Register to reply

Cauchy -schwarz inequality help

by dr hannibal
Tags: cauchy, inequality, schwarz
Share this thread:
dr hannibal
#1
Jul5-10, 08:34 AM
P: 10
Need help proving Cauchy Schwarz inequality ...

the first method I know is pretty easy

[itex]\displaystyle\sum_{i=1}^n (a_ix-b_i)^2 \geq 0 [/itex]

expanding this and using the discriminatant quickly establishes the inequality..


The 2nd method I know is I think a easier one , but I dont have a clue about how this notation works..

Since cauchy SHwarz inquality states..

[tex](a_1b_1+a_2b_2+...+a_nb_n)^2 \leq ((a_1)^2+(a_2)^2+..+(a_n)^2)((b_1)^2+(b_2)^2+...+(b_n)^2)[/tex]

[tex]((a_1)^2+(a_2)^2+..+(a_n)^2)((b_1)^2+(b_2)^2+...+(b_n)^2)-(a_1b_1+a_2b_2+...+a_nb_n)^2 \geq 0[/tex]

I dont usnderstand how the below notation works as I cant follow from the above line to the line below , if someone can point me to some resources where I can know more about it :) ...


[itex]\displaystyle\sum_{i\not=j}^n ((a_i)^2(b_j)^2+(a_j)^2(b_i)^2-2a_ib_ja_jb_i ) [/itex]


Thanks
Phys.Org News Partner Mathematics news on Phys.org
'Moral victories' might spare you from losing again
Fair cake cutting gets its own algorithm
Effort to model Facebook yields key to famous math problem (and a prize)
snipez90
#2
Jul5-10, 09:05 AM
P: 1,105
That's just summing over the quantities within the parentheses for which the two indices i and j differ. Note that if i = j, the quantity inside the summation is just 0, so it does not contribute to the sum.
dr hannibal
#3
Jul5-10, 09:31 AM
P: 10
Quote Quote by snipez90 View Post
That's just summing over the quantities within the parentheses for which the two indices i and j differ. Note that if i = j, the quantity inside the summation is just 0, so it does not contribute to the sum.
thanks :) , one more small question when they have summed the above where is [tex]-2a_ib_ja_jb_i[/tex] comming from?

Tedjn
#4
Jul5-10, 12:20 PM
P: 738
Cauchy -schwarz inequality help

[tex](a_1b_1 + a_2b_2 + \ldots + a_nb_n)^2[/tex]

Expanded out, convince yourself that whenever i ≠ j you get a 2aibiajbj. To do this, it helps to write out a simple case for small n (n = 2 or 3) and look at how what terms you get that involve i ≠ j. The sign in your example is negative, because you are subtracting.
dr hannibal
#5
Jul5-10, 12:45 PM
P: 10
Quote Quote by Tedjn View Post
[tex](a_1b_1 + a_2b_2 + \ldots + a_nb_n)^2[/tex]

Expanded out, convince yourself that whenever i ≠ j you get a 2aibiajbj. To do this, it helps to write out a simple case for small n (n = 2 or 3) and look at how what terms you get that involve i ≠ j. The sign in your example is negative, because you are subtracting.
thanks


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Cauchy-Schwarz -> AM-HM inequality Calculus & Beyond Homework 1
Cauchy-Schwarz Inequality General Math 10
Cauchy-Bunyakovsky-Schwarz inequality Linear & Abstract Algebra 6
Proof of Cauchy-Schwarz Inequality Calculus & Beyond Homework 1
Cauchy Schwarz Inequality Calculus & Beyond Homework 4