Matrix transformations and effects on the unit square

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on understanding the area transformation of the unit square under a matrix transformation T induced by matrix A, which is determined by the absolute value of the determinant of A, abs(det(A)). The transformation of unit vectors i and j into vectors Ti and Tj is examined, highlighting that the area of the parallelogram formed by these vectors can be calculated using the vector product without needing the sine of the angle between them, as they are unit vectors. The conversation also touches on the vector cross product's directionality and its dependence on the angles between the vectors involved. Additionally, it notes that while the magnitude of the area can be derived from the sine of the angle and the magnitudes of the vectors, the vector product simplifies this calculation. The discussion concludes by acknowledging the complexity of area transformations in higher dimensions.
fogvajarash
Messages
127
Reaction score
0
I was looking over my notes today, and I realized that there was a point that isn't pretty clear.

If we have the image under T (being T a matrix transformation induced by a matrix A) of the unit square, then its area should be abs(det(A)). Why is this though? I was looking at the proof and I saw that the transformation was defined as T(i) = Ti = (a c 0) and T(j) = Tj = (b d 0) [in this case i and j are the unit vectors]. However, the area of the parallelogram made between these vectors is stated to be as [[Ai x Aj]] (without the sinθ being θ the angle these vectors make). Or is it because as if they are unit vectors, they are 90 degrees to each other?

Thank you very much.

Edit: This link (around page 1) should help if I'm not clear with my explanations http://www.math.mun.ca/~mkondra/linalg2/la2set7.pdf
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
You don't need the trig function to evaluate a cross product.
 
Oh darn, I finally saw my notes and checked that indeed it is just the vector product lv x wl (for the trig function, it involves the magnitude of both vectors or lal lbl sinθ, which is completely different from the vector product). So this means that we can as well find the area of that parallelogram using the sine of the angle and the two magnitudes?

Thank you Simon.
 
The advantage of the vector form is that it gives you the direction of the cross product as well.

Consider if ##\vec{v} = (v\cos\phi,v\sin\phi,0)^t## and ##\vec{u}=(u\cos\theta, u\sin\theta, 0)^t##
Where ##\theta## is the angle ##\vec{u}## makes to the x-axis and ##\phi## is the angle ##\vec v## makes to the x axis.

Then $$\vec{u}\times\vec{v} = \left| \begin{array}{ccc}
\hat{\imath} & \hat{\jmath} & \hat{k}\\
u\cos\theta & u\sin\theta & 0\\
v\cos\phi & v\cos\phi & 0\end{array}\right| = uv\sin(\phi-\theta)\hat{k}$$ ... which result required trig identities.

Notice that ## \theta -\phi ## is the angle between the vectors
- so the equation you are used to is just for the magnitude.

It gets trickier when you go to more than three dimensions.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top