Proof of an inner product space

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that the normed linear space l_{\infty}^{2} is not an inner product space, with a focus on the application of the parallelogram law and the characteristics of the space.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the application of the parallelogram law to the l_{\infty}^{2} space and question whether their attempts to find counterexamples are valid. Some suggest using specific numerical examples to test the law, while others discuss the implications of using bounded functions versus sequences.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of different methods to demonstrate that l_{\infty}^{2} is not an inner product space. Some participants have provided guidance on the validity of using counterexamples, while others are clarifying definitions and properties of the space in question.

Contextual Notes

Participants are discussing the definition of l_{\infty}^{2} and its relationship to norms, with some uncertainty about whether the functions involved are bounded. There is also confusion regarding the correct interpretation of the norm associated with this space.

cabin5
Messages
17
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Prove that the normed linear space [tex]l_{\infty}^{2}[/tex] is not an inner product space.


Homework Equations


parallelogram law;
[tex]\left\|x+y\right\|^2+\left\|x-y\right\|^2=2\left\|x\right\|^2+2\left\|y\right\|^2[/tex]


The Attempt at a Solution


Well, I tried to apply parallelogram law to the [tex]l_{\infty}^{2}[/tex] space where

[tex]x=(\alpha^1,\alpha^2)[/tex] and [tex]y=(\beta^1,\beta^2)\in l_{\infty}^{2}[/tex] .

[tex]\left\|x\right\|=max\left\{\left|\alpha^1\right|,\left|\alpha^2\right|\right\} and <br /> <br /> \left\|y\right\|=max\left\{\left|\beta^1\right|,\left|\beta^2\right|\right\}[/tex]

If one puts these norms into the parallelogram law equation, one gets a fuzzy expression on both sides of the equation, therefore it is important to put out expressions inside the max{} function which I could not achieve to do.

Is there another method to solve this problem or am I misapplying the law to [tex]l_{\infty}^{2}[/tex] space?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You only need a counterexample to show it's not an inner product space. Start putting some actual numbers in for the alphas and betas.
 
Is it a mathematically correct method?
 
cabin5 said:
Is it a mathematically correct method?

What would not be 'mathematical' or 'correct' about it? If I claim all primes are odd, and somebody points out 2 is even, that's enough to prove me wrong. Just do it.
 
Yes, as Dick said, proving that a general statement is NOT true by counterexample is a perfectly correct method.
 
thanks for the post!
 
well,
I tried the parallelogram law for x=(0,3) and y=(2,5) and it perfectly worked on both sides of the equation.
Should I choose the complex field for that space?

What's wrong with that?
 
Last edited:
You must have put some effort into find a case where it works. Almost all other cases don't work. Like x=(1,0) and y=(0,1). It has to work for all cases or your norm doesn't come from an inner product.
 
Finally, It worked :)
I thought any ordered pair would work as a counterexample.

Thanks a lot!
 
  • #10
No, and ordered pair won't work because R2 DOES make a inner product space. This question was about [itex]l_\infty^2[/itex]. Your counterexample must be from that space. What are the vectors in that space?
 
  • #11
HallsofIvy said:
No, and ordered pair won't work because R2 DOES make a inner product space. This question was about [itex]l_\infty^2[/itex]. Your counterexample must be from that space. What are the vectors in that space?

I took it to be R^2 with the max norm. You think it's bounded functions on R^2, right? It's still pretty easy to find a counterexample with bounded functions.
 
  • #12
I have no clue whether one must use a bounded function or not in order to prove that.
 
  • #13
The question is, what is the definition of the space l^2_infinity? Can you tell us what it is?
 
  • #14
Sorry for so late reply:

The definition of [tex]l_{\infty}^{n}[/tex] :
On the linear space [tex]V_{n}(F)[/tex] with the infinity norm defined by
[tex]\left\|x\right\|_p=\left[\sum^{\infty}_{i=1}\left|\alpha^{i}\right|^p\right]^{1/p}[/tex]

where [tex]x=(\alpha^i)[/tex].
The corresponding linear space to this norm is denoted by [tex]l_{\infty}^{n}[/tex].
 
Last edited:
  • #15
Dick said:
I took it to be R^2 with the max norm. You think it's bounded functions on R^2, right? It's still pretty easy to find a counterexample with bounded functions.

No, I was assuming infinite sequences {an} such that {a2n} was summable.
 
  • #16
so [tex]l_{\infty}^{2}[/tex] defines that norm which is basically the square of root total sum of square of each element of 2 vectors defined over R^2 field.

Eventually , I think that you're example is correct, but besides I have no idea about whether functions defined in [tex]l_{\infty}^{2}[/tex] is bounded or not (since I didn't take any real analysis course during undergrad.)
 
  • #17
HallsofIvy said:
No, I was assuming infinite sequences {an} such that {a2n} was summable.

I don't think that's what the problem is supposed to be about.
 
  • #18
cabin5 said:
so [tex]l_{\infty}^{2}[/tex] defines that norm which is basically the square of root total sum of square of each element of 2 vectors defined over R^2 field.

Eventually , I think that you're example is correct, but besides I have no idea about whether functions defined in [tex]l_{\infty}^{2}[/tex] is bounded or not (since I didn't take any real analysis course during undergrad.)

I think what you just described is l^2_2. The 'infinity' usually designates a max norm (supremum) rather than a power root norm.
 
  • #19
oh, ****!

you're right , It was supposed to be max norm! I miswrote the definition.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K