From "Linear Algebra Demystified", David McMahon, 2006, problem 2, page 132 and page 235:

$$<\underline{u},\underline{v}> = 2i$$ $$<\underline{u},\underline{w}> = 1 + 9i$$

$$ y = (2\ <3i\underline{u},\ \ \underline{v}>\ ) - <\underline{u},\ \ i \underline{w}> $$

Find value of y:

$$ y = (2(-3i)<\underline{u},\ \ \underline{v}>\ )\ - (i<\underline{u},\ \ \underline{w}>) \\ $$

$$ y = ((-6i)<\underline{u},\ \ \underline{v}>\ )\ - (i<\underline{u},\ \ \underline{w}>) \\ $$

$$ y = ((-6i)(2i) - (i)(1+9i) $$

$$ y = -12i^2 - i-9i^2) $$

$$ y = -21i^2 - i $$

$$ y = 21 - i $$

However, book says the answer is:

$$ -3 -i $$

How did they get that? are they wrong or right? just curious because complex inner product has some strange factoring rules for pulling out constants, being first argument anti-linear, and second argument linear.

If i understand correctly, when pulling the complex constant out of the first argument of dot product then i need to conjugate the imaginary term, if i pull the complex constant out of the second argument of dot product, then i don't need to conjugate it.

and as usual: $i^2 = \sqrt{-1} \sqrt{-1} = -1$

Actually, i'm a little bit confused about this part. The book say that complex vectors have the following inner space properties:

$$ <a\underline{u}, \underline{w}> = a^* <\underline{u}, \underline{w}> $$

$$ <\underline{u}, b\underline{w}> = b <\underline{u}, \underline{w}> $$

And they had a proof in the book that proves it this way...but when i look on the internet, they say its this, instead:

$$ <a\underline{u}, \underline{w}> = a <\underline{u}, \underline{w}> $$

$$ <\underline{u}, b\underline{w}> = b^* <\underline{u}, \underline{w}> $$

(my opinion, is that mathworld wrote it wrong then wikipedia copied it, and then everybody else believed them)

  • $\begingroup$ mathworld.wolfram.com/HermitianInnerProduct.html $\endgroup$ – DiscreteMath Feb 26 at 4:04
  • $\begingroup$ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilbert_space $\endgroup$ – DiscreteMath Feb 26 at 4:09
  • $\begingroup$ turns out that on 2/26/2019, both mathword and wikipedia are printing the equations wrong. I complained to mathworld using their complaint form. $\endgroup$ – DiscreteMath Feb 26 at 12:48
  • $\begingroup$ When pulling out a scalar, whether the scalar in the first argument or the second one should be conjugated is just a convention. Some choose the first one and some choose the second one. As long as one is consistent (in your case, the book author is not), this shouldn't be a problem. $\endgroup$ – user1551 Feb 26 at 13:34

$$2<3iu,v>-<u,iw>=-6i\cdot2i-i(1+9i)=12-i+9=21-i,$$ which says that the book answer is wrong and you are right.

  • $\begingroup$ but don't you need to apply complex-conjugate to remove complex constant from LHS of dot product? $2<3iu,v>=2(-3i)<u,v> = -6i<u,v>= (-6i)(2i)=-12i^2=12$ $\endgroup$ – DiscreteMath Feb 26 at 3:57
  • $\begingroup$ @DiscreteMath Yes, I think you are right. I fixed. Maybe in the given $<u,v>=-2i$? $\endgroup$ – Michael Rozenberg Feb 26 at 6:03

Found this in a better math book:

enter image description here


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.