The difference between applying a rotation matrix to a vector and to a matrix












10














Suppose that the rotation matrix is defined as $mathbf{R}$. Then in order to rotate a vector and a matrix, the following expressions are, respectively, used



$mathbf{u'}=mathbf{R} mathbf{u}$



and



$mathbf{U'}=mathbf{R} mathbf{U} mathbf{R}^T$,



where $mathbf{u}$ and $mathbf{U}$ are, respectively, an arbitrary vector and an arbitrary matrix.



For me, the first one is obvious since you simply multiply the rotation matrix by the vector (for example a point coordinate in 3D) and obtain the rotated vector (rotated point coordinate in 3D). However, the second one is not clear for me and why the rotation should be multiplied from both sides and how this expression is derived.



P.S. The matrix $mathbf{U}$ can be interpreted as a stretch matrix in 3D.










share|cite|improve this question
























  • If you have a linear algebra textbook on hand, you might find it instructive to read about changes of basis. The matrix $R$, in this context, can be nicely thought of as a change-of-basis matrix.
    – Omnomnomnom
    17 hours ago






  • 1




    The expression $RU$ also is a kind of "rotation of $U$," namely, it takes whatever transformation $U$ was going to perform and composes that with a subsequent rotation represented by $R.$ But this is actually giving us a new transformation within the old coordinate system, not rewriting the old transformation in a new coordinate system as we would get from $RUR^T.$
    – David K
    11 hours ago












  • When you say "$U$ is a matrix", it makes a difference whether $U$ is merely a set of points (in which case $RU$ is already the "rotation of $U$"), or itself a transformation matrix (as in this case). Can you please edit your title/body to be more clear?
    – smci
    49 mins ago


















10














Suppose that the rotation matrix is defined as $mathbf{R}$. Then in order to rotate a vector and a matrix, the following expressions are, respectively, used



$mathbf{u'}=mathbf{R} mathbf{u}$



and



$mathbf{U'}=mathbf{R} mathbf{U} mathbf{R}^T$,



where $mathbf{u}$ and $mathbf{U}$ are, respectively, an arbitrary vector and an arbitrary matrix.



For me, the first one is obvious since you simply multiply the rotation matrix by the vector (for example a point coordinate in 3D) and obtain the rotated vector (rotated point coordinate in 3D). However, the second one is not clear for me and why the rotation should be multiplied from both sides and how this expression is derived.



P.S. The matrix $mathbf{U}$ can be interpreted as a stretch matrix in 3D.










share|cite|improve this question
























  • If you have a linear algebra textbook on hand, you might find it instructive to read about changes of basis. The matrix $R$, in this context, can be nicely thought of as a change-of-basis matrix.
    – Omnomnomnom
    17 hours ago






  • 1




    The expression $RU$ also is a kind of "rotation of $U$," namely, it takes whatever transformation $U$ was going to perform and composes that with a subsequent rotation represented by $R.$ But this is actually giving us a new transformation within the old coordinate system, not rewriting the old transformation in a new coordinate system as we would get from $RUR^T.$
    – David K
    11 hours ago












  • When you say "$U$ is a matrix", it makes a difference whether $U$ is merely a set of points (in which case $RU$ is already the "rotation of $U$"), or itself a transformation matrix (as in this case). Can you please edit your title/body to be more clear?
    – smci
    49 mins ago
















10












10








10


4





Suppose that the rotation matrix is defined as $mathbf{R}$. Then in order to rotate a vector and a matrix, the following expressions are, respectively, used



$mathbf{u'}=mathbf{R} mathbf{u}$



and



$mathbf{U'}=mathbf{R} mathbf{U} mathbf{R}^T$,



where $mathbf{u}$ and $mathbf{U}$ are, respectively, an arbitrary vector and an arbitrary matrix.



For me, the first one is obvious since you simply multiply the rotation matrix by the vector (for example a point coordinate in 3D) and obtain the rotated vector (rotated point coordinate in 3D). However, the second one is not clear for me and why the rotation should be multiplied from both sides and how this expression is derived.



