Understanding Vector Spaces: The Confusion of Notation in Coefficient Matrices

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around understanding the vector spaces associated with coefficient matrices, specifically the confusion surrounding the notation of dimensions in relation to rows and columns. Participants explore the implications of matrix dimensions on vector spaces, particularly in the context of linear transformations.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants raise questions about the correct interpretation of the dimensions of vector spaces related to coefficient matrices, specifically whether an m x n matrix corresponds to Rm or Rn. There are attempts to clarify the definitions of vector spaces and the role of linear transformations in this context.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered insights into the relationship between matrix dimensions and vector spaces, while others express confusion about the notation used in different textbooks. The discussion is ongoing, with various interpretations being explored without a clear consensus.

Contextual Notes

Participants note discrepancies in notation between different textbooks, which contributes to the confusion regarding the dimensions of vector spaces. There is also mention of the need to clarify the distinction between row vectors and column vectors in relation to the matrix dimensions.

stgermaine
Messages
45
Reaction score
0
If I am given a coefficient matrix of m rows and n columns (an m x n matrix), then is the vector space of that matrix Rm or Rn? I get really confused sometimes. Sometimes, the superscript seems like the number of rows, and sometimes the number of variables. It also doesn't help that my class textbook uses the notation n x m whereas the Lay Linear Algebra textbook, which is far superior to the one used in my class, uses m x n.

Most of the time, it seems like it corresponds to the number of variables, so the number of columns in a coefficient matrix, so an m x n matrix is a vector space of Rn.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
stgermaine said:
If I am given a coefficient matrix of m rows and n columns (an m x n matrix), then is the vector space of that matrix Rm or Rn?

I find it helpful to use an informal definition of "vector space":

A vector space is a set of things and some rules for making linear combinations of those things.

##\mathbb{R}^m## and ##\mathbb{R}^n## are two different vector spaces. Suppose we choose a standard basis for each of those spaces, and we agree to represent vectors as columns of their components using those bases. If ##\hat{L}## is a linear transformation that inputs vectors from ##\mathbb{R}^n## and outputs vectors in ##\mathbb{R}^m##, then we can represent ##\hat{L}## as an ##m \times n## matrix. (It's easy to get ##m## and ##n## confused. When in doubt, I pick two small numbers for ##m## and ##n## and write down an example. Then it's usually clear if I've gotten it backwards.)

We can also make linear combinations of matrices: a matrix can be multiplied by a scalar, two matrices can be added, and the rules of * and + are well-behaved. That means the set of all ##m \times n## real matrices forms another vector space. If I remember correctly, this new vector space is isomorphic to ##\mathbb{R}^{m n}##.

For example, the set of all ##2 \times 3## real matrices is a real vector space with dimension 6. Each matrix represents a linear transformation from ##\mathbb{R}^3## to ##\mathbb{R}^2##. I hope that clarifies things!
 
Well, first you are going to have to explain what you mean by "the vector space of that matrix"! Of course, a matrix can represent a linear combination from one vector space, U, to another, V. One standard way to do that is by the matrix multiplication Au= v, thinking of u and v as "column matrices" with a single column. If we do that, then the definition of matrix multiplication requires that u have as many rows as A has columns and that v have as many rows as A has rows. That is, if A has "m rows and n columns", u must have n rows, so be in [itex]R^n[/itex] and v must have m rows and so be in [itex]R^m[/itex]. That is, if A has m rows and n columns, A represents a linear transformation from [itex]R^n[/itex] to [itex]R^m[/itex].
 
A quote from my textbook says "Note that BA is an nxm matrix (as it represents a linear transf. from Rm to Rn)

And further on it says that "the eqn z = B(Ax) = (BA)x for all vectors x in Rm. I guess what you are saying about linear tarnsformation makes sense, since a lot of these matrices are being multiplied. I was just wondering in cases when the textbook says stuff like "for all vectors x in R2"

And then it hit me that the number of 'rows' on a column vector correspond to the number of columns in a coefficient matrix. I think that's one place where I got mixed up about what the superscript means in Rn.
 
stgermaine said:
It also doesn't help that my class textbook uses the notation n x m whereas the Lay Linear Algebra textbook, which is far superior to the one used in my class, uses m x n.

Depends on whether you're talking about row vectors or column vectors?

P.S. Why is this in homework help?
 
@Dimension10 I think I was getting column vectors and row vectors confused. Maybe I should have posted this on Linear & Abstract Algebra.

Anyway thank you all I'm no longer confused about this.
 
If this was a question about course work, then this is indeed the correct place for it.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K