Linear dependence of a set under linear transformation?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the linear dependence of a set under a linear transformation T: V -> W. It is established that if S is a linearly dependent subset of V, then T(S) is also linearly dependent, as demonstrated through the proof involving distinct vectors and non-zero scalars. However, a counterexample is provided where T maps multiple vectors in S to the same value, leading to the conclusion that T(S) may not retain linear dependence. Specifically, the example of T: ℝ² -> ℝ, defined by T(x,y) = x+y, illustrates that while S = {(2,0),(0,2),(1,1)} is dependent, T(S) = {2} is not.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of linear transformations and their properties
  • Familiarity with concepts of linear dependence and independence
  • Knowledge of vector spaces and their representations
  • Basic proficiency in linear algebra, particularly in proofs and counterexamples
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of linear transformations in detail
  • Explore the implications of mapping distinct vectors to the same value under transformations
  • Learn about the rank-nullity theorem and its applications
  • Investigate further examples of linear dependence in different vector spaces
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in linear algebra, mathematicians exploring vector spaces, and anyone interested in the implications of linear transformations on vector sets.

poochie_d
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

Here is the problem:
If T: V -> W is a linear transformation and S is a linearly dependent subset of V, then prove that T(S) is linearly dependent.

Now, I know that the usual proof goes as follows:
Since S is linearly dependent, there are distinct vectors v_1, ..., v_n in S and scalars a_1, ..., a_n (not all zero) such that \sum_{i=1}^n a_i v_i = 0.

=> \sum_{i=1}^n a_i T(v_i) = T(\sum_{i=1}^n a_i v_i) = T(0) = 0

=> Since there are vectors T(v_1), ..., T(v_n) in T(S) and scalars a_1, ..., a_n (not all zero) such that they form a nontrivial representation of 0, it follows that T(S) is dependent.

What I am wondering is whether the above proof is still valid if some of the v_i's take on the same value under T. In this case, wouldn't the proof be wrong, since you have to have distinct vectors to show that the set is dependent?

e.g. What if you have a situation where S = \{v_1,v_2,v_3\} and v_1 + v_2 - 2v_3 = 0, but T(v_1) = T(v_2) = T(v_3) = w (say), so that
0 = T(v_1) + T(v_2) - T(v_3) = w + w - 2w = 0w? This doesn't prove that T(S) is dependent! (Or does it?)

Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks!


PS: I am posting this here since it is related to linear algebra, but maybe this is a homework-type question; please feel free to move it to a different forum if it doesn't belong here.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I moved this to the Homework & Coursework section, which is where it should go. Adding this note will bump the question.
 
Oh, never mind; I figured it out. It turns out the statement I was trying to prove is not true...
e.g. If you have T:\mathbb{R}^2 \to \mathbb{R}, \: T(x,y) = x+y, and S = \{(2,0),(0,2),(1,1)\}, then S is linearly dependent but T(S) = \{2\} is not.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K