Another question about projections.

  • Thread starter Thread starter evilpostingmong
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Projections
evilpostingmong
Messages
338
Reaction score
0
Say we have a transformation T\inL(V). Now suppose a subspace of V (U) is in the rangespace of T. Now suppose PUv=u with u=a1u1+...+amvm.
Now apply T to u to get T(u)=b1u1+...+bmum=/=a1u1+...+amvm. What would happen
if we apply PUto T(u)? In other words, what would we end up with after computing PUT(u)?
I'm just wondering whether or not applying a transformation (a non-projection in this case) after a projection would result
in a different output after applying the projection to the image of T? In other words, would
PUT(u) map to a1u1+..+amum or would it map to b1u1+..+bmum?
Thank you for your response!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Em..It's a bit hard to understand your post, could you explain what do these mean:
T <br /> \in<br /> L(V),
V (U) (what does U mean)
PU (projection?)
T(u)=b1u1+...+bmum=/=a1u1+...+amvm
It would be helpful if you can clarify these
 
kof9595995 said:
Em..It's a bit hard to understand your post, could you explain what do these mean:
T <br /> \in<br /> L(V),
V (U) (what does U mean)
PU (projection?)
T(u)=b1u1+...+bmum=/=a1u1+...+amvm
It would be helpful if you can clarify these

T is a transformation that sends a vector from V to V.
U is a subspace of V. PU is a projection onto U. And T(u)=b1u1+..+bmum=/=a1u1+...+amum means that T is not
an identity operator, since u=a1u1+...+amum.
 
Last edited:
I think in general cases they wouldn't be same, just take an exmple
projection
<br /> P = \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c}<br /> 1 &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 \\<br /> \end{array}} \right)<br />
transformation(I take a rotation)
<br /> T = \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c}<br /> 0 &amp; { - 1} \\<br /> 1 &amp; 0 \\<br /> \end{array}} \right)<br />
take a vector
<br /> \overrightarrow v = \left[ \begin{array}{l}<br /> 1 \\ <br /> 1 \\ <br /> \end{array} \right]<br />
then compute as what you said
<br /> P\overrightarrow v = \left[ \begin{array}{l}<br /> 1 \\ <br /> 0 \\ <br /> \end{array} \right]<br />
<br /> PT\overrightarrow v = \left[ \begin{array}{l}<br /> - 1 \\ <br /> 0 \\ <br /> \end{array} \right]<br />
 
kof9595995 said:
I think in general cases they wouldn't be same, just take an exmple
projection
<br /> P = \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c}<br /> 1 &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 \\<br /> \end{array}} \right)<br />
transformation
<br /> T = \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c}<br /> 0 &amp; { - 1} \\<br /> 1 &amp; 0 \\<br /> \end{array}} \right)<br />
take a vector
<br /> \overrightarrow v = \left[ \begin{array}{l}<br /> 1 \\ <br /> 1 \\ <br /> \end{array} \right]<br />
then compute as what you said
<br /> P\overrightarrow v = \left[ \begin{array}{l}<br /> 1 \\ <br /> 0 \\ <br /> \end{array} \right]<br />
<br /> PT\overrightarrow v = \left[ \begin{array}{l}<br /> - 1 \\ <br /> 0 \\ <br /> \end{array} \right]<br />

That answers it! Thank you!
 
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
When decomposing a representation ##\rho## of a finite group ##G## into irreducible representations, we can find the number of times the representation contains a particular irrep ##\rho_0## through the character inner product $$ \langle \chi, \chi_0\rangle = \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{g\in G} \chi(g) \chi_0(g)^*$$ where ##\chi## and ##\chi_0## are the characters of ##\rho## and ##\rho_0##, respectively. Since all group elements in the same conjugacy class have the same characters, this may be...
Back
Top