Ok i got to the end of this whole Im theory but

  • Thread starter Thread starter transgalactic
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Theory
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around understanding the image of linear transformations and the application of specific methods to find it. Participants are exploring cases involving matrices and transformations, particularly focusing on the kernel and image of linear operators.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss various cases of linear transformations and their images, questioning the methods used to derive results. There are attempts to clarify the definitions and processes involved in finding the image and kernel of given matrices.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered insights into specific transformations and their implications, while others express confusion regarding the methods and results presented. Multiple interpretations of the transformations are being explored, and there is an ongoing dialogue about the correct approach to take.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention challenges with row reduction and the timing of transitioning to the application of transformations. There is a noted discrepancy between personal results and those found in textbooks, raising questions about the validity of different approaches.

transgalactic
Messages
1,386
Reaction score
0
ok i got to the end of this whole I am theory but...

i have two cases that i need guidense

in the link i showed a basic case and how we solve it using this method

http://img145.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img8275vc2.jpg

than i presented the first case that i can't solve
i which i tried to copy a case that we have delt with before
(with the b2=0)

than i presented the second case that i can't solve like our (b2=0) example

basically may method say to make A*x=b

then to find the "b"s value for which we get a solution for the matrix

in the end we copy the "b" column with the conclution the gives us an answer for the matrix.

in both cases i get to part of the conclution but i can't go further
to wright down the "b" column with this conclutions and to
exract the vectors of the basis

?

(by the way)
i am using this method because i was tought that it works for every basis
unlike the tangugation mathod that works only for standart basis
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
How many different problems do you have here?

The first appears to be "Find the kernel of linear transformation A where A is the matrix
\left[\begin{array}{cccc} 1 & 0 & 0 & -3 \\ 2 & 0 & 4 & -5 \end{array}\right].
from R4 to R2. It is easy to see that, multiplied by &lt;x_1, x_2, x_3, x_4&gt; gives <x_1- 3x_4, 2x_1+ 4x_3- 5x_4>[/itex] it is equally easy to see that, for arbitrary x_1, x_2, x_3, x_4 those can give any numbers. The image of A is all of R2 and so < 1, 0> and <0, 1> are basis vectors. The rest of what you have there, I simply don't understand. And I have no idea what "tangugation" means! Translate please.
 
all of my questions are about finding the Im

i have there two cases that i don't know how to find their Im

i also tried to solve them using your method
but i have troubles with it

http://img167.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img8276dz3.jpg

and tangugation i think its the operation of transforming column into rows

i don't have a problem with the first metrix
i just showed an example of how this method is working
the problem is with the second metrix and the last metrix
in the middle i gave another example of how to find the I am
using this method
 
Last edited:
Your first operator changes the general (x, y, z, t) into (0, -y+ z, 0, 0). Isn't it obvious, that we can pick y and z to make -y+ z anything? (More technically, we can always solve -y+ z= a for any a- and it has an infinite number of solutions.) The image is simply the one dimensional subspace (0, a, 0, 0). You were almost there in writing y(0, -1, 0, 0)+ z(0, 1, 0, 0) since that is equal to (-y+ z)(0, 1, 0, 0). The image is the subspace having basis (0, 1, 0, 0) and, of course, is one-dimensional.

But you say the answer in your book is (0, 1, -1, 0). I don't know how they got that. The "augmented" matrix you show
\left(\begin{array} {ccccc}0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \\ 0 &amp; -1 &amp; 1 &amp; 0 &amp; b_2 \\ 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; b_3+ b_2 \\ 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \end{array}\right)
Looks like it is the result of row reducing another augmented matrix: it looks like it started as
\left(\begin{array}{ccccc} 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \\ 0 &amp; -1 &amp; 1 &amp; 0 &amp; b_2 \\ 0 &amp; 1 &amp; -1 &amp; 0 &amp; b_3 \\ 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \end{array}\right)
In other words, that the original transformation "mapped" (x, y, z, t) to (0, -y+ z, y- z, 0). If that is the case,since y- z= -(-y+ z) and, again, for y and z arbitrary, y- z can be anything, that is of the form (0, a, -a, 0)= a(0, 1, -1, 0) and, in this case, the image is the subspace having basis {(0, 1, -1, 0)}.

So which is, in fact, the correct transformation? (x, y, z, t)-> (0, -y+ z, 0, 0) which is what you give initially, or (x, y, z, t)-> (0, -y+ z, y- z, 0) which is what your book seems to be working with.

For the second problem where T(x, y, z)= (2x- y- z, -y+ z, 0), since 2x-y-z and y- z are arbitrary (there exist at least one solution to 2x- y- z= a and y-z= b for all a and b), any vector in the image if of the form (a, b, 0)= a(1, 0, 0)+ b(0, 1, 0). The image has basis {(1, 0, 0), (0, 1, 0)}.


Swapping rows and columns, in English, at least, is "transposition". What by, the way, is your native language? Your English is excellent.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ok i understood your method
the only problem that remains for me is
"when to start this process?"

of making A*(x,y,z)

in any general problem i get a metrix like

(a b c)
(d e f)
(s t y)

from substituting A(e1) A(e2) A(e3) into the general formula

than i try to transform it so it will contain as much zeros as possible

(a b c)
(0 e f)
(0 0 y)

it can take several operations of row reduction for me to get to this resolt
i can go further and make this metrix to look like this

(a b 0)
(0 e 0)
(0 0 y)

i got the impression that we can get many I am resolts
because our matrix can change many time.
for example when you worked with
0 0 0 0
0-1 1 0
0 0 0 0

you got an answer that differs the answer in my book
so you took the previos form of this matrix (one step before)
and then you made A*(x,y,z) and then you got the right answer

what is the guide line for me to know
for stopping row reduction procces and starting with A*(x,y,z) process
thanks?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
8K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
7K