CREAT. MATH. INFORM. Online version at http://creative-mathematics.ubm.

ro/
26 (2017), No. 2, 153 - 162 Print Edition: ISSN 1584 - 286X Online Edition: ISSN 1843 - 441X

A proof of Garfunkel inequality and of some related results

in inner product spaces

D AN Ş TEFAN M ARINESCU and M IHAI M ONEA

A BSTRACT. In this paper, we will present a inner product space proof of a geometric inequality proposed by
J. Garfunkel in American Mathematical Monthly [Garfunkel, J., Problem 2505, American Mathematical Monthly,
81 (1974), No. 11] and consider some other similar results.

1. I NTRODUCTION
In [3], Garfunkel proposed the following problem:

Problem 1.1. Let a, b, c be the sides of a triangle ABC, and let ma , mb , mc be the medians to
sides a, b, c, respectively. Extend the medians so as to meet the circumcircle again, and these chords
be Ma , Mb , Mc , respectively. Then:
a) Ma + Mb + Mc > 34 (ma + mb + mc );
√
b) Ma + Mb + Mc > 2 3 3 (a + b + c).

The readers can find two solutions to this problem in [2]. These geometrical inequa-
lities raised the interest of more mathematicians. For example, the second solution is
due Erdös and Klamkim. The references of this paper contains more results connected
with Problem 1.1 as solutions, extensions or generalizations. Garfunkel (see [4]) himself,
proposed another similar inequality.

Problem 1.2. Triangle ABC is inscribed in a circle. The medians of the triangle intersect at G
and are extended to the circle to points D, E and F . Then:
GA + GB + GC 6 GD + GE + GF . (1.1)

In fact, the relation GA = 32 ma and the analogues show that inequality (1.1) is equiva-
lent with the previous. Boente ([1]) presented a proof to Problem 1.2., which includes the
following generalization.

Proposition 1.3. Let P1 ,P2 , .., Pm be points of an n-sphere S, and G their center of gravity. For
any i ∈ {1, 2, ..., m} the extensions of Pi G intersect S at Qi . Then:
Xn Xn
Pi G 6 Qi G.
i=1 i=1

Tsintsifas ([10]) completed the inequality (1.1) with another two inequalities. These
results are included in the following problem.

Received: 18.01.2017. In revised form: 29.05.2017. Accepted: 05.06.2017

2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 51M16, 46C15, 26D05.
Key words and phrases. Inner product space, Garfunkel inequality.
Corresponding author: Mihai Monea; mihaimonea@yahoo.com

153
154 Dan Ştefan Marinescu and Mihai Monea

Problem 1.4. Let G be the centroid of a triangle ABC and and suppose that AG, BG, CG meet
the circumcircle of the triangle again in A0 , B 0 , C 0 , respectively. Then:
a) GA0 + GB 0 + GC 0 > GC + GB + GC;
GA GB GC
b) GA 0 + GB 0 + GC 0 = 3;

c) GA · GB · GC 0 > GA · GB · GC.
0 0

In 1985, Klamkin moved this problem to a higher level. He presented a generalization

for a n-simplex from Rn (see [5]).

Proposition 1.5. The medians of a n-dimensional simplex A0 A1 A2 ...An from Rn intersect at

the centroid G and are extended to meet the circumsphere again, in the points B0 , B1 , B2 , ..., Bn ,
respectively.
a) Prove: GA0 + GA1 + GA2 + ... + GAn 6 GB0 + GB1 + GB2 + ... + GBn ;
GA0 GA1 GAn
b) Prove: GB 0
+ GB 1
+ ... + GB n
= n + 1;
c) Prove: GA0 · GA1 · GA2 · ... · GAn 6 GB0 · GB1 · GB2 · ... · GBn .

Supplementary, he proposed an open question.

Open Question 1.6. The medians of an n-dimensional simplex A0 A1 A2 ...An from Rn intersect
at the centroid G and are extended to meet the circumsphere again in the points B0 , B1 , B2 , ..., Bn ,
respectively. Determine all other points P such that

P A0 + P A1 + P A2 + ... + P An 6 P B0 + P B1 + P B2 + ... + P Bn .

We found a partial answer in [11]. The authors of this paper investigated all the previ-
ous results and concluded that these inequalities are more general.
In this context, the aim of this paper is to prove the inequality 1.1 in inner product
spaces. We completed with new inequalities related to 1.1. The main results are represen-
ted by the Proposition 3.1 from Section 3. Moreover, we present a similar open question
for inner product space. We offer only a partial answer. We start with some preliminary
results which are included in the second section.

