Prove that there is an inner product on R^2, such that the associated norm is given by: ||(x,y)||=(|x|^p+|y|^p)^(1/p) where p>0 only if p=2

Liam Potter 2022-09-17 Answered
Prove that there is an inner product on R 2 , such that the associated norm is given by:
( x , y ) ∥= ( | x | p + | y | p ) 1 p
where p>0 only if p=2So far what I have tried to do is assume there exists such an inner product for some aribtrary p, and then show that some property that holds for all inner products (e.g. the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, triangle inequality, parallelogram equality, does not hold for the inner product with the said associated norm unless p=2.
First I tried the parallelogram equality and ended up with:
( | x 1 + x 2 | p + | y 1 + y 2 | p ) 1 p = ( | x 1 | + | y 1 | ) 1 p + ( | x 2 | p + | y 2 | p ) 1 p
but I don't know how to show that this equality only holds for p=2 (although I'm pretty sure it does because I tried plugging in random values for p 2).
Since for an inner product, the parallelogram equality must hold,
u , v = 1 2 ( u + v 2 + u v 2 )
must also hold.
Using this definition of the inner product, I also tried to show a contradiction by showing that if p 2, the Cauchy-Schwarz Inequality didn't hold. However I think that's a dead end.
You can still ask an expert for help

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

Solve your problem for the price of one coffee

  • Available 24/7
  • Math expert for every subject
  • Pay only if we can solve it
Ask Question

Answers (1)

Chiecrere2f
Answered 2022-09-18 Author has 8 answers
Your parallelogram equality does not seem correct. If a norm v is given by an inner product, then
v + w 2 + v w 2 = 2 ( v 2 + w 2 )
Now just pick v=(1,0), w=(0,1), and calculate both sides with arbitrary p, then you will get an equation which holds iff p=2.

We have step-by-step solutions for your answer!

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

You might be interested in

asked 2022-04-07
1) I know that all inner product space is also a normed space with the norm induce by the scalar product, but is the reciprocal true ? I mean, is all normed space also a inner product space ?
2) I know that all normed space is a metric space with the metric induced by the norm. Is the reciprocal true ? I mean, is all metric space also a normed space ?
asked 2022-06-26
I had a question about a problem that I was working on for my pre-calculus class.

Here's the problem statement:

The area of the parallelogram with vertices 0, м , w , and v + w is 34. Find the area of the parallelogram with vertices 0, A v , A w , and A v + A w , where
A = ( 3 5 1 3 ) .
I got the answer by doing something very tedious. I set v = ( 17 0 ) and w = ( 0 2 ) , and did some really crazy matrix multiplication and a lot of plotting points of GeoGebra to get the answer of: 476 .

Now, I'm 100% sure that was not the fastest way, can someone tell me the non-bash way to do the problem?
asked 2022-06-30
How to rigorously prove that the diagonals of a parallelogram are never parallel? It is intuitively obvious, but since it is not an axiom, it is a proposition that needs to be proved. I would like to see a proof without using analytic geometry, but only the old methods of Euclidean synthetic geometry.
asked 2022-06-15
Prove | x + y | 2 + | x y | 2 = 2 | x | 2 + 2 | y | 2 if x , y R k .
Interpret this geometrically, as a statement about parallelograms.
I've shown that the expression given equates to x x + 2 x y + y y + x x 2 x y + y y. But what does this have to do with parallelograms?
asked 2022-08-18
I came across a property which I am not sure if true in general. Suppose you have a parallelogram whose vertices are v 1 , v 2 , v 3 , v 4 R 2 . Let's say that the side [ v 1 , v 4 ] is parallel to [ v 2 , v 3 ]. Is it true that
| | v 1 v 4 | | 2 < | | v 1 v 3 | | | | v 2 v 4 | | ,
that is, the square of one side is less than the product of the diagonals? I could also be just missing an obvious counterexample, but so far I can't prove it either.
asked 2022-06-14
How can we use vectors and dot products to show that the diagonals of a parallelogram intersect at 90 if and only if the figure is a rhombus?
I did the proof, but I realized my final answer would be a rectangle. (I know a rhombus is a type of rectangle, too). But I only want to prove the two diagonals are orthogonal.
asked 2022-05-10
Given a lattice Γ C , a Theta function ϑ : C C is a holomorphic function with the following property:
ϑ ( z + γ ) = e 2 i π a γ z + b γ ϑ ( z )
for every γ Γ, and a γ , b γ C .

Exercise: A Theta function never vanishes iff ϑ ( z ) = e p ( z ) with p ( z ) a polynomial of degree at most 2.

Hint: The "only if" part is trivial. The hint is: show that log ( ϑ ( z ) ) = O ( 1 + | z | 2 ). I tried to apply log on both sides, or derive one and two times, or everything I could have thought of. I don't get where the square comes from.

New questions