Geometric interpretation of maps

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the geometric interpretation of various mathematical maps, specifically transformations in two and three dimensions. Participants explore the nature of these transformations, including reflections, translations, and projections, while also examining properties such as injectivity and surjectivity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the map $f_1$ represents a rotation of $180^{\circ}$ and a point reflection in the origin.
  • Others argue that $f_2$ is a reflection across the $xz$-plane since $x$ and $z$ remain unchanged while $y$ changes sign.
  • It is noted that $f_3$ involves a translation by the vector $\begin{pmatrix}2 \\ -3 \\ 1\end{pmatrix}$.
  • Participants discuss $f_4$ and derive that it is not injective due to the existence of multiple preimages and not surjective since the vector $\begin{pmatrix}1 \\ 1 \\ 1\end{pmatrix}$ has no preimage.
  • There is a question regarding the injectivity and surjectivity of the reflection to the $z$-axis, with some participants expressing uncertainty about the definitions of these properties.
  • One participant suggests that a function is injective if each point in the domain has a unique image, while others clarify that this does not guarantee surjectivity.
  • There is a discussion about the need for graphical tools to visualize the transformations and whether drawing unit vectors would suffice.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the interpretations of the transformations but express uncertainty regarding the definitions and implications of injectivity and surjectivity. The discussion remains unresolved on some aspects, particularly concerning the bijectiveness of certain transformations.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight that the definitions of injectivity and surjectivity require careful consideration, indicating that the discussion may depend on specific mathematical contexts and definitions.

mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Hey! :o

We have the below maps:

  1. $f_1:\mathbb{R}^2\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^2, \ \ \begin{pmatrix}x \\ y\end{pmatrix}\mapsto \begin{pmatrix}-x \\ -y\end{pmatrix}$
  2. $f_2:\mathbb{R}^3\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^3, \ \ \begin{pmatrix}x \\ y\\ z\end{pmatrix}\mapsto \begin{pmatrix}x \\ -y\\ z\end{pmatrix}$
  3. $f_3:\mathbb{R}^3\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^3, \ \ \begin{pmatrix}x \\ y\\ z\end{pmatrix}\mapsto \begin{pmatrix}x+2 \\ y-3 \\ z+1\end{pmatrix}$
  4. $f_4:\mathbb{R}^3\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^3, \ \ \begin{pmatrix}x \\ y\\ z\end{pmatrix}\mapsto \begin{pmatrix}x-z \\ y-z \\ 0\end{pmatrix}$

I want to give the geometric interpretation of these maps. I have done the following:

  1. We have that $\begin{pmatrix}-x \\ -y\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix}-1 & 0 \\ 0 & -1\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}x \\ y\end{pmatrix}$ which means that this is a rotation of $180^{\circ}$.
  2. Since $x$ and $z$ are unchanged and $y$ changes the sign, it is a reflection at the $xz$-plane.
  3. Since we add to $\begin{pmatrix}x \\ y \\ z\end{pmatrix}$ the vector $\begin{pmatrix}2 \\ -3 \\ 1\end{pmatrix}$ it is a translation by the vector $\begin{pmatrix}2 \\ -3 \\ 1\end{pmatrix}$.
  4. We have that $\begin{pmatrix}x \\ y\\ z\end{pmatrix}\mapsto \begin{pmatrix}x-z \\ y-z \\ 0\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & -1 \\ 0 & 1 & -1 \\ 0 & 0 & 0\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}x \\ y\\ z\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & -1 \\ 0 & 1 & -1 \\ 0 & 0 & 1\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}x \\ y\\ z\end{pmatrix}$. The first matrix describes the projection to the $xy$-plane and the second one the shear mapping parallel to the $xy$-plane by the value $-1$ in the $x$ direction and by the value $-1$ in the $y$ direction.
Is everything correct? (Wondering)
I want to check also if $f_4$ is injective and surjective.

