What Are the Orthogonal Complements of Union and Intersection in Hilbert Spaces?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter LikeMath
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Orthogonal
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the orthogonal complements of the union and intersection of two subsets, M and N, within a Hilbert space H. Participants explore the mathematical properties and relationships between these sets, particularly focusing on the intersection and its complement.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the orthogonal complement of the intersection, (M∩N)⊥, is equal to M⊥∩N⊥, but there is uncertainty about the correctness of this claim.
  • Others argue that the other inclusion is not obvious and suggest that (M∩N)⊥ might actually equal M⊥ + N⊥.
  • A participant questions the meaning of summing two sets and seeks clarification on how to prove the proposed equality.
  • It is noted that to prove two sets are equal, one must show that they contain each other.
  • Another participant points out a potential misunderstanding regarding the definition of (M∩N)⊥, emphasizing that the condition =0 should only apply to y in the intersection, not to all elements in M and N.
  • There is a suggestion that constraints on M and N may be necessary for the equality (M∩N)⊥ = M⊥ + N⊥ to hold, with a later reply confirming that both M and N should be subspaces.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between the orthogonal complements and the intersection of sets, with no consensus reached on the correct formulation or proof of the proposed equalities.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge that certain assumptions or constraints on the subsets M and N may be required for the discussion, particularly regarding their status as subspaces.

LikeMath
Messages
62
Reaction score
0
Let M and N be two subsets of a hilbert space H.
What are orthogonal complements of following sets:
1) The union of M and N.
2) The intersection of M and N.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
So, what did you try already??
 
[itex]x\in (M\cap N)^\bot[/itex] means
[itex]<x,y>=0[/itex] for all [itex]y\in M \text{ and } y\in N[/itex] and hence

[itex]x\in M^\bot\cap N^\bot.[/itex]. The other direction is obvious, so we get [itex](M\cap N)^\bot=M^\bot\cap N^\bot[/itex]
This is for the intersection, but I strongly think that I had a mistake.
 
[itex]x\in (M\cap N)^\bot[/itex] means
[itex]<x,y>=0[/itex] for all [itex]y\in M \text{ and } y\in N[/itex] and hence

[itex]x\in M^\bot\cap N^\bot.[/itex]. The other direction is obvious, so we get [itex](M\cap N)^\bot=M^\bot\cap N^\bot[/itex]
This is for the intersection, but I strongly think that I had a mistake.
 
I don't think the other inclusion is obvious.

In fact, I suspect [itex](M\cap N)^\bot = M^\bot + N^\bot[/itex]...
 
I do not know what do you mean by the sum of tow sets? and how can I prove that?
 
one can't, in general, sum two sets, but if we already have an addition defined, then:

A + B = {a+b : a is in A, b is in B}.
 
How did you guess that it is the sum of?

since my goal is to reach this equality.

How can we prove it?
 
normally, to prove 2 sets are equal, you show they contain each other.
 
  • #10
Of course, but I did not manege tp solve it!
On the other hand, [itex](M\cap N)^\bot=M^\bot+N^\bot[/itex] means [itex]M^\bot+ N^\bot\subset M^\bot\cap N^\bot[/itex], but this seems senseless, does not it?
 
  • #11
LikeMath said:
[itex]x\in (M\cap N)^\bot[/itex] means
[itex]<x,y>=0[/itex] for all [itex]y\in M \text{ and } y\in N[/itex] and hence

[itex]x\in M^\bot\cap N^\bot.[/itex]. The other direction is obvious, so we get [itex](M\cap N)^\bot=M^\bot\cap N^\bot[/itex]
This is for the intersection, but I strongly think that I had a mistake.

your definition of [itex](M\cap N)^\bot[/itex] isn't correct here.

we don't know that <x,y> = 0 for all y in M and y in N, just those y that are in the intersection. if y is in M-N, all bets are off.
 
  • #12
Oh yes, that's the problem. But the problem now how can we prove that
[itex](M\cap N)^\bot=M^\bot+N^\bot[/itex]
 
  • #13
LikeMath said:
[itex](M\cap N)^\bot=M^\bot+N^\bot[/itex]

I think we should have some contraintes on M and N, do not I?
 
Last edited:
  • #14
LikeMath said:
I think we should have some contraintes on M and N, do not I?

Yeah, M and N should both be subspaces.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
Replies
0
Views
676
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
761
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
621
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K