I know that all Hilbert spaces are Banach spaces, and that the converse is not true, but I've been unable to come up with a (hopefully simple!) example of a Banach space that is not also a Hilbert space. Any help would be appreciated!
Anthony
Oct2-08, 12:04 PM
Hint: a necessary and sufficient for a Banach space (\mathcal{B},\|\cdot\|) to be a Hilbert space is for the norm to satisfy the parallelogram identity:
\| a+b \|^2 + \|a-b \|^2 = 2 \|a\|^2 + 2\| b\|^2
for each a,b \in \mathcal{B}. Now think of some simple Banach spaces and check the above.
Old Guy
Oct2-08, 12:48 PM
Thank you, Anthony; I was aware of this condition but could not come up with anything. I believe I'm looking for a complete normed vector space (Banach) that is NOT complete under the inner product norm (as required for Hilbert), but I can't quite get my brain around how this would look.
jostpuur
Oct2-08, 12:56 PM
Speaking about spaces that are not Hilbert spaces is not quite clear always. Strictly speaking, if you don't define any inner product onto a given Banach space, then it is not a Hilbert space! But if you are asked to give an example of a Banach space that is not an Hilbert space, most surely it means that you want a kind of space that cannot even be made into a Hilbert space. That means that an inner product that would give the original norm, doesn't exist.
jostpuur
Oct2-08, 01:00 PM
Hint: a necessary and sufficient for a Banach space (\mathcal{B},\|\cdot\|) to be a Hilbert space is for the norm to satisfy the parallelogram identity:
\| a+b \|^2 + \|a-b \|^2 = 2 \|a\|^2 + 2\| b\|^2
for each a,b \in \mathcal{B}. Now think of some simple Banach spaces and check the above.
I got stuck there. How do you prove the bilinearity of
by using the parallelogram only? :confused: (I'm dealing with real vector spaces first.)
jostpuur
Oct2-08, 01:05 PM
This completeness business is little bit misdirection, since dealing with finite dimensional spaces, where completeness is trivial, is enough. One can device a two dimensional norm space which is not an inner product space, and then you have a Banach space which is not a Hilbert space.
Old Guy
Oct2-08, 03:28 PM
One can device a two dimensional norm space which is not an inner product space, and then you have a Banach space which is not a Hilbert space.
This is exactly what I'm seeking; can someone please provide an example? Thank you.
cliowa
Oct2-08, 05:28 PM
Think of a space of functions: Say you fix some interval, look at the continuous functions...
morphism
Oct3-08, 12:15 AM
Or just consider the p-norms on R^2, and use the parallelogram law. It's very easy to prove that the only p-norm that comes from an inner product is the 2-norm.
Anthony
Oct3-08, 07:17 AM
I got stuck there. How do you prove the bilinearity of
by using the parallelogram only? :confused: (I'm dealing with real vector spaces first.)
If \| \cdot \| satisfies the parallelogram identity, then the induced inner product is given by the polarization identity:
for a,b,c\in\mathcal{B}, which both follow from the parallelogram identity. Now subtract them and use the definition of (\cdot, \cdot) given by the polarization identity.
Old Guy: I would follow morphism's advice and try out some norms you know of in \mathbf{R}^n.
HallsofIvy
Oct3-08, 01:54 PM
I got stuck there. How do you prove the bilinearity of
by using the parallelogram only? :confused: (I'm dealing with real vector spaces first.)
Why do you want to prove it? Your original problem was to find a Banach space that is not a Hilbert space. It was pointed out that a norm that does not satisfy the "parallelogram" inequality is not an innerproduct space. It was also pointed out that any L[sub]p[/sup] for p other than 2 is a Banach space that is not a Hilbert space. There is no need to prove that "if the parallelgram inequality is satisified, a Banach space is a Hilbert space.
Anthony
Oct3-08, 03:34 PM
HallsofIvy, it was Old Guy, not jostpuur, who posed the original problem. :)