Dimension of a set of symmetric matrices & prove it's a vector space

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on proving that the set of 3x3 symmetric matrices forms a vector space and determining its dimension. It is established that this set contains the zero matrix and is closed under addition and scalar multiplication, as symmetric matrices remain symmetric under these operations. The dimension is confirmed to be 6, as six specific matrices can serve as a basis for the space, demonstrating both linear independence and the ability to generate any symmetric matrix through linear combinations. Confusion arises regarding the basis and dimension concepts, particularly in relation to matrix reducibility, but it is clarified that the dimension of a vector space is determined by the number of linearly independent vectors in its basis. Ultimately, understanding the properties of symmetric matrices and their basis is crucial for grasping the vector space structure.
kesun
Messages
37
Reaction score
0
Prove: the set of 3x3 symmetric matrices is a vector space and find its dimension.

Well in class my prof has done this question, but I still don't quite get it..

Ok, first off, I need to prove that it's a vector space. The easy way is probably to prove that it contains the zero space and is closed under the two operations. Certainly it contains the zero vector, which I understand; but when my prof went for the second part, he wrote something in this fashion:

[a d e]___[1 0 0]____[0 0 0]
[d b f] = a [0 0 0] + b [0 1 0] + c [...] + d [...] + e [...] + f [...] => dimension of 6.
[e f c]___[0 0 0]____[0 0 0]

(sorry I have to use the underscore to line them up properly..)

How is that closed under the two operations? I am not getting it completely..

Also, how they add up to the original matrix certainly makes sense to me, but how he devided them up in this way sort of puzzles me...Since every matrix is reducible, so this one should be as well. Since the dimension of the number of elements in a basis, then shouldn't this have a basis of max. 3? I'm pretty sure I am not thinking correctly, but someone please straighten this stuff out for me please!

 
Physics news on Phys.org
kesun said:
Prove: the set of 3x3 symmetric matrices is a vector space and find its dimension.

Well in class my prof has done this question, but I still don't quite get it..

Ok, first off, I need to prove that it's a vector space. The easy way is probably to prove that it contains the zero space and is closed under the two operations. Certainly it contains the zero vector, which I understand; but when my prof went for the second part, he wrote something in this fashion:

[a d e]___[1 0 0]____[0 0 0]
[d b f] = a [0 0 0] + b [0 1 0] + c [...] + d [...] + e [...] + f [...] => dimension of 6.
[e f c]___[0 0 0]____[0 0 0]

(sorry I have to use the underscore to line them up properly..)

Here your prof is already proving that the dimension is 6. The point is that the six matrices on the right hand side form a basis of the vector space of 3x3 symmetric matrices. The formula proves that: 1) They generate the space, because any element can be written as a linear combination. 2) They are linearly independent because if the left hand side is 0, then certainly the scalar factors a,b,c,d,e,f are zero.

How is that closed under the two operations? I am not getting it completely..

Your professor may have skipped that. One way to prove this is just check "by hand" that the sum and scalar multiples of symmetric matrices are again symmetric, another way is to use the fact that a matrix is symmetric if and only if it equals its transpose (and use linearity of transposition).

Also, how they add up to the original matrix certainly makes sense to me, but how he devided them up in this way sort of puzzles me...Since every matrix is reducible, so this one should be as well. Since the dimension of the number of elements in a basis, then shouldn't this have a basis of max. 3? I'm pretty sure I am not thinking correctly, but someone please straighten this stuff out for me please!
 
Ah! So say for matrix:

[1 4]
[9 0]

(which is the same as [1 4, 9 0] to make representation easier)
It can have a basis like this:

1[1 0, 0 0]+4[0 1, 0 0]+9[0 0, 1 0]+0[0 0, 0 1]

right?

Since this matrix reduces to the identity matrix, should the original matrix itself be the basis by definition? Should its dimension be 2 or 4? When we talk about things like basis and dimension, shouldn't we be talking about the reduced version of the matrix? I'm still a bit confused..
 
A basis is something a vector space can have, for example (1,0,0), (0,1,0), (0,0,1) is a basis of R^3. The matrices

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

form a basis of the symmetric 2x2 matrices.

On the other hand, a vector can have a representation in terms of a basis, so for example

(2,-1,0) = 2(1,0,0) + (-1)(0,1,0) + 0(0,0,1)

or

\begin{bmatrix}3&7\\7&1\end{bmatrix}=3\begin{bmatrix}1&0\\0&0\end{bmatrix} + 7\begin{bmatrix}0&1\\1&0\end{bmatrix}+1\begin{bmatrix}0&0\\0&1\end{bmatrix}.

The properties of a basis guarantee that such a representation always exists and that it is unique, i.e. there is only one possible choice of coefficients in front of the basis vectors. These coefficients are also called the coordinates of the vector on the left hand side with respect to the basis.

One source of confusion maybe that a matrix can also be considered as a vector (in a vector space of matrices).
 
So for example, a 2x2 skew-symmetric matrix should have a basis of:

[1 0] [0 1],[0 0]
[0 0],[-1 0],[0 1]

is that correct?
 
kesun said:
So for example, a 2x2 skew-symmetric matrix should have a basis of:

[1 0] [0 1],[0 0]
[0 0],[-1 0],[0 1]

is that correct?

No, only the second matrix is skew symmetric.
 
Oh, I forgot the important fact that the diagonal consists only zero in a skew-symmetric matrix. Yes, the only basis for it would be [0 1, -1 0] then.

So to prove that a matrix is a basis, I just need to show that its vectors(columns) are linearly independent, right?
 
kesun said:
Oh, I forgot the important fact that the diagonal consists only zero in a skew-symmetric matrix. Yes, the only basis for it would be [0 1, -1 0] then.

So to prove that a matrix is a basis, I just need to show that its vectors(columns) are linearly independent, right?

No, this would prove that (0,-1), (1,0) is a basis of R^2. If you want to show that [0 1, -1 0] is a basis for the skew-symmetric 2x2-matrices you need to show two things:

1) Every skew-symmetric 2x2 matrix can be written in the form a*[0 1, -1 0] for some a (in other words this proves that the vector space of skew symmetric 2x2 matrices is generated by [0 1, -1 0]). This should be easy.

2) The set of vectors {[0 1, -1 0]} (in this case consisting only of one element) is linearly independent, this is also rather trivial if you take a look at the definition of "linearly independent" and follows from the fact that [0 1, -1 0] is not the matrix with all zeros.
 

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K