Art of Problem Solving
AoPS Online
Math texts, online classes, and more
for students in grades 5-12.
Visit AoPS Online ‚
Books for Grades 5-12 Online Courses
Beast Academy
Engaging math books and online learning
for students ages 6-13.
Visit Beast Academy ‚
Books for Ages 6-13 Beast Academy Online
AoPS Academy
Small live classes for advanced math
and language arts learners in grades 2-12.
Visit AoPS Academy ‚
Find a Physical Campus Visit the Virtual Campus

Difference between revisions of "Hölder's Inequality"

m (I'm trying to see if removing the category "Theorems" will fix the issue described here: https://artofproblemsolving.com/community/c10h2471130_formatting_error_on_aops_wiki)
m (Added Categories)
 
(6 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
== Elementary Form ==
 
== Elementary Form ==
 
If <math>a_1, a_2, \dotsc, a_n, b_1, b_2, \dotsc, b_n, \dotsc, z_1, z_2, \dotsc, z_n</math> are [[nonnegative]] [[real number]]s and <math>\lambda_a, \lambda_b, \dotsc, \lambda_z</math> are nonnegative reals with sum of 1, then
 
If <math>a_1, a_2, \dotsc, a_n, b_1, b_2, \dotsc, b_n, \dotsc, z_1, z_2, \dotsc, z_n</math> are [[nonnegative]] [[real number]]s and <math>\lambda_a, \lambda_b, \dotsc, \lambda_z</math> are nonnegative reals with sum of 1, then
−
<cmath> \begin{align*}
+
<cmath>(a_1 + \dotsb + a_n)^{\lambda_a} (b_1 + \dotsb + b_n)^{\lambda_b} \dotsm (z_1 + \dotsb + z_n)^{\lambda_z}
−
a_1^{\lambda_a}b_1^{\lambda_b} \dotsm z_1^{\lambda_z} + \dotsb &+ a_n^{\lambda_a} b_n^{\lambda_b} \dotsm z_n^{\lambda_z} \\
+
\geq a_1^{\lambda_a}b_1^{\lambda_b} \dotsm z_1^{\lambda_z} + \dotsb + a_n^{\lambda_a}b_n^{\lambda_b} \dotsm z_n^{\lambda_z}.</cmath>
−
\le{}& (a_1 + \dotsb + a_n)^{\lambda_a} (b_1 + \dotsb + b_n)^{\lambda_b} \dotsm (z_1 + \dotsb + z_n)^{\lambda_z} .
+
 
−
\end{align*}</cmath>
 
 
Note that with two sequences <math>\mathbf{a}</math> and <math>\mathbf{b}</math>, and <math>\lambda_a = \lambda_b = 1/2</math>, this is the elementary form of the [[Cauchy-Schwarz Inequality]].
 
Note that with two sequences <math>\mathbf{a}</math> and <math>\mathbf{b}</math>, and <math>\lambda_a = \lambda_b = 1/2</math>, this is the elementary form of the [[Cauchy-Schwarz Inequality]].
  
Line 20: Line 19:
 
<cmath> \prod_i \biggl( \sum_j a_{ij} \biggr)^{\lambda_i} \ge \prod_i \prod_j \left( \frac{a_{ij}}{\beta_j} \right)^{\lambda_i \beta_j} = \prod_j \biggl[ \prod_i \Bigl( \frac{a_{ij}}{\beta_j} \Bigr)^{\lambda_i} \biggr]^{\beta_j} . </cmath>
 
<cmath> \prod_i \biggl( \sum_j a_{ij} \biggr)^{\lambda_i} \ge \prod_i \prod_j \left( \frac{a_{ij}}{\beta_j} \right)^{\lambda_i \beta_j} = \prod_j \biggl[ \prod_i \Bigl( \frac{a_{ij}}{\beta_j} \Bigr)^{\lambda_i} \biggr]^{\beta_j} . </cmath>
 
But from our choice of <math>\beta_j</math>, for all integers <math>1 \le j \le m</math>,
 
