Mathematics · Book 5 · Bachelor Year 3

University Mathematics — Year 3

University Mathematics — Year 3 · Bachelor Year 3

13Hilbert Spaces

A Hilbert space is a Banach space whose norm comes from an inner product — and that single extra structure restores, in infinite dimension, almost all of Euclidean geometry: orthogonal projections exist, every continuous functional is an inner product against a fixed vector (Riesz), and orthonormal bases expand every vector in a convergent series with Pythagorean bookkeeping (Parseval). The chapter’s climax is a debt honored: the trigonometric system is an orthonormal basis of L2L^2, so Parseval’s identity holds for every square-integrable function — the statement Year 2 could only prove for piecewise C1\mathcal C^1 functions. We end with Lax–Milgram, the workhorse lemma of the variational approach to differential equations.

Throughout, HH is a vector space over K=RK = \R or C\C.

13.1 Inner products; the projection theorem

Definition 13.1

An inner product is a map ⟨⋅,⋅⟩ ⁣:H×H→K\langle \cdot,\cdot\rangle \colon H\times H \to K, linear in the second variable, with ⟨y,x⟩=⟨x,y⟩‾\langle y, x\rangle = \overline{\langle x, y\rangle} and ⟨x,x⟩>0\langle x, x\rangle > 0 for x≠0x \neq 0. It induces the norm ∥x∥=⟨x,x⟩1/2\norm x = \langle x, x\rangle^{1/2}, the Cauchy–Schwarz inequality ∣⟨x,y⟩∣≤∥x∥∥y∥\abs{\langle x, y\rangle} \leq \norm x\norm y (Year 2’s proof — the discriminant — is unchanged), and the parallelogram law

∥x+y∥2+∥x−y∥2=2∥x∥2+2∥y∥2.\norm{x + y}^2 + \norm{x - y}^2 = 2\norm x^2 + 2\norm y^2 .

A Hilbert space is an inner-product space complete for this norm. Examples: ℓ2\ell^2 (Problem 8.1) and, the fundamental one, L2(μ)L^2(\mu) with ⟨f,g⟩=∫fˉg  ⁣dμ\langle f, g\rangle = \int\bar fg\,\dd\mu — complete by Riesz–Fischer (Theorem 12.4); the inner product is finite by Cauchy–Schwarz (== Hölder at p=q=2p = q = 2).

Theorem 13.2 (Projection onto a closed convex set)

Let C≠∅C \neq \varnothing be a closed convex subset of the Hilbert space HH and x∈Hx \in H. There is a unique pC(x)∈Cp_C(x) \in C with

∥x−pC(x)∥=d(x,C),\norm{x - p_C(x)} = d(x, C),

characterized by: Re⁡⟨x−pC(x), c−pC(x)⟩≤0\operatorname{Re}\langle x - p_C(x),\ c - p_C(x)\rangle \leq 0 for all c∈Cc \in C. The map pCp_C is 11-Lipschitz.

Proof. Let d=d(x,C)d = d(x, C) and (cn)⊆C(c_n) \subseteq C with ∥x−cn∥→d\norm{x - c_n} \to d. Parallelogram on x−cnx - c_n and x−cmx - c_m:

∥cn−cm∥2=2∥x−cn∥2+2∥x−cm∥2−4 ∥x−cn+cm2∥2≤2∥x−cn∥2+2∥x−cm∥2−4d2\norm{c_n - c_m}^2 = 2\norm{x - c_n}^2 + 2\norm{x - c_m}^2 - 4\,\bigl\|x - \tfrac{c_n + c_m}2\bigr\|^2 \leq 2\norm{x{-}c_n}^2 + 2\norm{x{-}c_m}^2 - 4d^2

(convexity puts the midpoint in CC): the right side tends to 00, so (cn)(c_n) is Cauchy, and its limit p∈Cp \in C (closed) attains dd. Uniqueness: two minimizers give, by the same identity, ∥p−p′∥2≤2d2+2d2−4d2=0\norm{p - p'}^2 \leq 2d^2 + 2d^2 - 4d^2 = 0.

Characterization: for c∈Cc \in C, t∈(0, 1]t \in \intoc01, the vector p+t(c−p)∈Cp + t(c - p) \in C, so

d2≤∥x−p−t(c−p)∥2=d2−2tRe⁡⟨x−p,c−p⟩+t2∥c−p∥2;d^2 \leq \norm{x - p - t(c-p)}^2 = d^2 - 2t\operatorname{Re}\langle x - p, c - p\rangle + t^2\norm{c-p}^2 ;

divide by t→0+t \to 0^+: Re⁡⟨x−p,c−p⟩≤0\operatorname{Re}\langle x - p, c - p\rangle \leq 0. Conversely this inequality gives ∥x−c∥2=∥x−p∥2−2Re⁡⟨x−p,c−p⟩+∥p−c∥2≥∥x−p∥2\norm{x - c}^2 = \norm{x - p}^2 - 2\operatorname{Re}\langle x - p, c - p\rangle + \norm{p - c}^2 \geq \norm{x-p}^2. Lipschitz: for x,yx, y with projections p,qp, q, add the two variational inequalities (with c=qc = q, resp. c=pc = p): Re⁡⟨x−y−(p−q),p−q⟩≥0\operatorname{Re}\langle x - y - (p - q), p - q\rangle \geq 0, so ∥p−q∥2≤Re⁡⟨x−y,p−q⟩≤∥x−y∥∥p−q∥\norm{p - q}^2 \leq \operatorname{Re}\langle x - y, p - q\rangle \leq \norm{x - y}\norm{p - q}. ∎

Theorem 13.3 (Orthogonal decomposition)

Let FF be a closed subspace of HH. Then pFp_F is linear, x−pF(x)⊥Fx - p_F(x) \perp F for all xx, and

H=F⊕F⊥,F⊥={y:⟨y,f⟩=0 ∀f∈F},(F⊥)⊥=F.H = F \oplus F^\perp, \qquad F^\perp = \{y : \langle y, f\rangle = 0\ \forall f\in F\}, \qquad (F^\perp)^\perp = F .

For a general subspace, (F⊥)⊥=Fˉ(F^\perp)^\perp = \bar F; in particular FF is dense iff F⊥={0}F^\perp = \{0\}.

Proof. For a subspace, the variational characterization with c=pF(x)±fc = p_F(x) \pm f (f∈Ff \in F, both signs, and if\iu f in the complex case) forces ⟨x−pF(x),f⟩=0\langle x - p_F(x), f\rangle = 0: the residual is orthogonal to FF. Decomposition x=pF(x)+(x−pF(x))x = p_F(x) + (x - p_F(x)) with F∩F⊥={0}F \cap F^\perp = \{0\} (⟨y,y⟩=0\langle y, y \rangle = 0); linearity of pFp_F follows from uniqueness of such decompositions (both sides linear in them). (F⊥)⊥⊇F(F^\perp) ^\perp \supseteq F always; conversely if x⊥F⊥x \perp F^\perp, write x=f+gx = f + g: g=x−f∈F⊥g = x - f \in F^\perp and ⟨g,g⟩=⟨x,g⟩−⟨f,g⟩=0\langle g, g\rangle = \langle x, g\rangle - \langle f, g\rangle = 0: x=f∈Fx = f \in F. For a general subspace FF: F⊥=Fˉ ⊥F^\perp = \bar F^{\,\perp} (continuity of the inner product), so (F⊥)⊥=Fˉ(F^\perp)^\perp = \bar F by the closed case; density iff Fˉ=H\bar F = H iff F⊥=0F^\perp = 0. ∎

Theorem 13.4 (Riesz representation)

For every continuous linear functional φ∈H′\varphi \in H' there is a unique a∈Ha \in H with

φ(x)=⟨a,x⟩(x∈H),∥φ∥H′=∥a∥.\varphi(x) = \langle a, x\rangle \quad (x \in H), \qquad \norm\varphi_{H'} = \norm a .

Proof. If φ=0\varphi = 0: a=0a = 0. Otherwise F=ker⁡φF = \ker\varphi is a closed proper subspace; pick u∈F⊥u \in F^\perp, ∥u∥=1\norm u = 1 (Theorem 13.3: F⊥≠0F^\perp \neq 0 since F≠HF \neq H). For any xx, the vector φ(x)u−φ(u)x∈ker⁡φ\varphi(x)u - \varphi(u)x \in \ker\varphi, hence ⊥u\perp u:

0=⟨u,φ(x)u−φ(u)x⟩=φ(x)−φ(u)⟨u,x⟩:φ(x)=⟨φ(u)‾ u, x⟩.0 = \langle u, \varphi(x)u - \varphi(u)x\rangle = \varphi(x) - \varphi(u)\langle u, x\rangle : \qquad \varphi(x) = \langle \overline{\varphi(u)}\,u,\ x\rangle .

So a=φ(u)‾ua = \overline{\varphi(u)}u works. Uniqueness: ⟨a−a′,x⟩=0\langle a - a', x\rangle = 0 for all xx, test x=a−a′x = a - a'. Norms: ∣φ(x)∣≤∥a∥∥x∥\abs{\varphi(x)} \leq \norm a\norm x (Cauchy–Schwarz) with equality at x=ax = a. ∎

Example 13.5 (A projection, computed to the end)

In H=L2([0, 1])H = L^2(\intcc01), what is the best approximation of f(x)=x2f(x) = x^2 by an affine function? The subspace F=Vect⁡(1,x)F = \operatorname{Vect}(1, x) is closed (finite-dimensional), and pF(f)=a+bxp_F(f) = a + bx is characterized by orthogonality of the residual to 11 and to xx:

∫01(x2−a−bx)  ⁣dx=0,∫01x (x2−a−bx)  ⁣dx=0,\int_0^1(x^2 - a - bx)\,\dd x = 0, \qquad \int_0^1x\,(x^2 - a - bx)\,\dd x = 0,

i.e. 13=a+b2\frac13 = a + \frac b2 and 14=a2+b3\frac14 = \frac a2 + \frac b3: a=−16a = -\frac16, b=1b = 1. So pF(x2)=x−16p_F(x^2) = x - \frac16, and the error is

d(f,F)2=∫01(x2−x+16)2 ⁣dx=1180,d(f,F)=165.d(f, F)^2 = \int_0^1\Bigl(x^2 - x + \frac16\Bigr)^2\dd x = \frac1{180}, \qquad d(f, F) = \frac1{6\sqrt5} .

Two remarks worth internalizing. First, the computation is nothing but a 2×22\times2 linear system — the normal equations; for the monomial basis their matrix (1i+j+1)\bigl(\frac1{i+j+1}\bigr) is the notoriously ill-conditioned Hilbert matrix, and orthogonalizing first (Legendre polynomials, Problem 13.1) is the cure. Second, the best uniform approximation of x2x^2 by affine functions is different (x−18x - \frac18, by equioscillation): each norm has its own geometry, and only the Hilbertian one answers with a linear system.

13.2 Orthonormal bases

Definition 13.6

A family (ei)i∈I(e_i)_{i\in I} is orthonormal if ⟨ei,ej⟩=δij\langle e_i, e_j\rangle = \delta_{ij}, and a Hilbert basis (orthonormal basis) if moreover its finite linear combinations are dense in HH (the family is total). We treat the countable case I=NI = \N, which by Gram–Schmidt covers every separable HH (Proposition 13.8).

Theorem 13.7 (Bessel, Parseval)

Let (en)n∈N(e_n)_{n\in\N} be orthonormal in HH, and cn(x)=⟨en,x⟩c_n(x) = \langle e_n, x\rangle.

