Proving (My) = (M*x).y | Complex Vectors and Matrices

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nick89
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion centers around proving a property of complex vectors and matrices, specifically involving the inner product of complex vectors and the action of a complex matrix on these vectors. The original poster seeks validation of their solution to an exam question regarding the equality of two expressions involving complex vectors and a matrix.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to demonstrate the equality of two expressions involving complex vectors and a matrix, questioning the correctness of their initial steps and definitions related to the inner product.
  • Some participants discuss the definitions of the inner product and how they relate to the expressions used, suggesting alternative formulations and clarifying conventions.
  • Others express uncertainty about the implications of definitions provided in their textbook and whether they hold universally.

Discussion Status

Participants have engaged in clarifying the definitions of the inner product and its implications for the problem at hand. While some guidance has been offered regarding the validity of the original poster's approach, there remains a lack of explicit consensus on the universality of the definitions discussed.

Contextual Notes

The original poster notes that their textbook presents definitions of the inner product in both real and complex contexts, leading to some confusion about the applicability of these definitions in their proof. There is an acknowledgment of the potential for varying conventions in defining the inner product.

Nick89
Messages
553
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


This was a question in a recent exam and I would like to know if the answer I gave is correct since I not 100% sure...

If [itex]\mathbf{x}[/itex] and [itex]\mathbf{y}[/itex] are complex vectors in C^n (complex) and [itex]M[/itex] is a square (n x n)-matrix (also in C^n), prove that:
[tex]\mathbf{x} \cdot (M \mathbf{y}) = (M^* \mathbf{x}) \cdot \mathbf{y}[/tex]
(where M* denotes the complex conjugate + the transpose of M: [itex]M^* = \overline{M}^T[/itex]
(The dot denotes the standard complex dot-product)


The Attempt at a Solution


I did the following:

[tex]\mathbf{x} \cdot \mathbf{y} = \mathbf{x}^T \mathbf{\overline{y}}[/tex]
So
[tex]\mathbf{x} \cdot (M \mathbf{y}) = \mathbf{x}^T \overline{M \mathbf{y}} = \mathbf{x}^T \overline{M} \overline{\mathbf{y}}[/tex]

Now:
[tex]\mathbf{x}^T \overline{M} = (M^* \mathbf{x})^T[/tex] because [tex](M^* \mathbf{x})^T = \mathbf{x}^T (M^*)^T = \mathbf{x}^T \overline{M}[/tex]

So, now we have:
[tex]\mathbf{x} \cdot (M \mathbf{y}) = (M^* \mathbf{x})^T \overline{\mathbf{y}} = (M^* \mathbf{x}) \cdot \mathbf{y}[/tex]


Is this solution correct? Or did I make an error somewhere? (I'm not entirely sure of the very first statement for example...)

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, that's basically correct. But if you aren't sure of the first statement, look up how you defined the inner product. You could also have written your definition x.y=(y*)x. An equally valid definition of inner product is x.y=(x*)y. The first inner product is antilinear in y and the second one is antilinear in x. The choice of one or the other is a matter of convention.
 
Well that was really the problem. The book we are using first defines inner products on the real numbers, it defines the standard dot product as:
[tex]\vec{x} \cdot \vec{y} = \sum_{i=1}^n x_i y_i[/tex]
and it is then shown that x.y = x^T y.

Then it goes on later about the complex numbers. It does define the standard dot product as:
[tex]\vec{x} \cdot \vec{y} = \sum_{i=1}^n x_i \overline{y_i}[/tex]
but it does NOT explicitly show that the dotproduct can also be written as [tex]\mathbf{x}^T \overline{\mathbf{y}}[/tex].
I can easily verify that this works but I wasn't sure whether it is true for every condition...

So it is correct? Yay :)
 
That's the same as (y*)x, yes. Which is the same as your expression.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K