Can Linear Transformations Occur Between Infinite and Finite Dimensions?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of linear transformations between finite and infinite dimensional vector spaces, exploring whether such transformations can be represented in matrix form. Participants consider various scenarios, including transformations from infinite to infinite dimensions, finite to infinite dimensions, and vice versa.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that every linear transformation from Rn to Rm can be represented in matrix form and questions the representation for transformations involving infinite dimensions.
  • Another participant discusses the definition of a matrix and suggests that if matrices are defined in terms of arbitrary sets, then linear transformations can be represented as matrices, provided a basis is fixed.
  • A different viewpoint emphasizes the importance of convergence when dealing with infinite sums, suggesting that matrices become more useful in this context, particularly for continuous linear transformations between separable Hilbert spaces.
  • One participant asserts that linear transformations can be represented in matrix form if convergence exists in the infinite dimension, questioning the representation otherwise.
  • Another participant introduces the idea that transformations between infinite dimensional spaces can often be represented as integrals, indicating a shift from traditional linear algebra to functional analysis.
  • A final participant raises a question about the feasibility of transforming between infinite dimensional and finite dimensional spaces.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying views on the representation of linear transformations between finite and infinite dimensions, with no consensus reached on the conditions under which such representations are valid. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the specifics of these transformations.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations related to definitions of matrices, the role of convergence, and the distinction between linear algebra and functional analysis in the context of infinite dimensional spaces.

ajayguhan
Messages
153
Reaction score
1
I know that every linear transformation from Rn to Rm can be represented in a matrix form.


What about a transformation from a

1. Infinite dimension to infinite dimension
2.finite to infinite dimension
3.infinite to finite dimension
Can they represented by matrix form...?

Before this one question is there a linear transformation from Infinite dimension to infinite dimension, finite to infinite dimension and vice versa..?


Any help appreciated.

Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Algebraic version:

If your definition of a linear transformation is just a linear map between two real vector spaces, [itex]T:V\to W[/itex], then it depends on how you define a matrix.
- One definition of a matrix is as an element of [itex]\mathbb R^{I\times J}[/itex], where [itex]I,J[/itex] are arbitrary sets. Fix [itex]M=(m_{i,j})_{i\in I, j\in J}\in \mathbb R^{I\times J}[/itex]... For any [itex]i\in I[/itex], we can think of the row [itex]i[/itex] of [itex]M[/itex] as [itex](m_{i,j})_{j\in J}[/itex]. For any [itex]j\in J[/itex], we can think of the column [itex]j[/itex] of [itex]M[/itex] as [itex](m_{i,j})_{i\in I}[/itex].
- If this is how you define a matrix, then there's a sensible way of representing [itex]T[/itex] as a matrix. Fix a basis [itex]\{v_j\}_{j\in J}\subseteq V[/itex] and a basis [itex]\{w_i\}_{i\in I}\subseteq W[/itex]. Here, a basis for the vector space means a subset such that every element of the vector space can be represented as a unique linear combination of finitely many elements of the subset. (Sometimes, this is called a Hamel basis.)
- Then define the matrix [itex]M\in \mathbb R^{I\times J}[/itex] (in which every column has finitely many non-zero entries) by letting column [itex]j\in J[/itex] satisfy [itex]T(v_j)=\sum_{i\in I} m_{i,j} w_i[/itex]. (In this sum, just don't count entries with [itex]m_{i,j}=0[/itex], and then it's a finite sum). By definition of a basis, there's a unique way to do this (once the basis has been fixed).

- By doing the same thing in reverse, fixing bases [itex](v_j)_{j\in J}[/itex] and [itex](w_i)_{i\in I}[/itex], every [itex]M\in \mathbb R^{I\times J}[/itex] with each column having finitely many nonzero entries will then induce a unique linear transformation [itex]T:V\to W[/itex].
 
Analytic:

If you have a notion of convergence, and you want to allow for infinite sums, things become subtler, and matrices become a little more useful. [The construction in the above post is some form of matrix representation, but it's not really useful in any way.]

One example: There's a very nice way of using matrices (with countably many rows/columns) to describe continuous linear transformations between separable Hilbert spaces. E.g. between [itex]l^2[/itex] and [itex]l^2[/itex], or between [itex]\mathbb R^n[/itex] and [itex]l^2[/itex]. This is a totally different construction than the one I gave above, and it illuminates some senses in which [itex]l^2[/itex] behaves very similarly to [itex]\mathbb R^n[/itex]. That's why it's many people's favourite example of an infinite-dimensional vector space.
 
We can represent the linear transformation from 1. Infinite dimension to infinite dimension2.finite to infinite dimension3.infinite to finite dimension interms of matrix, if convergence (catchy sequence) exist in the infinite dimension, if not we can't represent it in matrix form...correct..?
 
Transformations from and to infinite dimensional spaces are typically represented as itegrals of the form [itex]\int K(x, t)f(t)dt[/itex] where "f(t)" gives, for each t, the componts of the "vector".

(Infinite dimensional vector spaces are typically not dealt with in "Linear Algebra", which is often defined as "the theory of finite dimensional vector spaces", but in "Functional Analysis".)
 
Can we transform a infinite dimensional space to finite dimension and vice versa ...?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
8K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K