Proving Inner Product Spaces: The Case of Real Polynomials of Degree 2

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that the integral defined by = ∫_{-1}^{1}f(x)g(x)dx establishes an inner product space for the vector space P2 of real polynomials of degree at most 2. Participants are exploring the axioms of inner product spaces, particularly focusing on the non-negativity condition.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the proof of the non-negativity condition ≥ 0 and the implications of equality. Some question the necessity of certain steps in the original proof attempt, suggesting a more straightforward approach. Others explore the properties of the integrand and its implications for the integral's value.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of different methods to demonstrate the required properties of the inner product. Some participants have offered guidance on simplifying the proof, while others are questioning the assumptions and steps taken in the original attempts. Multiple interpretations of the problem are being examined.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the constraints of the problem, including the definitions and properties of inner product spaces, as well as the specific characteristics of polynomials in P2. There is a focus on ensuring the proof adheres to the axioms without unnecessary complexity.

boneill3
Messages
126
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



We consider P2 the vector space of all real polynomials of degree at most 2.
Show that

[itex] <f,g> = \int_{-1}^{1}f(x)g(x)dx[/itex]

defines an inner product space

Homework Equations



I'm Using one of the Axioms of Inner product spaces IP1. which states that.

[itex] <u,u>[/itex] [itex]\geq 0[/itex] with equality when and only when [itex]u=0_{v}[/itex]

The Attempt at a Solution



For IP1

let [itex]a,b,c,d,e,f,x \in R[/itex]

then

[itex] <f,g> = \int_{-1}^{1}f(x)g(x)dx[/itex]

[itex] <f,g> = \int_{-1}^{1}(a+bx+cx^2)(d+ex+fdx^2)dx[/itex]

[itex] <f,g> = \left[ \frac{cd+fx^3}{3}+\frac{bd+ex^2}{2}+adx\right]_{-1}^{1}[/itex]

[itex] <f,g> = 2ad+\frac{2cd+f}{3}\[/itex]

[itex] <f,g> \geq 0[/itex]




To show that equality to 0 implies the zero polynomial can I use?


let [itex]a,b,c,d,e,f \in R \neq 0[/itex]
and
[itex]x\in R[/itex]

Consider

[itex] <f,f> = \int_{-1}^{1}f(x)f(x)dx = \left[ \frac{cd+fx^3}{3}+\frac{bd+ex^2}{2}+adx\right]_{-1}^{1}<br /> [/itex]

if we assume
[itex] <f,f> = 0[/itex]

then this implies

[itex] \left[ \frac{cd+fx^3}{3}+\frac{bd+ex^2}{2}+adx\right]_{-1}^{1}<br /> = 0[/itex]

but a,b,c,d,e,f [itex]\neq 0[/itex]

therefore

[itex] \left[ \frac{cd+fx^3}{3}+\frac{bd+ex^2}{2}+adx\right]_{-1}^{1}<br /> \neq 0[/itex]

contradicting our assumption

hence a,b,c,d,e,f [itex]= 0[/itex] the zero polynomial


So we have

[itex] <u,u>[/itex] [itex]\geq 0[/itex]

and

[itex] <u,u>[/itex] [itex]= 0 \rightarrow f = 0_{v}[/itex]

So IP1 holds


Is that enough to prove IP1 ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Could you explain the steps in your proof that
[tex]\langle f, g \rangle \geq 0[/tex]?​

P.S. don't you find that identity rather suspicious?
 
You have a lot of extra work that you don't need or want. For the nonnegativity thing you want to show that <f, f> >= 0, with equality iff f = 0. You have a lot of work showing <f, g>, which isn't applicable for this axiom. You want the inner product of a function f with itself.
 
Last edited:
I'll try again

For IP1

let
[itex]a,b,c \in R[/itex]

then


[itex]<f,f>[/itex][itex]= \int_{-1}^{1}f(x)f(x)dx[/itex]


[itex]<f,f>[/itex][itex]= \int_{-1}^{1}(a+bx+cx^2)(a+bx+cx^2)dx[/itex]


[itex]<f,f>[/itex][itex]=\left[\frac{c^2x^5}{5}+\frac{bcx^4}{2}+\frac{(2ac+b^2)x^3}{3}abx^2+a^2x\right]_{-1}^{1}[/itex]



[itex]<f,f>[/itex][itex]= 2a^2+\frac{4ac}{3}+\frac{2b^2}{3}+\frac{2c^2}{5}[/itex]


[itex]\geq 0[/itex]

Is that better?
 
Still too complicated...by a mile. You're going to feel like an idiot when you see it :P Happens to the best of us ;)
 
boneill3 said:
[itex]<f,f>[/itex][itex]= 2a^2+\frac{4ac}{3}+\frac{2b^2}{3}+\frac{2c^2}{5}[/itex]


[itex]\geq 0[/itex]
Why should this be true? :confused:

While this is certainly not the easy way to prove it, once you figure out the problem you should still try and make sure you understand how to do things this way.
 
Is there another way to write this than the way you chose?
[itex]<f, f> = \int_{-1}^{1}(a+bx+cx^2)(a+bx+cx^2)dx[/itex]
 
Another way is

[itex]= \int_{-1}^{1}(a+bx+cx^2)^2dx[/itex]
 
It sure is. Now is there anything you can definitely say about the integrand, and therefore say about the integral?
 
  • #10
Could I say that the integrand is a non-negative functon therefore the integral will be a positive real number greater or equal to zero ?
 
  • #11
Yes but that doesn't make it definite. What can you say about the integral of a non-negative continuous function that's non-zero at at least one point?
 
  • #12
It is measurable?
 
  • #13
beetle2 said:
It is measurable?

No, if you remember the definition of the integral as a limit of a riemannian sum, you will understand what aPhilosopher is trying to say.
 
  • #14
Are you talking about the fact that it is a definite integral because the riemann sum exists as the limit of sums as n approaches infinity and it's a bounded function?
 
  • #15
You have an integral whose integrand is [tex]|f(x)|^{2}[/tex]. If [tex]f(x) = 0[/tex] everywhere, the integral is obviously zero.

If [tex]f(x) \neq 0[/tex] in at least one point, the integrand is [tex]|f(x)|^{2}>0[/tex] in at least that point, being zero in the others. Your interval of integration is positive, [tex]dx > 0[/tex] everywhere. So, your integral can be interpreted as an summation of products of positive values [tex]|f(x)|^{2} dx[/tex] and of zeros.

This argument proves that [tex]\left< f , f \right> > 0[/tex] if [tex]f(x)[/tex] is not identically zero, and proves that [tex]\left< f , f \right> = 0[/tex] if [tex]f(x) = 0[/tex] everywhere in the interval.
 
  • #16
UgOOgU said:
If [tex]f(x) \neq 0[/tex] in at least one point, the integrand is [tex]|f(x)|^{2}>0[/tex] in at least that point, being zero in the others. Your interval of integration is positive, [tex]dx > 0[/tex] everywhere. So, your integral can be interpreted as an summation of products of positive values [tex]|f(x)|^{2} dx[/tex] and of zeros.
The formal argument is that if a continuous function equals some number strictly greater than zero at some point, then there is whole neighborhood of that point on which the function is strictly greater than zero. This is an essential property of continuous functions (and follows almost immediately from the definition). Since our integrand is nonnegative, a whole neighborhood (rather than just a single point) does contribute to the integral being greater than zero.
 

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
11K