Convergence of orthagonal vectors

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving that if a sequence of vectors {uk} in Rn converges to a vector u in Rn, and a vector v is orthogonal to each uk, then v is also orthogonal to u. The proof utilizes the definition of convergence and orthogonality, specifically the property that = 0 if v is orthogonal to u. The approach involves showing that as uk approaches u, the inner product converges to , confirming the orthogonality of v to u.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector spaces in Rn
  • Familiarity with the concepts of convergence and Cauchy sequences
  • Knowledge of inner product spaces and orthogonality
  • Basic proficiency in mathematical proof techniques
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of Cauchy sequences in Rn
  • Explore the definition and implications of convergence in vector spaces
  • Learn about inner product spaces and their geometric interpretations
  • Investigate formal proof techniques in linear algebra
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for mathematics students, particularly those studying linear algebra, as well as educators and anyone interested in the rigorous foundations of vector convergence and orthogonality.

cap.r
Messages
64
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


{uk} is in Rn and converges to u in Rn

let v be in Rn and v is orthogonal to each uk.

prove v is orthogonal to u


Homework Equations


just definition of convergence. and orthogonality. <v,u>=0 if v is orthogonal to u.

The Attempt at a Solution


uk converges so it is cauchy, so it's terms are getting closer to each other.

for epsilon>0 , there exists k>= k0 st. ||uk-u|| < epsilon
so if v is orthogonal to uk then u is orthogonal to each term in uk. but the terms of uk are getting closer to u. so if v is orthogonal to a uk that is very close to u, then it is also orthogonal to u.

this proof is in no way formal but i think i have the right idea. can some one please help rewrite this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It sounds like you want to argue that if uk converges to u, then <uk, v> converges to <u, v>. Does that sound right?

if so, let h be an arbitrarily small vector. what happens to <u + h, v> = <u, v> + <h, v> as h goes to zero? The magnitude can vary of course, But you just want an upper and lower bound on it anyways. Each magnitude of h represents a neighborhood of u that contains every element of uk for k sufficiently large. (this of course comes from the definition of a limit)

Alternatively, you might be able to do something cool with the fact that <u - uk, v> = <u, v>. That that is useful is just a guess on my part though.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
8K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K