In $mathbb{R}^n$, is the dot product the only inner product?
$begingroup$
Just what the title says. I'm reading, from various resources, that the inner product is a generalization of the dot product. However, the only example of inner product I can find, is still the dot product.
Does another "inner product" exist on the $mathbb{R}^n$ space?
vector-spaces inner-product-space
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Just what the title says. I'm reading, from various resources, that the inner product is a generalization of the dot product. However, the only example of inner product I can find, is still the dot product.
Does another "inner product" exist on the $mathbb{R}^n$ space?
vector-spaces inner-product-space
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
This might be useful.
$endgroup$
– StackTD
Dec 14 '18 at 11:07
$begingroup$
@StackTD: thanks!!! Exactly what I was looking for
$endgroup$
– blue_note
Dec 14 '18 at 11:15
1
$begingroup$
And related: Is there a classification of the inner products on $mathbb{R}^n$ up to isomorphism?.
$endgroup$
– StackTD
Dec 14 '18 at 11:37
$begingroup$
@StackTD: thanks again
$endgroup$
– blue_note
Dec 14 '18 at 11:38
$begingroup$
As some other answers point out, there are infinitely many inner products (i.e., symmetric, positive-definite bilinear forms) on $Bbb R^n$. But for any of them one can choose a basis of $Bbb R^n$ with respect to which the bilinear form is the standard one: $({bf x}, {bf y}) = x_1 y_1 + cdots + x_n y_n$. So up to isomorphism there is only one inner product on $Bbb R^n$. (This is a special case of Sylvester's Law of Inertia.)
$endgroup$
– Travis
Dec 25 '18 at 0:51
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Just what the title says. I'm reading, from various resources, that the inner product is a generalization of the dot product. However, the only example of inner product I can find, is still the dot product.
Does another "inner product" exist on the $mathbb{R}^n$ space?
vector-spaces inner-product-space
$endgroup$
Just what the title says. I'm reading, from various resources, that the inner product is a generalization of the dot product. However, the only example of inner product I can find, is still the dot product.
Does another "inner product" exist on the $mathbb{R}^n$ space?
vector-spaces inner-product-space
vector-spaces inner-product-space
edited Dec 14 '18 at 15:19
Andrews
3551317
3551317
asked Dec 14 '18 at 11:02
blue_noteblue_note
32418
32418
1
$begingroup$
This might be useful.
$endgroup$
– StackTD
Dec 14 '18 at 11:07
$begingroup$
@StackTD: thanks!!! Exactly what I was looking for
$endgroup$
– blue_note
Dec 14 '18 at 11:15
1
$begingroup$
And related: Is there a classification of the inner products on $mathbb{R}^n$ up to isomorphism?.
$endgroup$
– StackTD
Dec 14 '18 at 11:37
$begingroup$
@StackTD: thanks again
$endgroup$
– blue_note
Dec 14 '18 at 11:38
$begingroup$
As some other answers point out, there are infinitely many inner products (i.e., symmetric, positive-definite bilinear forms) on $Bbb R^n$. But for any of them one can choose a basis of $Bbb R^n$ with respect to which the bilinear form is the standard one: $({bf x}, {bf y}) = x_1 y_1 + cdots + x_n y_n$. So up to isomorphism there is only one inner product on $Bbb R^n$. (This is a special case of Sylvester's Law of Inertia.)
$endgroup$
– Travis
Dec 25 '18 at 0:51
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
This might be useful.
$endgroup$
– StackTD
Dec 14 '18 at 11:07
$begingroup$
@StackTD: thanks!!! Exactly what I was looking for
$endgroup$
– blue_note
Dec 14 '18 at 11:15
1
$begingroup$
And related: Is there a classification of the inner products on $mathbb{R}^n$ up to isomorphism?.
$endgroup$
– StackTD
Dec 14 '18 at 11:37
$begingroup$
@StackTD: thanks again
$endgroup$
– blue_note
Dec 14 '18 at 11:38
$begingroup$
As some other answers point out, there are infinitely many inner products (i.e., symmetric, positive-definite bilinear forms) on $Bbb R^n$. But for any of them one can choose a basis of $Bbb R^n$ with respect to which the bilinear form is the standard one: $({bf x}, {bf y}) = x_1 y_1 + cdots + x_n y_n$. So up to isomorphism there is only one inner product on $Bbb R^n$. (This is a special case of Sylvester's Law of Inertia.)
$endgroup$
– Travis
Dec 25 '18 at 0:51
1
1
$begingroup$
This might be useful.
$endgroup$
– StackTD
Dec 14 '18 at 11:07
$begingroup$
This might be useful.
