1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

I Scalar Product Problem

  1. Jul 1, 2017 #1
    Alright, so we ran into a peculiarity in answering this question.

    Let R be the set of all functions f defined on the interval [0,1] such that -

    (1) f(t) is nonzero at no more than countably many points t1, t2, . . .
    (2) Σi = 1 to ∞ f2(ti) < ∞ .

    Define addition of elements and multiplication of elements by scalars in the ordinary way, i.e., (f + g)(t) = f(t) + g(t), (αf)(t) = αf(t). If f and g are two elements of R, nonzero only at the points t1, t2, . . . and t'1, t'2, . . . respectively, define the scalar product of f and g as

    (3) (f,g) = Σi,j = 1 to ∞ f(ti)g(t'j) .

    Prove that this scalar product makes R into a Euclidean space.

    By the looks of it, (3) is not referring to a sum across all pairs (i,j), since that may induce (absolute) convergence issues for certain elements in the set, where it might not be possible for them to have a finite norm. So we figured that the sum (3) is such that i and j run in parallel across Z+, like it would be in l2.
    The peculiarity we found next is in the ordering of the countable domain of points with non-zero image. It may not be well-ordered for some functions, and even if you were to assume only well-ordered domains, there can be several different countable orderings (given that the sums of functions are included). One possibility we considered is if f has smaller ordering than g, we can generalize the sum (3) so that it only goes up to the ordering of f (like we would if f had a finite domain and g had a countable domain). But even so, the list of plausible orderings goes a long way in [0,1], and then there is a problem with resolving one of the properties of the scalar product:

    (iv) (f , g+h) = (f , g) + (f , h)

    Typically, proving (iv) would involve showing that (f , g+h) remains absolutely convergent. But the problem is how to consider the domain of g+h in the left expression as opposed to the individual domains of g and h in the right expression. In any case, we're stuck.
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 1, 2017 #2


    User Avatar
    2017 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    Where does the question come from? The scalar product doesn't seem to make sense.
    What I could imagine is $$(f,g) = \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} f(s_k) g(s_k)$$ where the sk are the union of ti and t'i. Or the intersection, doesn't make a difference here.
  4. Jul 1, 2017 #3
  5. Jul 2, 2017 #4
    So for completion, we have managed to prune the problem statement to something doable. Altogether, it works when considering mfb's statement of the scalar product -

    - which is the intuitive way of looking that things, since that is how the scalar product in C2[a,b] behaves. The general idea is that -

    - is an instance of absolute convergence, where absolute convergence implies unconditional convergence. Then by "Sequences and Series: A Sourcebook", Pete L. Clark, Chapter 2 . Section 9 . pg 89 . Theorem 2.52:

    For a : NR an ordinary sequence and A ∈ R, the following are equivalent:
    i. The unordered sum Σn ∈ Z+ an is convergent, with sum A.
    ii. The series Σn = 0 to ∞ an is unconditionally convergent, with sum A.

    So given any countable (un)ordering of points of non-zero image, so long as there exists a reordering ω that is absolutely convergent, then everything should fit together.
    Last edited: Jul 2, 2017
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Draft saved Draft deleted