Why is the set of cosines and sines a vector space?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion clarifies that the set of functions {cos(mx), sin(nx)} does not form a vector space due to its lack of closure under addition. Instead, the space of their linear combinations is a vector space, where the inner product is defined as ∫π φn φm dx. The Fourier Series is significant because it provides a basis for a larger space of functions, allowing for the representation of many functions as infinite sums of these trigonometric functions, although not all functions on the interval [-π, π] can be represented this way.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of linear algebra concepts, particularly vector spaces.
  • Familiarity with inner product definitions in function spaces.
  • Knowledge of Fourier Series and their applications in mathematical analysis.
  • Basic understanding of orthogonality in function spaces.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of vector spaces in the context of function spaces.
  • Learn about the definition and implications of inner products in infinite-dimensional spaces.
  • Explore the convergence criteria for Fourier Series and their applications.
  • Investigate the concept of orthogonal bases in Hilbert spaces.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physics students, and anyone interested in advanced linear algebra, particularly those studying Fourier analysis and functional spaces.

davidbenari
Messages
466
Reaction score
18
So when I took linear algebra I was asked to show the well-known properties of orthogonality in the functions cos(mx) and sin(mx)... With this I mean all the usual combinations which I don't see why I should point out explicitly.

The inner product in the vector space was defined ##\int_{-\pi}^{\pi} \phi_n \phi_m dx ## as usual.

What I don't understand is why the space of functions ( cos(mx), sin(nx) ) (with this notation I'm pointing out all cosines and sines of integer angular frequency), is a vector space.

Namely, its not closed under addition! If I add whichever combination I won't get a function of the form cos(mx) or sin(mx) back. There'll always be a phase constant ##\Phi## or something along those lines.

Why are people so wishywashy with this? How can you define an inner product on a space of functions that doesn't form a vector space?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The set of just those trig functions is not a vector space. However, the space of their linear combinations is. It is on this space (or perhaps a larger one like square integrable functions) that the inner product you described is defined. Here that exercise shows that 1,\sin x,\cos x, \sin 2x,\cos 2x,... are orthogonal.
 
  • Like
Likes davidbenari
Oh, that makes sense. I have one question though; when you have a set of functions like this one (infinite, orthogonal, not necessarily trigonometric) do they serve as a basis for all possible functions or not necessarily?

If not, then is the Fourier Series so useful because the basis (1 sinx, cosx,...cosnx,sinnx) describes a vector space that is "very big" ?
 
Strictly speaking \{1,\sin x, \cos x,...\} is only a basis for the space of their linear combinations. However, more functions are included in your space if you allow infinite sums of these trig functions. Not every function on [-\pi,\pi]can be written as a (even infinite) sum of trig functions and the question of exactly which functions have a convergent Fourier series is quite complicated.
Fortunately, 'nice' functions (C^1 is sufficient but not necessary) can be written as their Fourier series which is enough in many applications, the first historically being to the heat equation.
 
  • Like
Likes davidbenari
I am studying the mathematical formalism behind non-commutative geometry approach to quantum gravity. I was reading about Hopf algebras and their Drinfeld twist with a specific example of the Moyal-Weyl twist defined as F=exp(-iλ/2θ^(μν)∂_μ⊗∂_ν) where λ is a constant parametar and θ antisymmetric constant tensor. {∂_μ} is the basis of the tangent vector space over the underlying spacetime Now, from my understanding the enveloping algebra which appears in the definition of the Hopf algebra...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K