MHB Is the Space of Real Polynomials of Degree ≤ n a Euclidean Space?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on whether the space of real polynomials of degree ≤ n can be considered a Euclidean space by examining the bilinear function defined by the integral of the product of two polynomials. It is established that this function is symmetric, but the key requirement is proving it is positive definite. The participants clarify that for a bilinear form to be positive definite, it must satisfy specific conditions, particularly that the integral of the square of a polynomial is non-negative and equals zero only when the polynomial itself is zero. Ultimately, the conclusion is reached that the space does indeed qualify as a Euclidean space under the given conditions.
Sudharaka
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
1,558
Reaction score
1
Hi everyone, :)

Here's a question I encountered and I need your help to solve it.

Question:

Let \(V\) be the space of real polynomials of degree \(\leq n\).

a) Check that setting \(\left(f(x),\,g(x)\right)=\int_{0}^{1}f(x)g(x)\,dx\) turns \(V\) to a Euclidean space.

b) If \(n=1\), find the distance from \(f(x)=1\) to the linear span \(U=<x>\).

My Answer:

In our notes it's given that an Euclidean space is a pair \((V,\,f)\) where \(V\) is a vector space over \(\mathbb{R}\) and \(f:V\times V\rightarrow\mathbb{R}\) is a positive symmetric bilinear function. So therefore I thought that we have to check whether the given bilinear function is positive symmetric. It's clearly symmetric as interchanging \(f\) and \(g\) won't matter. But to make it positive we shall find a condition. Let,

\[f(x)=a_{0}+a_{1}x+\cdots+a_{n}x^{n}\]

\[g(x)=b_{0}+b_{1}x\cdots+b_{n}x^{n}\]

Then,

\[f(x)g(x)=\sum_{k=0}^{n}\left(\sum_{i=0}^{n}a_{i}b_{k-i}\right)x^{k}\]

Hence we have,

\[\left(f(x),\,g(x)\right)=\int_{0}^{1}f(x)g(x)\,dx>0\]

\[\Rightarrow \sum_{k=0}^{n}\left(\sum_{i=0}^{n}a_{i}b_{k-i}\right)\frac{1}{k+1}>0\]

Is this the condition that we have to obtain in order for \(V\) to become an Euclidean space?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Usually, a bilinear function f is positive definite iff f(v,v) is non-negative for all v and f(v,v) > 0 for v not zero. If this is what you meant, your conclusion is certainly true. (Apparently, you think positive means f(u,v) > 0 for all u,v. For this interpretation, your result is clearly false. Furthermore, it's impossible to have such a "positive" bilinear form.)
 
johng said:
Usually, a bilinear function f is positive definite iff f(v,v) is non-negative for all v and f(v,v) > 0 for v not zero. If this is what you meant, your conclusion is certainly true. (Apparently, you think positive means f(u,v) > 0 for all u,v. For this interpretation, your result is clearly false. Furthermore, it's impossible to have such a "positive" bilinear form.)

Hi johng, :)

Thanks much for the reply. Yeah, I see the mistake in my interpretation of positive definite. So it seems that the result should be,

\[\Rightarrow \sum_{k=0}^{n}\left(\sum_{i=0}^{n}a_{i}a_{k-i}\right)\frac{1}{k+1}>0\]

Am I correct? I replaced the \(b\) by \(a\).
 
For a fixed v, you must show (v,v)>=0 and (v,v)=0 only for v=0. So for your particular scalar product, let g be a polynomial of degree at most n. Then

$$(g,g)=\int_0^1g(x)^2\,dx\geq0$$ since the integral of a non-negative function is non-negative.

Also $$\int_0^1g(x)^2\,dx=0\text{ implies }g\equiv0$$ which is true by the fact that if the integral of a non-negative function is 0, then the function must be identically 0.
 
I am studying the mathematical formalism behind non-commutative geometry approach to quantum gravity. I was reading about Hopf algebras and their Drinfeld twist with a specific example of the Moyal-Weyl twist defined as F=exp(-iλ/2θ^(μν)∂_μ⊗∂_ν) where λ is a constant parametar and θ antisymmetric constant tensor. {∂_μ} is the basis of the tangent vector space over the underlying spacetime Now, from my understanding the enveloping algebra which appears in the definition of the Hopf algebra...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
861
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K