Finding Dual Basis of Linear Functionals for a Given Basis in C^3

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on finding the dual basis of a given basis B={a_1, a_2, a_3} in C^3, where a_1=(1,0,-1), a_2=(1,1,1), and a_3=(2,2,0). The user explores the annihilator subspaces W_1, W_2, and W_3, deriving linear functionals f_1, f_2, and f_3 through systems of equations. A discrepancy arises in the final functional f_3, leading to a question about the reliability of the method used for finding dual bases. The user suggests that incorporating an additional equation for each system may yield consistent results.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of linear algebra concepts, particularly dual spaces and bases.
  • Familiarity with linear functionals and annihilator spaces.
  • Proficiency in solving systems of linear equations.
  • Knowledge of vector spaces, specifically in C^3.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of dual spaces in linear algebra.
  • Learn about the relationship between bases and their duals in finite-dimensional vector spaces.
  • Explore methods for verifying linear functionals using matrix multiplication.
  • Investigate the implications of dimensionality in vector spaces and their annihilators.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics, particularly those specializing in linear algebra, as well as educators seeking to deepen their understanding of dual bases and linear functionals.

Abuattallah
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hello,
Problem, let [itex]B=[/itex]{[itex]a_1,a_2,a_3[/itex]} be a basis for [itex]C^3[/itex] defined by [itex]a_1=(1,0,-1)[/itex] [itex]a_2=(1,1,1)[/itex] [itex]a_3=(2,2,0)[/itex]
Find the dual basis of [itex]B[/itex].

My Solution. Let [itex]W_1[/itex] be the subspace generated by [itex]a_2=(1,1,1)[/itex] [itex]a_3=(2,2,0)[/itex], let's find [itex][/itex] [itex]W*[/itex], where [itex]W*[/itex] is the set of linear anihilator of [itex]W_1[/itex]. Consider the system:

\begin{align*}
\begin{bmatrix}1 & 1 & 1 \\ 2 & 2 & 0 \\\end{bmatrix} &\begin{bmatrix} x_1 \\x_2\\x_3 \\\end{bmatrix}
=0
\end{align*}
solving this will yeild [itex]x_2=-x_1[/itex] and [itex]x_3=0[/itex]
so from this, by assinging [itex]x_1=1[/itex] ,we find out that the map [itex]f_1=x_1-x_2[/itex].
Similarly,

Let [itex]W_2[/itex] be the subspace generated by [itex]a_2=(1,0,-1)[/itex] [itex]a_3=(2,2,0)[/itex], let's find [itex][/itex] [itex]W*[/itex], where [itex]W*[/itex] is the set of linear anihilator of [itex]W_2[/itex]. Consider the system:

\begin{align*}
\begin{bmatrix}1 & 0 & -1 \\ 2 & 2 & 0 \\\end{bmatrix} &\begin{bmatrix} x_1 \\x_2\\x_3 \\\end{bmatrix}
=0
\end{align*}
solving this will yeild [itex]x_2=-x_1[/itex] and [itex]x_3=x_1[/itex]
so from this, by assinging [itex]x_1=1[/itex] ,we find out that the map [itex]f_2=x_1-x_2+x_3[/itex].

Finally,

Let [itex]W_3[/itex] be the subspace generated by [itex]a_2=(1,1,1)[/itex] [itex]a_3=(1,0,-1)[/itex], let's find [itex][/itex] [itex]W*[/itex], where [itex]W*[/itex] is the set of linear anihilator of [itex]W_3[/itex]. Consider the system:

\begin{align*}
\begin{bmatrix}1 & 1 & 1 \\ 1 & 0 & -1 \\\end{bmatrix} &\begin{bmatrix} x_1 \\x_2\\x_3 \\\end{bmatrix}
=0
\end{align*}
solving this will yeild [itex]x_2=-2x_1[/itex] and [itex]x_3=x_1[/itex]
so from this, by assinging [itex]x_1=1[/itex] ,we find out that the map [itex]f_3=x_1-2x_2+x_3[/itex].
So far so Good. The issue is that the last map [itex]f_3[/itex]does not agree with the solution I have, but every other thing is the same.Note that I have the final solution with a diffrenet method of solution than mine. In the solution, I got that [itex]f_3=-1/2x_1+x_2-1/2x_3[/itex], I know that I assigned [itex]x_1=1[/itex] when I was trying to find [itex]f_3[/itex], and I could get the same answer if I put [itex]x_1=-1/2[/itex].
This significantly affect the nature of the map. i.e.
let [itex](5,4,2)\in C^3[/itex], then
[itex](5,4,2)=1(1,0,-1)+3(1,1,1)+1/2(2,2,0)[/itex]
so we have [itex]c_1=1, c_2=3, c_3=1/2[/itex]. while
[itex]f_1(5,4,2)=1[/itex],
[itex]f_2(5,4,2)=3[/itex],
[itex]f_3(5,4,2)=-1[/itex]
so note that [itex]c_3 \ \ does \ \ not \ \ equal \ \ f_3(5,4,2)[/itex]
While if I used the map [itex]f_3=-1/2x_1+x_2-1/2x_3[/itex] we get that [itex]f_3(5,4,2)=1/2[/itex]. The equality should ocuur since [itex]f_3[/itex]is a vector in the dual which determine the scalar [itex]c_3[/itex].
So my explanation is that I should consider also another equation to each system saying that [itex]c_1x_1+ c_2x_2 + c_2x_3=1[/itex] for each system depending on our choice of the vectors to determine [itex]c_1,c_2,c_3[/itex].
My question, Is this method always work when we find the Dual basis to a given Basis?.
Because I figured this method by myself using a similar method to find anihilator space along with the fact that [itex]dim \ \ W + dim \ \ of \ \ annihilator \ \ space= dim \ \ V[/itex]
, where [itex]W\subset V[/itex]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You could just have taken the suitably normed perpendicular vectors of your basis. Should have been easier to find, and in the end to cross check by a matrix multiplication.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 52 ·
2
Replies
52
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K