Alternate inner products on Euclidean space? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)$|x -y|+|y-z|=|x-z|$ implies $y= a x + b z$ where $a +b =1$Complex inner product aren't inner products.Inequivalent norms (given by different inner products) on infinite dimensional Hilbert space.Is it possible to define an inner product to an arbitrary field?Bilinear, symmetric function $f(mathbf x, mathbf y)$ defines an inner productDot Product vs Inner ProductUniqueness (or not) of an inner product on some vector spaceIncidence algebras and dot productsHow to prove that the matrix of a symmetric bilinear form is symmetricCompatibility of cross and inner product on $mathbbR^3$

What causes the vertical darker bands in my photo?

When -s is used with third person singular. What's its use in this context?

Dominant seventh chord in the major scale contains diminished triad of the seventh?

Antler Helmet: Can it work?

How to motivate offshore teams and trust them to deliver?

Can inflation occur in a positive-sum game currency system such as the Stack Exchange reputation system?

Is there any avatar supposed to be born between the death of Krishna and the birth of Kalki?

Does surprise arrest existing movement?

When to stop saving and start investing?

What do you call a phrase that's not an idiom yet?

What do you call a plan that's an alternative plan in case your initial plan fails?

How much radiation do nuclear physics experiments expose researchers to nowadays?

Why is "Consequences inflicted." not a sentence?

Super Attribute Position on Product Page Magento 1

I am not a queen, who am I?

How widely used is the term Treppenwitz? Is it something that most Germans know?

Do you forfeit tax refunds/credits if you aren't required to and don't file by April 15?

What's the purpose of writing one's academic bio in 3rd person?

Check which numbers satisfy the condition [A*B*C = A! + B! + C!]

Problem drawing boxes with arrows in tikZ

Withdrew £2800, but only £2000 shows as withdrawn on online banking; what are my obligations?

Is there a "higher Segal conjecture"?

How does a Death Domain cleric's Touch of Death feature work with Touch-range spells delivered by familiars?

Letter Boxed validator



Alternate inner products on Euclidean space?



Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)$|x -y|+|y-z|=|x-z|$ implies $y= a x + b z$ where $a +b =1$Complex inner product aren't inner products.Inequivalent norms (given by different inner products) on infinite dimensional Hilbert space.Is it possible to define an inner product to an arbitrary field?Bilinear, symmetric function $f(mathbf x, mathbf y)$ defines an inner productDot Product vs Inner ProductUniqueness (or not) of an inner product on some vector spaceIncidence algebras and dot productsHow to prove that the matrix of a symmetric bilinear form is symmetricCompatibility of cross and inner product on $mathbbR^3$










3












$begingroup$


After reading about inner products as a generalization of the dot product, I was hoping to be able to prove that the dot product is in some sense the unique inner product in Euclidean space (e.g., up to constant scaling).



But it seems that there are a whole bunch of alternative inner products in $mathbbR^2$ with nonzero cross-terms between basis vectors, for example, $langle (a, b)^intercal, (x, y)^intercal rangle = ax + by + 0.5(ay + bx)$. Unless I've made a mistake, this satisfies symmetry, linearity, and positive-definiteness.



Is there a sense in which the dot product is the canonical inner product on Euclidean space? Or do we just pick it because the implied norm matches our notion of distance?










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




rampatowl is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Not quite what you're asking - but we do know that any two inner products on a finite-dimensional vector space are equivalent, which means there are positive constants $c, C$ such that $c langle x, y rangle_1 le langle x, y rangle_2 le C langle x, y rangle_2$ for all $x,y$. So although the inner product is not unique, at least any two are within a constant scaling factor of each other. (This fact is most useful when studying a topology induced by the inner product - it means the corresponding topology doesn't depend on the choice of inner product.)
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel Schepler
    13 hours ago
















3












$begingroup$


After reading about inner products as a generalization of the dot product, I was hoping to be able to prove that the dot product is in some sense the unique inner product in Euclidean space (e.g., up to constant scaling).



But it seems that there are a whole bunch of alternative inner products in $mathbbR^2$ with nonzero cross-terms between basis vectors, for example, $langle (a, b)^intercal, (x, y)^intercal rangle = ax + by + 0.5(ay + bx)$. Unless I've made a mistake, this satisfies symmetry, linearity, and positive-definiteness.



