Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

I Coefficients of a vector regarded as a function of a vector

  1. Mar 5, 2016 #1
    I am reading Segei Winitzki's book: Linear Algebra via Exterior Products ...

    I am currently focused on Section 1.6: Dual (conjugate) vector space ... ...

    I need help in order to get a clear understanding of the notion or concept of coefficients of a vector [itex]v[/itex] as linear functions (covectors) of the vector [itex]v[/itex] ...

    The relevant part of Winitzki's text reads as follows:


    ?temp_hash=4082c7aaf4ddda88f4ad9183a4813769.png



    In the above text we read:


    " ... ... So the coefficients [itex]v_k, \ 1 \leq k \leq n[/itex], are linear functions of the vector [itex]v[/itex] ; therefore they are covectors ... ... "


    Now, how and in what way exactly are the coefficients [itex]v_k[/itex] a function of the vector [itex]v[/itex] ... ... ?


    To indicate my confusion ... if the coefficient [itex]v_k[/itex] is a linear function of the vector [itex]v[/itex] then [itex]v_k(v)[/itex] must be equal to something ... but what? ... indeed what does [itex]v_k(v)[/itex] mean? ... further, what, if anything, would [itex]v_k(w)[/itex] mean where [itex]w[/itex] is any other vector? ... and further yet, how do we formally and rigorously prove that [itex]v_k[/itex] is linear? ... what would the formal proof look like?... ...

    Hope someone can help ...

    Peter

    ============================================================================

    *** NOTE ***

    To indicate Winitzki's approach to the dual space and his notation I am providing the text of his introduction to Section 1.6 on the dual or conjugate vector space ... ... as follows ... ...


    ?temp_hash=4082c7aaf4ddda88f4ad9183a4813769.png
    ?temp_hash=4082c7aaf4ddda88f4ad9183a4813769.png
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Mar 5, 2016
  2. jcsd
  3. Mar 5, 2016 #2
    Hi Math:

    One way to look at the vi components of v WRT the basis vectors ei is:
    vi = v DOT ei .​
    where DOT is the dot product operator.

    Hope that helps.

    Regards,
    Buzz
     
  4. Mar 5, 2016 #3
    Thanks for the help Buzz Bloom ...

    ... BUT ... while your interpretation [itex] v_i (v) = v \cdot e_i [/itex] works in a way ...

    ... it then defines [itex]v_i[/itex] as a function with only one domain value, namely [itex]v[/itex] ... and only one image namely [itex]v \cdot e_i = v_i[/itex] ...

    Is that right?

    Peter
     
  5. Mar 6, 2016 #4
    Hi Math:

    I am not sure I understand what is puzzling you. What other domain value than v do you think might be plausible? Your use of the term "image" also seems odd.
    The following are quotes from Wikipedia.
    In mathematics, an image is the subset of a https://www.physicsforums.com/javascript:void(0) [Broken]'s codomain which is the output of the function on a subset of its domain.
    In mathematics, the codomain or target set of a https://www.physicsforums.com/javascript:void(0) [Broken] is the https://www.physicsforums.com/javascript:void(0) [Broken] Y into which all of the https://www.physicsforums.com/javascript:void(0) [Broken] of the function is constrained to fall.​
    As I interpret these definitions, for a single valued function the image is always unique. Do you think it might be possible for vi(v) to be a multi-valued function?

    Regards,
    Buzz
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 7, 2017
  6. Mar 6, 2016 #5

    lavinia

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    A function on a vector space is linear if ##L(aV + bW) = aL(V) + bL(W)## for arbitrary scalars ##a## and ##b## and arbitrary vectors ##W## and ##V##.

    If one has a basis for the vector space then a linear function is determined completely by its values on the basis vectors. For instance the function that assigns zero to all but the i'th basis vector and 1 to the i'th is an example. It just picks out the i'th coefficient of a vector with respect to this basis.
     
  7. Mar 7, 2016 #6

    Erland

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Given a basis, each coordinate ##v_k## is uniquely determined by ##\mathbf v##. This means that it is a function of ##\mathbf v##. The purpose of the ##\mathbf u+\lambda \mathbf v## -line is to prove that each of these functions is linear. They actually only prove this for the first coordinate, but the same argument would work for each ##k##.

    The author either defines a linear transformation ##T:U\to V## by the condition ##T(\mathbf u + \lambda \mathbf v)=T(\mathbf u)+\lambda T(\mathbf v)##, for all ##\mathbf u,\mathbf v\in U## and ##\lambda \in \Bbb C## (or ##\Bbb R##), or assumes it is known that this condition is equivalent to ##T## being a linear transformation.
     
  8. Mar 8, 2016 #7
    Thanks Buzz, Lavinia and Erland ... you have helped me gain an understanding of the issue that was bothering me ...

    I also had a helpful post from Deveno on MHB ... so I thought I'd share part of it with you ...

    The start of Deveno's post which contains the essence of his post reads as follows:


    " ... ... The way I am used to seeing this "co-vector" defined is like so:

    Suppose [itex]v = \sum\limits_j v_je_j [/itex], where [itex]\{e_j\}[/itex] is a basis (perhaps the standard basis, perhaps not). We define:

    [itex]\pi_i(v) = v_i[/itex]

    (Note we have as many [itex]\pi[/itex]-functions, as we have coordinates).

