Exercise 1.16

Exercise 16: Suppose k 3 , x , y k , | x y | = d > 0 , and r > 0 . Prove:

  • If 2 r > d , there are infinitely many z k such that

    | z x | = | z y | = r .

  • If 2 r = d , there is exactly one such z .
  • If 2 r < d , there is no such z .

How must these statements be modified if k is 2 or 1?

Answers

(a): To simplify the calculations, we may assume without losing generality that x = ( 0 , , 0 ) and y = ( d , 0 , , 0 ) . (Translate k by x , then rotate it to place y on the positive x-axis. Both transformations preserve distances and angles.)

For 0 𝜃 < 1 let

z 𝜃 = ( d 2 , cos 𝜃 4 r 2 d 2 4 , sin 𝜃 4 r 2 d 2 2 , 0 , , 0 ) .

Then

| z 𝜃 x | 2 = | z 𝜃 y | 2 = d 2 4 + ( cos 2 𝜃 + sin 2 𝜃 ) 4 r 2 d 2 4 = r 2 .

For k = 2 , the hyperplane of equidistant points is the line ( d 2 , x 2 ) , so there are two points with distance r > d 2 from x and y , ( d 2 , ± 4 r 2 d 2 2 ) . For k = 1 , the hyperplane reduces to the single point z = d 2 , so there are no points with distance r > d 2 from x and y .

(b): If d = 2 r , then | z x | + | z x | = | x y | , that is, we have equality in Theorem 1.37(f). Looking at the proof, this only happens if ( z x ) ( z y ) = | z x | | z y | . By the solution to exercise 15, this only happens if z x = t ( z y ) for some real number t . Since | z x | = | z y | , t must be ± 1 . If t = 1 , then x = y , so t = 1 and z is the midpoint ( x y ) 2 .

(c): | z x | + | z y | = 2 r < | x y | contradicts Theorem 1.37(f).

User profile picture
2023-08-07 00:00
Comments

Remark 1. We will assume, without a loss of generality, that x = 0 , y = ( d , 0 , , 0 ) . This takes care of any situation since we can always redefine our coordinate system such that this is true.

Lemma 1. For any z such that | z x | = | z y | , z 1 = d 2 .

Proof of Lemma. From Definition 1.36, the equation in the exercise text implies,

i = 1 k z i 2 = i = 1 k ( z i y i ) 2 .

For k = 1 , this becomes z 1 2 = ( z 1 d ) 2 , and so z 1 = d 2 . For k 2 , subtracting ( z 2 2 + + z k 2 ) , we get z 1 2 = ( z 1 d ) 2 , and so z 1 = d 2 . □

Proof of ( a ) . If 2 r > d , by (??), r 2 = | z | 2 > d 2 4 . Then, if k 3 , by Definition 1.36 and the Lemma above,

r 2 = i = 1 k z i 2 = d 2 4 + i = 2 k z i 2 > d 2 4 r 2 d 2 4 = i = 2 k z i 2 > 0 , (1)

which has infinitely many solutions for z . If k = 2 , (1) becomes r 2 d 2 4 = z 2 2 > 0 , which only has two solutions for z ,

z = ( d 2 , ± r 2 d 2 4 ) .

If k = 1 , there is no such z since by the Lemma above, z 1 = d 2 , and so | z | = d 2 d 2 . □

Proof of ( b ) . If 2 r = d , by (??), r 2 = | z | 2 = d 2 4 . Then, (1) becomes

r 2 d 2 4 = i = 2 k z i 2 = 0 .

Then, there is only one value of z for any k , which is z = ( d 2 , 0 , 0 , ) . □

Proof of ( c ) . If 2 r < d , we get

| z x | + | z y | < | x y | ,

which contradicts Theorem 1.37 ( f ) . Therefore, there are no solutions for z for any k . □

User profile picture
2023-09-01 19:16
Comments