P.S. The matrix $mathbf{U}$ can be interpreted as a stretch matrix in 3D.










share|cite|improve this question















Suppose that the rotation matrix is defined as $mathbf{R}$. Then in order to rotate a vector and a matrix, the following expressions are, respectively, used



$mathbf{u'}=mathbf{R} mathbf{u}$



and



$mathbf{U'}=mathbf{R} mathbf{U} mathbf{R}^T$,



where $mathbf{u}$ and $mathbf{U}$ are, respectively, an arbitrary vector and an arbitrary matrix.



For me, the first one is obvious since you simply multiply the rotation matrix by the vector (for example a point coordinate in 3D) and obtain the rotated vector (rotated point coordinate in 3D). However, the second one is not clear for me and why the rotation should be multiplied from both sides and how this expression is derived.



P.S. The matrix $mathbf{U}$ can be interpreted as a stretch matrix in 3D.







linear-algebra matrices vectors rotations






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 16 hours ago









A.Γ.

22.5k32656




22.5k32656










asked 17 hours ago









Msen Rezaee

306312




306312












  • If you have a linear algebra textbook on hand, you might find it instructive to read about changes of basis. The matrix $R$, in this context, can be nicely thought of as a change-of-basis matrix.
    – Omnomnomnom
    17 hours ago






  • 1




    The expression $RU$ also is a kind of "rotation of $U$," namely, it takes whatever transformation $U$ was going to perform and composes that with a subsequent rotation represented by $R.$ But this is actually giving us a new transformation within the old coordinate system, not rewriting the old transformation in a new coordinate system as we would get from $RUR^T.$
    – David K
    11 hours ago












  • When you say "$U$ is a matrix", it makes a difference whether $U$ is merely a set of points (in which case $RU$ is already the "rotation of $U$"), or itself a transformation matrix (as in this case). Can you please edit your title/body to be more clear?
    – smci
    49 mins ago




















  • If you have a linear algebra textbook on hand, you might find it instructive to read about changes of basis. The matrix $R$, in this context, can be nicely thought of as a change-of-basis matrix.
    – Omnomnomnom
    17 hours ago






  • 1




    The expression $RU$ also is a kind of "rotation of $U$," namely, it takes whatever transformation $U$ was going to perform and composes that with a subsequent rotation represented by $R.$ But this is actually giving us a new transformation within the old coordinate system, not rewriting the old transformation in a new coordinate system as we would get from $RUR^T.$
    – David K
    11 hours ago












  • When you say "$U$ is a matrix", it makes a difference whether $U$ is merely a set of points (in which case $RU$ is already the "rotation of $U$"), or itself a transformation matrix (as in this case). Can you please edit your title/body to be more clear?
    – smci
    49 mins ago


















If you have a linear algebra textbook on hand, you might find it instructive to read about changes of basis. The matrix $R$, in this context, can be nicely thought of as a change-of-basis matrix.
– Omnomnomnom
17 hours ago




If you have a linear algebra textbook on hand, you might find it instructive to read about changes of basis. The matrix $R$, in this context, can be nicely thought of as a change-of-basis matrix.
– Omnomnomnom
17 hours ago




1




1




The expression $RU$ also is a kind of "rotation of $U$," namely, it takes whatever transformation $U$ was going to perform and composes that with a subsequent rotation represented by $R.$ But this is actually giving us a new transformation within the old coordinate system, not rewriting the old transformation in a new coordinate system as we would get from $RUR^T.$
– David K
11 hours ago






The expression $RU$ also is a kind of "rotation of $U$," namely, it takes whatever transformation $U$ was going to perform and composes that with a subsequent rotation represented by $R.$ But this is actually giving us a new transformation within the old coordinate system, not rewriting the old transformation in a new coordinate system as we would get from $RUR^T.$
– David K
11 hours ago














When you say "$U$ is a matrix", it makes a difference whether $U$ is merely a set of points (in which case $RU$ is already the "rotation of $U$"), or itself a transformation matrix (as in this case). Can you please edit your title/body to be more clear?
– smci
49 mins ago






When you say "$U$ is a matrix", it makes a difference whether $U$ is merely a set of points (in which case $RU$ is already the "rotation of $U$"), or itself a transformation matrix (as in this case). Can you please edit your title/body to be more clear?
– smci
49 mins ago












4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















14














Here the matrix $U$ is considered not as a bunch of column vectors, but as a (matrix of the) linear map $Fcolon {Bbb R}^nto {Bbb R}^n$
$$
y=F(x)=Ux.
$$

What happens if we rotate both $y$ and $x$ by $R$? We get (since $R^TR=I$ for rotations)
$$
y=UxquadRightarrowquad Ry=RUxquadRightarrowquad Ry=underbrace{RUR^T}_{U'}RxquadRightarrowquad y'=U'x'.
$$

Thus the matrix $U'=RUR^T$ corresponds to the same linear map $F$ in the new coordinates after rotation ($x'mapsto y'$).



