Proving Triangle Inequality for d(x,A) & d(y,A)

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on verifying the algebraic proof of the triangle inequality for distances d(x,A) and d(y,A). The initial proof attempts to show that the absolute difference between these distances is bounded by d(x,y). However, a participant points out a flaw in the reasoning, particularly in the manipulation of inequalities. They suggest splitting the proof into two cases based on the relative sizes of d(x,A) and d(y,A) to clarify the argument. The conversation concludes with the original poster expressing gratitude for the feedback and indicating they have resolved the issue.
Somefantastik
Messages
226
Reaction score
0
Hey folks, can someone quickly check my algebra?

Given:

d(x,A) \leq d(x,y) + d(y,A)

To show:

\left|d(x,A) - d(y,A) \right| \leq d(x,y)

Proof:

from given, d(x,A) - d(yA) \leq d(x,y);

and

-d(x,A) + d(y,A) \geq -d(x,y);

\Rightarrow d(y,A) - d(x,A) \geq -d(x,y);

\Rightarrow -d(x,y) \leq d(x,A)-d(y,A) \leq d(x,y);

Therefore

\left|d(x,A) - d(y,A) \right| \leq d(x,y)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Your penultimate line doesn't follow.

Instead, split up in the two cases a) d(y,A) less than d(x,A) and b) greater than

For a), we have d(x,A)-d(y,A)=|d(x,A)-d(y,A)|, and hence, your first line of the proof may be written as:
0<= |d(x,A)-d(y,A)|<d(x,y)

you can manage b) on your own
 
d(y,A) - d(x,A) \geq -d(x,y);

Does not imply

-d(x,y) \leq -(-d(x,A)+d(y,A))

but the transition between the last two lines of your proof relies on it. You just switched the sides and direction of the inequality (which is fine) and multiplied one side by -1 (not good). If we could do that, it would be a two line proof. ;-)
 
I knew there was something fishy. Thank you for your time y'all, I think I got it.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top