Parallelogram law calculation is this an error in the text?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on a potential error found in Kolmogorov and Fomin's Real Analysis book, specifically on page 161, regarding the claim involving vectors f, g, and h in a real Hilbert space. The equation presented, \|f + g + h\|^2 + \|f - h - g\|^2 = 2\|f - h\|^2 + 2\|g\|^2, is scrutinized for its validity, particularly in the context of \mathbb{R} with specific values for f, g, and h. The conclusion drawn is that the claim is indeed erroneous, supported by a counterexample and further corroborated by an external errata document that highlights multiple errors in that section of the book.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of real Hilbert spaces
  • Familiarity with the parallelogram law in inner product spaces
  • Basic knowledge of vector norms and inner products
  • Ability to analyze mathematical proofs and claims
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the parallelogram law in various inner product spaces
  • Examine the properties of norms derived from inner products
  • Study the errata for Kolmogorov and Fomin's Real Analysis for additional context
  • Explore common errors in mathematical texts and their implications
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of real analysis, educators teaching Hilbert spaces, and anyone interested in the accuracy of mathematical literature.

AxiomOfChoice
Messages
531
Reaction score
1
In Kolmogorov and Fomin's Real Analysis book, pg. 161, they make the following claim: For any vectors f,g,h in a real Hilbert space, we have

[tex] \|f + g + h\|^2 + \|f - h - g\|^2 = 2\|f - h\|^2 + 2\|g\|^2.[/tex]

They attempt to justify this using the parallelogram law:

[tex] \|x + y\|^2 + \|x - y\|^2 = 2\|x\|^2 + 2\|y\|^2,[/tex]

which holds in any inner product space. But I do not think they're right about this; doesn't their claim fail in [itex]\mathbb R[/itex] with f = 2, g = -1, h = 1, when the inner product is just multiplication? Don't you get something like 8 = 4?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If the first h in your equation had a negative in front of it you would get the result using x=f-h and y=g. Maybe it is just a typo.
 
For anyone who should happen across this page in the future: I've discovered that this actually is a typo. Click http://math.gmu.edu/~tlim/errataByEdgar.pdf" for more information. Apparently, that entire section of the book (examining when a norm is derived from an inner product) is littered with errors.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K