English | Español

Try our Free Online Math Solver!

Online Math Solver

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Please use this form if you would like
to have this math solver on your website,
free of charge.


Math 110 - Fall 05 - Lectures no

Math 110 - Fall 05 - Lectures notes # 11

The next goal is to make explicit the connection between
matrices, familiar from Math 54, and linear transformations
T: V -> W between finite dimensional vectors spaces.
They are not quite the same, because the matrix that represents
T depends on the bases you choose to span V and W, and
the order of these bases:

Def: Let V be a finite dimensional vector space. An
ordered basis of V is a basis for V with an order:
{v_1,...,v_ n}, where n=dim (V).

Ex: Let e_ i = i- th standard basis vector (1 in i- th entry, 0 elsewhere)
Then the bases {e_1,e_2,e_3} and {e_2,e_3,e_1} are the same
(order in a set does not matter), but the ordered bases
{e_1,e_2,e_3} and {e_2,e_3,e_1} are different .

Def: For V = F^n, {e_1,...,e_ n} is the standard ordered basis.
For P_ n (F), {1,x,x^2,...,x_ n} is the standard ordered basis.

Given ordered bases for V and W, we can express both vectors
in V and W, and linear transformations T: V->W as vectors and
matrices with respect to these ordered bases:

Def: Let beta = {v_1,...,v_ n} be an ordered basis for V.
For any x in V, let x = sum_ {i=1 to n} a_ i*v_ i be the unique
linear combination representing x. The coordinate vector
of x relative to beta, denoted [x]_ beta, is

ASK & WAIT: What is [v_ i]_ beta ?
ASK & WAIT: Let V = P_5(F), beta = {1,x,x^2,x^3,x^4,x^5},
and v = 3-6x+x^3. What is [v]_ beta?
ASK & WAIT: If beta = {x^5, x^4, x^3, x^2, x, 1}?

Lemma: The mapping Beta: V -> F^n that maps x to [x]_ beta is linear.
Proof: if x = sum_ i a_ i*v_ i and y = sum_ i b_ i*v_ i, then
[x]_ beta = [a_1;...;a_ n], [y]_ beta=[b_1;...;b_ n] and

[x+y]_ beta = [sum_ i (a_ i+ b_ i)*v_ i]_ beta ... by def of x+ y
= [a_1+b_1 ; ... ; a_ n+ b_ n ] ... by def of []_beta
= [a_1 ; ... ; a_ n] + [b_1; ... ; b_ n]
= [x]_ beta + [y]_ beta ... by def of []_beta
Similarly, [c*x]_ beta = c*[x]_ beta

We need this representation of vectors in V as
coordinate vectors of scalars in order to apply T: V -> W
as multiplication by a matrix . We will also need to
represent vectors in W the same way.

Let beta = {v_1,...,v_ n} and gamma = {w_1,...,w_ m}
be ordered bases of V and W, resp. Let T: V -> W be linear.
Then there are unique scalars a_ {ij} such that
T (v_ j) = sum_ {i=1 to m} a_ {ij}*w_ i
These scalars will be the entries of the matrix representing T:

Def: Let T: V -> W be linear, V and W finite dimensional.
Using the above notation, the m x n matrix A with
entries a_ {ij}, is the matrix representation of T in the ordered
bases beta and gamma. We write A = [T]_ beta^gamma.
If V = W and beta = gamma, we write simply A = [T]_ beta

Note that column j of A is [a_{1j};...;a_ {mj] = [T (v_ j)]_ gamma

To see why we call A the matrix representation of T, let us use
it to compute y = T (x).

Suppose x = sum_ {j=1 to n} x_ j*v_ j, so [x]_ beta = [x_1;...;x_ n]
is the coordinate vector for x. We claim the coordinate
vector for y is just gotten by multiplying by A:
[y]_ gamma = A * [x]_ beta

To confirm this we compute:
y = T (x) = T (sum_ {j=1 to n} x_ j*v_ j) ... by def of x
= sum_ {j=1 to n} x_ j*T (v_ j) ... since T is linear
= sum_ {j=1 to n} x_ j*(sum_ {i=1 to m} a_ {ij}*w_ i)
... by def of T (v_ j)
= sum_ {j=1 to n} sum_ {i=1 to m} a_ {ij}*x_ j*w_ i
... move x_ j into sum
= sum_ {i=1 to m} sum_ {j=1 to n} a_ {ij}*x_ j*w_ i
... reverse order of sums
= sum_ {i=1 to m} w_ i * (sum_ {j=1 to n} a_ {ij}*x_ j)
... pull w_ i out of inner sum

so
[y]_ gamma = [ sum_ {j=1 to n} a_{1j}*x_ j ] = A * [ x_1 ] = A*[x]_ beta
[ sum_ {j=1 to n} a_{2j}*x_ j ] [ x_2 ] as desired
[ ... ] [ ... ]
[ sum_ {j=1 to n} a_ {mj}*x_ j ] [ x_ n ]