  1. (Bessel) ∑n∣cn(x)∣2≤∥x∥2\sum_n\abs{c_n(x)}^2 \leq \norm x^2, and the series ∑ncn(x)en\sum_nc_n(x)e_n converges in HH, with sum pF(x)p_F(x), F=Vect⁡‾(en)F = \overline{\operatorname{Vect}}(e_n).
  2. The following are equivalent: (i) (en)(e_n) is a Hilbert basis; (ii) x=∑ncn(x)enx = \sum_nc_n(x)e_n for every xx; (iii) Parseval: ∥x∥2=∑n∣cn(x)∣2\norm x^2 = \sum_n\abs{c_n(x)}^2 for every xx; (iv) the only vector orthogonal to all ene_n is 00.
  3. If (en)(e_n) is a Hilbert basis, x↦(cn(x))nx \mapsto (c_n(x))_n is an isometric isomorphism H→ℓ2H \to \ell^2 (every infinite-dimensional separable Hilbert space “is” ℓ2\ell^2), and ⟨x,y⟩=∑ncn(x)‾cn(y)\langle x, y\rangle = \sum_n\overline{c_n(x)}c_n(y).

Proof. (1) For finite NN: x−∑n≤Ncnen⊥ekx - \sum_{n\leq N}c_ne_n \perp e_k (k≤Nk \leq N), so Pythagoras gives ∥x∥2=∑n≤N∣cn∣2+∥x−∑n≤Ncnen∥2\norm x^2 = \sum_{n\leq N}\abs{c_n}^2 + \norm{x - \sum_{n\leq N}c_ne_n}^2: Bessel. The partial sums SN=∑n≤NcnenS_N = \sum_{n\leq N}c_ne_n are Cauchy: ∥SN−SM∥2=∑M<n≤N∣cn∣2\norm{S_N - S_M}^2 = \sum_{M<n\leq N}\abs{c_n}^2, tail of a convergent series; the limit lies in FF, and x−lim⁡SN⊥x - \lim S_N \perp each eke_k (continuity), hence ⊥F\perp F: by uniqueness of the orthogonal decomposition, lim⁡SN=pF(x)\lim S_N = p_F(x).

(2) (i)⇒\Rightarrow(ii): F=HF = H, so pF=idp_F = \mathrm{id}. (ii)⇒\Rightarrow(iii): Pythagoras in the limit (∥SN∥2=∑n≤N∣cn∣2→∥x∥2\norm{S_N}^2 = \sum_{n \leq N}\abs{c_n}^2 \to \norm x^2). (iii)⇒\Rightarrow(iv): x⊥x \perp all ene_n gives ∥x∥2=0\norm x^2 = 0. (iv)⇒\Rightarrow(i): F⊥={0}F^\perp = \{0\} (orthogonality to all ene_n is orthogonality to FF), so FF is dense by Theorem 13.3; but FF, a closure, is already closed: F=HF = H.

(3) The map is linear, isometric by (iii) (hence injective), and surjective: given (cn)∈ℓ2(c_n) \in \ell^2, the series ∑cnen\sum c_ne_n converges (Cauchy as in (1)) to a preimage. The inner product formula is polarization from (iii), or a direct limit computation. ∎

Proposition 13.8 (Gram–Schmidt)

Let (xn)(x_n) be a linearly independent sequence. Setting inductively e~n=xn−∑k<n⟨ek,xn⟩ek\tilde e_n = x_n - \sum_{k<n}\langle e_k, x_n\rangle e_k and en=e~n/∥e~n∥e_n = \tilde e_n/\norm{\tilde e_n} produces an orthonormal (en)(e_n) with the same finite spans: Vect⁡(e1,…,en)=Vect⁡(x1,…,xn)\operatorname{Vect}(e_1, \dots, e_n) = \operatorname{Vect} (x_1, \dots, x_n). Consequently every separable Hilbert space (one with a countable dense subset) has a Hilbert basis.

Proof. Induction: e~n⊥ek\tilde e_n \perp e_k (k<nk < n) by construction, and e~n≠0\tilde e_n \neq 0 by independence; the spans match at each stage (triangular change of basis). For a separable HH: from a dense sequence extract a linearly independent subfamily with dense span (discard each vector in the span of its predecessors — the span is unchanged), orthonormalize: the result is total. ∎

Theorem 13.9 (The trigonometric system; Parseval at last)

In L2([−π, π])L^2(\intcc{-\pi}\pi) with ⟨f,g⟩=12π∫−ππfˉg\langle f, g\rangle = \frac1{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^\pi \bar fg, the family en(t)=einte_n(t) = \eu^{\iu nt}, n∈Zn \in \Z, is a Hilbert basis. Consequently, for every f∈L2f \in L^2 — in particular every piecewise continuous 2π2\pi-periodic ff — with cn(f)=12π∫−ππf(t)e−int ⁣dtc_n(f) = \frac1{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}f(t)\eu^{-\iu nt}\dd t:

f=∑n∈Zcn(f) eint  in L2,12π∫−ππ∣f∣2=∑n∈Z∣cn(f)∣2.f = \sum_{n\in\Z}c_n(f)\,\eu^{\iu nt} \ \ \text{in } L^2, \qquad \frac1{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}\abs f^2 = \sum_{n\in\Z}\abs{c_n(f)}^2 .

This proves, in full generality, the Parseval identity that Year 2 admitted.

Proof. Orthonormality is a direct computation (Year 2). Totality: let f∈L2f \in L^2 be ⊥\perp all ene_n, i.e. all Fourier coefficients vanish. Continuous 2π2\pi-periodic functions are dense in L2([−π, π])L^2(\intcc{-\pi}\pi): indeed Cc((−π, π))\mathcal C_c(\intoo{-\pi}\pi) is dense (Theorem 12.6(2)) and such functions extend periodically and continuously. Trigonometric polynomials are ∥⋅∥∞\norm\cdot_\infty-dense among continuous periodic functions (Stone–Weierstrass, Corollary 7.16(c)), and ∥⋅∥2≤∥⋅∥∞\norm\cdot_2 \leq \norm\cdot_\infty: trigonometric polynomials are dense in L2L^2. But f⊥f \perp every trigonometric polynomial, hence f⊥f \perp a dense subspace: f∈(dense)⊥={0}f \in (\text{dense})^\perp = \{0\} (Theorem 13.3). Criterion (iv) of Theorem 13.7 concludes; (ii) and (iii) unpack to the display (reindexing the countable Z\Z; the double-ended series converges unconditionally — the partial sums over any exhausting family converge, by the ℓ2\ell^2 tail argument). ∎

Theorem 13.10 (Lax–Milgram)

Let HH be a real Hilbert space and a ⁣:H×H→Ra \colon H\times H \to \R bilinear, continuous (∣a(u,v)∣≤M∥u∥∥v∥\abs{a(u,v)} \leq M\norm u\norm v) and coercive (a(u,u)≥α∥u∥2a(u, u) \geq \alpha\norm u^2, α>0\alpha > 0). Then for every φ∈H′\varphi \in H' there is a unique u∈Hu \in H with

a(u,v)=φ(v)for all v∈H.a(u, v) = \varphi(v) \qquad \text{for all } v \in H .

Proof. For fixed uu, v↦a(u,v)v \mapsto a(u, v) is continuous linear: Riesz gives a unique Au∈HAu \in H with a(u,v)=⟨Au,v⟩a(u,v) = \langle Au, v\rangle; AA is linear with ∥Au∥≤M∥u∥\norm{Au} \leq M\norm u (uniqueness of representatives, then bound). Coercivity: α∥u∥2≤a(u,u)=⟨Au,u⟩≤∥Au∥∥u∥\alpha\norm u^2 \leq a(u,u) = \langle Au, u\rangle \leq \norm{Au}\norm u, so ∥Au∥≥α∥u∥\norm{Au} \geq \alpha\norm u: AA is injective with closed range (a Cauchy image sequence AunAu_n forces unu_n Cauchy). The range is dense: w⊥im⁡Aw \perp \operatorname{im}A gives 0=⟨Aw,w⟩≥α∥w∥20 = \langle Aw, w\rangle \geq \alpha\norm w^2. Closed and dense: AA is bijective. Given φ\varphi, let ff represent it (Riesz) and u=A−1fu = A^{-1}f: a(u,v)=⟨f,v⟩=φ(v)a(u, v) = \langle f, v\rangle = \varphi(v), uniquely (a(u−u′,⋅)=0a(u - u', \cdot) = 0 and coercivity). ∎

Remark 13.11

When aa is symmetric, Lax–Milgram’s solution is the unique minimizer of the energy J(v)=12a(v,v)−φ(v)J(v) = \frac12a(v,v) - \varphi(v) (Exercise 13.9): existence of solutions to variational problems in one stroke. Applied to suitable function spaces (the Sobolev spaces of a later course), this solves boundary value problems for differential equations — the modern entry point to partial differential equations.

13.3 Exercises

Exercise 13.1 ★

(a) Prove the polarization identities (real: 4⟨x,y⟩=∥x+y∥2−∥x−y∥24\langle x, y\rangle = \norm{x+y}^2 - \norm{x-y}^2; complex: the four-term version). (b) Show that ∥⋅∥1\norm\cdot_1 on L1([0, 1])L^1(\intcc01) and ∥⋅∥∞\norm\cdot_\infty on C([0, 1])\mathcal C(\intcc01) violate the parallelogram law: these norms come from no inner product.

Solution

Solution of Exercise 13.1.

(a) Real: expand ∥x±y∥2=∥x∥2±2⟨x,y⟩+∥y∥2\norm{x \pm y}^2 = \norm x^2 \pm 2\langle x,y\rangle + \norm y^2 and subtract. Complex (inner product linear in the second slot): expanding as above,

⟨x,y⟩=14∑k=03ik ∥ikx+y∥2,\langle x, y\rangle = \frac14\sum_{k=0}^{3} \iu^k\,\bigl\|\iu^kx + y\bigr\|^2,

each term contributing ik⋅2Re⁡((−i)k⟨x,y⟩)\iu^k\cdot2\operatorname{Re}\bigl( (-\iu)^k\langle x,y\rangle\bigr), whose sum is 4⟨x,y⟩4\langle x,y\rangle (check the four values of kk; the ∑ik(∥x∥2+∥y∥2)=0\sum\iu^k (\norm x^2 + \norm y^2) = 0).

(b) L1L^1: f=1[0, 1/2]f = \mathbf 1_{\intcc0{1/2}}, g=1[1/2, 1]g = \mathbf 1_{\intcc{1/2}1}: ∥f±g∥12=1\norm{f\pm g}_1^2 = 1 each, sum 22; 2∥f∥12+2∥g∥12=1≠22\norm f_1^2 + 2\norm g_1^2 = 1 \neq 2. Sup norm: f=1f = \mathbf 1, g(t)=tg(t) = t on [0, 1]\intcc01: ∥f+g∥∞2+∥f−g∥∞2=4+1=5≠4=2+2\norm{f + g}_\infty^2 + \norm{f-g}_\infty^2 = 4 + 1 = 5 \neq 4 = 2 + 2. Failing the parallelogram law, these norms are induced by no inner product (which would force it by direct expansion).

Exercise 13.2 ★

In H=L2([0, 1])H = L^2(\intcc01) (real): (a) compute the projection of ff onto the subspace of constant functions, and interpret; (b) compute the projection onto {g:g=0 a.e. on [0, 1/2]}\{g : g = 0 \text{ a.e.\ on } \intcc0{1/2}\}; (c) compute d(x↦x, Vect⁡(1))d\bigl(x \mapsto x,\ \operatorname{Vect}(\mathbf 1)\bigr).

Solution

Solution of Exercise 13.2.

(a) p(f)=(∫01f)1p(f) = \bigl(\int_0^1f\bigr)\mathbf 1: indeed f−∫f⊥f - \int f \perp constants (∫(f−∫f)c=0\int(f - \int f)c = 0). The best constant approximation of ff in mean square is its average — the first instance of conditional expectation (Chapter 22).

(b) p(f)=f 1[1/2, 1]p(f) = f\,\mathbf 1_{\intcc{1/2}1}: the difference f1[0, 1/2]f\mathbf 1_{\intcc0{1/2}} is orthogonal to every gg vanishing on [0, 1/2]\intcc0{1/2}.

(c) d2=∥x−12∥22=∫01(x−12)2 ⁣dx=112d^2 = \bigl\|x - \tfrac12\bigr\|_2^2 = \int_0^1(x - \tfrac12)^2\dd x = \tfrac1{12}: d=123d = \frac1{2\sqrt3}.

