0

Suppose $d'(x,y)= \frac{d(x,y)}{1+d(x,y)}$ for $x,y \in X$ and I want to prove $d$ and $d'$ are equivalent metrics on $X$.

I would show $$\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}d(x_n,x)=0 \quad\Longleftrightarrow\quad \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}d'(x_n,x)=0.$$

To prove $\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}d'(x_n,x)=0 \Rightarrow \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}d(x_n,x)=0$, is it valid to say:

if $0=\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}d'(x_n,x)=\frac{\lim_{n \rightarrow > \infty}d(x_n,x)}{1+\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty}d(x_n,x)}$,

then $\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty}d(x_n,x)=0$.

If it's invalid, what am I doing wrong?

Thanks!

wtnmath
  • 434
  • No. And what is $y$? – amsmath Nov 06 '17 at 05:03
  • @amsmath Why isn't that valid? Thanks for pointing out, I just edited my question. – wtnmath Nov 06 '17 at 05:05
  • 1
    There is still the $y$... Well, how do you know that $d(x_n,x)$ converges? you can treat the other direction in that way. – amsmath Nov 06 '17 at 05:06
  • @amsmath do you mind to elaborate? This is following the rules of limits, am I missing something? – wtnmath Nov 06 '17 at 05:10
  • 1
    It doesn't. You can only do that when you know that $d(x_n,x)$ converges. – amsmath Nov 06 '17 at 05:11
  • Note that $\tfrac d{1+d} = 1 - \tfrac 1 {1+d}$. That should help. – amsmath Nov 06 '17 at 05:25
  • 1
    Don't get confused by the answers. You are following the right strategy. One direction is as you intended with the other direction: if $d(x_n,x)\to 0$, then $d'(x_n,x) = \tfrac{d(x_n,x)}{1+d(x_n,x)}\to \tfrac 0{1+0} = 0$. For the other direction use the identity in my previous comment. – amsmath Nov 06 '17 at 05:46
  • @amsmath At that point, it'd be better if you (or someone else, but I'm lazy, and you've been basically paving the way) submitted an answer summarizing and expanding on these comments, since as of now the two answers (including the one deleted) do not address the question. – Clement C. Nov 06 '17 at 16:06

3 Answers3

2

Ok, if $d(x_n,x)\to 0$, then $$ d'(x_n,x) = \frac{d(x_n,x)}{1+d(x_n,x)}\to \frac 0{1+0} = 0. $$ Conversely, if $d'(x_n,x)\to 0$, then $$ 0\leftarrow \frac{d(x_n,x)}{1+d(x_n,x)} = 1 - \frac 1 {1+d(x_n,x)}. $$ That is, you have $\tfrac{1}{1+d(x_n,x)}\to 1$. Taking reciprocals gives $1+d(x_n,x)\to 1$ and thus $d(x_n,x)\to 0$. You can also do the following: $d' = \tfrac d {1+d}$. Solving for $d$ gives $d = \tfrac{d'}{1-d'}$. Hence, $$ d(x_n,x) = \frac{d'(x_n,x)}{1-d'(x_n,x)}\to\frac 0{1-0} = 0. $$

amsmath
  • 10,633
1

The function $f(t)=\frac {t}{1+t}$ is strictly increasing for $t\geq 0.$

If $d'(x_n,x)\to 0$ then there are only finitely many $n$ for which $d(x_n,x)> 1/2$. Because $d(x_n,x)> 1/2\implies d'(x_n,x)=f(d(x_n,x))> f(1/2)=1/3$ and we cannot have $d'(x_n,x)> 1/3$ for infinitely many $n.$

So for all but finitely many $n$ we have $d'(x_n,n)=\frac {d(x_n,x)}{1+d(x_n,x)}\geq \frac {d(x_n,x)}{1+1/2}.$

Hence $d(x_n,x)\leq (1+1/2)d'(x_n,x)$ for all but finitely many $n$, so $d(x_n,x)\to 0.$

0

EDIT

I misunderstood the question - my solution is not valid if you are interested in "topological equivalence", rather it's entirely based around a notion called "strong equivalence". I haven't deleted it however, because it could still be useful.


To show two metrics $d, d'$ are strongly equivalent, it doesn't suffice suffice to show that $\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} d(x_n, x) = 0 \Leftrightarrow \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} d'(x_n, x) = 0$ for all $x$.

Consider the integers equipped with the usual metric, $d(a,b)=|a-b|$ and the trivial metric, $d'(a,b) = \cases{0, a=b\\ 1, a\neq b}$

Then your above statement with limits is satisfied, because in each case the sequence $x_n$ is eventually constantly equal to $x$. However, $d$ and $d'$ are not equivalent: Let $x \in \mathbb{Z}$. Then there does not exist $c \in \mathbb{R}$ such that $d(x,y)\leq cd'(x,y)$ for all $y\in\mathbb{Z}$.


To prove that $d$ and $d'$ are strongly equivalent, you want to:

  1. choose an arbitrary $x \in X$.
  2. Find $c_1 \in \mathbb{R}$ such that for any $y \in X$, $d(x,y) \leq c_1d'(x,y)$
  3. Find $c_2 \in \mathbb{R}$ such that for any $y \in X$, $d'(x,y) \leq c_2d(x,y)$
Harambe
  • 8,230
  • Of course, there exists such a $c$, namely $c = 1/2$. Also, what you use here is strong equivalence. Sorry, but your answer is actually not an answer. – amsmath Nov 06 '17 at 05:22
  • oh you're right - well, $c = 1/2$ doesn't satisfy the condition I wrote out, but that's irrelevant anyway because what you're saying is that for $r = 1/2$ you get the same balls in $\mathbb{Z}$ whichever metric you use – Harambe Nov 06 '17 at 05:28
  • 1
    $d(1,2) = 1 \neq \frac{1}{2} = \frac{1}{2}d'(1,2)$ – Harambe Nov 06 '17 at 05:33
  • 1
    Yeah, yeah. I mixed $d'$ and $d$. You have $d = 2d'$. You've made another mistake in your last comment. – amsmath Nov 06 '17 at 05:34
  • all good, thanks for pointing out my mistake though! I'm way too accustomed to spaces with lots of structure so it didn't even occur to me that I was assuming extra information :) – Harambe Nov 06 '17 at 05:35
  • $d$ and $d'$ are NOT necessarily strongly equivalent . $d'\leq 1$ and $d$ may be unbounded. Sor example if $X=\Bbb R$ and $d(x,y)=|x-y|.$ – DanielWainfleet Nov 06 '17 at 22:10
  • Yeah exactly, I realise my "answer" doesn't address the question because I completely misinterpreted it, but I left it there anyway because it still contains information that could benefit someone else one day. Should I just delete it? – Harambe Nov 06 '17 at 22:13
  • With your introductory edit in the A, I suggest you leave it up. – DanielWainfleet Nov 06 '17 at 23:11