Research article

Minimal translation graphs in semi-Euclidean space

  • Received: 06 February 2021 Accepted: 07 July 2021 Published: 12 July 2021
  • MSC : 53B25, 53B30

  • In this paper we study a characterization of minimal translation graphs which are generalization of minimal translation hypersurfaces in semi-Euclidean space.

    Citation: Derya Sağlam. Minimal translation graphs in semi-Euclidean space[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(9): 10207-10221. doi: 10.3934/math.2021591

    Related Papers:

    [1] Derya Sağlam . Correction: Minimal translation graphs in semi-Euclidean space. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(5): 9508-9508. doi: 10.3934/math.2022528
    [2] Derya Sağlam . Minimal homothetical and translation lightlike graphs in $ \mathbb{R} _{q}^{n+2} $. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(9): 17198-17209. doi: 10.3934/math.2022946
    [3] Derya Sağlam, Cumali Sunar . Translation hypersurfaces of semi-Euclidean spaces with constant scalar curvature. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(2): 5036-5048. doi: 10.3934/math.2023252
    [4] Jin Liu, Botao Wang . A rigidity result for $ 2 $-dimensional $ \lambda $-translators. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(10): 24947-24956. doi: 10.3934/math.20231272
    [5] M. Khalifa Saad, Nural Yüksel, Nurdan Oğraş, Fatemah Alghamdi, A. A. Abdel-Salam . Geometry of tubular surfaces and their focal surfaces in Euclidean 3-space. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(5): 12479-12493. doi: 10.3934/math.2024610
    [6] Ibrahim AL-Dayel, Emad Solouma, Meraj Khan . On geometry of focal surfaces due to B-Darboux and type-2 Bishop frames in Euclidean 3-space. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(7): 13454-13468. doi: 10.3934/math.2022744
    [7] Jedsadapong Pioon, Narin Petrot, Nimit Nimana . Convergence of distributed approximate subgradient method for minimizing convex function with convex functional constraints. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(7): 19154-19175. doi: 10.3934/math.2024934
    [8] Gözde Özkan Tükel . Integrable dynamics and geometric conservation laws of hyperelastic strips. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(9): 24372-24384. doi: 10.3934/math.20241186
    [9] Walter Carballosa, José M. Rodríguez, José M. Sigarreta . On the hyperbolicity of Delaunay triangulations. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(12): 28780-28790. doi: 10.3934/math.20231474
    [10] Chanchal Garodia, Izhar Uddin, Bahaaeldin Abdalla, Thabet Abdeljawad . A modified proximal point algorithm in geodesic metric space. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(2): 4304-4320. doi: 10.3934/math.2023214
  • In this paper we study a characterization of minimal translation graphs which are generalization of minimal translation hypersurfaces in semi-Euclidean space.



    As is wellknown the first non-trivial examples of minimal surfaces in 3-dimensional Euclidean space E3 are the catenoids, the helicoids and the minimal translation surfaces. A surface is called a translation surface if it is given by an immersion

    X:UE2E3,(x,y)(x,y,z),

    where z=f(x)+g(y). Scherk proved in 1835 that the only minimal translation surfaces (besides the planes) are the surfaces given by

    z=1alog|cos(ax)cos(ay)|,

    where a is a non-zero constant [1].

    In [2], it has been shown that the minimal translation surfaces are generalized to minimal translation hypersurfaces as follows:

    "Let Mn(n2) be a translation hypersurface in En+1 i.e. Mn is the graph of a function

    F:RnR:(x1,,xn)F(x1,,xn)=f1(x1)++fn(xn),

    where fi is a smooth function of one real variable for i=1,,n. Then Mn is minimal if and only if either Mn is a hyperplane or a product submanifold Mn=M2×En2, where M2 is a minimal translation surface of Scherk in E3."

    In [3], Woestyne parameterized minimal translation surfaces in the 3-dimensional Minkowski space R31 with metric g=dx21+dx22dx23, in the following theorems:

    Theorem 1. Every minimal, spacelike surface of translation in R31, is congruent to a part of one of the following surfaces:

    1. A spacelike plane,

    2. The surface of Scherk of the first kind, a parametrization of the surface is F(x,y)=(x,y,a1log(cosh(ay)/cosh(ax))), with tanh2(ax)+tanh2(ay)<1 [3].

