Physics Forums (http://www.physicsforums.com/index.php)
-   Calculus & Beyond Homework (http://www.physicsforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=156)
-   -   Hilbert, Inner Product (http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=591868)

 bugatti79 Mar30-12 01:32 PM

Hilbert, Inner Product

I have just realized that I accidently put it in wrong sub forum. This should be in 'calculus and beyond'.

1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data

Prove the function <x,y>=x_1y_1+x_2y_2+x_3y_3 defines an inner product space on the real vector space R^3 where x=(x1,x2,x3) and y=(y1,y2,y3)

3. The attempt at a solution

Axiom 1 <x,y> >=0 since we have that x_n and y_n for n=1,2,3 are in R

Axiom 2a <x,y> =x1y1+x2y2+x3y3, then <x,y>=0 iff x_n and y_n for n=1,2,3 both =0

Axiom 2b <ax,y>=a<x,y>

<ax,y> = ax1y1+ax2y2+ax3y3
= a(x1y1+x2y2+x3y3)
=a<x,y>

Axiom 3 <y,x>= complex of <x,y>

<y,x>=(y1x1+y2x2+y3x3) but y complex =y and x complex=x in R therefore
= (y1x1 complex+y2x2 complex +x3y3 complex)
=<y,x> complex
=<x,y> complex

Axiom 4 <x+y,z>=<x,z>+<y,z>, let z=(z1,z2,z3) in R^3

<x+y,z>=(x1+y1+x2+y2+x3+y3)(z1+z2+z3)
=x1z1 +x2z2+x3z3+y1z1+y2zy3z3
=<x,z>+<y,z>
...?

 Mark44 Mar30-12 02:02 PM

Re: Hilbert, Inner Product

Quote:
 Quote by bugatti79 (Post 3841965) 1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data Prove the function =x_1y_1+x_2y_2+x_3y_3 defines an inner product space on the real vector space R^3 where x=(x1,x2,x3) and y=(y1,y2,y3) 3. The attempt at a solution Axiom 1 >=0 since we have that x_n and y_n for n=1,2,3 are in R
This isn't Axiom 1. It has to do with <x, x>.
Quote:
 Quote by bugatti79 (Post 3841965) Axiom 2a =x1y1+x2y2+x3y3, then =0 iff x_n and y_n for n=1,2,3 both =0 Axiom 2b =a = ax1y1+ax2y2+ax3y3 = a(x1y1+x2y2+x3y3) =a Axiom 3 = complex of
Don't you mean "conjugate transpose"?
Since the underlying vector space is R3, all you need to show is that <x, y> = <y, x>.
Quote:
 Quote by bugatti79 (Post 3841965) =(y1x1+y2x2+y3x3) but y complex =y and x complex=x in R therefore = (y1x1 complex+y2x2 complex +x3y3 complex) = complex = complex Axiom 4 =+, let z=(z1,z2,z3) in R^3 =(x1+y1+x2+y2+x3+y3)(z1+z2+z3) =x1z1 +x2z2+x3z3+y1z1+y2zy3z3 =+ ...?

 bugatti79 Mar30-12 02:09 PM

Re: Hilbert, Inner Product

Quote:
 Quote by Mark44 (Post 3842015) This isn't Axiom 1. It has to do with .
Oh I see,

Axiom 1 <x,x> >=0 since we have that x_n for n=1,2,3 are in R

Quote:
 Quote by Mark44 (Post 3842015) Don't you mean "conjugate transpose"? Since the underlying vector space is R3, all you need to show is that = .
Yes, the bar on top of them.
Anyway,

<y,x>=y1x1+y2x2+y3x3
=x1y1+x2y2+x3y3
=<x,y>

Is axiom 4 ok?

