How are definition 1 and definition 2 equivalent?












0












$begingroup$


Definition 1:[Reference: Metric spaces, Micheal O Searcoid]



Suppose $V$ is a linear space over $mathbb R$ or $mathbb C $. Suppose $||·||$ is a real function
defined on $V$ such that, for each $x, y ∈ V$ and each scalar $α$, we have



$||x|| ≥ 0$ with equality if, and only if, $x = 0$;



$||αx|| = |α| ||x||$; and



• (triangle inequality) $||x + y|| ≤ ||x|| + ||y||$.



Then $||·||$ is called a norm on $V.$



Definition 2:[Reference: Introduction to topology and modern analysis, George F. Simmons]



Suppose $V$ is a linear space over $mathbb R$ or $mathbb C $. Suppose $||·||$ is a real function
defined on $V$ such that, for each $x, y ∈ V$, we have



$||x|| ≥ 0$ with equality if, and only if, $x = 0$;



$||-x|| = ||x||$; and



• (triangle inequality) $||x + y|| ≤ ||x|| + ||y||$.



Then $||·||$ is called a norm on $V.$




How does the definition 1 and definition 2 are equivalent?



Suppose $||·||$ satisfies the three conditions in the definition 1.
It obviously satisfies the three conditions of definition 2. Only
change in the definition is the second condition only.



Suppose $||·||$ satisfies the three conditions in the definition 2.
Only change in the definition is the second condition only.



each scalar $α $ scalar and $xin V$ , $||alpha x||=|alpha|||x||$. Suppose $alpha in mathbb R$,



Case 1:- $alpha=0$, then condition (2) of definition (1) satisfies
trivially.



I don't know how to proceed further.











share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    As SmileyCraft said, the definitions are not equivalent. I believe the first is the standard one. I would guess that the motivation for the second is that those are the only properties of a norm that are used in showing that a norm induces a metric (absolute homogeneity is only needed in the case $alpha=-1$). So it is sufficient to induce a metric.
    $endgroup$
    – AlephNull
    Dec 24 '18 at 21:22
















0












$begingroup$


Definition 1:[Reference: Metric spaces, Micheal O Searcoid]



Suppose $V$ is a linear space over $mathbb R$ or $mathbb C $. Suppose $||·||$ is a real function
defined on $V$ such that, for each $x, y ∈ V$ and each scalar $α$, we have



$||x|| ≥ 0$ with equality if, and only if, $x = 0$;



$||αx|| = |α| ||x||$; and



• (triangle inequality) $||x + y|| ≤ ||x|| + ||y||$.



Then $||·||$ is called a norm on $V.$



Definition 2:[Reference: Introduction to topology and modern analysis, George F. Simmons]



Suppose $V$ is a linear space over $mathbb R$ or $mathbb C $. Suppose $||·||$ is a real function
defined on $V$ such that, for each $x, y ∈ V$, we have



$||x|| ≥ 0$ with equality if, and only if, $x = 0$;



$||-x|| = ||x||$; and



• (triangle inequality) $||x + y|| ≤ ||x|| + ||y||$.



Then $||·||$ is called a norm on $V.$




How does the definition 1 and definition 2 are equivalent?



Suppose $||·||$ satisfies the three conditions in the definition 1.
It obviously satisfies the three conditions of definition 2. Only
change in the definition is the second condition only.



Suppose $||·||$ satisfies the three conditions in the definition 2.
Only change in the definition is the second condition only.



each scalar $α $ scalar and $xin V$ , $||alpha x||=|alpha|||x||$. Suppose $alpha in mathbb R$,



Case 1:- $alpha=0$, then condition (2) of definition (1) satisfies
trivially.



I don't know how to proceed further.











share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    As SmileyCraft said, the definitions are not equivalent. I believe the first is the standard one. I would guess that the motivation for the second is that those are the only properties of a norm that are used in showing that a norm induces a metric (absolute homogeneity is only needed in the case $alpha=-1$). So it is sufficient to induce a metric.
    $endgroup$
    – AlephNull
    Dec 24 '18 at 21:22














0












0








0





$begingroup$


Definition 1:[Reference: Metric spaces, Micheal O Searcoid]



Suppose $V$ is a linear space over $mathbb R$ or $mathbb C $. Suppose $||·||$ is a real function
defined on $V$ such that, for each $x, y ∈ V$ and each scalar $α$, we have



$||x|| ≥ 0$ with equality if, and only if, $x = 0$;



$||αx|| = |α| ||x||$; and



• (triangle inequality) $||x + y|| ≤ ||x|| + ||y||$.