    Theorem 2. Every minimal, timelike surface of translation in R31, is congruent to a part of one of the following surfaces:

    1. A timelike plane,

    2. The surface of Scherk of the first kind, a parametrization of the surface is F(x,y)=(x,y,a1log(cosh(ay)/cosh(ax)))with tanh2(ax)+tanh2(ay)>1.

    3. The surface of Scherk of the second kind, a parametrization of the surface is F(x,y)=(x,y,a1log(cosh(ay)/sinh(ax))).

    4. The surface of Scherk of the third kind, a parametrization of the surface is F(x,y)=(x,y,a1log(sinh(ay)/sinh(ax))).

    5. A flat B-scroll over a null curve, a parametrization of the surface is F(x,y)=(x,y,±x+g(y))with g(y) an arbitrary function [3].

    Seo, gave a classification of the translation hypersurfaces with constant mean curvature or constant Gauss–Kronecker curvature in Euclidean space or Lorentz– Minkowski space in [4]. Also they characterized the minimal translation hypersurfaces in the upper half-space model of hyperbolic space. In particular, they proved the following theorem:

    Theorem 3. Let M be a translation hypersurface with constant mean curvature H in Rn+1. Then M is congruent to a cylinder Σ×Rn2, where Σ is a constant mean curvature surface in R3. In particular, if H=0, then M is either a hyperplane or M=Σ×Rn2, where Σ is a Scherk's minimal translation surface in R3[4].

    And they can obtained a similar result in the Lorentz–Minkowski space as follows:

    Theorem 4. Let M be a spacelike translation hypersurface with constant mean curvature H in Ln+1. Then M is congruent to a cylinder Σ×Rn2, where Σ is a constant mean curvature surface in L3. In particular, if H=0, then M is either a hyperplane or M=Σ×Rn2, where Σ is a Scherk's maximal spacelike translation surface in L3 [4].

    In [5], Hasanis and Lopez classified and described the construction of all minimal translation surfaces in R3. In 2019, Aydın and Ogrenmis investigated translation hypersurfaces generated by translating planar curves and classified these translation hypersurfaces with constant Gauss-Kronecker and mean curvature [6]. Recently, many authors have studied the geometry of minimal translational hypersurface [7,8,9,10,11,12].

    In [12], Yang, Zhang and Fu gave a characterization of a class of minimal translation graphs which are generalization of minimal translation hypersurfaces in Euclidean space. In this paper we study a characterization of minimal translation graphs in semi-Euclidean space.

    By the (n+1)-dimensional semi-Euclidean space with index ν, denoted by Rn+1ν, mean Rn+1 equipped with the semi-Euclidean metric

    g=ε1dx21+ε2dx22++εn+1dx2n+1, (2.1)

    for which εi,(i=1,2,,n+1) is either 1 or 1. We assume n2. The number of minus signs is equal to the index ν and is given by

    ν=12(n+1n+1j=1εj).

    Let Mn be a hypersurface of Rn+1ν for which the induced metric is non-degenerate. Then Mn can locally always be seen as the graph of a function F:RnR. In what follows, we will assume that f is a function of the coordinates x1,,xn. This can easily be achieved possibly by rearranging the coordinates of Rn+1ν. So Mn is locally given by

    xn+1=F(x1,xn). (2.2)

    Assume that Mn is minimal. This means that the mean curvature vector vanishes at every point. The graph Mn in the semi-Euclidean space Rnν is minimal if and only if

    nj=1εj[2Fx2j(ni=1εi(Fxi)2+εn+1)Fxjni=1εiFxi2Fxixj]=0. (2.3)

    One easily calculates that minimality condition above [13].

