Let $H_1$, $H_2$,...,$H_n$ be $n$ Hilbert Spaces. For each $\phi_i \in H_i$, Let $$ \phi_1 \otimes \phi_2 \otimes... \otimes \phi_n:= \text{Conjugate multilinear form which acts on $H_1 \times H_2.. \times H_n$}$$ by

$$(\phi_1 \otimes \phi_2 \otimes... \otimes \phi_n ) \langle\psi_1,\psi_2,..,\psi_n\rangle =\langle\phi_1,\psi_1\rangle_{H_1}\langle\phi_2,\psi_2 \rangle_{H_2}...\langle\phi_n,\psi_n\rangle_{H_n}$$

Let $S$ be the set of all finite linear combinations of such Conjugate multilinear forms. We define an innerproduct $(.,.)$ on $S$ by defining $$\langle\phi_1 \otimes \phi_2 \otimes... \otimes \phi_n ,\psi_1 \otimes \psi_2 \otimes..\otimes \psi_n\rangle =\langle\phi_1,\psi_1\rangle_{H_1}\langle\phi_2,\psi_2 \rangle_{H_2}...\langle\phi_n,\psi_n\rangle_{H_n}$$

We can extend it to whole of $S$ by linearity. Now I want to show that this $(.,.)$ is well defined. For this I need to show that $(\lambda,\lambda')$ doesnot depend on the linear combination which is used to express $\lambda$ and $\lambda'$.

Suppose that $\lambda= \sum_{i=1}^{m}c_i (\phi_{i1} \otimes \phi_{i2} \otimes... \otimes \phi_{in})=\sum_{i=1}^{m}c_i' (\phi'_{i1} \otimes \phi'_{i2} \otimes... \otimes \phi'_{in}$) and $\lambda'=\sum_{i=1}^{m}d_i (\psi_{i1} \otimes \psi_{i2} \otimes... \otimes \psi_{in})=\sum_{i=1}^{m}d'_i (\psi'_{i1} \otimes \psi'_{i2} \otimes... \otimes \psi'_{in})$

From here How do I conclude that it is well defined??

I am learning Tensor Products on Hilbert Spaces.

Thanks for the help!!

  • $\begingroup$ I think this question has been answered already on SE. Here's a link. $\endgroup$ – Oliver Jones Feb 2 '16 at 10:32
  • $\begingroup$ @OliverJones I want to do it the way I have mentioned $\endgroup$ – tattwamasi amrutam Feb 2 '16 at 10:37

You don't seem to have set up the approach properly. You should start with the tensor product of the $H_i$'s, i.e. $H=H_1\otimes H_2\otimes \cdots \otimes H_n$. This is a quotient vector space. An expression of the form $\phi_1\otimes \phi_2\otimes \cdots \otimes \phi_n$ represents an equivalence class in $H$. In order for the inner product to be well-defined on $H$, you must show that it doesn't depend on the representative for this class. What you've written above doesn't describe the representatives of $\phi_1\otimes \phi_2\otimes \cdots \otimes \phi_n$. You need to review how $H_1\otimes H_2\otimes \cdots \otimes H_n$ is constructed.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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