Is there a sense in which the dot product is the canonical inner product on Euclidean space? Or do we just pick it because the implied norm matches our notion of distance?










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




rampatowl is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Not quite what you're asking - but we do know that any two inner products on a finite-dimensional vector space are equivalent, which means there are positive constants $c, C$ such that $c langle x, y rangle_1 le langle x, y rangle_2 le C langle x, y rangle_2$ for all $x,y$. So although the inner product is not unique, at least any two are within a constant scaling factor of each other. (This fact is most useful when studying a topology induced by the inner product - it means the corresponding topology doesn't depend on the choice of inner product.)
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel Schepler
    13 hours ago














3












3








3


1



$begingroup$


After reading about inner products as a generalization of the dot product, I was hoping to be able to prove that the dot product is in some sense the unique inner product in Euclidean space (e.g., up to constant scaling).



But it seems that there are a whole bunch of alternative inner products in $mathbbR^2$ with nonzero cross-terms between basis vectors, for example, $langle (a, b)^intercal, (x, y)^intercal rangle = ax + by + 0.5(ay + bx)$. Unless I've made a mistake, this satisfies symmetry, linearity, and positive-definiteness.



Is there a sense in which the dot product is the canonical inner product on Euclidean space? Or do we just pick it because the implied norm matches our notion of distance?










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




rampatowl is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$




After reading about inner products as a generalization of the dot product, I was hoping to be able to prove that the dot product is in some sense the unique inner product in Euclidean space (e.g., up to constant scaling).



But it seems that there are a whole bunch of alternative inner products in $mathbbR^2$ with nonzero cross-terms between basis vectors, for example, $langle (a, b)^intercal, (x, y)^intercal rangle = ax + by + 0.5(ay + bx)$. Unless I've made a mistake, this satisfies symmetry, linearity, and positive-definiteness.



Is there a sense in which the dot product is the canonical inner product on Euclidean space? Or do we just pick it because the implied norm matches our notion of distance?







linear-algebra inner-product-space






share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




rampatowl is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




rampatowl is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 14 hours ago









Björn Friedrich

2,70661831




2,70661831






New contributor




rampatowl is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 14 hours ago









rampatowlrampatowl

1162




1162




New contributor




rampatowl is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





rampatowl is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






rampatowl is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Not quite what you're asking - but we do know that any two inner products on a finite-dimensional vector space are equivalent, which means there are positive constants $c, C$ such that $c langle x, y rangle_1 le langle x, y rangle_2 le C langle x, y rangle_2$ for all $x,y$. So although the inner product is not unique, at least any two are within a constant scaling factor of each other. (This fact is most useful when studying a topology induced by the inner product - it means the corresponding topology doesn't depend on the choice of inner product.)
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel Schepler
    13 hours ago













  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Not quite what you're asking - but we do know that any two inner products on a finite-dimensional vector space are equivalent, which means there are positive constants $c, C$ such that $c langle x, y rangle_1 le langle x, y rangle_2 le C langle x, y rangle_2$ for all $x,y$. So although the inner product is not unique, at least any two are within a constant scaling factor of each other. (This fact is most useful when studying a topology induced by the inner product - it means the corresponding topology doesn't depend on the choice of inner product.)
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel Schepler
    13 hours ago








1




1




$begingroup$
Not quite what you're asking - but we do know that any two inner products on a finite-dimensional vector space are equivalent, which means there are positive constants $c, C$ such that $c langle x, y rangle_1 le langle x, y rangle_2 le C langle x, y rangle_2$ for all $x,y$. So although the inner product is not unique, at least any two are within a constant scaling factor of each other. (This fact is most useful when studying a topology induced by the inner product - it means the corresponding topology doesn't depend on the choice of inner product.)
$endgroup$
– Daniel Schepler
13 hours ago





$begingroup$
Not quite what you're asking - but we do know that any two inner products on a finite-dimensional vector space are equivalent, which means there are positive constants $c, C$ such that $c langle x, y rangle_1 le langle x, y rangle_2 le C langle x, y rangle_2$ for all $x,y$. So although the inner product is not unique, at least any two are within a constant scaling factor of each other. (This fact is most useful when studying a topology induced by the inner product - it means the corresponding topology doesn't depend on the choice of inner product.)
$endgroup$
– Daniel Schepler
13 hours ago











