Inner Product: Equation for x^p & x^q | 65 Chars

keddelove
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hello, I am working on an assignment were I have shown that a certain equation defines an inner product, which was simple enough. Te equation was:

\left\langle {f,g} \right\rangle = \int\limits_0^1 {f\left( x \right)g\left( x \right)x^2 dx}My question then is: How do i state an equation for the inner product of x^p and x^q.

Sorry if the information is sparse
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You set f(x)=x^p and g(x)=x^q.
 
Looks straight forward to me. If
<f,g>= \int_0^1 f(x)g(x)x^2 dx
f(x)= xp, and g(x)= xq, then
<f,g>= \int_0^1 (x^p)(x^q)x^2dx= \int_0^1 x^{p+q+2}dx
 
HallsofIvy said:
Looks straight forward to me. If
<f,g>= \int_0^1 f(x)g(x)x^2 dx
f(x)= xp, and g(x)= xq, then
<f,g>= \int_0^1 (x^p)(x^q)x^2dx= \int_0^1 x^{p+q+2}dx
And you can give an exact number equal to that last expression.
 
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
Back
Top