Dimensionality, Rangespace & Nullspace Problem

  • Thread starter Thread starter e(ho0n3
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Amp Nullspace
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion addresses the problem of proving that for an n x n matrix A, the dimension of the intersection of the range and null space, \dim(R(A) \cap N(A)), equals \dim R(A) - \dim R(A^2). The solution involves determining a basis for both R(A) and R(A^2) and demonstrating that a constructed set X, which combines elements from both spaces, spans R(A) and is linearly independent. The proof confirms the relationship between the dimensions of these spaces, establishing a clear mathematical foundation for the claim.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of linear algebra concepts such as range space and null space.
  • Familiarity with the properties of linear transformations represented by matrices.
  • Knowledge of basis and dimension in vector spaces.
  • Ability to solve homogeneous equations and understand linear independence.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of linear transformations in depth, focusing on range and null spaces.
  • Learn about the Rank-Nullity Theorem and its implications for matrix transformations.
  • Explore advanced topics in linear algebra, such as eigenvalues and eigenvectors.
  • Practice solving problems involving dimensionality in vector spaces using various matrices.
USEFUL FOR

Students of linear algebra, mathematicians, and educators looking to deepen their understanding of matrix transformations and their properties, particularly in relation to range and null spaces.

e(ho0n3
Messages
1,349
Reaction score
0
[SOLVED] Dimensionality, Rangespace & Nullspace Problem

Homework Statement
Prove (where A is an n x n matrix and so defines a transformation of any n-dimensional space V with respect to B, B where B is a basis of V) that [itex]\dim(R(A) \cap N(A)) = \dim R(A) - \dim R(A^2)[/itex]

The attempt at a solution
If I determine the basis of [itex]R(A) \cap N(A)[/itex], I can determine its dimensionality and then compare it with [itex]\dim R(A) - \dim R(A^2)[/itex].

I've been unsuccessful at finding a basis. Also, given that [itex]\dim R(A) = m[/itex], is there a way to determine what [itex]\dim R(A^2)[/itex] is?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Let [tex]\{Av_1, \ Av_2, \ ..., \ Av_k\}[/tex] be a basis for [tex]R(A)\cap N(A)[/tex] and [tex]\{A^2u_1, \ A^2u_2, \ ..., \ A^2u_m\}[/tex] be a basis for [tex]R(A^2)[/tex], with [tex]v_1, \ v_2, \ ..., \ v_k, \ u_1, \ u_2, \ ..., \ u_m \in V[/tex].

We claim that X = [tex]\{Av_1, \ Av_2, \ ..., \ Av_k, \ Au_1, \ Au_2, \ ..., \ Au_m\}[/tex] is a basis for [tex]R(A)[/tex].

Proof:
1) X spans [tex]R(A)[/tex].

Take any [tex]w \in R(A)[/tex]. Since [tex]Aw \in R(A^2)[/tex], so [tex]Aw = b_1 A^2u_1 \ + b_2 A^2u_2 \ + ... \ + b_m A^2u_m[/tex], for some scalars [tex]b_1, \ b_2, \ ..., \ b_m[/tex].

Thus, [tex]A(w \ - b_1 Au_1 \ - b_2 Au_2 \ - ... \ - b_m Au_m) = \mathbf{0}[/tex] and so [tex]w \ - \ b_1 Au_1 \ - \ b_2 Au_2 \ - \ ... \ - \ b_m Au_m \in R(A) \cap N(A)[/tex] (Why?)
Complete the proof yourself :)

Hence, every element in [tex]R(A)[/tex] can be expressed as a linear combination of [tex]Av_1, \ Av_2, \ ..., \ Av_k, \ Au_1, \ Au_2, \ ..., \ Au_m[/tex] and so X spans [tex]R(A)[/tex].

2) X is a linearly independent set.
We solve the homogeneous equation [tex]c_1 Av_1 \ + \ c_2 Av_2 \ + \ ... \ + \ c_k Av_k \ + \ c_{k+1} Au_1 \ + \ c_{k+2} Au_2 \ + \ ... \ + \ c_{k+m} Au_m = \mathbf{0}[/tex], where [tex]c_1, \ c_2, \ ..., \ c_{k+m}[/tex] are scalars.

Now, [tex]A(c_1 Av_1 \ + \ c_2 Av_2 \ + \ ... \ + \ c_k Av_k \ + \ c_{k+1} Au_1 \ + \ c_{k+2} Au_2 \ + \ ... \ + \ c_{k+m} Au_m) = \mathbf{0}[/tex], and thus...
Complete the proof yourself: I suggest first showing that [tex]c_{k+1} \ = c_{k+2} \ = ... \ = c_{k+m} \ = 0[/tex]

Since the homogeneous equation has only the trivial solution, X is a linearly independent set.

This proves our claim and the result follows.
 
Neat. I wish I had your intuition.

pizzasky said:
Thus, [tex]A(w \ - b_1 Au_1 \ - b_2 Au_2 \ - ... \ - b_m Au_m) = \mathbf{0}[/tex] and so [tex]w \ - \ b_1 Au_1 \ - \ b_2 Au_2 \ - \ ... \ - \ b_m Au_m \in R(A) \cap N(A)[/tex] (Why?)
Complete the proof yourself :)

w is in R(A) and so is [tex]- b_1 Au_1 - \cdots - b_m Au_m[/tex] because it's a linear combination of members of X. Thus [tex]w - b_1 Au_1 - \cdots - b_m Au_m[/tex] is in R(A). Since [tex]A(w - b_1 Au_1 - \cdots - b_m Au_m) = \mathbf{0}[/tex], [tex]w - b_1 Au_1 - \cdots - b_m Au_m[/tex] is also in N(A).

Now, [tex]A(c_1 Av_1 \ + \ c_2 Av_2 \ + \ ... \ + \ c_k Av_k \ + \ c_{k+1} Au_1 \ + \ c_{k+2} Au_2 \ + \ ... \ + \ c_{k+m} Au_m) = \mathbf{0}[/tex], and thus...
Complete the proof yourself: I suggest first showing that [tex]c_{k+1} \ = c_{k+2} \ = ... \ = c_{k+m} \ = 0[/tex]

Let [tex]\mathfrak{v} = c_1 Av_1 + \cdots + c_k Av_k[/tex] and let [tex]\mathfrak{u} = c_{k+1} Au_1 + \cdots + c_{k+m} Au_m[/tex]. [tex]A(\mathfrak{v} + \mathfrak{u}) = A\mathfrak{v} + A\mathfrak{u} = A\mathfrak{u} = \mathbf{0}[/tex].

The last equality above plus the fact that [tex]\{A^2u_1, \ldots, A^2u_m\}[/tex] is linearly independent means that [tex]c_{k+1} = \cdots = c_{k+m} = 0[/tex]. Thus [tex]\mathfrak{v} + \mathfrak{u} = \mathbf{0}[/tex] reduces to just [tex]\mathfrak{v} = \mathbf{0}[/tex] and since [tex]\{Av_1, \ldots, Av_k\}[/tex] is a linearly independent set, [tex]c_1 = \cdots = c_k = 0[/tex] as well. Ergo, X is linearly independent.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
34
Views
4K
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K