Linear Transformation from R^m to R^n: Mapping Scalars to Vectors

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of linear transformations from R^m to R^n, specifically exploring the idea of mapping scalars to vectors and the implications for understanding properties of the transformed space. Participants consider the relationship between linear transformations, gradients, and the analysis of transformed subsets in different dimensions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that a linear transformation can be viewed as mapping scalars to vectors, drawing parallels to vector fields and gradients.
  • Another participant cautions that interpreting components of vectors as individual numbers may lead to a loss of important information, especially regarding coordinate systems, and recommends viewing the transformation as matrix multiplication.
  • A different participant expresses confusion about analyzing the properties of the image of a closed bounded subset under a linear transformation, questioning how to apply concepts like gradients to this transformed space.
  • One participant proposes that the focus should be on mapping points to vectors rather than numbers to vectors, suggesting a geometric interpretation of vectors originating from the origin.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants present differing views on how to conceptualize linear transformations and their implications for analyzing transformed spaces. There is no consensus on the best approach to understand these concepts or the appropriate mathematical frameworks to apply.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the relationship between linear algebra, calculus, and topology in the context of analyzing transformed spaces, indicating a need for clarity on the relevant theorems and concepts.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and practitioners in mathematics, physics, and engineering who are exploring linear transformations, vector fields, and the analysis of transformed geometric spaces.

dumbQuestion
Messages
124
Reaction score
0
Can we think of a linear transformation from R^m-->R^n as mapping scalars to vectors?

Let me say what I mean. Say we have some linear transformation L from R^m to R^n which can be represented by a matrix as follows:

L=[ a11x1+a12x2+...+a1mx m
a21x1+...
.
.
.
anmx1+...+ anmxm ](sorry for that ridiculous representation, just wasn't sure how to write it in this forum). Anyway its supposed to be the general representation of some nXm matrix.So this takes as imputs scalars (x1,x2,...,xn) and gives as output:

L(x1,x2,...,xn)=(a11x1+a12x2+...+a1nx n, a21x1+a22x2+...+ a2nxn,...,an1x1+...+anmxm)isn't this just like saying:

L(x1,x2,...,xn)=(a11x1+a12x2+...+a1nxn)i + (a21x1+a22x2+...+a2nxn)j,+...+,(an1x1+...+anmxm))t *(not sure what standard vector you would use if its n dimensional, i only know i j and k so i just randomly chose the letter t)So can't we think of the transformation like a vector field? Isn't this what the gradient ∇ does? (takes a scalar field and transforms it to a vector field) Now, we can't take the gradient of a vector field right, so how can we go about finding max and min points then? Because they occur when the gradient is 0 but how can I really think of the gradient of this?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org


You could, but if you do that, interpreting the separate components of the vector in Rn as individual numbers, and the components in Rm as vectors, you lose important information- especially if you want to consider changing coordinate systems.

Better to think of the function as a matrix multiplication: y= Mx where, because x has n rows and y has m columns, M is a matrix with n columns and m rows.
 


But what if my goal is to learn things about say, the space this is mapped to. For example, say I have for example a closed bounded subset in R^m, O, and I want to look at L(O) (the transformation of O into R^n using my linear transformation L). Say I want to learn things about that range. For example min and max properties. I'm just kind of confused how I would say, take the gradient of that space to find that stuff out, or get to know properties about what's going on on the boundary. An example being say I have a transformation T that's mapping points in R^3 to points in R^2. So this can be represented as a 2X3 matrix. Now say I just want to evaluate T(C) where C is, say, a closed ball of radius epsilon. Now I want to know things about the output of this, like the min and max that we find in T(C).Is this a linear algebra question? Or a calculus question? Or a topology question? I'm just not sure where to look to study and understand this or maybe what theorems I should look at to understand it more?
 
Last edited:


Then you don't want to think of mapping numbers to vectors, you want to map points to vectors. And you can do that by assuming that each vector starts at the origin and then taking each vector to indicate the point at its tip.
 

Similar threads

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