    A hypersurface Mn in the semi-Euclidean space Rn+1ν is called translation graph if it is the graph of the function given by

    F(x1,,xn)=f1(x1)++fn1(xn1)+fn(u),

    where u=ni=1cixi, ci are constants, cn0 and each fi is a smooth function of one real variable for i=1,2,,n. Additionally in this paper, we assume that the following condition are provided:

    ni=1εic2i0andnj=1jiεjc2j0,foralli=1,,n1. (2.4)

    fi vanishes nowhere for i=1,2,,n, otherwise Mn is a non-degenerate hyperplane.

    The minimality condition (2.3) can be rewritten as

    εn+1nj=1εjFjj+nijεiεj(F2iFjjFiFjFij)=0. (2.5)

    Then we calculate the partial derivatives in the Eq (2.5) for the translation graph,

    Fi=fi+cifn,Fn=cnfn, (2.6)
    Fii=fii+c2ifn,Fnn=c2nfn, (2.7)
    Fij=cicjfn,Fin=cicnfn, (2.8)

    for 1in1. Since Mn is minimal, we substitute (2.6)–(2.8) into (2.5) and we obtain

    εn+1n1i=1εifi+(εn+1ni=1εic2i+εnc2nn1i=1εif2i)fn+εnc2n(n1i=1εifi)f2n+n1i,j=1ijεiεj(fi+cifn)2fj+12n1i,j=1ijεiεj(cifjcjfi)2fn=0. (2.9)

    Since cn0, we take the derivative of the Eq (2.9) with respect to xn, we have

    [εn+1ni=1εic2i+εnc2nn1i=1εif2i+12n1i,j=1ijεiεj(cifjcjfi)2]fn+2[n1i,j=1εi(nj=1jiεjc2j)fi]fnfn+2n1i,j=1ijεiεjcififjfn=0. (2.10)

    According to the Eq (2.10), we get following cases:

    Case 1. fn=0.

    With proper translation, fn=mu2 for a constant m0 such that fn=mu2. If m=0, then Mn would not be a translation graph. According to this, we rewrite (2.10)

    2m2un1i=1εi(nj=1jiεjc2j)fi+mn1i,j=1ijεiεjcififj=0. (2.11)

    Since m0, we get

    n1i=1εi(nj=1jiεjc2j)fi=0,n1i,j=1ijεiεjcififj=0. (2.12)

    In the first equation of (2.12), each fi depends on a different variable, then fi has to be a constant for i=1,,n1. Also, let be fi(xi)=aix2i, where ai is constant. Then from (2.12) we obtain following equations

    n1i=1εi(nj=1jiεjc2j)ai=0,aicin1j=1jiεjaj=0,wherei=1,,n1. (2.13)

    Now we substitute fn=mu2 and fi(xi)=aix2i for i=1,,n1 in the Eq (2.9), we find

    4m2[n1i=1εi(nj=1jiεjc2j)ai]u2+8m(n1i,j=1ijεiεjaiciajxi)u4mn1i,j=1ijεiεjaiajcicjxixj+4n1i=1εia2i(mnj=1jiεjc2j+n1j=1jiεjaj)x2i+εn+1n1i=1εiai+εn+1mni=1εic2i=0. (2.14)

    According to (2.13) and (2.14), we obtain

    4mn1i,j=1ijεiεjaiajcicjxixj=4n1i=1εia2i(mnj=1jiεjc2j+n1j=1jiεjaj)x2i+εn+1n1i=1εiai+εn+1mni=1εic2i (2.15)

    Since the above equation is a quadratic polynomial with x1,,xn1, by the arbitrariness of xi, we get

    a2i(mnj=1jiεjc2j+n1j=1jiεjaj)=0,fori=1,,n1, (2.16)
    n1i=1εiai+mni=1εic2i=0 (2.17)

    and

    aiajcicj=0,fori,j=1,,n1,ij. (2.18)

    According to (2.16) and (2.17), we find

    a3i=m(ciai)2,fori=1,,n1. (2.19)

    From (2.18), we can see that at most one akck0. Without loss of generality, we assume ak0ck00 and every akck=0 for kk0. From (2.19), we get ak00 and ak=0 for kk0. According to this, with the first equation of (2.13) and the assumption (2.4), we have a contradiction. Therefore, we obtain that every ak=0 for k=1,,n1 and fi(xi)=0. By substituting this equalities in (2.9) we obtain mni=1εic2i=0, which is a contradiction with the assumption (2.4).

