Is there an orthonormal basis for $L^2([0,1])$ consisting of only even-degree polynomials?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
1
down vote

favorite












Problem:



Does $L^2([0,1])$ equipped with the inner product $$langle f,g rangle = int_0^1 overlinef(x)g(x) , dx$$ have an orthonormal basis of the form $leftf_n(x):=sumlimits_k=0^n a_k x^2k mid n ge 0right$?



Attempt:



I worked this out by hand and then checked with Mathematica. I think that no such basis exists. However, in my proof I showed that the orthonormal system need not even be complete.



Did I make a mistake somewhere?



Here is the Mathematica code:



u[n_, x_] := Sum[(a[k]+I*b[k])*x^(2*k), k,0,n]

f[m_, n_] := Integrate[ComplexExpand[Conjugate[u[m,x]]*u[n,x]], x,0,1]

Solve[f[0,0]==1, f[0,1]==0, f[1,0]==0, f[1,1]==1, a[0],b[0],a[1],b[1]]


In the code above I expanded each coefficient $a_k$ into its real and imaginary parts, and then solved the set of equations



$$langle f_0,f_0 rangle = 1, langle f_0,f_1 rangle = 0, langle f_1,f_0 rangle = 0, langle f_1,f_1 rangle = 1$$



but got an empty solution set.







share|cite|improve this question






















  • You really don't need to worry about imaginary coefficients. If there's an orthonormal basis of the type you seek then there'll be one with real coefficients.
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Aug 18 at 2:13










  • Why are imaginary coefficients irrelevant here?
    – Mathemagica
    Aug 18 at 2:22






  • 1




    Think Gram-Schmidt.
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Aug 18 at 2:23














up vote
1
down vote

favorite












Problem:



Does $L^2([0,1])$ equipped with the inner product $$langle f,g rangle = int_0^1 overlinef(x)g(x) , dx$$ have an orthonormal basis of the form $leftf_n(x):=sumlimits_k=0^n a_k x^2k mid n ge 0right$?



Attempt:



I worked this out by hand and then checked with Mathematica. I think that no such basis exists. However, in my proof I showed that the orthonormal system need not even be complete.



Did I make a mistake somewhere?



Here is the Mathematica code:



u[n_, x_] := Sum[(a[k]+I*b[k])*x^(2*k), k,0,n]

f[m_, n_] := Integrate[ComplexExpand[Conjugate[u[m,x]]*u[n,x]], x,0,1]

Solve[f[0,0]==1, f[0,1]==0, f[1,0]==0, f[1,1]==1, a[0],b[0],a[1],b[1]]


In the code above I expanded each coefficient $a_k$ into its real and imaginary parts, and then solved the set of equations



$$langle f_0,f_0 rangle = 1, langle f_0,f_1 rangle = 0, langle f_1,f_0 rangle = 0, langle f_1,f_1 rangle = 1$$



but got an empty solution set.







share|cite|improve this question






















  • You really don't need to worry about imaginary coefficients. If there's an orthonormal basis of the type you seek then there'll be one with real coefficients.
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Aug 18 at 2:13










  • Why are imaginary coefficients irrelevant here?
    – Mathemagica
    Aug 18 at 2:22






  • 1




    Think Gram-Schmidt.
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Aug 18 at 2:23












up vote
1
down vote

favorite









up vote
1
down vote

favorite











Problem:



Does $L^2([0,1])$ equipped with the inner product $$langle f,g rangle = int_0^1 overlinef(x)g(x) , dx$$ have an orthonormal basis of the form $leftf_n(x):=sumlimits_k=0^n a_k x^2k mid n ge 0right$?



Attempt:



I worked this out by hand and then checked with Mathematica. I think that no such basis exists. However, in my proof I showed that the orthonormal system need not even be complete.



Did I make a mistake somewhere?



