Norm of a Bounded Linear Functional

In summary, the problem asks to find the norm of a bounded linear functional on a finite dimensional linear space with a given basis. Using the given theorem, the norm can be expressed as the supremum of a fraction involving the norm of the functional and the norm of the basis elements. By using the Holder's inequality, it can be simplified to the norm of the functional being equal to the \(q\)-norm of the norm of the basis elements. Some further details need to be considered, but this is the general approach to finding the norm.
  • #1
Sudharaka
Gold Member
MHB
1,568
1
Hi everyone, :)

Here's a question with my answer, but I just want to confirm whether this is correct. The answer seems so obvious that I just thought that maybe this is not what the question asks for. Anyway, hope you can give some ideas on this one.

Problem:

Let \(X\) be a finite dimensional linear space. Let \(x_1,\,\cdots,\,x_n\) be a basis of \(X\). Define the norm,

\[\|x\|_p=\left\|\sum_{i=1}^{n}a_i x_i\right\|_p=\|(a_1,\,\cdots,\,a_n)\|_p\]

If \(f\) is a bounded linear functional on \(X\), find the norm \(\|f\|\).

My Answer:

We have been given the following theorem;

Let \((X,\,\|\cdot\|_X)\) and \((Y,\,\|\cdot\|_{Y})\) be two normed linear spaces over \(F\) and \(B(X,\,Y)\) denote the set of all bounded linear functions from \(X\) to \(Y\). Then the function \(\|\cdot\|:\,B(X,Y)\rightarrow\mathbb{R}\) defined by,

\[\|T\|=\sup_{x\in X,\, \|x\|_X\neq 0}\frac{\|T(x)\|_Y}{\|x\|_X}\]

for \(T\in B(X,\,Y)\) is a norm on \(B(X,\,Y)\).

From the above theorem we know that the set of all bounded linear functionals, \(B(X,\,\mathbb{R})\) has the norm,

\[\|f\|=\sup_{x\in X,\, \|x\|_p\neq 0}\frac{|f(x)|}{\|x\|_p}=\sup_{x\in X,\, \|x\|_p\neq 0}\frac{|f(x)|}{\left(\sum_{i=1}^{n}|a_i|^p\right)^{1/p}}\]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Sudharaka said:
From the above theorem we know that the set of all bounded linear functionals, \(B(X,\,\mathbb{R})\) has the norm,

\[\|f\|=\sup_{x\in X,\, \|x\|_p\neq 0}\frac{|f(x)|}{\|x\|_p}=\sup_{x\in X,\, \|x\|_p\neq 0}\frac{|f(x)|}{\left(\sum_{i=1}^{n}|a_i|^p\right)^{1/p}}\]
That's the definition of $\|f\|$. You probably have to express it in terms of $f$ and $x_1,\dots,x_n$,
 
  • #3
Evgeny.Makarov said:
That's the definition of $\|f\|$. You probably have to express it in terms of $f$ and $x_1,\dots,x_n$,

Thanks very much for the reply. Well I can substitute \(x=a_1 x_1+\cdots+a_n x_n\) and get,

\[\|f\|=\sup_{x\in X,\, \|x\|_p\neq 0}\frac{|f(x)|}{\left(\sum_{i=1}^{n}|a_i|^p\right) ^{1/p}}=\sup_{x\in X,\, \|x\|_p\neq 0}\frac{|a_1 f(x_1)+\cdots+a_n f(x_n)|}{\left(\sum_{i=1}^{n}|a_i|^p\right) ^{1/p}}\]

But can I simplify any more? I don't think so. Correct? :)
 
  • #4
You may because you need to find not what this fraction equals, but what its supremum is. Could it be that $\|f\|=\max(\|f(x_1)\|,\dots,\|f(x_n)\|)$? I just don't remember this stuff very well.
 
  • #5
At a first glance, without thinking about it carefully, I would assume that the dual of a $p$-norm ought to be a $q$-norm, where \(\displaystyle \frac1p + \frac1q = 1.\) So my guess is that \(\displaystyle \|f\| = \Bigl(\sum_{i=1}^n|f(x_i)|^q\Bigr)^{\!1/q}.\)
 
  • #6
Opalg said:
At a first glance, without thinking about it carefully, I would assume that the dual of a $p$-norm ought to be a $q$-norm, where \(\displaystyle \frac1p + \frac1q = 1.\) So my guess is that \(\displaystyle \|f\| = \Bigl(\sum_{i=1}^n|f(x_i)|^q\Bigr)^{\!1/q}.\)

I don't know if there's a false in this argument and if there is please let me know,

\begin{eqnarray}

\|f\|&=&\sup_{x\in X,\, \|x\|_p\neq 0}\frac{|f(x)|}{\|x\|_p}\\

&=&\sup_{x\in X,\, \|x\|_p\neq 0}\frac{|f(x)|}{\left(\sum_{i=1}^{n}|a_i|^p\right) ^{1/p}}\\

&=&\sup_{x\in X,\, \|x\|_p\neq 0}\frac{\left|\sum_{i=1}^{n}a_i f(x_i)\right|}{\left(\sum_{i=1}^{n}|a_i|^p\right) ^{1/p}}