$endgroup$
– StackTD
Dec 14 '18 at 11:07
$begingroup$
@StackTD: thanks!!! Exactly what I was looking for
$endgroup$
– blue_note
Dec 14 '18 at 11:15
$begingroup$
@StackTD: thanks!!! Exactly what I was looking for
$endgroup$
– blue_note
Dec 14 '18 at 11:15
1
1
$begingroup$
And related: Is there a classification of the inner products on $mathbb{R}^n$ up to isomorphism?.
$endgroup$
– StackTD
Dec 14 '18 at 11:37
$begingroup$
And related: Is there a classification of the inner products on $mathbb{R}^n$ up to isomorphism?.
$endgroup$
– StackTD
Dec 14 '18 at 11:37
$begingroup$
@StackTD: thanks again
$endgroup$
– blue_note
Dec 14 '18 at 11:38
$begingroup$
@StackTD: thanks again
$endgroup$
– blue_note
Dec 14 '18 at 11:38
$begingroup$
As some other answers point out, there are infinitely many inner products (i.e., symmetric, positive-definite bilinear forms) on $Bbb R^n$. But for any of them one can choose a basis of $Bbb R^n$ with respect to which the bilinear form is the standard one: $({bf x}, {bf y}) = x_1 y_1 + cdots + x_n y_n$. So up to isomorphism there is only one inner product on $Bbb R^n$. (This is a special case of Sylvester's Law of Inertia.)
$endgroup$
– Travis
Dec 25 '18 at 0:51
$begingroup$
As some other answers point out, there are infinitely many inner products (i.e., symmetric, positive-definite bilinear forms) on $Bbb R^n$. But for any of them one can choose a basis of $Bbb R^n$ with respect to which the bilinear form is the standard one: $({bf x}, {bf y}) = x_1 y_1 + cdots + x_n y_n$. So up to isomorphism there is only one inner product on $Bbb R^n$. (This is a special case of Sylvester's Law of Inertia.)
$endgroup$
– Travis
Dec 25 '18 at 0:51
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Yes and are all in the form
$$
langle x, yrangle=x^Tcdot Acdot y
$$
where $x^T$ is the transpose vector of $x$ and $A$ is a $ntimes n$ symmetric definite positive matrix.
In fact let $langle x, yrangle$ a generic inner product on $mathbb R^n$ then for every $y$ the function
$$
f_y:xrightarrow langle x, yrangle
$$
is linear from $mathbb R^n$ to $mathbb R$ then exists a vector $alpha(y)inmathbb R^n$ such that
$$
langle x, yrangle = alpha(y)^Tcdot x
$$
Observe that
$$
langle x, ay+by'rangle = alangle x, yrangle + blangle x, y'rangleRightarrow alpha(ay+by')=aalpha(y)+balpha(y')
$$
then $alpha$ is a linear operator from $mathbb R^n$ in itself then exists an $ntimes n$ matrix $A$ such that
$$
alpha(y)=Acdot y
$$
so
$$
alpha(y)^Tcdot x=y^Tcdot A^Tcdot x
$$
Now remember that $langle x, yrangle=langle y, xrangle$ then you can easly prove that $A^T=A$ and $A$ must be symmetric.
Why now $A$ must be definite positive? Because $langle x, xranglegeq 0$ and holds equality if and only if $x=0$. Applying it to the initial formula we obtain the definition of a definite positive matrix.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
We need $A$ to be positive definite also.
$endgroup$
– littleO
Dec 14 '18 at 11:26
$begingroup$
Oh yes, I forgotten it!
$endgroup$
– P De Donato
Dec 14 '18 at 11:28
$begingroup$
Note that in some contexts, one only requires that an inner product be nondegenerate (and not necessarily positive definite).
$endgroup$
– Travis
Dec 25 '18 at 0:52
$begingroup$
If it's semidefinite positive it becomes a semi-inner product and not a inner product.
$endgroup$
– P De Donato
Dec 28 '18 at 11:30
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The dot product on $mathcal{R}^n$ is defined as follows:
$$(a,b) = a^i b^j (e_i,e_j) = a^i b^j delta_{ij} = a^i b^i ,$$
where $a,b in mathcal{R}^n$ and $e_i,e_j$ standard basis vectors. I used Einstein summation convention here.
