MHB Relationship between metric and inner product

Click For Summary
A metric is not a type of inner product, as inner products are bilinear maps while metrics do not have this requirement. For instance, a simple function defining a metric can assign a distance of 1 between distinct points, which does not qualify as an inner product. However, given an inner product, a metric can be derived from it using the formula that involves the square root of the inner product of the difference of two vectors. This indicates that while metrics can be applied to inner product spaces, the reverse is not necessarily true, as some metric spaces lack the structure for an inner product. Understanding these distinctions is crucial in linear algebra and functional analysis.
dingo
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Hi, I have this question:

in the context of linear algebra, would it be correct to say that a metric is a kind of inner product?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No.

Inner products are bilinear maps, and a metric need not be. For example, the function

$d: V \times V \to \Bbb R$ given by:

$d(v,w) = 1$ if $v \neq w$
$d(v,v) = 0$

is a metric, but it most assuredly is *not* an inner product.

However...*given* an inner product $\langle \cdot,\cdot\rangle$, we can define a metric on an inner product space by:

$d(v,w) = \sqrt{\langle v-w,v-w\rangle}$

Metrics are a sort of "relaxing" of the requirements of the norm induced by an inner product-we can put a metric on an inner product space, but we may not be able to put an inner product on a metric space (such a space may not even have a vector addition defined on it).
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
11K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K