Timeline for Determining if a set is a Basis for l^2
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 17, 2017 at 22:16 | vote | accept | Ali | ||
| Mar 17, 2017 at 22:16 | vote | accept | Ali | ||
| Mar 17, 2017 at 22:16 | |||||
| Mar 17, 2017 at 22:16 | vote | accept | Ali | ||
| Mar 17, 2017 at 22:16 | |||||
| Mar 17, 2017 at 22:16 | vote | accept | Ali | ||
| Mar 17, 2017 at 22:16 | |||||
| Mar 17, 2017 at 22:15 | answer | added | H. H. Rugh | timeline score: 3 | |
| Mar 17, 2017 at 19:15 | answer | added | Michael Renardy | timeline score: 7 | |
| Mar 17, 2017 at 17:54 | answer | added | Abdelmalek Abdesselam | timeline score: 2 | |
| Mar 17, 2017 at 17:41 | comment | added | Abdelmalek Abdesselam | I guess you want a total set of vectors rather than a basis. | |
| Mar 17, 2017 at 17:20 | comment | added | Robert Israel | That's not sufficient for a basis. | |
| Mar 17, 2017 at 17:12 | comment | added | Ali | In other words if f in l^2 is orthogonal to all e_n s do we get f is zero | |
| Mar 17, 2017 at 17:11 | comment | added | Ali | I mean dense in l^2 with respect to the l^2 norm | |
| Mar 17, 2017 at 16:58 | comment | added | Robert Israel | It's certainly not a Hamel basis or an orthonormal basis; Schauder basis is the most reasonable interpretation, I would think. | |
| Mar 17, 2017 at 16:56 | comment | added | Michael Renardy | You might want to specify more closely what you mean by "basis," since there are several different notions. | |
| Mar 17, 2017 at 16:52 | history | asked | Ali | CC BY-SA 3.0 |