Exercise 13.3 ★★

(a) Show that for a subspace FF: FF dense   ⟺  \iff F⊥={0}F^\perp = \{0\}, and give an example in ℓ2\ell^2 of a proper dense subspace (so F⊥=0F^\perp = 0 without F=HF = H: the decomposition theorem genuinely needs FF closed). (b) Show that if xn→xx_n \to x and yn→yy_n \to y in norm, then ⟨xn,yn⟩→⟨x,y⟩\langle x_n, y_n\rangle \to \langle x, y\rangle, and locate two places where the chapter used this continuity.

Solution

Solution of Exercise 13.3.

(a) The equivalence is Theorem 13.3 (Fˉ=(F⊥)⊥\bar F = (F^\perp)^\perp, and Fˉ=H  ⟺  F⊥={0}\bar F = H \iff F^\perp = \{0\}). Example: the space FF of finite sequences is dense in ℓ2\ell^2 (truncation) and proper: F⊥={0}F^\perp = \{0\} yet F≠ℓ2F \neq \ell^2 — for a non-closed subspace, H=F⊕F⊥H = F \oplus F^\perp fails blatantly (F⊕{0}≠HF \oplus \{0\} \neq H).

(b) ∣⟨xn,yn⟩−⟨x,y⟩∣≤∣⟨xn−x,yn⟩∣+∣⟨x,yn−y⟩∣≤∥xn−x∥sup⁡n∥yn∥+∥x∥ ∥yn−y∥→0\abs{\langle x_n, y_n\rangle - \langle x, y\rangle} \leq \abs{\langle x_n - x, y_n\rangle} + \abs{\langle x, y_n - y\rangle} \leq \norm{x_n - x}\sup_n\norm{y_n} + \norm x\,\norm{y_n - y} \to 0 (convergent sequences are bounded). Used: in Theorem 13.7(1) to see x−lim⁡SN⊥ekx - \lim S_N \perp e_k, and in Theorem 13.3 to see F⊥=Fˉ ⊥F^\perp = \bar F^{\,\perp}.

Exercise 13.4 ★★

Apply Gram–Schmidt to 1,x,x21, x, x^2 in L2([−1, 1])L^2(\intcc{-1}1) (Lebesgue measure): obtain the first three normalized Legendre polynomials, and verify they match n+12 Pn\sqrt{n + \frac12}\,P_n for the Rodrigues polynomials PnP_n of Problem 13.1.

Solution

Solution of Exercise 13.4.

e0=12e_0 = \frac1{\sqrt2}. Next, x⊥1x \perp \mathbf 1 already (∫−11x=0\int_{-1}^1x = 0), and ∫−11x2=23\int_{-1}^1x^2 = \frac23: e1=32 xe_1 = \sqrt{\tfrac32}\,x. Then x2−⟨e0,x2⟩e0=x2−13x^2 - \langle e_0, x^2\rangle e_0 = x^2 - \frac13 (and ⊥e1\perp e_1 by parity), with

∫−11(x2−13)2 ⁣dx=25−49+29=845:e2=458 (x2−13).\int_{-1}^1\Bigl(x^2 - \frac13\Bigr)^2\dd x = \frac25 - \frac49 + \frac29 = \frac{8}{45}: \qquad e_2 = \sqrt{\tfrac{45}8}\,\Bigl(x^2 - \frac13\Bigr).

Comparison: P0=1P_0 = 1, P1=xP_1 = x, P2=3x2−12P_2 = \frac{3x^2 - 1}2, and n+12 Pn\sqrt{n + \tfrac12}\,P_n gives 12\frac1{\sqrt2}, 32x\sqrt{\frac32}x, 52 3x2−12=458(x2−13)\sqrt{\frac52}\,\frac{3x^2-1}2 = \sqrt{\frac{45}8}\bigl(x^2 - \frac13\bigr): exactly e0,e1,e2e_0, e_1, e_2.

Exercise 13.5 ★★

Apply Parseval (Theorem 13.9) to f(t)=tf(t) = t and f(t)=t2f(t) = t^2 on [−π, π]\intcc{-\pi}\pi — now legitimately for these (continuous, but previously the identity needed piecewise-C1\mathcal C^1 care at the wrap-around discontinuity): recover

∑n≥11n2=π26,∑n≥11n4=π490.\sum_{n\geq1}\frac1{n^2} = \frac{\pi^2}6, \qquad \sum_{n\geq1}\frac1{n^4} = \frac{\pi^4}{90} .
Solution

Solution of Exercise 13.5.

For f(t)=tf(t) = t: c0=0c_0 = 0 and, integrating by parts, cn=i(−1)nnc_n = \frac{\iu(-1)^n}{n} for n≠0n \neq 0: ∣cn∣2=1n2\abs{c_n}^2 = \frac1{n^2}. Parseval:

12π∫−ππt2 ⁣dt=π23=∑n≠01n2=2∑n≥11n2 ⟹ ∑n≥11n2=π26.\frac1{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^\pi t^2\dd t = \frac{\pi^2}3 = \sum_{n\neq0}\frac1{n^2} = 2\sum_{n\geq1}\frac1{n^2} \ \Longrightarrow\ \sum_{n\geq1}\frac1{n^2} = \frac{\pi^2}6 .

For f(t)=t2f(t) = t^2: c0=π23c_0 = \frac{\pi^2}3, cn=2(−1)nn2c_n = \frac{2(-1)^n}{n^2} (n≠0n \ne 0). Parseval:

12π∫−ππt4 ⁣dt=π45=π49+∑n≠04n4 ⟹ ∑n≥11n4=18(π45−π49)=π490.\frac1{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}t^4\dd t = \frac{\pi^4}5 = \frac{\pi^4}9 + \sum_{n\neq0}\frac4{n^4} \ \Longrightarrow\ \sum_{n\geq1}\frac1{n^4} = \frac18\Bigl(\frac{\pi^4}5 - \frac{\pi^4}9\Bigr) = \frac{\pi^4}{90} .

No piecewise-C1\mathcal C^1 caveats are needed: Theorem 13.9 covers every L2L^2 function.

Exercise 13.6 ★★

(a) Find a∈L2([0, 1])a \in L^2(\intcc01) with ∫01/2f=⟨a,f⟩\int_0^{1/2}f = \langle a, f\rangle for all ff; compute ∥φ∥\norm\varphi for this functional. (b) Show that the evaluation f↦f(12)f \mapsto f(\frac12), defined on the subspace C([0, 1])⊆L2([0, 1])\mathcal C(\intcc01) \subseteq L^2(\intcc01), is not continuous for ∥⋅∥2\norm\cdot_2: no Riesz representative exists (evaluation is not an L2L^2 notion).

Solution

Solution of Exercise 13.6.

(a) φ(f)=∫01/2f=⟨1[0, 1/2], f⟩\varphi(f) = \int_0^{1/2}f = \langle\mathbf 1_{\intcc0{1/2}},\ f\rangle: the representative is a=1[0, 1/2]a = \mathbf 1_{\intcc0{1/2}}, and ∥φ∥=∥a∥2=12\norm\varphi = \norm a_2 = \frac1{\sqrt2} (Theorem 13.4).

(b) Take the tent functions fnf_n with peak 11 at 12\frac12 and support of width 2n\frac2n: fn(12)=1f_n(\tfrac12) = 1 while ∥fn∥22≤2n→0\norm{f_n}_2^2 \leq \frac2n \to 0: no constant CC can give ∣f(12)∣≤C∥f∥2\abs{f(\frac12)} \leq C\norm f_2. Point evaluation is meaningless in L2L^2 — elements are classes modulo null sets — and this computation is the quantitative reason.

Exercise 13.7 ★★★

Let HH be separable with Hilbert basis (en)(e_n), and (xk)(x_k) a bounded sequence. (a) Show that some subsequence converges weakly: there is xx with ⟨y,xkj⟩→⟨y,x⟩\langle y, x_{k_j}\rangle \to \langle y, x\rangle for every y∈Hy \in H. (Diagonal extraction on the coefficients ⟨en,xk⟩\langle e_n, x_k\rangle; assemble xx via Bessel and uniform boundedness of norms.) (b) Show en⇀0e_n \rightharpoonup 0 but ∥en∥=1\norm{e_n} = 1: weak limits can lose norm. Show ∥x∥≤lim inf⁡∥xkj∥\norm x \leq \liminf\norm{x_{k_j}} in (a).

Solution

Solution of Exercise 13.7.

(a) Let M=sup⁡k∥xk∥M = \sup_k\norm{x_k}. The scalar sequences (⟨en,xk⟩)k(\langle e_n, x_k\rangle)_k are bounded by MM: a diagonal extraction yields xkjx_{k_j} with ⟨en,xkj⟩→γn\langle e_n, x_{k_j}\rangle \to \gamma_n for every nn. For each NN: ∑n≤N∣γn∣2=lim⁡j∑n≤N∣⟨en,xkj⟩∣2≤M2\sum_{n\leq N}\abs{\gamma_n}^2 = \lim_j\sum_{n\leq N}\abs{\langle e_n, x_{k_j}\rangle}^2 \leq M^2 (Bessel), so (γn)∈ℓ2(\gamma_n) \in \ell^2 and x=∑nγnen∈Hx = \sum_n\gamma_ne_n \in H (Theorem 13.7(3)). For y∈Hy \in H:

∣⟨y,xkj−x⟩∣≤∣∑n≤Ncn(y)‾(⟨en,xkj⟩−γn)∣+2M(∑n>N∣cn(y)∣2)1/2,\abs{\langle y, x_{k_j} - x\rangle} \leq \Bigl|\sum_{n\leq N}\overline{c_n(y)}\bigl(\langle e_n, x_{k_j}\rangle - \gamma_n\bigr)\Bigr| + 2M\Bigl(\sum_{n>N}\abs{c_n(y)}^2\Bigr)^{1/2},

using the expansion ⟨y,z⟩=∑cn(y)‾cn(z)\langle y, z\rangle = \sum\overline{c_n(y)}c_n(z) and Cauchy–Schwarz on the tail; choose NN then jj: weak convergence to xx.

(b) ⟨y,en⟩=cn(y)→0\langle y, e_n\rangle = c_n(y) \to 0 for every yy (ℓ2\ell^2 tails): en⇀0e_n \rightharpoonup 0, yet ∥en∥=1\norm{e_n} = 1: the norm is not weakly continuous. In (a): ∥x∥2=∑∣γn∣2≤lim inf⁡j∥xkj∥2\norm x^2 = \sum\abs{\gamma_n}^2 \leq \liminf_j\norm{x_{k_j}}^2 (finite sections and Bessel again): weak limits can only lose norm.

Exercise 13.8 ★★

(Adjoints) For T∈L(H)T \in \mathcal L(H), show there is a unique T∗∈L(H)T^* \in \mathcal L(H) with ⟨Tx,y⟩=⟨x,T∗y⟩\langle Tx, y\rangle = \langle x, T^*y\rangle (Riesz), and ∣∣∣T∗∣∣∣=∣∣∣T∣∣∣\vertiii{T^*} = \vertiii T. Compute the adjoint of the shift SS on ℓ2\ell^2, and prove ker⁡T∗=(im⁡T)⊥\ker T^* = (\operatorname{im}T)^\perp — deduce im⁡T‾=(ker⁡T∗)⊥\overline{\operatorname{im}T} = (\ker T^*)^\perp.

Solution

Solution of Exercise 13.8.