3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

Any inner product is dot product in some basis. For example, your inner product is standard dot product written in basis $left(e_1, frac12e_1 + fracsqrt32e_2right)$.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    No it's not. $e_2 = (-1,2)/sqrt3$ in that basis, which has euclidean norm 5/3. But $left<e_2,e_2right> = 1$.
    $endgroup$
    – eyeballfrog
    11 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Using author's inner product we have $langle (-1, 2) / sqrt3, (-1, 2) / sqrt3rangle = 1$. And in general - if we write two vectors in this basis and take inner product as defined in question, we get their standard dot product.
    $endgroup$
    – mihaild
    10 hours ago


















2












$begingroup$

There is nothing special about the dot product. Yes, it corresponds to the Euclidean norm if you are using an orthonormal basis. But if your basis is not orthonormal then the Euclidean norm will be represented by some other symmetric matrix.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$




















    1












    $begingroup$

    For an arbitrary inner product $left<right>$ on $mathbb R^n$, there is a positive definite real symmetric matrix $A_ij = left<e_i|e_jright>$ that defines the transform. Since it is real and symmetric, it is orthogonally diagonalizable. That is, for any inner product on $mathbb R^n$, there is a set of real numbers $lambda_j$ and an orthonormal basis $left|xi_jright>$ such that
    $$
    left<a|bright> = sum_jlambda_jleft<a|xi_jright>left<xi_j|bright>
    $$

    Roughly speaking, the inner product resolves $a$ and $b$ into their $xi_j$ components, then weights the resulting dot product by $lambda_j$.



    In general, this choice of $left|xi_jright>$ will be unique. However, for some inner products, there will be multiple possible choices of $left|xi_jright>$. The Euclidean norm is unique (up to a constant scaling) in that every choice of $left|xi_jright>$ allows the inner product to be written in that form--it is independent of the chosen basis.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function()
      var channelOptions =
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "69"
      ;
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
      createEditor();
      );

      else
      createEditor();

      );

      function createEditor()
      StackExchange.prepareEditor(
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: true,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: 10,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader:
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      ,
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      );



      );






      rampatowl is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function ()
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3188850%2falternate-inner-products-on-euclidean-space%23new-answer', 'question_page');

      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes








      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      3












      $begingroup$

      Any inner product is dot product in some basis. For example, your inner product is standard dot product written in basis $left(e_1, frac12e_1 + fracsqrt32e_2right)$.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$












      • $begingroup$
        No it's not. $e_2 = (-1,2)/sqrt3$ in that basis, which has euclidean norm 5/3. But $left<e_2,e_2right> = 1$.
        $endgroup$
        – eyeballfrog
        11 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        Using author's inner product we have $langle (-1, 2) / sqrt3, (-1, 2) / sqrt3rangle = 1$. And in general - if we write two vectors in this basis and take inner product as defined in question, we get their standard dot product.
        $endgroup$
        – mihaild
        10 hours ago















      3












      $begingroup$

      Any inner product is dot product in some basis. For example, your inner product is standard dot product written in basis $left(e_1, frac12e_1 + fracsqrt32e_2right)$.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$












      • $begingroup$
        No it's not. $e_2 = (-1,2)/sqrt3$ in that basis, which has euclidean norm 5/3. But $left<e_2,e_2right> = 1$.
        $endgroup$
        – eyeballfrog
        11 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        Using author's inner product we have $langle (-1, 2) / sqrt3, (-1, 2) / sqrt3rangle = 1$. And in general - if we write two vectors in this basis and take inner product as defined in question, we get their standard dot product.
        $endgroup$
        – mihaild
        10 hours ago













      3












      3








      3





      $begingroup$

      Any inner product is dot product in some basis. For example, your inner product is standard dot product written in basis $left(e_1, frac12e_1 + fracsqrt32e_2right)$.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$



      Any inner product is dot product in some basis. For example, your inner product is standard dot product written in basis $left(e_1, frac12e_1 + fracsqrt32e_2right)$.







