Using a different definition of norm

In summary, the conversation discusses the definition of norm in vector spaces and how it affects the set of points with a norm of 1. The set of points with a norm of 1 using the given definition form a "diamond" or a "cube" depending on the dimension of the space. It is also mentioned that norms are equivalent in finite dimensional spaces, but not in infinite dimensional spaces, such as function spaces.
  • #1
neutrino
2,094
2
Here's a question from Apostol's Calculus Vol1

Suppose that instead of the usual definition of norm of a vector in [tex]V_n[/tex], we define it the following way,

[tex]||A|| = \sum_{k=1}^{n}|a_k|.[/tex]

Using this definition in [tex]V_2[/tex] describe on a figure the set of all points [tex](x,y)[/tex] of norm 1.


Is it possible to do that? Doesn't every point [tex](x,y)[/tex] of the form [tex](\frac{1}{s}, \frac{s-1}{s}), s \geq 1[/tex] satisfy the condition? (i.e., the number of points is not finite)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
What has the number of points got to do with the ability to describe them? There are an uncountable number of points of normal norm one, and they are described as the unit circle.

If you just take the point (x,y) and consider the 4 cases of the signs of x and y you will see the answer quite easily (in particular, if x and y are both positive, it is the set { (t,1-t) : 0<=t <=1 }
 
  • #3
Thank you. I knew I was forgetting something really simple. :redface:
 
  • #4
By the way (this may be the next problem in Apostle!), the norm defined by [tex]||A||= max(|x_k|)[/tex] is also equivalent to the "usual" norm.

Where the set of all point p such that ||p||= 1, with the usual norm form a "ball" and the set of all points, ||p||= 1 ,with the norm you give, form a "diamond", the set of all points, ||p||= 1, with this norm, form a "cube".

The norms are equivalent since given any one, we can find a smaller of the other figures that will fit inside. For any neighborhood in one norm, there exist neighborhoods in the other norms that fit inside. Thus, open sets are identical in all 3 norms.

This is for finite dimensional space. Interestingly, for infinite dimensional spaces, such as function spaces, the 3 norms:
[tex]||f||=\sqrt{\int f(x)^2 dx}[/tex]
(The "L2" norm)
[tex]||f||= \int |f(x)|dx[/tex]
(The "L1" norm)
[tex]||f||= max |f(x)|[/tex]
(The "[itex]L_\infty[/itex]" norm)
do not give the same things. In fact, the sets of functions for which they exist are different.
 
  • #5
HallsofIvy said:
By the way (this may be the next problem in Apostle!), the norm defined by [tex]||A||= max(|x_k|)[/tex] is also equivalent to the "usual" norm.

Indeed it is. :)

Where the set of all point p such that ||p||= 1, with the usual norm form a "ball" and the set of all points, ||p||= 1 ,with the norm you give, form a "diamond", the set of all points, ||p||= 1, with this norm, form a "cube".

The norms are equivalent since given any one, we can find a smaller of the other figures that will fit inside. For any neighborhood in one norm, there exist neighborhoods in the other norms that fit inside. Thus, open sets are identical in all 3 norms.

That is very interesting! Although it may not be very difficult to do it in V_3, I usually stick to V_2 for visualising these concepts.
Interestingly, for infinite dimensional spaces, such as function spaces, the 3 norms:
[tex]||f||=\sqrt{\int f(x)^2 dx}[/tex]
(The "L2" norm)
[tex]||f||= \int |f(x)|dx[/tex]
(The "L1" norm)
[tex]||f||= max |f(x)|[/tex]
(The "[itex]L_\infty[/itex]" norm)
do not give the same things. In fact, the sets of functions for which they exist are different.
Now, that is somewhat beyond what I can understand. I'm self-studying linear algebra (just begun, in fact), in a non-math-methods way limited to computing determinants and solving linear equations. But I'm sure I'll be able to appreciate this in the future. Thanks.
 

FAQ: Using a different definition of norm

What is a norm?

A norm is a standard or rule that is widely accepted and expected to be followed. It can refer to social norms, cultural norms, or mathematical norms.

Why would someone use a different definition of norm?

There may be various reasons for using a different definition of norm. It could be to challenge traditional norms and promote change, to better fit a specific context or situation, or to explore alternative perspectives.

How does using a different definition of norm impact research or experiments?

Using a different definition of norm can significantly impact research or experiments as it changes the parameters and criteria being used to measure and analyze results. This can lead to different conclusions and insights.

Are there any risks or limitations to using a different definition of norm?

Yes, there can be risks and limitations to using a different definition of norm. It may not be widely accepted or supported by others, which could affect the credibility and validity of the research. It may also be difficult to compare or replicate results using different norms.

How can the use of different norms be beneficial?

The use of different norms can be beneficial in providing a more comprehensive understanding of a concept or phenomenon. It can also encourage critical thinking and promote diversity of thought, leading to new perspectives and innovations.

Similar threads

Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
543
Replies
43
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
15K
Back
Top