Baby Rudin problem driving me crazy

  • Thread starter slipperypete
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation is about a difficult problem in geometry involving the proof of a proposition in Rudin's book. The problem involves finding infinitely many solutions for a given set of equations, where the variables are subject to certain constraints. The conversation also discusses the cases where there is exactly one solution or no solution at all. The speaker has been struggling with this problem for several days and is seeking help and feedback on their proposed solutions.
  • #1
slipperypete
3
0
I started my way through baby Rudin recently, been able to answer every question so far, but I just can't get #16 from Chapter 1.

I (think) understand the geometry of it perfectly. I just can't prove it rigorously/analytically. I haven't been able to do anything for 3 days now, except think about this problem. So any help would be appreciated.

Suppose [tex]k\geq 3, |\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{y}|=d>0,\text{ and }r>0[/tex]. Prove:

(a) If 2r>d, there are infinitely many [tex]\mathbf{z}\in\mathbb{R}^k[/tex] such that [tex]\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{x}\right|=\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{y}\right|=r[/tex].

I have:

Since [tex]\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{x}\right|=\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{y}\right|=r[/tex], then [tex]2r=\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{x}\right|+\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{y}\right|[/tex]. Also, so [tex]\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{x}\right|=\left|\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{z}\right|[/tex], so [tex]2r=\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{x}\right|+\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{y}\right|=\left|\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{z}\right|+\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{y}\right|[/tex]. By Rudin's Proposition 1.37(f), [tex]\left|\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{y}\right|\leq\left|\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{z}\right|+\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{y}\right|[/tex] for any [tex]\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y},\mathbf{z}\in\mathbb{R}^{k}[/tex]. Since [tex]\left|\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{y}\right|=d[/tex], this proposition makes it is clear that, given [tex]\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}\in\mathbb{R}^{k}[/tex], there exists infinitely many [tex]\mathbf{z}\in\mathbb{R}^{k}[/tex] satisfying the equations [tex]2r>d,\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{x}\right|=\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{y}\right|=r[/tex].

I'm not sure this is a valid proof, because it would hold in [tex]\mathbb{R}^2[/tex]. But if I'm imagining the geometry correctly, there should be exactly 2 solutions in 2-space (i.e., the 2 points at which the circles of radius r, drawn about [tex]\mathbf{x}[/tex] and [tex]\mathbf{y}[/tex], intersect), not infinitely many. So I'm sure I'm missing something, but I don't see any holes in the proof.

I've also observed that under 2-space, if you square these equations: [tex]\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{x}\right|=r,\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{y}\right|=r[/tex] and apply the definition of norm, you get a system of two equations and two variables ([tex]z_1,z_2[/tex]). I know there's a solution there, which meshes perfectly with my understanding of the geometry behind this problem. Moreover, if you move on to 3-space and proceed in the same way, you get a system of two equations and three variables ([tex]z_1,z_2,z_3[/tex]). I know that this system will have infinitely many solutions. But I don't know how to prove rigorously that the 2-variable system is solvable or that the 3-variable system is unsolvable. Also, the way I understand the problem, r is fixed. But it is subject to some constraint (e.g., 2r>d). I don't know how to incorporate this constraint into the proof.

(b) If 2r=d, there is exactly one such [tex]\mathbf{z}[/tex].

I can't even figure out where to begin. I've noticed that if you set [tex]\mathbf{z}=\tfrac{1}{2}\left(\mathbf{x}+\mathbf{y}\right)[/tex], then [tex]\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{x}\right|=\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{y}\right|[/tex]. Also, this makes [tex]2r=2\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{x}\right|=2\left|\tfrac{\mathbf{x}+\mathbf{y}}{2}-\mathbf{x}\right|=\left|\mathbf{y}-\mathbf{x}\right|=d[/tex].

I can derive this "solution" for [tex]\mathbf{z}[/tex] by squaring [tex]\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{x}\right|=\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{y}\right|[/tex] and going from there. But no relationship between 2r and d is needed to figure this out, so it would seem that [tex]\mathbf{z}=\tfrac{1}{2}\left(\mathbf{x}+\mathbf{y}\right)[/tex] should be true in the cases of 2r>d and 2r<d. So I'm stuck on this one.

(c) If [tex]2r<d[/tex], there is no such [tex]\mathbf{z}[/tex].

This is the one I think I've made the most progress on. I think Rudin's Theorem 1.37(f) should apply. Let me know if this proof works/doesn't work:

Assume a solution does exist. Since [tex]\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{x}\right|=\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{y}\right|=r[/tex] and [tex]\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{x}\right|=\left|\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{z}\right|[/tex], then [tex]2r=\left|\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{z}\right|+\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{y}\right|[/tex]. It's given that [tex]\left|\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{y}\right|=d[/tex], so if [tex]2r<d[/tex], then [tex]\left|\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{z}\right|+\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{y}\right|<\left|\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{y}\right|[/tex]. But this contradicts Rudin's Theorem 1.37(f), which says that [tex]\left|\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{z}\right|+\left|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{y}\right|\geq\left|\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{y}\right|[/tex]. Therefore, no [tex]\mathbf{z}[/tex] exists.

Any input would be appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org

1. What is the "Baby Rudin problem"?

The "Baby Rudin problem" refers to a famous problem in mathematics that appears in the book "Principles of Mathematical Analysis" by Walter Rudin. It is a challenging problem that has stumped many mathematicians over the years.

2. Why is the "Baby Rudin problem" so difficult?

The "Baby Rudin problem" is difficult because it requires a deep understanding of advanced mathematical concepts such as real analysis, topology, and complex analysis. It also involves creative and critical thinking skills to come up with a solution.

3. Has anyone solved the "Baby Rudin problem"?

Yes, the "Baby Rudin problem" has been solved by several mathematicians over the years. However, the problem is still considered a challenging and important problem in mathematics.

4. What is the significance of the "Baby Rudin problem" in mathematics?

The "Baby Rudin problem" is significant because it highlights the importance of rigorous mathematical proofs and the interconnectedness of different mathematical concepts. It also serves as a test of one's mathematical abilities and creativity.

5. How can I improve my chances of solving the "Baby Rudin problem"?

To improve your chances of solving the "Baby Rudin problem", it is essential to have a strong foundation in real analysis, topology, and complex analysis. It is also helpful to read different approaches and solutions to the problem and practice solving similar problems to enhance your problem-solving skills.

Similar threads

  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
4
Views
930
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
356
  • Classical Physics
Replies
2
Views
885
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Classical Physics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
3
Views
878
Back
Top