Length of vector in space of polynomials

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the length of vectors in the context of polynomials, specifically focusing on the inner product defined as the integral from -1 to 1 of the product of polynomials. Participants are examining the implications of evaluating integrals of polynomials and the geometric interpretations presented in class.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning the evaluation of integrals, particularly regarding the cancellation of areas above and below the x-axis. There is confusion about whether the integral of a polynomial can yield a zero value when calculating its length and how this relates to the definition of the inner product.

Discussion Status

Some participants are seeking clarification on the evaluation process of integrals and whether the lecturer's explanation aligns with standard practices. There is an acknowledgment of differing interpretations, and while some guidance has been offered, no consensus has been reached regarding the correct approach to the problem.

Contextual Notes

Participants note potential discrepancies in the lecturer's examples and express uncertainty about the implications of the inner product definition on integral evaluation. The discussion reflects a mix of foundational understanding and confusion regarding specific cases.

DorianG
Messages
27
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Apologies in advance as I can't use any formatting yet...

In linear algebra class, we're finding the length of vectors (polynomials) by computing its inner product with itself and finding the square root of the resultant value.
The inner product is defined in this case (not sure if it's the standard inner product for the vector space over polynomials) as the value of the integral from -1 to 1 of f(t)g(t) dt, where in the case of length this becomes f(t)f(t) dt as it's the inner product of f(t) with itself.
The problem is that, say the integral of at^4 + bt^3 + ct^2 + dt + c from -1 to 1 was evaluated unusally in some examples in class. Rather than just evaluate each summand and substitute the limits of integration (which results in 0 for all even powers of t), the lecturer noted that, after integrating 1 to get t^1, evaluated from -1 to 1, the integral value was zero. Geometrically, he explained that it is equivalent to the line x=y and thus has equal area above and below the x-axis from -1 to 1, and thus cancels.
As I would take it though, and by evaluating formally, t from -1 to 1 is [1]-[-1] = 1 + 1 = 2.
Which is the correct value to take?
As I see it, a more complex function might have equal area above and below the x-axis between -1 and 1. Without noticing this, as it wouldn't be very obvious, the integral would just be evaluated as normal and not 'seen to be zero' by inspection, wouldn't it?
Is evaluating integrals different when finding the length of a polynomial? And is the length of a polynomial over two values, say in 2-d, actually given by that method? Just a little confused about some of the issues around the algorithm and would appreciate any help.
Thanks!

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution


Homework Statement


Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
DorianG said:
… the integral from -1 to 1 of f(t)g(t) dt, where in the case of length this becomes f(t)f(t) dt as it's the inner product of f(t) with itself.
The problem is that, say the integral of at^4 + bt^3 + ct^2 + dt + c from -1 to 1 was evaluated unusally in some examples in class. Rather than just evaluate each summand and substitute the limits of integration (which results in 0 for all even powers of t), the lecturer noted that, after integrating 1 to get t^1, evaluated from -1 to 1, the integral value was zero. …

Hi DorianG! :smile:

This makes no sense …

|f| is defined via an integral of f squared …

it doesn't matter what interval you're using, or whether it's a polynomial or not …

so long as f is real, f squared will be non-negative, so how can its integral be zero? :confused:
 
Hi tiny-tim,
Thanks for the reply.

it doesn't matter what interval you're using, or whether it's a polynomial or not …

so long as f is real, f squared will be non-negative, so how can its integral be zero?

I'm not really sure! It still doesn't make sense to me.

|f| is defined via an integral of f squared …

This part I get (I think). So if, for the easiest example, f(t) = 1 for all t, the 'length' of f(t) with the inner product as described, is the integral of 1 (= f(t)f(t) = 1(1) = 1) dt from 1 to -1.
This is t evaluated from 1 to -1 and is therefore 2 - am I right in this?

Sorry, but sometimes when you're looking at something for too long, it gets way over-complicated and I need to have some of the easier things verified!

I think maybe I should just forget that it's a special inner-product thing and just evaluate the integral at the limits exactly as I would have done without knowing it!
Thanks again for the reply.
 
I expect either the lecturer got something wrong or you copied it wrong …

but I can't see that it matters …

this is only an example for class, and you've obviously got the principles anyway. :wink:

Just go with the flow …

it'll sort itself out later, if it needs to! :smile:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K