0 Голоса «за»0 Голоса «против»

Просмотров: 13433 стр.These are my notes for the graduate course Algebra I at University of Maryland (College Park), Fall 2016, taught by Harry Tamvakis. The course webpage is http://www.math.umd.edu/~harryt/teaching/600.html, and that is where the homework can be found. I hope to update these notes every few weeks as the course progresses.
Send any comments or corrections to jheavner (at) umd (dot) umd.

Sep 05, 2016

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd

These are my notes for the graduate course Algebra I at University of Maryland (College Park), Fall 2016, taught by Harry Tamvakis. The course webpage is http://www.math.umd.edu/~harryt/teaching/600.html, and that is where the homework can be found. I hope to update these notes every few weeks as the course progresses.
Send any comments or corrections to jheavner (at) umd (dot) umd.

© All Rights Reserved

Просмотров: 134

These are my notes for the graduate course Algebra I at University of Maryland (College Park), Fall 2016, taught by Harry Tamvakis. The course webpage is http://www.math.umd.edu/~harryt/teaching/600.html, and that is where the homework can be found. I hope to update these notes every few weeks as the course progresses.
Send any comments or corrections to jheavner (at) umd (dot) umd.

© All Rights Reserved

- Neuromancer
- The E-Myth Revisited: Why Most Small Businesses Don't Work and
- How Not to Be Wrong: The Power of Mathematical Thinking
- Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us
- Chaos: Making a New Science
- The Joy of x: A Guided Tour of Math, from One to Infinity
- How to Read a Person Like a Book
- Moonwalking with Einstein: The Art and Science of Remembering Everything
- The Wright Brothers
- The Other Einstein: A Novel
- The 6th Extinction
- The Housekeeper and the Professor: A Novel
- The Power of Discipline: 7 Ways it Can Change Your Life
- The 10X Rule: The Only Difference Between Success and Failure
- A Short History of Nearly Everything
- The Kiss Quotient: A Novel
- The End of Average: How We Succeed in a World That Values Sameness
- Made to Stick: Why Some Ideas Survive and Others Die
- Algorithms to Live By: The Computer Science of Human Decisions
- The Universe in a Nutshell

Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 33

Notes by Joseph Heavner

September 24, 2016

Abstract

These are simply a retying of my in class notes, perhaps with a few

gaps filled in. They are not sufficiently detailed to replace our course

text (Dummit & Foote) or Prof. Tamvakis lectures, but these notes

may serve as a good supplement to such resources, particularly for review

purposes. Any special material should be marked in some way or another

as supplementary.

Send any corrections or suggestions to jheavner (at) umd (dot) edu.

Contents

1 August 30: Introduction to

Field

1.1 Logistics . . . . . . . . . .

1.2 The Course . . . . . . . .

1.3 Guiding Philosophy . . . .

1.4 Notation . . . . . . . . . .

1.5 High-Level Overview . . .

1.6 Vector Spaces . . . . . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

of V

2.1 Linear Independence . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2.2 Bases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2.3 Dimension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

2

2

2

3

3

3

3

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

& Their Matrices

3.1 Zorns Lemma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3.2 Infinite Dimensional Vector Spaces . . . . . .

3.3 Linear Maps & Their Matrices . . . . . . . .

3.4 Preview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

7

7

7

9

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

11

11

13

13

15

16

4.1 Isomorphisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

4.2 Direct Sums & Direct Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

4.3

4.4

Quotient Spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Preview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5.1 Isomorphism Theorems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5.2 Universal Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5.2.1 Universal Property of the Quotient . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5.2.2 Universal Property of the Direct Product . . . . . . . . .

5.2.3 Universal Property of Direct Sum . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6 September 15: Hom, Duals, Coordinates,

6.1 More Subspace Constructions . . . . . . .

6.2 Coordinate Systems . . . . . . . . . . . .

6.3 Matrix of a Linear Map . . . . . . . . . .

18

20

21

21

22

23

24

24

Eigenvalues

26

. . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

. . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

. . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

7.1

1

1.1

31

31

over a Field

Logistics

There are three problem types in this courses p-sets: A, B, C. Type A problems are standard and fairly straightforward, testing comprehension of material. Type B problems are more involved and difficult, and they are designed to be similar to research in that they consist of many parts, one leading

into another. Type C problems are particularly difficult and serve as extra

credit. Homeworks will be assigned on Thursday (posted to the course website (http://www.math.umd.edu/~harryt/teaching/600.html) and due the

following Thursday. You are permitted two late submissions.

The heart of the course is in the homework and lectures, but the university

requires we give exams for any course tested on in a qualifying exam such as

this one. Therefore, there will be one in-class midterm on Tuesday, November

1, and there will be a final exam on Monday, December 9, 1:30 - 3:30 p.m., as

scheduled by the university.

1.2

The Course

Algebra is essentially the study of sets with some additional structure, especially

algebraic operations and symmetries. This differs from analysis by the concept

of a limit. In this way, analysis is the study of inequalities; algebra is the study

of equalities. Analysts always have some fudge room, but so do algebraists in

the sense that equality really means isomorphism in most contexts, a weaker

but more interesting condition. Both areas enter geometry, which is a synthetic

field utilizing analysis locally and algebra globally.

1.3

Guiding Philosophy

We begin with linear algebra, unlike most books, including our own. Why do

we do this? Well, we basically know all about linear algebra at this point in the

sense that we can completely classify vector spaces up to isomorphism. This is

not the case for groups, the usual starting point, or even rings (another starting

point); although, finite simple groups have been classified in several thousand

pages of research. Also, linear algebra is more fundamental from a historical

perspective (historically, mathematicians worked with representations of groups

rather than the abstract groups themselves). Succinctly, groups can be abstract

and difficult to start with. (Note: Evan Chen and I recently discussed how to

introduce algebra in the context of his Napkin project, and we both agreed linear

algebra followed by rings followed by groups followed by the rest is probably best.)

1.4

Notation

Tamvakis mentioned more than this, but I only wrote down the notations that

differ from standard or where there are several widely used variants. We write

A B to include the possibility that A = B; if we wish to emphasis that

equality cannot happen, we will write (. For instance, we might write

[

\

(, ) = R &

(, ) = {0}

>0 R

0 R

Please do not confuse {0} with . You are better than that. (That last part

was me.) Oh, and we also exclude 0 from N. (I hope I can force myself to stick

with this, because I always include 0, so forgive me if I mess this up.) Also, we

will always assume the axiom of choice unless otherwise mentioned.

1.5

High-Level Overview

Algebra is involved in the study of set inclusions, the going from one distinguished set to another, in particular the inclusions

NZQRCHO

where the last two are the quaternions and octonions. Of course, there is

one inclusion there not studied by us. Can you guess what it is? (Hopefully,

you said Q to R.)

Vector spaces form a category. (By this point in your career, you probably

have some vague idea what this is, but do not worry about it.) In this and

similar categories, we will discuss sub-objects, quotients, direct products and

direct sums, morphisms, kernels, images, cokernels, and so forth. Part of the

beauty of thinking of things categorically is seeing the connections like this.

