Projection onto a subspace

The Projv(x) = A(ATA)-1ATx

I'm puzzled why this equation doesn't reduce to Projv(x) = IIx

since (ATA)-1 = A-1(AT)-1 so that should mean that A(ATA)-1AT = AA-1(AT)-1AT = II

What is wrong with my reasoning?

Thanks.
 

Fredrik

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
10,730
406
It doesn't look wrong to me. Where did you get the idea that the first expression is a projection operator?
 
20
0
The problem is that A will be rectangular (non-square) if you are projecting onto a subspace, and thus its inverse does not exist (e.g. A is a column vector for projection onto a line).
 
Last edited:
It doesn't look wrong to me. Where did you get the idea that the first expression is a projection operator?
Hi Fredrik,

I first saw it in the Khan Academy Linear Algebra video: "Lin Alg: A Projection onto a Subspace is a Linear Transformation" which is at this link: http://www.khanacademy.org/video/lin-alg--a-projection-onto-a-subspace-is-a-linear-transforma?playlist=Linear%20Algebra [Broken]

But I also found it at Wikipedia here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projection_(linear_algebra)

and in the book "Matrix Analysis and Applied Linear Algebra" by Carl Meyer on page 430

--
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The problem is that A will be rectangular (non-square) if you are projecting onto a subspace, and thus its inverse does not exist (e.g. A is a column vector for projection onto a line).
That makes sense. Thanks.
 

Related Threads for: Projection onto a subspace

  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
7K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
1K
Top