In general, for any change of the basis $x'=Sx$, $y'=Sy$ the corresponding change of the matrix $U$ is
$$
Sy=underbrace{SUS^{-1}}_{U'}SxquadRightarrowquad y'=U'x'.
$$

It means that the class of all similar matrices ${SUS^{-1}colon Stext{ invertible}}$ is exactly the class of all matrices that describe the same linear map in different bases.






share|cite|improve this answer































    4














    Using your example where $U$ is a stretch matrix in 3D, if you want to "rotate" this matrix, you essentially want this stretch action to occur in a different direction / axis. Suppose you have some shape aligned to this new axis. You want to know what the $U'$ is that stretches the shape parallel to this axis. To do this, you use $R^T$ to rotate everything back to the original orientation. Then you do the original stretch transformation $U$. Then you rotate this back using $R$. So $U'=RUR^T$.



    enter image description here






    share|cite|improve this answer























    • Thanks for your answer. But could you please give me a clearer example. I understood your point. However, I couldn't understand your example.
      – Msen Rezaee
      17 hours ago










    • @MsenRezaee I added a picture to help illustrate the point. It is in 2D rather than 3D, but it should be simple to see how this generalises
      – John Doe
      14 hours ago





















    3














    One thing that may be instructive is to recall that every matrix can be represented as the linear combination of a series of dyadic/outer products between two vectors, $U = sum_i a_i otimes b_i = sum_i a_i b_i^T$ where $a_i$ and $b_i$ are a sequence of column vectors.



    When changing the basis of the matrix, we are in effect applying the vector rule for changing bases to both sequences of vectors:



    $$U’ = sum_i a_i’ otimes b_i’ = sum_i Ra_i (Rb_i)^T = sum_iRa_ib_i^T R^T = RUR^T$$



    Hope this helps!






    share|cite|improve this answer



















    • 2




      This is not language I'm familiar with, but wouldn't $ab^T$ always be rank $1$, so only rank $1$ matrices can be represented this way?
      – Callus
      17 hours ago






    • 2




      @Callus I guess it was meant that any matrix could be represented as a span of dyadic matrices.
      – A.Γ.
      17 hours ago










    • Correct, thank you for spotting that @Callus and @A.Γ.! Will update answer shortly.
      – aghostinthefigures
      17 hours ago



















    0














    The columns of $mathbf{U}$ tell you what happens to the coordinate vectors $hat{e}_1,hat{e}_2,hat{e}_3$. For example, if the first column is $[a,b,c]^T$, then $mathbf{U}hat{e}_1 = ahat{e}_1 + bhat{e}_2 + chat{e}_3$.



    The matrix $mathbf{U}'$ is the matrix that behaves the same way on the rotated coordinate basis $hat{f}_i = mathbf{R}hat{e}_i$. This is because $mathbf{R}^T = mathbf{R}^{-1}$ so for example
    $$begin{align*}
    mathbf{U}'hat{f}_1 &= mathbf{R}mathbf{U}mathbf{R}^Tmathbf{R}hat{e}_1 \
    &= mathbf{R}left(mathbf{U}hat{e}_1right) \
    &= mathbf{R}(ahat{e}_1 + bhat{e}_2 + chat{e}_3) \
    &= amathbf{R}hat{e}_1 + bmathbf{R}hat{e}_2 + cmathbf{R}hat{e}_3 \
    &= ahat{f}_1 + bhat{f}_2 + chat{f}_3
    end{align*}
    $$






    share|cite|improve this answer





















      Your Answer





      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
      });
      });
      }, "mathjax-editing");

