A Lagrange multipliers on Banach spaces (in Dirac notation)

Rabindranath
Messages
10
Reaction score
1
I want to prove Cauchy–Schwarz' inequality, in Dirac notation, ##\left<\psi\middle|\psi\right> \left<\phi\middle|\phi\right> \geq \left|\left<\psi\middle|\phi\right>\right|^2##, using the Lagrange multiplier method, minimizing ##\left|\left<\psi\middle|\phi\right>\right|^2## subject to the constraint ##\left<\phi\middle|\phi\right> - c = 0##, where ##c## is a constant.

I'm completely new to Lagrange multipliers (although the idea is perfectly clear in simpler cases like e.g. ##f : \mathbf R^2 \to \mathbf R##), and the Fréchet derivative etc., and have tried to consult https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange_multipliers_on_Banach_spaces, but am still quite confused, conceptually.

This is my sketchy thinking thus far (trying to follow the Wikipedia exposition, adapted to my problem):

We have a Banach space ##B_\phi##. We then let ##f = \left|\left<\psi\middle|\phi\right>\right|^2 : B_\phi \to \mathbf C##, which we want to minimize. The constraint is given by ##g = \left<\phi\middle|\phi\right> - c : B_\phi \to \mathbf C##, which is set to zero. The Wikipedia article goes on to suppose that "##u_0##" (would "##\left|\phi_0\right>##" be a logical label in my case?) is a constrained extremum of ##f##, i.e. an extremum of ##f## on ##g^{-1}(0) = \big\{\left|\phi\right> \in B_\phi## ##|## ##g(\left|\phi\right>) = 0 \in \mathbf C \big\} \subseteq B_\phi##. The problem is then formulated as $$Df(u_0) = \lambda \circ Dg(u_0)$$ where ##\lambda## is the Lagrange multiplier, and ##D## the Fréchet derivative. Is it a complete misconception if I write this as (given ##f## and ##g## above, and my assumption that ##u_0 = \left|\phi_0\right>##) $$D \left|\left<\psi|\phi_0\right>\right|^2 = \lambda \circ D\big(\left<\phi_0|\phi_0\right> -c\big)$$?

My main questions at the moment are:

1. What are the conceptual errors above? (I guess there are plenty)
2. How do I evaluate the Fréchet derivative, e.g. ##D \left|\left<\psi|\phi_0\right>\right|^2##?

Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Rabindranath said:
2. How do I evaluate the Fréchet derivative, e.g. ##D \left|\left<\psi|\phi_0\right>\right|^2##?

As an example, suppose that you work in the complex Hilbert space ##H = \mathbb{C}## and let ##z_0 \in H## be fixed. If I read you correctly, you would be interested in differentiability of ##z \mapsto \left|\left<z |z_0 \right>\right|^2##. However, unless ##z_0 = 0## (which makes everything trivial), this map is not differentiable except at ##z = 0##. (You can check this using the Cauchy-Riemann equations.)

For the case of a real Hilbert space, it would be different. It is my impression that - since complex differentiability is such a strong requirement - Fréchet derivatives of operators and functionals are usually discussed in the context of real normed spaces, although I think that the basic definitions work fine in either case.
 
  • Like
Likes Rabindranath
Krylov said:
As an example, suppose that you work in the complex Hilbert space ##H = \mathbb{C}## and let ##z_0 \in H## be fixed. If I read you correctly, you would be interested in differentiability of ##z \mapsto \left|\left<z |z_0 \right>\right|^2##.

Rather ##z \mapsto \left|\left<z_0 |z \right>\right|^2## if I use your example. That is, going back to my example again, for some arbitrarily chosen fixed element ##\left|\psi\right>## in the Banach space ##B_\phi##, I'm interested in the map ## \left|\phi\right> \mapsto \left|\left<\psi\middle|\phi\right>\right|^2 ##. This is what I wanted to minimize, by means of the Lagrange multiplier method (with constraint ##g = \left<\phi\middle|\phi\right> - c = 0 ##). What I called ##\left|\phi_0\right>## was meant as "the element that minimizes ## \left|\phi\right> \mapsto \left|\left<\psi\middle|\phi\right>\right|^2 ## given the constraint".

Thanks for your reply anyway! I will look into it deeper when I have more time.
 
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