2. S OME PRELIMINARY RESULTS

In this section, X denote a real or complex inner product space. First, we recall a useful
result.

Proposition 2.1. Let n ∈ N, n > 2 and x1 , x2 , ..., xn , y ∈ X. For any α1 , α2 , ..., αn ∈ R with
α1 + α2 + ... + αn = 1, we have:
2
n
X n
X X
2 2
y − αk xk = αk ky − xk k − αi αj kxk − xj k . (2.2)


k=1 k=1 16k<j6n

In [7], it showed that this identity characterizes an inner product space. We apply 2.2
to prove the following proposition.
 A proof of Garfunkel inequality and of some related results in inner product spaces 155

Proposition 2.2. Let x0 , x1 , x2 ∈ X and r ∈ [0, ∞) such that kx1 − x0 k = kx2 − x0 k = r. For
any α ∈ [0, 1], we denote w = αx1 + (1 − α) x2 . Then
2
kw − x1 k · kw − x2 k = r2 − kw − x0 k .
Proof. Tha case n = 2 in 2.2 led us to
2 2
kw − x0 k = kx0 − αx1 − (1 − α) x2 k
2 2 2
= α kx0 − x1 k + (1 − α) kx0 − x2 k − α (1 − α) kx1 − x2 k
2
= r2 − α (1 − α) kx1 − x2 k .
It follows
kw − x1 k · kw − x2 k = kαx1 + (1 − α) x2 − x2 k · kαx1 + (1 − α) x2 − x1 k
= α kx1 − x2 k · (1 − α) kx1 − x2 k
2
= α (1 − α) kx1 − x2 k ,
which concludes our proof. 

The previous proposition represent a version for an inner product space of a ”point
power theorem”.

Proposition 2.3. Let x0 ∈ X and r ∈ [0, ∞). Then, for any x1 , x ∈ X with kx1 − x0 k = r
and kx − x0 k < r, it exists just one pair (y1 ; α) with y1 ∈ X and α ∈ (0, 1) so that x =
αy1 + (1 − α) x1 and ky1 − x0 k = r.
Proof. First, we want to find t ∈ R\ {0, 1} such that y1 = tx1 + (1 − t) x and ky1 − x0 k = r.
Then
y1 − x0 = tx1 + (1 − t) x − x0
2 2
⇒ ky1 − x0 k = ktx1 + (1 − t) x − x0 k .
By using 2.2, we have
2 2 2
t kx1 − x0 k + (1 − t) kx − x0 k − t (1 − t) kx1 − xk = r2
2 2
⇒ t (1 − t) kx1 − xk = (1 − t) kx − x0 k − (1 − t) r2
2
kx − x0 k − r2
⇒t= 2 < 0,
kx1 − xk
so t ∈ R\ {0, 1} . Then
2 2 2
kx − x0 k − r2 r2 + kx1 − xk − kx − x0 k
y= 2 x1 + 2 x.
kx1 − xk kx1 − xk
It follows that
   
2 2 2 2
r2 + kx1 − xk − kx − x0 k x = r2 − kx − x0 k x1 + kx1 − xk y1
2 2
kx1 − xk r2 − kx − x0 k
⇒x= 2 2 y1 + 2 2 x1 .
r2 + kx1 − xk − kx − x0 k r2 + kx1 − xk − kx − x0 k
If we denote
2
kx1 − xk
a= 2 2,
r2 + kx1 − xk − kx − x0 k
we have x = ay1 + (1 − a) x1 and a ∈ (0, 1).
156 Dan Ştefan Marinescu and Mihai Monea

Now, let (y2 , β) another pair in the same conditions as the pair (y1 ; α). Then
αy1 + (1 − α) x1 = βy2 + (1 − β) x1

⇒ (α − β) x1 = αy1 − βy2
⇒ (α − β) x1 − (α − β) x0 = αy1 − βy2 − (α − β) x0 .
If we suppose that α 6= β, then
α −β
x1 − x0 = y1 + y2 − x0
α−β α−β
2
2 2 α −β
⇒ r = kx1 − x0 k = y1 + y2 − x0
.
α−β α−β
Proposition 2.1 led us to
α 2 β 2 αβ 2
r2 = ky1 − x0 k − ky2 − x0 k + 2 ky1 − y2 k
α−β α−β (α − β)
α β αβ 2
⇒ r2 = r2 − r2 + 2 ky1 − y2 k
α−β α−β (α − β)
⇒ ky1 − y2 k = 0
⇒ y1 = y2 .
The equality (α − β) x1 = αy1 − βy2 becames (α − β) x1 = (α − β) y1 , also x1 = y1
which is false. The assumption α 6= β is not true and we have α = β. From (α − β) x1 =
αy1 − βy2 , we obtain again y1 = y2 and the pairs (y1 ; α) and (y2 , β) are identical. 

