Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Comments on Complex functions and inner product $\langle \frac{\partial f}{\partial z} , g\rangle $

Parent

Complex functions and inner product $\langle \frac{\partial f}{\partial z} , g\rangle $

+1
−0

I'm working through this academic paper: Stability of the Solutions of Differential Equations whose author is Bernard Beauzamy. A link to paper. In the academic paper, it works with the norm \begin{equation*} \left\Vert f\right\Vert= \left( \int_{0}^{\infty}\int_{0}^{2\pi} e^{-r^2} |f(re^{i\theta})|^2 r dr\frac{d\theta}{\pi} \right)^{1/2} \end{equation*} for analytic polynomials and the scalar product associated is \begin{equation*} \langle f,g\rangle= \int_{0}^{\infty}\int_{0}^{2\pi} e^{-r^2}f(re^{i\theta})\overline{g(re^{i\theta})} r dr\frac{d\theta}{\pi} \end{equation*} The lemma that I'm trying to check says the following:

For any $f$, $g$ in $\mathcal{P}_2$ \begin{equation*} \left\langle \frac{\partial f}{\partial z} , g\right\rangle = \langle f, zg \rangle \qquad \langle zf,g \rangle = \left\langle f, \frac{\partial g}{\partial z} \right\rangle \end{equation*} the functions $f$ and $g$ are given by \begin{equation*} f(z) = \sum_{j=0}^{\infty} a_j z^j, \quad g(z) = \sum_{j=0}^{\infty} b_j z^j. \end{equation*} The derivative of $f$ with respect to $z$ is \begin{equation*} \frac{\partial f}{\partial z} = \sum_{j=1}^{\infty} a_j j z^{j-1}. \end{equation*} so the scalar product is \begin{align*} \left\langle \frac{\partial f}{\partial z}, g \right\rangle &= \int_{0}^{\infty} \int_{0}^{2\pi} e^{-r^2} \left(\sum_{j=1}^{\infty} a_j j (re^{i\theta})^{j-1}\right) \overline{\left(\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} b_k (re^{i\theta})^k\right)} r \, dr \, \frac{d\theta}{\pi} \\ &= \int_{0}^{\infty} \int_{0}^{2\pi} e^{-r^2} \sum_{j=1}^{\infty} \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} a_j j r^{j-1} e^{i(j-1)\theta} \overline{b_k} r^k e^{-ik\theta} r \, dr \, \frac{d\theta}{\pi} \\ &= \int_{0}^{\infty} \int_{0}^{2\pi} e^{-r^2} \sum_{j=1}^{\infty} \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} a_j \overline{b_k} j r^{j+k} e^{i(j-k-1)\theta} r \, dr \, \frac{d\theta}{\pi}. \end{align*}

\begin{equation*} \int_{0}^{2\pi} e^{i(j-k-1)\theta} \frac{d\theta}{\pi} = \begin{cases} 1 & \text{if } j = k+1, \\\\ 0 & \text{if } j \neq k+1. \end{cases} \end{equation*}

Hence \begin{align*} \left\langle \frac{\partial f}{\partial z}, g \right\rangle &= \int_{0}^{\infty} e^{-r^2} \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} a_{k+1} \overline{b_k} (k+1) r^{2k+3} r \, dr \\ &= \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} a_{k+1} \overline{b_k} (k+1) \int_{0}^{\infty} e^{-r^2} r^{2k+3} dr. \end{align*}

The other scalar product is \begin{align*} \langle f, zg \rangle &= \int_{0}^{\infty} \int_{0}^{2\pi} e^{-r^2} \left(\sum_{j=0}^{\infty} a_j (re^{i\theta})^j\right) \overline{\left(\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} b_k r^{k+1} e^{i(k+1)\theta}\right)} r \, dr \, \frac{d\theta}{\pi} \\ &= \int_{0}^{\infty} \int_{0}^{2\pi} e^{-r^2} \sum_{j=0}^{\infty} \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} a_j \overline{b_k} r^{j+k+1} e^{i(j-k-1)\theta} r \, dr \, \frac{d\theta}{\pi}. \end{align*}

Again, integrating over $\theta$ and $j=k+1$ \begin{align*} \langle f, zg \rangle &= \int_{0}^{\infty} e^{-r^2} \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} a_{k+1} \overline{b_k} r^{2k+3} r \, dr \\ &= \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} a_{k+1} \overline{b_k} \int_{0}^{\infty} e^{-r^2} r^{2k+3} dr. \end{align*}

\begin{align*} \langle \frac{\partial f}{\partial z}, g \rangle &= \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} a_{k+1} \overline{b_k} (k+1) \int_{0}^{\infty} e^{-r^2} r^{2k+3} dr, \\\\ \langle f, zg \rangle &= \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} a_{k+1} \overline{b_k} \int_{0}^{\infty} e^{-r^2} r^{2k+3} dr. \end{align*}

These are not equal due to the factor $(k+1)$ present in $\left\langle \frac{\partial f}{\partial z}, g \right\rangle$. So I don't know where the error is.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

2 comment threads

No the complex conjugation is correct in each inner product used. Any advice on how to get it? You ca... (1 comment)
Are you sure you didn't miss a complex conjugation in the inner product formula? (1 comment)
Post
+1
−0

There are multiple issues with how you compute the exponent of $r$.

The first issue is you compute $r^{j-1}r^k = r^{j+k}$ rather than $r^{j+k-1}$.

You compound this error when you substitute $j = k+1$ into $r^{j+k}$ (which should be $r^{j+k-1}$) in the formula for $\left\langle\frac{\partial f}{\partial z},g\right\rangle$. You end up with $r^{2k+3}$ rather than $r^{2k+1}$ (which should actually be $r^{2k}$).

You make the same mistake in the formula for $\langle f,zg\rangle$ where $r^{j+k+1}$ should become $r^{2k+2}$ but you have $r^{2k+3}$. That said, in this case you make another mistake which cancels this out by "multiplying" $r^{2k+3}r$ to just $r^{2k+3}$ instead of $r^{2k+4}$ when you pull the sum out of the integral.

Without these mistakes you would end up with $$\begin{align} \left\langle \frac{\partial f}{\partial z}, g\right\rangle &= \sum_{k=0}^\infty a_{k+1}\overline{b_k} (k+1)\int_0^\infty e^{-r^2}r^{2k+1} dr \\ \langle f, zg \rangle &= \sum_{k=0}^\infty a_{k+1}\overline{b_k} \int_0^\infty e^{-r^2}r^{2k+3} dr \end{align}$$

Applying integration by parts to the integral in the second equation will reduce it to the first, i.e. a $k+1$ factor will pop out and the power of the $r^{2k+3}$ will be reduced by $2$. (This is easiest to see, for me at least, by first doing a $u$-substitution with $u=-r^2$.)

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

1 comment thread

Thanks for your advice. I made a mistake with the calculations. The correct change of variable was $u... (1 comment)
Thanks for your advice. I made a mistake with the calculations. The correct change of variable was $u...
Richard‭ wrote 3 months ago

Thanks for your advice. I made a mistake with the calculations. The correct change of variable was $u=r^2$. I leave the correct result below.