      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "69"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: true,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: 10,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3061638%2fthe-difference-between-applying-a-rotation-matrix-to-a-vector-and-to-a-matrix%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes








      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      14














      Here the matrix $U$ is considered not as a bunch of column vectors, but as a (matrix of the) linear map $Fcolon {Bbb R}^nto {Bbb R}^n$
      $$
      y=F(x)=Ux.
      $$

      What happens if we rotate both $y$ and $x$ by $R$? We get (since $R^TR=I$ for rotations)
      $$
      y=UxquadRightarrowquad Ry=RUxquadRightarrowquad Ry=underbrace{RUR^T}_{U'}RxquadRightarrowquad y'=U'x'.
      $$

      Thus the matrix $U'=RUR^T$ corresponds to the same linear map $F$ in the new coordinates after rotation ($x'mapsto y'$).



      In general, for any change of the basis $x'=Sx$, $y'=Sy$ the corresponding change of the matrix $U$ is
      $$
      Sy=underbrace{SUS^{-1}}_{U'}SxquadRightarrowquad y'=U'x'.
      $$

      It means that the class of all similar matrices ${SUS^{-1}colon Stext{ invertible}}$ is exactly the class of all matrices that describe the same linear map in different bases.






      share|cite|improve this answer




























        14














        Here the matrix $U$ is considered not as a bunch of column vectors, but as a (matrix of the) linear map $Fcolon {Bbb R}^nto {Bbb R}^n$
        $$
        y=F(x)=Ux.
        $$

        What happens if we rotate both $y$ and $x$ by $R$? We get (since $R^TR=I$ for rotations)
        $$
        y=UxquadRightarrowquad Ry=RUxquadRightarrowquad Ry=underbrace{RUR^T}_{U'}RxquadRightarrowquad y'=U'x'.
        $$

        Thus the matrix $U'=RUR^T$ corresponds to the same linear map $F$ in the new coordinates after rotation ($x'mapsto y'$).



        In general, for any change of the basis $x'=Sx$, $y'=Sy$ the corresponding change of the matrix $U$ is
        $$
        Sy=underbrace{SUS^{-1}}_{U'}SxquadRightarrowquad y'=U'x'.
        $$

        It means that the class of all similar matrices ${SUS^{-1}colon Stext{ invertible}}$ is exactly the class of all matrices that describe the same linear map in different bases.






        share|cite|improve this answer


























          14












          14








          14






          Here the matrix $U$ is considered not as a bunch of column vectors, but as a (matrix of the) linear map $Fcolon {Bbb R}^nto {Bbb R}^n$
          $$
          y=F(x)=Ux.
          $$

          What happens if we rotate both $y$ and $x$ by $R$? We get (since $R^TR=I$ for rotations)
          $$
          y=UxquadRightarrowquad Ry=RUxquadRightarrowquad Ry=underbrace{RUR^T}_{U'}RxquadRightarrowquad y'=U'x'.
          $$

          Thus the matrix $U'=RUR^T$ corresponds to the same linear map $F$ in the new coordinates after rotation ($x'mapsto y'$).



          In general, for any change of the basis $x'=Sx$, $y'=Sy$ the corresponding change of the matrix $U$ is
          $$
          Sy=underbrace{SUS^{-1}}_{U'}SxquadRightarrowquad y'=U'x'.
          $$

          It means that the class of all similar matrices ${SUS^{-1}colon Stext{ invertible}}$ is exactly the class of all matrices that describe the same linear map in different bases.






          share|cite|improve this answer














          Here the matrix $U$ is considered not as a bunch of column vectors, but as a (matrix of the) linear map $Fcolon {Bbb R}^nto {Bbb R}^n$
          $$
          y=F(x)=Ux.
          $$

          What happens if we rotate both $y$ and $x$ by $R$? We get (since $R^TR=I$ for rotations)
          $$
          y=UxquadRightarrowquad Ry=RUxquadRightarrowquad Ry=underbrace{RUR^T}_{U'}RxquadRightarrowquad y'=U'x'.
          $$

          Thus the matrix $U'=RUR^T$ corresponds to the same linear map $F$ in the new coordinates after rotation ($x'mapsto y'$).