For fixed yy, x↦⟨y,Tx⟩x \mapsto \langle y, Tx\rangle is a continuous linear functional; Riesz gives a unique T∗yT^*y with ⟨y,Tx⟩=⟨T∗y,x⟩\langle y, Tx\rangle = \langle T^*y, x\rangle for all xx — conjugating, ⟨Tx,y⟩=⟨x,T∗y⟩\langle Tx, y\rangle = \langle x, T^*y\rangle. Uniqueness makes T∗T^* linear;

∥T∗y∥=sup⁡∥x∥=1∣⟨T∗y,x⟩∣=sup⁡∥x∥=1∣⟨y,Tx⟩∣≤∣∣∣T∣∣∣ ∥y∥,\norm{T^*y} = \sup_{\norm x = 1}\abs{\langle T^*y, x\rangle} = \sup_{\norm x=1}\abs{\langle y, Tx\rangle} \leq \vertiii T\,\norm y,

so ∣∣∣T∗∣∣∣≤∣∣∣T∣∣∣\vertiii{T^*} \leq \vertiii T, and T∗∗=TT^{**} = T gives equality. Shift: ⟨Sx,y⟩=∑n≥1xnyˉn+1=⟨x,S∗y⟩\langle Sx, y\rangle = \sum_{n\geq1} x_n\bar y_{n+1} = \langle x, S^*y\rangle with (S∗y)n=yn+1(S^*y)_n = y_{n+1}: the backward shift. Kernel–image: T∗y=0T^*y = 0 iff ⟨x,T∗y⟩=0\langle x, T^*y\rangle = 0 for all xx iff ⟨Tx,y⟩=0\langle Tx, y\rangle = 0 for all xx iff y⊥im⁡Ty \perp \operatorname{im}T: ker⁡T∗=(im⁡T)⊥\ker T^* = (\operatorname{im}T)^\perp; taking ⊥\perp and using Theorem 13.3, im⁡T‾=(ker⁡T∗)⊥\overline{\operatorname{im}T} = (\ker T^*)^\perp.

Exercise 13.9 ★★

Let aa be as in Lax–Milgram and moreover symmetric. Show that uu solves a(u,⋅)=φa(u, \cdot) = \varphi iff uu minimizes J(v)=12a(v,v)−φ(v)J(v) = \frac12a(v, v) - \varphi(v), and that the minimum is attained at exactly one point. (Complete the square: J(u+w)−J(u)=12a(w,w)≥α2∥w∥2J(u + w) - J(u) = \frac12a(w,w) \geq \frac\alpha2\norm w^2.) Application: re-derive the projection theorem for closed subspaces from Lax–Milgram.

Solution

Solution of Exercise 13.9.

If a(u,⋅)=φa(u, \cdot) = \varphi: for any ww,

J(u+w)−J(u)=a(u,w)−φ(w)+12a(w,w)=12a(w,w)≥α2∥w∥2,J(u + w) - J(u) = a(u, w) - \varphi(w) + \tfrac12a(w,w) = \tfrac12a(w,w) \geq \tfrac\alpha2\norm w^2,

strictly positive for w≠0w \neq 0: uu is the unique minimizer. Conversely, at a minimizer the function t↦J(u+tw)t \mapsto J(u + tw) (a quadratic polynomial in tt) has vanishing derivative at 00: a(u,w)−φ(w)=0a(u, w) - \varphi(w) = 0 for every ww. Projection re-derived: for a closed subspace FF, apply Lax–Milgram on the Hilbert space FF with a(u,v)=⟨u,v⟩a(u,v) = \langle u, v\rangle (M=α=1M = \alpha = 1) and φ(v)=⟨x,v⟩\varphi(v) = \langle x, v\rangle: a unique p∈Fp \in F with ⟨p,v⟩=⟨x,v⟩\langle p, v\rangle = \langle x, v\rangle for all v∈Fv \in F, i.e. x−p⊥Fx - p \perp F — and by the symmetric case, pp minimizes 12∥v∥2−⟨x,v⟩=12∥v−x∥2−12∥x∥2\frac12\norm v^2 - \langle x, v\rangle = \frac12\norm{v - x}^2 - \frac12\norm x^2 over FF: the projection.

Exercise 13.10 ★★★

(The Haar system) On [0, 1]\intcc01, let h0=1h_{0} = \mathbf 1, and for n=2j+kn = 2^j + k (j≥0j \geq 0, 0≤k<2j0 \leq k < 2^j):

hn=2j/2(1[k2−j, (k+12)2−j)−1[(k+12)2−j, (k+1)2−j)).h_n = 2^{j/2}\Bigl(\mathbf 1_{[k2^{-j},\,(k + \frac12)2^{-j})} - \mathbf 1_{[(k+\frac12)2^{-j},\,(k+1)2^{-j})} \Bigr).

Show that (hn)n≥0(h_n)_{n\geq0} is orthonormal in L2([0, 1])L^2(\intcc01), and total. (Orthogonality: disjoint or nested supports; totality: finite spans contain all dyadic step functions, which are dense — via Theorem 12.6(1) and dyadic approximation of intervals.) The Haar system is the ancestor of wavelets.

Solution

Solution of Exercise 13.10.

Normalization: ∫hn2=2j⋅2−j=1\int h_n^2 = 2^j\cdot 2^{-j} = 1. Orthogonality: two distinct Haar functions have either disjoint (interiors of) supports (product zero a.e.), or the support of the finer is contained in a half-interval where the coarser is constant — then the integral of the product is that constant times ∫hfiner=0\int h_{\text{finer}} = 0; against h0=1h_0 = \mathbf 1, again ∫hn=0\int h_n = 0. Totality: the span of {h0,…,h2J−1}\{h_0, \dots, h_{2^J-1}\} consists of step functions on the dyadic grid of step 2−J2^{-J}; both spaces have dimension 2J2^J and the Haar functions are independent (orthonormal): the span is all such step functions. Dyadic step functions are dense in L2([0, 1])L^2(\intcc01): simple functions are dense (Theorem 12.6(1)), measurable sets are approximated by finite unions of intervals (Exercise 9.7), and intervals by dyadic ones (endpoints move by ≤2−J\leq 2^{-J}). By Theorem 13.7, the Haar system is a Hilbert basis.

Exercise 13.11 ★★

(Orthogonal projections, characterized) Let HH be a Hilbert space and P∈L(H)P \in \mathcal L(H) with P2=PP^2 = P, P≠0P \neq 0. Show the equivalence of: (i) PP is the orthogonal projection onto im⁡P\operatorname{im}P; (ii) P=P∗P = P^* (Exercise 13.8); (iii) ∣∣∣P∣∣∣=1\vertiii P = 1. (For (iii) ⇒\Rightarrow (i): if some x∈(ker⁡P)⊥x \in (\ker P)^\perp had Px≠xPx \neq x, consider x+t(Px−x)x + t(Px - x) — or directly: for u∈im⁡Pu \in \operatorname{im}P and v∈ker⁡Pv \in \ker P, expand ∥P(u+tv)∥2≤∥u+tv∥2\norm{P(u + tv)}^2 \leq \norm{u + tv}^2 for all t∈Rt \in \R and conclude ⟨u,v⟩=0\langle u, v\rangle = 0.) Exhibit a non-orthogonal projection on R2\R^2 and compute its norm.

Solution

Solution of Exercise 13.11.

(i) ⇒\Rightarrow (ii): for the orthogonal projection, ⟨Px,y⟩=⟨Px,Py⟩=⟨x,Py⟩\langle Px, y\rangle = \langle Px, Py\rangle = \langle x, Py\rangle (insert the decompositions x=Px+(x−Px)x = Px + (x - Px) etc. and kill cross terms). (ii) ⇒\Rightarrow (iii): ∥Px∥2=⟨P2x,x⟩=⟨Px,x⟩≤∥Px∥∥x∥\norm{Px}^2 = \langle P^2x, x\rangle = \langle Px, x\rangle \leq \norm{Px}\norm x, so ∣∣∣P∣∣∣≤1\vertiii P \leq 1, and Pu=uPu = u on the nonzero image: =1= 1. (iii) ⇒\Rightarrow (i): H=im⁡P⊕ker⁡PH = \operatorname{im}P \oplus \ker P (algebraically, from P2=PP^2 = P); take u=Pu∈im⁡Pu = Pu \in \operatorname{im}P, v∈ker⁡Pv \in \ker P, t∈Rt \in \R: ∥P(u+tv)∥2=∥u∥2\norm{P(u + tv)}^2 = \norm u^2 must be ≤∥u+tv∥2=∥u∥2+2tRe⁡⟨u,v⟩+t2∥v∥2\leq \norm{u + tv}^2 = \norm u^2 + 2t\operatorname{Re}\langle u, v\rangle + t^2\norm v^2 for every tt, forcing Re⁡⟨u,v⟩=0\operatorname{Re}\langle u, v\rangle = 0 (compare the linear terms as t→0±t \to 0^\pm); replacing vv by iv\iu v kills the imaginary part too: im⁡P⊥ker⁡P\operatorname{im}P \perp \ker P, which is exactly orthogonality of the projection. Example: P(x,y)=(x+y,0)P(x, y) = (x + y, 0) on R2\R^2: P2=PP^2 = P, image the xx-axis, kernel the line y=−xy = -x, and ∣∣∣P∣∣∣=sup⁡∣x+y∣∥(x,y)∥=2\vertiii P = \sup\frac{\abs{x+y}}{\norm{(x,y)}} = \sqrt2 (attained at (1,1)/2(1,1)/\sqrt2): an oblique projection has norm >1> 1. (For the record, (ii) also gives (i) directly: ker⁡P=ker⁡P∗=(im⁡P)⊥\ker P = \ker P^* = (\operatorname{im}P)^\perp by Exercise 13.8.)

Exercise 13.12 ★★★

(Von Neumann’s ergodic theorem) Let U∈L(H)U \in \mathcal L(H) be unitary (U∗U=UU∗=IU^*U = UU^* = I), F=ker⁡(U−I)F = \ker(U - I) the fixed space, PP the orthogonal projection onto FF, and An=1n∑k=0n−1UkA_n = \frac1n\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}U^k. (a) Show ker⁡(U−I)=ker⁡(U∗−I)\ker(U - I) = \ker(U^* - I) (from ∥Ux−x∥2=2∥x∥2−2Re⁡⟨Ux,x⟩\norm{Ux - x}^2 = 2\norm x^2 - 2\operatorname{Re}\langle Ux, x\rangle and unitarity), and deduce im⁡(U−I)‾=F⊥\overline{\operatorname{im}(U - I)} = F^\perp. (b) Show that Anx→xA_nx \to x for x∈Fx \in F, and Anx→0A_nx \to 0 for x∈im⁡(U−I)x \in \operatorname{im}(U - I) (telescoping), then for x∈im⁡(U−I)‾x \in \overline{\operatorname{im}(U - I)} (uniform bound ∣∣∣An∣∣∣≤1\vertiii{A_n} \leq 1). (c) Conclude: Anx→PxA_nx \to Px for every x∈Hx \in H — time averages converge to the projection on the invariants. (d) Spell it out for H=L2(R/Z)H = L^2(\R/\Z) and Uf=f(⋅+α)Uf = f(\cdot + \alpha) with α\alpha irrational: identify FF (use Fourier series, Theorem 13.9) and deduce that 1n∑k<nf(x+kα)→∫01f\frac1n\sum_{k<n}f(x + k\alpha) \to \int_0^1f in L2L^2: the L2L^2 equidistribution of irrational rotations.

Solution

Solution of Exercise 13.12.

(a) For unitary UU: ∥Ux−x∥2=2∥x∥2−2Re⁡⟨Ux,x⟩\norm{Ux - x}^2 = 2\norm x^2 - 2\operatorname{Re}\langle Ux, x\rangle and ∥U∗x−x∥2=2∥x∥2−2Re⁡⟨x,Ux⟩\norm{U^*x - x}^2 = 2\norm x^2 - 2\operatorname{Re}\langle x, Ux\rangle: the two vanish together, so ker⁡(U−I)=ker⁡(U∗−I)\ker(U - I) = \ker(U^* - I). Then, using ker⁡T∗=(im⁡T)⊥\ker T^* = (\operatorname{im}T)^\perp (Exercise 13.8) with T=U−IT = U - I and T∗=U∗−IT^* = U^* - I:

im⁡(U−I)‾=(ker⁡(U∗−I))⊥=F⊥.\overline{\operatorname{im}(U - I)} = \bigl(\ker(U^* - I)\bigr)^\perp = F^\perp .

