Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun. Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ • π ƒ -¹ ² ³ °
| |
|
|
You are not logged in. #1 2009-02-06 10:11:19
Cauchy–Schwarz–Bunyakovsky inequalityToday I learned from Introduction to Metric and Topological Spaces by W.A. Sutherland a version of the Cauchy–Schwarz inequality involving integrals. It goes by the funny name of Cauchy–Schwarz–Bunyakovsky inequality. for al real numbers . Proof: The inequality is obviously true if . Hence we may assume that at least one is not 0. Then Treating the LHS as a quadratic in , we see that its discriminant cannot be positive. This is the proof given in Introduction to Metric and Topological Spaces. The integral version is as follows. The proof is similar to the Cauchy–Schwarz case, only this time you start with Last edited by JaneFairfax (2009-02-07 02:32:01) #3 2009-02-06 23:56:02
Re: Cauchy–Schwarz–Bunyakovsky inequality
I don't follow this part. Why can't the discriminant be positive? Wrap it in bacon #4 2009-02-07 00:04:20
Re: Cauchy–Schwarz–Bunyakovsky inequalityBecause then the quadratic equation LHS = 0 would have two distinct real roots and the LHS would be negative between these roots. Last edited by JaneFairfax (2009-02-07 00:36:09) #5 2009-02-07 00:09:12
Re: Cauchy–Schwarz–Bunyakovsky inequality
The fact that the quadratic is always greater than or equal to 0 means that it must have at most one real root. Last edited by Daniel123 (2009-02-07 00:10:35) #6 2009-02-07 03:14:03
Re: Cauchy–Schwarz–Bunyakovsky inequalityI'm an idiot. Thanks for the explanation. Wrap it in bacon #7 2009-02-07 06:01:18
Re: Cauchy–Schwarz–Bunyakovsky inequality
That is rather odd, normally I've heard it referred to as the Cauchy-Schwarz special case of Holder's inequality, where Holder's inequality is: Where 1/p + 1/q = 1. Of course, Cauchy-Schwarz is the special case with p = q = 2. "In the real world, this would be a problem. But in mathematics, we can just define a place where this problem doesn't exist. So we'll go ahead and do that now..." #8 2009-02-08 08:26:59
Re: Cauchy–Schwarz–Bunyakovsky inequalityThat's nice. I remember we have a similar proof in Calculus for multi-variable function's Taylor expansion. It adds in lamda as well. Such method is called "adding parameter", which shares the same delicacy as adding a line to solve geometry problems. X'(y-Xβ)=0 #10 2010-09-27 23:06:44
Re: Cauchy–Schwarz–Bunyakovsky inequality...hi jane #11 2010-09-27 23:08:05
Re: Cauchy–Schwarz–Bunyakovsky inequality..iam really in need of a solution to this problem please reply soon #12 2010-10-05 21:24:11
Re: Cauchy–Schwarz–Bunyakovsky inequalityJane has already stopped discussing serious topics. X'(y-Xβ)=0 #13 2010-10-05 21:40:37
Re: Cauchy–Schwarz–Bunyakovsky inequalityHi George,Y; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. Probability is the most important concept in modern science, especially as nobody has the slightest notion what it means. 90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics. #14 2010-11-17 11:56:45
Re: Cauchy–Schwarz–Bunyakovsky inequalityBasically, the roots cannot be real. Consider the quadratic equation as a parabola. If the equation has real roots then it crosses the x axis twice and has negative values between them, but we know that our quadratic function cannot be negative, so the roots have to be imaginary and so the discriminant has to be less than zero. #15 2010-11-26 23:46:50
Re: Cauchy–Schwarz–Bunyakovsky inequality
Last edited by JaneFairfax (2010-12-22 06:37:00) |