But from our choice of <math>\beta_j</math>, for all integers <math>1 \le j \le m</math>,
−
<cmath> \prod_i \left( \frac{a_{ij}}{\beta_j} \right)^{\lambda_i} = \frac{\prod_i a_{ij}^{\lambda_i}}{ \beta_k} = \frac{\prod_j a_{ij}^{\lambda_i}}{ \prod_j a_{ij}^{\lambda_i} / \sum_j \prod_i a_{ij}^{\lambda_i}} = \sum_j \prod_i a_{ij}^{\lambda_i} . </cmath>
+
<cmath> \prod_i \left( \frac{a_{ij}}{\beta_j} \right)^{\lambda_i} = \frac{\prod_i a_{ij}^{\lambda_i}}{ \beta_j} = \frac{\prod_i a_{ij}^{\lambda_i}}{ \prod_i a_{ij}^{\lambda_i} / \sum_j \prod_i a_{ij}^{\lambda_i}} = \sum_j \prod_i a_{ij}^{\lambda_i} . </cmath>
 
Therefore
 
Therefore
 
<cmath> \prod_j \biggl[ \prod_i \Bigl( \frac{a_{ij}}{\beta_j} \Bigr)^{\lambda_i} \biggr]^{\beta_j} = \prod_k \biggl( \sum_j \prod_i a_{ij}^{\lambda_i} \biggr)^{\beta_k} = \sum_j \prod_i a_{ij}^{\lambda_i}, </cmath>
 
<cmath> \prod_j \biggl[ \prod_i \Bigl( \frac{a_{ij}}{\beta_j} \Bigr)^{\lambda_i} \biggr]^{\beta_j} = \prod_k \biggl( \sum_j \prod_i a_{ij}^{\lambda_i} \biggr)^{\beta_k} = \sum_j \prod_i a_{ij}^{\lambda_i}, </cmath>
Line 40: Line 39:
 
<center><math>\left(1 + \frac {x}{y}\right)^k + \left(1 + \frac {y}{x}\right)^k\geq 2^{k+1}</math></center>
 
<center><math>\left(1 + \frac {x}{y}\right)^k + \left(1 + \frac {y}{x}\right)^k\geq 2^{k+1}</math></center>
  
−
[[Category:Inequality]]
+
[[Category:Algebra]]
−
[[Category:Definition]]
+
[[Category:Inequalities]]
 +
[[Category:Mathematics]]

Latest revision as of 17:42, 28 September 2024

Elementary Form

If $a_1, a_2, \dotsc, a_n, b_1, b_2, \dotsc, b_n, \dotsc, z_1, z_2, \dotsc, z_n$ are nonnegative real numbers and $\lambda_a, \lambda_b, \dotsc, \lambda_z$ are nonnegative reals with sum of 1, then \[(a_1 + \dotsb + a_n)^{\lambda_a} (b_1 + \dotsb + b_n)^{\lambda_b} \dotsm (z_1 + \dotsb + z_n)^{\lambda_z} \geq a_1^{\lambda_a}b_1^{\lambda_b} \dotsm z_1^{\lambda_z} + \dotsb + a_n^{\lambda_a}b_n^{\lambda_b} \dotsm z_n^{\lambda_z}.\]

Note that with two sequences $\mathbf{a}$ and $\mathbf{b}$, and $\lambda_a = \lambda_b = 1/2$, this is the elementary form of the Cauchy-Schwarz Inequality.

We can state the inequality more concisely thus: Let $\{ \{a_{ij}\}_{i=1}^n \} _{j=1}^m$ be several sequences of nonnegative reals, and let $\{ \lambda_i \}_{i=1}^n$ be a sequence of nonnegative reals such that $\sum \lambda = 1$. Then \[\sum_j \prod_i a_{ij}^{\lambda_i} \le \prod_i \biggl( \sum_j a_{ij} \biggr)^{\lambda_i} .\]

Proof of Elementary Form

We will use weighted AM-GM. We will disregard sequences $\{ a_{ij} \}_{i=1}^n$ for which one of the terms is zero, as the terms of these sequences do not contribute to the left-hand side of the desired inequality but may contribute to the right-hand side.