(b) On FF: Ukx=xU^kx = x, so Anx=xA_nx = x. For x=(U−I)yx = (U - I)y: Anx=1n(Uny−y)A_nx = \frac1n(U^ny - y), of norm ≤2n∥y∥→0\leq \frac2n\norm y \to 0. For xx in the closure: given ε\varepsilon, pick x′=(U−I)yx' = (U - I)y with ∥x−x′∥<ε\norm{x - x'} < \varepsilon; since ∣∣∣An∣∣∣≤1n∑∣∣∣Uk∣∣∣=1\vertiii{A_n} \leq \frac1n\sum\vertiii{U^k} = 1, ∥Anx∥≤∥An(x−x′)∥+∥Anx′∥≤ε+o(1)\norm{A_nx} \leq \norm{A_n(x - x')} + \norm{A_nx'} \leq \varepsilon + o(1).

(c) Decompose x=Px+(x−Px)x = Px + (x - Px) with Px∈FPx \in F and x−Px∈F⊥=im⁡(U−I)‾x - Px \in F^\perp = \overline{\operatorname{im}(U - I)} (part (a)): Anx=Px+An(x−Px)→Px+0A_nx = Px + A_n(x - Px) \to Px + 0.

(d) In the Fourier basis em(x)=e2iπmxe_m(x) = \eu^{2\iu\pi mx}: Uem=e2iπmαemUe_m = \eu^{2\iu\pi m\alpha}e_m, so Uem=emUe_m = e_m iff mα∈Zm\alpha \in \Z iff m=0m = 0 (α\alpha irrational): F=C1F = \C\mathbf 1 and Pf=⟨1,f⟩1=∫01fPf = \langle\mathbf 1, f\rangle\mathbf 1 = \int_0^1f. The theorem reads 1n∑k<nf(⋅+kα)→∫01f\frac1n\sum_{k<n}f(\cdot + k\alpha) \to \int_0^1f in L2(R/Z)L^2(\R/\Z): the orbit averages of an irrational rotation equidistribute — the L2L^2 shadow of Weyl’s equidistribution theorem, obtained by pure Hilbert geometry.

13.4 Problem: orthogonal polynomials

Problem 13.1

Weekend problem — Legendre, Hermite, and Gauss quadrature

Let I⊆RI \subseteq \R be an interval and w>0w > 0 a continuous weight on the interior of II such that ∫I∣t∣nw(t) ⁣dt<∞\int_I \abs t^nw(t)\dd t < \infty for all nn; work in H=L2(I,w  ⁣dλ)H = L^2(I, w\,\dd\lambda) with ⟨f,g⟩=∫Ifˉg w\langle f, g\rangle = \int_I \bar fg\,w. Gram–Schmidt applied to 1,t,t2,…1, t, t^2, \dots produces the orthogonal polynomials (pn)(p_n) for ww (monic normalization: pn=tn+⋯p_n = t^n + \cdots).

Part I — General theory.

  1. Show that pnp_n is orthogonal to every polynomial of degree <n< n, and that (p0,…,pn)(p_0, \dots, p_n) is a basis of Rn[t]\R_n[t].
  2. (Three-term recurrence) Show there are reals an,bna_n, b_n with

    pn+1(t)=(t−an) pn(t)−bn pn−1(t),bn=∥pn∥2∥pn−1∥2>0.p_{n+1}(t) = (t - a_n)\,p_n(t) - b_n\,p_{n-1}(t), \qquad b_n = \frac{\norm{p_n}^2}{\norm{p_{n-1}}^2} > 0 .

    (Expand t pnt\,p_n in the basis (pk)k≤n+1(p_k)_{k \leq n+1} and kill coefficients by orthogonality, using ⟨tpn,pk⟩=⟨pn,tpk⟩\langle tp_n, p_k\rangle = \langle p_n, tp_k\rangle.)

  3. (Roots) Show that pnp_n has nn distinct roots, all interior to II. (Let t1<⋯<tmt_1 < \dots < t_m be the interior sign changes of pnp_n; if m<nm < n, test pnp_n against ∏i≤m(t−ti)\prod_{i\leq m}(t - t_i) and contradict orthogonality.)

Part II — Legendre (I=[−1, 1]I = \intcc{-1}1, w=1w = 1). Define Pn(t)=12nn!  ⁣dn ⁣dtn[(t2−1)n]P_n(t) = \frac{1}{2^nn!}\,\frac{\dd^n}{\dd t^n}\bigl[(t^2 - 1)^n\bigr] (Rodrigues).

  1. Show deg⁡Pn=n\deg P_n = n with leading coefficient (2n)!2n(n!)2\frac{(2n)!}{2^n(n!)^2}, and, integrating by parts nn times, that ⟨Pn,Q⟩=0\langle P_n, Q\rangle = 0 for every polynomial QQ of degree <n< n: the PnP_n are (up to normalization) the orthogonal polynomials for w=1w = 1.
  2. Compute ∥Pn∥22=22n+1\norm{P_n}_2^2 = \frac{2}{2n+1} (integrate by parts nn times against itself and reduce to a Beta/Wallis integral, Exercise 11.8).
  3. Show that the normalized Legendre polynomials form a Hilbert basis of L2([−1, 1])L^2(\intcc{-1}1) (Weierstrass, Corollary 7.16, plus density of C\mathcal C in L2L^2), and expand f(t)=∣t∣f(t) = \abs t up to degree 22: compute the best quadratic L2L^2-approximation of ∣t∣\abs t.

Part III — Hermite (I=RI = \R, w(t)=e−t2w(t) = \eu^{-t^2}). Define Hn(t)=(−1)net2 ⁣dn ⁣dtne−t2H_n(t) = (-1)^n\eu^{t^2}\frac{\dd^n}{\dd t^n}\eu^{-t^2}.

  1. Show that HnH_n is a polynomial of degree nn with leading coefficient 2n2^n, that Hn+1=2tHn−Hn′H_{n+1} = 2tH_n - H_n', and that ⟨Hm,Hn⟩w=δmn 2nn!π\langle H_m, H_n\rangle_w = \delta_{mn}\,2^nn!\sqrt\pi (parts again).
  2. Show that the Hermite family is total in L2(R,e−t2 ⁣dt)L^2(\R, \eu^{-t^2}\dd t), admitting one result from Chapter 14: if g∈L1(R)g \in L^1(\R) has ∫g(t)e−iξt ⁣dt=0\int g(t)\eu^{-\iu\xi t}\dd t = 0 for all ξ\xi, then g=0g = 0 a.e. (For f⊥f \perp all HnH_n, i.e. ⊥\perp all polynomials: show z↦∫f(t)e−t2e−izt ⁣dtz \mapsto \int f(t)\eu^{-t^2}\eu^{-\iu zt}\dd t is well defined, expand the exponential as a series, justify the interchange by domination, and conclude that the Fourier transform of fe−t2f\eu^{-t^2} vanishes.)

Part IV — Gauss quadrature. Fix nn, let t1<⋯<tnt_1 < \dots < t_n be the roots of pnp_n (Part I), and define the weights wi=∫Iℓi(t) w(t) ⁣dtw_i = \int_I \ell_i(t)\,w(t)\dd t where ℓi\ell_i are the Lagrange interpolation basis polynomials at the tit_i.

  1. Show that the quadrature rule Q(f)=∑iwif(ti)Q(f) = \sum_iw_if(t_i) is exact on all polynomials of degree ≤n−1\leq n - 1 (interpolation), and in fact — the miracle — on all polynomials of degree ≤2n−1\leq 2n - 1: write P=qpn+rP = qp_n + r and use orthogonality on the quotient qq.
  2. Show that the weights are positive (apply the rule to ℓi2\ell_i^2, of degree 2n−22n - 2), and deduce from Polya’s theorem (Exercise 8.9) that Gauss quadrature converges: Qn(f)→∫IfwQ_n(f) \to \int_I fw for every continuous ff on a compact II.
  3. For n=2n = 2, I=[−1, 1]I = \intcc{-1}1, w=1w = 1: compute the nodes ±13\pm\frac1{\sqrt3} and weights 1,11, 1, and verify exactness on 1,t,t2,t31, t, t^2, t^3 by hand. Compare with the trapezoid rule on the same two evaluation points.

Part V — Chebyshev: the polynomials that oscillate best. Now I=[−1, 1]I = \intcc{-1}1 and w(t)=11−t2w(t) = \frac1{\sqrt{1 - t^2}}.

  1. Show that Tn(cos⁡θ)=cos⁡nθT_n(\cos\theta) = \cos n\theta defines a polynomial TnT_n of degree nn (establish Tn+1=2t Tn−Tn−1T_{n+1} = 2t\,T_n - T_{n-1} from a trigonometric identity), with leading coefficient 2n−12^{n-1} for n≥1n \geq 1; and that the substitution t=cos⁡θt = \cos\theta gives

    ⟨Tm,Tn⟩w=∫0πcos⁡mθ cos⁡nθ  ⁣dθ=0 (m≠n),∥T0∥w2=π,  ∥Tn∥w2=π2:\langle T_m, T_n\rangle_w = \int_0^\pi\cos m\theta\,\cos n\theta\,\dd\theta = 0 \ (m \neq n), \qquad \norm{T_0}_w^2 = \pi,\ \ \norm{T_n}_w^2 = \frac\pi2 :

    the TnT_n are the orthogonal polynomials for this weight, and Chebyshev expansions are Fourier cosine series in disguise.

  2. Locate explicitly the nn roots tk=cos⁡(2k−1)π2nt_k = \cos\frac{(2k-1)\pi}{2n} and the n+1n + 1 extrema sj=cos⁡jπns_j = \cos\frac{j\pi}n of TnT_n on [−1, 1]\intcc{-1}1, where Tn(sj)=(−1)jT_n(s_j) = (-1)^j: the graph equioscillates between ±1\pm1.
  3. (Minimax) Show that among all monic polynomials of degree nn, the polynomial 21−nTn2^{1-n}T_n has the smallest sup-norm on [−1, 1]\intcc{-1}1, namely 21−n2^{1-n} — and it is the unique minimizer. (If a monic PP had sup⁡∣P∣<21−n\sup\abs P < 2^{1-n}, the difference 21−nTn−P2^{1-n}T_n - P, of degree ≤n−1\leq n-1, would alternate in sign at the n+1n+1 equioscillation points.)
  4. Application to interpolation: for nodes t1<⋯<tnt_1 < \dots < t_n in [−1, 1]\intcc{-1}1, the error of Lagrange interpolation of a Cn\mathcal C^n function involves ω(t)=∏i(t−ti)\omega(t) = \prod_i(t - t_i). Show that choosing Chebyshev roots as nodes minimizes sup⁡[−1, 1]∣ω∣\sup_{\intcc{-1}1}\abs\omega, and give the resulting bound ∥f−Lnf∥∞≤∥f(n)∥∞2n−1 n!\norm{f - L_nf}_\infty \leq \frac{\norm{f^{(n)}}_\infty} {2^{n-1}\,n!} — compare with equally spaced nodes (state Runge’s phenomenon as the cautionary tale).
  5. Verify ∣Tn′(±1)∣=n2\abs{T_n'(\pm1)} = n^2 (differentiate Tn(cos⁡θ)=cos⁡nθT_n(\cos\theta) = \cos n\theta and take limits θ→0,π\theta \to 0, \pi): polynomials bounded by 11 on [−1, 1]\intcc{-1}1 can have derivative as large as n2n^2 at the edge (Markov’s inequality says no larger — statement only). Where in the interval is the derivative bound only O(n)O(n)?
  6. (Chebyshev–Gauss quadrature) Show that the Gauss rule for the weight ww at the nn Chebyshev roots has equal weights wi=πnw_i = \frac\pi n (exactness on T0,…,Tn−1T_0, \dots, T_{n-1} plus the trigonometric sums ∑k=1ncos⁡(j(2k−1)π2n)=0\sum_{k=1}^n\cos\bigl(j\tfrac{(2k-1)\pi}{2n}\bigr) = 0 for 1≤j≤n−11 \leq j \leq n - 1): the most uniform of all quadratures. Write it out for n=3n = 3.