1.6

Vector Spaces

addition + : V V V and external multiplication : R V V such that

1. u + v = v + u u, v V

3

2. (u + v) + w = u + (v + w) u, v V

3. ! 0 V

4. ! v V for all v V

5. ( )v = v + v for all , R and all v V

6. (u + v) = u + v R , u, v V

7. ()v = (v) , R v V

8. ! 1 V

Examples.

1 Rn := {(x1 , . . . , xn ) : xi R i {1, . . . , n}}

2 Mm,n (R) := {real m by n matrices}

3 Generalize A a non-empty set and consider F un(A, R) = {f : A R}, e.g.,

can be seen as A = {1, . . . , n} x(1), . . . , x(n) where we might just let x(i) be

xi to go with our familiar notation of sequences and importantly matrices

4 C([0, 1]) = {f : [0, 1] R : f is continuous}

5 Pn of polynomials (in the formal sense) of degree at most n, i.e.,

(

)

n

X

i

p(x) =

ai x , ai R

i=1

Also, the vector space of all real polynomials of any degree, which you might

know as R[x], which is a vector space because R is a field.

The eight axioms imply vectors in real space behave like we expect. We

prove two easy but essential theorems.

Theorem. 0v = 0v V

Proof. Functional equation type manipulation

0 + 0 = 0 = (0 + 0)v = 0 = 0v + 0v = 0 + 0v = 0v = 0

Theorem. v = 1(v)v V

Proof. Same sort of thing. We have 1 + (1) = 0 = 1v + (1)v = 0v = 0 by

the first theorem, and so we have v + (1)v = 0 = v + (v) = (1)v = v

by cancellation.

We now generalize the idea of a vector space. If you take any field (basically anything resembling R, but you should really know what this means, as

undergraduate algebra is a prerequisite for this course), e.g., Q, R, C, you define

a vector space over the field F (an F -vector space) by replacing R with F in

the definition of a real vector space. So, V over general fields are not too hard.

Examples.

4

Definition. For a vector space V , H V , then H is a subspace of V if H

is closed under the inherited operations, i.e., if u, v H, F = u + v

H & u H, so that H itself is easy seen to be a vector space itself.

Examples.

1 Subspaces of R2 are the lines through the origin, the empty set, and the

whole space (the last two, i.e., the empty set and the whole space, are always

subspaces and might be called trivial) 2 R3 is basically the same with lines

and 2-planes through the origin being the non-trivial ones 3 the solution space

of a homogeneous linear system A Mm,n (R) has subspace given by

x1

H := x = ... : Ax = 0

xn

One can easily translate the matrix equation to m linear equations in n

variables, all equal to 0.

Definition. A linear combination of v1 , . . . , vn is

n

X

i vi , i F , vi V

i=1

( n

)

X

Span(S) = hSi =

i vi , i F , v i V

i=1

i.e., the set of all linear combinations of the vectors in the set. (We will

sometimes say the span generates. This and the alternate notation should be

clear from your experience with groups.)

Theorem. The span of a set is the smallest subspace containing the set, or

precisely

\

Span(S) =

H

H

subspace

containing

S

know hSi H by closure, so hSi H. Span is a clear subspace containing S,

so hSi = H (one of them), and so the intersection must be less than or equal in

size, meaning hSi H.

Next time we will look at linear independence and bases to get to the dimension of a vector space. Let us define just one last thing before we leave, and

this is cute: we can define finite dimensional vector spaces right now, but we

still need machinery to define the dimension of a vector space. Anyway, here

you go.

5

generates V , i.e., hSi = V .

2.1

Linear Independence

n

X

i vi = 0 (i F , vi V ) = i = 0i

i=1

relation among the vectors.

Proposition. (1) Any v 6= 0 in V is linearly independent as a singleton & (2)

Two vectors are linearly dependent if and only if v = u for some , so that

they are scalar multiples.

Proof. Omitted (clear)

Pn

Example. Take A Mm,n (F ), consider Ax = i=1 xi ai = b. Asking if Ax = b

has a solution in x over F is equivalent to asking if b Span(a1 , . . . , an ). Asking

if Ax = 0 has only the trivial solution is equivalent to asking if {a1 , . . . , an } is

linearly independent.

Exercise. Find the equation of the plane spanned by (1, 2, 3), (4, 5, 6) R3 .

Consider

1

2

3

4

x

p

5

= y R3

q

6

z

1 4

x

1 4

x

y 2x

0 3 y 2x 0 3

0 0 z 2y + x

0 6 z 3x

Whence, the equation of the plane is

x 2y + z = 0

2.2

Bases

spans V .

Examples. 1 F n has basis {e1 , . . . , en } where ei where the ith component of

ei is 1 and all others zero (this is known as the standard basis) 2 Mm,n (F )

has basis {Ei,j } with 1 i m and 1 j n where only (Ei,j )i,j is 1 and

all others are 0 (again, this is standard for the space).

3 Pn (F ) has basis

B = {1, x, . . . , xn } 4 P(F ) has infinite basis B = {1, x, . . .}.

Proposition. B is a basis iff every v V can be written uniquely as

v=

n

X

i vi

i=1

Proof.

We prove right implication first. Choose v V . Then, the span of the basis

being V means we may write

V =

n

X

i i ()

i=1

P

i i

P where i B. This is unique, because if not we would have 0 =

i i for some other constants, where the constants are not all identical, and

that would imply B is not linearly independent and so not a basis.

Going the opposite direction, we suppose that all v can be written uniquely

as above. It isPclear from () that B spans V . And, B is linearly independent,

because 0 =

0vi , but that expressions uniqueness guarantees that only 0

coefficients give 0.

P

Consequently, a basis gives rise to a coordinate system, because

i i and

{i } are in bijection.

Proposition 1. If v1 , . . . , vn V are linearly dependent, then some vi is a

linearly combination of the previous ones, and conversely.

Proof.

Suppose there is a linear combination being 0 with not all constants being

0. Let K = max{i : xi 6= 0}. So, we have that

k

X

i xi = 0 = xk =

i=1

Pk1

i=1

i xi

of k 1 vectors, then

k1

X

n

X

i xi 1vk +

i=1

0vj = 0

j=k+1

Proposition 2. Every non-zero finite dimensional vector space has a basis

(disclaimer: not unique).

Proof. Suppose the span of v1 , . . . , vn is V . If the vectors are linearly independent, then we are done. Otherwise, write

vk =

k1

X

i=1

i vi

vk being hatted means it is excluded. If, the set with vk excluded is linearly

independent, then we are again done. Otherwise, continue this process of throwing out vectors until you reach a linearly independent set. (This is guaranteed

to terminate, because the singleton is always linearly independent; it is also

guaranteed to always remain spanning.)

Proposition 3. If V is finite, with u1 , . . . um V linearly independent, then

we can find um+1 , . . . , um+r such that u1 , . . . , um , um+1 , . . . , um+r is a basis.

Proof. Let {v1 , . . . , vn } be a basis of V . Then, {u1 , . . . , um , v1 , . . . , vn } spans

V . Now, throw out vectors as in Prop. 2s proof so that we get a basis. Note

that ui is never removed, because no ui is a linear combination of the previous

vectors by assumption of linear independence.

Proposition 4. If {v1 , . . . , vn } is a basis of V and if {w1 , . . . , wm } are linearly

independent, then m n.