    Case 2. fn0.

    If we divide by fn on both sides of the Eq (2.10), we obtain

    [εn+1ni=1εic2i+εnc2nn1i=1εif2i+12n1i,j=1ijεiεj(cifjcjfi)2]+2[n1i=1εi(nj=1jiεjc2j)fi]fnfnfn+2[n1i,j=1ijεiεjcififj]fnfn=0 (2.20)

    Differentiating (2.20) with respect to u, we get

    [n1i=1εi(nj=1jiεjc2j)fi](fnfnfn)u+[n1i,j=1ijεiεjcififj](fnfn)u=0 (2.21)

    We have 3 possibilities.

    Case 2a. (fnfn)u0.

    In this case,

    fn=afn+bu, (2.22)

    where a,b are constants. Since fn0, then a0. By solving this equation we obtain

    fn(u)=keua+bu+ab,

    where k is a nonzero constant. According to this equation, we get

    (fnfnfn)u=kaeua0.

    Thus, according to (2.21), we obtain

    n1i=1εi(nj=1jiεjc2j)fi=0. (2.23)

    Since each fi depends on a different variable, then fi has to be a constant for i=1,,n1. Let be fi(xi)=aix2i, where ai is constant. From (2.23) we obtain

    n1i=1εi(nj=1jiεjc2j)ai=0.

    Hence, from (2.20) we have

    εn+1ni=1εic2i+εnc2nn1i=1εi(2aixi)2+12n1i,j=1ijεiεj(2ciajxj2cjaixi)2+8an1i,j=1ijεiεjciaiajxi=0.

    This is a contradiction.

    Case 2b. n1i=1εi(nj=1jiεjc2j)fi0.

    Let be n1i=1εi(nj=1jiεjc2j)fi=0. Then each fi is constant for i=1,,n1. Also we can write fi(xi)=aix2i, where ai is constant. From the assumption, we have

    n1i=1εi(nj=1jiεjc2j)ai=0.

    According to (2.21), we get

    n1i,j=1ijεiεjcififj=0.

    From (2.20), we obtain

    εn+1ni=1εic2i+εnc2nn1i=1εi(2aixi)2+12n1i,j=1ijεiεj(2ciajxj2cjaixi)2=0,

    which is a contradiction. Also it must be n1i=1εi(nj=1jiεjc2j)fi0. According to Cases 2a and 2b, we can rewrite (2.21)

    n1i,j=1ijεiεjcififjn1i=1εi(nj=1jiεjc2j)fi=(fnfnfn)u(fnfn)u=m, (2.24)

    where m is constant. Thus we have

    (fnfnfn)u=m(fnfn)u.

    By integration of this equation, we get

    fnfnfn=mfnfn+c (2.25)

    where c is a constant. Thus we have fnfn=mfn+cfn. By integration of this equation, we obtain

    f2n+2mfn=2cfn+c0, (2.26)

    where c0 is a constant. By solving this ODE, after a translation, we find

    fn={mu2clncos((m2+c0)2cu),ifm2+c0<0mu2clncosh(m2+c02cu),ifm2+c0>0and|fn+mm2+c0|<1mu2clnsinh(m2+c02cu),ifm2+c0>0and|fn+mm2+c0|>1mu2cln|u|,ifm2+c0=0.

    Moreover, from (2.24), we get

    n1i,j=1ijεiεjcififj=mn1i=1εi(nj=1jiεjc2j)fi. (2.27)

    Since

    n1i=1εi(nj=1jiεjc2j)fi0,

    all fi functions don't vanish for i=1,,n1. Let be fi00. By differentiating the Eq (2.27) with respect to xi0, we obtain

    (mni=1ii0εic2in1i=1ii0εicifi)fi0fi0=ci0n1i=1ii0εifi. (2.28)

    Thus we get the following case.

    Case 2c. mni=1ii0εic2in1i=1ii0εicifi=0.

