The Cauchy-Schwarz inequality says that

$$|\langle v, w \rangle| \leq \|v\| \|w\|\tag{1}$$ for vectors $v, w$ in a complex Hilbert space.

By exploiting the obvious inequality

$$\|v-w\|^2 \geq 0\tag{2}$$

and expanding everything out, one gets the weaker inequality $$ \hbox{Re} \langle v, w \rangle \leq \frac{1}{2} \|v\|^2 + \frac{1}{2} \|w\|^2. \tag{3} $$ Now (3) is weaker than (1). Firstly, observe that the phase rotation symmetry $v \mapsto e^{i\theta} v$ preserves the RHS of (3) but not the LHS. We exploit this by replacing $v$ by $e^{i\theta} v$ in (3) for some phase $\theta$ to be chosen later, to obtain $$ \hbox{Re} e^{i\theta} \langle v, w \rangle \leq \frac{1}{2} \|v\|^2 + \frac{1}{2} \|w\|^2. $$ By choosing $e^{i\theta}$ to cancel the phase of $\langle v, w \rangle$, we obtain $$ |\langle v, w \rangle| \leq \frac{1}{2} \|v\|^2 + \frac{1}{2} \|w\|^2 \tag{4} $$ This is closer to (1); we have fixed the left-hand side, but the right-hand side is still too weak. But we can amplify further, by exploiting an imbalance in a different symmetry, namely the homogenisation symmetry $(v,w) \mapsto (\lambda v, \frac{1}{\lambda} w)$ for a scalar $\lambda > 0$, which preserves the left-hand side but not the right. Inserting this transform into (4) we conclude that $$ |\langle v, w \rangle| \leq \frac{\lambda^2}{2} \|v\|^2 + \frac{1}{2\lambda^2} \|w\|^2 $$ where $\lambda > 0$ is at our disposal to choose. We can optimise in $\lambda$ by minimising the right-hand side, and indeed one easily sees that the minimum (or infimum, if one of $v$ and $w$ vanishes) is $\|v\| \|w\|$ (which is achieved when $\lambda = \sqrt{\|w\|/\|v\|}$ when $v,w$ are non-zero, or in an asymptotic limit $\lambda \to 0$ or $\lambda \to \infty$ in the degenerate cases), and so we have amplified our way to the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality (1).

The above is a proof of the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality from one of Terry Tao's expository articles.

In Folland's Real Analysis, a similar construction is given, which also proves the condition when the equality in (1) is true:

enter image description here

Here is my question:

following Tao's argument, can one prove that the equality in (1) is true only when $v,w$ are linearly dependent?


It is not entirely clear what you mean by 'following Tao's argument'.

Suppose $|\langle v,w\rangle| = \|v\| \|w\|$.

Let $w=\alpha v +h$, with $h \bot v$. Then $\|w\|^2 = |\alpha|^2 \|v\|^2 + \|h\|^2$ and $|\langle v,w\rangle| = |\alpha| \|v\|^2$.

Then the first squared line gives: $|\alpha|^2 \|v\|^4 = \|v\|^2 (|\alpha|^2 \|v\|^2 + \|h\|^2)$.

Hence either $v=0$ and we have $v = 0 \cdot w$, or $h=0$ in which case $w = \alpha v$.

Alternative approach:

If $w=0$ or $v=0$ the result is true so suppose both are not zero.

Suppose $|\langle v,w\rangle| = \|v\| \|w\|$. Replacing $v$ by $\theta v$, with $|\theta| = 1$ does not change the formula, so we can assume that $\langle v,w\rangle = \|v\| \|w\|$.

Note that replacing $(v,w)$ by $(tv, {1 \over t} w)$, with $t>0$ does not change the formula.

Now note that $(t\|v\|-{1 \over t}\|w\|)^2 = \|tv-{1 \over t}w\|^2$.

Now choose $t=\sqrt{\|w\| \over \|v\|}$ to get $w = {\|w\| \over \|v\|} v$.


I may not ask the queation in a clear good way. I was looking for an argument similar to Tao's one, which is conceptually easy and natural to remember. Here is one that I find natural.

Suppose $|\langle x,y\rangle|=\|x\|\|y\|\neq 0$. It suffices to show that there exists $t\in\mathbb{C}$ such that $$ \|x-ty\|^2=0.\tag{1} $$ Expanding everything out, one has $$ \|x-ty\|^2=\|x\|^2+|t|^2\|y\|^2-2\hbox{Re}(t\langle x,y\rangle)\tag{2} $$ Our goal is to choose $t$ so that the right hand side is $0$. As a complex number, we can write $t=re^{-\theta}$ where $r=|t|$.

Let $\theta=-\hbox{sgn}(\langle x,y\rangle)$ where $\hbox{sgn}(z):=z/|z|$ for $z\neq 0$. Then (2) becomes $$ \|x-ty\|^2=\|x\|^2+r^2\|y\|^2-2r\cdot|\langle x,y\rangle|=\|x\|^2+r^2\|y\|^2-2r\cdot\|x\|\|y\|.\tag{3} $$ In other word we can choose the phase angle of $t$ to "cancel" out that of $\langle x,y\rangle$.

Now, choosing $r=\|x\|/\|y\|$, we are done: $$ \|x\|^2+r^2\|y\|^2-2r\cdot\|x\|\|y\|=0. $$

  • $\begingroup$ The above is essentially what I did in my alternative approach below except I used $\|tv - {1 \over t} w\|^2$ instead (following the 'Tao' approach above). $\endgroup$ – copper.hat Apr 23 '17 at 16:25
  • $\begingroup$ I feel like this looks too much like a different proof of C-S. Indeed, If you instead write $\|x-ty\|^2 ≥ 0$, expand to $$0≤ | \|x\|^{1/2} - |t|\|y\|^{1/2} |^{2} - 2\Re( t\langle x,y\rangle) + 2 |t| \|x\|^{1/2} \|y\|^{1/2}$$ and use your value of $t$, C-S pops out. $\endgroup$ – Calvin Khor Dec 29 '17 at 12:47
  • $\begingroup$ (the above proof is different from the one in Folland since it is for a complex space) In particular the scaling invariance property is not used, and one is forced to accept that $\|x-ty\|≥0$ is somehow a priori a good place to start. $\endgroup$ – Calvin Khor Dec 29 '17 at 13:00

Our papers below offer some new, elementary approaches to Schwarz inequalities:

  1. Z. Boros and A. Szaz, Generalized Schwarz inequalities for .... Novi Sad J. Math. 47(2017), 177--188.

  2. Z. Boros and A. Szaz, A weak Schwarz inequality for .... Rostock Math. Koll. 71(2016), 28--40.


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.