\end{eqnarray}

By the Holder's inequality we get,

\[\left|\sum_{i=1}^{n}a_i f(x_i)\right|\leq\sum_{i=1}^{n}\left|a_i f(x_i)\right|\leq \left(\sum_{i=1}^{n}\left|a_i\right|^p\right)^{1/p}\left(\sum_{i=1}^{n}\left|f(x_i)\right|^q\right)^{1/q}\]

So we see that for a proper choice of \(x\) we can make,

\[\left|\sum_{i=1}^{n}a_i f(x_i)\right|=\left(\sum_{i=1}^{n}\left|a_i\right|^p\right)^{1/p}\left(\sum_{i=1}^{n}\left|f(x_i)\right|^q\right)^{1/q}\]

Therefore,

\[\|f\|=\left(\sum_{i=1}^{n}\left|f(x_i)\right|^q \right)^{1/q}\]
 
  • #7
Sudharaka said:
I don't know if there's a false in this argument and if there is please let me know,

\begin{eqnarray}

\|f\|&=&\sup_{x\in X,\, \|x\|_p\neq 0}\frac{|f(x)|}{\|x\|_p}\\

&=&\sup_{x\in X,\, \|x\|_p\neq 0}\frac{|f(x)|}{\left(\sum_{i=1}^{n}|a_i|^p\right) ^{1/p}}\\

&=&\sup_{x\in X,\, \|x\|_p\neq 0}\frac{\left|\sum_{i=1}^{n}a_i f(x_i)\right|}{\left(\sum_{i=1}^{n}|a_i|^p\right) ^{1/p}}

\end{eqnarray}

By the Holder's inequality we get,

\[\left|\sum_{i=1}^{n}a_i f(x_i)\right|\leq\sum_{i=1}^{n}\left|a_i f(x_i)\right|\leq \left(\sum_{i=1}^{n}\left|a_i\right|^p\right)^{1/p}\left(\sum_{i=1}^{n}\left|f(x_i)\right|^q\right)^{1/q}\]

So we see that for a proper choice of \(x\) we can make,

\[\left|\sum_{i=1}^{n}a_i f(x_i)\right|=\left(\sum_{i=1}^{n}\left|a_i\right|^p\right)^{1/p}\left(\sum_{i=1}^{n}\left|f(x_i)\right|^q\right)^{1/q}\]

Therefore,

\[\|f\|=\left(\sum_{i=1}^{n}\left|f(x_i)\right|^q \right)^{1/q}\]
Yes, that looks good – except that you have swept some of the messy detail under the carpet by saying "for a proper choice of \(x\)...". (Wink)
 
  • #8
As an observation, instead of writing $||x||_p \ne 0$, you can also write $x \ne 0$.
It is an axiom of a norm that these two are identical.
 
  • #9
Opalg said:
Yes, that looks good – except that you have swept some of the messy detail under the carpet by saying "for a proper choice of \(x\)...". (Wink)

:p Yeah, need to find the method to solve the problem quickly without going into too much detail. Grad studies is a race against time; I always find myself trying hard to do all the problems they give us, all throughout the week, but until the last moment I cannot complete them. Thank you very much for all your help. I really appreciate it. :)

I like Serena said:
As an observation, instead of writing $||x||_p \ne 0$, you can also write $x \ne 0$.
It is an axiom of a norm that these two are identical.

Thanks very much, I missed this little point. :)
 

Related to Norm of a Bounded Linear Functional

1. What is the definition of the Norm of a Bounded Linear Functional?

The Norm of a Bounded Linear Functional is a mathematical concept used to measure the magnitude or size of a bounded linear functional. It is often denoted as ||f|| and is defined as the supremum of the set of all values of the functional on the unit ball of the underlying vector space.

2. How is the Norm of a Bounded Linear Functional calculated?

The Norm of a Bounded Linear Functional is calculated by taking the supremum of the set of all values of the functional on the unit ball of the underlying vector space. This can be represented mathematically as ||f|| = sup |f(x)|, where x is an element of the unit ball of the underlying vector space.

3. What is the significance of the Norm of a Bounded Linear Functional?

The Norm of a Bounded Linear Functional is significant because it provides a way to measure the size or magnitude of a bounded linear functional. It also plays a crucial role in the study of functional analysis, as it helps to define important concepts such as continuity, convergence, and equivalence of bounded linear functionals.

4. How does the Norm of a Bounded Linear Functional relate to the concept of a Banach space?

The Norm of a Bounded Linear Functional is closely related to the concept of a Banach space. In fact, a Banach space is defined as a normed vector space where the norm is induced by a bounded linear functional. This means that the Norm of a Bounded Linear Functional is an essential part of the definition of a Banach space.

5. Can the Norm of a Bounded Linear Functional be infinite?

Yes, the Norm of a Bounded Linear Functional can be infinite. This can happen when the supremum of the set of all values of the functional on the unit ball of the underlying vector space is infinite. In such cases, the functional is considered to be unbounded.

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
21
Views
1K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
4
Views
317
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
26
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
16
Views
1K
Back
Top