Here is the Mathematica code:



u[n_, x_] := Sum[(a[k]+I*b[k])*x^(2*k), k,0,n]

f[m_, n_] := Integrate[ComplexExpand[Conjugate[u[m,x]]*u[n,x]], x,0,1]

Solve[f[0,0]==1, f[0,1]==0, f[1,0]==0, f[1,1]==1, a[0],b[0],a[1],b[1]]


In the code above I expanded each coefficient $a_k$ into its real and imaginary parts, and then solved the set of equations



$$langle f_0,f_0 rangle = 1, langle f_0,f_1 rangle = 0, langle f_1,f_0 rangle = 0, langle f_1,f_1 rangle = 1$$



but got an empty solution set.







share|cite|improve this question














Problem:



Does $L^2([0,1])$ equipped with the inner product $$langle f,g rangle = int_0^1 overlinef(x)g(x) , dx$$ have an orthonormal basis of the form $leftf_n(x):=sumlimits_k=0^n a_k x^2k mid n ge 0right$?



Attempt:



I worked this out by hand and then checked with Mathematica. I think that no such basis exists. However, in my proof I showed that the orthonormal system need not even be complete.



Did I make a mistake somewhere?



Here is the Mathematica code:



u[n_, x_] := Sum[(a[k]+I*b[k])*x^(2*k), k,0,n]

f[m_, n_] := Integrate[ComplexExpand[Conjugate[u[m,x]]*u[n,x]], x,0,1]

Solve[f[0,0]==1, f[0,1]==0, f[1,0]==0, f[1,1]==1, a[0],b[0],a[1],b[1]]


In the code above I expanded each coefficient $a_k$ into its real and imaginary parts, and then solved the set of equations



$$langle f_0,f_0 rangle = 1, langle f_0,f_1 rangle = 0, langle f_1,f_0 rangle = 0, langle f_1,f_1 rangle = 1$$



but got an empty solution set.









share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Aug 18 at 3:36









Michael Hardy

205k23187463




205k23187463










asked Aug 18 at 1:38









Mathemagica

88922765




88922765











  • You really don't need to worry about imaginary coefficients. If there's an orthonormal basis of the type you seek then there'll be one with real coefficients.
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Aug 18 at 2:13










  • Why are imaginary coefficients irrelevant here?
    – Mathemagica
    Aug 18 at 2:22






  • 1




    Think Gram-Schmidt.
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Aug 18 at 2:23
















  • You really don't need to worry about imaginary coefficients. If there's an orthonormal basis of the type you seek then there'll be one with real coefficients.
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Aug 18 at 2:13










  • Why are imaginary coefficients irrelevant here?
    – Mathemagica
    Aug 18 at 2:22






  • 1




    Think Gram-Schmidt.
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Aug 18 at 2:23















You really don't need to worry about imaginary coefficients. If there's an orthonormal basis of the type you seek then there'll be one with real coefficients.
– Lord Shark the Unknown
Aug 18 at 2:13




You really don't need to worry about imaginary coefficients. If there's an orthonormal basis of the type you seek then there'll be one with real coefficients.
– Lord Shark the Unknown
Aug 18 at 2:13












Why are imaginary coefficients irrelevant here?
– Mathemagica
Aug 18 at 2:22




Why are imaginary coefficients irrelevant here?
– Mathemagica
Aug 18 at 2:22




1




1




Think Gram-Schmidt.
– Lord Shark the Unknown
Aug 18 at 2:23




Think Gram-Schmidt.
– Lord Shark the Unknown
Aug 18 at 2:23










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
5
down vote



accepted










The functions $1$, $x^2$, $x^4,ldots,x^2n,ldots$ are linearly independent, so the Gram-Schmidt process does yield an orthonormal sequence with
$f_n(x)=sum_i=0^n a_n,ix^2i$, and the $a_n.i$ real. Is this system complete?



