Linear Transformation from R^m to R^n: Mapping Scalars to Vectors

In summary, the conversation discusses the concept of a linear transformation from R^m to R^n and how it can be represented using a matrix. It also raises questions about interpreting the transformation as a vector field and finding max and min points, as well as understanding the properties of the range of the transformation. The conversation ends with a discussion about which field of study would be most helpful in understanding these concepts.
  • #1
dumbQuestion
125
0
Can we think of a linear transformation from R^m-->R^n as mapping scalars to vectors?

Let me say what I mean. Say we have some linear transformation L from R^m to R^n which can be represented by a matrix as follows:

L=[ a11x1+a12x2+...+a1mx m
a21x1+...
.
.
.
anmx1+...+ anmxm ](sorry for that ridiculous representation, just wasn't sure how to write it in this forum). Anyway its supposed to be the general representation of some nXm matrix.So this takes as imputs scalars (x1,x2,...,xn) and gives as output:

L(x1,x2,...,xn)=(a11x1+a12x2+...+a1nx n, a21x1+a22x2+...+ a2nxn,...,an1x1+...+anmxm)isn't this just like saying:

L(x1,x2,...,xn)=(a11x1+a12x2+...+a1nxn)i + (a21x1+a22x2+...+a2nxn)j,+...+,(an1x1+...+anmxm))t *(not sure what standard vector you would use if its n dimensional, i only know i j and k so i just randomly chose the letter t)So can't we think of the transformation like a vector field? Isn't this what the gradient ∇ does? (takes a scalar field and transforms it to a vector field) Now, we can't take the gradient of a vector field right, so how can we go about finding max and min points then? Because they occur when the gradient is 0 but how can I really think of the gradient of this?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2


You could, but if you do that, interpreting the separate components of the vector in Rn as individual numbers, and the components in Rm as vectors, you lose important information- especially if you want to consider changing coordinate systems.

Better to think of the function as a matrix multiplication: y= Mx where, because x has n rows and y has m columns, M is a matrix with n columns and m rows.
 
  • #3


But what if my goal is to learn things about say, the space this is mapped to. For example, say I have for example a closed bounded subset in R^m, O, and I want to look at L(O) (the transformation of O into R^n using my linear transformation L). Say I want to learn things about that range. For example min and max properties. I'm just kind of confused how I would say, take the gradient of that space to find that stuff out, or get to know properties about what's going on on the boundary. An example being say I have a transformation T that's mapping points in R^3 to points in R^2. So this can be represented as a 2X3 matrix. Now say I just want to evaluate T(C) where C is, say, a closed ball of radius epsilon. Now I want to know things about the output of this, like the min and max that we find in T(C).Is this a linear algebra question? Or a calculus question? Or a topology question? I'm just not sure where to look to study and understand this or maybe what theorems I should look at to understand it more?
 
Last edited:
  • #4


Then you don't want to think of mapping numbers to vectors, you want to map points to vectors. And you can do that by assuming that each vector starts at the origin and then taking each vector to indicate the point at its tip.
 

Related to Linear Transformation from R^m to R^n: Mapping Scalars to Vectors

1. What is a linear transformation?

A linear transformation is a mathematical function that maps one vector space to another in a way that preserves the linear structure of the original space. In simpler terms, it is a mapping that transforms one set of vectors into another set of vectors while maintaining their geometric properties, such as direction and magnitude.

2. What is the difference between R^m and R^n?

R^m refers to a vector space with m dimensions, while R^n refers to a vector space with n dimensions. In other words, R^m represents a set of m-tuples or m-dimensional vectors, while R^n represents a set of n-tuples or n-dimensional vectors. The difference lies in the number of components or variables used to describe the vectors in each space.

3. How is a linear transformation represented?

A linear transformation from R^m to R^n is typically represented by a matrix of size n x m. Each column of the matrix represents the transformation of the corresponding basis vector in R^m, and the resulting vector in R^n is obtained by multiplying the matrix with the original vector.

4. What are scalars and vectors in linear transformation?

In linear transformation, scalars refer to the numerical coefficients that are multiplied with the vectors to produce a new vector. Vectors, on the other hand, refer to elements of a vector space that have both magnitude and direction and can be transformed by a linear transformation.

5. How are linear transformations useful in real life applications?

Linear transformations have numerous applications in various fields, such as engineering, physics, computer graphics, and economics. They are used to model and analyze physical systems, compress and manipulate images, and solve systems of equations, to name a few. They are also essential in machine learning and data analysis, where they are used to transform and manipulate data for better analysis and predictions.

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
6
Views
929
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
0
Views
466
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
4
Views
930
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
15
Views
677
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top