Remarks. In fact, y1 represents the ”intersect” of B (x0 , r) with ”lines” determined by

x1 and x.

Proposition 2.4. Let n ∈ N, n > 2, r ∈ (0, ∞) and x0 ∈ X. Let x1 , x2 , ..., xn ∈ X, at least

two distinct, such that kx1 − x0 k = kx2 − x0 k = ... = kxn − x0 k = r. For any α1 , α2 , ..., αn ∈
(0, 1) with α1 + α2 + ... + αn = 1, we have
kα1 x1 + α2 x2 + ... + αn xn − x0 k < r.

Proof. We are using 2.2 and we obtain

2
n
X
2
kα1 x1 + α2 x2 + ... + αn xn − x0 k = x0 − αk xk


k=1
n
X X
2 2
= αk kx0 − xk k − αk αj kxk − xj k
k=1 16k<j6n
Xn
2
< αk kx0 − xk k
k=1
Xn
= αk r2
k=1

and the conclusion follows now. 

 A proof of Garfunkel inequality and of some related results in inner product spaces 157

We conclude this section by recalling another useful result (see page 76 from [9]).

Proposition 2.5. (Chebyshev Inequality) Let n ∈ N, n > 2. Let a1 , a2 , ..., an ∈ R ,

b1 , b2 , ..., bn ∈ R and p1 , p2 , ..., pn ∈ [0, 1] such that a1 6 a2 6 ... 6 αn , b1 > b2 > ... > bn and
p1 + p2 + ... + pn = 1. Then
n n
! n !
X X X
pk ak bk 6 pk ak pk bk .
k=1 k=1 k=1

3. THE MAIN RESULTS

For the results from this section, we establish the following general conditions and
notations. Let n ∈ N , n > 2, r ∈ (0, ∞) and x0 ∈ X. Let x1 , x2 , ..., xn ∈ X, at least two
distinct, such that

kx1 − x0 k = kx2 − x0 k = ... = kxn − x0 k = r.

Let α1 , α2 , ..., αn ∈ (0, 1) with α1 + α2 + ... + αn = 1. Denote

x = α1 x1 + α2 x2 + ... + αn xn .

Proposition 2.4 shows that kx − x0 k < r. For any k ∈ {1, 2, .., n} we denote yk ∈ X , the
elements defined by Proposition 2.3 for xk and x.

Proposition 3.1. The following assertions are true:

n
αk kx k −xk
P
a) kyk −xk = 1;
k=1
n
P n
P
b) αk kxk − xk 6 αk kyk − xk;
k=1 k=1
n n
Q αk Q αk
c) kyk − xk > kxk − xk ;
k=1 k=1
2 P 2
d) kxk − yk k · kxk − xk = kxk − xk + αi αj kxi − xj k , for any k ∈ {1, 2, ..., n};
16i<j6n
r P
2
e) kxk − yk k > 2 αi αj kxi − xj k , for any k ∈ {1, 2, ..., n};
16i<j6n
n √ P √
2 2n
P
f) kxk − yk k > √
n−1
· αi αj kxi − xj k.
k=1 16i<j6n

Proof. a) We have
n n 2
X kxk − xk X kxk − xk
αk = αk .
kyk − xk kyk − xk · kxk − xk
k=1 k=1

Proposition 2.2 goes to

n n
X kxk − xk 1 X 2
αk = 2 αk kxk − xk .
kyk − xk r2 − kx − x0 k k=1
k=1
158 Dan Ştefan Marinescu and Mihai Monea