Part VI — Christoffel–Darboux, interlacing, and the Jacobi matrix. Back to a general weight; hk=∥pk∥2h_k = \norm{p_k}^2 (monic pkp_k), bk=hk/hk−1b_k = h_k/h_{k-1}.

  1. (Least norm) Show that among all monic polynomials of degree nn, the orthogonal pnp_n is the unique one of minimal L2(w)L^2(w)-norm — identify the minimization as an orthogonal projection onto Rn−1[t]\R_{n-1}[t] (Theorem 13.2 or the finite-dimensional projection of Year 2). The minimax property of question 14 is the same statement with L∞L^\infty in place of L2L^2: same hero, two norms.
  2. (Christoffel–Darboux) Prove, by induction on nn using the three-term recurrence, the identity

    ∑k=0npk(x) pk(y)hk=pn+1(x) pn(y)−pn(x) pn+1(y)hn (x−y)(x≠y),\sum_{k=0}^{n}\frac{p_k(x)\,p_k(y)}{h_k} = \frac{p_{n+1}(x)\,p_n(y) - p_n(x)\,p_{n+1}(y)}{h_n\,(x - y)} \qquad (x \neq y),

    and its confluent form (y→xy \to x): ∑k≤npk(x)2hk=pn+1′(x)pn(x)−pn′(x)pn+1(x)hn\sum_{k\leq n}\frac{p_k(x)^2}{h_k} = \frac{p_{n+1}'(x)p_n(x) - p_n'(x)p_{n+1}(x)}{h_n}.

  3. Deduce that pnp_n and pn+1p_{n+1} have no common root, and that at every root x0x_0 of pn+1p_{n+1}: pn(x0) pn+1′(x0)>0p_n(x_0)\,p_{n+1}'(x_0) > 0. Conclude the interlacing of roots: between two consecutive roots of pn+1p_{n+1} lies exactly one root of pnp_n.
  4. (Jacobi matrix) Let JnJ_n be the n×nn\times n symmetric tridiagonal matrix with diagonal a0,…,an−1a_0, \dots, a_{n-1} and off-diagonal entries b1,…,bn−1\sqrt{b_1}, \dots, \sqrt{b_{n-1}}. Show by induction that det⁡(tIn−Jn)=pn(t)\det(tI_n - J_n) = p_n(t), so the roots of pnp_n are the eigenvalues of a real symmetric matrix — re-proving in one line that they are real, and (with the interlacing above) tying orthogonal polynomials to the spectral world of Chapter 15.
  5. (Synthesis) Assemble the dictionary for the three classical families (Legendre, Hermite, Chebyshev): interval, weight, defining formula, three-term recurrence, norm, and the natural habitat of each (quadrature and approximation on compacta; Gaussian analysis; minimax and Fourier-cosine methods). One sentence on what the general theory (Parts I, VI) gave that no individual computation could.

Part VII — The error term, and the kernel behind the weights. Here II is compact and f∈C2n(I)f \in \mathcal C^{2n}(I).

  1. (Gauss error formula) Let HfHf be the Hermite interpolant of degree ≤2n−1\leq 2n - 1 matching ff and f′f' at the nodes t1,…,tnt_1, \dots, t_n (prove its existence and the pointwise error

    f(t)−Hf(t)=f(2n)(ξt)(2n)!  pn(t)2f(t) - Hf(t) = \frac{f^{(2n)}(\xi_t)}{(2n)!}\;p_n(t)^2

    by the usual auxiliary-function argument). Deduce, by integrating this identity against ww and squeezing between the extrema of f(2n)f^{(2n)}, that

    ∫If w−Qn(f)=f(2n)(ξ)(2n)! hnfor some ξ∈I,\int_I f\,w - Q_n(f) = \frac{f^{(2n)}(\xi)}{(2n)!}\,h_n \qquad\text{for some } \xi \in I,

    with hn=∥pn∥2h_n = \norm{p_n}^2 as in Part VI: Gauss quadrature errs by one 2n2n-th derivative, weighted by the squared norm of the monic orthogonal polynomial.

  2. (The weights are Christoffel values) Using the reproducing kernel Kn(x,y)=∑k=0n−1pk(x)pk(y)hkK_n(x, y) = \sum_{k=0}^{n-1} \frac{p_k(x)p_k(y)}{h_k} of Rn−1[t]\R_{n-1}[t] and the exactness of QnQ_n up to degree 2n−22n - 2, prove

    wi  =  ( ∑k=0n−1pk(ti)2hk) ⁣−1:w_i \;=\; \Bigl(\,\sum_{k=0}^{n-1} \frac{p_k(t_i)^2}{h_k}\Bigr)^{\!-1} :

    each weight is the value at its node of the Christoffel function — positivity of the weights (question 10) again, now with an exact formula. Verify it recovers w1=w2=1w_1 = w_2 = 1 for n=2n = 2, I=[−1, 1]I = \intcc{-1}1, w=1w = 1.

  3. (Everything checks on one integral) For the Chebyshev weight and n=3n = 3 nodes, compute both sides of

    ∫−11t61−t2  ⁣dt=5π16,Q3(t6)=9π32,\int_{-1}^{1}\frac{t^6}{\sqrt{1 - t^2}}\,\dd t = \frac{5\pi}{16}, \qquad Q_3(t^6) = \frac{9\pi}{32},

    so the quadrature error is exactly π32\frac{\pi}{32}; then check that the error formula of question 23 predicts precisely this value (here f(6)=6!f^{(6)} = 6! is constant, and h3=∥2−2T3∥w2=π32h_3 = \norm{2^{-2}T_3}_w^2 = \frac\pi{32}): theory and computation agree to the last digit.

Solution

Solution of Problem 13.1.

1. Gram–Schmidt guarantees Vect⁡(p0,…,pn)=Vect⁡(1,…,tn)=Rn[t]\operatorname{Vect}(p_0, \dots, p_n) = \operatorname{Vect}(1, \dots, t^n) = \R_n[t] and pn⊥pkp_n \perp p_k (k<nk < n), hence pn⊥Rn−1[t]p_n \perp \R_{n-1}[t]. The pkp_k, of strictly increasing degrees, are independent: a basis.

2. t pnt\,p_n is monic of degree n+1n + 1: expand t pn=pn+1+∑k≤nckpkt\,p_n = p_{n+1} + \sum_{k\leq n}c_kp_k with ck=⟨pk,tpn⟩/∥pk∥2c_k = \langle p_k, tp_n\rangle/\norm{p_k}^2. For k≤n−2k \leq n - 2: ⟨pk,tpn⟩=⟨tpk,pn⟩=0\langle p_k, tp_n\rangle = \langle tp_k, p_n\rangle = 0 (degree k+1<nk + 1 < n). So tpn=pn+1+anpn+bnpn−1tp_n = p_{n+1} + a_np_n + b_np_{n-1}, the stated recurrence, with

bn=⟨pn−1,tpn⟩∥pn−1∥2=⟨tpn−1,pn⟩∥pn−1∥2=⟨pn+(lower), pn⟩∥pn−1∥2=∥pn∥2∥pn−1∥2>0.b_n = \frac{\langle p_{n-1}, tp_n\rangle}{\norm{p_{n-1}}^2} = \frac{\langle tp_{n-1}, p_n\rangle}{\norm{p_{n-1}}^2} = \frac{\langle p_n + (\text{lower}),\ p_n\rangle}{\norm{p_{n-1}}^2} = \frac{\norm{p_n}^2}{\norm{p_{n-1}}^2} > 0 .

3. Let t1<⋯<tmt_1 < \dots < t_m be the points interior to II where pnp_n changes sign, and q=∏i≤m(t−ti)q = \prod_{i\leq m}(t - t_i) (with q=1q = 1 if m=0m = 0). Then pnqp_nq has constant sign on II and is not a.e. zero: ∫Ipnq w≠0\int_Ip_nq\,w \neq 0. If m<nm < n, this contradicts pn⊥Rn−1[t]p_n \perp \R_{n-1}[t]. So m=nm = n: pnp_n has nn distinct interior roots (it has at most nn roots in all).

4. (t2−1)n(t^2 - 1)^n has degree 2n2n; nn derivatives leave degree nn, with leading coefficient (2n)(2n−1)⋯(n+1)2nn!=(2n)!2n(n!)2\frac{(2n)(2n-1)\cdots(n+1)}{2^nn!} = \frac{(2n)!}{2^n(n!)^2}. For deg⁡Q<n\deg Q < n, integrate by parts nn times: all boundary terms contain a derivative of order <n< n of (t2−1)n(t^2-1)^n, which vanishes at ±1\pm1 (root of order nn); after nn steps the integrand carries Q(n)=0Q^{(n)} = 0.

5. With u=(t2−1)nu = (t^2 - 1)^n:

(2nn!)2∥Pn∥2=∫−11(u(n))2=(−1)n∫−11u u(2n)=(2n)!∫−11(1−t2)n ⁣dt,(2^nn!)^2\norm{P_n}^2 = \int_{-1}^1(u^{(n)})^2 = (-1)^n\int_{-1}^1 u\,u^{(2n)} = (2n)!\int_{-1}^1(1 - t^2)^n\dd t ,

(u(2n)=(2n)!u^{(2n)} = (2n)!; boundary terms vanish as in question 4). And ∫−11(1−t2)n ⁣dt=B(12,n+1)=Γ(12)Γ(n+1)Γ(n+32)=2⋅4n(n!)2(2n+1)!\int_{-1}^1(1-t^2)^n\dd t = B(\tfrac12, n+1) = \frac{\Gamma(\frac12)\Gamma(n+1)}{\Gamma(n + \frac32)} = \frac{2\cdot4^n(n!)^2}{(2n+1)!} (Exercise 11.8). Combining: ∥Pn∥2=22n+1\norm{P_n}^2 = \frac{2}{2n + 1}.

6. Polynomials are ∥⋅∥∞\norm\cdot_\infty-dense in C([−1, 1])\mathcal C(\intcc{-1}1) (Weierstrass, Corollary 7.16), continuous functions are L2L^2-dense (Theorem 12.6), and ∥⋅∥2≤2∥⋅∥∞\norm\cdot_2 \leq \sqrt2\norm\cdot_\infty: polynomial spans are total, so the normalized PnP_n form a Hilbert basis. Expansion of ∣t∣\abs t: the coefficient against P0P_0 is ⟨P0,∣t∣⟩∥P0∥2=12\frac{\langle P_0, \abs t\rangle}{\norm{P_0}^2} = \frac12; against P1P_1: 00 (parity); against P2P_2: ∫−11∣t∣ 3t2−12 ⁣dt2/5=1/42/5=58\frac{\int_{-1}^1\abs t\,\frac{3t^2-1}2\dd t}{2/5} = \frac{1/4}{2/5} = \frac58. Best quadratic approximation:

∣t∣≈12+58 P2(t)=316+1516 t2.\abs t \approx \frac12 + \frac58\,P_2(t) = \frac{3}{16} + \frac{15}{16}\,t^2 .

7. From  ⁣dn+1 ⁣dtn+1e−t2= ⁣dn ⁣dtn(−2t e−t2)\frac{\dd^{n+1}}{\dd t^{n+1}}\eu^{-t^2} = \frac{\dd^n}{\dd t^n}(-2t\,\eu^{-t^2}) and Leibniz, Hn+1=2tHn−Hn′H_{n+1} = 2tH_n - H_n'; induction gives degree nn and leading coefficient 2n2^n. For m<nm < n, integrate by parts nn times in ∫HmHne−t2=(−1)n∫Hm (e−t2)(n)\int H_m H_n\eu^{-t^2} = (-1)^n\int H_m\,\bigl(\eu^{-t^2} \bigr)^{(n)}: boundary terms (polynomial ×\times e−t2\eu^{-t^2}) vanish at ±∞\pm\infty, leaving ∫Hm(n) e−t2=0\int H_m^{(n)}\,\eu^{-t^2} = 0. For m=nm = n: Hn(n)=2nn!H_n^{(n)} = 2^nn!, so ∥Hn∥w2=2nn!∫e−t2=2nn!π\norm{H_n}_w^2 = 2^nn!\int\eu^{-t^2} = 2^nn!\sqrt\pi.

