MHB Canonical Isomorphism and Tensor Products

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sudharaka
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Isomorphism Tensor
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on understanding the expression \(\alpha(t)(v)\) within the context of the canonical isomorphism \(\alpha\) from \(V^*\otimes V\) to \(L(V, V)\). Participants clarify that the elementary tensor \(e^i \otimes e_j\) corresponds to a linear transformation defined by taking the \(i\)-th coordinate of \(v\) and placing it in the \(j\)-th position, with other coordinates set to zero. The specific tensor \(t = (e^1 + e^2) \otimes (e_3 + e_4)\) is expanded and evaluated, leading to the result \(\alpha(t)(v) = 5e_3 + 5e_4\). The conversation highlights the complexity of tensor notation and the importance of understanding linear mappings and their representations in matrix form. Overall, the discussion emphasizes the foundational concepts of tensor products and linear transformations in finite-dimensional vector spaces.
Sudharaka
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
1,558
Reaction score
1
Hi everyone, :)

Here's a problem that I have trouble understanding. Specifically I am not quite getting what it means by the expression \(\alpha (t)(v)\). Hope somebody can help me to improve my understanding. :)

Problem:

Let \(\alpha\) be the canonical isomorphism from \(V^*\otimes V\) to \(L(V,\, V)\). Find \(\alpha(t)(v)\) where \(t=(e^1+e^2)\otimes (e_3+e_4)\) and \(v=2e_1+3e_2+2e_3+3e_4\).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Sudharaka said:
Hi everyone, :)

Here's a problem that I have trouble understanding. Specifically I am not quite getting what it means by the expression \(\alpha (t)(v)\). Hope somebody can help me to improve my understanding. :)

Problem:

Let \(\alpha\) be the canonical isomorphism from \(V^*\otimes V\) to \(L(V,\, V)\). Find \(\alpha(t)(v)\) where \(t=(e^1+e^2)\otimes (e_3+e_4)\) and \(v=2e_1+3e_2+2e_3+3e_4\).
With the usual caveat that I'm not really at home with this tensor notation, the idea is that an element of $V^*\otimes V$ gives rise to a linear transformation from $V$ to $V$. The elementary tensor $e^i\otimes e_j$ gives rise to the linear transformation $T = \alpha(e^i\otimes e_j)$ defined by $T(v) = \alpha(e^i\otimes e_j)(v) = \langle e^i,v\rangle e_j$ (for all $v\in V$), where the angled brackets $\langle x,v\rangle$ denote the action of $x\in V^*$ on the element $x\in V$ under the duality between the two spaces. Thus $\alpha(e^i\otimes e_j)(e_k) = \begin{cases}e_j& \text{ if }k=i, \\ 0&\text{ if }k\ne i. \end{cases}$
 
Opalg said:
With the usual caveat that I'm not really at home with this tensor notation, the idea is that an element of $V^*\otimes V$ gives rise to a linear transformation from $V$ to $V$. The elementary tensor $e^i\otimes e_j$ gives rise to the linear transformation $T = \alpha(e^i\otimes e_j)$ defined by $T(v) = \alpha(e^i\otimes e_j)(v) = \langle e^i,v\rangle e_j$ (for all $v\in V$), where the angled brackets $\langle x,v\rangle$ denote the action of $x\in V^*$ on the element $x\in V$ under the duality between the two spaces. Thus $\alpha(e^i\otimes e_j)(e_k) = \begin{cases}e_j& \text{ if }k=i, \\ 0&\text{ if }k\ne i. \end{cases}$

Thanks so much for your reply. I took a long time to understand this due to my limited knowledge about tensors, but I think now I am getting there. :)
 
As I indicated in another thread the basis of elementary tensors $e^j \otimes e_i$ of $V^{\ast} \otimes V$ can be identified with the basis of elementary matrices $E_{ij}$ of $\text{Hom}(V,V)$.

Note that this identification uses a basis choice for $V$, but it is possible to do this in a completely basis-free manner.

One thing to remember is that linear functionals (at least for finite-dimensional vector spaces) are pretty much just "glorified inner products". That is, every element $f \in V^{\ast}$ can be thought of as the function:

$\langle u,\_\rangle$ for some vector $u$.