      share|cite|improve this answer












      share|cite|improve this answer



      share|cite|improve this answer










      answered 14 hours ago









      mihaildmihaild

      1,03211




      1,03211











      • $begingroup$
        No it's not. $e_2 = (-1,2)/sqrt3$ in that basis, which has euclidean norm 5/3. But $left<e_2,e_2right> = 1$.
        $endgroup$
        – eyeballfrog
        11 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        Using author's inner product we have $langle (-1, 2) / sqrt3, (-1, 2) / sqrt3rangle = 1$. And in general - if we write two vectors in this basis and take inner product as defined in question, we get their standard dot product.
        $endgroup$
        – mihaild
        10 hours ago
















      • $begingroup$
        No it's not. $e_2 = (-1,2)/sqrt3$ in that basis, which has euclidean norm 5/3. But $left<e_2,e_2right> = 1$.
        $endgroup$
        – eyeballfrog
        11 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        Using author's inner product we have $langle (-1, 2) / sqrt3, (-1, 2) / sqrt3rangle = 1$. And in general - if we write two vectors in this basis and take inner product as defined in question, we get their standard dot product.
        $endgroup$
        – mihaild
        10 hours ago















      $begingroup$
      No it's not. $e_2 = (-1,2)/sqrt3$ in that basis, which has euclidean norm 5/3. But $left<e_2,e_2right> = 1$.
      $endgroup$
      – eyeballfrog
      11 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      No it's not. $e_2 = (-1,2)/sqrt3$ in that basis, which has euclidean norm 5/3. But $left<e_2,e_2right> = 1$.
      $endgroup$
      – eyeballfrog
      11 hours ago












      $begingroup$
      Using author's inner product we have $langle (-1, 2) / sqrt3, (-1, 2) / sqrt3rangle = 1$. And in general - if we write two vectors in this basis and take inner product as defined in question, we get their standard dot product.
      $endgroup$
      – mihaild
      10 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      Using author's inner product we have $langle (-1, 2) / sqrt3, (-1, 2) / sqrt3rangle = 1$. And in general - if we write two vectors in this basis and take inner product as defined in question, we get their standard dot product.
      $endgroup$
      – mihaild
      10 hours ago











      2












      $begingroup$

      There is nothing special about the dot product. Yes, it corresponds to the Euclidean norm if you are using an orthonormal basis. But if your basis is not orthonormal then the Euclidean norm will be represented by some other symmetric matrix.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$

















        2












        $begingroup$

        There is nothing special about the dot product. Yes, it corresponds to the Euclidean norm if you are using an orthonormal basis. But if your basis is not orthonormal then the Euclidean norm will be represented by some other symmetric matrix.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$















          2












          2








          2





          $begingroup$

          There is nothing special about the dot product. Yes, it corresponds to the Euclidean norm if you are using an orthonormal basis. But if your basis is not orthonormal then the Euclidean norm will be represented by some other symmetric matrix.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          There is nothing special about the dot product. Yes, it corresponds to the Euclidean norm if you are using an orthonormal basis. But if your basis is not orthonormal then the Euclidean norm will be represented by some other symmetric matrix.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered 14 hours ago









          gandalf61gandalf61

          9,293825




          9,293825





















              1












              $begingroup$

              For an arbitrary inner product $left<right>$ on $mathbb R^n$, there is a positive definite real symmetric matrix $A_ij = left<e_i|e_jright>$ that defines the transform. Since it is real and symmetric, it is orthogonally diagonalizable. That is, for any inner product on $mathbb R^n$, there is a set of real numbers $lambda_j$ and an orthonormal basis $left|xi_jright>$ such that
              $$
              left<a|bright> = sum_jlambda_jleft<a|xi_jright>left<xi_j|bright>
              $$

              Roughly speaking, the inner product resolves $a$ and $b$ into their $xi_j$ components, then weights the resulting dot product by $lambda_j$.



