MHB Min(a, b) expressed in terms of absolute value

  • Thread starter Thread starter mathdad
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on expressing the min function in terms of absolute values, specifically the formula min(a, b) = (a + b - |a - b|)/2. It verifies this formula with examples, showing that it correctly identifies the minimum value in various scenarios: when a < b, b < a, and a = b. The conversation then transitions to exploring whether this formula can be applied to expressions like min(2x, 3x) and discusses the hypothesis for a max function, which is proposed as max(a, b) = (a + b + |a - b|)/2. The participants also delve into the implications of these formulas when applied to expressions involving variables, indicating a need for further exploration of cases involving absolute values.
mathdad
Messages
1,280
Reaction score
0
Given two real numbers a and b, the notation min(a, b) denotes the smaller of the two numbers. In cases where a = b, then min(a, b) denotes the common value of a and b. It can be shown that min(a, b) can be expressed in terms of absolute value as follows:

min(a, b) = (a + b - | a - b |)/2

Verify this equation in the following case:

a = 6 and b = 1

Solution:

m(6, 1) = (6 + 1 - | 6 - 1 |)/2

m(6, 1) = (7 - | 5 |)/3

min(6, 1) = (7 - 5)/2

m(6, 1) = (2/2)

min(6, 1) = 1

We can say that if a = 6 and b = 1, then the smallest of the two numbers is 1.

Question:

Can this be done with expressions?

For example, if a = 2x and b = 3x, can we use the above equation to find min(a, b)? What about max(a, b)?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Before we move onto expressions, do you see how the given formula works? Try simplifying the min() function under the assumptions:

a) $$a<b$$

b) $$b<a$$

c) $$a=b$$

What do you find? Can you put forth a hypothesis for a max() function?
 
When b < a

min(a, b) = (a + b - | a - b |)/2

Verify this equation in the following case:

a = 6 and b = 1

Solution:

m(6, 1) = (6 + 1 - | 6 - 1 |)/2

m(6, 1) = (7 - | 5 |)/3

min(6, 1) = (7 - 5)/2

m(6, 1) = (2/2)

min(6, 1) = 1

We can say that if a = 6 and b = 1, then the smallest of the two numbers is 1. The function confirms that b is the minimum value.

When a < b

m(1, 6) = (1 + 6 - | 1 - 6 |)/2

m(1, 6) = (7 - | -5 |)/2

m(1, 6) = (7 - (5))/2

m(1, 6) = 2/2

m(1, 6) = 1

The function confirms that a is the minimum value.

When a = b

m(4, 4) = (4 + 4 - |4 - 4 |)/2

m(4, 4) = (8 - |0|)/2

m(4, 4) = 8/2

m(4, 4) = 4

When a = b, the function shows that both a and b share a common number or value.

I cannot come up with a hypothesis in this case. For me at this level of math, the function is just a plug and chug to confirm a max or min value.
 
What I meant was to do something like the following:

We are given:

$$\min(a,b)=\frac{a+b-|a-b|}{2}$$

a) $$a<b\implies a-b<0$$

And so the min() function becomes:

$$\min(a,b)=\frac{a+b+(a-b)}{2}=\frac{2a}{2}=a$$

b) $$b<a\implies 0<a-b$$

And so the min() function becomes:

$$\min(a,b)=\frac{a+b-(a-b)}{2}=\frac{2b}{2}=b$$

c) $$a=b$$

And so the min() function becomes:

$$\min(a,b)=\frac{b+b-(b-b)}{2}=\frac{2b}{2}=b=a$$

About our hypothesis, look at how the min() function behaves in the 3 scenarios above...what do you think we can do the the min() function to get it to be a max() function?
 
I'll get back to you later. Happy Father's Day.
 
My guess is to maximize the given function we replace subtraction with addition in the numerator.

max(a, b) = (a + b + | a - b |)/2

Yes?
 
RTCNTC said:
My guess is to maximize the given function we replace subtraction with addition in the numerator.

max(a, b) = (a + b + | a - b |)/2

Yes?

Test it the way I did for the min() function in post #4...:D
 
I do not know how to test it as demonstrated in post 4. Can you show me?
 
RTCNTC said:
I do not know how to test it as demonstrated in post 4. Can you show me?

What I meant was to do something like the following:

We are testing:

$$\max(a,b)=\frac{a+b+|a-b|}{2}$$

a) $$a<b\implies a-b<0$$

And so the max() function becomes:

$$\max(a,b)=\frac{a+b-(a-b)}{2}=\frac{2b}{2}=b\quad\checkmark$$

b) $$b<a\implies 0<a-b$$

And so the max() function becomes:

$$\max(a,b)=\frac{a+b+(a-b)}{2}=\frac{2a}{2}=a\quad\checkmark$$

c) $$a=b$$

And so the max() function becomes:

$$\max(a,b)=\frac{b+b+(b-b)}{2}=\frac{2b}{2}=b=a\quad\checkmark$$

So, we conclude our hypothesis is correct in all possible cases.

Suppose we now consider:

$$\min(px,qx)$$

What does the formula give us? How many cases can we check?
 
  • #10
min(px, qx).

min(px, qx) = (px + qx - | px - qx|)/2

min(px, qx) = (pqx - (px - qx))/2

min(px, qx) = (pqx -px + qx)/2

min(px, qx) = x(pq - p + q)/2

I am stuck here.
 
  • #11
RTCNTC said:
min(px, qx).

min(px, qx) = (px + qx - | px - qx|)/2

Okay, I agree we have:

$$\min(px,qx)=\frac{px+qx-|px-qx|}{2}$$

RTCNTC said:
min(px, qx) = (pqx - (px - qx))/2

In your next step, you have somehow combined:

$$px+qx=pqx$$

Which is not true in general, and also you have removed the absolute value without given any conditions on p, q, or x. As our next step, we could write:

$$\min(px,qx)=\frac{(p+q)x-|(p-q)x|}{2}$$

We may use the identity:

$$|uv|=|u||v|$$

(which you should verify using the radical definition for absolute value)

to write:

$$\min(px,qx)=\frac{(p+q)x-|p-q||x|}{2}$$

Okay, now we will have 6 cases to check...looking at the above formula, can you explain the conditions giving rise to all six cases?
 
  • #12
I did not know the rule |vu| = |v| |u|.

You said:

Okay, now we will have 6 cases to check...looking at the above formula, can you explain the conditions giving rise to all six cases?

I don't understand.
 
  • #13
RTCNTC said:
I did not know the rule |vu| = |v| |u|.

You said:

Okay, now we will have 6 cases to check...looking at the above formula, can you explain the conditions giving rise to all six cases?

I don't understand.

If we try to remove the absolute values...what do we need to be concerned about?
 
  • #14
Removing the absolute value bars yields a 0 in the numerator.
 
  • #15
RTCNTC said:
Removing the absolute value bars yields a 0 in the numerator.

How?
 
  • #16
(p + q)x - | p - q ||x|)/2

(p + q)x - (p + q)|x|)/2

[(px + qx) -px -qx]/2

(px + qx - px - qx)/2

0/2

0
 
  • #17
RTCNTC said:
(p + q)x - | p - q ||x|)/2

(p + q)x - (p + q)|x|)/2

[(px + qx) -px -qx]/2

(px + qx - px - qx)/2

0/2

0

How do you justify:

$$|p-q|=p+q$$ ?
 
  • #18
I give up! Can you show me what you mean?
 

Similar threads

Back
Top