16

Starting with the abstract concept of a vector space, I can see why we'd want to add some structure to be able to perform useful operations. For instance if we add a metric/ norm to a vector space we can talk about distances. If we add an inner product to a vector space we can talk about angles. These two operations also give us a bunch of inequalities (like Cauchy-Schwarz) that we get as well.

But I don't see the point of equipping our vector space with some degree two polynomial. What does that get us? Is there some geometric meaning to it (like how we got distance and angle from norm and inner product)?

  • I wish someone would mention one of the most geometric use of bilinear and quadratic (because I am too lazy to do this as full answer) :) Inner product is a first example of bilinear form. Another nice example is the first and the second fundamental forms of surface, which are bilinear and quadratic forms respectively. Both serve to measure geometric aspects of surface and curves on it, like angle between curves, areas and curvatures along direction. – Evgeny Dec 22 '15 at 19:13
  • 1
    @Evgeny Actually it looks like all of that has been mentioned in one form or another between the two solutions. If you don't mind, I might adopt the terms so it's a little more obvious. – rschwieb Dec 22 '15 at 19:23
  • 1
    @rschwieb Yeah, I've overlooked your answer while was writing my comment, sorry :) – Evgeny Dec 22 '15 at 19:26

3 Answers3

13

Outside of characteristic $2$ fields, there is a correspondence between quadratic forms and symmetric bilinear forms. (You can still say something in the characteristic $2$ case, you just have to be more careful.)

So in some sense, what you must have already learned with the run-of-the-mill dot product of vectors actually generalizes in a very nice way to include more interesting spaces.

In the case of $\Bbb R$, say, this allows vectors with zero length and negative length. In the case of $\Bbb R^3$ with $Q((x,y,z)=x^2+y^2-z^2$, you get a indefinite but nondegenerate bilinear form on the space. By specifying a hyperboloid sheet in this space, you can model the hyperbolic plane.

I think if you are interested in this, I would like to recommend Kaplanksy's Linear algebra and geometry to learn about quadratic and bilinear forms, and then find a basic exposition on differential geometry that explains the roots of the extrema tests (mentioned by H.R.) in terms of quadratic forms.

In differential geometry, the first and second fundamental forms incorporate bilinear/quadratic forms. Not just a single form, mind you, but these actually speak of a family of forms, one for each point of some surface in space. The forms can differ from point to point depending on the nature of the space, but at any given point, the form gives information about the shape of the surface near the point.

rschwieb
  • 153,510
  • So we only care about quadratic forms because we can get a symmetric bilinear form (which is almost an inner product) out of any quadratic form? – user300418 Dec 22 '15 at 19:01
  • 2
    @user300418 You could say there is a very close correspondence between the two concepts. In certain cases, it's more advantageous to use one over the other for clarity – rschwieb Dec 22 '15 at 19:04
4

Just want to mention an application. Quadratic forms appear in optimization problems of multi-variable functions. Also, the idea of positive definiteness and negative definiteness are based on the quadratic form concept. This gives rise to a test in order to distinguish the extreme points, namely Maximum, Minimum, and Saddle points. In fact, quadratic forms are the building blocks of the multi-variable optimization.

Just to write some formulas, consider the scalar field $f:\mathbb{R}^n \to \mathbb{R}$ denoted by $f({\bf{x}})$. Then writting the Taylor expansion at ${\bf{x}}={\bf{x}}_0$ will lead to

$$f({\bf{x}})=f({\bf{x}}_0)+\nabla f({\bf{x}}_0) \cdot ({\bf{x}}-{\bf{x}}_0) + \frac{1}{2} ({\bf{x}}-{\bf{x}}_0) \cdot \nabla \nabla f ({\bf{x}}_0) \cdot ({\bf{x}}-{\bf{x}}_0) + \cdot \cdot \cdot$$

Next, for ${\bf{x}}_0$ to be an extreme point one requires that

$$\nabla f ({\bf{x}}_0) =0$$

and to study the type of extreme point one should study carefully the quadratic form

$$Q({\bf{x}})=\frac{1}{2} ({\bf{x}}-{\bf{x}}_0) \cdot \nabla \nabla f ({\bf{x}}_0) \cdot ({\bf{x}}-{\bf{x}}_0)$$