              In general, this choice of $left|xi_jright>$ will be unique. However, for some inner products, there will be multiple possible choices of $left|xi_jright>$. The Euclidean norm is unique (up to a constant scaling) in that every choice of $left|xi_jright>$ allows the inner product to be written in that form--it is independent of the chosen basis.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$

















                1












                $begingroup$

                For an arbitrary inner product $left<right>$ on $mathbb R^n$, there is a positive definite real symmetric matrix $A_ij = left<e_i|e_jright>$ that defines the transform. Since it is real and symmetric, it is orthogonally diagonalizable. That is, for any inner product on $mathbb R^n$, there is a set of real numbers $lambda_j$ and an orthonormal basis $left|xi_jright>$ such that
                $$
                left<a|bright> = sum_jlambda_jleft<a|xi_jright>left<xi_j|bright>
                $$

                Roughly speaking, the inner product resolves $a$ and $b$ into their $xi_j$ components, then weights the resulting dot product by $lambda_j$.



                In general, this choice of $left|xi_jright>$ will be unique. However, for some inner products, there will be multiple possible choices of $left|xi_jright>$. The Euclidean norm is unique (up to a constant scaling) in that every choice of $left|xi_jright>$ allows the inner product to be written in that form--it is independent of the chosen basis.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$















                  1












                  1








                  1





                  $begingroup$

                  For an arbitrary inner product $left<right>$ on $mathbb R^n$, there is a positive definite real symmetric matrix $A_ij = left<e_i|e_jright>$ that defines the transform. Since it is real and symmetric, it is orthogonally diagonalizable. That is, for any inner product on $mathbb R^n$, there is a set of real numbers $lambda_j$ and an orthonormal basis $left|xi_jright>$ such that
                  $$
                  left<a|bright> = sum_jlambda_jleft<a|xi_jright>left<xi_j|bright>
                  $$

                  Roughly speaking, the inner product resolves $a$ and $b$ into their $xi_j$ components, then weights the resulting dot product by $lambda_j$.



                  In general, this choice of $left|xi_jright>$ will be unique. However, for some inner products, there will be multiple possible choices of $left|xi_jright>$. The Euclidean norm is unique (up to a constant scaling) in that every choice of $left|xi_jright>$ allows the inner product to be written in that form--it is independent of the chosen basis.






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  For an arbitrary inner product $left<right>$ on $mathbb R^n$, there is a positive definite real symmetric matrix $A_ij = left<e_i|e_jright>$ that defines the transform. Since it is real and symmetric, it is orthogonally diagonalizable. That is, for any inner product on $mathbb R^n$, there is a set of real numbers $lambda_j$ and an orthonormal basis $left|xi_jright>$ such that
                  $$
                  left<a|bright> = sum_jlambda_jleft<a|xi_jright>left<xi_j|bright>
                  $$

                  Roughly speaking, the inner product resolves $a$ and $b$ into their $xi_j$ components, then weights the resulting dot product by $lambda_j$.



                  In general, this choice of $left|xi_jright>$ will be unique. However, for some inner products, there will be multiple possible choices of $left|xi_jright>$. The Euclidean norm is unique (up to a constant scaling) in that every choice of $left|xi_jright>$ allows the inner product to be written in that form--it is independent of the chosen basis.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered 11 hours ago









                  eyeballfrogeyeballfrog

                  7,222633




                  7,222633




















                      rampatowl is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









                      draft saved

                      draft discarded


















                      rampatowl is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                      rampatowl is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











                      rampatowl is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid …


                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function ()
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3188850%2falternate-inner-products-on-euclidean-space%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      -inner-product-space, linear-algebra

