Conformal invariants and quasiregular mappings
Conformal invariants and quasiregular mappings
复制标题
DOI:
10.1007/bf02792546
复制
发表时间:
1985-12
期刊:
影响因子:
--
通讯作者:
M. Vuorinen
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
M. Vuorinen
The theory of quasiconformal and quasiregular mappings in R', n _---2, has resulted from efforts to generalize the theory of conformal mappings and analytic functions of one complex variable (cf. the survey article [50]). The systematic study of n-dimensional quasiconformai mappings, ie one-to-one quasiregular mappings, was started in 1960 by FW Gehring and J. V/iis~ il/i. The study of nonhomeomorphic n-dimensional quasiregular mappings was started by Yu. G. Reshetnyak in 1966. The usual methods of the classical complex analysis such as those based on geometric or algebraic special properties of complex numbers (power series, infinite or finite sums and products, complex integration) are not applicable to the study of quasiregular mappings in R", n> 3. The case n= 2 is somewhat exceptional because in this case one can apply some powerful results, which have no counterpart in the higher dimensional case n _-> 3. Among such results are Riemann's mapping theorem [25, p. 14], Stoilow's decomposition theorem [25, p. 252], and the fundamental existence theorem [25, Kap. V]. In this paper the stress is on results which hold for all n=> 2 and the methods in this case are rather real variable than complex variable m~ thods. There are three approaches to the theory of n-dimensional quasiregular mappings, each based on different methods of proof. The first approach, due to Yu. G. Reshetnyak 1966-69, is analytic in character and makes use of tools from the PDE theory and differential geometry. The second approach, geometric in character, was developed by O. Martio, S. Rickman, and J. Viis~ il~ i in 1969-72. The second approach is based on tools from the geometric function theory, in particular, on the extremal length method of A. Beurling and LV Ahlfors [1, p. 81]. In the present context it is actually more convenient to use the modulus M (F) of a curve family F rather than the extremal length of F which is equal to I/M (F). The third, very recent, approach of B. Bojarski and T. Iwaniec [7] is based on maximal functions and other ideas from real analysis.