Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

If $(V, \langle \cdot, \cdot \rangle)$ is a finite-dimensional inner product space and $f,g : \mathbb{R} \longrightarrow V$ are differentiable functions, a straightforward calculation with components shows that

$$ \frac{d}{dt} \langle f, g \rangle = \langle f(t), g^{\prime}(t) \rangle + \langle f^{\prime}(t), g(t) \rangle $$

This approach is not very satisfying. However, attempting to apply the definition of the derivative directly doesn't seem to work for me. Is there a slick, perhaps intrinsic way, to prove this that doesn't involve working in coordinates?

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 27 down vote accepted

Observe that $$ \begin{align*} \frac{1}{h} & \left[ \langle f(t+h),\, g(t+h)\rangle - \langle f(t),\, g(t) \rangle \right] \\ & = \frac{1}{h} \left[ \langle f(t+h),\, g(t+h)\rangle - \langle f(t),\, g(t+h)\rangle \right] + \frac{1}{h} \left[ \langle f(t),\, g(t+h)\rangle - \langle f(t),\, g(t)\rangle \right] \\ &= \left\langle \frac{1}{h} \left[ f(t+h) - f(t) \right],\, g(t+h) \right\rangle + \left\langle f(t),\, \frac{1}{h} \left[ g(t+h) - g(t) \right] \right\rangle. \end{align*} $$ As $h\to 0$ the first expression converges to $$ \frac{d}{dt} \langle f(t), g(t) \rangle $$ and the last expression converges to $$ \langle f^{\prime}(t), g(t) \rangle + \langle f(t), g^{\prime}(t) \rangle $$ by definition of the derivative, by continuity of $g$ and by continuity of the scalar product. Hence the desired equality follows.

Note that this doesn't use finite-dimensionality and that the argument is the exact same as the one for the ordinary product rule from calculus.

share|cite|improve this answer
Thanks Theo, very nice answer – ItsNotObvious Jan 4 '12 at 16:30

This answer may be needlessly complicated if you don't want such generality, taking the approach of first finding the Fréchet derivative of a bilinear operator.

If $V$, $W$, and $Z$ are normed spaces, and if $T:V\times W\to Z$ is a continuous (real) bilinear operator, meaning that there exists $C\geq 0$ such that $\|T(v,w)\|\leq C\|v\|\|w\|$ for all $v\in V$ and $w\in W$, then the derivative of $T$ at $(v_0,w_0)$ is $DT|_{(v_0,w_0)}(v,w)=T(v,w_0)+T(v_0,w)$. (I am assuming that $V\times W$ is given a norm equivalent with $\|(v,w)\|=\sqrt{\|v\|^2+\|w\|^2}$.) This follows from the straightforward computation

$$\frac{\|T(v_0+v,w_0+w)-T(v_0,w_0)-(T(v,w_0)+T(v_0,w))\|}{\|(v,w)\|}=\frac{\|T(v,w)\|}{\|(v,w)\|}\leq C\frac{\|v\|\|w\|}{\|(v,w)\|}\to 0$$

as $(v,w)\to 0$.

With $V=W$, $Z=\mathbb R$ or $Z=\mathbb C$, and $T:V\times V\to Z$ the inner product, this gives $DT_{(v_0,w_0)}(v,w)=\langle v,w_0\rangle+\langle v_0,w\rangle$. Now if $f,g:\mathbb R\to V$ are differentiable, then $F:\mathbb R\to V\times V$ defined by $F(t)=(f(t),g(t))$ is differentiable with $DF|_t(h)=h(f'(t),g'(t))$. By the chain rule,

$$D(T\circ F)|_{t}(h) =DT|_{F(t)}\circ DF|_t(h)=h(\langle f'(t),g(t)\rangle+\langle f(t),g'(t)\rangle),$$

which means $\frac{d}{dt} \langle f, g \rangle = \langle f'(t),g(t)\rangle+\langle f(t),g'(t)\rangle$.

share|cite|improve this answer
This is also a great answer. – ItsNotObvious Jan 4 '12 at 16:31
I notice that $\langle v, w_0\rangle + \langle v_0, w\rangle$ is not linear in $(v,w)$. (I.e. it's conjugate linear in $w$). So how can this be the derivative? I stumbled upon this page with exactly this question in mind. – Eric Auld Jan 16 '15 at 1:02
@Eric: It is real linear. That it what is used here, as noted above, "if $T$... is a continuous (real) bilinear operator...". – Jonas Meyer Jan 16 '15 at 2:33

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.