What is the orthonormal basis for P2(R) using Gram-Schmidt and T*?

  • Thread starter Thread starter quasar_4
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on finding an orthonormal basis for the polynomial space P2(R) using the Gram-Schmidt orthogonalization process, with the inner product defined as = integral f(t)g(t) dt from 0 to 1. The user initially attempted to apply Gram-Schmidt to the standard basis {1, x, x^2} and produced an orthonormal basis B = {1, (3^1/2)*2*(x - 1/2), (12/1009)(x^2 - (9/4)x - 1/3)*(5045)^1/2}. However, they encountered issues with the inner product not yielding zero for the first two vectors, indicating a potential error in their calculations. The user ultimately resolved their confusion regarding the normalization process and confirmed the correctness of their orthonormal basis.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of polynomial spaces, specifically P2(R)
  • Familiarity with the Gram-Schmidt orthogonalization process
  • Knowledge of inner product spaces and their properties
  • Basic calculus, particularly integration techniques
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Gram-Schmidt process in detail, focusing on its application to polynomial bases
  • Learn about inner product spaces and their significance in functional analysis
  • Explore the properties of Legendre polynomials and their relation to orthonormal bases
  • Investigate matrix representations of linear transformations in polynomial spaces
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students studying linear algebra or functional analysis, and anyone interested in orthogonal polynomials and their applications in mathematical modeling.

quasar_4
Messages
273
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Find an orthonormal basis for P2(R) using the Gram-Schmidt orthogonalization process, with the inner product defined by <f,g> = integral f(t)g(t) dt from 0 to 1. Then, if T(f) = f '' (1) + x*f (0), find T*(f).

Homework Equations



Given a basis a = {w1, w2, ... , wn}, we compute the orthonormal basis B = {v1, v2,...,vn} by Gram-Schmidt:

v1=w1

v2= w2 - (<w2, v1>/(<v1,v1>^2))*v1

v3 = w3 - (<w3, v1>/(<v1,v1>^2))*v1 - <w3, v2>/(<v2,v2>^2))*v2

The Attempt at a Solution



I just need someone to verify this and tell me if I'm right. I'm a bit confused at how this is so much more complex then the case when the integral is from -1 to 1 (that will just give you the Legendre polynomials and I'm able to compute them just fine). When I used the standard ordered basis {1,x,x^2} with Gram Schmidt, I got this:

B = {1, (3^1/2)*2*(x - 1/2), (12/1009)(x^2 - (9/4)x - 1/3)*(5045)^1/2}

which is REALLY ugly. :eek: I don't think this works, as I keep trying to take the inner product of v1 and v2, but I don't get zero... but I also don't see any mistakes in my work, so I don't know.

If I could just get this orthonormal basis, then I know I just need to get the matrix representation of T which would be really easy, and then take its transpose. From that point, I'm not sure how to get from the matrix [T*]B back into an expression T*(f).

Please help! Even if someone just knows what the correct orthonormal basis for this inner product is.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your version of Gram-Schmidt doesn't look quite like I know it. Don't you subtract all of the projections of the previous vectors and then normalize the result (as in the wikipedia exposition)? The first and second vectors in your results look fine, but the third one is way off.
 
Last edited:
aha, I see now, I was squaring a norm when I shouldn't have been... it seems to work fine now! Finally... thanks!
 
As for finding T in matrix form instead of finding an orthonormal basis you could always just see how T acts on ax^2 +bx + c and then correlate that with a 3-tuple.

Then you just easily extrapolate a 3x3 matrix wrt the standard basis on R_3 (Which is orthonormal anyways).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
8K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K