynomial and some integer ; (b) and .
Remark 2.2*.*
If with , the polynomial traces a closed curve more than once, thus creating uncountably many self-intersections. If and , the number of self-intersections may also be infinite: consider where is an algebraic polynomial of degree . This polynomial has self-intersections , for all .
The sharpness of Theorem 2.1 is discussed in Section 3. Its proof requires preliminary lemmas involving Chebyshev polynomials and resultants.
Let , , be the Chebyshev polynomial of second kind of degree . Recall that
[TABLE]
By convention, and for ; both of these formulas are consistent with (2.4).
Lemma 2.3**.**
Consider a Laurent polynomial (2.1) with , , , and . Let
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Then, with , we have
[TABLE]
Also, is a polynomial in of total degree , and is a polynomial in of total degree . Finally, if and are considered as elements of , their resultant is a polynomial of degree in .
Proof.
The property (2.7) follows by expanding into a sum and observing that
[TABLE]
The monomial of highest degree in comes from multiplying the leading term of by . This leading term is (see, e.g. [1, 2.1.E.10(g), p. 37]), and therefore the leading monomial in is .
Concerning , note that the total degree of is , which is strictly decreasing for negative and constant for positive . Thus, if , the monomial of highest degree in is , which has degree . If , then the highest degree is , which is is achieved by multiple monomials. Their sum is
[TABLE]
There is no cancellation between monomials in (2.8).
For the computation of the resultant of and , write down their Sylvester matrix (see e.g. [3, (1.12), Chapter 12, p. 400] or [9, Chapter 1, p. 24]) as
[TABLE]
which is a matrix of size where the diagonal elements are of degree in , while off-diagonal elements are of degree less than . It follows that the determinant of this matrix is a polynomial of degree in . ∎
Lemma 2.4**.**
Let , , be as in Lemma 2.3. Given a self-intersection of , write it in the form where and . Let . Then , i.e., the algebraic curves and intersect at the points and . Different self-intersections correspond to different pairs .
Proof.
The identity (2.7) implies . Since , we also have from (2.6). Since the self-intersection can also be written as , it follows that and vanish at as well. Finally, the pair determines up to replacing with , , which does not change the self-intersection set . ∎
Proof of Theorem 2.1.
We begin with the case . For the Laurent polynomial agrees with the harmonic polynomial
[TABLE]
Let , where . This is an invertible -linear transformation of the plane, with the inverse . We have
[TABLE]
where the coefficient of vanishes by the choice of . Returning to the Laurent polynomial form, we have for ,
[TABLE]
If depends only on for some , then by applying the inverse transformation we conclude that the original polynomial had the same property, i.e., exceptional case (a) holds. Apart from this exceptional case, we can apply Theorem 2.1 to , with . The bound provided by (2.3) is largest when , when it is equal to . This completes the case .
From now on, . Let and be as in Lemma 2.3. The polynomials and are relatively prime in , for otherwise their resultant would be identically zero, contradicting Lemma 2.3. We also want to show they are relatively prime in . If not, there is a nonconstant polynomial that divides both and . Let be a zero of . Then for all , which in view of (2.5) implies . The definition of the Chebyshev polynomial implies that for some integer . By virtue of (2.7) we have for all . Comparing the coefficients of these Laurent polynomials, we conclude that can be written in the form where is such that is a primitive th root of unity, and is a Laurent polynomial. This is the exceptional case (a) of the theorem.
Thus, and are relatively prime in . By Bezout’s theorem [9, Chapter 3, Theorem 3.1, p. 59] they have at most common zeros. By Lemma 2.4, the number of self-intersections of is at most . This proves the case of (2.3). The case requires additional consideration of the intersection between and at infinity, similar to the proof of Theorem 3 in [8].
Recalling (2.5) and (2.6), we can write the polynomials and in terms of homogeneous coordinates as follows:
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Since is a polynomial, the index- term in (2.10) is divisible by which is a monomial of degree . Thus, has a zero of order at the point of the projective space . Similarly, the index- term of (2.11) is divisible by the monomial of degree . Thus, has a zero of order at the point of . By Theorem 5.10 in [9, p. 114], the curves and have an intersection of multiplicity at least at .
Since the index- term in the sum (2.10) has degree in and jointly, it follows that has a zero of order at . Also, the index term in (2.11) has degree in and jointly, which implies that has a zero of order at . (As usual, a zero of order [math] is not a zero at all.) This results in the intersection multiplicity at least at .
Subtracting the intersections at and from the total number given by Bezout’s theorem, we conclude that the curves and have at most
[TABLE]
intersections in the affine plane . By Lemma 2.4, the number of self-intersections of is bounded by , in agreement with (2.3). This completes the proof of Theorem 2.1. ∎
3. Lower bound on the number of self-intersections
The case of algebraic polynomials, considered by Quine [7], corresponds to in Theorem 2.1, when the estimate on the number of self-intersections is . This bound is attained by for small , as shown in [7].