Ex: T: R^2 -> R^4, T((x, y) = (x-y, 3*x+2*y, -2*x, 7*y)
beta = standard basis for R^2, gamma = standard basis for R^4,
so T((1,0)) = (1;3;-2;0) and T((0,1)) = (-1;2;0;7), so
A = [ 1 -1 ] (for brevity in these notes, we will sometimes use
[ 3 2 ] "Matlab notation": T = [ 1 -1 ; 3 2 ; -2 0 ; 0 7 ] )
[-2 0 ]
[ 0 7 ]

ASK & WAIT: What if beta = {e2,e1} and gamma = {e3 e4 e1 e2}?

Suppose x = 3*e1 - e2; what is T (x)?
what is [T (x)]_ gamma, using standard bases?
T (x) = T(3,-1) = (4,7,-6,-7)
[T (x)]_ gamma = A * [3;-1] = [4;7;-6;-7]

Ex: T: P_3(R) -> P_2(R), T (f (x)) = f’ (x),
beta = {1, 1+x, x^2, x^3 }, gamma = {2 , x , x^2}
Then T(1) = 0, T(1+x) = 1 = (1/2)*2; T (x^2) = 2*x ; T (x^3) = 3*x^2
So T = [ 0 1/2 0 0 ]
[ 0 0 2 0 ]
[ 0 0 0 3 ]
ASK & WAIT: What is T if beta = { 1, x, x^2, x^3 }? If gamma={1,x,x^2}?

Having identified matrices with linear transformations between
two finite dimensional spaces with ordered bases, and recalling
that mxn matrices form a vector space, we will not be surprised
that all the linear transformations between any two vector
spaces is also a vector space:

Def: Let T and U be linear transformations from V -> W.
Then we define the new function T+ U: V -> W by (T+ U) (v) =T (v)+ U (v)
and the new function c*T: V -> W by (c*T) (v) = c*T (v)

Thm: Using this notation, we have that
(1) For all scalars c, c*T+ U is a linear transformation
(2) The set of all linear transformation from V -> W,
is itself a vector space, using
the above definitions of addition and multiplication by scalars

Proof:
(1) (c*T+ U) (sum_ i a_ i*v_ i)
= (c*T) (sum_ i a_ i*v_ i) + U (sum_ i a_ i*v_ i) ... by def of c*T+ U
= c*(T (sum_ i a_ i*v_ i)) + U (sum_ i a_ i*v_ i) ... by def of c*T
= c*(sum_ i a_ i*T (v_ i)) + sum_ i a_ i*U (v_ i) ... since T, U linear
= sum_ i a_ i*c*T (v_ i) + sum_ i a_ i*U (v_ i)
= sum_ i a_ i*(c*T (v_ i)+ U (v_ i))
= sum_ i a_ i*(c*T+ U) (v_ i) ... by def of c*T+ U
(2) We let T_0, defined by T_0(v) = 0_W for all v, be the
" zero vector " in L (V, W). It is easy to see that all the
axioms of a vector space are satisfied. (homework!)

Def: L (V, W) is the vector space of all linear transformations
from V -> W. If V=W, we write L (V) for short.

Given ordered bases for finite dimensional V and W, we get a
matrix [T]_ beta^gamma for every T in L (V, W). It is natural
to expect that the operations of adding vectors in L (V, W)
(adding linear transformations) should be the same as adding
their matrices, and that multiplying a vector in L (V, W) by a
scalar should be the same as multiplying its matrix by a scalar:

Thm: Let V and W be finite dimensional vectors spaces with
ordered bases beta and gamma, resp. Let T and U be in L (V, W).

Then
(1) [T+ U]_ beta^gamma = [T]_ beta^gamma + [U]_ beta^gamma
(2) [c*T]_ beta^gamma = c*[T]_ beta^gamma
In other words, the function []_beta^gamma: L (V, W) -> M_ {m x n} (F)
is a linear transformation.

Proof: (1) We compute column j of matrices on both sides
and comfirm they are the same. Let beta = {v_1,...,v_ n}
and gamma = {w_1,...,w_ m}. Then
(T+ U) (v_ j) = T (v_ j) + U (v_ j) so
[(T+ U) (v_ j)]_ gamma = [T (v_ j)]_ gamma + [U (v_ j)]_ gamma
by the above Lemma that shows the mapping x -> [x]_ gamma
was linear.
(2) Similarly (c*T) (v_ j) = c*T (v_ j) so
[(c*T) (v_ j)]_ gamma = [c*T (v_ j)]_ gamma
= c*[T (v_ j)]_ gamma by the Lemma
so the j-th columns of both matrices are the same