    Let be mni=1ii0εic2in1i=1ii0εicifi0. From (2.28), we get

    fi0ci0fi0=n1i=1ii0εifimni=1ii0εic2in1i=1ii0εicifi=a, (2.29)

    where a is a constant. From (2.29), we obtain

    fi0=bi0eaci0xi0di0aci0xi0, (2.30)

    where bi0 and di0 are constants. According to (2.29), we get

    εi(fi+acifi)=mani=1ii0εic2i,

    for each i=1,,i01,i0+1,,n1. By solving the equation, we obtain

    fi=bieacixi+mni=1ii0εic2iεicixi, (2.31)

    where bi are constants for i=1,,i01,i0+1,,n1. By differentiating (2.27) with respect to xk for k=1,,i01,i0+1,,n1, we get

    fk(n1i=1ikεicifimni=1ikεic2i)+ckfkn1i=1ikεifi=0. (2.32)

    We substitute (2.30) and (2.31) in (2.32) and we obtain

    2ac3kbkni=1ik,ii0εic2ibiea(cixi+ckxk)=c3kbkBkeackxk, (2.33)

    where

    Bk=(n3)mni=1ii0εic2imni=1ikεic2iεi0di0a

    for k=1,,i01,i0+1,,n1. Since xk is arbitrary and from (2.31), we get c3kbkc2ibi=0. Hence ckbkcibi=0 for i,k=1,,i01,i0+1,,n1 and ik. Thus, there is at most one ckbk0. Let be all ckbk=0 for k=1,,i01,i0+1,,n1 and kj0. It follows

    fj0=abj0cj0eacj0xj0+mni=1ii0εic2iεj0cj0 (2.34)

    and

    fk=mnk=1ki0εkc2kεkck (2.35)

    for k=1,,i01,i0+1,,n1 and kj0. By substituting (2.30), (2.34) and (2.35) in (2.27), we obtain

    εi0(n3)m(ni=1ii0εic2i)a2bi0c2i0eaci0xi0+εj0a2bj0c2j0Ceacj0xj0=0,

    where

    C=(n3)mni=1ii0εic2imni=1ij0εic2iεi0di0a.

    We rewrite the Eq (2.20) for n=3

    ε43i=1εic2i+ε3c232i=1εif2i+ε1ε2(c1f2c2f1)2+2[2i=1εi(3j=1jiεjc2j)fi]f3f3f3+2[2i,j=1ijεiεjcififj]f3f3=0. (2.36)

    According to (2.25) and (2.27), (2.36) becomes

    ε4(ε1c21+ε2c22+ε3c23)+ε3c23(ε1f21+ε2f22)+ε1ε2(c1f2c2f1)2+2c(ε1(ε2c22+ε3c23)f1+ε2(ε1c21+ε3c23)f2)=0. (2.37)

    By differentiating the Eq (2.37) with respect to x1, we obtain

    ε3c23f1f1ε2c2(c1f2c2f1)f1+c(ε2c22+ε3c23)f1=0.

    If we arrange the equation above, then we get

    (ε2c22+ε3c23)(f1+cf1f1)=ε2c1c2f2. (2.38)

    From this equation, f2 is constant and f2=0. This is a contradiction. Also it must be

    mni=1ii0εic2in1i=1ii0εicifi=0.

    We showed that mni=1ii0εic2in1i=1ii0εicifi=0 and fi are constants for 1in1,ii0. Then fi(xi)=ai, where ai are constants for i=1,,i01,i0+1,,n1 and

    mni=1ii0εic2i=n1i=1ii0εiciai (2.39)

    We rewrite (2.20),

    εn+1ni=1εic2i+εnc2nn1i=1ii0εia2i+εi0f2i0ni=1ii0εic2i+n1j=1ji0(εja2jn1i=1ijεic2i)2εi0ci0fi0n1i=1ii0εiciain1j=1ji0(εjcjajn1i=1ij,ii0εiciai)+2εi0fi0(ni=1ii0εic2i)fnfnfn+2εi0fi0(n1i=1ii0εiciai)fnfn=0 (2.40)

    According to (2.25) and (2.39), we rewrite (2.40)