Proof. Assume m 2 to throw out the trivial case. Then, {wm , v1 , . . . , vn }

is linearly dependent and spans V , so we have a subset {wm , vi1 , . . . , vik } that

will be a basis, because wm never goes. Do the same with wm1 and continue

until you reach {w2 , . . . , wm , vk1 , . . . , vks }. At each step, we replace at least

one vi with a wj , but at the end we still have at least one vi left, since w1 is

not a linear combination of the others. So, the number of steps is m 1 and

m 1 n 1 = m n.

Corollary.

Any two bases of a finite dimensional vector space have the same cardinality.

2.3

Dimension

|{1 , . . . , n } = n where {1 , . . . , n } is any basis of V .

Examples. 1 Dim(F n ) = n 2 Dim(Mm,n ) = m n 3 Dim(Pn ) = n + 1

It is important to note that the dimension of a vector space depends on what

field you are working over, so we should really write DimF (V ) when it might

be unclear. The canonical example here is that Dim(C) = 2 over R but 1 over

C.

Corollary. Let V be of dimension n. (1) hSi = V = |S| n with equality

only when S is a basis & (2) L V linearly independent implies |L| n

with equality only when L is a basis.

In other words, a basis is a minimal spanning set and a maximal linearly

independent set.

We now go to one last corollary. This one is not so easy, because it tricks you.

You will think spanning set when you should be thinking linear independence.

Corollary. Suppose V is finite-dimensional and W is a subspace of V (we may

write W < V for this in the future, in the spirit of group theory). Then, W is

Proof. Suppose w1 , . . . , wn is a linearly independent subset of W and W is

infinite dimensional. Then, there exists wm+1 W but not in hw1 , . . . , wm i,

because that span isnt W ,, but then we have {w1 , . . . , wm+1 } is still linearly

independent (by Prop. 1). In this way, we get an infinity of linearly independent

wi W , but these must also be independent in V (obvious), so we have a

contradiction, because V is finite.

The rest is left as an exercise.

10

Maps & Their Matrices

3.1

Zorns Lemma

The first part of this lecture, we will just be extending some results to the case of

infinite dimensional vector spaces. Note that linear independence for a (possibly

infinite) vector space is defined to be a finite subset of the space for which there

is no dependence relation.

Definition. Let I 6= be an index set and {Ai }iI be a family of non-empty

sets. A choice function

Q is any f : I iI Ai such that f (i) Ai i. The

Cartesian product iI

Q Ai is the set of all choice functions from I to Ai .

Elements are denoted iI ai , where i I. This means f takes i to ai for all

i I.

We now define the second most controversial axiom in mathematics (canonically formalized as ZFC set theory).

Definition. The axiom of choice states that choice functions exist. Equivalently, any family of non-empty sets has a non-empty Cartesian product.

Q

Note that when i is finite, iI Ai = A1 An , and its choice functions, which look like (f (1), . . . , f (n)) are just n-tuples of elements with the ith

component belonging to the ith set.

This is not nearly as tame an axiom as it may seem. It leads to all sorts

of odd matters, including the infamous Banach-Tarski paradox, but it is also

very important to prove some theorems we want, like that all vector spaces

have a basis. (I discussed the axiom of choice, whether I accept it, and why

in a Quora answer not too long ago, as did some other mathematically inclined individuals such as David Joyce at Clark, c.f. https://www.quora.com/

Do-you-believe-in-the-axiom-of-choice/answer/Joseph-Heavner?srid=

OteC.)

Let us quickly look at the most controversial axiom in the foundations of

mathematics, just for fun/culture: the axiom of infinity. As many know, we

construct the natural numbers by taking the empty set and saying it is 0, the

set containing it is 1, and so forth, i.e.,

0 ; {} 1 ; {, {}} 2 ; {, {}, {, {}}} 3 ;

The axiom of infinity says the collection of all of these things (natural numbers) form a set, N. Yet, one never sees infinite objects, and so this is somewhat

odd, and it leads to more weirdness with real numbers and cardinal infinities (or,

worse, ordinal infinities) and so forth; it is, however, also too important for most

mathematicians to want to let go of, because it weakens math substantially and

makes some things we know and love impossible or weird. (Some alternative

philosophies of math include finitism, intuitionism, and constructivism, and you

can look up N.J. Wildberger for an actual mathematician who believes in this

sort of thing and pushes hard for others to, too.)

We now define some things so that we can define Zorns lemma, which is

11

equivalent to the axiom of choice, even if we cannot prove that here. (It is

pretty hard to do, except maybe for the set theorists among us, but we always

knew those guys were, err, different Joe.)

Definition. A partially ordered set (poset) is a set A, which has a relation

on it, which is reflexive (x x x A), anti-symmetric (x y and y x =

x = y), and transitive (x y and y z implies x z).

Note that this is not a total order, so we do not have that any two elements

are comparable (i.e., that x y or y x for all x, y A).

Definition. A total order is a partial order such that if x, y A, then x y

or y x. B A is a chain if it is totally ordered.

Definition. B A has an upper bound M if b M for all b B.

Definition. a A is maximal if a x implies a = x for all x A.

Take A = P(R){R} (recall the power set is the set of all subsets) and let

be given by set inclusion. Then, the maximal elements of A are punctured lines,

i.e., R{x} for some x R, so that only one point is removed. (Not subtracting

by the reals makes the maximal element the reals themselves, clearly, and indeed

the power set of any set under set inclusion would have maximal element of the

whole set in this way.)

Definition. Zorns lemma states that if P 6= is a poset such that every chain

in P has an upper bound, then P has a maximal element.

While the axiom of choice is somewhat intuitive, this is not at all obvious.

It is, however, very important for us to transition from finite dimensional things

to infinite dimensional things (not that it always works), so we should try to

build some intuition for why it might be true.

Proto-Proof.

I am loosely borrowing Luries terminology here, because I wanted to distinguish this explanation, even if it is not the most revealing one of all time (not

at the fault of any person). We basically argue by contradiction. If P did not

have a maximal element, then any m1 would have m2 m1 and so forth to get

a chain

m1 m2

But, this being a chain means it has an upper bound, so there exists some

n1 mi i, and then we get another chain n1 n1 , and then we repeat

ad infinitum. In a sense, this does not seem desirable.

Anyway, we can get to what we have been trying to now. This is a tough

proof the first time around if you have not seen Zorns lemma before, but it is

very important, just as is knowing Zorns lemma. (I actually like Langs Algebra

for a reference on this, because it has a pretty decent appendix on set theory,

which covers Zorns lemma in some detail, and because I think this is a good

book for serious algebraic type people to have some familiarity with, anyway.)

12

3.2

Theorem. Any non-zero vector space (including the possibility that it has

infinite dimension) has a basis.

Proof.

Let P := {all linearly independent subsets C V } ordered by set inclusion.

We check that every chain in P has an upper bound. Let C be a chain in P .

We claim that

[

D :=

C

CC

Clearly, D contains C for all C C by construction. So, we just check that

D P , so that we know D is linearly independent. Choose v1 , . . . , vn D.

