i was reading this book of Athanase Papadopoulos, Metric Spaces, Convexity and Nonpositive Curvature and in the isometries chapter it's defined the following concept. Given $f:X\rightarrow X$ an isometry define the minimal displacement as \begin{align*} \lambda(f)=\inf_{x\in X}|x-f(x)| \end{align*} It's a very intuitive definition, and there are obvious examples like in the euclidean plane, $\lambda(T_{(x,y)})=||(x,y)||$ where $T$ is the traslation in the $(x,y)$ direction or $\lambda(R_{p,\alpha})=0$ for any rotation centered in any point $p$ and for any angle $\alpha$. My problem start with the Proposition 11.1.3 that say given two isometries $f,g$ of the same metric space $X$ then $\lambda(f\circ g)\leq \lambda(f)+\lambda(g)$. Now, in the euclidean plane, consider two distinct points, $p$ and $p'$ and two rotations $R_{p,\pi}$ and $R_{p',\pi}$ in $\pi$ centered on those points. For me, it's clear $S=R_{p,\pi}\circ R_{p',\pi}$ is a traslation because has no fixed points. But if this was true then $\lambda(S)>0$. Although $\lambda(R_{p,\pi})=\lambda(R_{p',\pi})=0$ which is a contradiction to the proposition. For sure i'm misunderstanding something but i can't figure it out what it is. If someone can help me i would be thankful.
2026-02-22 17:51:55.1771782715
Minimal displacement for isometries composition
48 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in METRIC-SPACES
- Show that $d:\mathbb{C}\times\mathbb{C}\rightarrow[0,\infty[$ is a metric on $\mathbb{C}$.
- Question on minimizing the infimum distance of a point from a non compact set
- Is hedgehog of countable spininess separable space?
- Lemma 1.8.2 - Convex Bodies: The Brunn-Minkowski Theory
- Closure and Subsets of Normed Vector Spaces
- Is the following set open/closed/compact in the metric space?
- Triangle inequality for metric space where the metric is angles between vectors
- Show that $f$ with $f(\overline{x})=0$ is continuous for every $\overline{x}\in[0,1]$.
- Help in understanding proof of Heine-Borel Theorem from Simmons
- Is the distance between those compact sets equal to $0$?
Related Questions in ISOMETRY
- Show that two isometries induce the same linear mapping
- How does it follow that $A^T A = I$ from $m_{ij}m_{ik}=\delta _{jk}$?
- Drawing the image of a circle under reflection through its center?
- Check that the rotation isometry has an inverse
- Isometry maps closed unit ball to closed unit balI
- Rotate around a specific point instead of 0,0,0
- Minimal displacement for isometries composition
- Proving that two curves in $\mathbb{R^3}$ with the same binormal vector are congruent
- Dimension of real inner product with unitary transformation
- Can an orthogonal matrix preserve $\ell_p$-norm on a subspace?
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
As stated, the claim is simply false. For instance, let $X$ be the real line with the usual metric and $f(x)=-x, g(x)=1-x$. Then $\lambda(f)=\lambda(g)=0$ since both have fixed points in $X$. On the other hand, $g\circ f(x)= x+1$, hence, $\lambda(g\circ f)=1$.
On the other hand, suppose that $X$ has nonpositive curvature (actually, convex distance function will suffice).
Lemma. Suppose that $f, g$ are commuting isometries of $X$. Then $$ \lambda(g\circ f)\le \lambda(f) + \lambda(g). $$ Proof. For of all, in view of convexity of the distance function, if $h\in Isom(X)$ and $Y\subset X$ is a closed convex $h$-invariant subset then $\lambda(h)=\lambda(h|Y)$. Now, for $\epsilon>0$ define
$$ M_{f,\epsilon}= \{x\in X: d(x, f(x))\le \lambda(f) + \epsilon\}$$ This subset of $X$ is closed convex and $f$-invariant. Moreover, since $f$ and $g$ commute, this subset is also $g$-invariant and $h$-invariant for $h=g\circ f$. Applying the same reasoning to $M_{g,\epsilon}$, we see that $$ \lambda(h)= \lambda(h|M_{f,\epsilon}\cap M_{g,\epsilon}). $$ Therefore, take $$ x\in M_{f,\epsilon}\cap M_{g,\epsilon}. $$ For such $x$ we have: $$ d(gf(x), x)\le d(gf(x), f(x)) + d(f(x), x) \le \lambda(g) +\epsilon + \lambda(f) +\epsilon = \lambda(g) + \lambda(f) + 2\epsilon. $$ Since $\epsilon>0$ was arbitrary, we conclude that $$ d(gf(x), x)\le \lambda(g) + \lambda(f). $$ Taking the infimum over all $x\in M_{f,\epsilon}\cap M_{g,\epsilon}$, we conclude that $$ \lambda(h)\le \lambda(f) + \lambda(g). $$