Difference between Inner Product and Dot Product

Taturana
Messages
108
Reaction score
0
Could someone explain me the difference between the inner product and the dot product?

Thanks all
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
There really isn't any. The terms are used more or less interchangeably. For 2 or 3 dimensions dot product is usually used, while for higher dimensions and Hilbert space, inner product is usually used, but they mean the same thing.
 
There is, in a sense, a technical difference. The "dot product" is defined in any R^n (or C^n while an "inner product" is any function from a pair of vectors, in any vector space, to the real numbers, satisfying
1) <u, v>= <v, u> (or, if the vector space is over the complex numbers, the complex conjugate of <v, u>.
2) <u+ v, w>= <u, w>+ <v, w>.
3) <ku, v>= k<u, v> for any number k.

Of course, any dot product is an inner product.

Going the other way, if we choose an orthonormal basis for the vector space, \{v_1, v_2, v_3, \cdot\cdot\cdot, v_n\} any vectors u, and v, can be written as a linear combination of them, and then write the inner product as a dot product of those coefficients. The theoretical "meat" of the Gram-Schmidt procudure (that such an orthonormal basis exists) is that every inner product is a dot product- in some basis.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Back
Top