For integers $1 \le k \le m$, let us define \[\beta_k = \frac{\prod_i a_{ik}^{\lambda_i}}{\sum_j \prod_i a_{ij}^{\lambda_i}} .\] Evidently, $\sum \beta_j = 1$. Then for all integers $1\le i \le n$, by weighted AM-GM, \[\sum_j a_{ij} = \sum_j \beta_j \left(\frac{a_{ij}}{\beta_j} \right) \ge \prod_j \left( \frac{a_{ij}}{\beta_j} \right)^{\beta_j} .\] Hence \[\prod_i \biggl( \sum_j a_{ij} \biggr)^{\lambda_i} \ge \prod_i \prod_j \left( \frac{a_{ij}}{\beta_j} \right)^{\lambda_i \beta_j} = \prod_j \biggl[ \prod_i \Bigl( \frac{a_{ij}}{\beta_j} \Bigr)^{\lambda_i} \biggr]^{\beta_j} .\] But from our choice of $\beta_j$, for all integers $1 \le j \le m$, \[\prod_i \left( \frac{a_{ij}}{\beta_j} \right)^{\lambda_i} = \frac{\prod_i a_{ij}^{\lambda_i}}{ \beta_j} = \frac{\prod_i a_{ij}^{\lambda_i}}{ \prod_i a_{ij}^{\lambda_i} / \sum_j \prod_i a_{ij}^{\lambda_i}} = \sum_j \prod_i a_{ij}^{\lambda_i} .\] Therefore \[\prod_j \biggl[ \prod_i \Bigl( \frac{a_{ij}}{\beta_j} \Bigr)^{\lambda_i} \biggr]^{\beta_j} = \prod_k \biggl( \sum_j \prod_i a_{ij}^{\lambda_i} \biggr)^{\beta_k} = \sum_j \prod_i a_{ij}^{\lambda_i},\] since the sum of the $\beta_k$ is one. Hence in summary, \[\prod_i \biggl( \sum_j a_{ij} \biggr)^{\lambda_i} \ge \sum_j \prod_i a_{ij}^{\lambda_i} ,\] as desired. Equality holds when $a_{ij}/\beta_j = a_{ij'}/\beta_{j'}$ for all integers $i,j,j'$, i.e., when all the sequences $\{a_{ij}\}_{j=1}^m$ are proportional. $\blacksquare$

Statement

If $p,q>1$, $1/p+1/q=1$, $f\in L^p, g\in L^q$ then $fg\in L^1$ and $||fg||_1\leq ||f||_p||g||_q$.

Proof

If $||f||_p=0$ then $f=0$ a.e. and there is nothing to prove. Case $||g||_q=0$ is similar. On the other hand, we may assume that $f(x),g(x)\in\mathbb{R}$ for all $x$. Let $a=\frac{|f(x)|^p}{||f||_p^p}, b=\frac{|g(x)|^q}{||g||_q^q},\alpha=1/p,\beta=1/q$. Young's Inequality gives us \[\frac{|f(x)|}{||f||_p}\frac{|g(x)|}{||g||_q} \leq \frac{1}{p}\frac{|f(x)|^p}{||f||_p^p} + \frac{1}{q}\frac{|g(x)|^q}{||g||_q^q}.\] These functions are measurable, so by integrating we get \[\frac{||fg||_1}{||f||_p||g||_q}\leq \frac{1}{p}\frac{||f(x)||^p}{||f||_p^p} + \frac{1}{q}\frac{||g(x)||^q}{||g||_q^q} = \frac{1}{p}+\frac{1}{q}=1 .\]

Examples

  • Prove that, for positive reals $x,y,k$, the following inequality holds:
$\left(1 + \frac {x}{y}\right)^k + \left(1 + \frac {y}{x}\right)^k\geq 2^{k+1}$
Retrieved from "https://artofproblemsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=Hölder%27s_Inequality&oldid=228535"