Erdős Problem #1040 — Let F⊆CF\subseteq \mathbb{C} be a closed infinite set, and let μ(F)\mu(F) be the infimum of ∣{z:∣f(z)∣<1}∣,\lvert \{ z: \lvert f(z)\rvert < 1\}\rvert, as ff ranges over all polynomials of the shape ∏(z−zi)\prod (z-z_i)…

About 68 years old · traced to

Let F⊆CF\subseteq \mathbb{C} be a closed infinite set, and let μ(F)\mu(F) be the infimum of ∣{z:∣f(z)∣<1}∣,\lvert \{ z: \lvert f(z)\rvert < 1\}\rvert, as ff ranges over all polynomials of the shape ∏(z−zi)\prod (z-z_i) with zi∈Fz_i\in F. Is μ(F)\mu(F) determined by the transfinite diameter of FF? In particular, is μ(F)=0\mu(F)=0 whenever the transfinite diameter of FF is ≥1\geq 1?

References

Progress summary

Refreshed
Claimed solved

A recent preprint disproves the conjecture: two sets with the same capacity can have different minimum sublevel-set areas, although a related boundary case remains open.

Erdős, Herzog, and Piranian posed the question in 1958, asking whether μ(F)\mu(F) is determined solely by the transfinite diameter of FF. The answer is now negative.

Known results

  • Erdős, Herzog, and Piranian (1958): affirmative for line segments and discs; they also obtained a positive lower-radius bound when the transfinite diameter is less than 11.
  • Erdős and Netanyahu (1973): for bounded connected FF with transfinite diameter c∈(0,1)c\in(0,1), every relevant sublevel set contains a disc of radius bounded below in terms of cc.

April 2026 disproof and extensions

“A note on the Erdős minimal area problem” constructs compact sets K1,K2K_1,K_2 with equal capacity but unequal μ\mu, even allowing arbitrarily different values at fixed capacity. It also proves μ(K)=0\mu(K)=0 for every compact KK with capacity greater than 11; the general capacity-one case remains open.

Current status (as of June 2026): The original transfinite-diameter question is settled negatively; the general capacity-one vanishing problem remains open.

Sources

Solutions 0

No solutions have been posted yet.