Section 44.4 Examples
In this section.
Subsection 44.4.1 Computing with compositions
Example 44.4.1. Computing the image of a composition.
Consider
defined by
Then the composition is
What is the image vector under the composition for
Compute:
So
Example 44.4.2. Computing input-output formulas for a composition.
Consider
where \(D\) is differentiation, \(E_3\) is evaluation at \(x = 3\text{,}\) and \(T\) is defined by
We can compute an input-output formula for the composition \(S = T E_3 D\) by
Subsection 44.4.2 Checking and computing inverses
Example 44.4.3. Determining whether a transformation is invertible.
Consider \(\funcdef{T}{\R^4}{\matrixring_{2\times 3}(\R)}\) defined by
Does \(T\) have an inverse transformation \(funcdef{T}{\im T}{\R^4}\text{?}\) We can use the kernel to investigate:
We could use row reducing to solve this homogeneous system, but it should be clear that we cannot have both \(a = d\) and \(a = - d\) simultaneously unless both \(a,d\) are zero, and similarly for \(b\) and \(c\text{.}\)
Therefore, since \(\ker T = \{\zerovec\}\text{,}\) \(T\) is one-to-one and an inverse \(\funcdef{\inv{T}}{\im T}{\R^4}\) exists.
Example 44.4.4. Computing inverse images.
Let's continue with the invertible transformation \(T\) from Example 44.4.3. What is the inverse image
First, recall that \(\inv{T}\) is only defined on \(\im T\text{.}\) Is the matrix used as input to \(\inv{T}\) above actually in \(\im T\text{?}\) Attempting to compute its inverse image will answer the question for us — if we are able to come to a solution, then it must be in \(\im T\text{,}\) and if we find that there is no solution, then it must not be in \(\im T\text{.}\) As usual, attempting to solve for the inverse image will lead to a linear system, and we know how to determine when a system has solutions or not (Proposition 2.5.6).
The inverse image we would like to calculate (if it exists) will be precisely the \(\R^4\) vector that satisfies
from which we obtain linear system
This system can be converted to an augmented matrix and reduced, leading to one unique solution
hence
Subsection 44.4.3 Checking surjectivity
The easiest way to determine surjectivity of a transformation is to use the Dimension Theorem to establish the dimension of the image.
Example 44.4.5. Determining whether a transformation is surjective.
In Example 44.4.3, we found that a transformation \(\funcdef{T}{\R^4}{\matrixring_{2\times 3}(\R)}\) had trivial kernel. Using the Dimension Theorem, we must then have
and so
Since \(\im T\) is a subspace of the codomain space \(\matrixring_{2 \times 3}(\R)\text{,}\) Statement 3 of Proposition 20.5.8 tells us that it is not possible for \(T\) to be surjective.
Subsection 44.4.4 Defining isomorphisms by choice of bases
Example 44.4.6. Creating an isomorphism by sending a domain space basis to a codomain space basis.
Let's create an isomorphsm \(\funcdef{T}{\R^4}{\matrixring_2(\R)}\) by sending the standard basis for \(\R^4\) to some nonstandard basis of \(\matrixring_2(\R)\text{:}\)
We can determine an input-ouput formula for \(T\) by expanding an arbitrary input as a linear combination of the standard basis of \(\R^4\text{,}\) and using the linearity of \(T\text{:}\)
Similarly to Example 44.4.3, it is easy to check that this transformation is one-to-one by verifying that the kernel is trivial. Then, using the Dimension Theorem, we must have
from which we can conclude that \(T\) must be surjective as well. Together, trivial kernel and full image tells us that \(T\) is indeed an isomorphism.
Example 44.4.7. A geometric example: rotation in \(\R^3\).
Rotation around an axis should be an isomorphism of \(\R^3\) onto \(\R^3\text{,}\) as every vector in \(\R^3\) can be realized as the rotated image of one unique “input” vector.
Let \(\funcdef{T}{\R^3}{\R^3}\) represent counter-clockwise rotation by \(\pi/2\) around the axis through the origin and parallel to the vector
where “counter-clockwise” is considered as one looks “downward” along \(\uvec{n}\) back toward the origin. Let's set up an orthogonal basis of \(\R^3\) that will help describe \(T\text{,}\) beginning with the axis \(\uvec{n}\text{.}\) It will be easiest to analyze rotation around \(\uvec{n}\) using vectors in the plane normal to \(\uvec{n}\text{.}\) So let's guess a vector
that is parallel to this plane (which we can verify by computing \(\dotprod{\uvec{n}}{\uvec{v}_1} = 0\)). Now, since \(T\) rotates by \(\pi/2\text{,}\) it will be convenient to take another vector in the normal plane that is also orthogonal to \(\uvec{v}_1\text{.}\) We could use Gram-Schmidt to do this, but instead we'll use the cross product to be able to use the right-hand rule to control the direction (“positive” or “negative”) of the result. Use the right-hand rule to convince yourself that
will be counter-clockwise (relative to \(\uvec{n}\) as described above) from \(\uvec{v}_1\text{.}\)
Finally, we need to adjust \(\uvec{v}_1, \uvec{v}_2\) to be the same length, as vectors shouldn't change length as they rotate. However, instead of normalizing both to unit vectors, we can compute that \(\uvec{v}_2\) is \(\sqrt{14}\) times as long as \(\uvec{v}_1\text{,}\) so let's redefine \(\uvec{v}_1\) to be
We now have an orthogonal basis \(\basisfont{B} = \{ \uvec{n}, \uvec{v}_1, \uvec{v}_2 \} \) of \(\R^3\text{.}\) Since \(T\) is uniquely defined by the collection of image vectors \(T(\basisfont{B})\text{,}\) we know \(T\) completely by knowing the images