Proving Inner Product Spaces: Proving x=y if <x,z> = <y,z>

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving a property of inner product spaces, specifically that if the inner products of two vectors with all basis vectors are equal, then the vectors themselves must be equal. The context is set within a finite dimensional inner-product space.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and the conditions under which the inner products are equal. There are attempts to manipulate the expressions involving the inner products and to consider orthogonality.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, raising questions about the assumptions regarding the vectors involved and the implications of their orthogonality. Some guidance has been offered regarding the relationship between the vectors and the basis, but no consensus has been reached on the resolution of the problem.

Contextual Notes

There is a discussion about the implications of the vectors being in the inner product space versus a subspace, with examples provided to illustrate potential misunderstandings of the problem's constraints.

hitmeoff
Messages
260
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Let [tex]\beta[/tex] be a basis for a finite dimensional inner-product space.

b) Prove that is < x, z > = < y, z> for all z [tex]\in[/tex] [tex]\beta[/tex], then x = y

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


start with the Cauchy-Schwarz:
|< x, z >| [tex]\leq[/tex] ||x|| ||z||

then because <x,z> = <y,z>

|< y, z >| [tex]\leq[/tex] ||x|| ||z||

so y = x, is this correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Nope.
 
vela said:
Nope.

Any guidance?
 
What is < x, z> - < y, z>? When is < x, x> = 0?
 
Tedjn said:
What is < x, z> - < y, z>? When is < x, x> = 0?
<x,z> - <y,z> = 0 and <x,x> = 0 iff x =0

<x,z> + <-y,z> = <x-y, z> = 0

and |<x-y, z>| [tex]\leq[/tex] ||x-y|| [tex]\cdot[/tex] ||z||

if z [tex]\neq[/tex] 0 the ||x-y|| must = 0. and ||x-y|| = 0 iff x-y = 0 so x = y
 
C.S. gives you an upper bound, via rearrangement, a lower bound for ||x-y|| of 0. That doesn't mean ||x-y|| = 0. Use the fact that <x-y,z> = 0 for every basis vector.
 
Tedjn said:
C.S. gives you an upper bound, via rearrangement, a lower bound for ||x-y|| of 0. That doesn't mean ||x-y|| = 0. Use the fact that <x-y,z> = 0 for every basis vector.

if z is a basis vector, then x-y is orthogonal to any and every z [tex]\in[/tex] [tex]\beta[/tex] but I am not sure where to go from there.
 
Hint: x-y is also orthogonal to every linear combination of z's.
 
Im completely stuck. I know that x-y [tex]\in[/tex] ortho complement of [tex]\beta[/tex]

But in this section, I am not supposed to know that yet, so I don't want to go down that route.
 
  • #10
how about assuming you have a suitable orthonormal basis for the space, then consider the product of x and y with each of ths basis vectors...

or if you know <x-y,z> = 0 for all z, how about the case z = x-y?
 
  • #11
lanedance said:
how about assuming you have a suitable orthonormal basis for the space, then consider the product of x and y with each of ths basis vectors...

or if you know <x-y,z> = 0 for all z, how about the case z = x-y?

in the case z = x-y, then <x-y, x-y> = 0 and that's only if x-y = 0 meaning x = y.

But here's my question, a few posts ago I thought about this, but then I got to thinking why x-y would necessarily be in [tex]\beta[/tex]. I know x-y must = some linear combination of z's [tex]\in[/tex] [tex]\beta[/tex] since it is a basis. but why is x-y necessarily in [tex]\beta[/tex]?

let x' = x-y and x-y = c1z1 +...+ cnzn then

<x', c1z1 +...+ cnzn> = <x', c1z1> +...+ <x', cnzn>

with each term inner product = 0

but c1z1 +...+ cnzn isn't necessarily in [tex]\beta[/tex], rather in the span([tex]\beta[/tex])
 
Last edited:
  • #12
Thats a fair point and I think the above is only true if x & y are in B.

As it says innner product space as opposed to a "subspace" its probably fair to assume that x & y are in B. Once x & y are in B, clearly x-y is in B.

As a counter example say B is the subspace of R^3 spanned by [0,0,1]. Then let x = [1,0,1] and y = [0,1,1]

clearly <x,z> = <y,z> = 0 for all z in B, but x != y

note that the projection of x & y onto B will still be equal though...
 
Last edited:
  • #13
lanedance said:
Thats a fair point and I think the above is only true if x & y are in B.

As it says innner product space as opposed to a "subspace" its probably fair to assume that x & y are in B. Once x & y are in B, clearly x-y is in B.

As a counter example say B is the subspace of R^3 spanned by [0,0,1]. Then let x = [1,0,1] and y = [0,1,1]

clearly <x,z> = <y,z> = 0 for all z in B, but x != y

Got it... I guess I read the problem wrong. I think you are write. The wya the problem is written, I think its meaning to imply x and y are in the inner product space. Geez, I had thought of this solution long ago, but I never figuered x and y were implied as being in B
 

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K