Solving Convexity of Open Disc Problem in Complex Plane

  • Thread starter Thread starter e(ho0n3
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Disc
e(ho0n3
Messages
1,349
Reaction score
0
[SOLVED] Convexity of Open Disc

I'm trying to prove that the open disc in the complex plane given by D = {z : |z - w| < r} is convex.

Let p and q be two points in D. The line segment from p to q is L = {(1 - t)p + tq : 0 <= t <= 1}. Let u be a point an arbitrary point on this segment. If I can show that |u - w| < r, I'm done.

This is essentially a geometry problem. There's probably a proposition in Euclid's Elements that the line segment from any two points on the circle is contained in the circle. How do you show this analytically though?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Use the triangle inequality on w(t)=|(1-t)p+tq|. The result is a linear function in t. |w(0)|=|p|<=1 and |w(1)|=|q|<=1. Hence?
 
Using the triangle inequality is a great idea:

|p| - |w| < |p - w| < r so |p| < r + |w|. Similarly |q| < r + |w|.

|(1 - t)p + tq - w| <= (1 - t)|p| + t|q| + |w| < (1 - t)(r + |w|) + t(r + |w|) + |w| = r + 2|w| so (1 - t)|p| + t|q| - |w| < r.

However, since (1 - t)|p| + t|q| - |w| <= |(1 - t)p + tq - w|, I don't know if the latter is greater than r.
 
I can how my first reply could be a little difficult to digest. I was taking w=0 and r=1 and not telling you that. Furthermore I meant to define u(t)=p(1-t)+qt to fit in with your notation better. Let's try that again. u(t)-w=(p-w)(1-t)+(q-w)t, right? So |u(t)-w|<=|p-w|(1-t)+|q-w|t. Can you finish it from there?
 
Ah, I see. Writing u(t)-w as (p-w)(1-t)+(q-w)t is the right idea. It never occurred to me. From then on, it trivially follows that |u - w| < r. Thanks a lot.
 
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