The system is complete iff the polynomials in $x^2$ are dense in
$L^2[0,1]$. By the Stone-Weierstrass theorem, continuous functions on $[0,1]$
can be uniformly approximated by polynomials in $x^2$, and so also approximated
in $L^2[0,1]$ by polynomials in $x^2$. As the continuous functions
are dense in $L^2[0,1]$ then so are the polynomials in $x^2$. The orthonormal
sequence is complete.






share|cite|improve this answer


















  • 1




    We can also conclude that the polynomials in $x^2$ are dense in $L^2([0,1])$ by the Müntz–Szász theorem.
    – Mathemagica
    Aug 18 at 2:37






  • 2




    @Mathemagica You can ... if you like using a sledgehammer $ddotsmile$.
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Aug 18 at 2:38






  • 2




    We can uniformly approximate $g(x)=f(sqrt x)$ by a polynomial $p(x)$, for continuous$ f, $ whereupon $p(x^2)$ approximates $f(x).$
    – DanielWainfleet
    Aug 18 at 5:06











Your Answer




StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: false,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);








 

draft saved


draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2886333%2fis-there-an-orthonormal-basis-for-l20-1-consisting-of-only-even-degree-po%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest






























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
5
down vote



accepted










The functions $1$, $x^2$, $x^4,ldots,x^2n,ldots$ are linearly independent, so the Gram-Schmidt process does yield an orthonormal sequence with
$f_n(x)=sum_i=0^n a_n,ix^2i$, and the $a_n.i$ real. Is this system complete?



The system is complete iff the polynomials in $x^2$ are dense in
$L^2[0,1]$. By the Stone-Weierstrass theorem, continuous functions on $[0,1]$
can be uniformly approximated by polynomials in $x^2$, and so also approximated
in $L^2[0,1]$ by polynomials in $x^2$. As the continuous functions
are dense in $L^2[0,1]$ then so are the polynomials in $x^2$. The orthonormal
sequence is complete.






share|cite|improve this answer


















  • 1




    We can also conclude that the polynomials in $x^2$ are dense in $L^2([0,1])$ by the Müntz–Szász theorem.
    – Mathemagica
    Aug 18 at 2:37






  • 2




    @Mathemagica You can ... if you like using a sledgehammer $ddotsmile$.
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Aug 18 at 2:38






  • 2




    We can uniformly approximate $g(x)=f(sqrt x)$ by a polynomial $p(x)$, for continuous$ f, $ whereupon $p(x^2)$ approximates $f(x).$
    – DanielWainfleet
    Aug 18 at 5:06















up vote
5
down vote



accepted










The functions $1$, $x^2$, $x^4,ldots,x^2n,ldots$ are linearly independent, so the Gram-Schmidt process does yield an orthonormal sequence with
$f_n(x)=sum_i=0^n a_n,ix^2i$, and the $a_n.i$ real. Is this system complete?



The system is complete iff the polynomials in $x^2$ are dense in
$L^2[0,1]$. By the Stone-Weierstrass theorem, continuous functions on $[0,1]$
can be uniformly approximated by polynomials in $x^2$, and so also approximated
in $L^2[0,1]$ by polynomials in $x^2$. As the continuous functions
are dense in $L^2[0,1]$ then so are the polynomials in $x^2$. The orthonormal
sequence is complete.






share|cite|improve this answer


















  • 1




    We can also conclude that the polynomials in $x^2$ are dense in $L^2([0,1])$ by the Müntz–Szász theorem.
    – Mathemagica
    Aug 18 at 2:37






  • 2




    @Mathemagica You can ... if you like using a sledgehammer $ddotsmile$.
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Aug 18 at 2:38






  • 2




    We can uniformly approximate $g(x)=f(sqrt x)$ by a polynomial $p(x)$, for continuous$ f, $ whereupon $p(x^2)$ approximates $f(x).$
    – DanielWainfleet
    Aug 18 at 5:06













up vote
5
down vote



accepted







up vote
5
down vote



accepted






The functions $1$, $x^2$, $x^4,ldots,x^2n,ldots$ are linearly independent, so the Gram-Schmidt process does yield an orthonormal sequence with
$f_n(x)=sum_i=0^n a_n,ix^2i$, and the $a_n.i$ real. Is this system complete?