In general we can express $a,b$ in a different basis i.e. $a=tilde{a}^i tilde{e}_i$ and $b = tilde{b}^i tilde{e}_i$ so now not the standard basis but an arbitrary basis of $mathcal{R}^n$ assuming still $(,)$ is positive-definite. This then gives:
$$(a,b) = tilde{a}^i tilde{b}^j (tilde{e}_i,tilde{e}_j) = tilde{a}^i tilde{b}^j A_{ij} equiv a^T A b.$$
Note that $A$ now is not the identity matrix like in the standard inner product.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The tensor metric allows for the vector norm to remain constant under change of basis vectors, and is an example of inner product (page 15). In the simple setting of basis vectors constant in direction and magnitude from point to point in $mathbb R^2,$ here is an example:
Changing basis vectors from Euclidean orthonormal basis $smallleft{vec e_1=begin{bmatrix}1\0 end{bmatrix},vec e_2=begin{bmatrix}0\1 end{bmatrix}right}$ to
$$ left{vec u_1=color{red}2vec e_1 + color{red}1vec e_2,quad vec u_2=color{blue}{-frac 1 2 }vec e_2+color{blue}{frac 1 4} vec e_2right}tag 1$$ would result in a different norm of the vector $vec v=begin{bmatrix} 1\1end{bmatrix}_text{e basis},$ i.e $Vert vec v Vert^2=v_1^2 + v_2^2 = 2,$ when expressed with respect to the new basis vectors.
In this regard, since vector components transform contravariantly, the change to the new coordinate system would be given by the backward transformation matrix:
$$B=begin{bmatrix} frac 1 4 & frac 1 2\-1&2end{bmatrix}$$
i.e. the inverse of the forward transformation for the basis vectors as defined in $(1),$ which in matrix form corresponds to
$$F=begin{bmatrix} color{red} 2 & color{blue}{-frac 1 2}\color{red}1& color{blue}{frac 1 4}end{bmatrix}.$$
Hence, the same vector $vec v$ expressed in the new basis vectors is
$$vec v_{text{u basis}}=begin{bmatrix} frac 1 4 & frac 1 2\-1&2end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix} 1\1end{bmatrix}=begin{bmatrix} frac 3 4\1end{bmatrix}.$$
And the norm would entail an inner product with the new metric tensor. In the orthonormal Euclidean basis this is simply the identity matrix. Now the matrix tensor is a $(0,2)-text{tensor},$ and transforms covariantly:
$$g_{text{ in u basis}}=(F^top F) I= begin{bmatrix} 2 & 1\-frac 1 2& frac 1 4end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix} 2 & -frac 1 2\1& frac 1 4end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix} 1 & 0\0& 1end{bmatrix}=begin{bmatrix} 5 & -frac 3 4\- frac 3 4& frac{5}{16}end{bmatrix}$$
The actual multiplication of basis vectors to obtain the metric tensor is explained in this presentation by @eigenchris. This metric tensor indeed renders the right norm of $vec v:$
$$begin{bmatrix}frac 3 4 & 1end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix} 5 & -frac 3 4\- frac 3 4& frac{5}{16}end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix}frac 3 4 \ 1end{bmatrix}=2$$
following the operations here.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3039219%2fin-mathbbrn-is-the-dot-product-the-only-inner-product%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Yes and are all in the form
$$
langle x, yrangle=x^Tcdot Acdot y
$$
where $x^T$ is the transpose vector of $x$ and $A$ is a $ntimes n$ symmetric definite positive matrix.
In fact let $langle x, yrangle$ a generic inner product on $mathbb R^n$ then for every $y$ the function
$$
f_y:xrightarrow langle x, yrangle
$$
is linear from $mathbb R^n$ to $mathbb R$ then exists a vector $alpha(y)inmathbb R^n$ such that
$$
langle x, yrangle = alpha(y)^Tcdot x
$$
Observe that
$$
langle x, ay+by'rangle = alangle x, yrangle + blangle x, y'rangleRightarrow alpha(ay+by')=aalpha(y)+balpha(y')
$$
then $alpha$ is a linear operator from $mathbb R^n$ in itself then exists an $ntimes n$ matrix $A$ such that
$$
alpha(y)=Acdot y
$$
so
$$
alpha(y)^Tcdot x=y^Tcdot A^Tcdot x
$$
Now remember that $langle x, yrangle=langle y, xrangle$ then you can easly prove that $A^T=A$ and $A$ must be symmetric.
Why now $A$ must be definite positive? Because $langle x, xranglegeq 0$ and holds equality if and only if $x=0$. Applying it to the initial formula we obtain the definition of a definite positive matrix.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
We need $A$ to be positive definite also.
$endgroup$
– littleO
Dec 14 '18 at 11:26
$begingroup$
Oh yes, I forgotten it!
$endgroup$
– P De Donato
Dec 14 '18 at 11:28
$begingroup$
Note that in some contexts, one only requires that an inner product be nondegenerate (and not necessarily positive definite).