Then, vi Ci for some Ci C , 1 i n. Since C is a chain, we can totally

order C1 , . . . , Cn by inclusion. Let j [1, n] be such that

Cj =

n

[

Ci

i=1

v1 , . . . , vn are linearly independent. So, the chain has an upper bound given by

the union.

Whence, by Zorns lemma, P has a maximal element, B, which we claim is a

basis (think maximally linearly independent). Linear independence is given by

construction, so we need only show it spans V . If it did not span V , we could

choose v0 V Span(B) and see that B {v0 } is linearly independent. (Prove

this!) It also strictly contains B, but that contradicts the maximality of B in P ,

and we are done.

Similarly, one can show that any linearly independent subset S V can be

extended to a basis of V , even in the infinite dimensional case. Also, we can

handle infinite linearly independent sets and that sort of thing, but that is in

analysis, for instance in Hilbert or Banach spaces; infinite bases for these take

some care and are not well-suited for algebra.

But, we now move on to part two of this lecture, which covers linear maps

(transformations), which are the homomorphisms of vector spaces, i.e., the morphisms or structure preserving functions of vector spaces. As is always the case

with algebra (and math in general), these morphisms are key. Luckily, you

already have some familiarity with them from linear algebra.

3.3

T : V W is linear if it is additive (T (x+y) = T (x)+T (y)) and respects scalar

multiplication (T (cx) = cT (x)), or equivalently if T (cx + y) = cT (x) + T (y).

(c F and x, y V )

13

It is easy to see that T (0) = T (00) = 0T (0) = 0, where the only the second

and fourth zeros are the scalar zeros and where the last is the zero vector in W .

Examples.

1. Any m n matrix A with entries in F induces a linear transformation

TA : F n F m with TA (x) = Ax.

2. Conversely, if T : F n F m is any linear map, then there is a unique

A Mm,n (F ) such that T = TA , i.e., T (x) = Ax for all x F n .

Indeed, note that

T (x) = T

n

X

i=1

!

xi ei

n

X

x1

xi T (ei ) = (T (e1 ), . . . , T (en )) ...

i=1

xn

almost always use column vectors as to have left multiplication (f x, not

xf ), but you will live. Anyway, consider the example T (x, y) = (2x +

y, 3x

by the matrix (where the first column is

4y). This is represented

1

0

T(

) and the second is T (

)):

0

1

2 1

3 4

3. Let R be counterclockwise rotation by radians in R2 . Then, R : R2

R2 is represented by the matrix

(R (e1 ) R (e2 )) =

cos

sin

sin

cos

which can be seen by drawing the unit vectors and parametrizing the plane

as usual.

4. C (R) is the set of all infinitely differentiable real functions f : R R.

Clearly, this is a real vector space. Moreover, D : C (R) C (R) given

by D : f 7 f 0 is linear, because differentiation is linear.

Here is a good question. Why do we multiply matrices the way we do? This

is a good question, because the elementary theory gives no reason as to why we

should not just do array multiplication; however, matrices are not arrays: they

are linear transformations in disguise. Therefore, it makes sense that matrix

multiplication is defined to correspond with composition of linear maps. In particular, composition of the maps F p F n F m corresponds to multiplications

of the unique matrices which represent them.

Remark. T : V W is uniquely determined by the values T (b) for b B,

where B is any basis of V .

Proof. Clear

14

unique linear map T : V W so that T (vi ) = wi for all i I.

P

Proof. Given v V , write v uniquely as v = iI i vi (finite). Then,

!

X

X

T (v) = T

i v i =

i wi

iI

iI

Definition. For T : V W we define the kernel of T to be Ker(T ) := {v

V : T (v) = 0}. We define the image of T to be Im(T ) := {T (v) : v V }.

Proposition. Im(T ) is a subspace of W and Ker(T ) is a subspace of V .

Proof. Easy.

Worked Examples.

1. T : R3 R3 given by T (x, y, z) = (x y, y z, z x). Find the kernel and

the image.

Well, the kernel is the (x, y, z) so that every component is 0, which means

x y = 0 and y z = 0 and z x = 0, so clearly we have x = y = z, and so the

kernel are vectors of the form (x, x, x), which is the span h(1, 1, 1)i. The image,

however, is whatever we can get out. Rewriting the vectors, we get x(1, 0, 1) +

y(1, 1, 0) + z(0, 1, 1), which is spanned by (1, 0, 1), (1, 1, 0), (0, 1, 1), but

we can just throw out that last vector, because clearly they are linearly dependent. It turns out that we are then left with a basis {(1, 0, 1), (1, 1, 0)},

which obviously also describes the image.

2. Compute the image and the kernel of the map from C (R) to itself given

by differentiation.

It is instructive to do some work yourself. I will just say the kernel are the

constant functions, as they are those with derivative 0. (What spans this?) The

image is basically the fundamental theorem of calculus.

Also, oddly, we get a surjective map with a non-zero kernel, something which

does not happen in the finite case.

3.4

Preview

space and the image is called the column space (of A). The dimension of the

null space is the nullity; the dimension of the column space is the rank. We will

prove the important rank-nullity theorem, which says (for finite V , at least)

dim kerT + dim ImT = dimV

(Of course, you can translate this to nullity and rank as you please.)

15

Quotient Spaces

4.1

Isomorphisms

Proposition. T : V W a linear map, then (1) T injective iff ker T = {0} &

(2) T surjective iff Im T = W .

Proof.

The second part is basically the definition of surjectivity. As for (1), this is

a good fact to know, so we will prove it. If T is one-to-one, then let v ker T ,

and see that T (v) = 0 = T (0) but T is an injection so v = 0. For the other

direction, if v ker T is 0, then

T (v1 ) = T (v2 ) = T (v1 v2 ) = 0 = v1 v2 ker T = v1 = v2

Definition. A linear map T : V W is an isomorphism if there exists S :

W V such that S T = 1V and T S = 1W .

Theorem. Every vector space of dimension n is isomorphic to F n . (n = 0 is a

stupid case.)

Pn

Proof. Choose basis v1 , . . . , vn . Then, any v V is i=1 i vi . Define T : V

F n to be v 7 (1 , . . . , n ). It is left as an exercise to choose that this is linear

and has an inverse.

Examples.

1 : F n F n an isomorphism corresponds to invertible matrices in Mn (F )

(i.e., to GL(n, F )). This is easy to see once you have the correspondence between

linear maps between vector spaces and matrices.

2 F4

= P3

= M2,2 (R) given by mapping bases. Taking the standard ones,

we get

(e1 , e2 , e3 , e4 ) 7 (1, x, x2 , x3 ) 7

1

0

0

0

,

0

0

1

0

,

0

1

0

0

,

0

0

0

1

2

3

This

gives the classic identification of (a, b, c, d) with a + bx + cx + dx with

a b

.

c d

4.2

There are two notions of a direct product for vector spaces; these are intimately

related, and in practice they may even be considered the same.

Definition. Let V1 , V2 be vector spaces over F . The external direct sum

V1 V2 := {(v1 , v2 ) : v1 V1 , v2 V2 } with addition and scalar multiplication

defined component-wise.

Theorem. If V1 and V2 are finite dimensional, then dim(V1 , V2 ) = dim V1 +

dim V2 .

