Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by thorel 1053 days ago
The realization that functions can be treated as elements in an abstract vector space (with infinitely many dimensions) is a turning point in the history of mathematics that led to the emergence of the sub-field known as functional analysis.

The significance of this paradigm shift is that it allowed mathematicians to apply some of the geometric intuition developed from the study of finite-dimensional spaces (such as the 3D Euclidean space) to difficult questions involving functions, such as the existence of solutions to certain differential equations.

The history of this change of perspective is absolutely fascinating and can be traced back to the end of the 19th century and beginning of the 20th century. At the time, work on axiomatic foundations of mathematics was driving a systematization of the study of mathematical objects by capturing their structure with a concise list of axioms. This is for example how the concept of an abstract vector space was born, encompassing not only Euclidean spaces but also infinite-dimensional spaces of functions.

An early reference already demonstrating this change of perspective, albeit in a primitive form, is a memoir by Vito Volterra from 1889 [1]. The PhD thesis of Maurice Fréchet from 1906 [2] is arguably the work that was most influential in crystalizing the new paradigm and presenting it in a modern form that served as a key reference for the first half of the 19th century. Of course, these are only two among a multitude of works around that time. Looking at later developments in the 19th century, it is hard not to also mention the book by Stefan Banach from 1932 [3].

[1] https://projecteuclid.org/journals/acta-mathematica/volume-1...

[2] https://zenodo.org/record/1428464/files/article.pdf

[3] http://kielich.amu.edu.pl/Stefan_Banach/pdf/teoria-operacji-...

2 comments

My friend, you don't even need it to be in vector space for functional analysis. Truly what is needed is just an inner product. I will grant you the inner product must be linear and hence in a vector space.
I dont understand the point of this comment. You obviously need it to be a vector space before you can define an inner product. Inner product spaces are very special examples of vector spaces.
Why even require an inner product! You can get away with a lot just sitting in an Banach space (only a norm required).
I agree. The GP comment contains some inaccuracies: most of the spaces of functions considered in functional analysis do not have an inner product defined on them, but are still vector spaces. The existence of an inner product presupposes a vector space structure, but the converse is not true…

Perhaps the most famous example is provided by the Lp spaces [1] consisting of functions whose pth power is absolutely integrable. For p≥1, these spaces are Banach spaces (complete normed spaces) but it is only when p=2 that the norm is associated with an inner product.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lp_space

Not saying that the vector space bit isn't neat, but it's called functional analysis because you can take limits of various forms and define (semi-) continuity, have completions of spaces, and all that has nice properties. So to me, a crucial thing is that these vector spaces are indeed topological.