Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Linear Transformations and matrix representation

  1. May 26, 2015 #1
    Assume the mapping T: P2 -> P2 defined by:
    T(a0 + a1t+a2t2) = 3a0 + (5a0 - 2a1)t + (4a1 + a2)t2
    is linear.Find the matrix representation of T relative to the basis B = {1,t,t2}

    My book says to first compute the images of the basis vector. This is the point where I'm stuck at because I'm not sure how the books arrives at the images:
    T(b1) = T(1) = 3+5t
    T(b2) = T(t) = -2t+4t2
    T(b3) = T(t2) = t2

    Where are these results coming from?
    I don't understand where 1 is supposed to go to solve for T(1). I guess its the notation that is throwing me off. Usually when solving for a transformation, it has something such as T(x) = x^2, and you solve the transformation by substituting the value of the input for x. But now my input is 1 for an entire expression (a0 + a1t+a2t2)
     
  2. jcsd
  3. May 26, 2015 #2

    Svein

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Start with what you know. If you want T(1), look at your definition. In order to get T(1), put a0=1, a1=0 and a2=0. Then the definition says T(1)= 3⋅1 + (5⋅1 - 2⋅0)t + (4⋅0 + 0)t2. In the same way, to find T(t) , put a0=0, a1=1 and a2=0. The rest is left as an exercise...
     
  4. May 26, 2015 #3

    Fredrik

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I'm not a fan of calling the functions 1, t and t2 (these are notations for numbers, not functions). I would define functions ##e_0, e_1, e_2## by
    \begin{align*}
    &e_0(x)=1\\
    &e_1(x)=x\\
    &e_2(x)=x^2
    \end{align*} for all real numbers x. Then T is defined by ##T(a_0e_0+a_1e_1+a_2e_2)=3a_0e_0+(5a_0-2a_1)e_1+(4a_1+a_2)e_2## for all real numbers ##a_1,a_2,a_3##. Now let's do what Svein did, in my notation:
    $$T(e_0)=T(1e_0+0e_1+0e_2)=3\cdot 1 e_0+(5\cdot 1-2\cdot 0)e_1+(4\cdot 0+0)e_2=3e_0+5e_1.$$
     
  5. May 26, 2015 #4
    How do you know which ax corresponds to the input? For T(1), you set a0 =1 and for T(t) you set a1 = 1. I don't think it could be the order in which it appears in B, because B is just a set of vectors and the order shouldn't matter.
     
  6. May 26, 2015 #5
    So what makes
    e0(x)=1 and not e0(x)=x? If the order of the vectors in the Basis changed, how would I know that e0(x)=1? . Also, why are the others always zero?
     
  7. May 26, 2015 #6

    Fredrik

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Yes, strictly speaking, it's ambiguous to talk about the components of a vector in a specific basis. We should always be talking about the components of a vector with respect to an ordered basis like the triple ##(b_1,b_2,b_3)## rather than the components of a vector with respect to the basis ##\{b_1,b_2,b_3\}##. Unfortunately people are sloppy with the language. But they're at least being sloppy in a consistent way. When they talk about the components of a vector with respect to ##\{b_1,b_2,b_3\}##, they always mean with respect to ##(b_1,b_2,b_3)##, and never with respect to e.g. ##(b_3,b_1,b_2)##.

    The way I did it is just a convention. You could number the functions differently if you want to.

    Now you're probably thinking "wait a minute, the formula for the number on row i, column j of the matrix depends on the order of the basis vectors, so each choice of how to order them could give me a different matrix". This would be a correct observation. A linear operator and a basis don't uniquely determine a matrix. A linear operator and an ordered basis on the other hand...

    In this problem, it's safe to assume that you should find the matrix of T with respect to the ordered basis ##(b_1,b_2,b_3)## (i.e. my ##(e_0,e_1,e_2)##).

    I'm not sure what others you're referring to.
     
    Last edited: May 26, 2015
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook