Need Help Solving a Puzzle? Let Us Assist You!

  • Thread starter Thread starter pnaik2008
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Puzzle
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of linear independence in the context of functionals and polynomials. Participants are exploring the properties of a set of functionals defined on polynomials of degree 2 or less, specifically examining whether a certain set is linearly independent.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the definition of linear independence and how to apply it to the given functionals. There are attempts to derive equations based on specific polynomial inputs to determine the coefficients associated with the functionals.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing various approaches to proving linear independence. Some participants are questioning the correctness of the equations derived, while others are attempting to clarify the implications of the results. There is no explicit consensus on the final outcome, but several productive lines of reasoning are being explored.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of homework rules, which may limit the amount of direct assistance they can provide to one another. There are also ongoing questions about the assumptions made regarding the functionals and their definitions.

pnaik2008
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
I am trying to solve this,,,need help...
 

Attachments

  • linear.jpg
    linear.jpg
    16.2 KB · Views: 473
Physics news on Phys.org
Here's a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_delta_function" .
 
Last edited by a moderator:
But the S* is linearly Independent, How can we prove that?
 
Use the definition of "linearly independent". If [itex]a_1\phi_1(f)+ a_2\phi_2(f)+ a_3\phi_3(f)= 0[/itex] for all f, must [itex]a_1, a_2, a_3[/itex] all be 0?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
what is the values of [tex]\phi<sub>0</sub>[/tex] [tex]\phi<sub>1</sub>[/tex] [tex]\phi<sub>-1</sub>[/tex] ?
 
Your attachment says that phi-1(f)= f(-1), phi0(f)= f(0), and phi1(f)= f(1)!

a phi-1+ b phi0+ c phi1= 0 means that, for any function f, [a phi-1(f)+ b phi0(f)+ c phi1= af(1)+ bf(0)+ cf(1)= 0.

Since P3 is the space of polynomials of degree 2 or less, ax2+ bx+ c. Take f above to be x2, x, and 1. What do a, b, and c have to be?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What was the values of a b c ?
 
That is the question that pnaik2008 needs to answer! IF he/she can show that a= b= c= 0, then S* is linearly independent.
 
How could we show that a=b=c=0?,and if we proof that S is linearly independent, what are the basis of the S??
 
  • #10
I've already explained that in my response #6. af(-1)+ bf(0)+ cf(1)= 0 for all polynomials of order 2 or less. Take f to be x2, x, and 1 and you get three equations to solve for a, b, and c.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #11
HallsofIvy said:
I've already explained that in my response #6. af(-1)+ bf(0)+ cf(1)= 0 for all polynomials of order 2 or less. Take f to be x2, x, and 1 and you get three equations to solve for a, b, and c.

Since it has taken already too much time, I will give a shot.

If f = x^2, then
f(0) = 0
f(-1) = 1
f(1) = 1
=> a*0 + b*1 + c*1 = 0

If f = x, then
f(0) = 0
f(-1) = -1
f(1) = 1
=> a*0 + b*(-1) + c*1 = 0

If f = 1, then
f(0) = 1
f(-1) = 1
f(1) = 1
=> a*1 + b*1 + c*1 = 0

So we have three equations
b + c = 0 (1)
-b + c = 0 (2)
a + b + c = 0 (3)

We get from (2)
b = c

Thus, we get from (1)
2b = 0
b = 0 (4)

Putting that to (1)
c = 0 (5)

Putting (4) and (5) to (3), we get
c = 0

Thus,
a + b + c = 0

This means that S* is linearly independent.

---

I leave the rest for the questioner.
 
Last edited:
  • #12
soopo said:
Since it has taken already too much time, I will give a shot.

If f = x^2, then
f(0) = 0
f(-1) = 1
f(1) = 1
=> a*0 + b*1 + c*1 = 0
So you are taking af(0)+ bf(-1)+ cf(1)= 0? That's not what I had before but perfectly legal.

If f = x, then
f(0) = 0
f(-1) = -1
f(1) = 1
=> a*0 + b*1 + c*1 = 0
You mean a*0+ b*(-1)+ c*1= -b+ c= 0, right?

If f = 1, then
f(0) = 1
f(-1) = 1
f(1) = 1
=> a*1 + b*1 + c*1 = 0

So we have three equations
b + c = 0
b + c = 0
No, -b+ c= 0.
a + b + c = 0

Simplifying
b + c = 0 (1)
a + b + c = 0 (2)

Substituting the equation (1) to (2)
a = 0

By trial and error, we know that
b = 0
c = 0

Thus,
a + b + c = 0

This means that S* is linearly independent.
The three equations you got, b+ c= 0, b+ c= 0, a+ b+ c= 0, the first two being the same, would give b= -c so that a+ b+ c= a- c+ c= a= 0 but does NOT mean b and c must be 0. for example b= 1, c= -1, a= 0 satisfy b+ c= 1- 1= 0, a+ b+ c= 0+ 1- 1= 0. That would prove S* is NOT linearly independent.

However, the correct equations are -b+ c= 0, b+ c= 0, a+ b+ c= 0. Adding the first two equations, 2c= 0 so c= 0. Putting c= 0 into the first equation -b+ 0= 0 so b= 0. Putting b= c= 0 into the third equation, a+ b+ c= a+ 0+ 0= a= 0. Since a= b= c= 0, S* is linearly independent.

But I would have liked to have seen pnaik2008 at least try that calculation.

---

I leave the rest for the questioner.
 
  • #13
HallsofIvy said:
So you are taking af(0)+ bf(-1)+ cf(1)= 0? That's not what I had before but perfectly legal.


You mean a*0+ b*(-1)+ c*1= -b+ c= 0, right?


I fixed the mistake.

I can't stand in waiting for b).

My attempt is:

The basis of S of (P_3, R) is (x^2, x, 1).

According to the definition of dual basis, for example the dual basis of the vector (1 0) is (1 0)^T.

Thus, the dual basis of (x^2, x, 1) is (x^2, x, 1).
 
  • #14
The three given functionals are [itex]\phi_{-1}(f)= f(-1)[/itex], [itex]\phi_0(f)= f(0)[/itex], [itex]\phi)_1(f)= f(1)[/itex]. A "dual basis" would be functions

[math]f-1(x)[/math] such that
[math]\phi_{-1}(f_{-1})= f_{-1}(-1)= 1,
[math]\phi_{0}(f_{-1})= f_{-1}(0)= 0,
[math]\phi_1(f_{-1})= f_{-1}(1)= 0

[math]f0(x)[/math] such that
[math]\phi_{0}(f_0)= f_{0}(-1)= 0,
[math]\phi_{0}(f_0)= f_0(0)= 1,
[math]\phi_1(f_0)= f_0(1)= 0

[math]f1(x)[/math] such that
[math]\phi_{0}(f_1)= f_{1}(-1)= 0,
[math]\phi_{0}(f_1)= f_1(0)= 0,
[math]\phi_1(f_1)= f_1(1)= 1

Since we are talking about polynomials of degree 2 or less, this reduces to
1) Find [itex]f_{-1}(x)= ax^2+ bx+ c[/itex] satisfying
a) [itex]f_{-1}(-1)= a- b+ c= 1[/itex]
b) [itex]f_{-1}(0)= c= 0[/itex]
c) [itex]f_{-1}(1)= a+ b+ c= 0[/itex]

2) Find [itex]f_{0}(x)= ax^2+ bx+ c[/itex] satisfying
a) [itex]f_{0}(-1)= a- b+ c= 0[/itex]
b) [itex]f_{0}(0)= c= 1[/itex]
c) [itex]f_{0}(1)= a+ b+ c= 0[/itex]

3) Find [itex]f_{1}(x)= ax^2+ bx+ c[/itex] satisfying
a) [itex]f_{1}(-1)= a- b+ c= 0[/itex]
b) [itex]f_{1}(0)= c= 0[/itex]
c) [itex]f_{1}(1)= a+ b+ c= 1[/itex]
 
  • #15
Fixing the formatting of HallOfIvy:
[tex]f_{-1}(x)[/tex] such that
[tex]\phi_{-1}(f_{-1})= f_{-1}(-1)= 1,[/tex]
[tex]\phi_{0}(f_{-1})= f_{-1}(0)= 0,[/tex]
[tex]\phi_1(f_{-1})= f_{-1}(1)= 0[/tex]

[tex]f_{0}(x)[/tex] such that
[tex]\phi_{-1}(f_0)= f_{0}(-1)= 0,[/tex] # I fixed -1 here for phi
[tex]\phi_{0}(f_0)= f_0(0)= 1,[/tex]
[tex]\phi_1(f_0)= f_0(1)= 0[/tex]

[tex]f_{1}(x)[/tex] such that
[tex]\phi_{-1}(f_1)= f_{1}(-1)= 0,[/tex] # I fixed -1 here for phi
[tex]\phi_{0}(f_1)= f_1(0)= 0,[/tex]
[tex]\phi_1(f_1)= f_1(1)= 1[/tex]

Since we are talking about polynomials of degree 2 or less, this reduces to
1) Find [itex]f_{-1}(x)= ax^2+ bx+ c[/itex] satisfying
a) [itex]f_{-1}(-1)= a- b+ c= 1[/itex] # I am not sure should this be 1
b) [itex]f_{-1}(0)= c= 0[/itex]
c) [itex]f_{-1}(1)= a+ b+ c= 0[/itex]

2) Find [itex]f_{0}(x)= ax^2+ bx+ c[/itex] satisfying
a) [itex]f_{0}(-1)= a- b+ c= 0[/itex]
b) [itex]f_{0}(0)= c= 1[/itex]
c) [itex]f_{0}(1)= a+ b+ c= 0[/itex]

3) Find [itex]f_{1}(x)= ax^2+ bx+ c[/itex] satisfying
a) [itex]f_{1}(-1)= a- b+ c= 0[/itex]
b) [itex]f_{1}(0)= c= 0[/itex]
c) [itex]f_{1}(1)= a+ b+ c= 1[/itex]

Reformatting what HallsOfIvy says[tex]\begin{tabular}{ | f_-1(x) | f_0(x) | f_1(x) | }<br /> & f_{-1}(x) & f_0(x) & f_1(x) \\ <br /> \hline<br /> \phi_{-1} & 1 & 0 & 0 \\<br /> \phi_0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\<br /> \phi_1 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\<br /> ax^2 + bx + c: x=-1 & a -b + c = 1 & c = 0 & a + b + c = 0 \\<br /> ax^2 + bx + c: x =0 & - - 0 & - - 1 & - - 0 \\<br /> ax^2 + bx + c: x=1 & - - 0 & - - 0 & - - 1 \\<br /> \end{tabular}[/tex]

I did not write variables to the last two rows again.

I am not sure about the #4 line.
a -b + c =1? # should it be 0.

Could you, please, hallOfIvy more explain your results?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K