                      Popular posts from this blog

                      2017 IndyCar Series Contents Series news Teams and drivers Schedule Season summary Footnotes References External links Navigation menu"INDYCAR: Initial 2018 bodywork concepts unveiled"the original"IndyCar confirms switch to Performance Friction brakes in 2017""AJ Foyt Racing will switch to Chevy"the original"Carlos Munoz, Conor Daly will drive for AJ Foyt Racing""Zach Veach's Indy 500 Debut Confirmed with Foyt""No mass exodus from Honda after Ganassi switch""Ex-F1 driver Sato joins Andretti Autosport for 2017 IndyCar season""IndyCar's Ryan Hunter-Reay, sponsor DHL paired through 2020""hhgregg and Andretti Autosport announce partnership for key races in 2016""INDYCAR: Rossi re-signs with Andretti"the original"McLaren Formula 1 - Fernando Alonso to race at Indy 500 with McLaren, Honda and Andretti Autosport""Shank will finally take part in Indy 500 with Harvey, Andretti | MotorSportsTalk""Andretti adds Jack Harvey to Indy 500 field""Ganassi switches to Honda power for 2017""INDYCAR: Chilton returns to Ganassi"the original"IndyCar silly season: Who's going where in 2017?""INDYCAR: Kanaan, NTT Data return to Ganassi"the original"Kimball to remain at Ganassi for 2017""Coyne confirms Bourdais for 2017 IndyCar season""Davison to sub for Bourdais in Indy 500"the original"Gutierrez confirmed for Detroit IndyCar debut""Gutierrez returns with Coyne for rest of 2017 season""Vautier to drive for Coyne at Texas"the original"INDYCAR: Coyne confirms Jones for 2017"the original"Pippa Mann returns to Coyne for Indy 500""Karam, Dreyer & Reinbold teaming up again for Indianapolis 500""Pigot to return to Ed Carpenter Racing""Hildebrand confirmed as full-time Ed Carpenter driver""Veach to replace injured Hildebrand at Barber"the originalNew Team Harding Racing Enters Chaves for 101st Indianapolis 500"Juncos Racing Announces Entry in 101st Running of the Indianapolis 500 :: Juncos Racing""Juncos confirms Pigot for Indy 500""Saavedra confirmed in Juncos' second 500 entry"the original"Lazier confirms Indy 500 run after son's USF2000 debut"the original"Claman DeMelo to race for RLLR at Sonoma"the original"Rahal signs Servia and ace engineer for 2017""IndyCar: Aleshin returns with Schmidt"the original"Aleshin replaced by Saavedra for Toronto""Jack Harvey will pilot SPM No. 7 car at Watkins Glen, Sonoma""Jay Howard confirmed in Tony Stewart's supported SPM Indy entry""INDYCAR: Newgarden to wave the flag at Penske"the original"Pagenaud opts for No. 1 in 2017"the original"Penske confirms Newgarden for 2017""Montoya to stay with Team Penske in 2017""Target leaving IndyCar after 27 seasons with Chip Ganassi""Cavin: IndyCar could see complete driver/team shakeup in 2017""End of the road for KV Racing?""KV Racing confirms closure, equipment sold to Juncos""Juncos confirms IndyCar Series entry"the original"Juncos readies IndyCar program, aims for '17 500"the original"Harding Racing to add Texas, Pocono to schedule"the original"Sato signs with Andretti Autosport for 2017""INDYCAR: Aleshin in Doubt at SPM"the original"Long Beach notebook: JR Hildebrand breaks hand""Hildebrand cleared to return at Phoenix"the original"Bourdais to undergo surgery on multiple fractures""Aleshin loses Schmidt Peterson IndyCar ride""Saavedra in at SPM for Pocono, Gateway"the original"Bourdais to make return at Gateway"the original"The IndyCar Grand Prix no longer is sponsored by Angie's List""2017 IndyCar Series rulebook""2017 Verizon IndyCar Series Official Rulebook"Official websiteeeeee

                      Word for a person who has no opinion about whether god existsWord for having a definite opinion while simultaneously withholding judgment?What's the opposite of “newcomer? Is ”veteran" OK?What do you call an “atheist” who might believe in an afterlife?What's a word for someone who wants to voice opinions but not have them challenged?Word for someone who dismisses contrary opinions as irrational?Somone who thinks they are overly special/out of the ordinaryIs there a word, phrase or idiom for “a person who is incapable of thinking about the future”?The belief that a god is human-likeA word for a non-famous person/thing you have heard a lot aboutAdjective for a person who enjoys taking care of their appearance

                      Can I sign legal documents with a smiley face?Do Legal Documents Require Signing In Standard Pen Colors?Is it possible to legally prohibit someone from linking to specific pages on your website?Do scans of signed documents have the same legal power as the original document?What can I do if I signed an excessively restrictive contract?Can other party sneak in new contract terms via termination notice?How to prove that someone forged my signature on a contract that I was not aware of?In Australia, Is it legal to sign a document as somebody else?making a contract that includes video licenceLease dispute, over email and text messageIf you must include all of the natural language prose in a legal document, or if it can be abstracted outE-signing: legal ramifications of “identifying” a person