$endgroup$
– Travis
Dec 25 '18 at 0:52
$begingroup$
If it's semidefinite positive it becomes a semi-inner product and not a inner product.
$endgroup$
– P De Donato
Dec 28 '18 at 11:30
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Yes and are all in the form
$$
langle x, yrangle=x^Tcdot Acdot y
$$
where $x^T$ is the transpose vector of $x$ and $A$ is a $ntimes n$ symmetric definite positive matrix.
In fact let $langle x, yrangle$ a generic inner product on $mathbb R^n$ then for every $y$ the function
$$
f_y:xrightarrow langle x, yrangle
$$
is linear from $mathbb R^n$ to $mathbb R$ then exists a vector $alpha(y)inmathbb R^n$ such that
$$
langle x, yrangle = alpha(y)^Tcdot x
$$
Observe that
$$
langle x, ay+by'rangle = alangle x, yrangle + blangle x, y'rangleRightarrow alpha(ay+by')=aalpha(y)+balpha(y')
$$
then $alpha$ is a linear operator from $mathbb R^n$ in itself then exists an $ntimes n$ matrix $A$ such that
$$
alpha(y)=Acdot y
$$
so
$$
alpha(y)^Tcdot x=y^Tcdot A^Tcdot x
$$
Now remember that $langle x, yrangle=langle y, xrangle$ then you can easly prove that $A^T=A$ and $A$ must be symmetric.
Why now $A$ must be definite positive? Because $langle x, xranglegeq 0$ and holds equality if and only if $x=0$. Applying it to the initial formula we obtain the definition of a definite positive matrix.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
We need $A$ to be positive definite also.
$endgroup$
– littleO
Dec 14 '18 at 11:26
$begingroup$
Oh yes, I forgotten it!
$endgroup$
– P De Donato
Dec 14 '18 at 11:28
$begingroup$
Note that in some contexts, one only requires that an inner product be nondegenerate (and not necessarily positive definite).
$endgroup$
– Travis
Dec 25 '18 at 0:52
$begingroup$
If it's semidefinite positive it becomes a semi-inner product and not a inner product.
$endgroup$
– P De Donato
Dec 28 '18 at 11:30
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Yes and are all in the form
$$
langle x, yrangle=x^Tcdot Acdot y
$$
where $x^T$ is the transpose vector of $x$ and $A$ is a $ntimes n$ symmetric definite positive matrix.
In fact let $langle x, yrangle$ a generic inner product on $mathbb R^n$ then for every $y$ the function
$$
f_y:xrightarrow langle x, yrangle
$$
is linear from $mathbb R^n$ to $mathbb R$ then exists a vector $alpha(y)inmathbb R^n$ such that
$$
langle x, yrangle = alpha(y)^Tcdot x
$$
Observe that
$$
langle x, ay+by'rangle = alangle x, yrangle + blangle x, y'rangleRightarrow alpha(ay+by')=aalpha(y)+balpha(y')
$$
then $alpha$ is a linear operator from $mathbb R^n$ in itself then exists an $ntimes n$ matrix $A$ such that
$$
alpha(y)=Acdot y
$$
so
$$
alpha(y)^Tcdot x=y^Tcdot A^Tcdot x
$$
Now remember that $langle x, yrangle=langle y, xrangle$ then you can easly prove that $A^T=A$ and $A$ must be symmetric.
Why now $A$ must be definite positive? Because $langle x, xranglegeq 0$ and holds equality if and only if $x=0$. Applying it to the initial formula we obtain the definition of a definite positive matrix.
$endgroup$
Yes and are all in the form
$$
langle x, yrangle=x^Tcdot Acdot y
$$
where $x^T$ is the transpose vector of $x$ and $A$ is a $ntimes n$ symmetric definite positive matrix.
In fact let $langle x, yrangle$ a generic inner product on $mathbb R^n$ then for every $y$ the function
$$
f_y:xrightarrow langle x, yrangle
$$
is linear from $mathbb R^n$ to $mathbb R$ then exists a vector $alpha(y)inmathbb R^n$ such that
$$
langle x, yrangle = alpha(y)^Tcdot x
$$
Observe that
$$
langle x, ay+by'rangle = alangle x, yrangle + blangle x, y'rangleRightarrow alpha(ay+by')=aalpha(y)+balpha(y')
$$
then $alpha$ is a linear operator from $mathbb R^n$ in itself then exists an $ntimes n$ matrix $A$ such that
$$
alpha(y)=Acdot y
$$
so
$$
alpha(y)^Tcdot x=y^Tcdot A^Tcdot x
$$
Now remember that $langle x, yrangle=langle y, xrangle$ then you can easly prove that $A^T=A$ and $A$ must be symmetric.
