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