Thanks

 Ray Vickson Mar30-12 02:20 PM

Re: Hilbert, Inner Product

Quote:
 Quote by bugatti79 (Post 3841965) I have just realized that I accidently put it in wrong sub forum. This should be in 'calculus and beyond'. 1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data Prove the function =x_1y_1+x_2y_2+x_3y_3 defines an inner product space on the real vector space R^3 where x=(x1,x2,x3) and y=(y1,y2,y3) 3. The attempt at a solution Axiom 1 >=0 since we have that x_n and y_n for n=1,2,3 are in R Axiom 2a =x1y1+x2y2+x3y3, then =0 iff x_n and y_n for n=1,2,3 both =0 Axiom 2b =a = ax1y1+ax2y2+ax3y3 = a(x1y1+x2y2+x3y3) =a Axiom 3 = complex of =(y1x1+y2x2+y3x3) but y complex =y and x complex=x in R therefore = (y1x1 complex+y2x2 complex +x3y3 complex) = complex = complex Axiom 4 =+, let z=(z1,z2,z3) in R^3 =(x1+y1+x2+y2+x3+y3)(z1+z2+z3) =x1z1 +x2z2+x3z3+y1z1+y2zy3z3 =+ ...?
Your statement "Axiom 1 <x,y> >=0" is NOT a property of an inner product; we can have <x,y> > 0, = 0 or < 0. However, we do have <x,x> >= 0, with <x,x> = 0 iff x is the zero vector. Can you prove that?

Your statement "Axiom 2a <x,y> =x1y1+x2y2+x3y3, then <x,y>=0 iff x_n and y_n for n=1,2,3 both =0" is FALSE: <x,y> = 0 means only that the vectors x and y are perpendicular to one another.

Your statement "Axiom 3 <y,x>= complex of <x,y>" is meaningless; perhaps you mean "complex conjugate". Anyway, in real space, the components of x and y are all real and <x,y> is real; the property you state is trivially true, because x1*y1 + x2*y2 + x3*y3 = y1*x1 + y2*x2 + y3*x3.

Your statement of Axiom 4 is correct, but your proof is absolutely incorrect! Go back and read what you did.

RGV

 Mark44 Mar30-12 02:30 PM

Re: Hilbert, Inner Product

Quote:
 Quote by bugatti79 (Post 3842026) Oh I see, Axiom 1 >=0 since we have that x_n for n=1,2,3 are in R
You're waving your arms here. Expand <x, x> using the definition of this inner product and it should be obvious why <x, x> >= 0.
Quote:
 Quote by bugatti79 (Post 3842026) Yes, the bar on top of them. Anyway, =y1x1+y2x2+y3x3 =x1y1+x2y2+x3y3 = Is axiom 4 ok? Thanks
Yes, #4 is fine.

 bugatti79 Mar30-12 02:58 PM

Re: Hilbert, Inner Product

Quote:
 Quote by Mark44 (Post 3842058) You're waving your arms here. Expand using the definition of this inner product and it should be obvious why >= 0.
Quote:
 Quote by Ray Vickson (Post 3842043) Your statement "Axiom 1 >=0" is NOT a property of an inner product; we can have > 0, = 0 or < 0. However, we do have >= 0, with = 0 iff x is the zero vector. Can you prove that?
<x,x>=x1x1+x2x2+x3x3>=0 where x_n>=0 for n=1,2,3 since x_n is in R

<x,x>=0 iff x1x1+x2x2+x3x3=0 ie iff x_nx_n=0 for n=1,2,3, iff x_n=0 for n=1,2,3, ie x=x_n=0 the 0 vector.

 Mark44 Mar30-12 03:14 PM

Re: Hilbert, Inner Product

Quote:
 Quote by bugatti79 (Post 3842085) =x1x1+x2x2+x3x3>=0 where x_n>=0 for n=1,2,3 since x_n is in R
No, you're still not getting it. Any or all of the coordinates of a given vector can be negative, such as x = [1, -2, 5]. Here x2 < 0, but it's easy to show that <x, x> > 0.
Quote:
 Quote by bugatti79 (Post 3842085) =0 iff x1x1+x2x2+x3x3=0 ie iff x_nx_n=0 for n=1,2,3, iff x_n=0 for n=1,2,3, ie x=x_n=0 the 0 vector.
If the sum of three numbers is zero, why in this case is it necessarily true that all three numbers have to be zero?

 bugatti79 Mar30-12 03:49 PM

Re: Hilbert, Inner Product

Quote:
 Quote by Mark44 (Post 3842108) No, you're still not getting it. Any or all of the coordinates of a given vector can be negative, such as x = [1, -2, 5]. Here x2 < 0, but it's easy to show that > 0.
The product of a negative number times a negative number gives a positive therefore <x,x> will always be greater than 0..?

