Radon's lemma states:

Let A be a set of $d$+2 points in $R^{d}$. Then there exist two disjoint subsets $A1$, $A2$ $\subset$ $A$ such that

$conv(A1)$ $\cap$ $conv(A2)$ = $\emptyset$

I understand that this is true and I am not looking for a proof, however I am not sure why it is useful. I have seen that it is used in Helly's Theorem, however I do not understand how showing that there could exist a non-empty intersection if we take the convex hulls of two sets says anything about the actual existence of intersections. I think I am missing some fundamental understanding of what this lemma actually means.



Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.