2012
DOI: 10.1007/s00209-012-1063-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Totally geodesic discs in strongly convex domains

Abstract: International audienc

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…(8.11) Since z n ∈ Ω there exists a unique complex geodesic ϕ n of the domain Ω so that ϕ n (0) = z n and ϕ n (1) = e 1 . As a consequence of [17,Lemma 3.5], the restriction α n : [0, 1) → C q of ϕ n extends C 1 -smoothly to the closed interval [0, 1] and α ′ (1) ∈ T e 1 ∂Ω, hence as the real number t increases to 1, the point ϕ n (t) converges to e 1 non-tangentially.…”
Section: Existence Of Backward Orbitsmentioning
confidence: 95%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…(8.11) Since z n ∈ Ω there exists a unique complex geodesic ϕ n of the domain Ω so that ϕ n (0) = z n and ϕ n (1) = e 1 . As a consequence of [17,Lemma 3.5], the restriction α n : [0, 1) → C q of ϕ n extends C 1 -smoothly to the closed interval [0, 1] and α ′ (1) ∈ T e 1 ∂Ω, hence as the real number t increases to 1, the point ϕ n (t) converges to e 1 non-tangentially.…”
Section: Existence Of Backward Orbitsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Complex geodesics are isometries between (D, k D ) and (Ω, k Ω ), and therefore map real geodesic of D to real geodesic in Ω. On the other hand every real geodesic of Ω is contained in some complex geodesic [17,Lemma 3.3], and its pullback is a real geodesic in D. Hence every real geodesic in Ω is C ∞ , and for all x = y ∈ Ω the geodesic segment joining x to y is unique up to isometries of the interval I. Moreover for every p ∈ Ω and ζ ∈ ∂Ω there exists a unique geodesic ray connecting the two points.…”
Section: Real Geodesicsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recent work on the rigidity of local Bergman isometries may be found in [40]. Isometries of the Kobayashi metric between a strongly pseudoconvex domain and the ball are also shown to be rigid in [33] while a more recent result in [24] proves the rigidity of an isometry between a pair of strongly convex domains even in the non equidimensional case; the choice of either the Kobayashi or the Carathéodory metric is irrelevant here since the two coincide. However, this seems to be unknown for isometries of the Kobayashi or the Carathéodory metric between a pair of strongly pseudoconvex domains.…”
Section: Setmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…However, the proof given there is incorrect. In fact, by carefully reading that proof, one can see that what the authors of [GS13] claimed is essentially the following (with notations fixed there): Let Ω be a bounded strongly convex domain with C 3 -smooth boundary and let p ∈ ∂Ω. Let φ be a complex geodesic of Ω with φ(1) = p and ψ be a holomorphic mapping from ∆ into Ω such that ψ(1) = p and ψ ′ (1) = φ ′ (1).…”
Section: Uniqueness Of Complex Geodesics With Prescribed Boundary Datamentioning
confidence: 99%