MHB Norms for a Linear Transformation .... Browder, Lemma 8.4 ....

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading Andrew Browder's book: "Mathematical Analysis: An Introduction" ... ...

I am currently reading Chapter 8: Differentiable Maps and am specifically focused on Section 8.1 Linear Algebra ...

I need some help in fully understanding Lemma 8.4 ...

Lemma 8.4 reads as follows:
View attachment 9371
View attachment 9372
In the above proof of Lemma 8.4 by Browder we read the following:

" ... ... On the other hand since $$\sum_{ j = 1 }^m ( a_k^j )^2 = \ \mid T e_k \mid \ \le \| T \|^2$$ for every $$k, 1 \le k \le n$$ ... ... "

My question is as follows:

Can someone please demonstrate rigorously that $$\sum_{ j = 1 }^m ( a_k^j )^2 = \ \mid T e_k \mid \ \le \| T \|^2$$ ...
(... ... it seems plausible that $$\sum_{ j = 1 }^m ( a_k^j )^2 = \ \mid T e_k \mid \ \le \| T \|^2$$ but how do we demonstrate it rigorously ... ... )
Help will be much appreciated ...

Peter
 

Attachments

  • Browder - 1 - Lemma 8.4 ... PART 1 .. .png
    Browder - 1 - Lemma 8.4 ... PART 1 .. .png
    39.8 KB · Views: 126
  • Browder - 2 - Lemma 8.4 ... PART 2 ... .png
    Browder - 2 - Lemma 8.4 ... PART 2 ... .png
    12.3 KB · Views: 122
Physics news on Phys.org
Peter said:
Can someone please demonstrate rigorously that $$\sum_{ j = 1 }^m ( a_k^j )^2 = |T e_k|^2 \le \| T \|^2$$ ...
The equality $$\sum_{ j = 1 }^m ( a_k^j )^2 =|T \mathbf{e}_k|^2$$ comes from the definition of the matrix of $T$. In fact, $T \mathbf{e}_k = (a_k^1 \mathbf{e}_1,a_k^2 \mathbf{e}_2,\ldots,a_k^m \mathbf{e}_m).$

The inequality $|T \mathbf{e}_k| \leqslant \|T\|$ comes from the definition of $\|T\|$. In fact, $\|T\| = \sup\{|T\mathbf{v}|:\mathbf{v}\in\Bbb{R}^n, |\mathbf{v}|\leqslant1\}$, which implies that $|T\mathbf{v}| \leqslant \|T\|$whenever $|\mathbf{v}|\leqslant1$. But $|\mathbf{e}_k| = 1$, so we can take $\mathbf{v} = \mathbf{e}_k$ to get $|T \mathbf{e}_k| \leqslant \|T\|$.
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K