This set is due Monday, April 11. The questions in problem 2 are required from everybody, and graduate students should also work on problem 1. (Of course, it would make me happier if everybody attempts problem 1 as well.)

1. Let be a real finite-dimensional, inner product space. For , define

,

and

.

a. Prove that is a norm on the vector space . In particular, for all . Also, prove that for all b. Prove that for all . Is also a norm? c. Prove that for any there are vectors of norm 1 with and . d. Suppose now that is such that . Prove (without appealing to the fundamental theorem of algebra and without using determinants) that admits an eigenvalue (real) with eigenvector as in item c and, in fact, . e. Prove that for any , we have . f. Suppose that is self-adjoint. Check that so is and that . In particular, this gives a proof that squares of self-adjoint operators on real vector spaces admit eigenvalues that does not use the fundamental theorem of algebra. Check that the eigenvalues of are non-negative. g. Again, let be self-adjoint. (So we know there is an orthonormal basis for consisting of eigenvectors of ) Assume also that is invertible, that there is a unique eigenvalue of of largest absolute value, and that this satisfies . Let be an eigenvector of with eigenvalue and such that . Starting with a vector of norm 1 (arbitrary except for the fact that is not orthogonal to ), define a sequence of unit vectors by setting

(and note we are not dividing by 0, so these vectors are well defined). Also, define a sequence of numbers by setting

Prove that there is a sequence with each equal to 1 or and such that

and

as .

2. Solve problems 7.1, 7.3, 7.6, 7.7, 7.11, 7.14 from the book.

Note: In problem 1.f, the eigenvalues of are precisely the squares of the eigenvalues of , but at the moment I do not have a way of showing this directly. As extra-credit, show without appealing to the fundamental theorem of algebra (and without using determinants, of course) that must have a real eigenvalue.

This entry was posted on Monday, March 21st, 2011 at 11:06 pm and is filed under 403/503: Linear Algebra II. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Georgii: Let me start with some brief remarks. In a series of three papers: a. Wacław Sierpiński, "Contribution à la théorie des séries divergentes", Comp. Rend. Soc. Sci. Varsovie 3 (1910) 89–93 (in Polish). b. Wacław Sierpiński, "Remarque sur la théorème de Riemann relatif aux séries semi-convergentes", Prac. Mat. Fiz. XXI (1910) 17–20 […]

It is not possible to provide an explicit expression for a non-linear solution. The reason is that (it is a folklore result that) an additive $f:{\mathbb R}\to{\mathbb R}$ is linear iff it is measurable. (This result can be found in a variety of places, it is a standard exercise in measure theory books. As of this writing, there is a short proof here (Intern […]

Stefan, "low" cardinalities do not change by passing from $L({\mathbb R})$ to $L({\mathbb R})[{\mathcal U}]$, so the answer to the second question is that the existence of a nonprincipal ultrafilter does not imply the existence of a Vitali set. More precisely: Assume determinacy in $L({\mathbb R})$. Then $2^\omega/E_0$ is a successor cardinal to ${ […]

Marginalia to a theorem of Silver (see also this link) by Keith I. Devlin and R. B. Jensen, 1975. A humble title and yet, undoubtedly, one of the most important papers of all time in set theory.

Given a positive integer $a$, the Ramsey number $R(a)$ is the least $n$ such that whenever the edges of the complete graph $K_n$ are colored using only two colors, we necessarily have a copy of $K_a$ with all its edges of the same color. For example, $R(3)= 6$, which is usually stated by saying that in a party of 6 people, necessarily there are 3 that know e […]

Equality is part of the background (first-order) logic, so it is included, but there is no need to mention it. The situation is the same in many other theories. If you want to work in a language without equality, on the other hand, then this is mentioned explicitly. It is true that from extensionality (and logical axioms), one can prove that two sets are equ […]

$L$ has such a nice canonical structure that one can use it to define a global well-ordering. That is, there is a formula $\phi(u,v)$ that (provably in $\mathsf{ZF}$) well-orders all of $L$, so that its restriction to any specific set $A$ in $L$ is a set well-ordering of $A$. The well-ordering $\varphi$ you are asking about can be obtained as the restriction […]

Gödel sentences are by construction $\Pi^0_1$ statements, that is, they have the form "for all $n$ ...", where ... is a recursive statement (think "a statement that a computer can decide"). For instance, the typical Gödel sentence for a system $T$ coming from the second incompleteness theorem says that "for all $n$ that code a proof […]

When I first saw the question, I remembered there was a proof on MO using Ramsey theory, but couldn't remember how the argument went, so I came up with the following, that I first posted as a comment: A cute proof using Schur's theorem: Fix $a$ in your semigroup $S$, and color $n$ and $m$ with the same color whenever $a^n=a^m$. By Schur's theo […]

It depends on what you are doing. I assume by lower level you really mean high level, or general, or 2-digit class. In that case, 54 is general topology, 26 is real functions, 03 is mathematical logic and foundations. "Point-set topology" most likely refers to the stuff in 54, or to the theory of Baire functions, as in 26A21, or to descriptive set […]