Why now $A$ must be definite positive? Because $langle x, xranglegeq 0$ and holds equality if and only if $x=0$. Applying it to the initial formula we obtain the definition of a definite positive matrix.
edited Dec 25 '18 at 0:33
answered Dec 14 '18 at 11:24
P De DonatoP De Donato
4897
4897
$begingroup$
We need $A$ to be positive definite also.
$endgroup$
– littleO
Dec 14 '18 at 11:26
$begingroup$
Oh yes, I forgotten it!
$endgroup$
– P De Donato
Dec 14 '18 at 11:28
$begingroup$
Note that in some contexts, one only requires that an inner product be nondegenerate (and not necessarily positive definite).
$endgroup$
– Travis
Dec 25 '18 at 0:52
$begingroup$
If it's semidefinite positive it becomes a semi-inner product and not a inner product.
$endgroup$
– P De Donato
Dec 28 '18 at 11:30
add a comment |
$begingroup$
We need $A$ to be positive definite also.
$endgroup$
– littleO
Dec 14 '18 at 11:26
$begingroup$
Oh yes, I forgotten it!
$endgroup$
– P De Donato
Dec 14 '18 at 11:28
$begingroup$
Note that in some contexts, one only requires that an inner product be nondegenerate (and not necessarily positive definite).
$endgroup$
– Travis
Dec 25 '18 at 0:52
$begingroup$
If it's semidefinite positive it becomes a semi-inner product and not a inner product.
$endgroup$
– P De Donato
Dec 28 '18 at 11:30
$begingroup$
We need $A$ to be positive definite also.
$endgroup$
– littleO
Dec 14 '18 at 11:26
$begingroup$
We need $A$ to be positive definite also.
$endgroup$
– littleO
Dec 14 '18 at 11:26
$begingroup$
Oh yes, I forgotten it!
$endgroup$
– P De Donato
Dec 14 '18 at 11:28
$begingroup$
Oh yes, I forgotten it!
$endgroup$
– P De Donato
Dec 14 '18 at 11:28
$begingroup$
Note that in some contexts, one only requires that an inner product be nondegenerate (and not necessarily positive definite).
$endgroup$
– Travis
Dec 25 '18 at 0:52
$begingroup$
Note that in some contexts, one only requires that an inner product be nondegenerate (and not necessarily positive definite).
$endgroup$
– Travis
Dec 25 '18 at 0:52
$begingroup$
If it's semidefinite positive it becomes a semi-inner product and not a inner product.
$endgroup$
– P De Donato
Dec 28 '18 at 11:30
$begingroup$
If it's semidefinite positive it becomes a semi-inner product and not a inner product.
$endgroup$
– P De Donato
Dec 28 '18 at 11:30
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The dot product on $mathcal{R}^n$ is defined as follows:
$$(a,b) = a^i b^j (e_i,e_j) = a^i b^j delta_{ij} = a^i b^i ,$$
where $a,b in mathcal{R}^n$ and $e_i,e_j$ standard basis vectors. I used Einstein summation convention here.
In general we can express $a,b$ in a different basis i.e. $a=tilde{a}^i tilde{e}_i$ and $b = tilde{b}^i tilde{e}_i$ so now not the standard basis but an arbitrary basis of $mathcal{R}^n$ assuming still $(,)$ is positive-definite. This then gives:
$$(a,b) = tilde{a}^i tilde{b}^j (tilde{e}_i,tilde{e}_j) = tilde{a}^i tilde{b}^j A_{ij} equiv a^T A b.$$
Note that $A$ now is not the identity matrix like in the standard inner product.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The dot product on $mathcal{R}^n$ is defined as follows:
$$(a,b) = a^i b^j (e_i,e_j) = a^i b^j delta_{ij} = a^i b^i ,$$
where $a,b in mathcal{R}^n$ and $e_i,e_j$ standard basis vectors. I used Einstein summation convention here.
In general we can express $a,b$ in a different basis i.e. $a=tilde{a}^i tilde{e}_i$ and $b = tilde{b}^i tilde{e}_i$ so now not the standard basis but an arbitrary basis of $mathcal{R}^n$ assuming still $(,)$ is positive-definite. This then gives:
$$(a,b) = tilde{a}^i tilde{b}^j (tilde{e}_i,tilde{e}_j) = tilde{a}^i tilde{b}^j A_{ij} equiv a^T A b.$$
Note that $A$ now is not the identity matrix like in the standard inner product.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The dot product on $mathcal{R}^n$ is defined as follows:
$$(a,b) = a^i b^j (e_i,e_j) = a^i b^j delta_{ij} = a^i b^i ,$$
where $a,b in mathcal{R}^n$ and $e_i,e_j$ standard basis vectors. I used Einstein summation convention here.