          In general, for any change of the basis $x'=Sx$, $y'=Sy$ the corresponding change of the matrix $U$ is
          $$
          Sy=underbrace{SUS^{-1}}_{U'}SxquadRightarrowquad y'=U'x'.
          $$

          It means that the class of all similar matrices ${SUS^{-1}colon Stext{ invertible}}$ is exactly the class of all matrices that describe the same linear map in different bases.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited 17 hours ago

























          answered 17 hours ago









          A.Γ.

          22.5k32656




          22.5k32656























              4














              Using your example where $U$ is a stretch matrix in 3D, if you want to "rotate" this matrix, you essentially want this stretch action to occur in a different direction / axis. Suppose you have some shape aligned to this new axis. You want to know what the $U'$ is that stretches the shape parallel to this axis. To do this, you use $R^T$ to rotate everything back to the original orientation. Then you do the original stretch transformation $U$. Then you rotate this back using $R$. So $U'=RUR^T$.



              enter image description here






              share|cite|improve this answer























              • Thanks for your answer. But could you please give me a clearer example. I understood your point. However, I couldn't understand your example.
                – Msen Rezaee
                17 hours ago










              • @MsenRezaee I added a picture to help illustrate the point. It is in 2D rather than 3D, but it should be simple to see how this generalises
                – John Doe
                14 hours ago


















              4














              Using your example where $U$ is a stretch matrix in 3D, if you want to "rotate" this matrix, you essentially want this stretch action to occur in a different direction / axis. Suppose you have some shape aligned to this new axis. You want to know what the $U'$ is that stretches the shape parallel to this axis. To do this, you use $R^T$ to rotate everything back to the original orientation. Then you do the original stretch transformation $U$. Then you rotate this back using $R$. So $U'=RUR^T$.



              enter image description here






              share|cite|improve this answer























              • Thanks for your answer. But could you please give me a clearer example. I understood your point. However, I couldn't understand your example.
                – Msen Rezaee
                17 hours ago










              • @MsenRezaee I added a picture to help illustrate the point. It is in 2D rather than 3D, but it should be simple to see how this generalises
                – John Doe
                14 hours ago
















              4












              4








              4






              Using your example where $U$ is a stretch matrix in 3D, if you want to "rotate" this matrix, you essentially want this stretch action to occur in a different direction / axis. Suppose you have some shape aligned to this new axis. You want to know what the $U'$ is that stretches the shape parallel to this axis. To do this, you use $R^T$ to rotate everything back to the original orientation. Then you do the original stretch transformation $U$. Then you rotate this back using $R$. So $U'=RUR^T$.



              enter image description here






              share|cite|improve this answer














              Using your example where $U$ is a stretch matrix in 3D, if you want to "rotate" this matrix, you essentially want this stretch action to occur in a different direction / axis. Suppose you have some shape aligned to this new axis. You want to know what the $U'$ is that stretches the shape parallel to this axis. To do this, you use $R^T$ to rotate everything back to the original orientation. Then you do the original stretch transformation $U$. Then you rotate this back using $R$. So $U'=RUR^T$.



              enter image description here







              share|cite|improve this answer














              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer








              edited 14 hours ago

























              answered 17 hours ago









              John Doe

              10.2k11134




              10.2k11134












              • Thanks for your answer. But could you please give me a clearer example. I understood your point. However, I couldn't understand your example.
                – Msen Rezaee
                17 hours ago










              • @MsenRezaee I added a picture to help illustrate the point. It is in 2D rather than 3D, but it should be simple to see how this generalises
                – John Doe
                14 hours ago




















              • Thanks for your answer. But could you please give me a clearer example. I understood your point. However, I couldn't understand your example.
                – Msen Rezaee
                17 hours ago










              • @MsenRezaee I added a picture to help illustrate the point. It is in 2D rather than 3D, but it should be simple to see how this generalises
                – John Doe
                14 hours ago


















              Thanks for your answer. But could you please give me a clearer example. I understood your point. However, I couldn't understand your example.
              – Msen Rezaee
              17 hours ago




              Thanks for your answer. But could you please give me a clearer example. I understood your point. However, I couldn't understand your example.
              – Msen Rezaee
              17 hours ago












              @MsenRezaee I added a picture to help illustrate the point. It is in 2D rather than 3D, but it should be simple to see how this generalises
              – John Doe
              14 hours ago






              @MsenRezaee I added a picture to help illustrate the point. It is in 2D rather than 3D, but it should be simple to see how this generalises
              – John Doe
              14 hours ago













              3














              One thing that may be instructive is to recall that every matrix can be represented as the linear combination of a series of dyadic/outer products between two vectors, $U = sum_i a_i otimes b_i = sum_i a_i b_i^T$ where $a_i$ and $b_i$ are a sequence of column vectors.