16

((v1 , 0), . . . , (vm , 0), (0, v10 ), . . . , (0, vn0 )) is a basis. (Prove!)

How would you define addition of vector subsets? Well, the obvious way is

to say that if A, B V , then A + B := {a + b : a A, b B}, but this is not

necessarily a subspace. (For that, we want A, B to be subspaces.)

Definition. U1 , U2 < V (subspaces), then we say V is the internal direct sum

of U1 , U2 if each v V has a unique expression as v = u1 + u2 for u1 inU1 and

u2 U2 .

Theorem. V

= U1 U2 with the isomorphism given by v = u1 +u2 7 (u1 , u2 ).

Proof.

Exercise

that, like we mentioned before, there is not a big distinction in practice between

these two technically different ideas, because internal direct products give rise

to external direct products and vice-versa.

Proposition. V = U1 U2 iff V = U1 + U2 (as a set) and U1 U2 = {0}. If

dim V < , then this is equivalent to V = U1 +U2 and dim U1 +dim U2 = dim V .

Proof. We begin with left implication. Suppose V = U1 + U2 but it is not

unique. Why must u1 = u01 and u2 = u02 ? Well, u1 u01 = u2 u02 lie in the

intersection, so both sides are zero, and whence the result follows. For right

implication, we clearly have V = U1 + U2 by definition, so we check that the

subspaces intersect trivially. Indeed, if u U1 U2 , then 0 + 0 = 0 = u + (u)

with u U1 and u U2 and by uniqueness we have u = 0.

Exercise.

a complement of U in V .

Theorem. For any vector space V with U < V , there exists U 0 < V such

that U U 0 = V , i.e., compliments exist.

Proof. Assume U 6= {0} and U 6= V . Let B1 be a basis of U . Then, B1 is

linearly independent in V and we can find a basis B2 V such that B1 B2 is

a basis of V . Set U 0 = hB2 i. It follows that V = U U 0 .

Example. If V = R2 and U = h(1, 1)i, then what are the complements of U ?

The answer is any other subspace, i.e., all lines through the origin not equal to

U.

Clearly, compliments are not unique. There is no canonical choice of complement, either, as least not without additional structure (e.g., if you give the

space an inner product, then orthogonality gives a canonical complement). We

now generalize these constructions to more than two vector spaces.

Definition.

If {Ui }iI is a family of vector spaces over F , then the direct

Q

product iI Ui is the Cartesian product of the Ui as sets with point-wise

17

addition

andQscalar multiplication, i.e.,

Q

iI ai = iI ai .

iI

ai +

iI

bi =

iI

ai + bi and

just

Qanother notation for Cartesian product, really, so we use both) consisting

of ai with only finitely many non-zero ai .

These really are different in the extension. The direct product

is much, much

L

larger than the direct sum, for instance. Note that V =P iI Ui if and only if

each v V has a unique expression as a finite sum v = i ai with ai Ui .

L

Example. Let B = {bi } be a basis of V . Then, V = iI F bi (this is weird

notation, but F is justLthe set of elements from the field, so we really have the

span of {bi }), so V

i IF (6= F i ) where all but finitely are zero.

=

Theorem. There is an analogue of the criterion

in the finite case. V =

Pn

Ln

i=1 Ui and Ui U1 + + Ui + + Un = 0

for all i. (As usual, the hat denotes exclusion.)

Proof. This theorem is boring enough, kinda ugly to look at. It is not hard to

see, though, so we will not prove it.

4.3

Quotient Spaces

It is much nicer to speak of vector spaces than groups or most other categories

when it comes to quotients. We can draw nice pictures, and who doesnt love

pictures? A picture is worth a thousand words, right? Here is the idea. Take

some U R2 . There are many, albeit no canonical, compliments. So, we make

a set of all lines parallel to U into a vector space, R2 /U , which essentially plays

the role of a canonical compliment (even though it is not actually a subspace!).

(Draw this. I would, but I am too lazy to make a nice picture, and it is not

complicated enough for me to want to expose you to a crappy MS Paint drawing.) We add lines by choosing v1 `1 and v2 `2 l adding and considering

the unique line through that point parallel to U as `1 + `2 = `3 . (Similarly

for multiplication.) The magic is that this is actually independent of choice of

v1 , v2 ! (Alternatively, we could define the addition with the set addition A + B

from before.)

We now digress a bit to review equivalence relations.

Definition. A relation on a set S is an equivalence relation if and only if

is (1) reflexive (x x), (2) symmetric (x y = y x), (3) transitive (x y

and y z means x z).

Definition. An equivalence class of x S under the relation is denoted

Cx or [x] and is defined as [x] := {y S : y x}. (Note that this is always

non-empty, as x [x].)

Examples.

1 If R, then 1 2 if and only if 1 2 = 2k , k Z. So, []

points on the unit circle.

2 Define S := {all days, numbered} (clearly this is a loose one). Then, day

1 is equivalent to day 2 if and only if the days are equivalent mod 7, i.e., if day 1

- day 2 is divisible by 7. The equivalence classes are just Monday, . . . , Sunday.

18

equivalent to x y.

Proof.

Exercise.

Consequently, {Cx } form a partition of S (i.e., they cover S`and are pairwise

disjoint), and conversely any partition of S is a disjoint union CC C (that notation just means the union is disjoint, it comes from the fact that the coproduct

in Set is just this) gives rise to n equivalence relation x y x, y C. So,

the equivalence classes are obviously the C C.

Definition.

mod .

We have a nice picture for this, whereby the modding out by collapses

points considered equal under the relation to mere points.

U . (Check this is an equivalence relation.) This corresponds to the example

before (x, y lie on ` k U ). Equivalence classes of x V are cosets x + U :=

{x + u : u U } (translating the vector U by x). The quotient V /U is then

given by {x + U : x V }, which is just V / as a set, but it has operations

(x + U ) + (y + U ) := (x + y) + U and (x + U ) := x + U .

The notations are a bit weird, because we must choose a representative.

Therefore, we should check that this is well-defined.

Theorem.

(x + U ) + (y + U ) = (x0 + U ) + (y 0 + U ). This is given because x x0 =

subspace

x x0 U = (x + y) (x0 + y 0 ) = (x x0 ) + (y y 0 ) U . Similarly,

multiplication is well-defined.

19

4.4

Preview

Next time, we will look at the isomorphism theorems, as they appear on the

p-set.

20

Properties

with (u0 ) = u0 + V is an isormorphism.

Proof. The map is linear by construction, so we need only show it is a

bijection. We first show injection. ker = 0, because u0 ker = (u0 ) =

0V /U = u0 + U = U , but u0 U = u0 U U 0 = {0}. It is surjective

essentially

beause we can write every v V uniquely as u + u0 , since V =

L 0

U

U . So, (u0 ) = u0 + U = (v u) + U = v + U .

The converse of this theorem is not true, but we do have a nice corollary.

Corollary.

Proof.

Example. Let A Mm,n (F ), b F m , and S := {x F n : Ax = b}. Either S

is empty, or S is a coset of H = Null(A). Indeed, if x0 S, then S = x0 + H.

5.1

Isomorphism Theorems

Theorem.

V / ker f

= Imf .

