1
$\begingroup$

Suppose that $\sum_{i=1}^{n}\lambda_{i}=1$, where $\lambda_{i}>0$, and $\sum_{i=1}^{n}b_{i}^{2}=1$, where $b_{i}>0$. Does one have $\sqrt{n}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\lambda_{i}b_{i}\le B$ for some constant $B$ (independent of $n$)? Thanks.

1 Answers 1

0

The question changed, here is an answer to the new question:

No. Choose $\lambda_1 = 1, b_1 = 1$. Let $\lambda_k=b_k=0$ for all $k\neq 1$. Then you have $\sum_i \lambda_i b_i = 1$. Hence $\sqrt{n} \sum_i \lambda_i b_i = \sqrt{n}$. So you cannot have a bound independent of $n$.

Old answer:

Yes. The Cauchy-Schwarz-Bunyakovsky-$\cdots$ inequality gives $|\lambda^T b | \leq \|\lambda\| \|b\| = \|\lambda\| \leq 1$.

More simply, since $\sum_i b_i^2 = 1$ we have $|b_i| \leq 1$, and then $\sum_i \lambda_i b_i \leq \sum_i \lambda_i |b_i| \leq \sum_i \lambda_i =1$.

It follows that $\sqrt{n} \sum_i \lambda_i b_i \leq \sqrt{n}$, so take $B=\sqrt{n}$.

  • 0
    copper.hat, thank you very much for your answer. There is a varied question [here](http://math.stacke$x$change.com/questions/238188/is-there-an-absolute-constant-for-this)May be you can also answer that one. I'll vote you up for you to get more points. Thanks.2012-11-15