Composition of functions and operator algebra.

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on transforming functions into operators for manipulation in operator algebra, specifically addressing challenges with affine and nonlinear functions. The participant expresses difficulty in finding accessible resources on operator algebra, often encountering complex topics like Banach spaces. They seek clarity on manipulating operators, particularly regarding commutativity and simplifying function compositions. The conversation touches on the algebraic structure of functions and the limitations of affine functions in maintaining compatibility with addition. Suggestions for further research and resources are requested to better understand these concepts at a foundational level.
tony42
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hello.

I would like to turn an equation (function) like 4x2+2 into an operator, L, acting on x. Lx.

I want to get into operator algebra so that I can manipulate equations like √(4x2+2) using operators (e.g. the last equation could be RLx).

I'm finding difficulties:-

1. Many common functions/equations (like the above) add an integer at the end. I don't really know what I'm talking about but aren't these some kind of affine operation, making them nonlinear. And how would you go about turning functions into operators anyway?

2. Everytime I try to look up operator algebra on the web I am met with very advanced double dutch on banach spaces, operator spectra and such like.

3. No-one seems to be talking about manipulating collections of operators using commutativeness or other techniques and how to set those operators up. I think you can understand what I'm trying to get at. If I did succeed in turning function f and function g into two operators F and G. I could look at FG and, say, find that they commuted to make GF-x, then use that identity to simplify function compositions. This I what I've heard about operators; you can manipulate them without even worrying about the x or whatever they are operating upon.

I really hope someone out there can shed some light on this or point me in the right direction or even just make some suggestions for further researches.

Thanks for your time reading this. Cheers.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
there is a natural algebraic structure for functions f:S-->S, which is monoidal (one speaks of the monoid of transformations of S). one common way to think of this monoid is that S is a collection of "states" and the individual operators represent "processes", so that a product represents, in some sense, an "evolution" of the states.

this is done (for example) in computer programming, where the S is some data structure, and the f,g (etc.) represent individual programs that manipulate the data structure, so that fg means: run g, then run f.

the subcollection of "reversible processes" form a group, and this essentially is what permutation groups are (and permutation groups arise quite generally, in any kind of system that possesses symmetry).

for a collection of functions to possesses "more" properties, you usually desire a second operation (like +) that is "compatible" with composition. a common compatiblity condition is that left- and right-compostion be "+morphisms":

f(g+h) = fg + fh
(g+h)f = gf + hf.

here, you can see why affine functions and non-linear functions run into trouble: suppose S has an additive structure, and that f(x) = Ax + b (whatever "Ax" might mean).

then f(g+h) = A(g+h) + b, whereas:

fg + fh = Ag + b + Ah + b = Ag + Ah + b+b.

equating the two means that we have to have A(g+h) = Ag + Ah, and b = b+b.

so "A" has to be an additive homomorphism, and b = 0, which pretty much kills the hope of creating an affine function composition structure compatible with +.

simliarly suppose f(x) = x2.

then f(g+h) = (g+h)2 = (g+h)(g+h)

whereas fg + fh = g2+h2 = gg + hh.

even if we have distributivity, so that (g+h)(g+h) = gg + gh + hg + hh.

the two still won't be equal unless gh + hg = 0, which rather limits the kinds of functions we can consider.

linearity "fixes" these problems, we don't have to worry about "cross-terms". nevertheless, thare are still quite broad classes of functions that can be manipulated algebraically without reference to the "bound variable" x (whatever kind of thing "x" might be). polynomials are one example- where, for example, the polynomial can be represented purely in terms of its coefficients, instead of writing p(x) = x2+x-2, we consider the vector (1,1,-2) which "captures" everything we need to know about p.

another example is rational functions in x, where we can consider expressions like:

(f2g - 3fh)/(2f - 3g)2 and manipulate these like "ordinary fractions".

a lot of trigonometric function manipulation falls into this same category, the variable θ is often "just along for the ride", we are just interested in 2 functions s and c where s2+c2 is the constant function 1 (although it "looks strange" to think of sin(2θ) as s°(2_) ).

if you do find some simple rules, for even limited sets of functions, that make calculations simpler, and easier to understand, by considering functions as "operators", by all means, knock yourself out.
 
That's sort of interesting, but I really need how to find out about this at my level. Any suggestions for books or websites?
 
what is "your level"?

have you studied linear algebra yet?
 
My level? Well I have A-level Maths and A-level Further Maths. I'm an interested party really. I've done introductory stuff on complex numbers and quantum mechanics. I really hope to use the operators as a way of finding short-cuts in maths.
 
I am studying the mathematical formalism behind non-commutative geometry approach to quantum gravity. I was reading about Hopf algebras and their Drinfeld twist with a specific example of the Moyal-Weyl twist defined as F=exp(-iλ/2θ^(μν)∂_μ⊗∂_ν) where λ is a constant parametar and θ antisymmetric constant tensor. {∂_μ} is the basis of the tangent vector space over the underlying spacetime Now, from my understanding the enveloping algebra which appears in the definition of the Hopf algebra...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
847
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
7K