In general we can express $a,b$ in a different basis i.e. $a=tilde{a}^i tilde{e}_i$ and $b = tilde{b}^i tilde{e}_i$ so now not the standard basis but an arbitrary basis of $mathcal{R}^n$ assuming still $(,)$ is positive-definite. This then gives:
$$(a,b) = tilde{a}^i tilde{b}^j (tilde{e}_i,tilde{e}_j) = tilde{a}^i tilde{b}^j A_{ij} equiv a^T A b.$$
Note that $A$ now is not the identity matrix like in the standard inner product.
$endgroup$
The dot product on $mathcal{R}^n$ is defined as follows:
$$(a,b) = a^i b^j (e_i,e_j) = a^i b^j delta_{ij} = a^i b^i ,$$
where $a,b in mathcal{R}^n$ and $e_i,e_j$ standard basis vectors. I used Einstein summation convention here.
In general we can express $a,b$ in a different basis i.e. $a=tilde{a}^i tilde{e}_i$ and $b = tilde{b}^i tilde{e}_i$ so now not the standard basis but an arbitrary basis of $mathcal{R}^n$ assuming still $(,)$ is positive-definite. This then gives:
$$(a,b) = tilde{a}^i tilde{b}^j (tilde{e}_i,tilde{e}_j) = tilde{a}^i tilde{b}^j A_{ij} equiv a^T A b.$$
Note that $A$ now is not the identity matrix like in the standard inner product.
edited Dec 25 '18 at 14:36
answered Dec 14 '18 at 11:33
DaniDani
28210
28210
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The tensor metric allows for the vector norm to remain constant under change of basis vectors, and is an example of inner product (page 15). In the simple setting of basis vectors constant in direction and magnitude from point to point in $mathbb R^2,$ here is an example:
Changing basis vectors from Euclidean orthonormal basis $smallleft{vec e_1=begin{bmatrix}1\0 end{bmatrix},vec e_2=begin{bmatrix}0\1 end{bmatrix}right}$ to
$$ left{vec u_1=color{red}2vec e_1 + color{red}1vec e_2,quad vec u_2=color{blue}{-frac 1 2 }vec e_2+color{blue}{frac 1 4} vec e_2right}tag 1$$ would result in a different norm of the vector $vec v=begin{bmatrix} 1\1end{bmatrix}_text{e basis},$ i.e $Vert vec v Vert^2=v_1^2 + v_2^2 = 2,$ when expressed with respect to the new basis vectors.
In this regard, since vector components transform contravariantly, the change to the new coordinate system would be given by the backward transformation matrix:
$$B=begin{bmatrix} frac 1 4 & frac 1 2\-1&2end{bmatrix}$$
i.e. the inverse of the forward transformation for the basis vectors as defined in $(1),$ which in matrix form corresponds to
$$F=begin{bmatrix} color{red} 2 & color{blue}{-frac 1 2}\color{red}1& color{blue}{frac 1 4}end{bmatrix}.$$
Hence, the same vector $vec v$ expressed in the new basis vectors is
$$vec v_{text{u basis}}=begin{bmatrix} frac 1 4 & frac 1 2\-1&2end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix} 1\1end{bmatrix}=begin{bmatrix} frac 3 4\1end{bmatrix}.$$
And the norm would entail an inner product with the new metric tensor. In the orthonormal Euclidean basis this is simply the identity matrix. Now the matrix tensor is a $(0,2)-text{tensor},$ and transforms covariantly:
$$g_{text{ in u basis}}=(F^top F) I= begin{bmatrix} 2 & 1\-frac 1 2& frac 1 4end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix} 2 & -frac 1 2\1& frac 1 4end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix} 1 & 0\0& 1end{bmatrix}=begin{bmatrix} 5 & -frac 3 4\- frac 3 4& frac{5}{16}end{bmatrix}$$
The actual multiplication of basis vectors to obtain the metric tensor is explained in this presentation by @eigenchris. This metric tensor indeed renders the right norm of $vec v:$
$$begin{bmatrix}frac 3 4 & 1end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix} 5 & -frac 3 4\- frac 3 4& frac{5}{16}end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix}frac 3 4 \ 1end{bmatrix}=2$$
following the operations here.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The tensor metric allows for the vector norm to remain constant under change of basis vectors, and is an example of inner product (page 15). In the simple setting of basis vectors constant in direction and magnitude from point to point in $mathbb R^2,$ here is an example:
Changing basis vectors from Euclidean orthonormal basis $smallleft{vec e_1=begin{bmatrix}1\0 end{bmatrix},vec e_2=begin{bmatrix}0\1 end{bmatrix}right}$ to
$$ left{vec u_1=color{red}2vec e_1 + color{red}1vec e_2,quad vec u_2=color{blue}{-frac 1 2 }vec e_2+color{blue}{frac 1 4} vec e_2right}tag 1$$ would result in a different norm of the vector $vec v=begin{bmatrix} 1\1end{bmatrix}_text{e basis},$ i.e $Vert vec v Vert^2=v_1^2 + v_2^2 = 2,$ when expressed with respect to the new basis vectors.