    Thus [itex]\pi_i: V \to F[/itex], since [itex]v[/itex] is a vector, and [itex]v_i[/itex] is a scalar.... ... "


    Another important point is made later in his post ... where he writes:

    " ... ... Note that Winitzki is just naming the function by its image, something that is often done with functions (we often talk about "the function [itex]x^2[/itex]" when what we really MEAN is "the squaring function"). What he really means is the function:

    [itex]v \mapsto v_i[/itex] (function that returns the [itex]i[/itex]-th coordinate of [itex]v[/itex] in some basis).

    It is also important to note here that the function(s) we have defined here *depend on a choice of basis*, because the CO-ORDINATES of a vector depend on the basis used. ... ... "

    There is more to Deveno's post, but I have mentioned the main two points ...

    Peter
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2016
  9. Mar 8, 2016 #8

    Erland

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    At a closer thought, I realize that this condition is in fact not equivalent to the standard definirtion of linear transformation (for example the one given by Lavinia in Post #5). The condition does not imply that ##T(\lambda \mathbf u)=\lambda T(\mathbf u)## which is included in the ordinary definition. So either the author quoted in the OP made a mistake or some advanced reasoning.
     
  10. Mar 8, 2016 #9

    Samy_A

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Are you sure that they are not equivalent?

    Taking ##u=0, v=0:\ T(0)=T(0+\lambda 0)=T(0)+\lambda T(0)=(1+\lambda )T(0)## for any ##\lambda##.
    So ##T(0)=0##.
    Then ##T(\lambda v)=T(0 +\lambda v)=T(0)+\lambda T(v)=\lambda T(v)## for all ##v \in U## and all scalars ##\lambda##.
     
  11. Mar 8, 2016 #10

    Erland

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Yes, you are right... I guess I was tired :oops:
     
  12. Mar 8, 2016 #11

    lavinia

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    This description is the same as already explained. IMO the best way to think of a co-vector is as a linear map from a vector space into the field of scalars. This idea is independent of any basis.

    However, if one has a basis then any covector is determined by its values on the basis vectors. This follows directly from the condition that the covector is a linear map.

    If one writes the vector ##v## in terms of a basis as ##v = Σ_{i}v_{i}e_{i}## and if ##L## is a covector, then ##L(v) = Σv_{i}L(e_{i})## and this shows that if one knows the values of ##L## on the ##e_{i}##'s one knows ##L## on any vector, ##v##.

    It is important to notice that covectors form a vector space of their own - often called the dual space. If ##L## and ##H## are covectors then any linear combination of them ##aL + bH## is also a covector.

    If one has a basis ##e_{i}## for the vectors space, then a basis for the vector space of covectors - called the dual basis are the linear maps ##π_{i}## defined by ##π_{i}(e_{j}) = δ_{ij}## This is the covector that assigns 1 to the i'th basis vector and zero to all of the others - as mentioned already above. For each choice of basis ##e_{i}## one has a corresponding choice of basis ##π_{i}## for the vector space of covectors.

    The covectors ##v_{i}## mentioned above are the same as the covectors ##π_{i}##. So the function that picks out the i'th coordinate of a vector with respect to a basis is a covector.

    The dual space to the space of covectors is also a vector space. One might call it the space of covectors of covectors. If one writes a covector as ##Σ_{i}l_{i}π_{i}## then the ##l_{i}##'s are a basis for the space of covectors of covectors. A standard theorem says that this space is naturally isomorphic to the original vector space. Otherwise said, the dual space of the dual space of a vector space is naturally isomorphic to the vector space itself. One can see this by observing that the vector ##v## defines a linear map on covectors by ##v(L) = L(v)##.

    One final but crucial point: A vector space and its dual space (space of covectors) are isomorphic but not naturally isomorphic. There is no handy isomorphism between them the way that there is a natural isomorphism between the vector space and its double dual. One way to define an isomorphism is with an inner product. The covector corresponding to the vector ##v## is ##L_{v}(w) = <v,w>##.
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2016
  13. Mar 8, 2016 #12
    Thanks Lavinia ... very clear and VERY helpful ...

    Peter
     
  14. Mar 8, 2016 #13
    I'll just add that if you ever have occasion to deal with an infinite-dimensional vector space V (for instance, a countable-dimensional vector space having as basis

    B = {ej | j = 1, 2, 3,...}​

    ), then the (ordinary algebraic) dual is not isomorphic to the original vector space. Instead, the dimension of the dual has a larger cardinality than the dimension of V:

    dim(V*) > dim(V).​

    Also, note that in many cases when an infinite dimensional vector space V has a topology, the only dual vector space one is interested is the vector space of continuous linear functions on V. In this case, the continuous dual Vc* might be the same dimension as the original vector space.

    For details on both the algebraic dual and the continuous dual, this is a good reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_space.
     
  15. Mar 8, 2016 #14
    Thanks for the post zinq ... definitely helpful and interesting as I do want to try to cover the case of infinite dimensional vector spaces ... ...

    Thanks for the useful reference ...

    Peter
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Draft saved Draft deleted



Similar Discussions: Coefficients of a vector regarded as a function of a vector
Loading...