Proof.

we must have that f (v) = f (v 0 ). This is true since that is equivalence to saying

v v 0 ker f = f (v v 0 ) = 0 = f (v 0 ) = f (v), where f is linear, and so if

Corollary.

dim V .

Proof.

= Im(f ).

This gives a method for problems: to prove an isomorphism between a quotient V /U and V , find a surjective linear map f : V W where ker f = U . In

practice, we never construct actual isomorphisms for quotients.

Theorem. (The Second Isomorphism Theorem.) If M, N < V , then we have

(M + N )/M

= N/(M N ).

21

thinks it is boring, but Joe will write out the proof given in class, anyway.

Consider f : N (M + N )/M where f (n) = n + M (the m is absorbed). This

is clearly linear. Check that ker f = M N as follows.

def

The map is a surjection, because if you take a general (m + n) + M , you get

f (n) = n + M = m + n + M = (m + n) + M .

Corollary. If M, N are finite subspaces of a vector space V , then so is M +N ,

then dim(M + N ) + dim(M N ) = dim M + dim N .

Proof.

There are other theorems with the name isomorphism theorem, but Tamvakis has chosen to cover just these two, thankfully.

5.2

Universal Properties

We have officially arrived at our first hint of category theory for the year. I have

decided to add a bit more than was in class; in particular, I define a category

in full and give four examples.

Definition.

A category C consists of the following data: a class of objects, denoted Obj(C); a class of morphisms (arrows) between objects, denoted

Hom(a, b) (or M or(a, b)) for objects a, b C (an abuse of notation); a composition law of sorts so that Hom(b, c) Hom(a, b) Hom(a, c) for all objects

a, b, c for which two conditions hold: (i) associativity and (ii) the existence of

identities for all objects x.

In a sense, Tamvakis says this is all just a change of notation. Around the

end of the nineteenth century we began to think of maps taking precedence

over objects, of a function being a map between sets, but this is where we

only care about the maps (even calling them arrows), and basically ignore the

objects all together. Category theory has been affectionately (as well as not so

affectionately) described as abstract nonsense. It, like homological algebra

which uses category-theoretic methods heavily, has a lot of diagram chasing.

I will now draw a simple commutative diagram (using the diagrams package,

which can be found on Paul Taylors site), which represents a category, its

objects (A, B, C, D) and the maps between them; we have left out the identity

maps A A, B B, etc.

A

>B

d

C

>D

We say this diagram commutes, because we can follow maps two different

ways to get to the same object, i.e., because d b = c a. (Hence the name

22

objects as sets and arrows as functions, Grp, which has groups as objects and

arrows as homomorphisms, Top, which has topological spaces as objects and

continuous maps as arrows, and Vect k , which has vector spaces over the field k

as objects and linear maps as arrows. All of these are realized in concrete ways.

The arrows are just maps as we know and love, but categories need not be so.

The classic example here talks about posets, which I encourage you to look up

in, e.g., Evan Chens An Infinitely Large Napkin.

We now return to the lecture proper. We introduce universal properties by

looking at examples of them. The best one we have seen is that the quotient

space V /U comes with a canonical map : v 7 v + W . We wont really define

universal properties at all, at least not in general, but you should get a feel for

what they are. The formal definition is somewhat complicated and much more

categorically involved than we would like to get.

5.2.1

In this case, we have a universal property because we have a pair (V /U, ) that

satisfies the following conditions: (i) U ker (actually, we even have equality

here), (ii) for any pair (W, f ) of a vector space and a linear map f : V W

such that U ker f there exists a unique linear map f : V /U W such that

> V /U

..

..

.f

f > ...

We often draw a little curly arrow in the middle of the diagram to indicate

the direction in which one should read it to see the commutativity, but Joe sucks

at drawing commutative diagram in LATEX as it is. The dotted line indicates

that the map is induced by the others, i.e., given the others there exists a unique

Generally speaking, given a diagram and another copy of it with perhaps

certain conditions, there exists a unique set of induced arrows such that all the

triangles commute.

Proof.

have to check the map is well-defined. Well, v + U = v 0 + U implies v v 0 U

implies v v 0 ker f , which gives the result. (This is why the condition with

the kernel is required.)

Fundamentally, universal properties characterize the objects and morphisms

that obey them up to isomorphism via abstract nonsense . . . Oh, what the hell,

23

let us go ahead and quickly run through it. (Tamvakis did not use this language.

That would be moi.)

Consider

V /U

..

..

f

- .... f

?

W

..

..6

..

..

..

...

..

.

I hope to fix this eventually. Parallel arrows do not like me.) Suppose (W, f :

V W ) were also universal. (Well, it is a gadget in the diagram.) Then,

U ker f , but then there must be so it commutes both ways. We claim that

V

V /U

..

..

- ... id

.?

V /U

..

..

..

..

.. f

...

..

..?

And the uniqueness condition gives that f = id. The other way is

analogous.

5.2.2

Q

There exist canonical projection morphisms i : Ui Ui . So, the universal

property is: forQany V and morphisms fi : V Ui , there exists a unique

map f Q

: V

Ui so that i f = fi i. We are basically forced to have

f (v) = fi (v).

Y

5.2.3

Ui > Ui

<.....

.... f

i

..

!f .....

V

We will see once more that this really is technically distinct from the direct

product; in particular, arrows are reversed! There are canonical inclusions i :

Ui , Ui . The property is that for any V and linear maps gi : Ui V there

exists a unique map f : UP

that f i = fi for all i. Again, something

i V soP

is forced. In particular, f ( ui ) =

fi ui is forced. (Note that all but finitely

many ui are 0.

24

Ui < Ui

....

....

...

fi

...

!f ..>

V

25

6.1

{T : V W } where each map is linear. The operations are point-wise so that

(S + T )(v) = S(v) + T (v) and (S(v)) = (S)(v).

F n and W =

F m . Using these and

If dim V = n and dim W = m, then V =

n

m

representations T TA of any T Hom(F , F ) by the matrix A, we identify

Hom(V, W )

= Mm,n (F ), implying dim Hom(V, W ) = mn.

Definition. If W = F in the Hom construction above, we get the dual space

V := Hom(V, F ) of linear functionals V F .

Definition. Assuming dim V = n < and B = (v1 , . . . , vn ) a basis of

V , we construct the dual basis (v1 , . . . , vn ) for V by setting vi (vj ) = ij for

i, j = 1, . . . , n (the Kronecker delta, which is 0 except where i = j).

Theorem.

Proof.

!

n

X

i vi (vj ) = 0 j

i =

i vi = 0, then

i=1

Clearly, the dimension of the dual space is n, and so we have n linearly independent vectors, i.e., a basis.

We obtain an isomorphism V V by sending one basis to another, but this

is not canonical, as it depends on the bases. There is a canonical isomorphism

: V V given by x 7 x

where x

(f ) = f (x) F . Clearly, this is canonical.

Theorem.

Proof. The map is clearly linear. Since dim V = dim V < by assumption, it suffices to show that ker = {0}. Suppose x 6= 0. We find

f V = x

(f ) = f (x) 6= 0. Relabel x := v V . Extend v to a basis v, v2 , . . . , vn of V . Then, v , v2 , . . . , vn is a dual basis and f := v with

v (v) = 1 6= 0.

