I'm trying to understand the proof of the Sturm oscillation theorem and I hit the roadblock.
Theorem: Let $E_0<E_1<\dots$ be the eigenvalues of $H=-\frac{d^2}{dx^2}+V(x)$ on $L^2(0,a)$ with boundary conditions $u(0)=u(a)=0$. Then $u(x,E_n)$ has exactly $n$ zeros in $(0,a)$.
Part of the proof: Suppose $u_n$ has $m$ zeros $x_1<\dots<x_m$ in $(0,a)$. Let $v_0,\dots,v_m$ be the function $u_n$ restricted successively to $(0,x_1),(x_1,x_2),...,(x_m,a)$. The $v$'s are continuous and piecewise $C^1$ with $v_l(0)=v_l(a)=0$. Thus they lie in the quadratic form domain of $H$ and $$ <v_j,Hv_k>=\int_0^a v'_j v'_k + \int_0^a Vv_jv_k=\delta_{jk}E\int_0^a v_j^2dx $$ since if $j=k$, we can integrate by parts and use $-u''+Vu=Eu$. It follows that for any $v$ in the span of $v_j$'s, $<v,Hv>=E\|v\|^2$, so by the variational principle, $H$ has at least $m+1$ eigenvalues in $(-\infty, E_n]$, that is, $n+1\geq m+1$
Questions:
Why is it possible to express $<v_j,Hv_k>$ as in the formula above and how the expression is integrated by parts?
What is the variational principle mentioned above that allows to determine the number of eigenvalues in the interval $(-\infty, E_n]$?
Question 1
By definition $$ \newcommand{\ip}[2]{\left\langle#1,#2\right\rangle} \ip{v_j}{Hv_k} = \int_0^a(-v_jv_k''+Vv_jv_k). $$ The first term is in fact $\int_{x_j}^{x_{j+1}}-v_jv_k''$. On this interval we integrate by parts as usual. The boundary terms vanish because $v_j(x_j)=v_j(x_{j+1})=0$. Since $v_j$ (and $v_j'$) is supported on this interval, it makes no difference to expand it to the whole $[0,1]$, so $$ \ip{v_j}{Hv_k} = \int_0^a(v_j'v_k'+Vv_jv_k). $$ This is the first equality.
The other equality is different. The functions $v_j$ are supported on different intervals so $\ip{v_j}{Hv_k}$ has to be zero when $j\neq k$. It then remains to calculate $\ip{v_k}{Hv_k}$. This is nothing but $\int_{x_k}^{x_{k+1}}v_kHv_k$. Now $Hv_k=E_nv_k$ on this interval. This gives you $$ \ip{v_j}{Hv_k} = E_n\delta_{jk}\int_{x_k}^{x_{k+1}}v_k^2. $$ You can replace the integral with that from $0$ to $a$ since $v_k$ is zero outside the interval in the formula above.
So for the first equality, integrate by parts, and for the second, use the eigenfunction property.
Question 2
There are many variational principles out there, so I can only guess which one is meant here. Consult the material you are using for an exact formulation. My guess is this: If there is an $M$-dimensional space of functions $v$ with $\ip{v}{Hv}=E\ip{v}{v}$, then $H$ has to have at least $M$ eigenvalues $\leq E$. This applied to $M=m+1$ and $E=E_n$ gives the inequality in your proof.
Formatting comment
This is beside the point, but I can't help commenting. Please do not use the less and greater than symbols (
<and>) for the inner product. They are designed to be binary relations, so their looks and spacing don't fit the use in inner products. Instead, use the angle brackets\langleand\rangle.