  • This is very interesting, and I've never had the opportunity to learn this perspective on the tests for extrema. Let me know how far off this is from the truth: given a point on a surface in $3$ space, you get a tangent plane with a quadratic form, and analysis of this form gives indications about the behavior at the point of tangency. (Thanks for any feedback.) – rschwieb Dec 22 '15 at 19:09
  • 1
    @rschwieb He's talking about the Hessian matrix -- which I'd be more likely to call a symmetric bilinear form because it relates to second directional derivatives. – user300418 Dec 22 '15 at 19:11
  • @user300418: Thanks for clarification! :) – Hosein Rahnama Dec 22 '15 at 19:13
  • @user300418 Thanks for the input. I remember the Hessian but at the time never became aware of its usefulness in defining a bilinear form (and hence a quadratic form) on the tangent space. Now I sort of see how that happens (considering the link between the tangent space and the derivatives of the coordinate lines through the point of tangency.) – rschwieb Dec 22 '15 at 19:18
  • @user300418 I thought I remembered something about a quadratic form specifically, but I think I'm thinking of the determinant of the Hessian – rschwieb Dec 22 '15 at 19:18
  • @user: I've always thought of the Hessian as relating to the second-order term in the Taylor expansion, which is naturally a quadratic form. –  Dec 22 '15 at 19:29
  • By the way H.R. your formulas should involve $\mathbf x-\mathbf x_0$ and not just $\mathbf x_0$. –  Dec 22 '15 at 19:31
  • @Rahul: Yes, will correct that! :) – Hosein Rahnama Dec 22 '15 at 19:32
  • @Rahul The Hessian does act as a quadratic form in the Taylor expansion of a multivariate function, but that's actually just a special case of it -- in general the Hessian can take two distinct arguments. So I'd agree with user300418 that it's (at least sometimes) more conveniently thought of as a bilinear form. –  Dec 22 '15 at 19:36
2

Another place where bilinear and quadratic forms appear naturally and have geometric meaning is in algebraic and differential topology. If $M$ is a compact connected oriented $2n$ dimensional manifold, the wedge product induces a bilinear form on the vector space $H_{\mathrm{dR}}^n(M)$ of $n$-dimensional de Rham cohomology classes on $M$. Using Poincaré duality, one can interpret this bilinear form as computing generic signed intersections between $n$ dimensional submanifolds of $M$.

I can demonstrate this intuitively for the case $M$ is a two-dimensional torus. Consider the following image (taken from the Wolfram Mathworld page on homology intersection):

enter image description here

For the torus, $H_{\mathrm{dr}}^1(M)$ is a two dimensional real vector space and we can choose a basis $\mathcal{B} = (v_1, v_2)$ for $H_{\mathrm{dr}}^1(M)$ under which $v_1$ corresponds to the blue circle in the picture and $v_2$ corresponds to the red circle. On $H_{\mathrm{dr}}^1(M)$ we have a bilinear form $g$ which encodes the intersections between the circles. We have $ g(v_1, v_1) = 0 $ which corresponds to the fact that if we perturb the blue circle a little, the intersection between the original blue circle and the perturbed circle is zero. Similarly, we have $g(v_2, v_2) = 0$. However, we (can choose the basis so that) have $g(v_1, v_2) = 1$ which corresponds to the fact that the blue circle and the red circle intersect at a single point (counted with a plus sign) and even if we perturb them a little, they will still generically intersect at a single point. If we change the order of $v_1$ and $v_2$, this doesn't effect the geometric intersection but does change the sign and so $g(v_2, v_1) = -1$. Thus, the intersection form $g$ is a bilinear form on $H_{\mathrm{dr}}^1(M)$ represented by the matrix

$$ [g]_{\mathcal{B}} = \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ -1 & 0 \end{pmatrix}. $$

In this case, $g$ is an anti-symmetric bilinear form but if the dimension of $M$ is divisible by $4$, it will be a symmetric bilinear form (corresponding to a quadratic form). The form $g$ encodes information about submanifolds sitting inside $M$ and is an important invariant of $M$. It can be used to show that two manifolds are not homeomorphic but showing that corresponding bilinear forms are not equivalent. You can read a bit more about this here.

levap
  • 65,634
  • 5
  • 79
  • 122