MHB Linear Transformations & Matrices: Armstrong, Tapp Chs. 9 & 1 - Explained

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
At the start of Chapter 9, M. A. Armstrong in his book, "Groups and Symmetry" (see text below) writes the following:

" ... ... Each matrix $$A$$ in this group determines an invertible linear transformation $$f_A: \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$$ defined by $$f_A(x) = x A^t$$ ... ... "I know that one may define entities how one wishes ... but why does Armstrong define $$f$$ in terms of the transpose of $$A$$ rather than just simply $$A$$ ... there must be some reason or advantage to this ... but what is it? Can someone help to explain ...

I note in passing that Kristopher Tapp in his book, "Matrix Groups for Undergraduates" (Chapter 1, Section 5) ... see text below ... defines the action of a linear transformation ( multiplication by a matrix $$A$$) as $$R_A = X \cdot A$$ ... thus not using the transpose of $$A$$ ...Hope that someone can help ...

Peter=======================================================================================

The above post refers to the start of Ch. 9 of M. A. Armstrong's book, "Groups and Symmetry" ... so I am providing the relevant text ... as follows:View attachment 9568
The above post also refers to Chapter 1, Section 5 of Kristopher Tapp's book, "Matrix Groups for Undergraduates" ... so I am providing the relevant text ... as follows:View attachment 9569Note that Tapp uses $$\mathbb{K}$$ to refer to one of the real numbers, the complex numbers or the quaternions ...Hope that helps,

Peter
 

Attachments

  • Armstrong - Start of Chapter 9 ... .png
    Armstrong - Start of Chapter 9 ... .png
    39.3 KB · Views: 109
  • Tapp - Chater 5, Section 1... .png
    Tapp - Chater 5, Section 1... .png
    35 KB · Views: 128
Physics news on Phys.org
Peter said:
At the start of Chapter 9, M. A. Armstrong in his book, "Groups and Symmetry" (see text below) writes the following:

" ... ... Each matrix $$A$$ in this group determines an invertible linear transformation $$f_A: \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$$ defined by $$f_A(x) = x A^t$$ ... ... "I know that one may define entities how one wishes ... but why does Armstrong define $$f$$ in terms of the transpose of $$A$$ rather than just simply $$A$$ ... there must be some reason or advantage to this ... but what is it?
The answer is given in the text from Armstrong's book that you posted. If $f_A(x)$ is defined to be $xA^T$ then the map $A\mapsto f_A$ preserves multiplication: $f_{AB} = f_Af_B$. If the transpose does not occur in the definition then the map would reverse the order and you would get $f_{AB} = f_Bf_A$.
 
Opalg said:
The answer is given in the text from Armstrong's book that you posted. If $f_A(x)$ is defined to be $xA^T$ then the map $A\mapsto f_A$ preserves multiplication: $f_{AB} = f_Af_B$. If the transpose does not occur in the definition then the map would reverse the order and you would get $f_{AB} = f_Bf_A$.
Thanks for the help, Opalg ...

Peter
 
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
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...
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...
Back
Top