              When changing the basis of the matrix, we are in effect applying the vector rule for changing bases to both sequences of vectors:



              $$U’ = sum_i a_i’ otimes b_i’ = sum_i Ra_i (Rb_i)^T = sum_iRa_ib_i^T R^T = RUR^T$$



              Hope this helps!






              share|cite|improve this answer



















              • 2




                This is not language I'm familiar with, but wouldn't $ab^T$ always be rank $1$, so only rank $1$ matrices can be represented this way?
                – Callus
                17 hours ago






              • 2




                @Callus I guess it was meant that any matrix could be represented as a span of dyadic matrices.
                – A.Γ.
                17 hours ago










              • Correct, thank you for spotting that @Callus and @A.Γ.! Will update answer shortly.
                – aghostinthefigures
                17 hours ago
















              3














              One thing that may be instructive is to recall that every matrix can be represented as the linear combination of a series of dyadic/outer products between two vectors, $U = sum_i a_i otimes b_i = sum_i a_i b_i^T$ where $a_i$ and $b_i$ are a sequence of column vectors.



              When changing the basis of the matrix, we are in effect applying the vector rule for changing bases to both sequences of vectors:



              $$U’ = sum_i a_i’ otimes b_i’ = sum_i Ra_i (Rb_i)^T = sum_iRa_ib_i^T R^T = RUR^T$$



              Hope this helps!






              share|cite|improve this answer



















              • 2




                This is not language I'm familiar with, but wouldn't $ab^T$ always be rank $1$, so only rank $1$ matrices can be represented this way?
                – Callus
                17 hours ago






              • 2




                @Callus I guess it was meant that any matrix could be represented as a span of dyadic matrices.
                – A.Γ.
                17 hours ago










              • Correct, thank you for spotting that @Callus and @A.Γ.! Will update answer shortly.
                – aghostinthefigures
                17 hours ago














              3












              3








              3






              One thing that may be instructive is to recall that every matrix can be represented as the linear combination of a series of dyadic/outer products between two vectors, $U = sum_i a_i otimes b_i = sum_i a_i b_i^T$ where $a_i$ and $b_i$ are a sequence of column vectors.



              When changing the basis of the matrix, we are in effect applying the vector rule for changing bases to both sequences of vectors:



              $$U’ = sum_i a_i’ otimes b_i’ = sum_i Ra_i (Rb_i)^T = sum_iRa_ib_i^T R^T = RUR^T$$



              Hope this helps!






              share|cite|improve this answer














              One thing that may be instructive is to recall that every matrix can be represented as the linear combination of a series of dyadic/outer products between two vectors, $U = sum_i a_i otimes b_i = sum_i a_i b_i^T$ where $a_i$ and $b_i$ are a sequence of column vectors.



              When changing the basis of the matrix, we are in effect applying the vector rule for changing bases to both sequences of vectors:



              $$U’ = sum_i a_i’ otimes b_i’ = sum_i Ra_i (Rb_i)^T = sum_iRa_ib_i^T R^T = RUR^T$$



              Hope this helps!







              share|cite|improve this answer














              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer








              edited 16 hours ago

























              answered 17 hours ago









              aghostinthefigures

              1,2301216




              1,2301216








              • 2




                This is not language I'm familiar with, but wouldn't $ab^T$ always be rank $1$, so only rank $1$ matrices can be represented this way?
                – Callus
                17 hours ago






              • 2




                @Callus I guess it was meant that any matrix could be represented as a span of dyadic matrices.
                – A.Γ.
                17 hours ago










              • Correct, thank you for spotting that @Callus and @A.Γ.! Will update answer shortly.
                – aghostinthefigures
                17 hours ago














