How can the Lp Norm be used to prove inequalities?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the use of Lp norms to prove various inequalities, exploring theoretical aspects and mathematical reasoning. Participants are examining specific inequalities involving sums of powers and the relationships between different norms, particularly focusing on the implications of convexity and the triangle inequality.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the inequality (a_1+a_2+a_3)^\alpha ≥ a_1^\alpha + (a_2+a_3)^\alpha holds, suggesting a pattern that may extend to N terms.
  • Others argue that the L1 norm is greater than the Lp norm for p > 1, indicating a need for a proof-based approach to demonstrate this relationship.
  • A participant mentions the relevance of convexity in proving part (2) of the problem, specifically using the function f = x^α.
  • There is a suggestion that the triangle inequality could imply the relationship between Lp and L1 norms, leading to a potential proof for part (1).
  • Another participant suggests raising both sides of an inequality to the q power to explore relationships between norms when q < p.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on the inequalities involving Lp norms, with no consensus reached on the proofs or methods to be used. Multiple competing approaches and interpretations remain present throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the need for specific choices of a_i and α in their proofs, indicating that assumptions about these variables may affect the validity of the inequalities discussed. There are also references to the convexity of functions and the implications of the triangle inequality, which are not fully resolved.

ashah99
Messages
55
Reaction score
2
TL;DR
I would appreciate some help on proofs involving the Lp norm below, please. I looked up Holder's inequality, which might help with this problem, but I'm not sure how to set up the proofs.
1622919125593.png
 
Physics news on Phys.org
(a_1+a_2+a_3)^\alpha \ge a_1^\alpha+(a_2+a_3)^\alpha \ge a_1^\alpha + a_2^\alpha + a_3^\alpha
a_1+a_2+a_3 \ge [a_1^\alpha + a_2^\alpha + a_3^\alpha]^{\frac{1}{\alpha} }
and so on.

Bonus
f(x,y):=(x+y)^a-x^a-y^a
x,y \ge 0 ,\ \ a \ge 1
\frac{\partial f}{\partial x} \ge 0,\ \ \frac{\partial f}{\partial y} \ge 0, \ \ f(0,0)=0
 
Last edited:
anuttarasammyak said:
(a_1+a_2+a_3)^\alpha \ge a_1^\alpha+(a_2+a_3)^\alpha \ge a_1^\alpha + a_2^\alpha + a_3^\alpha
a_1+a_2+a_3 \ge [a_1^\alpha + a_2^\alpha + a_3^\alpha]^{\frac{1}{\alpha} }
and so on.

Bonus
f(x,y):=(x+y)^a-x^a-y^a
x,y \ge 0 ,\ \ a \ge 1
\frac{\partial f}{\partial x} \ge 0,\ \ \frac{\partial f}{\partial y} \ge 0, \ \ f(0,0)=0
How would I prove part (1)? By inspection, the l1 norm will be greater that the lp form when p > 1, since l1 is just the sum of the magnitudes...just not sure how to show work that is proof-based.

Are your hints regarding parts 2 & 3?
 
I stopped at 3 but you should continue upto N
(a_1+a_2+...+a_N)^\alpha \ge a_1^\alpha + a_2^\alpha + ... +a_N^\alpha
a_1+a_2+...+a_N \ge (a_1^\alpha + a_2\alpha + ... +a_N^\alpha)^\frac{1}{\alpha}
Let ##a_k=|x_k|##
 
anuttarasammyak said:
I stopped at 3 but you should continue upto N
(a_1+a_2+...+a_N)^\alpha \ge a_1^\alpha + a_2^\alpha + ... +a_N^\alpha
a_1+a_2+...+a_N \ge (a_1^\alpha + a_2\alpha + ... +a_N^\alpha)^\frac{1}{\alpha}
Let ##a_k=|x_k|##
I see that, how does this relate to part 1? I’m slow at understanding it seems.
 
(|x_1|+|x_2|+...+|x_N|)^p \ge |x_1|^p +|x_2|^p + ... +|x_N|^p
l_1\ norm=|x_1|+|x_2|+...+|x_N| \ge (|x_1|^p +|x_2|^p + ... +|x_N|^p)^\frac{1}{p}=l_p \ norm
 
anuttarasammyak said:
(|x_1|+|x_2|+...+|x_N|)^p \ge |x_1|^p +|x_2|^p + ... +|x_N|^p
l_1\ norm=|x_1|+|x_2|+...+|x_N| \ge (|x_1|^p +|x_2|^p + ... +|x_N|^p)^\frac{1}{p}=l_p \ norm
Okay. this makes sense. Thanks. How would part 2 be proved? I'm thinking I would need to choose some a_i and α and by using the convexity of the function f = x^α. Any thoughts here?
 
ashah99 said:
I'm thinking I would need to choose some a_i and α and by using the convexity of the function f = x^α.
Why don’t you do it ?

Also the hint may be helpful for 2 also. Try substituting ##a_k## to what ?
 
Last edited:
ashah99 said:
How would I prove part (1)? By inspection, the l1 norm will be greater that the lp form when p > 1, since l1 is just the sum of the magnitudes...just not sure how to show work that is proof-based.

Are your hints regarding parts 2 & 3?
since you know the Lp norm is a norm, you should be able to recognize that (1) is implied by triangle inequality, i.e.

##\big \Vert \mathbf x \big \Vert_p=\big \Vert \sum_{k=1}^n x_k \cdot \mathbf e_k\big \Vert_p\leq \sum_{k=1}^n \big \Vert x_k\cdot \mathbf e_k \big \Vert_p = \sum_{k=1}^n \big \Vert x_k\cdot \mathbf e_k \big \Vert_1 = \big \Vert \mathbf x \big \Vert_1##
 
  • #10
For (2), if ##q<p##, raise both sides to the ##q## power. Then you can pick a clever choice of ##y## to rewrite the inequality as ##||y||_{p/q} \leq ||y||_1##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K