Question about orthogonal vectors and the cosine

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the concept of orthogonality defect, defined as ##\prod_i ||b_i|| / det(B)##, and its relationship to almost orthogonal bases. The participants debate the accuracy of defining the angle ##\theta_i## as the angle between vector ##b_i## and the span of previous vectors, suggesting it should instead be the angle between ##b_i## and the orthogonal complement of that span. The vectors ##b_i^*## are identified as non-normalized Gram-Schmidt vectors, and the need for clarification in notation and definitions is emphasized.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of orthogonality in vector spaces
  • Familiarity with Gram-Schmidt process for orthonormalization
  • Knowledge of determinants in linear algebra
  • Concept of vector spans and orthogonal complements
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Gram-Schmidt process in detail, focusing on non-normalized vectors
  • Explore the concept of orthogonality defect in various contexts
  • Learn about vector spans and their orthogonal complements in linear algebra
  • Investigate the implications of angles between vectors in multi-dimensional spaces
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics, particularly those studying linear algebra, vector spaces, and orthogonality, as well as researchers working with Gram-Schmidt vectors and their applications.

Peter_Newman
Messages
155
Reaction score
11
Hi,

The orthogonality defect is ##\prod_i ||b_i|| / det(B)##. Now it is said: The relation between this quantity and almost orthogonal bases is easily explained. Let ##\theta_i## be the angle between ##b_i## and ##span(b_1,...,b_{i-1})##. Then ##||b_i^*|| = ||b_i|| cos(\theta_i)##. [...]

So the cosine is the ratio of the adjacent to the hypotenuse. That means between ##b_i^*## and ##b_i## there is always this ratio, I would accept that. But what irritates me a bit is the statement about the angle.

I have drawn this now for the case ##i=2## and I'm the opinion that what stands above is not completely correct, correctly would be, if it would be called ##\theta_i## is the angle between ##b_i## and ##span(b_1,...,b_{i-1})^{\perp}##.

For notation: ##b_i^*## are Gram Schmidt vectors.

What do you think?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Unfortunately no opinions about it yet? Are you perhaps missing information, or do you agree with me (and my comments)?
 
Peter_Newman said:
Unfortunately no opinions about it yet? Are you perhaps missing information, or do you agree with me (and my comments)?
It's not a B level for one thing. And, the post is too far out of context to be easy to help. Also, at this level I'd imagine you could work out a specific example, doing the legwork yourself, rather than sitting back and letting us start from square one. There's also the risk that the "Gram-Schmidt" vectors form your source are non-standard.
 
Ok, from your answer I can see that there might be some missing information here. To your suggestion with the sit back and wait for answers: (It sounds a bit accusatory for me) So I have a relatively concrete example tried to provide in the first post, by drawing once the facts and based on it, I would not agree with what was said. However, I have made a guess as to how it could be correct in the penultimate paragraph.

Unfortunately, I also do not have any background information other than what I had previously (quoted):

A quantity that has been used to measure how close a basis is to orthogonal is the orthogonality defect ##\prod_i ||b_i|| / det(B)##. The relation between this quantity and almost orthogonal bases is easily explained. Let ##\theta_i## be the angle between ##b_i## and ##span(b_1,...,b_{i-1})##. Then ##||b_i^*|| = ||b_i|| cos(\theta_i)##.

Perhaps it could and should be noted that the ##b_i^*##'s are not normalized Gram-Schmidt vectors. We are in a lattice context here, but it is not relevant for the quote for now. Otherwise I have no further information.



If we now consider only what the actual statement is, which makes me a bit wonder, then we could reduce this to the following statement:

Let ##\theta_i## be the angle between ##b_i## and ##span(b_1,...,b_{i-1})##. Then ##||b_i^*|| = ||b_i|| cos(\theta_i)##.

Here one needs then actually only, the information that the asterisks are Gram Schmidt vectors, which are not normalized and the ##b_i##'s are vectors of ##R^n##.
 
Last edited:
I think you are right that you need to add a little orthogonal symbol. If the angle between ##b_i## and the previous vectors is close to 0 , then ##||b_i^*||## should be close to 0.

You can also fix this by replacing cosine with sine.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Peter_Newman and PeroK
Hey @Office_Shredder , thanks again for your help! I see it absolutely the same!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K