Proving Existence of Min. Distance in ##S## from ##p_0##

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lee33
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Existence
Lee33
Messages
156
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Prove that if ##S## is a nonempty closed subset of ##E^n## and ##p_0\in E^n## then ##\min\{d(p_0,p):p\in S\}## exists.

2. The attempt at a solution

If ##p_0## was in ##S## why would ##\min\{d(p_0,p):p\in S\} = 0?## Is it just because it is the minimum? How about if ##p_0 \in S## then what will ##\max\{d(p_0,p):p\in S\}## be?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Lee33 said:

Homework Statement



Prove that if ##S## is a nonempty closed subset of ##E^n## and ##p_0\in E^n## then ##\min\{d(p_0,p):p\in S\}## exists.

2. The attempt at a solution

If ##p_0## was in ##S## why would ##\min\{d(p_0,p):p\in S\} = 0?## Is it just because it is the minimum? How about if ##p_0 \in S## then what will ##\max\{d(p_0,p):p\in S\}## be?

max is not really the issue. The minimum of a set of numbers is the smallest number in the set. If you take the open interval (0,1) it doesn't have a minimum. It does have an infimum which is 0 but that's not in the set. So it doesn't have a minimum. So if you put S to be the open interval (0,1) and ##p_0=0##, then the minimum does not exist. If S were closed why is the situation different?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Lee33 said:

Homework Statement



Prove that if ##S## is a nonempty closed subset of ##E^n## and ##p_0\in E^n## then ##\min\{d(p_0,p):p\in S\}## exists.

Don't forget that {d(p_0,p):p\in S\} is a non-empty subset of IR bounded below (by 0).
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Thank you Dick and PeroK! I think I understand now.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top