Suppose that, instead of using the usual Euclidean norm on , we use an arbitrary
-norm. Then the distance between two points
and
is given by
.
What are the geodesics in with the
-norm? (or in
, though I suspect that answering the question in
answers the question in
).
2007 August 20 at 3:42 pm |
First note that the distance between two points
and
should be defined with absolute values:
.
Then it follows that the geodesics are only straight lines when
. When
there are infinitely many shortest between two points, unless they both lie on the same horizontal or vertical line.
In fact,
whenever
and
are linearly independent) there are no other geodesics.
(1) for any norm, straight lines are always geodesics, and
(2) given any strictly convex norm (the triangle inequality is strict:
Fact (1) is not difficult to prove (use the triangle inequality and the definition of arc length as a limit of approximating polygons, no integrals needed), and fact (2) is easy.
Note that a norm is strictly convex if and only if there is no line segment on the boundary of the unit ball.
For more on this, you can look at my paper with Horst Martini:
The geometry of Minkowski spaces — a survey. Part I, Expositiones Mathematicae 19 (2001) 97-142.
2007 August 22 at 12:36 am |
Thanks for the response.
Is it obvious that the only geodesics are straight lines when
?
I don’t see it at the moment.
2007 August 22 at 12:53 pm |
Whatever your definition of the length
of a curve (polygonal approximation or integral) from
to
, the triangle inequality implies that
(1)
,
meaning that the straight line segment is a shortest path from
to
. From this and the strict triangle inequality (valid when the norm is strictly convex, see my previous comment), it follows that the only shortest curve between
and
is the straight line segment joining them (of length
).
Proof: Suppose there is a curve of length
joining
and
. It cannot be the straight line segment, so there exists a point
on it that is not on the segment between
and
. Then
and
are linearly independent, so you can apply the strict triangle inequality:
(2)
.
Denote the length of the curve from
to
by
and the length of the curve from
to
by
. Then by (1),
(3)
.
Combining (2) and (3) contradicts
. QED
It remains to show that the
norm is strictly convex when
. This follows if you analyze equality in the Minkowski inequality and the Hölder inequality on which it is based.
2007 August 22 at 1:53 pm |
Hi Randall
Sorry, I made a mistake. In the proof, don’t suppose there is a shorter curve. Instead assume that there is a shortest curve (also of length
) that is not the straight line segment. Then there is a point
etc. Finally, combining (2) and (3) already contradicts (1) and QED.
Hope this is not too confusing.
2007 September 1 at 2:53 pm |
Hi Konrad,
Makes sense.
Thanks again.