Why do we use double pipes to represent the norm of a vector?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the notation used for the norm of a vector, specifically the use of double pipes (||) versus single pipes (|), and the reasoning behind the definition of matrix multiplication. Participants explore the implications of these notations and definitions in various mathematical contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the norm of a vector is denoted by ||\vec{v}|| instead of |\vec{v}| because different norms can exist in various spaces, which may not always coincide.
  • Others argue that the notation ||x|| is standard for norms, and the mapping x ↦ |x| can also represent a norm, justifying the use of double pipes.
  • A participant notes that matrix multiplication is defined in a specific way to ensure that the composition of linear transformations corresponds to the multiplication of their associated matrices.
  • Some express confusion about the reasoning behind the definition of matrix multiplication, seeking clarification on its utility and foundational principles.
  • Another participant highlights that while the definition of matrix multiplication can be intimidating, understanding vector spaces and linear functions can simplify the concept.
  • One participant emphasizes that a simpler definition of matrix multiplication, akin to matrix addition, may be less useful in practical applications.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding the definitions and notations discussed. There is no consensus on the reasoning behind the specific definition of matrix multiplication, and multiple viewpoints on the utility of different notations for norms are presented.

Contextual Notes

Some participants indicate that the mathematics involved may be complex or beyond their current understanding, suggesting a potential limitation in fully grasping the discussed concepts.

Ashiataka
Messages
21
Reaction score
1
1. Why is the norm of a vector noted by double pipes when it is just the magnitude which is notated by single pipes?

2. Does anyone know where I could find out why matrix multiplication is defined the way it is? I know how to do it, but I do not understand why it is that way.

Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
1) You define the norm of a vector as ||\vec{v}|| instead of just |\vec{v}| because, although they often coincide, this is not necessary true. In some spaces (different from euclidean ones) you can define different kinds of norm, as for example: ||\vec{v}||=\min |\vec{v(x)}|, where x is a certain variable.

2) The way the matrix product works is a definition. You define an operation and then you find al the consequences.
 
1. In this case, it doesn't matter if you write ##\|x\|## or ##|x|##. The ##\|\,\|## notation is standard for norms, and the map ##x\mapsto|x|## is a norm. This is why it makes sense to write ##\|x\|## instead of ##|x|##.
2. For this you need to understand the relationship between linear operators and matrices. See e.g. this post. (You can ignore the quote and the stuff below it). Make sure that you understand bases of vector spaces before you try to understand this. The motivation behind the definition of matrix multiplication is what I said in this post. I think I have posted more details of this somewhere else. I will try to find it... Edit: There it is.

Edit 2: Some additional comments:
  • Linear operator, linear transformation, linear map, linear function all mean the same thing. (Most of the time anyway. Some authors use the term "operator" only when the domain and codomain are the same vector space, and some use the term "function" only when the codomain is ##\mathbb R## or ##\mathbb C##).
  • The point of view that I'm advocating in these posts is that for each linear transformation ##A:U\to V##, and each pair of bases (one for U, one for V), there's a matrix [A] that corresponds to it in the following way: We take the number on row i, column j to be ##(Au_j)_i##. Here ##u_j## is the jth member of the given basis for U, and ##(Au_j)_i## is the ith component of the vector Au_j, in the given basis for V. Matrix multiplication is defined the way it is to ensure that we always have ##[A\circ B]=[A]##.
 
Last edited:
Thank you.

I understand it is a definition. But I'm asking why it is defined that way.

EDIT:
Thank you Fredrik. I shall read through those posts, though I fear the mathematics is beyond me.
 
Last edited:
Ashiataka said:
I fear the mathematics is beyond me.
The notation (in particular all the indices) may be intimidating, but if you understand vector spaces, bases, and what it means for a function to be linear, it's actually pretty easy. You need to know that the definition of matrix multiplication can be written as ##(AB)_{ij}=\sum_k A_{ik}B_{kj}##. The right-hand side is often written as ##A_{ik}B_{kj}##, especially by physicists, because it's easy enough to remember that there's always a sum over each index that appears twice.
 
Ashiataka said:
2. Does anyone know where I could find out why matrix multiplication is defined the way it is? I know how to do it, but I do not understand why it is that way.

The basic reason is "because it is a very useful way to combine two matrices". A simple example is using matrices to represent simultanous equations. If you have equations like $$\begin{align} ax + by &= p\\ cx + dy &= q\end{align}$$ that corresponds to the matrix equation $$\begin{bmatrix} a & b \\ c & d\end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix} x \\ y \end{bmatrix} = \begin{bmatrix} p \\ q \end{bmatrix}$$.
An apparently simpler definition of "multiplication" like$$\begin{bmatrix} a & b \\ c & d\end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix} p & q \\ r & s \end{bmatrix} = \begin{bmatrix} ap & bq \\ cr & ds\end{bmatrix} $$ (similar to the definition of matrix addition) turns out to be much less useful.
 
C'mon, don't delete those, it was the "best explanation ever"!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K