Triangle inequality for distance to set

In summary, the conversation is about proving the inequality |d(x,A) - d(y,A)|\leq d(x,y) for a metric space X and a subset A of X using the triangle inequality. The conversation also discusses how the hint given in the problem implies the result should follow essentially from the triangle inequality. Various approaches and counterexamples are discussed, ultimately leading to the conclusion that the inequality holds.
  • #1
quasar987
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
4,807
32

Homework Statement


If X is a metric space and A is a subset of X, show that

[tex]|d(x,A) - d(y,A)|\leq d(x,y)[/tex]

for any x,y in X.

Homework Equations


Triangle inequality:
[tex]|d(x,z) - d(y,z)|\leq d(x,y)[/tex],

[tex]d(x,y)\leq d(x,z)+d(z,y)[/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution


Fidling around with the triangle inequality.

Edit: This is the third problem in G. Bredon's Topology and Geometry book. The goals of the exercice is to establish the continuity of the map [itex]x\mapsto d(x,A)[/itex], but she gives as a hint, "Use the triangle inequality to show that [itex]|d(x,A) - d(y,A)|\leq d(x,y)[/itex])" from which the result clearly follows in view of the continuity of the map [itex]x\mapsto d(x,x_0)[/itex] for some fixed x_0...

The point of this edit is to bring attention to the exact wording of her hint, from which one can arguably conclude that the result should follow essentially from the triangle inequality.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
As I understand it, [itex]
|d(x,A) - d(y,A)|\leq d(x,y)[/itex] should follow from the triangle inequality for d, which is [itex]|d(x,z) - d(y,z)|\leq d(x,y)[/itex] for any x, y and z in X. We know the latter holds because d is a metric. What you want to prove is technically not a triangle inequality, because d(x, A) is not really a metric, in the sense that it doesn't map pairs of points to numbers.
 
  • #3
Suppose A consists of two points. Label the points x and y so that x is farther from A than y. The only nontrivial case is that x is closer to a different point of A than y. So label the points in A={a,b} so that d(b,x)>d(a,x) and d(a,y)>d(b,y). Now assume the inequality isn't true. |d(x,A)-d(y,A)|>d(x,y) becomes d(x,a)-d(y,b)>d(x,y) -> d(x,a)>d(x,y)+d(y,b)>=d(x,b). That's a contradiction. For a general set A, you should be able to set up some epsilons and find points in A that represent the equivalent of a and b.
 
  • #4
Dick said:
Suppose A consists of two points. Label the points x and y so that x is farther from A than y. The only nontrivial case is that x is closer to a different point of A than y. So label the points in A={a,b} so that d(b,x)>d(a,x) and d(a,y)>d(b,y). Now assume the inequality isn't true. |d(x,A)-d(y,A)|>d(x,y) becomes d(x,a)-d(y,b)>d(x,y) -> d(x,a)>d(x,y)+d(y,b)>=d(x,b). That's a contradiction. For a general set A, you should be able to set up some epsilons and find points in A that represent the equivalent of a and b.

You can't assume that there exists points in A such that d(x,A) = d(x,a) and similarly for y. The easiest example is if A is open. Then the inf is most likely not in A.
 

What is the triangle inequality for distance to set?

The triangle inequality for distance to set is a mathematical principle that states that the shortest distance from a point to a set is always less than or equal to the sum of the distances from that point to any two other points in the set. Mathematically, it can be represented as: d(x, A) ≤ d(x, B) + d(B, A), where d(x, A) represents the distance from point x to set A, and d(B, A) represents the distance between points B and A.

Why is the triangle inequality for distance to set important?

The triangle inequality for distance to set is important because it allows us to prove the existence of a shortest distance between a point and a set. It also serves as a fundamental principle in many mathematical and scientific fields, such as geometry, optimization, and computer science.

What are some real-world applications of the triangle inequality for distance to set?

The triangle inequality for distance to set has numerous applications in various fields, including transportation planning, network routing, and facility location problems. It is also used in computer graphics to determine the shortest distance between a point and a 3D object or surface.

Can the triangle inequality for distance to set be extended to higher dimensions?

Yes, the triangle inequality for distance to set can be extended to higher dimensions. In fact, it is a generalization of the triangle inequality for distance in 2 or 3 dimensions. The principle remains the same, but the distance formula and geometric interpretation may vary based on the number of dimensions.

How is the triangle inequality for distance to set related to the triangle inequality for distances between points?

The triangle inequality for distance to set is a generalization of the triangle inequality for distances between points. It states that the shortest distance from a point to a set is always less than or equal to the sum of the distances from that point to any two other points in the set. This is a stronger inequality compared to the triangle inequality for distances between points, which only states that the sum of any two distances in a triangle is greater than the third distance.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
19
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
14
Views
519
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
996
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
996
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
1K
Back
Top