For that let $a,b,c,x,y,z\in \mathbb{R}$ with $f\begin{pmatrix}a \\ b \\ c\end{pmatrix}=f\begin{pmatrix}x \\ y \\ z\end{pmatrix} \Rightarrow \begin{pmatrix}a-c \\ b-c \\ 0\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix}x-z \\ y-z \\ 0\end{pmatrix}$. From that we get $a-c=x-z$ and $b-c=y-z$. Subtracting these two relations we get $a-b=x-y$. This equality is also satisfied with $x=-b$ and $y=-a$ and this means that $f_4$ is not injective.

The vector $\begin{pmatrix}1 \\ 1\\ 1\end{pmatrix}$ has no preimage under $f_4$ and so $f_4$ is not surjective.

Are both justifivations and results correct? (Wondering)
I want to check also if the reflection to the $z$-axis is injective and surjective.

For that does it hold that each point of the plane is the image of exactly one point and so this transformationis bijective? (Wondering)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
mathmari said:
1. We have that $\begin{pmatrix}-x \\ -y\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix}-1 & 0 \\ 0 & -1\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}x \\ y\end{pmatrix}$ which means that this is a rotation of $180^{\circ}$.

Hey mathmari!

Yep.
And it is also a point reflection in the origin. (Nerd)

mathmari said:
2. Since $x$ and $z$ are unchanged and $y$ changes the sign, it is a reflection at the $xz$-plane.

3. Since we add to $\begin{pmatrix}x \\ y \\ z\end{pmatrix}$ the vector $\begin{pmatrix}2 \\ -3 \\ 1\end{pmatrix}$ it is a translation by the vector $\begin{pmatrix}2 \\ -3 \\ 1\end{pmatrix}$.

4. We have that $\begin{pmatrix}x \\ y\\ z\end{pmatrix}\mapsto \begin{pmatrix}x-z \\ y-z \\ 0\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & -1 \\ 0 & 1 & -1 \\ 0 & 0 & 0\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}x \\ y\\ z\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & -1 \\ 0 & 1 & -1 \\ 0 & 0 & 1\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}x \\ y\\ z\end{pmatrix}$. The first matrix describes the projection to the $xy$-plane and the second one the shear mapping parallel to the $xy$-plane by the value $-1$ in the $x$ direction and by the value $-1$ in the $y$ direction.

All correct.
Let's make it a factor $-1$ rather than a value. Otherwise it seems as if it is a translation. (Nerd)

mathmari said:
I want to check also if $f_4$ is injective and surjective.

For that let $a,b,c,x,y,z\in \mathbb{R}$ with $f\begin{pmatrix}a \\ b \\ c\end{pmatrix}=f\begin{pmatrix}x \\ y \\ z\end{pmatrix} \Rightarrow \begin{pmatrix}a-c \\ b-c \\ 0\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix}x-z \\ y-z \\ 0\end{pmatrix}$. From that we get $a-c=x-z$ and $b-c=y-z$. Subtracting these two relations we get $a-b=x-y$. This equality is also satisfied with $x=-b$ and $y=-a$ and this means that $f_4$ is not injective.

The vector $\begin{pmatrix}1 \\ 1\\ 1\end{pmatrix}$ has no preimage under $f_4$ and so $f_4$ is not surjective.

Are both justifivations and results correct?

Yep. (Nod)

mathmari said:
I want to check also if the reflection to the $z$-axis is injective and surjective.

For that does it hold that each point of the plane is the image of exactly one point and so this transformationis bijective?
Each point "of the plane" is not good enough. (Worried)
We need that each point in the co-domain has a preimage of exactly one element.
Then it is both injective and surjective. (Thinking)

I'm afraid that the fact that "each point in the domain has an image of exactly one point" is also not good enough.
It means there could still be points in the co-domain that do not have an original. (Worried)
It does mean it is injective, but we still need to verify that it is surjective.
Put otherwise, it is both injective and surjective iff it is 1-1 and onto. (Thinking)
 
Klaas van Aarsen said:
Yep.
And it is also a point reflection in the origin. (Nerd)
All correct.
Let's make it a factor $-1$ rather than a value. Otherwise it seems as if it is a translation. (Nerd)

Is there a tool where we can see these translations graphically? Do we have to draw the images of the unit vectors for that? (Wondering)
Klaas van Aarsen said:
Each point "of the plane" is not good enough. (Worried)
We need that each point in the co-domain has a preimage of exactly one element.
Then it is both injective and surjective. (Thinking)

