We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
We started our study of the distinct distances problem in Section 1.6. The mathematicians Elekes and Sharir used to discuss this problem. Around the turn of the millennium, Elekes discovered a reduction from this problem to a problem about intersections of helices in R^3. Elekes said that, if something happens to him, then Sharir should publish their ideas.
Elekes passed away in 2008 and, as requested, Sharir then published their ideas. Before publishing, Sharir simplified the reduction so that it led to a problem about intersections of parabolas in R^3. Sharing the reduction with the general community had surprising consequences. Hardly any time had passed before Guth and Katz managed to apply the reduction to almost completely solve the distinct distances problem.
In this chapter we study the reduction of Elekes, Sharir, Guth, and Katz. This reduction is based on parameterizing rotations of the plane as points in R^3. As a warmup, we begin with a problem about distinct distances between two lines.
In Chapter 7 we studied the ESGK framework. This was a reduction from the distinct distances problem to a problem about pairs of intersecting lines in R^3. In the current chapter we further reduce the problem to bounding the number of rich points of lines in R^3. We solve this incidence problem with a more involved variant of the constant-degree polynomial partitioning technique. This completes the proof of the Guth–Katz distinct distances theorem.
The original proof of Guth and Katz is quite involved. We study a simpler proof for a slightly weaker variant of the distinct distances theorem. This simpler proof was introduced by Guth and avoids the use of tools such as flat points and properties of ruled surfaces.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.