For (
or
), define
.
Prove that is a metric on
.
Motivation.
A ruler is marked by rules for the sake of measuring things. Not so much common to a ruler, but well worth the rule for the general, that a metric must measure its metric space, with the metric defined below:
Definition. (metric) Let be a non-empty set. A function
is said to be a metric on
if it satisfies the following conditions:
i.
;
ii.
;
iii.
;
iv.
.
Remark.
i.
As is known, distance should be either positive or zero (i.e., non-negative); ii
.
We are in one only by discrimination; iii
.
Fair and just from a symmetric point of view; and iv
.
The straighter the path, the shorter the distance (also known as the Triangle Inequality).
Proof.
Assume for convenience. (Provided
, the assumption is ready for reduction or extension.)
i
.
If the minimum , condition (i)
is seen. If the minimum
, be it called the absolute value, the magnitude, the norm, the modulus, or whatsoever, a complex number is non-negative in norm.
Recall
.
(Norm of complex conjugate)
A complex number contains two parts, the real part
and the imaginary part
. The norm
(and the norm
of its complex conjugate
)
is defined by the formula:
.
It turns out that
(where
) is positive iff
, and zero iff
, but never negative.
The sum, the difference, the product, and the quotient of two complex numbers is one another complex number for the complex number field is algebraically closed.
ii
.
(only-if) Giving a try straightforth:
(if) In reverse from backward:
If provided with appropriate explanation, the proof can be shortened by use of the two-way if-and-only-if.
iii
.
Suffice it to check whether is true or not.
Roughwork.
, let
and
where
,
,
, and
are real numbers. Then,
iv
.
Given here are some equations, I write out all them lest I might forget any:
,
,
.
RTP (i.e. required to prove):
If , so what have I done with?
WTS (i.e. wish to show):
The following inequalities hold evidently:
But has not yet been ascertained.
The Argand diagram above replaces the usual – and
-axes of the Cartesian plane with the real and the imaginary axes of Argand plane.
Owing to my giving too raw and rude maybe a proof, the problem should have otherwise been treated case-by-case. I.e., they are in either case:
Just do it by rote:
QED