How can skew-symmetric matrices be proven to be a subspace of M_{n \times n}(F)?

  • Thread starter Thread starter RavenCpu
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matrix Proof
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that the set of skew-symmetric matrices forms a subspace of the space of n x n matrices over a field F. The original poster mentions that their friend is struggling with this linear algebra problem, particularly with the final step involving the direct sum of skew-symmetric and symmetric matrices.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the need to prove that both W_1 (skew-symmetric matrices) and W_2 (symmetric matrices) are subspaces. There are suggestions to demonstrate that their intersection is trivial and to find bases for these subspaces. Some participants propose different methods for proving the direct sum property, including using projections and matrix decompositions.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, offering various approaches and considerations for proving the required properties of the subspaces. There is an acknowledgment of the complexity of the task, and some guidance has been provided regarding potential methods to explore.

Contextual Notes

There is a specific mention that the field F is not of characteristic 2, which is relevant to the properties of the matrices being discussed. The original poster expresses uncertainty and seeks assistance, indicating that they are still in the process of understanding the problem fully.

RavenCpu
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hello all! I finally decided to join this forum after quite a long time of lurking haha. Anywho, to the point. A friend of mine is taking linear algebra and is having a lot of issues with the below posted problem. I'm trying to help her with it, but sadly I'm having issues with it as well haha. I would appreciate any help you all could offer me in doing this proof. I've gotten it all solved up until I have to prove that [itex]M_{n\times n}(F) = W_1 \oplus W_2[/itex]. So basically, I'm on the last step.

Prove:
A matrix M is called a skew-symmetric if [itex]M^t = -M[/itex]. Clearly, a skew-symmetric matrix is square. Let F be a field. Prove that the set [itex]W_1[/itex] of all skew-symmetric n x n matrices with entries from F is a Subspace of [itex]M_{n \times n}(F)[/itex]. Now assume that F is not of characteristic 2, and let [itex]W_2[/itex] be the subspace of [itex]M_{n \times n}(F)[/itex] conisting of all symmetric n x n matrices. Prove that [itex]M_{n\times n}(F) = W_1 \oplus W_2[/itex]
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Rewriting it so it's legible:

Hello all! I finally decided to join this forum after quite a long time of lurking haha. Anywho, to the point. A friend of mine is taking linear algebra and is having a lot of issues with the below posted problem. I'm trying to help her with it, but sadly I'm having issues with it as well haha. I would appreciate any help you all could offer me in doing this proof. I've gotten it all solved up until I have to prove that [itex]M_{n\times n}(F) = W_1 \oplus W_2[/itex]. So basically, I'm on the last step.

Prove:
A matrix M is called a skew-symmetric if [itex]M^t = -M[/itex]. Clearly, a skew-symmetric matrix is square. Let F be a field. Prove that the set [itex]W_1[/itex] of all skew-symmetric n x n matrices with entries from F is a Subspace of [itex]M_{n \times n}(F)[/itex]. Now assume that F is not of characteristic 2, and let [itex]W_2[/itex] be the subspace of [itex]M_{n \times n}(F)[/itex] conisting of all symmetric n x n matrices. Prove that [itex]M_{n\times n}(F) = W_1 \oplus W_2[/itex]
 
1. Prove that [itex]W_1,\, W_2[/itex] are subspaces
2. Prove [itex]W_1 \cap W_2 = \{ 0\}[/itex]
3'. Find bases [itex]\beta _1,\, \beta _2[/itex] and show that [itex]\beta _1 \cup \beta _2[/itex] is a basis for [itex]M_{n\times n}(F)[/itex]. This is easy since it's just a matter of comparing [itex]|\beta _1| + |\beta _2|[/itex] to dim(Mn x n(F)).
3''. Instead of 3', you could do the following: given any square matrix A, use your bases to compute the projection of A onto each of those subspaces, and show that the sum of the two projections is A.
3'''. You should do 3' or 3'', but another way is to prove that for any given matrix A, the equation A = (1/2)(A + At) + (1/2)(A - At) holds, and that a) A + At is symmetric, b) A - At is skew symmetric, and c) (1/2) makes sense because F is not of characteristic 2. This is the most efficient way to prove it, but it requires you to know how to decompose A in the first place. Doing the first two ways will actually teach you how, in the future, you can go about proving that some vector space is the direct sum of some subspaces. This third approach is just a handy tid-bit of knowledge, not a very instructive approach though.
 
Thanks for rewriting it :-) I'm not too familiar with symbols and the sort in forums. It looks so clean now!

Thank you for the help! I'll give it an attempt and see what comes of it.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
3K