Now, we apply 2.2 to y = x and y = x0 . Then

2
X n
2
kx0 − xk = x0 − αk xk


k=1
X 2
= r2 − αk αj kxk − xj k
16k<j6n

and
n
X X
2 2
0= αk kx − xk k − αk αj kxk − xj k .
k=1 16k<j6n
We obtain
n
X 2 2
αk kx − xk k = r2 − kx − x0 k
k=1
and
n n
X kxk − xk 1 X 2
αk = 2 αk kxk − xk = 1.
kyk − xk r2 − kx − x0 k k=1
k=1
b) For any k ∈ {1, 2, ..., n} , we have
2
kxk − xk r2 − kx − x0 k
= 2 .
kyk − xk kyk − xk
 
Then, we can apply Proposition 2.5 for the systems kx 1 −xk kx2 −xk
,
ky1 −xk ky2 −xk , ..., kxn −xk
kyn −xk and
(ky1 − xk , ky2 − xk , ..., kyn − xk) and we obtain
n n
X X kxk − xk
αk kxk − xk = αk · kyk − yk
kyk − xk
k=1 k=1
n n
X kxk − xk X
6 αk · αk · kyk − yk.
kyk − xk
k=1 k=1
Using the previous assertion, we have
n
X n
X
αk kxk − xk 6 αk kyk − xk.
k=1 k=1

c) By applying the generalized means inequality, we obtain

n n  α
X kxk − xk Y kxk − xk k
αk > .
kyk − xk kyk − xk
k=1 k=1

The assertion a) give now the conclusion.

d) From the definition of yk , we have
kxk − yk k = kxk − xk + kx − yk k ,
for any k ∈ {1, 2, .., n}. Then
2
kxk − yk k · kxk − xk = kxk − xk + kx − yk k · kxk − xk .
By using Propositions 2.1 and 2.2 , we obtain
2 2
kxk − yk k · kxk − xk = kxk − xk + r2 − kx − x0 k
2
X 2
= kxk − xk + αi αj kxi − xj k .
16i<j6n
 A proof of Garfunkel inequality and of some related results in inner product spaces 159

e) For any k ∈ {1, 2, ..., n}, we have kxk − xk > 0 due to Proposition 2.4. Then
1 X 2
kxk − yk k > kxk − xk + αi αj kxi − xj k
kxk − xk
16i<j6n
s X
2
> 2 αi αj kxi − xj k .
16i<j6n

f ) Cauchy’s inequality give us

 2
X √
 αi αj kxi − xj k 6
16i<j6n
 
n (n − 1) X 2
 αi αj kxi − xj k  .
2
16i<j6n

Then
n
X n
X s X
2
kxk − yk k > 2 αi αj kxi − xj k
k=1 k=1 16i<j6n
√
2 2n X √
> √ · αi αj kxi − xj k
n − 1 16i<j6n

and the proofs are complete. 

1
Particularly, for α1 = α2 = ... = αn = , the Proposition 3.1 becomes:
n
Corollary 3.2. The following assertions are true:
n kx − xk
P k
a) = n;
k=1 ky k − xk
n
P Pn
b) kxk − xk 6 kyk − xk;
k=1 k=1
Qn Qn
c) kyk − xk > kxk − xk;
k=1 k=1
2 1 P 2
d) kxk − yk k · kxk − xk = kxk − xk + 2 kxi − xj k , for any k ∈ {1, 2, ..., n};
n 16i<j6n
2r P 2
e) kxk − yk k > kxi − xj k , for any k ∈ {1, 2, ..., n};
n 16i<j6n
√
Pn 2 2 P
f) kxk − yk k > p · kxi − xj k.
k=1 n (n − 1) 16i<j6n
Remarks.
1. If we apply the assertion b) from Corollary 3.2 for Rn , we obtain the inequality from
Proposition 1.3. More, this proof is not similar with the Boente’s proof from [1].
2. If we apply Corollary 3.2 to a n-simplex from Rn , we recover the results from Propo-
sition 1.5.

Finally, we give a partial answer to Open Problem 1.6. With the conditions established
to the beginning of this section, we denote
1
x= (x1 + x2 + ... + xn ) .
n
160 Dan Ştefan Marinescu and Mihai Monea
2 2 2
Proposition 3.3. If kx − x0 k > kx0 − xk + kx − xk then
n
X n
X
kxk − xk 6 kyk − xk.
k=1 k=1

Proof. From 2.2, we obtain

n
2 1X 2 1 X 2
kx − x0 k = kxk − x0 k − 2 kxi − xj k
n n
k=1 16i<j6n
1 X 2
= r2 − 2 kxi − xj k .
n
16i<j6n