    εn+1ni=1εic2i+εnc2nn1i=1ii0εia2i+εi0f2i0ni=1ii0εic2i+n1j=1ji0(εja2jn1i=1ijεic2i)2εi0ci0fi0n1i=1ii0εiciain1j=1ji0(εjcjajn1i=1ij,ii0εiciai)+2εi0cfi0ni=1ii0εic2i=0. (2.41)

    We arrange this equation

    εi0(ni=1ii0εic2i)f2i02εi0ci0(n1i=1ii0εiciai)fi0+2εi0c(ni=1ii0εic2i)fi0+B=0, (2.42)

    with

    B=εn+1ni=1εic2i+εnc2nn1i=1ii0εia2i+n1j=1ji0(εja2jn1i=1ijεic2i)n1j=1ji0(εjcjajn1i=1ij,ii0εiciai)=εn+1ni=1εic2i+(εnc2n+εi0c2i0)n1i=1ii0εia2i+12n1i,j=1ij,i,ji0εiεj(aicjajci)2.

    From (2.39), we rewrite (2.42)

    f2i02mci0fi0+2cfi0+Bεi0(ni=1ii0εic2i)=0.

    By solving the equation, we find

    fi0={2clncosA2cxi0+mci0xi0,ifA<02clncoshA2cxi0+mci0xi0,ifA>0and|fi0mci0A|<12clnsinhA2cxi0+mci0xi0,ifA>0and|fi0mci0A|>12cln|xi0|+mci0xi0,ifA=0 (2.43)

    with

    A=Bεi0ni=1ii0εic2im2c2i0.

    Moreover fi(xi)=ai, where ai are constants for i=1,,i01,i0+1,,n1 and we rewrite (2.9) again

    [εn+1ni=1εic2i+εnc2nn1i=1ii0εia2i+εi0f2i0ni=1ii0εic2i+n1j=1ji0(εja2jn1i=1ijεic2i)2εi0ci0fi0n1i=1ii0εiciain1j=1ji0(εjcjajn1i=1ij,ii0εiciai)]fn+[εn+1εi0+εi0n1i=1ii0εia2i+(εi0ni=1ii0εic2i)f2n+2(εi0n1i=1ii0εiaici)fn]fi0=0. (2.44)

    According to (2.41) and (2.44), we get

    [εn+12c(ni=1ii0εic2i)fn+n1i=1ii0εia2i+(ni=1ii0εic2i)f2n+2(n1i=1ii0εiaici)fn]fi0=0. (2.45)

    Since fi00, by substituting (2.39) into (2.45) and we obtain

    f2n+2mfn=2cfnεn+1+n1i=1ii0εia2ini=1ii0εic2i.

    When considered this equation with (2.26), then

    c0=εn+1+n1i=1ii0εia2ini=1ii0εic2i.

    According to (2.39), we get

    m2+c0=εn+1ni=1ii0εic2iεnc2nn1i=1ii0εia2i[n1i=1ii0εia2in1i=1ii0εic2i(n1i=1ii0εiciai)2](ni=1ii0εic2i)2

    Depending on the epsilones (-1 or +1) in the above equation, m2+c0 can be positive, negative and zero. With suitable translation, we get fi=0 for i=1,,i01,i0+1,,n1 and following the equations

    fi0={2clncosM2cxi0,ifM<02clncoshM2cxi0,ifM>0and|fi0M|<12clnsinhM2cxi0,ifM>0and|fi0M|>12cln|xi0|,ifM=0 (2.46)

    and

    fn={2clncos(N2c(c1x1++cnxn)),ifN<02clncosh(N2c(c1x1++cnxn)),ifN>0and|fnN|<12clnsinh(N2c(c1x1++cnxn)),ifN>0and|fnN|>12cln|c1x1++cnxn|,ifN=0 (2.47)

    where

    M=εi0εn+1ni=1εic2ini=1ii0εic2i,N=εn+1ni=1ii0εic2i.

    Therefore we complete the proof of the following main theorem.