Quote:
 Quote by Mark44 (Post 3842108) If the sum of three numbers is zero, why in this case is it necessarily true that all three numbers have to be zero?
Because if at least one of them is non 0 then <x,x> is non 0..?

 Mark44 Mar30-12 04:53 PM

Re: Hilbert, Inner Product

Quote:
 Quote by bugatti79 (Post 3842148) The product of a negative number times a negative number gives a positive therefore will always be greater than 0..?
That's closer. For any real number x, x2 ≥ 0, and x2 = 0 iff x = 0.
Quote:
 Quote by bugatti79 (Post 3842148) Because if at least one of them is non 0 then is non 0..?
Now, why is x12 + x22 + x32 ≥ 0? This is what you need to establish in order to verify the <x, x> ≥ 0

 bugatti79 Mar31-12 04:06 AM

Re: Hilbert, Inner Product

Quote:
 Quote by Mark44 (Post 3842214) That's closer. For any real number x, x2 ≥ 0, and x2 = 0 iff x = 0. Now, why is x12 + x22 + x32 ≥ 0? This is what you need to establish in order to verify the ≥ 0
because we have that

|x1*x1|+|x2*x2|+|x3*x3|>=0 and |x1*x1|+|x2*x2|+|x3*x3|=0 iff each |x_n*x_n|=0 for n=1,2,3

 Mark44 Mar31-12 12:55 PM

Re: Hilbert, Inner Product

Why do you have the absolute values? Your inner product is defined this way:
<x, y> = x1y1 + x2y2 + x3y3

So again, why is x12 + x22 + x32 ≥ 0?

Take a closer look at what I said in post # 9.

 bugatti79 Apr3-12 12:53 PM

Re: Hilbert, Inner Product

Quote:
 Quote by Mark44 (Post 3843449) Why do you have the absolute values? Your inner product is defined this way: = x1y1 + x2y2 + x3y3 So again, why is x12 + x22 + x32 ≥ 0? Take a closer look at what I said in post # 9.
Because we have that x=(x1,x2,x3) in R, therefore x^2>=0 in R^3..?

 Mark44 Apr3-12 01:16 PM

Re: Hilbert, Inner Product

Quote:
 Quote by bugatti79 (Post 3848225) Because we have that x=(x1,x2,x3) in R, therefore x^2>=0 in R^3..?
This makes no sense. x is a vector in R3, so x2 is not defined. Therefore you can't say that x2 ≥ 0.

Start with <x, x> and expand it, using the definition in post #1. It is really very simple to show that <x, x> ≥ 0.

 bugatti79 Apr3-12 02:51 PM

Re: Hilbert, Inner Product

Quote:
 Quote by Mark44 (Post 3848263) This makes no sense. x is a vector in R3, so x2 is not defined. Therefore you can't say that x2 ≥ 0. Start with and expand it, using the definition in post #1. It is really very simple to show that ≥ 0.
<x,x>=x1x1+x2x2+x3x3
=x1^2+x2^2+x3^3
but x1x1>=0, x2x2>=0 and x3x3>=0 since x1,x2,x3 are in R
implies <x,x>>=0

 Mark44 Apr3-12 02:59 PM

Re: Hilbert, Inner Product

Yes.

 bugatti79 Apr3-12 03:22 PM

Re: Hilbert, Inner Product

Quote:
 Quote by Mark44 (Post 3848406) Yes.
Thank you.

 All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:29 PM.