2025-04-13

1078: For 2 Not-Both-0 Complex Numbers and Non-Negative Real Number p, p-th Power of Absolute Value of Sum Is Smaller Than (p-th Power of 2) Times Sum of p-th Powers of Absolute Values

<The previous article in this series | The table of contents of this series | The next article in this series>

description/proof of that for 2 not-both-0 complex numbers and non-negative real number p, p-th power of absolute value of sum is smaller than (p-th power of 2) times sum of p-th powers of absolute values

Topics


About: set

The table of contents of this article


Starting Context


  • The reader knows a definition of complex numbers set.

Target Context


  • The reader will have a description and a proof of the proposition that for any 2 not-both-0 complex numbers and any non-negative real number, p, the p-th power of the absolute value of the sum of the numbers is smaller than (the p-th power of 2) times the sum of the p-th powers of the absolute values of the numbers.

Orientation


There is a list of definitions discussed so far in this site.

There is a list of propositions discussed so far in this site.


Main Body


1: Structured Description


Here is the rules of Structured Description.

Entities:
c1: C
c2: C
p: R such that 0p
//

Statements:
|c1|0|c2|0

|c1+c2|p<2p(|c1|p+|c2|p)
//


2: Note 1


We are not saying that this is the best possible evaluation: for example, for p=1, |c1+c2||c1|+|c2|, and for p=2, |c1+c2|22(|c1|2+|c2|2).

But in many cases, our concern is not having the best possible c for |c1+c2|p<c(|c1|p+|c2|p) but to see that there is such any constant c that does not depend on c1,c2 (but can depend on p).

This proposition is about getting a c by the arguably easiest way.


3: Proof


Whole Strategy: Step 1: see that |c1+c2||c1|+|c2|; Step 2: suppose that |c2||c1| and let |c2|=r|c1| for an rR such that 0r1; Step 3: evaluate (|c1|+|c2|)p=(|c1|+r|c1|)p; Step 4: see that supposing that |c1|<|c2| does not cause any problem.

Step 1:

|c1+c2||c1|+|c2|, which is a well-known fact, but to explain it succinctly, cj can be regarded to be a vector on R2 and |c1+c2| is the length of the sum of the vectors and |c1| and |c2| are the lengths of c1 and c2, and |c1+c2||c1|+|c2| holds by the Euclidean geometry.

Step 2:

Let us suppose that |c2||c1|.

Then, |c2|=r|c1| for an rR such that 0r1.

Step 3:

|c1+c2|p(|c1|+|c2|)p=(|c1|+r|c1|)p=(|c1|(1+r))p=(1+r)p|c1|p.

Let us suppose that |c2|<|c1|, which means that r<1.

Then, <2p|c1|p2p(|c1|p+|c2|p).

Let us suppose that |c2|=|c1|.

Then, |c1+c2|p(|c1|+|c2|)p=(2|c1|)p=2p|c1|p<2p(|c1|p+|c2|p): 0<|c2|, because otherwise, |c2|=|c1|=0, a contradiction against |c1|0|c2|0.

So, anyway, |c1+c2|p<2p(|c1|p+|c2|p).

Step 4:

Let us suppose that |c1|<|c2|.

Then, |c1+c2|p=|c2+c1|p, and by the previous steps, |c2+c1|p<2p(|c2|p+|c1|p)=2p(|c1|p+|c2|p).

So, |c1+c2|p<2p(|c1|p+|c2|p).


4: Note 2


Let us see a proof of that for p=2, |c1+c2|p2(|c1|2+|c2|2).

|c1+c2|2(|c1|+|c2|)2=|c1|2+|c2|2+2|c1||c2|.

But 0(|c1||c2|)2=|c1|2+|c2|22|c1||c2|, which implies that 2|c1||c2||c1|2+|c2|2.

So, |c1+c2|2|c1|2+|c2|2+|c1|2+|c2|2=2(|c1|2+|c2|2).

That is the best possible evaluation, because |1+1|2=22=4=2(1+1)=2(12+12).

In order to make <, we can just take any 2<c.


References


<The previous article in this series | The table of contents of this series | The next article in this series>