Then $||·||$ is called a norm on $V.$



Definition 2:[Reference: Introduction to topology and modern analysis, George F. Simmons]



Suppose $V$ is a linear space over $mathbb R$ or $mathbb C $. Suppose $||·||$ is a real function
defined on $V$ such that, for each $x, y ∈ V$, we have



$||x|| ≥ 0$ with equality if, and only if, $x = 0$;



$||-x|| = ||x||$; and



• (triangle inequality) $||x + y|| ≤ ||x|| + ||y||$.



Then $||·||$ is called a norm on $V.$




How does the definition 1 and definition 2 are equivalent?



Suppose $||·||$ satisfies the three conditions in the definition 1.
It obviously satisfies the three conditions of definition 2. Only
change in the definition is the second condition only.



Suppose $||·||$ satisfies the three conditions in the definition 2.
Only change in the definition is the second condition only.



each scalar $α $ scalar and $xin V$ , $||alpha x||=|alpha|||x||$. Suppose $alpha in mathbb R$,



Case 1:- $alpha=0$, then condition (2) of definition (1) satisfies
trivially.



I don't know how to proceed further.











share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




Definition 1:[Reference: Metric spaces, Micheal O Searcoid]



Suppose $V$ is a linear space over $mathbb R$ or $mathbb C $. Suppose $||·||$ is a real function
defined on $V$ such that, for each $x, y ∈ V$ and each scalar $α$, we have



$||x|| ≥ 0$ with equality if, and only if, $x = 0$;



$||αx|| = |α| ||x||$; and



• (triangle inequality) $||x + y|| ≤ ||x|| + ||y||$.



Then $||·||$ is called a norm on $V.$



Definition 2:[Reference: Introduction to topology and modern analysis, George F. Simmons]



Suppose $V$ is a linear space over $mathbb R$ or $mathbb C $. Suppose $||·||$ is a real function
defined on $V$ such that, for each $x, y ∈ V$, we have



$||x|| ≥ 0$ with equality if, and only if, $x = 0$;



$||-x|| = ||x||$; and



• (triangle inequality) $||x + y|| ≤ ||x|| + ||y||$.



Then $||·||$ is called a norm on $V.$




How does the definition 1 and definition 2 are equivalent?



Suppose $||·||$ satisfies the three conditions in the definition 1.
It obviously satisfies the three conditions of definition 2. Only
change in the definition is the second condition only.



Suppose $||·||$ satisfies the three conditions in the definition 2.
Only change in the definition is the second condition only.



each scalar $α $ scalar and $xin V$ , $||alpha x||=|alpha|||x||$. Suppose $alpha in mathbb R$,



Case 1:- $alpha=0$, then condition (2) of definition (1) satisfies
trivially.



I don't know how to proceed further.








functional-analysis metric-spaces norm






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Dec 24 '18 at 16:01









Bernard

125k743119




125k743119










asked Dec 24 '18 at 15:53









Unknown xUnknown x

2,59311128




2,59311128












  • $begingroup$
    As SmileyCraft said, the definitions are not equivalent. I believe the first is the standard one. I would guess that the motivation for the second is that those are the only properties of a norm that are used in showing that a norm induces a metric (absolute homogeneity is only needed in the case $alpha=-1$). So it is sufficient to induce a metric.
    $endgroup$
    – AlephNull
    Dec 24 '18 at 21:22


















  • $begingroup$
    As SmileyCraft said, the definitions are not equivalent. I believe the first is the standard one. I would guess that the motivation for the second is that those are the only properties of a norm that are used in showing that a norm induces a metric (absolute homogeneity is only needed in the case $alpha=-1$). So it is sufficient to induce a metric.
    $endgroup$
    – AlephNull
    Dec 24 '18 at 21:22
