6.2

Coordinate Systems

Let V be a real vector space (real just for simplicity this generalizes to

any field). Choose an ordered basis B = (b1 , . . . , bn ) of V . The basis induces

a coordinate isomorphism betweenV

and Rn given by V (V )B where if

x1

v = x1 b+ + xn bn , then (v)B = ... . If B 0 = (b01 , . . . , b0n ) is another basis

xn

26

Theorem. The coordinate vector (v)B0 = (x1 b1 + + xn bn )B0 = (id)B,B0 (v)B

where (id)B,B0 has ((b1 )B0 , . . . , (bn )B0 ) is the change of basis matrix.

Note that (id)B0 ,B = (id)1

B,B0 .

Example.

1. Let B be a basis for Rn . Let E = (e1 , . . . , en ) be as usual. Then,

1

(id)E,B = (id)1

B,E = (b1 , . . . , bn )

1

3

2

2

2. Let B =

,

R . Let v =

. We have

2

4

2

(id)B,B =

So, (v)B =

6.3

1

2

4

2

1

2

3

4

1

=

1

2

4

2

3

.

1

3

2

1

=

and v = b2 b1 .

1

2

1

C = (c1 , . . . , cm ) be a basis of W . Then, we can assign the matrix (T )B,C to

T (dependent on B and C, of course) such that (T (v))C = (T )B,C (v)B for all

v V . We then get the following diagram.

Rn

>W

> Rm

TA

Above the vertical maps are given by the coordinate maps and the map TA

is the linear map corresponding to the matrix A = (T )B,C .

x1

To find the matrix A, write T (v) = T (x1 b1 + + xn bn )(v)B = ... and

xn

(T (v))C = (x1 T (b1 ) + xn T (bn ))C so that

(T )B,C = ((T (b1 ))C , . . . , (T (bn ))C )

Now the notation (id)B,B should make some sense. One brief notational

note: suppose T : V V be a linear map and B a basis of V ; then, we might

denote (T )B,B by (T )B for convenience.

Example.

1. Let T : P2 P3 be a linear transformation given by f (x) 7 (2x + 5)f (x)

with B, C the standard bases on their respective vector spaces. Find (T )B,C

and compute (2x + 5)(1 3x + 4x2 ).

27

(T )B,C

5

2

=

0

0

0

5

2

0

5

0

0

& T (1 3x + 4x2 ) = 2

0

5

0

2

0

5

2

0

0

5

1

0

3 = 13

14

5

4

2

3

so that A = (T )E,E 0 = (T (e1 ), . . . , T (en )). Let B be a basis for Rn , C a basis

for Rm . We then have a sequence of maps

(v)B

(id)B,E

(v)E (T (v))E 0

(id)E 0 ,C

(T (v))C

Corollary. If A0 := P AQ for P, Q invertible (non-singular), then A0 is represented by the matrix TA with respect to the bases B = (q1 , . . . ,n ) and

C = (p1 , . . . , pn )1 . When B = C on Rn we get T (x) = Ax that (T )B =

(id)E,B A (id)B,E = P 1 AP where P = (b1 , . . . , bn ), and conversely.

Definition. Matrices A, B Mn (R) are similar if and only if there exists

P GL(n, R) such that A = P 1 BP .

So, similar matrices represent the same linear maps with respect to different

coordinate systems.

Question. By changing bases B, C how simple (interpret as you will) can we

make (T )B,C in general?

We, the students, all failed to get this correct. Granted, this was about

two minutes of throwing out ideas as simple from the identity to as complex as

mentioning the Jordan canonical form and so forth, which is actually in some

sense harder than this.

Theorem.

that

(T )B,C =

Ir

0

0

For all

(R) there exists P GL(n, R) amd Q GL(m, R)

A Mn

Ir 0

such that P AQ =

Corollary.

Proof. Let u1 , . . . , uk be a basis for ker T . Extend this to a basis (v1 , . . . , vr , U1 , . . . uk )

of V where r + k = n. Set wi = T (vi ) for 1 i r. The wi span ImT , which

has dimension r, so they are linearly independent. Extend to a basis of W :

(w1 , . . . , wr , `1 , . . . `s ) = C. Then, (T )B,C is as desired.

Let f : Mn (F ) F be any function such that f (A) = f (P 1 AP ) for all

P GL(n, F ), then f makes sense for linear transformations T Hom(V, V ).

28

T Hom(V, V ) if and only if there exists a v 6= 0 in V we have T (v) = v.

That v is called an eigenvector, or specifically a -eigenvector of T .

This happens if and only if ker(T I) 6= 0 so that T I is singular (not

invertible). (Check this by taking the determinant to be 0.) Of course, we have

not rigorously spoken about determinants, but we will eventually in much more

generality than vector spaces.

Theorem. The quantity det( AI) is equivalent to (1)n det(I A) where

A Mn (F ).

Proof.

Omitted.

Definition. The characteristic polynomial p(x) := det(I A) (note that

others might define this to be det(A I), which differs by most by sign) where

A is a matrix of the linear transformations T : V V with respect to some

bases.

So, the eigenvalues of T are the roots of p(x), and the eigenvalues of a

triangular matrix (look this up if you do not know what it means) are its diagonal

entries.

Exercise. Check that p(x) is independent of basis. So, if A B (similar), then

pA (x) = pB (x).

det(I P AP P 1) = det(P (I A)P 1 ) = det(I A)

Theorem. The characteristic polynomial p(x) of a linear map T with associated matrix A can be written

p(x) = xn (TrA)xn1 + + (1)n det A

Proof.

Omitted.

The hard part is obviously what the coefficients of the middle terms are.

We will see this later. (One guess involved minors, which is right to an extent.)

The answer is that ck = Tr(k A) where k is the kth exterior power. Have fun

trying to make something of that at this point, though.

3 2 0

Example. The -eigenspace V is the kernel of T I. Take A = 1 4 0.

0 0 2

1 2 0

Compute p(x) to be (x2)2 (xt), so that V2 = ker(A2I) = Null 1 2 0 =

0 0 0

2

0

1

h1 , 0i and similarly V5 = h1i.

0

1

0

Nota Bene. These note are a bit scrambled; hopefully, I will fix the ordering

later.

29

at most n eigenvalues.

Corollary. If F = C is the base field of the vector space V and v 6= 0, then T

has at least one eigenvalue and hence one eigenvector.

0 1

Example. The matrix R90 =

with p(x) = x2 + 1 has no real roots.

1 0

30

Nota Bene. I actually missed class this day, so thank you to Robert Adkins (the

fellow undergraduate in class) for the notes. The end of his notes for the last

lecture also made it in (the last few sentences), because I could not read what

I wrote.

7.1

eigenvectors of T . In this case, (T )B is a diagonal matrix (only entries are along

main diagonal). A matrix A Mn (F ) is diagonizable if TA is, i.e., if A is similar

to a diagonal matrix.

Proposition. If v1 , . . . , vk V are eigenvectors of T : V V corresponding to distinct eigenvalues, then {v1 , . . . , vn } is linearly independent; hence,

eigenspaces Vi are linearly independent.

