Proving d(x,A) ≤ d(x,y) + d(y,A) in Metric Spaces

  • MHB
  • Thread starter ozkan12
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Metric
In summary, the proof uses three properties of infimum to show that d(x,A) is less than d(x,y)+d(y,A).
  • #1
ozkan12
149
0
I am trying with no luck to prove:

Let (X,d) be a metric space and A a non-empty subset of X. For x,y in X, prove that

d(x,A) ≤ d(x,y) + d(y,A)d(x,A)=infz∈Ad(x,z). Now, say z0∈A and y∈X. Then d(x,z0)≤d(x,y)+d(y,z0). Taking infimum over all z∈A of the left hand side, we obtain:

d(x,A)=infz∈Ad(x,z)≤d(x,z0)≤d(x,y)+d(y,z0).

Observe that d(x,A) is now independent of z0. Hence taking the infimum over all z in A of the right hand side, we get:

d(x,A)≤d(x,y)+infz∈Ad(y,z)=d(x,y)+d(y,A).

İn this proof, we take inf for d(y,z0). but why we didnt take inf for d(x,y) ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
ozkan12 said:
İn this proof, we take inf for d(y,z0). but why we didnt take inf for d(x,y) ?
Because infimum is taken over $z_0$, and $d(x,y)$ does not depend on $z_0$.

The proof uses three properties of infimum.

  1. If $u\in B$, then $\inf B\le u$.
  2. If $v\le u$ for all $u\in B$, then $v\le\inf B$.
  3. $\inf_{u\in B}(c+u)=c+\inf B$ where $c$ does not depend on $u$.
(You may observe that properties 1 and 2 form the definition of infimum. Property 3 is proved using the interaction between $+$ and $\le$.)

Starting from $d(x,z_0)\le d(x,y)+d(y,z_0)$ and using property 1 where $u=d(x,z_0)$ and $B=\{d(x,z)\mid z\in A\}$, we get
\[
d(x,A)\overset{\text{def}}{=}\inf_{z\in A} d(x,z)\le d(x,z_0)\le d(x,y)+d(y,z_0).
\]
This inequality holds for all $z_0\in A$. Now applying property 2 where $v=d(x,A)$ and $B=\{d(x,y)+d(y,z_0)\mid z_0\in A\}$, we get
\[
d(x,A)\le\inf_{z\in A} (d(x,y)+d(y,z)).
\]
Finally, applying property 3 we get
\[
d(x,A)\le d(x,y)+\inf_{z\in A} d(y,z)\overset{\text{def}}{=}d(x,y)+d(y,A).
\]

P.S. I suggest you click the "Reply With Quote" button and study the LaTeX formatting in my post. It's not difficult, and you will be able to type your questions using beautiful math.
 
  • #3


We do not need to take the infimum for d(x,y) because it is already a fixed value in the inequality. The inequality states that d(x,A) is less than or equal to the sum of d(x,y) and d(y,A). We do not need to take the infimum for d(x,y) because it is already a fixed value and does not change. We only need to take the infimum for d(y,z) because it is a variable that can take on different values within the set A.
 

FAQ: Proving d(x,A) ≤ d(x,y) + d(y,A) in Metric Spaces

What is the purpose of proving d(x,A) ≤ d(x,y) + d(y,A) in metric spaces?

The purpose of this proof is to show that the distance between a point x and a set A is always less than or equal to the sum of the distance between x and another point y, and the distance between y and the same set A. This is a fundamental property in metric spaces that helps us understand the relationships between points and sets.

What is d(x,A) and how is it different from d(x,y)?

d(x,A) represents the distance between a point x and a set A in a metric space. It is the shortest distance from x to any point in the set A. On the other hand, d(x,y) represents the distance between two points x and y in the same metric space. While d(x,A) is the distance between a point and a set, d(x,y) is the distance between two individual points.

Can you provide an example to better understand the concept of d(x,A) ≤ d(x,y) + d(y,A)?

Sure, let's consider a metric space where the set A is a circle with a radius of 5 units, and x and y are two points on the circle. In this case, d(x,A) is the distance between x and the circle A, which is 5 units. And d(x,y) is the distance between x and y, which is also 5 units since they are both on the circle. Therefore, according to the property we are proving, d(x,A) ≤ d(x,y) + d(y,A) = 5 + 5 = 10 units. This means that the distance between x and the circle A will always be less than or equal to 10 units.

How does this property relate to the triangle inequality in metric spaces?

The triangle inequality states that the distance between two points in a metric space is always less than or equal to the sum of the distances between those points and a third point. This is similar to our property d(x,A) ≤ d(x,y) + d(y,A), where the distance between a point and a set is less than or equal to the sum of the distances between that point and another point, and between the other point and the same set. Both properties show that in metric spaces, the shortest distance between two points is always a straight line.

How is this proof useful in practical applications?

This property is useful in many practical applications, especially in the fields of physics, engineering, and computer science. It helps us understand the relationships between points and sets in metric spaces, which can be applied to problems involving distances, optimization, and optimization algorithms. For example, in network routing problems, this property can be used to find the shortest path between two points in a network. In addition, it is a fundamental concept in calculus and other areas of mathematics.

Similar threads

Back
Top