The system is complete iff the polynomials in $x^2$ are dense in
$L^2[0,1]$. By the Stone-Weierstrass theorem, continuous functions on $[0,1]$
can be uniformly approximated by polynomials in $x^2$, and so also approximated
in $L^2[0,1]$ by polynomials in $x^2$. As the continuous functions
are dense in $L^2[0,1]$ then so are the polynomials in $x^2$. The orthonormal
sequence is complete.






share|cite|improve this answer














The functions $1$, $x^2$, $x^4,ldots,x^2n,ldots$ are linearly independent, so the Gram-Schmidt process does yield an orthonormal sequence with
$f_n(x)=sum_i=0^n a_n,ix^2i$, and the $a_n.i$ real. Is this system complete?



The system is complete iff the polynomials in $x^2$ are dense in
$L^2[0,1]$. By the Stone-Weierstrass theorem, continuous functions on $[0,1]$
can be uniformly approximated by polynomials in $x^2$, and so also approximated
in $L^2[0,1]$ by polynomials in $x^2$. As the continuous functions
are dense in $L^2[0,1]$ then so are the polynomials in $x^2$. The orthonormal
sequence is complete.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited Aug 18 at 2:29

























answered Aug 18 at 2:16









Lord Shark the Unknown

87.5k953114




87.5k953114







  • 1




    We can also conclude that the polynomials in $x^2$ are dense in $L^2([0,1])$ by the Müntz–Szász theorem.
    – Mathemagica
    Aug 18 at 2:37






  • 2




    @Mathemagica You can ... if you like using a sledgehammer $ddotsmile$.
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Aug 18 at 2:38






  • 2




    We can uniformly approximate $g(x)=f(sqrt x)$ by a polynomial $p(x)$, for continuous$ f, $ whereupon $p(x^2)$ approximates $f(x).$
    – DanielWainfleet
    Aug 18 at 5:06













  • 1




    We can also conclude that the polynomials in $x^2$ are dense in $L^2([0,1])$ by the Müntz–Szász theorem.
    – Mathemagica
    Aug 18 at 2:37






  • 2




    @Mathemagica You can ... if you like using a sledgehammer $ddotsmile$.
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Aug 18 at 2:38






  • 2




    We can uniformly approximate $g(x)=f(sqrt x)$ by a polynomial $p(x)$, for continuous$ f, $ whereupon $p(x^2)$ approximates $f(x).$
    – DanielWainfleet
    Aug 18 at 5:06








1




1




We can also conclude that the polynomials in $x^2$ are dense in $L^2([0,1])$ by the Müntz–Szász theorem.
– Mathemagica
Aug 18 at 2:37




We can also conclude that the polynomials in $x^2$ are dense in $L^2([0,1])$ by the Müntz–Szász theorem.
– Mathemagica
Aug 18 at 2:37




2




2




@Mathemagica You can ... if you like using a sledgehammer $ddotsmile$.
– Lord Shark the Unknown
Aug 18 at 2:38




@Mathemagica You can ... if you like using a sledgehammer $ddotsmile$.
– Lord Shark the Unknown
Aug 18 at 2:38




2




2




We can uniformly approximate $g(x)=f(sqrt x)$ by a polynomial $p(x)$, for continuous$ f, $ whereupon $p(x^2)$ approximates $f(x).$
– DanielWainfleet
Aug 18 at 5:06





We can uniformly approximate $g(x)=f(sqrt x)$ by a polynomial $p(x)$, for continuous$ f, $ whereupon $p(x^2)$ approximates $f(x).$
– DanielWainfleet
Aug 18 at 5:06













 

draft saved


draft discarded


























 


draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2886333%2fis-there-an-orthonormal-basis-for-l20-1-consisting-of-only-even-degree-po%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest













































































這個網誌中的熱門文章

How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

Mutual Information Always Non-negative

Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?