Finding the Standard Matrix Representation for T1T2: A Non-Standard Product?

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
7 replies · 2K views
DanielFaraday
Messages
86
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



This is a slight variation of the last problem I posted.

Write the standard matrix representation for T1T2 and use it to find [T1T2(1,-3,0)]E.

Homework Equations



[tex] T_1\left(x_1,x_2,x_3\right)=\left(x_3,-x_1,x_3\right)[/tex]

[tex] T_2\left(x_1,x_2,x_3\right)=\left(x_3-x_1,x_3-2x_2-x_1,x_1-x_3\right)[/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution



[tex] T_1T_2=\left(x_3,-x_1,x_3\right)\cdot \left(x_3-x_1,x_3-2x_2-x_1,x_1-x_3\right)=x_1^2+2 x_1 x_2-x_1 x_3[/tex]

[tex] A=\left(x_1^2+2 x_1 x_2-x_1 x_3\right)\left(<br /> \begin{array}{ccc}<br /> 1 & 0 & 0 \\<br /> 0 & 1 & 0 \\<br /> 0 & 0 & 1<br /> \end{array}<br /> \right)[/tex]

Will A just end up being an identity matrix multiplied by the scalar that results from T1T2, or should I use a non-standard product for T1T2?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You have it all wrong. T1*T2(x) means T1(T2(x)). That's nothing like T1(x)*T2(x) whatever that means. Find the matrices corresponding to T1 and T2 and multiply them.
 
Is this right, then?

[tex] A=\left(<br /> \begin{array}{ccc}<br /> 0 & 0 & 1 \\<br /> -1 & 0 & 0 \\<br /> 0 & 0 & 1<br /> \end{array}<br /> \right)\cdot \left(<br /> \begin{array}{ccc}<br /> -1 & 0 & 1 \\<br /> -1 & -2 & 1 \\<br /> 1 & 0 & -1<br /> \end{array}<br /> \right)=\left(<br /> \begin{array}{ccc}<br /> 1 & 0 & -1 \\<br /> 1 & 0 & -1 \\<br /> 1 & 0 & -1<br /> \end{array}<br /> \right)[/tex]
 
DanielFaraday said:
Is this right, then?

[tex] A=\left(<br /> \begin{array}{ccc}<br /> 0 & 0 & 1 \\<br /> -1 & 0 & 0 \\<br /> 0 & 0 & 1<br /> \end{array}<br /> \right)\cdot \left(<br /> \begin{array}{ccc}<br /> -1 & 0 & 1 \\<br /> -1 & -2 & 1 \\<br /> 1 & 0 & -1<br /> \end{array}<br /> \right)=\left(<br /> \begin{array}{ccc}<br /> 1 & 0 & -1 \\<br /> 1 & 0 & -1 \\<br /> 1 & 0 & -1<br /> \end{array}<br /> \right)[/tex]

Almost. But why are there two 1's in the third column of the first matrix?
 
Thanks!

There are two 1's in the third column of the first matrix because there is an x3 in the first and last element of T1 (is that the right terminology?)
 
DanielFaraday said:
Thanks!

There are two 1's in the third column of the first matrix because there is an x3 in the first and last element of T1 (is that the right terminology?)

You were right. My mistake.
 
I made a mistake with that same transformation on another thread. There's something about that transformation... it's pretty sneaky
 
Must be us. DanielFaraday didn't have a problem.