I'm afraid that the fact that "each point in the domain has an image of exactly one point" is also not good enough.
It means there could still be points in the co-domain that do not have an original. (Worried)
It does mean it is injective, but we still need to verify that it is surjective.
Put otherwise, it is both injective and surjective iff it is 1-1 and onto. (Thinking)
The fact that each point in the domain has an image of exactly one point, means thst it is injective? (Wondering) Can we do do that also as below? (Wondering)

For that we consider the map $f:\mathbb{R}^3\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^3, \ \ \begin{pmatrix}x \\ y \\ z\end{pmatrix}\mapsto \begin{pmatrix}-x \\ -y \\ z\end{pmatrix}$.

For injectivity: Let $a,b,c,x,y,z\in \mathbb{R}$ with $f\begin{pmatrix}a \\ b \\ c\end{pmatrix}=f\begin{pmatrix}x \\ y \\ z\end{pmatrix}\Rightarrow \begin{pmatrix}-a \\ -b \\ c\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix}-x \\ -y \\ z\end{pmatrix}\Rightarrow \begin{cases}-a=-x \\ -b=-y \\ c=z\end{cases}\Rightarrow \begin{cases}a=x \\ b=y \\ c=z\end{cases} \Rightarrow \begin{pmatrix}a \\ b \\ c\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix}x \\ y \\ z\end{pmatrix}$.

That means that $f$ is injective. For surjectivity: Let $\begin{pmatrix}a \\ b \\ c\end{pmatrix}\in \mathbb{R}^3$. We have that $\begin{pmatrix}a \\ b \\ c\end{pmatrix}=f\begin{pmatrix}-a \\ -b \\ c\end{pmatrix}$. So for each $w\in \mathbb{R}^3$ there is a $v\in \mathbb{R}^3$ such that $f(v)=w$.

That means that $f$ is surjective. Is everything correct? (Wondering)
 
mathmari said:
Is there a tool where we can see these translations graphically? Do we have to draw the images of the unit vectors for that?

I don't really know of a specific tool to show the effect of a linear transformation.
Drawing the unit vectors and their images should work yes. (Thinking)

mathmari said:
The fact that each point in the domain has an image of exactly one point, means thst it is injective?

Let me rephrase that a bit. (Blush)

A function is injective if each point in the domain has a unique image of one point. That is, each such image does not have another original. We also say that the function is 1-1. (Thinking)

Equivalently, a function is injective if each point in the co-domain has at most 1 original.

mathmari said:
Can we do do that also as below?

For that we consider the map $f:\mathbb{R}^3\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^3, \ \ \begin{pmatrix}x \\ y \\ z\end{pmatrix}\mapsto \begin{pmatrix}-x \\ -y \\ z\end{pmatrix}$.

For injectivity: Let $a,b,c,x,y,z\in \mathbb{R}$ with $f\begin{pmatrix}a \\ b \\ c\end{pmatrix}=f\begin{pmatrix}x \\ y \\ z\end{pmatrix}\Rightarrow \begin{pmatrix}-a \\ -b \\ c\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix}-x \\ -y \\ z\end{pmatrix}\Rightarrow \begin{cases}-a=-x \\ -b=-y \\ c=z\end{cases}\Rightarrow \begin{cases}a=x \\ b=y \\ c=z\end{cases} \Rightarrow \begin{pmatrix}a \\ b \\ c\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix}x \\ y \\ z\end{pmatrix}$.

That means that $f$ is injective.

For surjectivity: Let $\begin{pmatrix}a \\ b \\ c\end{pmatrix}\in \mathbb{R}^3$. We have that $\begin{pmatrix}a \\ b \\ c\end{pmatrix}=f\begin{pmatrix}-a \\ -b \\ c\end{pmatrix}$. So for each $w\in \mathbb{R}^3$ there is a $v\in \mathbb{R}^3$ such that $f(v)=w$.

That means that $f$ is surjective.

Is everything correct?

Yep. (Nod)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
762
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K