Then
1 X 2 2 2
r2 − kxi − xj k > kx0 − xk + kx − xk
n2
16i<j6n

2 1 X 2 2
⇒ r2 − kx0 − xk > kxi − xj k + kx − xk .
n2
16i<j6n

From Proposition 2.2, we have

2
r2 − kx0 − xk = kxk − xk · kyk − xk ,

for any k ∈ {1, 2, .., n} and 2.2 give us

n
2 1X 1 X 2
kx − xk = kxk − xk − 2 kxi − xj k .
n n
k=1 16i<j6n

Then
n
1X 2
kxk − xk · kyk − xk > kxk − xk ,
n
k=1

for any k ∈ {1, 2, .., n}. Hence

n n
!2
1X 2 1X
kxk − xk > kxk − xk ,
n n
k=1 k=1

so that
n
!2
X
2
n kxk − xk · kyk − xk > kxk − xk ,
k=1

for any k ∈ {1, 2, .., n}. We obtain

n
!2
2 1 X
n · kyk − xk > kxk − xk .
kxk − xk
k=1
 A proof of Garfunkel inequality and of some related results in inner product spaces 161

Now we use Cauchy inequality and we have

n n
!2 n
!
2
X X X 1
n · kyk − xk > kxk − xk
kxk − xk
k=1 k=1 k=1
n
!2
X n2
> kxk − xk · P
n
k=1 kxk − xk
k=1
n
X
= n2 · kxk − xk,
k=1
which concludes our proof. 

Final Remarks.
1. In fact, the equality
2 2 2
kx − x0 k > kx0 − xk + kx − xk ,
from Proposition 3.3 is equivalent with
2 2 1 2 1 2
kx0 − xk + kx − xk − kx − x0 k 6 kx − x0 k
2 2
1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
⇔ kx0 − xk + kx − xk − kx − x0 k 6 kx − x0 k
2 2 4 4
2
x0 + x 6 1 kx − x0 k2
⇔ x −

2 4

x 0 + x 1 2
⇔ x − 2 6 2 kx − x0 k

 
x0 + x 1
⇔ x∈B , kx0 − xk .
2 2
x0 + x
It means that x is situated in the ”closed ball” with the center and the ”diameter”
2
kx0 − xk.
2. If we apply Proposition 3.2 for a n-simplex from Rn and taking into account by the
previous remark, we recover the answer proposed to Open Question 1.6 by G. Tsintsifas
(see [11]).
3. An elementary version of the results from Section 3 of this paper can be found in [8].

R EFERENCES
[1] Boente, P., Solution of Problem 2959, American Mathematical Monthly, 92 (1985), No. 5
[2] Erdos, P. and Klamkin, M. S., Solution of Problem 250, American Mathematical Monthly, 83 (1976), No. 1
[3] Garfunkel, J., Problem 2505, American Mathematical Monthly, 81 (1974), No. 11
[4] Garfunkel, J., Problem 2959, American Mathematical Monthly, 89 (1982), No. 7
[5] Klamkin, M. S., Solution to Problem 723, Crux Mathematicorum, 9 (1983), No. 5
[6] Klamkin, M. S., Problem 1086, Crux Mathematicorum, 11 (1985), No. 9
[7] Marinescu, D. Ş., Monea, M., Opincariu, M. and Stroe, M., Some Equivalent Characterizations Of Inner Product
Spaces And Their Consequences, Mathematical Inequalities and Applications, 18 (2015), No. 4, 1375–1385
[8] Marinescu, D. Ş. and Monea, M., Asupra inegalităţii lui Garfunkel, Gazeta Matematică B, CXIX (2014), nr. 12
[9] Steele, J. M.,The Cauchy–Schwarz Master Class: An Introduction to the Art of Mathematical Inequalities, Cam-
bridge University Press, 2004
[10] Tsintsifas, G., Problem 723, Crux Mathematicorum, 8 (1982), No. 3
162 Dan Ştefan Marinescu and Mihai Monea

[11] Tsintsifas, G., Solution to Problem 1086, Crux Mathematicorum, 13 (1987), No. 5

N ATIONAL C OLLEGE ”I ANCU DE H UNEDOARA ”

H UNEDOARA , R OMANIA
E-mail address: marinescuds@gmail.com

N ATIONAL C OLLEGE ”D ECEBAL ”,

D EVA , R OMANIA
E-mail address: mihaimonea@yahoo.com