In this regard, since vector components transform contravariantly, the change to the new coordinate system would be given by the backward transformation matrix:
$$B=begin{bmatrix} frac 1 4 & frac 1 2\-1&2end{bmatrix}$$
i.e. the inverse of the forward transformation for the basis vectors as defined in $(1),$ which in matrix form corresponds to
$$F=begin{bmatrix} color{red} 2 & color{blue}{-frac 1 2}\color{red}1& color{blue}{frac 1 4}end{bmatrix}.$$
Hence, the same vector $vec v$ expressed in the new basis vectors is
$$vec v_{text{u basis}}=begin{bmatrix} frac 1 4 & frac 1 2\-1&2end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix} 1\1end{bmatrix}=begin{bmatrix} frac 3 4\1end{bmatrix}.$$
And the norm would entail an inner product with the new metric tensor. In the orthonormal Euclidean basis this is simply the identity matrix. Now the matrix tensor is a $(0,2)-text{tensor},$ and transforms covariantly:
$$g_{text{ in u basis}}=(F^top F) I= begin{bmatrix} 2 & 1\-frac 1 2& frac 1 4end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix} 2 & -frac 1 2\1& frac 1 4end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix} 1 & 0\0& 1end{bmatrix}=begin{bmatrix} 5 & -frac 3 4\- frac 3 4& frac{5}{16}end{bmatrix}$$
The actual multiplication of basis vectors to obtain the metric tensor is explained in this presentation by @eigenchris. This metric tensor indeed renders the right norm of $vec v:$
$$begin{bmatrix}frac 3 4 & 1end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix} 5 & -frac 3 4\- frac 3 4& frac{5}{16}end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix}frac 3 4 \ 1end{bmatrix}=2$$
following the operations here.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The tensor metric allows for the vector norm to remain constant under change of basis vectors, and is an example of inner product (page 15). In the simple setting of basis vectors constant in direction and magnitude from point to point in $mathbb R^2,$ here is an example:
Changing basis vectors from Euclidean orthonormal basis $smallleft{vec e_1=begin{bmatrix}1\0 end{bmatrix},vec e_2=begin{bmatrix}0\1 end{bmatrix}right}$ to
$$ left{vec u_1=color{red}2vec e_1 + color{red}1vec e_2,quad vec u_2=color{blue}{-frac 1 2 }vec e_2+color{blue}{frac 1 4} vec e_2right}tag 1$$ would result in a different norm of the vector $vec v=begin{bmatrix} 1\1end{bmatrix}_text{e basis},$ i.e $Vert vec v Vert^2=v_1^2 + v_2^2 = 2,$ when expressed with respect to the new basis vectors.
In this regard, since vector components transform contravariantly, the change to the new coordinate system would be given by the backward transformation matrix:
$$B=begin{bmatrix} frac 1 4 & frac 1 2\-1&2end{bmatrix}$$
i.e. the inverse of the forward transformation for the basis vectors as defined in $(1),$ which in matrix form corresponds to
$$F=begin{bmatrix} color{red} 2 & color{blue}{-frac 1 2}\color{red}1& color{blue}{frac 1 4}end{bmatrix}.$$
Hence, the same vector $vec v$ expressed in the new basis vectors is
$$vec v_{text{u basis}}=begin{bmatrix} frac 1 4 & frac 1 2\-1&2end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix} 1\1end{bmatrix}=begin{bmatrix} frac 3 4\1end{bmatrix}.$$
And the norm would entail an inner product with the new metric tensor. In the orthonormal Euclidean basis this is simply the identity matrix. Now the matrix tensor is a $(0,2)-text{tensor},$ and transforms covariantly:
$$g_{text{ in u basis}}=(F^top F) I= begin{bmatrix} 2 & 1\-frac 1 2& frac 1 4end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix} 2 & -frac 1 2\1& frac 1 4end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix} 1 & 0\0& 1end{bmatrix}=begin{bmatrix} 5 & -frac 3 4\- frac 3 4& frac{5}{16}end{bmatrix}$$
The actual multiplication of basis vectors to obtain the metric tensor is explained in this presentation by @eigenchris. This metric tensor indeed renders the right norm of $vec v:$
$$begin{bmatrix}frac 3 4 & 1end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix} 5 & -frac 3 4\- frac 3 4& frac{5}{16}end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix}frac 3 4 \ 1end{bmatrix}=2$$
following the operations here.
