This article is ratedStart-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects:

Mathematics This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofmathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics ??? This article has not yet received a rating on theproject's priority scale.

The article says, "The quadratically integrable functions form an inner product space." I'm pretty sure that isn't true! A function that differs from the zero function on a non-empty set of measure zero will have inner product zero, violating positive-definiteness. That's why you have to mod out by these functions when you define L^p spaces, right? ---Vectornaut (talk)01:44, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Two functions may attain different values on a set of measure zero and still be considered equal under any${\displaystyle L_p}$ metric.Only the${\displaystyle L_2}$ metric is induced by an inner product, because the polarization identity does not hold for other values of${\displaystyle p}$.Therefore the other${\displaystyle L_p}$ spaces are not inner product spaces.The equality of functions in the context of Lebesgue integration is redefined in terms of the Lebesgue integral of their difference.Therefore, even if they do differ on a set of Lebesgue measure zero, they are equal under the revised equality.This is how an${\displaystyle L_p}$ space can be a metric space and how an${\displaystyle L_2}$ space is an inner product space.So the condition of sign definiteness (or positive definiteness, although that is redundant and can be derived by sign definiteness and the triangle inequality) holds for the${\displaystyle L_p}$ metrics under the revised equality.For more details see Naylor and Sell, Linear Operator Theory in Engineering and Science, Springer.— Precedingunsigned comment added byHelptry (talk •contribs)03:21, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@Helptry What you write is blatently wrong (very unusual at least). Two functions are equal, if their graphs are equal. What happens here is that the vector space N of Null-functions (functions whose support is a measure-0-set) must be (is) factored out from the space of sq-integrable functions cL2 (curlyL). Thus L2=cL2/N. The vector space of classes f+N, f sq. int. (f in cL2), then becomes a Hilbert space. This is correctly described in the article about L2 on WP. What you describe as "new equality" is equality in the quotient space cL2/N.— Precedingunsigned comment added byLMSchmitt (talk •contribs)19:53, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reference in regard to the latter:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lp_space— Precedingunsigned comment added byLMSchmitt (talk •contribs)20:00, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking for an explanation of L2 norm. I get here instead and I see L2 and I see norm, but if you are going to redirect me here then I would like to see L2 norm.— Precedingunsigned comment added by108.80.114.110 (talk)11:42, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth,L2 norm redirects toNorm (mathematics)#Euclidean norm, andL2-norm redirects toSquare-integrable function. I thinkL2-norm should be fixed to redirect toNorm (mathematics)#Euclidean norm, too. –Tobias Bergemann (talk)11:57, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There should be a redirect tohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lp_space which is much better written then this article here.— Precedingunsigned comment added byLMSchmitt (talk •contribs)20:03, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirectL2 space. The discussion will occur atWikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 10#L2 space until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)16:58, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Inhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebesgue_integration#Lebesgue_integrableintegrable is defined via finite Lebesque integral of the <|absolute|> value of a measerable function. Not using the positive and negative parts of Re(f) and Im(f). Thus the (mathematically correct, but too technical and trivial) section

"An equivalent definition is to say that the square of the function itself (rather than of its absolute value) is Lebesgue integrable. For this to be true, the integrals of the positive and negative portions of the real part must both be finite, as well as those for the imaginary part."

is unnecessary rubish. Replace by

Since${\displaystyle |f(x){|}^2=|f(x{)}^2|}$,an equivalent definition is obviously to say that the square of the function is Lebesgue integrable.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebesgue_integration#Lebesgue_integrable— Precedingunsigned comment added byLMSchmitt (talk •contribs)20:41, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Start-Class mathematics articles
• Unknown-priority mathematics articles