For example, we have $e^j = \langle e_j,\_ \rangle$ for the standard basis for $V$.

***Note*** Vector spaces, of course, do not always come equipped with a "natural" inner product. However, any non-degenerate bilinear form $B$ can be used to induce an isomorphism (only in the finite-dimensional case, n.b.) between $V$ and $V^{\ast}$, and the "go-to" non-degenerate bilinear form in an inner product space is, of course, the inner product (BUT...in complex vector spaces, it is often more convenient to use a sesquilinear form, due to the peculiarities of the complex conjugate).

In particular, it is natural to identify the 1-form (dual basis element) $e^j$ with the $j$-th projection function.

*******

Computing the values of these mappings is often tedious. $\alpha(e^i \otimes e_j) (v)$ basically takes the $i$-th coordinate of $v$ (in the given "$e$" basis) and sticks it in the $j$-th slot, with every other coordinate 0. To extend this to the entire tensor $t$ we extend by (multi-, in this case, bi-) linearity.

So if:

$t = (e^1 + e^2) \otimes (e_3 + e_4) = e^1 \otimes e_3 + e^1 \otimes e_4 + e^2 \otimes e_3 + e^2 \otimes e_4$

Then:

$\alpha(t)(v) = 2e_3 + 2e_4 + 3e_3 + 3e_4 = 5e_3 + 5e_4$

or, perhaps more understandably, relative to our given basis $S$ of $V$:

$[T]_S([v]_S) = [T]_S(2,3,2,3)^T = (0,0,5,5)^T$

(if I have done my arithmetic correctly), that is relative to the given basis, our linear mapping $T$ has the matrix:

$\begin{bmatrix}0&0&0&0\\0&0&0&0\\1&1&0&0\\1&1&0&0 \end{bmatrix}$
 
Deveno said:
As I indicated in another thread the basis of elementary tensors $e^j \otimes e_i$ of $V^{\ast} \otimes V$ can be identified with the basis of elementary matrices $E_{ij}$ of $\text{Hom}(V,V)$.

Note that this identification uses a basis choice for $V$, but it is possible to do this in a completely basis-free manner.

One thing to remember is that linear functionals (at least for finite-dimensional vector spaces) are pretty much just "glorified inner products". That is, every element $f \in V^{\ast}$ can be thought of as the function:

$\langle u,\_\rangle$ for some vector $u$.

For example, we have $e^j = \langle e_j,\_ \rangle$ for the standard basis for $V$.

***Note*** Vector spaces, of course, do not always come equipped with a "natural" inner product. However, any non-degenerate bilinear form $B$ can be used to induce an isomorphism (only in the finite-dimensional case, n.b.) between $V$ and $V^{\ast}$, and the "go-to" non-degenerate bilinear form in an inner product space is, of course, the inner product (BUT...in complex vector spaces, it is often more convenient to use a sesquilinear form, due to the peculiarities of the complex conjugate).

In particular, it is natural to identify the 1-form (dual basis element) $e^j$ with the $j$-th projection function.

*******

Computing the values of these mappings is often tedious. $\alpha(e^i \otimes e_j) (v)$ basically takes the $i$-th coordinate of $v$ (in the given "$e$" basis) and sticks it in the $j$-th slot, with every other coordinate 0. To extend this to the entire tensor $t$ we extend by (multi-, in this case, bi-) linearity.

So if:

$t = (e^1 + e^2) \otimes (e_3 + e_4) = e^1 \otimes e_3 + e^1 \otimes e_4 + e^2 \otimes e_3 + e^2 \otimes e_4$

Then:

$\alpha(t)(v) = 2e_3 + 2e_4 + 3e_3 + 3e_4 = 5e_3 + 5e_4$

or, perhaps more understandably, relative to our given basis $S$ of $V$:

$[T]_S([v]_S) = [T]_S(2,3,2,3)^T = (0,0,5,5)^T$

(if I have done my arithmetic correctly), that is relative to the given basis, our linear mapping $T$ has the matrix:

$\begin{bmatrix}0&0&0&0\\0&0&0&0\\1&1&0&0\\1&1&0&0 \end{bmatrix}$

Thanks so much. I will read all the details slowly to grab hold of them. The problem this tensor mathematics is that I find a lot of different approaches to a given problem with sometimes confuses me. :)
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K