$begingroup$
As SmileyCraft said, the definitions are not equivalent. I believe the first is the standard one. I would guess that the motivation for the second is that those are the only properties of a norm that are used in showing that a norm induces a metric (absolute homogeneity is only needed in the case $alpha=-1$). So it is sufficient to induce a metric.
$endgroup$
– AlephNull
Dec 24 '18 at 21:22




$begingroup$
As SmileyCraft said, the definitions are not equivalent. I believe the first is the standard one. I would guess that the motivation for the second is that those are the only properties of a norm that are used in showing that a norm induces a metric (absolute homogeneity is only needed in the case $alpha=-1$). So it is sufficient to induce a metric.
$endgroup$
– AlephNull
Dec 24 '18 at 21:22










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

They are not. For example $|x|=0$ for $x=0$ and $|x|=1$ otherwise obeys definition 2, but not definition 1.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I don't understand what do you mean.
    $endgroup$
    – Unknown x
    Dec 24 '18 at 16:05






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    What do you not understand? The fact that the definitions are not equivalent? The definition of my counterexample? My conclusion that it is a counterexample?
    $endgroup$
    – SmileyCraft
    Dec 24 '18 at 16:07












Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3051380%2fhow-are-definition-1-and-definition-2-equivalent%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









2












$begingroup$

They are not. For example $|x|=0$ for $x=0$ and $|x|=1$ otherwise obeys definition 2, but not definition 1.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I don't understand what do you mean.
    $endgroup$
    – Unknown x
    Dec 24 '18 at 16:05






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    What do you not understand? The fact that the definitions are not equivalent? The definition of my counterexample? My conclusion that it is a counterexample?
    $endgroup$
    – SmileyCraft
    Dec 24 '18 at 16:07
















2












$begingroup$

They are not. For example $|x|=0$ for $x=0$ and $|x|=1$ otherwise obeys definition 2, but not definition 1.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I don't understand what do you mean.
    $endgroup$
    – Unknown x
    Dec 24 '18 at 16:05






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    What do you not understand? The fact that the definitions are not equivalent? The definition of my counterexample? My conclusion that it is a counterexample?
    $endgroup$
    – SmileyCraft
    Dec 24 '18 at 16:07














2












2








2





$begingroup$

They are not. For example $|x|=0$ for $x=0$ and $|x|=1$ otherwise obeys definition 2, but not definition 1.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



They are not. For example $|x|=0$ for $x=0$ and $|x|=1$ otherwise obeys definition 2, but not definition 1.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Dec 24 '18 at 16:03









SmileyCraftSmileyCraft

3,786619




3,786619












  • $begingroup$
    I don't understand what do you mean.
    $endgroup$
    – Unknown x
    Dec 24 '18 at 16:05






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    What do you not understand? The fact that the definitions are not equivalent? The definition of my counterexample? My conclusion that it is a counterexample?
    $endgroup$
    – SmileyCraft
    Dec 24 '18 at 16:07


















  • $begingroup$
    I don't understand what do you mean.
    $endgroup$
    – Unknown x
    Dec 24 '18 at 16:05






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    What do you not understand? The fact that the definitions are not equivalent? The definition of my counterexample? My conclusion that it is a counterexample?
    $endgroup$
    – SmileyCraft
    Dec 24 '18 at 16:07
















$begingroup$
I don't understand what do you mean.
$endgroup$
– Unknown x
Dec 24 '18 at 16:05




$begingroup$
I don't understand what do you mean.
$endgroup$
– Unknown x
Dec 24 '18 at 16:05




1




1




$begingroup$
What do you not understand? The fact that the definitions are not equivalent? The definition of my counterexample? My conclusion that it is a counterexample?
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 24 '18 at 16:07




$begingroup$
What do you not understand? The fact that the definitions are not equivalent? The definition of my counterexample? My conclusion that it is a counterexample?
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 24 '18 at 16:07


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3051380%2fhow-are-definition-1-and-definition-2-equivalent%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Plaza Victoria

In PowerPoint, is there a keyboard shortcut for bulleted / numbered list?

How to put 3 figures in Latex with 2 figures side by side and 1 below these side by side images but in...