Pr1

Proof. If the claim fails, then there is some r > 1 so that vr = i=1 ai vi

with v1 , . . . vr1 are linearly independent (say a1 6= 0) and apply T : r vr =

Pr1

Pr1

P

ai (i r )vi = 0,

i=1 i vi . Also, r vr =

i=1 a1 r vi . Subtraction yields

which implies a1 (i r ) = 0, which means either a1 = 0 or i = r , both of

which are contradictions.

Theorem. Let T : V V be a linear map with dim V < . Let 1 , . . . , k be

distinct eigenvalues of T and let Wi = ker(T i I) = Vi . Then, the following

are equivalent:

1. T is diagonizable.

2. The characteristic

polynomial of T factors as a product of linear factors,

Q

i.e., p(x) = i (x i )di , and di = dim Wi , so the dimension of each

eigenspace is the multiplicity of the corresponding eigenvalue in p(x).

L

L

3. V = W1 Wk .

Proof.

(1) = (2) If

A=

i

..

.

i

..

.

k

..

.

k

1 )d1 (x k )dk . (Sorry for my crappy block matrix.)

31

P proposition

P above shows that W1 + + Wk is direct.

Hence, (2) implies i dim Wi = di = dim V , and so (3) follows.

(3) = (1) Form a basis B of V by concatenating bases of W1 , . . . , Wk .

Then, that is a basis of eigenvectors, so T is diagonizable by definition.

Note that in general ei := dim Wi mult(i ). This is because T (Wi ) Wi ,

so we can find a basis of V such that

..

.

i

Corollary.

If A Mn (F ) and B = (b

1 , . . . , bn ) is abasis of eigenvectors for A

1

..

with eigenvalues 1 , . . . , k and P =

, then A = BP B 1 . This

.

k

is because (A)E = (id)B,E (A)B (id)E,B , e.g.,

Example.

3

1

0

1

2 0

4 0 = 1

0

02

2

1

0

5

0

0

1

1

1

0

2

2

1

0

1

0

0

1

Theorem. (a) Let T : V V be a linear transformation where V is a complex

vector space. Then, there is a basis B of V such that (T )B is upper triangular.

(b) Any A Mn (C) is similar to an upper triangular matrix.

Proof. We proceed by induction on n = dim V . We know T has an eigenvector

v1 with

eigenvalue 1 . Extend

this to a basis B = (v1 , . . . vk ) of V , Then,

1

0

(T )B = .

. In matrix form, this means given A Mn (C)

..

R

there exists invertible P with P AP 1 = (T )B . By the induction hypothesis,

there exists Q GL(n 1, C) such that QRQ1 is upper triangular. Set

32

1

0

Q1 := .

..

0

Q

. Then,

1

(Q1 P )A(Q1 P )1 = Q1 (P AP 1 )Q1

1 = Q1 (T )B Q1

1

0

= .

..

Later we will see that there is a canonical representative in each similarity

class of Mn (C), the Jordan form. Henceforth in this lecture, we will always

restrict the base field to be R or C unless otherwise stated.

Definition. Let V be a real vector space. An inner product on V is a function

h, i >: V V R that is (i) linear in the first variable (hax, yi = ahx, yi and

hx + y, zi = hx, zi + hy, zi), (ii) symmetric (hx, yi = hy, xi), (iii) positive definite

(hv, vi 0 with equality only when x = 0).

Definition. For the complex numbers, the hermitian inner product is a map

h, i : V V C such that (i), (ii), and (iii) above held, except that (ii) is altered

so that hv, wi = hw, vi. Hence, a hermitian inner product is conjugate linear in

y 0 i.

the second variable hx, y + y 0 i = hx, yi + hx,

Example.

33

- Network Coding TheoryЗагружено:Matohatom
- Math 730 (Graduate Topology, UMD) Notes (Sept. 2016)Загружено:Joseph Heavner
- Principles of Topology [Croom] 9812432884Загружено:quills40
- Math 630 (Graduate Real Analysis, UMD) Notes (September 2016)Загружено:Joseph Heavner
- Zill Complex Analysis Solutions 3 (Misc, Ch. 2.5-3.2 without 2.7)Загружено:Joseph Heavner
- Zill Complex Analysis (ed 2) Solutions 4 (Chapter 4.1-4.4)Загружено:Joseph Heavner
- Elliptic Curves - Physics Research Interaction Team, UMD, 2016 - NotesЗагружено:Joseph Heavner
- [T. W. Korner] a Companion to Analysis a Second F(BookFi.org)Загружено:saradha_ramachandran
- A Nonlinear Grey BoxЗагружено:stefanovicana1
- University of Chicago CALC16300 Script 15Загружено:First Second
- 3AbonusBЗагружено:JAy
- Problem Set 1Загружено:maims plap
- M2 Lecture 3Загружено:Vlad Alexandru
- ps6Загружено:Gurvir Singh
- Gale TransformЗагружено:Pablo Soberón Bravo
- MonstersЗагружено:Anonymous TmId1PX5kf
- Time DomainЗагружено:FayazKhanPathan
- Springer 2008 Vedaldi AЗагружено:Abdul Dakkak
- 3.3-3.4Загружено:Jets Campbell
- Matrix TutorialЗагружено:widelto
- 9231_w02_erЗагружено:Avnish Chummun
- ZH013633638Загружено:Anonymous 7VPPkWS8O
- Orthogonal MatricesЗагружено:Hemant
- 105台聯大考科綱要及參考書目Загружено:Vincent Bold
- Ojo_MOR.pdfЗагружено:lekan4
- Coursera, Everything is the Same - Lecture 11Загружено:Joanne
- functional_analysis_pdf.pdfЗагружено:ali
- EE511 HW1 Review of Matrices F13Загружено:Neeru Singh
- Dls Cartier Ch 2Загружено:William Agudelo
- Chap12_Sec2 [Compatibility Mode]Загружено:sam

- Electromagnetism MIT 8.022Загружено:RossoVerdi
- Elliptic Curves - Physics Research Interaction Team, UMD, 2016 - NotesЗагружено:Joseph Heavner
- Notes - Demystifying the Higgs Boson With Leonard SusskindЗагружено:Joseph Heavner
- Leontief Input-Output Model Example ProblemЗагружено:Joseph Heavner
- MAT-208-H Chapter 1.10 Problem Set SolutionsЗагружено:Joseph Heavner
- Companion to Lang's Algebra (G. Bergman)Загружено:Joseph Heavner
- A Non-Standard Proof of Clairaut's Theorem for the Symmetry of Partial DerivativesЗагружено:Joseph Heavner
- The Special and General Linear GroupsЗагружено:Joseph Heavner
- Isomorphisms in Linear Algebra: A Formal ApproachЗагружено:Joseph Heavner
- Zill Complex Analysis (ed 2) Solutions 4 (Chapter 4.1-4.4)Загружено:Joseph Heavner
- Markov Chain Example ProblemЗагружено:Joseph Heavner
- Proof of Euler's Formula (problem posed in Zill's Complex Analysis)Загружено:Joseph Heavner

## Гораздо больше, чем просто документы.

Откройте для себя все, что может предложить Scribd, включая книги и аудиокниги от крупных издательств.

Отменить можно в любой момент.