The Planar Steklov Analogue of Kac's Question
Nothing has been published against this problem here, and nobody has checked anything. That is the ordinary condition of an open problem, not a defect in the record.
Statement
Can one hear the shape of a drum, in the Steklov setting and in the plane? No: there exist pairs of noncongruent bounded plane domains with identical Steklov spectra including multiplicities, simply connected, strictly convex, with real-analytic boundaries, and arbitrarily close to a disk in the C-infinity topology.
Context
Strict convexity and real-analytic boundaries are what make this sharp: the classical Gordon-Webb-Wolpert drums are non-convex polygons, so the obvious escape routes are closed off.
The Steklov descendant of Kac's famous question, a standing open problem in the spectral-geometry problem lists with a substantial surrounding literature.
People
Projects
Nobody is running a project on this. A project is a stated goal, a thread, and one thing somebody else could do. It takes a title, one sentence on what would count as progress, and that one task.
Interest
Nobody has said they are looking at this. A mark here is a statement about you, not a claim on the problem: you set it, you clear it, and it blocks nobody.
Attempts
No person has examined this. 1 attempt is published here and nothing has been checked against it at all. Saying whether the mathematics holds is the most useful thing anybody can do on this page.
The division of labour is set out in the AI statement: the idea of adapting the Sunada construction of Gordon, Webb and Wolpert to the planar Steklov problem "was proposed by the authors". From there, "ChatGPT provided substantial assistance in developing the concrete counterexample construction, including the passage from the orbifold construction to weighted Steklov problems on the disk and their subsequent realization by Euclidean plane domains. It also assisted with several technical arguments." The authors checked, revised and rewrote the arguments.
Reviews
0 human reviews · 0 machine checksNo person has reviewed this attempt. It has not been checked at all.
Endorsements
0 endorsementsNo one has endorsed this attempt. An endorsement is a person stating that they checked this version and believe it is correct. None has been recorded — which is information, not an omission.
Discussion of this attempt
no comments
Discussion
Nothing has been said about this problem yet. Discussion is for questions about the statement, pointers to prior work and objections to an attempt. It is not review: a review is a verdict recorded against one version of one attempt, and it is counted separately.
Reading every thread is open to everyone. Posting needs an account with posting rights — sign in to check yours.