Proving that T(u).T(V)=u.v if an only if A^T =A^-1

  • Thread starter Thread starter Myr73
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that T(u)·T(v) = u·v if and only if A^T = A^-1, where A is the standard matrix for the linear operator T acting on vectors u and v in R^n. Participants are exploring the implications of orthogonal matrices in relation to the dot product of transformed vectors.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are examining the relationship between the linear operator T and its standard matrix A, questioning the validity of using T(u)·T(v) = A(u)·A(v) without proof. There is a suggestion to expand u and v in the standard basis to facilitate understanding.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided insights on how to approach the proof, indicating that rewriting the dot product using matrix representations may clarify the conditions under which the equality holds. There is an ongoing exploration of the implications of A being orthogonal.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the definitions and properties of linear transformations and orthogonal matrices, with some expressing uncertainty about the necessary steps to prove the main assertion. There is a mention of homework constraints that may limit the use of certain assumptions.

Myr73
Messages
120
Reaction score
0
Let u and v be vectors in R^n , and let T be a linear operator on R^n. Prove that T(u).T(v)= u.v if and only if A^T=A^-1 where A is the standard matrix for T. What I have so far is --> If T is a linear operator on R^n, then ; T:R^n --> R^n
and if u and v be the vectors then ; T(u).T(V) = Au.Av
Where A is the standard matrix of T
{ and so we want Au.Av=u.v, which needs to be if and only if A^T=A^-1}

Therefore first we find what it means if A^T=A^-1
----> if A^T=A^-1 then multiplying both by A --> AA^T= I
Therefore the matrix A is and orthogonal matrix/
And so from the last statement , if Au.Av= u.v if and only if A^T=A^-1
Then --> Au.Av=u.v if and only if A is an orthogonal matrix.
Therefore we must prove that Au.Av= u.v means that this is only true if the matrix A is orthogonal.

This is where I am stuck I'm not sure how to prove this.
I'm not sure if this next part is necessary but I found that

u.v = u1v1+u2v2...UnVn

and that T(u)=A(u) such that a(11)u(1), a(12)u(2),..,a(1n)u(1)
a(21)u(1), a(22)u(2)...,a(2n)u(2)
..........
.........
a(n1)u(1), a(n2)u(2)...a(nn)u(n)

and same for T(v)=A(v) such that
a(11)v(1), a(12)v(2),..,a(1n)v(1)
a(21)v(1), a(22)v(2)...,a(2n)v(2)
..........
.........
a(n1)v(1), a(n2)v(2)...a(nn)v(n)

Im not sure if I need to develop T(u).T(v) further then A(u).A(v)..

I would really appreciate some help on this one, thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you sure that you're allowed to use ##Tu\cdot Tv=Au\cdot Av## without proof? If you use this, you don't even have to use the definition of "standard matrix for T". The simplest way to proceed is to use that ##x\cdot y=x^Ty##.

This is a valid approach even if you're not allowed to use ##Tu\cdot Tv=Au\cdot Av## without proof. You just have to do the proof as well. This is pretty straightforward if you expand u and v in the standard basis, and use the definitions of dot product, matrix multiplication, and "standard matrix for T".

Moderators: I moved the thread here from the linear algebra forum.
 
I only meant for example; Tu in matrix form would be [A][x] like -->a(11)u(1), a(12)u(2),..,a(1n)u(1)
a(21)u(1), a(22)u(2)...,a(2n)u(2)
..........
.........
a(n1)u(1), a(n2)u(2)...a(nn)u(n) ...Because A is the standard matrix of T. is that not the right way?

Also, I don't really understand what I am suppose to do with x.y=x^Ty
 
Myr73 said:
I only meant for example; Tu in matrix form would be [A][x] like -->a(11)u(1), a(12)u(2),..,a(1n)u(1)
a(21)u(1), a(22)u(2)...,a(2n)u(2)
..........
.........
a(n1)u(1), a(n2)u(2)...a(nn)u(n) ...Because A is the standard matrix of T. is that not the right way?
OK, you have a point. The observation you just made makes it obvious that ##Tu\cdot Tv=Au\cdot Av##. So I guess it's not necessary to do the proof I had in mind:
\begin{align}
&Tu\cdot Tv =\sum_{i,j} u_i v_j Te_i\cdot T e_j =\sum_{i,j,k,l} u_i v_j (Te_i)_k (Te_j)_l e_k\cdot e_l\\
&=\sum_{i,j,k,l} u_i v_j A_{ki} A_{lj}\delta_{kl} =\sum_{i,j,k} u_i v_j A_{ki} A_{kj}=\sum_k(Au)_k (Av)_k =Au\cdot Av
\end{align}

Myr73 said:
Also, I don't really understand what I am suppose to do with x.y=x^Ty
Use it to rewrite both sides of ##u\cdot v=Au\cdot Av##. You know how to deal with ##(Au)^T##, right?
 
Last edited:
no sorry, I'm unsure where to go from "Therefore we must prove that Au.Av= u.v means that this is only true if the matrix A is orthogonal."
 
If you rewrite ##u\cdot v=Au\cdot Av## using ##x\cdot y=x^Ty##, you should almost immediately see that the equality holds if and only if ##A## is orthogonal.

The general formula for the transpose of a product is ##(AB)^T=B^TA^T##. This follows almost immediately from the definitions:
$$((AB)^T)_{ij}=(AB)_{ji}=\sum_k A_{jk}B_{ki} =\sum_k (A^T)_{kj} (B^T)_{ik} =\sum_k (B^T)_{ik} (A^T)_{kj}=(B^TA^T)_{ij}.$$
 
ok, so are you meaning for vector u to be x and vector v to be y?
 
When you rewrite ##u\cdot v##, yes. Of course, that's not the only thing you need to rewrite.
 
Last edited:
hmm.. ok
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
7K