Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Source. Thomas Jenrich, A 64-dimensional two-distance counterexample to Borsuk's conjecture, arXiv:1308.0206v6 (20 August 2014), 7 pages. The paper numbers no theorems; its result is the content of Section 7, "The 64-dimensional counterexample", which runs from p. 3 to p. 4. See the source card.
Setting
Let be the graph, a strongly regular graph with parameters , on vertex set , and let be its adjacency matrix (Sections 2--3, pp. 1--2). With smallest eigenvalue , the vectors , , are the columns of : each has a in position , a in each of the positions adjacent to , and elsewhere. For distinct , is when are adjacent and otherwise, so the form a two-distance set; since the positive eigenvalue has multiplicity , they span a space of dimension at most (p. 2). A subset of the has smaller diameter than the whole set exactly when the corresponding vertices are pairwise adjacent, and, citing Bondarenko, has no clique of more than vertices (p. 2).
Section 5 (pp. 2--3) numbers the isotropic points of the nondegenerate Hermitian form on used in the construction of (Section 4, p. 2), attaches to each vertex the set of its isotropic points, lets be the vertices whose set contains the point and , and splits into the vertex sets of the connected pieces of the subgraph induced on . The program G24CHK checks (Section 6, p. 3) that there are three pieces of vertices each, so and , and that each has exactly neighbours in when , none when , and when . Sections 7 and 8 take these graph facts as given.
Statement
The vectors form a two-distance set spanning a space of dimension at most , and any subset of them of smaller diameter contains at most vectors. Hence they cannot be divided into fewer than parts of smaller diameter, and since the paper concludes (p. 4): "Because , the answer to Borsuk's question for is negative."
The dimension bound comes from a vector in , equal to on , on and elsewhere, which is orthogonal to every with but not to every , ; so the dimension drops by at least one from the bound (pp. 3--4).
Qualifications printed in the section (p. 4).
- The paper says it can be shown, for instance by vector calculations, that the inequalities and hold with equality, and that the proofs are not included. The counterexample needs only the upper bounds.
- It reports Bondarenko's remark that a computer check had shown at least parts are needed; the section itself proves .
Proof pointer and dependencies
The argument is the inner-product computation of Section 7 (pp. 3--4), which uses the neighbour counts of Section 6 to evaluate .
- The neighbour counts in and the sizes rest on the program G24CHK, distributed with the arXiv source; the paper notes that only the count of neighbours for needs the actual construction (p. 3). The program has not been run for this page.
- The clique bound is taken from Bondarenko's arXiv paper on two-distance sets, cited as [2] (p. 2); the bound follows from the eigenvalue multiplicity (p. 2); the remark on parts is cited from the published version, [3] (p. 4).
Read depth: claims checked. Sections 2--8 were read on the page images of pp. 1--4, clause by clause for the statement and its setting; the computational facts and the cited bounds were not re-derived.
The joint paper with Brouwer, which p. 1 says follows the principal idea of this manuscript but avoids the extensive computational part, is recorded at theorem_1; this manuscript is a separate source and not its locator.
Bears on
- E0505: after scaling to diameter one, the section's set gives a negative answer in dimension 64, resting on the computer-checked graph facts of Section 6 and on Bondarenko's clique bound, which the manuscript takes as given.