To summarize, what we have so far is this:
Given two ordered bases beta for V and gamma for W, we have
a one-to-one correspondence between
all linear transformations in L (V, W) and all matrices in M_ {m x n} (F).
Furthermore, this 1-to-1 correspondence " preserves " operations
in each set:
adding linear transformations <=> adding matrices
[ T + U <=> [T]_ beta^gamma + [U]_ beta^gamma ]
multiplying linear transformations by scalars
<=> multiplying matrices by scalars
[ c*T <=> c*[T]_ beta^gamma ]
applying linear transformation to a vector
<=> multiplying matrix times a vector
[ y = T (x) <=> [y]_ gamma = [T]_ beta^gamma * [x]_ beta ]

There are several other important properties of and operations
on linear transformations, and it is natural to ask what they
mean for matrices as well (we write A = [T]_ beta^gamma for short)
null space N (T) <=> set of vectors x such that A*x = 0
range space R (T) <=> all vectors of the form A*x
<=> all linear combinations of columns of A
T being one-to-one <=> Ax = 0 only if x=0
T being onto <=> span (columns of A) = F^m
T being invertible <=> A square and Ax =0 only if x=0

What about composition? If T: V -> W and U: W -> Z, then
consider UT: V -> Z, defined by UT (v) = U (T (v))

Thm: If T is in L (V, W) and U is in L (W, Z), then UT is in L (V, Z),
i.e. UT is linear.
Proof: UT( sum_ i a_ i*v_ i ) = U (T( sum_ i a_ i*v_ i )) ... by def of UT
= U( sum_ i a_ i*T (v_ i)) ... since T is linear
= sum_ i a_ i*U (T (v_ i)) ... since U is linear
= sum_ i a_ i*UT (v_ i) ... by def of UT

Thm:
(1) If T in L (V, W) and U1 and U2 are in L (W, Z), then
T(U1+U2) = TU1 + TU2 ( distributibity of addition over composition)
(2) If T in L (V, W), U in L (W, Z), and A in L (Z, Q), then
T (U A) = (T U) A is in L (V, Q) (associativity of composition)
(3) If T in L (V, W), I_ V the identity in L (V, V) and I_ W the identity in L (W, W),
then T I_ V = I_ W T = T (composition with identity)
(4) If T in L (V, W) and U in L (W, Z), and c a scalar, then
c (T U) = (c T) U = T (c U) (commutativity and associativity of
composition with scalar multiplication)
Proof: homework!

Now that we understand the properties of composition of linear transformations,
we can ask what operation on matrices it corresponds to:

Suppose T: V -> W and U: W -> Z are linear so UT: V -> Z
Let beta = {v_1,...,v_ n} be an ordered basis for V
gamma = {w_1,...,w_ m} be an ordered basis for W
delta = {z_1,...,z_ p} be an ordered basis for Z
with A = [U]_ gamma^delta the p x m matrix for U,
B = [T]_ beta^gamma the m x n matrix for T,
C = [UT]_ beta^delta the p x n matrix for UT
Our question is what is the relationship of C to A and B?
We compute C as follows:
column j of C = [UT (v_ j)]_ delta ... by def of C
= [U(T (v_ j))]_ delta ... by def of UT
= [U (sum_ {k=1 to m} B_ kj*w_ k)]_ delta ... by def of T (v_ j)
= [sum_ {k=1 to m} B_ kj*U (w_ k)]_ delta ... by linearity of U
= [sum_ {k=1 to m} B_ kj* sum_ {i=1 to p} A_ ik * z_ i]_ delta
... by def of U (w_ k)
= [sum_ {k=1 to m} sum_ {i=1 to p} A_ ik * B_ kj * z_ i]_ delta
... move B_ kj inside summation
= [sum_ {i=1 to p} sum_ {k=1 to m} A_ ik * B_ kj * z_ i]_ delta
... reverse order of summation
= [sum_ {i=1 to p} z_ i * (sum_ {k=1 to m} A_ ik * B_ kj)]_ delta
... pull z_ i out of inner summation
= [sum_ {k=1 to m} A_1k * B_ kj] ... by def of []_delta
[sum_ {k=1 to m} A_2k * B_ kj]
[ ... ]
[sum_ {k=1 to m} A_  mk * B_ kj]
said another way, C_ ij = sum_ {k=1 to m} A_ ik * B_ kj

Def: Given the p x m matrix A, and the m x n matrix B we define their
matrix-matrix product (or just product for short ) to be the p x n matrix C
with C_ ij = sum_ {k=1 to m} A_ ik * B_ k j

Thm: Using the above notation,
[UT]_ beta^delta = [U]_ gamma^delta * [T]_ beta^gamma

In other words, another correspondence between linear transformations
and matrices is:
composition of linear transformations <=> matrix-matrix multiplication

Prev Next