    Main theorem. Mn is a non-degenerate minimal translation graph in semi-Euclidean space Rn+1ν, if it is congruent to a part of one of the following surfaces:

    1. A non-degenerate hyperplane,

    2. A hypersurface parameterized by

    ϕ(x1,,xn)=(x1,,xn,F(x1,,xn)),F(x1,,xn)=fi0(xi0)+fn(u)

    where u=ni=1cixi, ci are constants, cn0, with the conditions in the Eq (2.4), for a unique i0, 1i0n1, such that fi0 and fn one of the previous forms in (2.46) and (2.47), respectively. In additionally, fk(xk)=0 for ki0 and 1kn1.

    Semi-Euclidean spaces are important in applications of general relativity which is the explanation of gravity in modern physics. In this study, we have a characterization of minimal translation graphs which are generalization of minimal translation hypersurfaces in semi-Euclidean space. Also, we obtain the main theorem by which we classify all non-degenerate minimal translation graphs.

    The author would like to thank the referees for their valuable suggestions.

    The author declares no conflict of interest.



    [1] L. Verstraellen, J. Walrave, S. Yaprak, The minimal translation surfaces in Euclidean space, Soochow J. Math., 20 (1994), 77–82.
    [2] F. Dillen, L. Verstraellen, G. Zafindratafa, A generalization of the translation surfaces of Scherk differential geometry in honor of Radu Rosca, Meeting on Pure and Applied Differential Geometry, Leuven, KU Leuven, Department Wiskunde, (1991), 107–109.
    [3] I. Van de Woestijne, Minimal surfaces of the 3-dimensional Minkowski space, In: M. Boyom, J. M. Morvan, L. Verstraelen, P. Bérard, B. Laget, C. M. Marle, Geometry and topology of submanifolds, II, Avignon: World Scientific, (1990), 344–369.
    [4] K. Seo, Translation hypersurfaces with constant curvature in space forms, Osaka J. Math., 50 (2013), 631–641.
    [5] T. Hasanis, R. López, Classification and construction of minimal translation surfaces in Euclidean space, Results Math., 75 (2020), 2–22. doi: 10.1007/s00025-019-1128-2
    [6] M. E. Aydın, A. O. Ogrenmis, Translation hypersurfaces with constant curvature in 4-dimensional isotropic space, 2017. Available from: https://arXiv.org/abs/1711.09051.
    [7] J. Inoguchi, R. López, M. I. Munteanu, Minimal translation surfaces in the Heisenberg group Nil3, Geom. Dedicata, 161 (2012), 221–231. doi: 10.1007/s10711-012-9702-8
    [8] R. López, M. I. Munteanu, Minimal translation surfaces in Sol3, J. Math. Soc. Jpn., 64 (2012), 985–1003.
    [9] M. Moruz, M. I. Munteanu, Minimal translation hypersurfaces in E4, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 439 (2016), 798–812. doi: 10.1016/j.jmaa.2016.02.077
    [10] M. I. Munteanu, O. Palmas, G. Ruiz-Hernandez, Minimal translation surfaces in Euclidean spaces, Mediter. J. Math., 13 (2016), 2659–2676. doi: 10.1007/s00009-015-0645-9
    [11] R. López, Ó. Perdemo, Minimal translation surfaces in Euclidean space, J. Geom. Anal., 27 (2017), 2926–2937. doi: 10.1007/s12220-017-9788-1
    [12] D. Yang, J. J. Zhang, Y. Fu, A note on minimal translation graphs in Euclidean space, Mathematics, 7 (2019), 889. doi: 10.3390/math7100889
    [13] I. Van de Woestyne, Minimal homothetical hypersurfaces of a semi-Euclidean, Results Math., 27 (1995), 333–342. doi: 10.1007/BF03322837
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Derya Sağlam, Correction: Minimal translation graphs in semi-Euclidean space, 2022, 7, 2473-6988, 9508, 10.3934/math.2022528
    2. Derya Sağlam, Minimal homothetical and translation lightlike graphs in Rn+2q, 2022, 7, 2473-6988, 17198, 10.3934/math.2022946
    3. Derya Sağlam, Cumali Sunar, Translation hypersurfaces of semi-Euclidean spaces with constant scalar curvature, 2022, 8, 2473-6988, 5036, 10.3934/math.2023252
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2021 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(2408) PDF downloads(93) Cited by(3)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog