Norm Inequality: Proving Max Statement

  • Thread starter Thread starter gop
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Norm
gop
Messages
55
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Show that

\frac{\Vert X(u+v) \Vert}{\Vert u+v \Vert} \leq \max \{ <br /> \frac{\Vert Xu \Vert}{\Vert u \Vert}, \frac{\Vert Xv \Vert}{\Vert v \Vert} \}<br />

Homework Equations




The Attempt at a Solution



Tried to rewrite the max statement as an inequality (without loss of genreality). Then However I can't really get anyway with it since
when I try to estimate the numerator or the denominator independently (triangle inequality, ...) I get a bound which is too high and I don't really know how to estimate both simultaniuously.

thx
 
Physics news on Phys.org
this doesn't seem to be working. counter example:
X=[[2,0],[0,1]] (x-coordinate is doubled)
u=(1,1)
v=(1,-1)
u+v=(2,0)
rescaled to the unit circle:
u/|u|=(1/sqrt(2),1/sqrt(2))
v/|v|=(1/sqrt(2),-1/sqrt(2))
u+v/|u+v|=(1,0)
applying the matrix X to these:
X(u/|u|)=(2/sqrt(2),1/sqrt(2))
X(v/|u|)=(2/sqrt(2),-1/sqrt(2))
X(u+v/|u+v|)=(2,0)
but the lengths of the first two are both sqrt(2.5) < 2
 
Thanks for your answer. Now I'm slightly confused. Actually the example is taken from "Introduction to Applied Nonlinear Dynamical Systems". where it is stated that

For any vectors f,g\in\mathbb{R}^n
\chi(f+g) \leq \max\{\chi(f),\chi(g)\}

where \chi is the Lyapunov exponent given by.

\chi(X,e) = \lim_{t\to\infty} \frac{1}{t} \log \frac{\vert Xe\vert}{\vert e \vert}

where X in general does depend on t.

Since the logarithm is a montonuous function and i have to show the behavior for all t such that it holds in the limit (or at least for some t>T). The book states that this follows readily from the defintion...

thx
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
14K
Back
Top