Lin. Alg. - Half Planes (convex)

  • Thread starter Thread starter mattmns
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Convex Planes
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the convexity of half-planes defined by linear inequalities, specifically the plane described by the inequality 2x - 3y >= 6. Participants explore the general case in Rn, where a non-zero vector A and a constant c define a set of points satisfying A · X >= c.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss defining points P and Q within the half-plane and using linear combinations to demonstrate that the resulting point remains in the half-plane. There is a focus on the properties of dot products and scalar multiplication in the context of convexity.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered guidance on how to approach the proof, while others are exploring different methods and questioning the clarity of their reasoning. There is ongoing exploration of the implications of the dot product and its properties in establishing convexity.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the challenge of extending the proof from two dimensions to Rn, and there is a mention of the need for clarity in the final expressions used in the proof.

mattmns
Messages
1,129
Reaction score
5
Hello, I am a little confused on how to prove these half planes are convex, and my book does not actually show an example.
----------
So here is a problem, my book briefly talks about it: Show that the plane 2x - 3y >= 6 is convex. So if we let A = (2,-3), and X = (x,y), then we can write the inequality [itex]A \cdot X >= 6[/itex]. Prove that this half plane is convex.
---------
So I want to let there be a point P in this half plane, and a point Q on this plane, and then show that (1-t)P + tQ is of the same form and therefore the half plane is convex. The problem I am having is what do I let P and Q be equal to, in order to show this? Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
P and Q must be points in the half-plane, of course. That is P= (x,y) where 2x- 3y>= 6, Q= (u, v) where 2u- 3v>= 6. As you say, the line segment between them is (1-t)P+ tQ= ((1-t)x+ tu, (1-t)y+ tv). Now can you show that, as long as 0<= t<= 1, that point is also in the half plane? That is, that 2[(1-t)x+ tu]- 3[(1-t)y+ tv]>= 6.
 
Thanks. The real problem is now to prove it in Rn :smile:

To make more clear, here is the actual problem from the book: Let A be a non-zero vector in Rn and let c be a fixed number. Show that the set of all elements X in Rn such that [itex]A \cdot X >= c[/itex] is convex.So I would just let A = (a1, a2, ..., an), P = (x1, x2,..., xn) and Q = (y1, y2,..., yn) where P and Q are points in X, so [itex]A \cdot P >= c[/itex] and [itex]A \cdot Q >= c[/itex]. And then (1-t)P+ tQ = ( (1-t)x1 + ty1, (1-t)x2 + ty2, ... , (1-t)xn + tyn) and show that this point is in X for 0 <= t <= 1. Meaning, [itex]a_{1}[(1-t)x_{1} + ty_{1}] + a_{2}[(1-t)x_{2} + ty_{2}], + ... + a_{n}[(1-t)x_{n} + ty_{n}] >= c[/itex]

I have not worked this out yet, but I think it should work.
 
Last edited:
Yep. Separate the xs from the ys and see what you get.
 
Ok, I just worked on the problem, and I think I have found a somewhat shorter way to do it. Well maybe it is not shorter, but instead I don't write everything out. I use the idea that the dot product is distributive and scalar multiplication is allowed (1-t), t.

-----
let A = (a1, a2, ..., an), P = (x1, x2,..., xn) and Q = (y1, y2,..., yn) where P and Q are points in X, so [itex]A \cdot P \geq c[/itex] and [itex]A \cdot Q \geq c[/itex]. So, we must show that [itex]A \cdot (1-t)P+ tQ \geq c[/itex]

but [itex]A \cdot [(1-t)P+ tQ] \ = \ A \cdot P(1-t) + A \cdot Qt[/itex]
and [itex]A \cdot P(1-t) + A \cdot Qt \geq c[/itex] is clearly true because [itex]A \cdot P \geq c[/itex], and [itex]A \cdot Q \geq c[/itex]
and so if we factor we have ((1-t) + t)(something greater than c) = 1(something greater than c).
So, [itex]A \cdot [(1-t)P+ tQ] \geq c[/itex]

=> (1-t)P + tQ is in X, and therefore X is convex.
------Does that look sufficient?

Also, the end looks a bit nasty, the whole "(something greater than c)" part, is there a prettier way to write this? Thanks!
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K