The following proposition implies that the bound provided by Theorem 2.1 is also sharp when is negative and coprime to .
Proposition 3.1**.**
Suppose , , and . Then for sufficiently small the Laurent polynomial has self-intersections on .
Proof.
The polynomial from (2.5) takes the form
[TABLE]
where . Note that and have no common zeros because . Therefore, any solution of with and arises from
[TABLE]
The zeros of the left-hand side of (3.2) on are for . It follows that for small enough , (3.2) holds at points of . Indeed, there are two such points near with , and one such point next to (only if is even). This adds up to when is even, and when is odd.
Thus, we have values of for which , and for each of them there are values os (roots of either or ) such that (3.1) turns into [math]. Each such pair produces a self-intersection of by virtue of (2.7), and all these self-intersections are distinct by Lemma 2.4. In conclusion, there are self-intersections of . ∎
We do not know whether Theorem 2.1 is sharp when and are not coprime, or when .
4. Approximating closed curves by Jordan curves
Let be the set of all circle embeddings, i.e., continuous injective maps of into . It is well known that continuous maps are dense in for . In this section we prove that is dense as well. As a corollary, it follows that the Fourier coefficients of a circle embedding can be arbitrarily close to any element of .
Note that the real-variable analog of this result is false: continuous injective maps are not dense in for any , as their closure is the set of monotone functions. Also, is not dense in the space of continuous maps with the uniform norm, e.g., a continuous map of onto a “figure eight” curve cannot be uniformly approximated by injective maps.
Theorem 4.1**.**
For , every function can be approximated in the norm by orientation-preserving -smooth embeddings of into .
Proof.
By the Stone-Weierstrass theorem, the Laurent polynomials are dense in , hence dense in . By a slight perturbation we can ensure that does not fall into either of the exceptional cases of Theorem 2.1 and therefore has a finite number of self-intersections. Consequently, there is a finite subset such that is injective on .
After removing small disjoint neighborhoods of the elements of from , we obtain a finite set of disjoint arcs , whose images under are disjoint smooth simple arcs , . Recall that a simple arc (a homeomorphic image of a line segment) does not separate the plane [6, Theorem V.10.1]. By Janiszewski’s theorem [6, Theorem V.9.1.2], the set is connected.
The arcs have orientation induced by the positive (counterclockwise) orientation of . Since the complement of consists of smooth arcs, every boundary point of is accessible from the domain by a smooth curve. In particular, we can join the endpoint of to the beginning of by a smooth curve that stays within . This replaces and by one simple arc, which we can make smooth as well.
Continue the above process until only one smooth oriented arc is left. We have two topologically different ways to join its ends, creating either a positively oriented simple closed curve, or a negatively oriented one. Up to a global homeomorphism, this choice amounts by completing the oriented segment either by the upper semicircle with counterclockwise orientation, or by the lower semicircle with clockwise orientation. We choose the closed curve to be positively oriented.
It remains to consider the impact of the above modifications on the norm of the parameterized curve . To do this, from the beginning we pick a large such that on , and perform the replacements so that the connecting curves remain within the open disk . Then the distance between the original and modified curves is controlled by the linear measure of the set on which is modified, and this measure can be made arbitrarily small. ∎
The Fourier coefficients of an integrable function are given by
[TABLE]
Theorem 4.1 and Parseval’s theorem imply the following result.
Corollary 4.2**.**
For any sequence and any there exists an orientation-preserving circle embedding such that .
Such density no longer holds in some weighted norms. For example, for every orientation-preserving circle embedding, as this quantity is proportional to the area enclosed by .
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Peter Borwein and Tamás Erdélyi, Polynomials and polynomial inequalities , Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 161, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1995. MR 1367960
- 2[2] Peter Duren, Harmonic mappings in the plane , Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics, vol. 156, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2004. MR 2048384
- 3[3] I. M. Gelfand, M. M. Kapranov, and A. V. Zelevinsky, Discriminants, resultants and multidimensional determinants , Modern Birkhäuser Classics, Birkhäuser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 2008, Reprint of the 1994 edition. MR 2394437
- 4[4] R. R. Hall, On an inequality of E. Heinz , J. Analyse Math. 42 (1982/83), 185–198. MR 729409
- 5[5] Leonid V. Kovalev and Xuerui Yang, Fourier series of circle embeddings , ar Xiv e-prints (2018), ar Xiv:1808.04817.
- 6[6] M. H. A. Newman, Elements of the topology of plane sets of points , Second edition, reprinted, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1961. MR 0132534
- 7[7] J. R. Quine, On the self-intersections of the image of the unit circle under a polynomial mapping , Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 39 (1973), 135–140. MR 0313485
- 8[8] by same author, Some consequences of the algebraic nature of p ( e i θ ) 𝑝 superscript 𝑒 𝑖 𝜃 p(e^{i\theta}) , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 224 (1976), no. 2, 437–442 (1977). MR 0419743
