Extend to an orthonormal basis for R^3

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the process of extending a set of vectors to an orthonormal basis in R^3 using the Gram-Schmidt process. Participants explore different choices for the additional vector in the basis and their implications on the resulting orthonormal set.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the choice of the third vector in the Gram-Schmidt process, suggesting that using $(u_1, u_2, e_1)$ simplifies the process due to orthogonality with $u_2$.
  • Another participant asserts that different orders of deriving an orthonormal set will yield valid results, as long as the order is not specified in the problem.
  • A participant provides a detailed mathematical breakdown of the Gram-Schmidt process, showing how different choices for the third vector lead to different but valid orthonormal vectors, noting that one choice results in an orientation-reversing matrix.
  • There is a reiteration of the mathematical steps involved in the Gram-Schmidt process, emphasizing that both methods of choosing the third vector are valid and yield orthogonal results.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that multiple valid orthonormal sets can be derived from the same initial vectors using different orders. However, there is a lack of consensus on the implications of choosing specific vectors regarding orientation.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes various mathematical expressions and projections that depend on the specific vectors chosen, which may lead to different orientations of the resulting orthonormal basis.

Petrus
Messages
702
Reaction score
0
Hello MHB,
(I Hope the picture is read able)
154unac.jpg

this is a exemple on My book ( i am supposed to find a singular value decomposition) well My question is in the book when they use gram-Schmidt to extand they use $$(u_1,u_2,e_3)$$ but I would use $$(u_1,u_2,e_1)$$ cause it is orthogonal against u_2 which make the gram-Schmidt easy!:) does My method works as well?
Edit: I am pretty sure it works cause it is orthonormal to the other! Just want confirmed:)!
Regards,
$$|\pi\rangle$$
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Re: Extend to a orthonornal basis for R^3

When you are asked to derive an orthonormal set from a set of vectors, different orders will give different results but they will all be orthonormal sets. Any of those would be a correct answer. (Unless the order is specifically mentioned in the problem.)
 
Re: Extend to a orthonornal basis for R^3

HallsofIvy said:
When you are asked to derive an orthonormal set from a set of vectors, different orders will give different results but they will all be orthonormal sets. Any of those would be a correct answer. (Unless the order is specifically mentioned in the problem.)
Thanks for the answer and thanks for taking your time! Have a nice day!:)

Regards,
$$|\pi\rangle$$
 
Petrus, what you say is true, but in the case of a standard basis vector we have:

$\text{proj}_{\mathbf{v}}(\mathbf{e}_j) = \dfrac{\mathbf{v}\cdot\mathbf{e}_j} {\mathbf{v}\cdot \mathbf{v}}\mathbf{v}$

If $\mathbf{v}$ is already a unit vector, this becomes:

$v_j\mathbf{v}$.

So if we pick $\mathbf{v}_3 = \mathbf{e}_3$ (as your text does), then Gram-Schmidt gives:

$\mathbf{u}_3 = \mathbf{e}_3 - \text{proj}_{\mathbf{u}_1}(\mathbf{e}_3) - \text{proj}_{\mathbf{u}_2}(\mathbf{e}_3)$

$= (0,0,1) -\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\left(\dfrac{2}{\sqrt{6}}, \dfrac{1}{\sqrt{6}},\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\right) - \dfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(0,\dfrac{-1}{\sqrt{2}},\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\right)$

$= (0,0,1) - \left(\dfrac{1}{3},\dfrac{1}{6},\dfrac{1}{6}\right) - \left(0,\dfrac{-1}{2},\dfrac{1}{2}\right)$

$= \left(\dfrac{-1}{3},\dfrac{1}{3},\dfrac{1}{3}\right)$

which upon normalization clearly becomes the $\mathbf{u}_3$ in your text.

Yes, you are correct that if we pick $\mathbf{v}_3 = \mathbf{e}_1$, then one of the projection terms we subtract is 0, and we get:

$\mathbf{u}_3 = (1,0,0) - \dfrac{2}{\sqrt{6}}\left(\dfrac{2}{\sqrt{6}}, \dfrac{1}{\sqrt{6}},\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\right)$

$= (1,0,0) - \left(\dfrac{2}{3},\dfrac{1}{3},\dfrac{1}{3}\right)$

$= \left(\dfrac{1}{3},\dfrac{-1}{3},\dfrac{-1}{3}\right)$

This is the negative (upon normalization) of the vector your book found, and is clearly also perpendicular to the plane spanned by $\{\mathbf{u}_1,\mathbf{u}_2\}$.

Now it's largely a matter of preference as to which $U$ you use, one will be orientation-preserving, and one will be orientation-reversing. I'm a bit surprised your text chose the orientation-reversing matrix, but as you can see, both methods work out (up to a sign difference) the same (and it turns out the sign of the 3rd column of $U$ doesn't matter, because the 3rd row of $\Sigma$ is 0).
 
Deveno said:
Petrus, what you say is true, but in the case of a standard basis vector we have:

$\text{proj}_{\mathbf{v}}(\mathbf{e}_j) = \dfrac{\mathbf{v}\cdot\mathbf{e}_j} {\mathbf{v}\cdot \mathbf{v}}\mathbf{v}$

If $\mathbf{v}$ is already a unit vector, this becomes:

$v_j\mathbf{v}$.

So if we pick $\mathbf{v}_3 = \mathbf{e}_3$ (as your text does), then Gram-Schmidt gives:

$\mathbf{u}_3 = \mathbf{e}_3 - \text{proj}_{\mathbf{u}_1}(\mathbf{e}_3) - \text{proj}_{\mathbf{u}_2}(\mathbf{e}_3)$

$= (0,0,1) -\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\left(\dfrac{2}{\sqrt{6}}, \dfrac{1}{\sqrt{6}},\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\right) - \dfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(0,\dfrac{-1}{\sqrt{2}},\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\right)$

$= (0,0,1) - \left(\dfrac{1}{3},\dfrac{1}{6},\dfrac{1}{6}\right) - \left(0,\dfrac{-1}{2},\dfrac{1}{2}\right)$

$= \left(\dfrac{-1}{3},\dfrac{1}{3},\dfrac{1}{3}\right)$

which upon normalization clearly becomes the $\mathbf{u}_3$ in your text.

Yes, you are correct that if we pick $\mathbf{v}_3 = \mathbf{e}_1$, then one of the projection terms we subtract is 0, and we get:

$\mathbf{u}_3 = (1,0,0) - \dfrac{2}{\sqrt{6}}\left(\dfrac{2}{\sqrt{6}}, \dfrac{1}{\sqrt{6}},\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\right)$

$= (1,0,0) - \left(\dfrac{2}{3},\dfrac{1}{3},\dfrac{1}{3}\right)$

$= \left(\dfrac{1}{3},\dfrac{-1}{3},\dfrac{-1}{3}\right)$

This is the negative (upon normalization) of the vector your book found, and is clearly also perpendicular to the plane spanned by $\{\mathbf{u}_1,\mathbf{u}_2\}$.

Now it's largely a matter of preference as to which $U$ you use, one will be orientation-preserving, and one will be orientation-reversing. I'm a bit surprised your text chose the orientation-reversing matrix, but as you can see, both methods work out (up to a sign difference) the same (and it turns out the sign of the 3rd column of $U$ doesn't matter, because the 3rd row of $\Sigma$ is 0).
Thanks a LOT I always like your post! Thanks for taking your time and have a nice day!:)

Regards,
$$|\pi\rangle$$
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K