Does every independent set spans the space necessarily form a basis?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on whether every independent set that spans a Hilbert space necessarily forms a basis, particularly in the context of infinite-dimensional spaces. Participants explore the definitions of basis, including Hamel and Schauder bases, and the implications of using closure in the definition of span.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that in finite-dimensional spaces, a set spans a space and is linearly independent if and only if it forms a basis.
  • Others question the definition of "basis" in infinite-dimensional spaces, suggesting that it may differ from the finite case.
  • A participant introduces the concept of a Hamel basis, noting that while it is linearly independent and spans the space, it does not necessarily imply a Schauder basis when considering closure.
  • Another participant clarifies that they were referring to a Schauder basis, which allows for unique linear combinations, and thanks others for pointing out the distinction.
  • It is noted that a Hamel basis can be linearly independent with a closure that spans the entire space, but it may not be a Schauder basis due to multiple representations of some vectors.
  • Concerns are raised about the implications of closure in the span, with examples provided that illustrate cases where elements in the closure cannot be expressed as series of basis elements.
  • One participant highlights that while the discussion involves non-Hilbert spaces, the presence of an orthonormal basis in Hilbert spaces may influence the situation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether every independent set that spans a Hilbert space forms a basis in the infinite-dimensional case. Multiple competing views and definitions of basis are presented, leading to ongoing debate.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty regarding the definitions of basis in infinite-dimensional spaces and the implications of closure in the context of span. The discussion includes examples that illustrate the complexity of these concepts without resolving them.

LikeMath
Messages
62
Reaction score
0
Hi there!

A Hilbert space E is spanned by a set S if E is generated by the element of S.

It is well known that in the finite dimensional case that
S spans E and S is linearly independent set iff the set S form a basis for E.

The question is that true for the infinite dimensional case? Noting that in this case by span we mean the closure of the span.

Thanks in advance
LikeMath
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What do you mean by "basis" in the infinite-dimensional case??
 
micromass said:
What do you mean by "basis" in the infinite-dimensional case??

That is every member of E can be written in a uniquely linear combination of vectors from this basis. I wonder if it "basis" has another definition?
 
LikeMath said:
That is every member of E can be written in a uniquely linear combination of vectors from this basis. I wonder if it "basis" has another definition?

That is commonly called a Hamel basis in infinite dimensional vector spaces.

Something that spans the set and is linearly independent is indeed a Hamel basis.

However, if you change the means of span to mean "the closure of the span", then this is not true anymore. For example, in \ell^2, the vectors

(1,0,0,0,...),~(0,1,0,0,...),~(0,0,1,0,...),...

are linearly independent and the closure of the span is \ell^2. But it is not a Hamel basis. (however, it is a Schauder basis and an orthonormal basis).
 
Ah ok, now I understand your point. In my question I mean Schauder basis (not the Hamel basis).

Thank you for drawing my attention to this piont.
 
Then it's still not true.
For example, take a Hamel basis of \ell^2 (this thing exists but is very very large). Then this is linearly independent and the closure of the span is entire \ell^2. But it's not a Schauder basis as some vectors have multiple representations as series of the basis.
 
micromass said:
Then it's still not true.
For example, take a Hamel basis of \ell^2 (this thing exists but is very very large). Then this is linearly independent and the closure of the span is entire \ell^2. But it's not a Schauder basis as some vectors have multiple representations as series of the basis.
Ok, but the basis in your example is linearly independent in the finite sense, is not it?

By the way are you really a high school student?

Thx
 
LikeMath said:
Ok, but the basis in your example is linearly independent in the finite sense, is not it?

Indeed. So you probably propose some kind of independence in the sense

\sum{\alpha_i e_i}=0~\Rightarrow~\alpha_i=0

But even then, I see a problem. It's not because an element is in the closure of the span that it can be written as a series of those elements. For example, take

\mathcal{C}([0,1])

with \|~\|_\infty (yes, I realize that this is not a Hilbert space). Then the set

\{1,x,x^2,x^3,...\}

is linearly independent and its span is dense (by the Weierstrass approximation theorem). But not every continuous function can be written as \sum \alpha_nx^n. This would imply that all continuous functions are analytic, which is not true.

But then again, this is not a Hilbert space. What could change in a Hilbert space is that you always have an orthonormal basis (which may not be countable). So that might change things.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
707
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K