Linear Combination Mapping: Is the Invertible Matrix Theorem True or False?

  • Thread starter Thread starter henry3369
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matrix Theorem
henry3369
Messages
194
Reaction score
0
True or False:
If the linear combination x -> Ax maps Rn into Rn, then the row reduced echelon form of A is I.

I don't understand why this is False. My book says it is false because it is only true if it maps Rn ONTO Rn instead of Rn INTO Rn. What difference does the word into make?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
henry3369 said:
True or False:
If the linear combination x -> Ax maps Rn into Rn, then the row reduced echelon form of A is I.

I don't understand why this is False. My book says it is false because it is only true if it maps Rn ONTO Rn instead of Rn INTO Rn. What difference does the word into make?
Consider the transformation whose matrix looks like this:
$$A =
\begin{bmatrix}1 & 0 & 0 & \dots & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & \dots & 0 \\
\vdots \\
0 & 0 & 0 & \dots & 0
\end{bmatrix}$$
This transformation maps a vector x to its projection on the ##x_1## axis, a map from Rn into Rn (but not onto Rn). Does it seem likely to you that this matrix will row reduce to the identity matrix?
 
Mark44 said:
Consider the transformation whose matrix looks like this:
$$A =
\begin{bmatrix}1 & 0 & 0 & \dots & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & \dots & 0 \\
\vdots \\
0 & 0 & 0 & \dots & 0
\end{bmatrix}$$
This transformation maps a vector x to its projection on the ##x_1## axis, a map from Rn into Rn (but not onto Rn). Does it seem likely to you that this matrix will row reduce to the identity matrix?
So if it maps onto Rn does that mean that it maps x into every position in Rn?
 
Also can you clarify why these two statements are equivalent in the Invertible Matrix Theorem::
1. The equation Ax = b has at least one solution for each b in Rn
2. The linear transformation x -> Ax is one-to-one.

What is throwing me off is the word least in statement 1. Shouldn't it have exactly one solution for every b in order for the transformation to be one-to-one?
 
henry3369 said:
Also can you clarify why these two statements are equivalent in the Invertible Matrix Theorem::
1. The equation Ax = b has at least one solution for each b in Rn
2. The linear transformation x -> Ax is one-to-one.

What is throwing me off is the word least in statement 1. Shouldn't it have exactly one solution for every b in order for the transformation to be one-to-one?
Yes, I'm bothered by it as well. It's technically correct, but misleading, as it seems to imply that for some b there might two input x values. That can't happen if the transformation is one-to-one, though.

To me, it's sort of like saying 3 + 4 is at least 7.
 
Yes, this is rank-nullity, together with the fact that a linear map is injective iff it has a trivial kernel.
 

Thread 'Trouble understanding an online solution to an exercise in Dummit & Foote'

##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
View full post »

Thread 'Questions about non existence of GCDs vs (coimages, cokernels)'

The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
View full post »

Thread 'Decomposition into irreps of compact Lie group'

When decomposing a representation ##\rho## of a finite group ##G## into irreducible representations, we can find the number of times the representation contains a particular irrep ##\rho_0## through the character inner product $$ \langle \chi, \chi_0\rangle = \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{g\in G} \chi(g) \chi_0(g)^*$$ where ##\chi## and ##\chi_0## are the characters of ##\rho## and ##\rho_0##, respectively. Since all group elements in the same conjugacy class have the same characters, this may be...
View full post »

Similar threads

I A true or false statement concerning condition number of a matrix
Replies
2
Views
561
Linear Transformations: Explaining the Theorem
Replies
2
Views
2K
MHB Check the statements about a 4x5 matrix with rank 2.
Replies
9
Views
5K
I Uniqueness of reduced row echelon form (proof verification)
Replies
4
Views
1K
I Row space, Column space, Null space & Left null space
Replies
8
Views
3K
B Is it invalid to redefine the sgn function in this way in a proof?
Replies
15
Views
4K
I Question from a proof in Axler 2nd Ed, 'Linear Algebra Done Right'
Replies
3
Views
2K
I Dimension and solution to matrix-vector product
Replies
4
Views
3K
Python Partial pivoting in getting the reduced row echelon form of a matrix
Replies
2
Views
1K
MHB Matrices.......whose null space consists all linear combinations
Replies
3
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top