8. Let f∈L2(R,e−t2 ⁣dt)f \in L^2(\R, \eu^{-t^2}\dd t) be orthogonal to every polynomial, and g=fe−t2g = f\eu^{-t^2}. Then g∈L1g \in L^1: ∫∣f∣e−t2≤(∫∣f∣2e−t2)1/2(∫e−t2)1/2\int\abs f\eu^{-t^2} \leq \bigl(\int\abs f^2\eu^{-t^2}\bigr)^{1/2}\bigl(\int\eu^{-t^2}\bigr)^{1/2} (Cauchy–Schwarz). For ξ∈R\xi \in \R, expand e−iξt\eu^{-\iu\xi t}: the partial sums are dominated since

∑k∣ξ∣kk!∫∣f∣ ∣t∣ke−t2 ⁣dt≤(∫∣f∣2e−t2)1/2∑k∣ξ∣kk!(∫t2ke−t2)1/2<∞\sum_k\frac{\abs\xi^k}{k!}\int\abs f\,\abs t^k\eu^{-t^2}\dd t \leq \Bigl(\int \abs f^2\eu^{-t^2}\Bigr)^{1/2} \sum_k\frac{\abs\xi^k}{k!}\Bigl(\int t^{2k}\eu^{-t^2}\Bigr)^{1/2} < \infty

(the last series converges: ∫t2ke−t2=Γ(k+12)≤k! π\int t^{2k}\eu^{-t^2} = \Gamma(k+\frac12) \leq k!\,\sqrt\pi, so the terms are O(∣ξ∣k/k!)O(\abs\xi^k/\sqrt{k!})). Term-by-term integration (Corollary 10.7 applied to the absolute series, then Fubini for series) gives

∫Rg(t) e−iξt ⁣dt=∑k(−iξ)kk!∫f(t) tk e−t2 ⁣dt=0,\int_\R g(t)\,\eu^{-\iu\xi t}\dd t = \sum_k\frac{(-\iu\xi)^k}{k!}\int f(t)\,t^k\,\eu^{-t^2}\dd t = 0 ,

each integral being ⟨tk,f⟩w\langle t^k, f\rangle_w-type =0= 0. By the admitted injectivity of the Fourier transform (Chapter 14), g=0g = 0 a.e., so f=0f = 0 a.e.: the Hermite family (whose spans are the polynomials) is total.

9. Exactness to degree n−1n - 1: for such PP, P=∑iP(ti)ℓiP = \sum_iP(t_i)\ell_i exactly, so ∫Pw=∑iP(ti)∫ℓiw=Q(P)\int Pw = \sum_iP(t_i)\int \ell_iw = Q(P). Degree ≤2n−1\leq 2n - 1: divide P=qpn+rP = qp_n + r, deg⁡q≤n−1\deg q \leq n - 1, deg⁡r≤n−1\deg r \leq n-1; then ∫Pw=∫qpnw+∫rw=0+Q(r)\int Pw = \int qp_nw + \int rw = 0 + Q(r) (pn⊥Rn−1[t]p_n \perp \R_{n-1}[t]), while Q(P)=∑iwi(q(ti) pn(ti)+r(ti))=Q(r)Q(P) = \sum_iw_i\bigl(q(t_i)\,p_n(t_i) + r(t_i)\bigr) = Q(r) since the nodes are the roots of pnp_n. Equal.

10. ℓi2\ell_i^2 has degree 2n−2≤2n−12n - 2 \leq 2n - 1 and ℓi2(tj)=δij\ell_i^2(t_j) = \delta_{ij}: 0<∫ℓi2w=Q(ℓi2)=wi0 < \int\ell_i^2w = Q(\ell_i^2) = w_i. Polya (Exercise 8.9, transported to II with weight): condition (i) holds — each polynomial is integrated exactly once 2n−1≥2n - 1 \geq its degree; condition (ii): ∑i∣wi∣=∑iwi=Q(1)=∫Iw\sum_i\abs{w_{i}} = \sum_iw_i = Q(\mathbf 1) = \int_Iw, bounded: Qn(f)→∫fwQ_n(f) \to \int fw for every f∈C(I)f \in \mathcal C(I), II compact.

11. Monic p2=t2−13p_2 = t^2 - \frac13 (from Exercise 13.4): nodes ±13\pm\frac1{\sqrt3}. Weights: ℓ1(t)=t−13−23\ell_1(t) = \frac{t - \frac1{\sqrt3}}{-\frac2{\sqrt3}}, and w1=∫−11ℓ1=1w_1 = \int_{-1}^1\ell_1 = 1; by symmetry w2=1w_2 = 1. Exactness: ∫1=2=1+1\int 1 = 2 = 1 + 1; ∫t=0=−13+13\int t = 0 = -\frac1{\sqrt3} + \frac1{\sqrt3}; ∫t2=23=13+13\int t^2 = \frac23 = \frac13 + \frac13; ∫t3=0\int t^3 = 0. The two-point trapezoid rule (nodes ±1\pm1, weights 1,11, 1) is exact only to degree 11: on t2t^2 it returns 22 instead of 23\frac23. Same cost, two extra degrees of exactness: the payoff of orthogonal nodes.

12. From cos⁡(n+1)θ+cos⁡(n−1)θ=2cos⁡θcos⁡nθ\cos(n{+}1)\theta + \cos(n{-}1)\theta = 2\cos\theta\cos n\theta: Tn+1=2tTn−Tn−1T_{n+1} = 2tT_n - T_{n-1} with T0=1T_0 = 1, T1=tT_1 = t; induction gives polynomials of degree nn with leading coefficient 2n−12^{n-1} (n≥1n \geq 1). Substituting t=cos⁡θt = \cos\theta (w(t) ⁣dt↦ ⁣dθw(t)\dd t \mapsto \dd\theta): ⟨Tm,Tn⟩w=∫0πcos⁡mθcos⁡nθ  ⁣dθ=0\langle T_m, T_n\rangle_w = \int_0^\pi\cos m\theta\cos n\theta\,\dd\theta = 0 for m≠nm \neq n, =π= \pi for m=n=0m = n = 0, =π2= \frac\pi2 otherwise (product-to-sum). Degrees and pairwise orthogonality identify the TnT_n with the Gram–Schmidt output up to scalars; a Chebyshev expansion of ff is exactly the Fourier cosine series of θ↦f(cos⁡θ)\theta \mapsto f(\cos\theta).

13. Tn(t)=0T_n(t) = 0 iff cos⁡nθ=0\cos n\theta = 0 iff θ=(2k−1)π2n\theta = \frac{(2k-1)\pi}{2n}: the nn distinct roots tk=cos⁡(2k−1)π2n∈(−1, 1)t_k = \cos\frac{(2k-1)\pi}{2n} \in \intoo{-1}1. Extrema: ∣Tn∣≤1\abs{T_n} \leq 1 on [−1, 1]\intcc{-1}1, with Tn(sj)=(−1)jT_n(s_j) = (-1)^j at the n+1n + 1 points sj=cos⁡jπns_j = \cos\frac{j\pi}n: perfect equioscillation.

14. 21−nTn2^{1-n}T_n is monic with sup-norm 21−n2^{1-n}. If a monic PP of degree nn had sup⁡∣P∣<21−n\sup\abs P < 2^{1-n}, the difference D=21−nTn−PD = 2^{1-n}T_n - P would have degree ≤n−1\leq n - 1 (leading terms cancel) yet alternate in sign at s0>⋯>sns_0 > \dots > s_n (there 21−nTn=±21−n2^{1-n}T_n = \pm2^{1-n} dominates PP): at least nn zeros — D≡0D \equiv 0, contradiction. For uniqueness at equality, the same DD satisfies (−1)jD(sj)≥0(-1)^jD(s_j) \geq 0; a nonzero polynomial of degree ≤n−1\leq n-1 cannot have nn weakly alternating extremal constraints without nn roots counted properly (if D(sj)=0D(s_j) = 0 for some interior sjs_j, that zero is double in the counting since DD keeps a sign locally): again D≡0D \equiv 0.

15. The Lagrange error formula (Rolle, Year 2) gives f−Lnf=f(n)(ξt)n! ω(t)f - L_nf = \frac{f^{(n)}(\xi_t)}{n!}\,\omega(t), so the uniform error is at most ∥f(n)∥∞n! sup⁡∣ω∣\frac{\norm{f^{(n)}}_\infty} {n!}\,\sup\abs\omega, and ω\omega is monic of degree nn: by question 14, sup⁡[−1, 1]∣ω∣≥21−n\sup_{\intcc{-1}1}\abs\omega \geq 2^{1-n} with equality iff the nodes are the Chebyshev roots. Hence the optimal bound ∥f−Lnf∥∞≤∥f(n)∥∞2n−1n!\norm{f - L_nf}_\infty \leq \frac{\norm{f^{(n)}}_\infty}{2^{n-1}n!}. With equally spaced nodes, sup⁡∣ω∣\sup\abs\omega is exponentially larger near the endpoints, and interpolating even 11+25t2\frac1{1 + 25t^2} diverges there as n→∞n \to \infty (Runge’s phenomenon); Chebyshev nodes are the cure.

16. Differentiating Tn(cos⁡θ)=cos⁡nθT_n(\cos\theta) = \cos n\theta: Tn′(cos⁡θ)=nsin⁡nθsin⁡θT_n'(\cos\theta) = \frac{n\sin n\theta} {\sin\theta}, which tends to n2n^2 as θ→0\theta \to 0 and to (−1)n+1n2(-1)^{n+1}n^2 as θ→π\theta \to \pi: ∣Tn′(±1)∣=n2\abs{T_n'(\pm1)} = n^2. At interior points, ∣Tn′(t)∣≤n1−t2=O(n)\abs{T_n'(t)} \leq \frac{n}{\sqrt{1 - t^2}} = O(n): the quadratic blow-up lives only at the edges (Bernstein’s interior bound versus Markov’s global one).

17. Let θk=(2k−1)π2n\theta_k = \frac{(2k-1)\pi}{2n} and Sj=∑k=1ncos⁡(jθk)S_j = \sum_{k=1}^n\cos(j\theta_k) for 1≤j≤n−11 \leq j \leq n-1. Then

Sj=Re⁡[eijπ/2n∑k=0n−1eijkπ/n]=Re⁡[eijπ/2n eijπ−1eijπ/n−1].S_j = \operatorname{Re}\Bigl[\eu^{\iu j\pi/2n} \sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\eu^{\iu jk\pi/n}\Bigr] = \operatorname{Re}\Bigl[\eu^{\iu j\pi/2n}\, \frac{\eu^{\iu j\pi} - 1}{\eu^{\iu j\pi/n} - 1}\Bigr] .

For jj even the numerator vanishes: Sj=0S_j = 0. For jj odd the numerator is −2-2, and eijπ/n−1=eijπ/2n⋅2isin⁡jπ2n\eu^{\iu j\pi/n} - 1 = \eu^{\iu j\pi/2n}\cdot2\iu\sin\frac{j\pi}{2n}, so the whole expression is −22isin⁡(jπ/2n)=isin⁡(jπ/2n)\frac{-2}{2\iu\sin(j\pi/2n)} = \frac{\iu}{\sin(j\pi/2n)}: purely imaginary, Sj=0S_j = 0 again. Hence the equal-weight rule πn∑kf(tk)\frac\pi n\sum_kf(t_k) integrates T0T_0 (∑wi=π=∫w\sum w_i = \pi = \int w) and kills T1,…,Tn−1T_1, \dots, T_{n-1} exactly as ∫Tjw=0\int T_jw = 0 does: it is exact to degree n−1n - 1. Weights exact to degree n−1n-1 at given nodes are unique (Lagrange basis): the Gauss weights are all πn\frac\pi n. For n=3n = 3: nodes ±32,0\pm\frac{\sqrt3}2, 0 and

∫−11f(t)1−t2  ⁣dt≈π3[f(32)+f(0)+f(−32)],\int_{-1}^1\frac{f(t)}{\sqrt{1 - t^2}}\,\dd t \approx \frac\pi3\Bigl[f\Bigl(\tfrac{\sqrt3}2\Bigr) + f(0) + f\Bigl(-\tfrac{\sqrt3}2\Bigr)\Bigr],

exact through degree 55.