$endgroup$
The tensor metric allows for the vector norm to remain constant under change of basis vectors, and is an example of inner product (page 15). In the simple setting of basis vectors constant in direction and magnitude from point to point in $mathbb R^2,$ here is an example:
Changing basis vectors from Euclidean orthonormal basis $smallleft{vec e_1=begin{bmatrix}1\0 end{bmatrix},vec e_2=begin{bmatrix}0\1 end{bmatrix}right}$ to
$$ left{vec u_1=color{red}2vec e_1 + color{red}1vec e_2,quad vec u_2=color{blue}{-frac 1 2 }vec e_2+color{blue}{frac 1 4} vec e_2right}tag 1$$ would result in a different norm of the vector $vec v=begin{bmatrix} 1\1end{bmatrix}_text{e basis},$ i.e $Vert vec v Vert^2=v_1^2 + v_2^2 = 2,$ when expressed with respect to the new basis vectors.
In this regard, since vector components transform contravariantly, the change to the new coordinate system would be given by the backward transformation matrix:
$$B=begin{bmatrix} frac 1 4 & frac 1 2\-1&2end{bmatrix}$$
i.e. the inverse of the forward transformation for the basis vectors as defined in $(1),$ which in matrix form corresponds to
$$F=begin{bmatrix} color{red} 2 & color{blue}{-frac 1 2}\color{red}1& color{blue}{frac 1 4}end{bmatrix}.$$
Hence, the same vector $vec v$ expressed in the new basis vectors is
$$vec v_{text{u basis}}=begin{bmatrix} frac 1 4 & frac 1 2\-1&2end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix} 1\1end{bmatrix}=begin{bmatrix} frac 3 4\1end{bmatrix}.$$
And the norm would entail an inner product with the new metric tensor. In the orthonormal Euclidean basis this is simply the identity matrix. Now the matrix tensor is a $(0,2)-text{tensor},$ and transforms covariantly:
$$g_{text{ in u basis}}=(F^top F) I= begin{bmatrix} 2 & 1\-frac 1 2& frac 1 4end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix} 2 & -frac 1 2\1& frac 1 4end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix} 1 & 0\0& 1end{bmatrix}=begin{bmatrix} 5 & -frac 3 4\- frac 3 4& frac{5}{16}end{bmatrix}$$
The actual multiplication of basis vectors to obtain the metric tensor is explained in this presentation by @eigenchris. This metric tensor indeed renders the right norm of $vec v:$
$$begin{bmatrix}frac 3 4 & 1end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix} 5 & -frac 3 4\- frac 3 4& frac{5}{16}end{bmatrix}begin{bmatrix}frac 3 4 \ 1end{bmatrix}=2$$
following the operations here.
edited Dec 16 '18 at 1:49
answered Dec 15 '18 at 22:57
Antoni ParelladaAntoni Parellada
2,96521341
2,96521341
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3039219%2fin-mathbbrn-is-the-dot-product-the-only-inner-product%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
$begingroup$
This might be useful.
$endgroup$
– StackTD
Dec 14 '18 at 11:07
$begingroup$
@StackTD: thanks!!! Exactly what I was looking for
$endgroup$
– blue_note
Dec 14 '18 at 11:15
1
$begingroup$
And related: Is there a classification of the inner products on $mathbb{R}^n$ up to isomorphism?.
$endgroup$
– StackTD
Dec 14 '18 at 11:37
$begingroup$
@StackTD: thanks again
$endgroup$
– blue_note
Dec 14 '18 at 11:38
$begingroup$
As some other answers point out, there are infinitely many inner products (i.e., symmetric, positive-definite bilinear forms) on $Bbb R^n$. But for any of them one can choose a basis of $Bbb R^n$ with respect to which the bilinear form is the standard one: $({bf x}, {bf y}) = x_1 y_1 + cdots + x_n y_n$. So up to isomorphism there is only one inner product on $Bbb R^n$. (This is a special case of Sylvester's Law of Inertia.)
$endgroup$
– Travis
Dec 25 '18 at 0:51