4

I just have a few questions about the general meaning of the notation "$[T]_\alpha^\beta$". I would really appreciate if someone would dumb it WAY down to the most basic level (no assumptions, no leaps of logic) because most of the literature I have read on this notation is very scattered.

I want to mention that $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are the ordered bases for $R^n$ and $R^m$ respectively. $T$ is the linear transformation from $R^n \to R^m$.

Questions:

  • What is $[T]$?

  • What are the subscript and superscript?

  • Does the order of the subscript and superscript matter (which one is on top or bottom)?

  • What are the dimensions of $[T]_\alpha^\beta$?

Thank you guys so much.

David South
  • 2,648
  • I wouldn't say that that is standard notation. Clearly it's just supposed to be the matrix that represents $T$ in those given bases, but you shouldn't get too worried about it. You likely won't see it again after this class. –  May 17 '15 at 00:43
  • @Bye_World: Agreed, and yet there is only one thing it could reasonably mean here... – hmakholm left over Monica May 17 '15 at 00:44

3 Answers3

4

I agree with others that this notation isn't particularly standard, but it seems to make most sense if it's designed to work when $T:V\to W$ is a linear transformation between arbitrary finite-dimensional abstract vector spaces with bases $\alpha=(\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_n)$ and $\beta=(\beta_1,\ldots,\beta_m)$, respectively. (Here each $\alpha_i$ is an element of $V$, and each $\beta_i$ is an element of $W$).

The matrix $[T]_\alpha^\beta$ is then the matrix with the property that if $T(\alpha_i)=c_1\beta_1+\cdots+c_m\beta_m$, then $(c_1,\ldots,c_m)^T$ is the $i$th column of $[T]_\alpha^\beta$.

This means that if you have a vector $v\in V$ and want to find $T(v)$, then you can

  1. Write $v$ as a linear combination of basis vectors from $\alpha$.
  2. Collect the coefficients as a column vector $X$
  3. Multiply that column vector by $[T]_\alpha^\beta$ from the left, which gives you a new column vector $Y=[T]_\alpha^\beta X$.
  4. Multiply each of the elements of $Y$ with the basis vectors from $\beta$.
  5. The sum $y_1\beta_1+y_2\beta_2+\cdots+y_m\beta_m$ will be the vector $T(v)\in W$.

Representing linear transformations with matrices allows transferring results from the nice, concrete setting of matrices to the more useful setting of abstract vector spaces. In particular, if we have a third vector space $Z$ with basis $\gamma$ and a linear transformation $U:W\to Z$, then function composition corresponds to matrix multiplication: $$ [U\circ T]_\alpha^\gamma = [U]_\beta^\gamma [T]_\alpha^\beta $$

  • This is very good! One small question, though. Did you mean to write "...then the matrix with the property that if $T(\alpha_i) = c_1\beta_1 + ... + c_n\beta_n$" or did you mean to write "$c_1\beta_1 + ... + c_n\beta_m$"? – David South May 17 '15 at 01:18
  • @DavidSouth: Sorry, I got the $n$s and $m$s a bit mixed up. It should be a slightly better approximation to correct now. – hmakholm left over Monica May 17 '15 at 01:27
3

$T:\mathbb{R}^n\to \mathbb{R}^m$ is a linear transformation, then $[T]$ is the matrix corresponding to $T$ in the standard basis $\{e_1,\dots, e_n\}$ and $\{e_1,\dots, e_m\}$. So $[T]_{\alpha}^{\beta}$ is the matrix representation of $T$ in terms of the ordered bases $\alpha$ and $\beta$. $[T]_{\alpha}^{\beta}$ is still an $m\times n$ matrix since all bases have to have the same number of elements. The subscript is the basis for the domain, while the superscript is the basis for the codomain.

Edit: The notation $[T]_{\alpha}^{\beta}$ is in no way standard notation for the matrix of $T$ in bases $\alpha$ and $\beta$ (actually, you'll find frustratingly enough that there is no agreed upon notation in linear algebra for this, especially when it comes to change of bases). However, I have seen the notation $[T]$ when talking about the matrix representation for $T$ in the standard basis elements in a few places, so I guess this is in some way standard.

Moya
  • 5,473
  • what is meant by "the matrix corresponding to $T$ in the standard basis ${e_1,...,e_n}$ and ${e_1,...e_m}$? How does a matrix "correspond" to two different bases? – David South May 17 '15 at 00:46
  • So essentially $T:R^n\to R^m$ is not a matrix: it is just a linear transformation between vector spaces. However, it can be "represented" as a matrix, because a linear transformation is uniquely defined by its action on basis elements. In this sense, $T$ is pretty easily identified with the matrix for $[T]$, but they are not explicitly the same thing. – Moya May 17 '15 at 00:48
  • So, to say a matrix corresponds to two different bases mean that it takes elements of the first bases and converts them into elements of the second bases? – David South May 17 '15 at 00:50
0

It means the matrix associated to $T$ respect the basis $V\subset\mathbb{R}^n$ and the basis $W\subset\mathbb{R}^m$

For example, if we have $T\colon\mathbb{R^2}\to\mathbb{R^3}$ such $T(x,y)=(x,x+y,y)$, and $V=\{e_1=(1,0);e_2=(0,1)\}$ a ordered basis for $\mathbb{R^2}$ and $W=\{f_1=(1,0,0);f_2=(0,1,0);f_3=(0,0,1)\}$ a ordered basis for $\mathbb{R^2}$, then we have to do:

$T(e_1)=T(0,1)=(0,1,1)=0f_1+1f_2+1f_3~~ \Rightarrow [T(e_1)]=[0,1,1]^\intercal$ $T(e_2)=T(1,0)=(1,1,0)=1f_1+1f_2+0f_3~~ \Rightarrow [T(e_2)]=[1,1,0]^\intercal$ So $[T]_V^W=[[T(e_1)][T(e_2)]]=\begin{bmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ 1 & 1 \\ 1 & 0 \end{bmatrix}$

Since $dim(V)=2$ and $dim(W)=3$, the matrix $[T]_V^W$ has order $3\times2$

luisfelipe18
  • 3,690
  • The notation $\alpha\subset \mathbb R^n$ is a really unfortunate choice here, because the matrix $[T]\alpha^\beta$ depends not only on the bases _as sets, but also on the order of the basis vectors. – hmakholm left over Monica May 17 '15 at 00:45
  • Sure, i'm just tiping as OP has tiped. Ps. I'm editing my post – luisfelipe18 May 17 '15 at 00:47
  • @HenningMakholm, what about now? – luisfelipe18 May 17 '15 at 00:56
  • x @Luis: Doesn't really address my point. My beef was not with the Greek letters but with the $\subset$ symbol, which I don't think can be used with an ordered tuple. (The downvote isn't mine, btw). – hmakholm left over Monica May 17 '15 at 01:02
  • @HenningMakholm Why the notation $V\subset\mathbb{R^n}$ is not good ? The ordered basis is showed by a index $e_i$ not in the set $V$ but in their elements after,you would be so kind as to explain your point? I am bad in English – luisfelipe18 May 17 '15 at 01:06
  • x @Luis: Because the thing to the right of $\subset$ must be a set, and a set has, by definition, no inherent ordering between its element. So writing $V\subset \text{anything}$ implies "I use the letter $V$ to stand for some unordered set of somethings". You can't then in the next breath assume that there is some order on the elements of $V$ implied anyway. – hmakholm left over Monica May 17 '15 at 01:09
  • Yes, you can do it, since $V$ has finite cardinal. and you know the elements, then you can enumerate them. sorry my friend but you are wrong. – luisfelipe18 May 17 '15 at 01:12