Is There a Constant \( c \) for the Moduli Sum of Complex Numbers?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the existence of a constant \( c \) that is independent of \( n \) for the moduli sum of complex numbers. Participants explore the conditions under which a subcollection of complex numbers can be selected such that the sum of their moduli meets or exceeds this constant. The conversation includes theoretical reasoning and mathematical exploration.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that if the sum of the moduli of a collection of complex numbers is greater than or equal to 1, then there exists a subcollection whose sum of moduli is at least some constant \( c \).
  • Another participant proposes that \( c = 1/2 \) could always work, but questions arise about the restrictions on \( c \).
  • Concerns are raised regarding the interpretation of the problem, specifically whether \( c \) must work for any sequence of complex numbers.
  • Some participants discuss the implications of dividing the complex numbers into two groups and how that relates to the triangle inequality.
  • There is a debate about the validity of using the triangle inequality in this context, with some arguing that it does not apply as suggested.
  • A later reply clarifies that the original problem statement should focus on the sum of the selected complex numbers rather than the sum of their moduli.
  • Participants express confusion about how to partition the complex numbers effectively to satisfy the conditions of the theorem.
  • One participant asserts that any partition will work under certain conditions, while others challenge this assertion with counterexamples.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the value of \( c \) or the methods for partitioning the complex numbers. Multiple competing views remain regarding the application of the triangle inequality and the conditions necessary for the proposed constant to hold.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions regarding the nature of the complex numbers and the specific conditions under which the theorem applies. The discussion highlights the complexity of partitioning and the implications of the triangle inequality in this context.

cheeez
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
show there is a some constant c, independent of n, s.t. if {Z_j} are complex numbers and sum of |Z_j| from 1 to n >= 1, then there's a subcollection {Z_j_k} of {Z_j} s.t. sum of |Z_j_k| >= c.

Any hint on how to start this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are there any restrictions on c? As I interpret the statement, c = 1/2 will always work.
 
how did you get 1/2. No restrictions on C. I don't get the question fully this C is a number that works for any sequence of {Z_j} right? otherwise you can pick any subcollection calculate the modulus of the sum and pick some C less than that.
 
You can obtain 1/2 by considering n=2. For any n, you can gather the n terms together into 2 terms.
 
ok it's 1/2 because you are looking at the subcollection of only 1 term right. so at least 1 of 2 must exceed 1/2.

i don't see how you can divide them into 2 numbers because you would need to have |z_1+..+z_i| + |z_i+1+...+z_n| >= 1 but that's not necessarily true since triangle inequality works the other way.
 
There's no need to involve the triangle inequality. The theorem you stated in the OP is about the sum of moduli, not moduli of the sums.
 
i don't get it how are you dividing z_1,...,z_n into 2 terms so |z_1+..+z_i| + |z_i+1+...+z_n| >= 1
 
cheeez said:
i don't get it how are you dividing z_1,...,z_n into 2 terms so |z_1+..+z_i| + |z_i+1+...+z_n| >= 1

Try

[tex]\sum_k |z_k| = \left( |z_1|+\cdots+|z_i| \right) + \left( |z_{i+1}|+\cdots+|z_n| \right).[/tex]
 
oh man I screwed up the original posting, I meant you need it so that |sum of z_j| >= C for some subcollection z_j of the original z_n
 
  • #10
Then use the triangle inequality to show that

[tex]|z_1+\cdots+z_i| + |z_{i+1}+\cdots+z_n| \geq 1. [/tex]
 
  • #11
you're saying this is always true for any i? if you have 3 numbers each of which has length 1/3 and if you divide it into z1+z2 and z3 where z1 and z2 point in the opposite directions this wouldn't be true. I don't think its as simple as the triangle inequality
 
  • #12
No it's not true for any i. You have to show that there is some partition that satisfies the premise of the theorem.
 
  • #13
yea that's what I'm trying to do, any ideas?
 
  • #14
Actually any partition will work. You have 2 positive numbers whose sum is [tex]\geq 1[/tex]. There's only a couple of cases to consider. I can't really be anymore specific without completely giving the proof.
 
  • #15
but obviously the {z1,z2} , {z3} partition does not work for n=3 take z1 , z2 to be a+bi, -a-bi, and z3 to be some other vector perpendicular to them and each length 1/3.
 
  • #16
Those don't satisfy [tex]|z_1+z_2 +z_3| \geq 1[/tex].
 
  • #17
I think I see the confusion, my correction only applies to the 2nd part. the original problem should be

show there is a some constant c, independent of n, s.t. if {Z_j} are complex numbers and sum of |Z_j| from 1 to n >= 1, then there's a subcollection {Z_j_k} of {Z_j} s.t. |sum of Z_j_k| >= c.

so here |z1| + |z2| + |z3| = 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
7K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K