Are these two linear maps equivalent?

  • Thread starter Thread starter roman93
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Equivalent Linear
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between linear maps S and T, specifically whether the map T': Im(A) -> C is equivalent to the composition TS: A -> C. Participants clarify that Im(A) refers to the image of A under the transformation S, not the imaginary part. It is confirmed that T' operates on a different domain but represents the same transformation as T. The correct notation for the image of S is Im(S) or S(A), and it is agreed that Image(T') equals Image(TS), leading to the conclusion that their ranks are also equal. The conversation emphasizes the importance of proper notation in linear algebra discussions.
roman93
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
let S: A ->B and T: B -> C be linear maps.
Then
TS : A -> B -> C.
But am I right in thinking that the map T': Im(A) -> C is the same as TS?

If this is wrong, can you explain why please :)

Thanks very much in advance!
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
What is Im(A)?
 
My guess would be imaginary part.
 
micromass said:
What is Im(A)?

Whovian said:
My guess would be imaginary part.

Im(A) is Image(A) or the space that we get when we apply the linear transformation S to A.
Also T' is the same transformation as T but just on a different domain.

I guess what I wrote in OP was wrong, but is it fine to say that Image(T') = Image(TS),
so Rank(T') = Rank(TS) ?
 
roman93 said:
Im(A) is Image(A) or the space that we get when we apply the linear transformation S to A.

The correct notation is Im(S) or S(A). The notation Im(A) is not in use.
I guess what I wrote in OP was wrong, but is it fine to say that Image(T') = Image(TS),
so Rank(T') = Rank(TS) ?

That is indeed correct.
 
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