Norms and orthogonal Polynomials

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion addresses two mathematical problems involving norms and orthogonal polynomials. The first problem requires proving the inequality ||fg|| ≤ ||f|| ||g|| using a semi-norm defined by ||f|| = ∑(1/k!)|f^(k)(x₀)|. The second problem involves demonstrating that a set of orthonormal polynomials {Pᵢ} satisfies the recurrence relation Pₖ₊₁(x) = (aₖx + bₖ)Pₖ(x) + cₖPₖ₋₁(x) under a specific inner product. Participants share insights on using induction and polynomial division to approach these proofs.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of semi-norms and their properties
  • Familiarity with derivatives and their notation
  • Knowledge of orthogonal polynomials and inner products
  • Experience with mathematical induction techniques
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of semi-norms in functional analysis
  • Learn about the application of induction in proving inequalities
  • Explore the theory of orthogonal polynomials and their recurrence relations
  • Investigate the use of inner products in proving polynomial orthogonality
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students studying functional analysis, and anyone interested in the properties of polynomials and their applications in mathematical proofs.

Tomer
Messages
198
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Thanks very much for reading.
I actually have two problems, I hope it's ok to state both of the in the same thread.

1. Let Vn be the space of all functions having the n'th derivitve in the point x0.
I've been given the semi-norm (holds all the norm axioms other than ||v|| = 0 => v = 0) defined by:
||f|| = \sum^{n}_{k=0}\frac{1}{k!}|f^{(k)}(x_{0})|

I need to show that ||fg|| \leq ||f|| ||g||

2. I need to prove that if the set of polynomials {Pi}, i=0,...,n is orthonormal on [a,b] in respect to the inner product defined by: <f,g> = \int ^{b}_{a}f(x)g(x)dx
then they hold the recurrance relation:
Pk+1(x) = (akx + bk)Pk(x) + ckPk-1(x)

The Attempt at a Solution



1. This one's been a nightmare for me. I've tried proving it straightforward, and then using induction, but I just get lost in a sea of indexes. I'm thinking there might be a more elegant way, but can't see it.
I'm of course trying to use the triangle inequality, which works great for the cases n=1 and n=2, but I just cannot generlize it.
I could write the whole development I've done here, it's like one whole page, but it'll take me ages and therefore think it's rather unnescesarry. I'll greatly appreciate a hint. If there's no other way but an ugly induction I think I'll skip it :-)
(I've used the fact that (fg)^{(k)}(x_{0}) = \sum^{k}_{i=0}(\frac{k!}{i!(k-i)!})f^{(k-i)}g^{(i)}(x_{0})

2. Well, I've been thinking polynomial division. If I assume the set of given Pi's is of ascending degrees (0,1,2...), I can always divide Pk+1(x) in Pk(x) and write:
P_{k+1}(x) = (a_{k}x + b_{k})P_{k}(x) + L(x)
Where deg(L(x)) < deg(Pk(x))
I don't know how to take it from here. How do I use the orthogonality? I would greatly appreciate hints :-)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
OK, for (a). You've come to the conclusion already that

<br /> \begin{eqnarray*}<br /> \|fg\|<br /> &amp; = &amp; \sum_{k=0}^n{\frac{1}{k!}\left|\sum_{i=0}^k\frac{k!}{i!(k-i)!}f^{(k-i)}(x_0)g^{(i)}(x_0)\right|}\\<br /> &amp; \leq &amp; \sum_{k=0}^n{\sum_{i=0}^k\frac{1}{i!(k-i)!}|f^{(k-i)}(x_0)g^{(i)}(x_0)|}<br /> \end{eqnarray*}<br />

The thing to do now is to switch those two sums appropriately.

For (b). The convention for orthogonal polynomials is that P_k always has degree k. So I shall follow that convention here. (I'm pretty sure the result is false if the convention is not followed).

Anyway. If you pick a suitable a_k, then P_{k+1}-a_kxP_k has degree \leq k. So we can write

P_{k+1}-a_k xP_k=b_kP_k+c_kP_{k-1}+\sum_{j=1}^{k-2}{d_jP_{k-2}}

Our job is to prove d_j=0. Do this by taking appropriate inner products.
 
Thanks, I'll try working on that.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
3K