Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Possible Duplicate:
Continuity of the metric function

For $F$ closed in a metric space $(X,d)$, is the map $d(x,F) = \inf\limits_{y \in F} d(x,y)$ continuous?

I think it is, but I'm having a complete mind blank (it's been a while since I did any analysis).

Any hints would be appreciated.

share|cite|improve this question

marked as duplicate by t.b., Rudy the Reindeer, Pedro Tamaroff, Jonas Teuwen, BenjaLim Aug 13 '12 at 5:33

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

I changed \mathrm{inf} to \inf. Not only is that simpler and standard, but when you set it in "display" mode rather than "inline", then it makes it look like this: $\displaystyle\inf_{y\in F}$. It's a standard operator name in TeX. – Michael Hardy Feb 9 '12 at 19:08
up vote 9 down vote accepted

Let $(X,\rho)$ be some metric space. For each $A\subset X$ we define distance from $x$ to $A$ by equality $\rho(x,A)=\inf\{\rho(x,y):y\in A\}$. Since for all $x_1,x_2,y\in X$ we have $$ \rho(x_1,y)\leq\rho(x_2,y)+\rho(x_1, x_2) $$ then after taking infimum we get $$ \rho(x_1,A)\leq\rho(x_2,y)+\rho(x_1, x_2) $$ then after taking infimum one more time we see $$ \rho(x_1,A)\leq\rho(x_2,A)+\rho(x_1, x_2) $$ Similarly we can prove that $$ \rho(x_2,A)\leq\rho(x_1,A)+\rho(x_1, x_2), $$ so $|\rho(x_1,A)-\rho(x_2,A)|\leq\rho(x_1, x_2)$. Now for each $\varepsilon>0$ take $\delta=\varepsilon$. Then for all $x_1,x_2\in X$ such that $\rho(x_1,x_2)< \delta$ we have $|\rho(x_1,A)-\rho(x_2,A)|<\varepsilon$. Thus $\rho(\cdot,A):X\to\mathbb{R}_+$ not only continuous, but Lipschitz continuous with Lipschitz constant 1.

In this proof, closedness of $A$ is unnecessary.

share|cite|improve this answer
Actually, you've shown that it is Lipschitz continuous with Lipschitz constant 1, which is way stronger than uniform continuity... This is comment necromancy, but you're the one who bumped the question. – tomasz Aug 12 '12 at 23:47
@tomasz, I'll add this observation. Thanks! – Norbert Aug 12 '12 at 23:50

Let $x\in X$, and let $d(x,F)=r$. we want to show that for all $\epsilon\gt 0$ there exists $\delta\gt 0$ such that if $d(x,y)\lt \delta$, then $|d(y,F)-r|\lt\epsilon$.

Let $d(y,F)=s$. Then for every $\gamma\gt 0$ there exists $f_1\in F$ such that $d(x,F)=r\leq d(x,f_1)\lt r+\gamma$. Therefore, $$d(y,F) \leq d(y,f_1)\leq d(y,x)+d(x,f_1) \lt d(y,x)+r+\gamma$$ so $$d(y,F)-r \leq d(y,x)+\gamma.$$ On the other hand, $d(x,F) \leq d(x,f_1) \leq d(x,y)+d(y,f_1) \leq d(x,y)+d(y,F)$, so $$d(y,F) \geq d(x,F)-d(x,y) \geq d(x,F)-d(x,y)-\gamma,$$ hence $$d(y,F)-r = d(y,F)-d(x,F)\geq -d(x,y)-\gamma.$$ I hope that's sufficient?

share|cite|improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.