Oxford Linear Algebra: Inner Product Space

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 พ.ย. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 33

  • @TomRocksMaths
    @TomRocksMaths  ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Check out ProPrep with a 30-day free trial: www.proprep.uk/info/TOM-Crawford

    • @swap_pat29
      @swap_pat29 ปีที่แล้ว

      why are we integrating from 0 to 1 while proving polynomial function space as a inner product space

    • @shafimuhammadkhaskheli6169
      @shafimuhammadkhaskheli6169 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      It is strictly greater than 0 not greater than. Or equal to

  • @danieljulian4676
    @danieljulian4676 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    I finally decided to get straight on some definitions; seems like I came to the right place. Well done!

  • @DarkBoo007
    @DarkBoo007 ปีที่แล้ว +11

    This video was surprisingly easy to follow. Its been years since I have done anything involving Linear Algebra but I was able to follow the video thoroughly.

  • @tpthpt5973
    @tpthpt5973 18 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    Great video! You teach very well.

  • @benjaminmtawale5177
    @benjaminmtawale5177 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Tomrocksmath you are really good at this!

  • @nic741
    @nic741 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Feedback: It would be really helpful if you could add (for those who require it), that an inner product requires conjugate symmetry. It just so happens that if you’re dealing with real fields then conjugate symmtery becomes your normal symmetry.
    I believe these small sidenotes would help point people, who are looking for more advanced linear algebra concepts, in the right direction.
    It would also make it easier for people to make connections between what’s presented here, and what is popularly found online. (i.e: Wikipedia)

  • @rubhern8187
    @rubhern8187 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Followed and understood everything for a system technician. This dude explanation is top notch 🎉🎉🎉 i can imagine how good he would be if he used visual software🎉🎉🎉. Any recommended textbooks would be appreciated. Subs and liked

  • @moziburullah9827
    @moziburullah9827 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Oh, and nice video too. Very well explained.

  • @trabalhogames2410
    @trabalhogames2410 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    this professor it's so cool, and btw i liked your tattoos. I hope you continue with your channel it's pertinant to any student or interested in Math.

  • @LucianoBracci
    @LucianoBracci ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Hey, your content is just amazing. Here's a challenge: do the ITA 2023 math exam, that's one of the hardest Brazil tests for college acceptance.

  • @moziburullah9827
    @moziburullah9827 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    What I don't like about inner product spaces is the name. I think important mathematical concepts ought to have short names. For example, vector spaces with a norm are called normed spaces. This is short and sweet. Inner products and their variants are so ubiquitous that they really ought to have a more concise and compact name.
    Also, I think names should be explained. What is 'inner' about inner product spaces? And does this mean there is also an outer product in contrast? And if so, how do they relate?
    I've seen certain specialisations of the tensor product called outer products. So I guess that answers one of my questions. And I expect its called 'inner' because it reduces the 'dimension' of the product - from a vector to a scalar. Whilst an 'outer' product increases the dimension, from a pair of vectors to a 2-vector.
    What I'm driving at here is that maths has a history thats embedded in its notation amd naming strategy. And I think that its worth making explicit.
    My suggestion for an alternative name for an inner product space is one thats imported from physics - a metric. Thus a metric space. Unfortunately this clashes with the standard notion of a metric space in maths. I guess we could distinguish the former from the latter by calling the former, a metric vector space and the latter, a topological metric space.
    And my vote for the most awkward name in maths goes to sesquilinear form. This, is a bilinear form that is linear in one variable and conjugate linear in the other. Since this comes up all the time for vector spaces over the complex numbers, we ought to have a nicer name for this too.

  • @easondu9236
    @easondu9236 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    was at open day on friday. shame didnt see you tom

  • @KenhelExcallius
    @KenhelExcallius ปีที่แล้ว +9

    Embarrassingly, I forgot the inner product and this video released at a perfect time for me to remember all about it!

    • @rebelsouljaz
      @rebelsouljaz ปีที่แล้ว +6

      I don't understand why that is "embarrassing".

  • @JackOConnor-v8n
    @JackOConnor-v8n ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Can you do the 2023 higher leaving cert paper (irish equivalent of gcse/a levels)

  • @swallowhousetakeo
    @swallowhousetakeo ปีที่แล้ว

    Thanks for sharing

  • @Nickle314
    @Nickle314 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Does it have "a" orthonormal basis, or does it have "at least one" orthonormal basis?

    • @harrisonbennett7122
      @harrisonbennett7122 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Orthonormal basis are not unique, you can always apply the Gram-Schmidt process to generate them, and they will always exist in a Hilbert space

  • @TheMemesofDestruction
    @TheMemesofDestruction ปีที่แล้ว +2

    🔥 🔥 🔥

  • @fVNzO
    @fVNzO 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Could someone tell me what the V x V notation means?

    • @yuhaozhang9921
      @yuhaozhang9921 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Vector X Vector

    • @harrisonbennett7122
      @harrisonbennett7122 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      This is just the set of all ordered pairs (a,b) where an and b are members of V. E.g. R x R = R^2 = 2D coordinates

  • @appiahaframcecil
    @appiahaframcecil 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    But from what I learnt, positive definite is strictly positive numbers excluding zero.
    So please let's see and maybe make correction on it

  • @dutonic
    @dutonic 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Oxford linear algebra. It’s like regular linear algebra, but Oxford

  • @MathsMadeSimple101
    @MathsMadeSimple101 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    What came first, Maths or science?

    • @moharassmi8729
      @moharassmi8729 ปีที่แล้ว

      Maths. Because maths can exist without science and even the number 1 can be classified as maths and started in the time of cavemen before people could talk

    • @paperclips1306
      @paperclips1306 ปีที่แล้ว

      Neither, you came first

  • @James_Lindgaard
    @James_Lindgaard ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Since I am building a perpetual motion machine that Gottfried Leibniz watched run for 2 hours, when he published his work, was Newton correct when Newton said it was his own work? Did Leibniz learn of Newton's unpublished work which only Newton's friends knew of? Because I am 1/2 Norwegian I basically learned to talk in Norway. Bessler was 1/2 Polish and Leibniz was a witness for Bessler when Bessler was arrested for being a fraud. Bessler wasn't convicted. To be a jerk I'll show how Newton could've used his math to show why the Moon orbits the Earth. Johannes Keppler used the inverse square law to understand the motion of the planets around the Sun. If Newton would've been tolerant of Keppler then he would've been a genius. I just explained Newton's most famous work. I think everyone will miss what I just said. It's not like the letter that Newton wrote to Keppler but is much more direct. Nothing personal Tom but people need to understand that science and math like anything else involves mind games and politics.

  • @abhishektiwari8374
    @abhishektiwari8374 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Jai shree ram

    • @paperclips1306
      @paperclips1306 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Does water float in water or is it submerged?