Nullity of Linear Transformation T:M_2x3(F) -> M_2x2(F): 4

  • Thread starter Thread starter _F_
  • Start date Start date
_F_
Messages
16
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Find the nullity of the linear transformation T:M_2x3(F) -> M_2x2(F) defined by:

T([a11, a12, a13; a21, a22, a23]) = ([2*a11 - a12, a13 + 2*a12; 0, 0])


The Attempt at a Solution


N(T) = {x in M_2x3(F) | T(x) = 0}

2*a11 - a12 = 0 => a11 = (a12)/2
a13 + 2*12 = 0 a13 = -2*a12

N(T) = {[a/2, a, -2*a; 0, 0, 0] | a in F}

Basis(N(T)) = {[1/2 1 -2; 0, 0, 0]}

nullity(T) = 6

But nullity(T) should be 4...

Any help is appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
_F_ said:
N(T) = {[a/2, a, -2*a; 0, 0, 0] | a in F}
Basis(N(T)) = {[1/2 1 -2; 0, 0, 0]}
nullity(T) = 6
But nullity(T) should be 4...
Why are these entries 0's? Look at the formula given for T. Do a21,a22,a23 appear anywhere in the transformed 2x2 matrix?
 
Defennder said:
Why are these entries 0's? Look at the formula given for T. Do a21,a22,a23 appear anywhere in the transformed 2x2 matrix?

You're right. But that said, if you take away the zero's you still get a 1x3 matrix whose dimension is 3...
 
You meant I a 2x3 matrix I presume. And it doesn't make sense to talk about the dimension of a matrix. You meant the dimension of the nullspace. And it isn't 3. How did you arrive at that?
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...

Similar threads

Replies
37
Views
6K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Back
Top