Prove Finite Orthogonal Set is Linearly Independent

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter bugatti79
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Orthogonal Sets
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that a finite orthogonal set of vectors is linearly independent. Participants explore the implications of orthogonality and orthonormality in the context of linear independence within inner product spaces (ips).

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a proof structure involving an orthogonal set of vectors and questions the derivation of a specific line in their argument.
  • Another participant clarifies that the assumption of orthogonality implies that the inner product of distinct vectors is zero, leaving only the term associated with the vector in question.
  • A subsequent reply questions whether the inner product equals 1 when i equals j, suggesting a potential misunderstanding of orthonormality.
  • Another participant argues that the term does not need to equal 1 for the proof to hold, emphasizing that it is a non-zero value and can be used to conclude that the coefficient must be zero.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of orthonormality versus orthogonality in the proof, indicating that multiple competing interpretations exist regarding the implications of these terms.

Contextual Notes

There is ambiguity regarding the definitions of orthogonal and orthonormal sets, particularly in relation to the inner product values and their implications for linear independence. The discussion does not resolve these definitions or their consequences.

bugatti79
Messages
786
Reaction score
4
Folks,

I am looking at my notes. Wondering where the highlighted comes from.
Prove that a finite orthogonal set is lineaarly independent

let u=(x_1,x_2,x_n) bee an orthogonal set set of vectors in an ips.
To show u is linearly independent suppose

Ʃ ##\alpha_i x_i=0## for i=1 to n

Fix any j=1 and consider <Ʃ##\alpha_i x_i, x_j##> i=1 to n

then

0=<Ʃ##\alpha_i x_i, x_j##> i=1 to n

=Ʃ<##\alpha_i x_i, x_j##> i=1 to n

=Ʃ##\alpha_i <x_i, x_j>## i=1 to n

=##\alpha_j <x_j, x_j>## since u is an orthonormal set

Where does this line come from? Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You are assuming the x_i's are orthogonal (i.e. <x_i,x_j>=0 if i =/= j), so the only term in the sum which is not necessarily 0 is a_j<x_j,x_j>
 
TwilightTulip said:
You are assuming the x_i's are orthogonal (i.e. <x_i,x_j>=0 if i =/= j), so the only term in the sum which is not necessarily 0 is a_j<x_j,x_j>

where <x_j,x_j>=1 when i=j? Thanks in advance.
 
Not necessarily. If you were to use "orthonormal" instead of just "orthogonal", then that would be true.

However, that is not necessary to your proof. &lt;x_j, x_j&gt; is some non-zero number. a_j. Divide both sides of \alpha_j a_j= 0 by that number to get \alpha_j= 0.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K