18. For monic PP of degree nn: P=pn+rP = p_n + r with r∈Rn−1[t]r \in \R_{n-1}[t], and pn⊥Rn−1[t]p_n \perp \R_{n-1}[t] (question 1), so ∥P∥2=∥pn∥2+∥r∥2≥∥pn∥2\norm P^2 = \norm{p_n}^2 + \norm r^2 \geq \norm{p_n}^2, with equality iff r=0r = 0: pnp_n is the orthogonal projection residue of tnt^n onto Rn−1[t]⊥\R_{n-1}[t]^\perp, i.e. the monic polynomial closest to the subspace it must avoid. Chebyshev’s 21−nTn2^{1-n}T_n answers the same question for the sup-norm: least deviation from zero, once in L2(w)L^2(w), once in L∞L^\infty.

19. Write Kn(x,y)=∑k=0npk(x)pk(y)hkK_n(x, y) = \sum_{k=0}^n\frac{p_k(x)p_k(y)}{h_k}. Base n=0n = 0: (x−y)1h0=p1(x)⋅1−1⋅p1(y)h0(x - y)\frac1{h_0} = \frac{p_1(x)\cdot1 - 1\cdot p_1(y)}{h_0} since p1=t−a0p_1 = t - a_0. Step: assuming the identity for n−1n - 1,

(x−y) Kn(x,y)=pn(x)pn−1(y)−pn−1(x)pn(y)hn−1+(x−y) pn(x)pn(y)hn;(x - y)\,K_n(x,y) = \frac{p_n(x)p_{n-1}(y) - p_{n-1}(x)p_n(y)}{h_{n-1}} + \frac{(x - y)\,p_n(x)p_n(y)}{h_n} ;

substitute x pn(x)=pn+1(x)+anpn(x)+bnpn−1(x)x\,p_n(x) = p_{n+1}(x) + a_np_n(x) + b_np_{n-1}(x) and y pn(y)=pn+1(y)+anpn(y)+bnpn−1(y)y\,p_n(y) = p_{n+1}(y) + a_np_n(y) + b_np_{n-1}(y) in the second term: the ana_n contributions cancel, and the bn=hnhn−1b_n = \frac{h_n}{h_{n-1}} contributions cancel the induction term; what survives is pn+1(x)pn(y)−pn(x)pn+1(y)hn\frac{p_{n+1}(x)p_n(y) - p_n(x)p_{n+1}(y)}{h_n}. The confluent form follows by letting y→xy \to x (both sides are polynomials in yy).

20. The confluent form gives pn+1′pn−pn′pn+1=hn∑k≤npk2hk≥hnh0>0p_{n+1}'p_n - p_n'p_{n+1} = h_n\sum_{k\leq n}\frac{p_k^2}{h_k} \geq \frac{h_n}{h_0} > 0 everywhere. At a root x0x_0 of pn+1p_{n+1}: pn+1′(x0) pn(x0)>0p_{n+1}'(x_0)\,p_n(x_0) > 0, so pn(x0)≠0p_n(x_0) \neq 0 (no common roots). Between consecutive roots x0<x1x_0 < x_1 of pn+1p_{n+1} (all simple, Part I), pn+1′p_{n+1}' has opposite signs, hence so does pnp_n: a root of pnp_n lies in each of the nn gaps — and that exhausts its nn roots: interlacing.

21. Expanding Dn(t)=det⁡(tIn−Jn)D_n(t) = \det(tI_n - J_n) along the last row: Dn=(t−an−1)Dn−1−bn−1Dn−2D_n = (t - a_{n-1})D_{n-1} - b_{n-1}D_{n-2}, with D0=1D_0 = 1, D1=t−a0D_1 = t - a_0: the recurrence and seeds of the monic pnp_n, so Dn=pnD_n = p_n. Roots of pnp_n = eigenvalues of the symmetric JnJ_n: real, and simple by question 19 — Gauss quadrature is the spectral theory of a tridiagonal matrix in disguise, the finite-dimensional shadow of Chapter 15.

22. Dictionary:

LegendreHermiteChebyshev
interval[−1, 1]\intcc{-1}1R\R[−1, 1]\intcc{-1}1
weight11e−t2\eu^{-t^2}(1−t2)−1/2(1-t^2)^{-1/2}
formulaRodrigues(−1)net2 ⁣dn ⁣dtne−t2(-1)^n\eu^{t^2} \frac{\dd^n}{\dd t^n}\eu^{-t^2}cos⁡(narccos⁡t)\cos(n\arccos t)
norm2^222n+1\frac2{2n+1}2nn!π2^nn!\sqrt\piπ,π2\pi, \frac\pi2
habitatquadratureGaussian calculusminimax

(each with its three-term recurrence: general form for Legendre, Hn+1=2tHn−2nHn−1H_{n+1} = 2tH_n - 2nH_{n-1}, Tn+1=2tTn−Tn−1T_{n+1} = 2tT_n - T_{n-1}). The general theory supplied what no single family shows: reality and interlacing of roots, positivity of quadrature weights, the mere existence of the recurrence and of Christoffel–Darboux — consequences of orthogonality alone, uniform in the weight.

23. Existence: the linear map R2n−1[t]→R2n\R_{2n-1}[t] \to \R^{2n}, P↦(P(t1),P′(t1),…,P(tn),P′(tn))P \mapsto (P(t_1), P'(t_1), \dots, P(t_n), P'(t_n)), is injective (a PP in the kernel has nn double roots and degree ≤2n−1\leq 2n - 1, so P=0P = 0) between spaces of equal dimension 2n2n: bijective. Pointwise error: fix tt not a node and choose KK so that g(s)=f(s)−Hf(s)−K pn(s)2g(s) = f(s) - Hf(s) - K\,p_n(s)^2 vanishes at s=ts = t. Then gg vanishes at the n+1n + 1 distinct points t,t1,…,tnt, t_1, \dots, t_n, and g′g' vanishes at each tit_i too (both f−Hff - Hf and pn2p_n^2 have double zeros there). Rolle gives nn zeros of g′g' strictly between consecutive zeros of gg — distinct from the nodes — so g′g' has 2n2n distinct zeros; applying Rolle 2n−12n - 1 more times produces ξt\xi_t with g(2n)(ξt)=0g^{(2n)}(\xi_t) = 0. Since deg⁡Hf≤2n−1\deg Hf \leq 2n - 1 and pn2p_n^2 is monic of degree 2n2n, g(2n)=f(2n)−K (2n)!g^{(2n)} = f^{(2n)} - K\,(2n)!, whence K=f(2n)(ξt)/(2n)!K = f^{(2n)}(\xi_t)/(2n)! — and the identity is trivial at the nodes. Integration: Qn(f)=Qn(Hf)Q_n(f) = Q_n(Hf) (HfHf matches ff at the nodes) and Qn(Hf)=∫Hf wQ_n(Hf) = \int Hf\,w by exactness up to degree 2n−12n - 1 (question 9), so the quadrature error is ∫(f−Hf) w\int(f - Hf)\,w. With m,Mm, M the extrema of f(2n)f^{(2n)} on II, the pointwise identity squeezes

m hn(2n)!  ≤  ∫I(f−Hf) w  ≤  M hn(2n)!,\frac{m\,h_n}{(2n)!} \;\leq\; \int_I(f - Hf)\,w \;\leq\; \frac{M\,h_n}{(2n)!} ,

and the intermediate value theorem applied to the continuous f(2n)f^{(2n)} delivers ξ\xi. (For Legendre with n=2n = 2: h2=∫−11(t2−13)2 ⁣dt=845h_2 = \int_{-1}^1(t^2 - \frac13)^2\dd t = \frac8{45}, so the error is f(4)(ξ)/135f^{(4)}(\xi)/135.)

24. The kernel reproduces Rn−1[t]\R_{n-1}[t]: expanding q=∑k⟨pk,q⟩hkpkq = \sum_k\frac{\langle p_k, q\rangle}{h_k}p_k gives ∫IKn(ti,t) q(t) w(t) ⁣dt=q(ti)\int_I K_n(t_i, t)\,q(t)\,w(t)\dd t = q(t_i) for every qq of degree ≤n−1\leq n - 1. Take q=ℓiq = \ell_i: the left side equals ℓi(ti)=1\ell_i(t_i) = 1. But t↦Kn(ti,t) ℓi(t)t \mapsto K_n(t_i, t)\,\ell_i(t) is a polynomial of degree ≤(n−1)+(n−1)=2n−2\leq (n - 1) + (n - 1) = 2n - 2, on which QnQ_n is exact (question 9), and it vanishes at every node tj≠tit_j \neq t_i (factor ℓi\ell_i), so

1=∫IKn(ti,t) ℓi(t) w(t) ⁣dt=wi Kn(ti,ti)=wi∑k=0n−1pk(ti)2hk.1 = \int_I K_n(t_i, t)\,\ell_i(t)\,w(t)\dd t = w_i\,K_n(t_i, t_i) = w_i\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\frac{p_k(t_i)^2}{h_k} .

The sum is >0> 0 (its k=0k = 0 term is 1/h0>01/h_0 > 0): the stated formula, and positivity again. Check (n=2n = 2, Legendre): p0=1p_0 = 1, h0=2h_0 = 2, p1=tp_1 = t, h1=23h_1 = \frac23; at ti=±13t_i = \pm\frac1{\sqrt3},

K2(ti,ti)=12+1/32/3=1,wi=1,K_2(t_i, t_i) = \frac12 + \frac{1/3}{2/3} = 1, \qquad w_i = 1,

as found in question 11.

25. Substituting t=cos⁡θt = \cos\theta, the integral is ∫0πcos⁡6θ  ⁣dθ=π 5⋅3⋅16⋅4⋅2=5π16\int_0^\pi\cos^6\theta\,\dd\theta = \pi\,\frac{5\cdot3\cdot1}{6\cdot4\cdot2} = \frac{5\pi}{16} (Wallis, Exercise 11.8). The n=3n = 3 Chebyshev–Gauss rule (question 17) has nodes cos⁡π6=32\cos\frac\pi6 = \frac{\sqrt3}2, cos⁡π2=0\cos\frac\pi2 = 0, cos⁡5π6=−32\cos\frac{5\pi}6 = -\frac{\sqrt3}2 and equal weights π3\frac\pi3:

Q3(t6)=π3(2⋅(32)6)=π3⋅5464=9π32,5π16−9π32=π32.Q_3(t^6) = \frac\pi3\Bigl(2\cdot\Bigl(\frac{\sqrt3}2 \Bigr)^{6}\Bigr) = \frac\pi3\cdot\frac{54}{64} = \frac{9\pi}{32}, \qquad \frac{5\pi}{16} - \frac{9\pi}{32} = \frac\pi{32} .

Prediction: the monic degree-33 orthogonal polynomial is 2−2T3=t3−34t2^{-2}T_3 = t^3 - \frac34t, with h3=116∥T3∥w2=116⋅π2=π32h_3 = \frac1{16}\norm{T_3}_w^2 = \frac1{16}\cdot\frac\pi2 = \frac\pi{32}; and f=t6f = t^6 has constant f(6)=720=6!f^{(6)} = 720 = 6!, so question 23 gives error 6!6! h3=π32\frac{6!}{6!}\,h_3 = \frac\pi{32} — with no dependence on ξ\xi left, the formula is forced to be exact, and it is.

Terms defined in this chapter

See all 395 terms in the glossary