Necessity of absolute value in Cauchy Schwarz inequality

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the necessity of absolute value in the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality as presented in "The Theoretical Minimum" by Susskind and Friedman. The participants analyze the derivation of the inequality, specifically questioning the introduction of absolute value symbols in the expression 2|X||Y| ≥ | + |. It is established that the absolute value is used to succinctly capture both positive and negative cases of the real part of the inner product, ensuring the inequality holds universally. The conversation also critiques the reliance on triangle logic for proving the inequality, suggesting a more rigorous approach through established mathematical texts.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of complex inner product spaces
  • Familiarity with the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality
  • Knowledge of real and complex analysis
  • Proficiency in mathematical notation and LaTeX
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the proof of the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality in real vector spaces
  • Explore the implications of triangle inequality in complex analysis
  • Review mathematical texts on inner product spaces and their properties
  • Investigate the relationship between real parts of complex numbers and absolute values
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physics students, and anyone studying linear algebra or complex analysis who seeks a deeper understanding of the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and its applications.

SamRoss
Gold Member
Messages
256
Reaction score
36
TL;DR
In going from |X|+|Y|>=|X+Y| to 2|X||Y|>=|<X|Y>+<Y|X>|, I'm not sure why the last set of absolute value symbols are necessary.
Reading The Theoretical Minimum by Susskind and Friedman. They state the following...

$$\left|X\right|=\sqrt {\langle X|X \rangle}\\
\left|Y\right|=\sqrt {\langle Y|Y \rangle}\\
\left|X+Y\right|=\sqrt {\left({\left<X\right|+\left<Y\right|}\right)\left({\left|X\right>+\left|Y\right>}\right)}$$

Then they state (based on triangle logic described earlier)...

$$\left|X\right|+\left|Y\right|\geq\left|X+Y\right|$$

They then say that if we square the above inequality on both sides and simplify (which, as far as I can see, simply amounts to subtracting ##\left|X\right|^2+\left|Y\right|^2## from both sides), we get...

2|X||Y| >= |<X|Y>+<Y|X>| (Sorry for this rendering. I was having trouble with Latex.)

My question is - where did the absolute value symbols on the right side come from? Why isn't it just 2|X||Y| >= <X|Y>+<Y|X> ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
SamRoss said:
They then say that if we square the above inequality on both sides and simplify (which, as far as I can see, simply amounts to subtracting ##\left|X\right|^2+\left|Y\right|^2## from both sides), we get...

2|X||Y| >= |<X|Y>+<Y|X>| (Sorry for this rendering. I was having trouble with Latex.)

My question is - where did the absolute value symbols on the right side come from? Why isn't it just 2|X||Y| >= <X|Y>+<Y|X> ?

I'm assuming we're working with scalars in ##\mathbb C##

##\langle X|Y\rangle+ \langle Y|X \rangle =2 \cdot re\big(\langle X|Y \rangle\big) \leq 2 \cdot \big \vert re\big(\langle X|Y\rangle \big)\big \vert##

If you step the the proof you should be able to see that there is an upper bound we can apply to the right hand side, and said upper bound holds whether or not

##re\big(\langle X|Y \rangle\big)##
is non-negative or non-positive, so why not be more succinct and capture both cases at the same time with an absolute value sign? Basically kill two bird with one stone is why they use the absolute value here.

- - - -
I have some concerns here though

SamRoss said:
Then they state (based on triangle logic described earlier)...

$$\left|X\right|+\left|Y\right|\geq\left|X+Y\right|$$

They then say that if we square the above inequality on both sides and simplify..

There isn't really "triangle logic", and in fact the standard way of proving triangle inequality is to use cauchy-schwarz. If you legitimately arrive at the triangle inequality by other means (e.g. convexity) then yes it implies cauchy-schwarz, but I rather doubt this was done here.
 
StoneTemplePython said:
##\langle X|Y\rangle+ \langle Y|X \rangle =2 \cdot re\big(\langle X|Y \rangle\big) \leq 2 \cdot \big \vert re\big(\langle X|Y\rangle \big)\big \vert##
I'm still confused. Is ##2 \cdot \big \vert re\big(\langle X|Y\rangle \big)\big \vert## the same thing as 2|X||Y|?
 
SamRoss said:
I'm still confused. Is ##2 \cdot \big \vert re\big(\langle X|Y\rangle \big)\big \vert## the same thing as 2|X||Y|?
No.

I'd advise first proving cauchy-schwarz over reals then returning to the complex case. I'd also advise first looking in a math text instead of this... the fact that your author seems to assume what he wants to prove (triangle inequality) is not a good sign
 
StoneTemplePython said:
No.

I'd advise first proving cauchy-schwarz over reals then returning to the complex case. I'd also advise first looking in a math text instead of this... the fact that your author seems to assume what he wants to prove (triangle inequality) is not a good sign

Good advice. I'll try that. Thanks for your help.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K