              • 2




                This is not language I'm familiar with, but wouldn't $ab^T$ always be rank $1$, so only rank $1$ matrices can be represented this way?
                – Callus
                17 hours ago






              • 2




                @Callus I guess it was meant that any matrix could be represented as a span of dyadic matrices.
                – A.Γ.
                17 hours ago










              • Correct, thank you for spotting that @Callus and @A.Γ.! Will update answer shortly.
                – aghostinthefigures
                17 hours ago








              2




              2




              This is not language I'm familiar with, but wouldn't $ab^T$ always be rank $1$, so only rank $1$ matrices can be represented this way?
              – Callus
              17 hours ago




              This is not language I'm familiar with, but wouldn't $ab^T$ always be rank $1$, so only rank $1$ matrices can be represented this way?
              – Callus
              17 hours ago




              2




              2




              @Callus I guess it was meant that any matrix could be represented as a span of dyadic matrices.
              – A.Γ.
              17 hours ago




              @Callus I guess it was meant that any matrix could be represented as a span of dyadic matrices.
              – A.Γ.
              17 hours ago












              Correct, thank you for spotting that @Callus and @A.Γ.! Will update answer shortly.
              – aghostinthefigures
              17 hours ago




              Correct, thank you for spotting that @Callus and @A.Γ.! Will update answer shortly.
              – aghostinthefigures
              17 hours ago











              0














              The columns of $mathbf{U}$ tell you what happens to the coordinate vectors $hat{e}_1,hat{e}_2,hat{e}_3$. For example, if the first column is $[a,b,c]^T$, then $mathbf{U}hat{e}_1 = ahat{e}_1 + bhat{e}_2 + chat{e}_3$.



              The matrix $mathbf{U}'$ is the matrix that behaves the same way on the rotated coordinate basis $hat{f}_i = mathbf{R}hat{e}_i$. This is because $mathbf{R}^T = mathbf{R}^{-1}$ so for example
              $$begin{align*}
              mathbf{U}'hat{f}_1 &= mathbf{R}mathbf{U}mathbf{R}^Tmathbf{R}hat{e}_1 \
              &= mathbf{R}left(mathbf{U}hat{e}_1right) \
              &= mathbf{R}(ahat{e}_1 + bhat{e}_2 + chat{e}_3) \
              &= amathbf{R}hat{e}_1 + bmathbf{R}hat{e}_2 + cmathbf{R}hat{e}_3 \
              &= ahat{f}_1 + bhat{f}_2 + chat{f}_3
              end{align*}
              $$






              share|cite|improve this answer


























                0














                The columns of $mathbf{U}$ tell you what happens to the coordinate vectors $hat{e}_1,hat{e}_2,hat{e}_3$. For example, if the first column is $[a,b,c]^T$, then $mathbf{U}hat{e}_1 = ahat{e}_1 + bhat{e}_2 + chat{e}_3$.



                The matrix $mathbf{U}'$ is the matrix that behaves the same way on the rotated coordinate basis $hat{f}_i = mathbf{R}hat{e}_i$. This is because $mathbf{R}^T = mathbf{R}^{-1}$ so for example
                $$begin{align*}
                mathbf{U}'hat{f}_1 &= mathbf{R}mathbf{U}mathbf{R}^Tmathbf{R}hat{e}_1 \
                &= mathbf{R}left(mathbf{U}hat{e}_1right) \
                &= mathbf{R}(ahat{e}_1 + bhat{e}_2 + chat{e}_3) \
                &= amathbf{R}hat{e}_1 + bmathbf{R}hat{e}_2 + cmathbf{R}hat{e}_3 \
                &= ahat{f}_1 + bhat{f}_2 + chat{f}_3
                end{align*}
                $$






                share|cite|improve this answer
























                  0












                  0








                  0






                  The columns of $mathbf{U}$ tell you what happens to the coordinate vectors $hat{e}_1,hat{e}_2,hat{e}_3$. For example, if the first column is $[a,b,c]^T$, then $mathbf{U}hat{e}_1 = ahat{e}_1 + bhat{e}_2 + chat{e}_3$.



                  The matrix $mathbf{U}'$ is the matrix that behaves the same way on the rotated coordinate basis $hat{f}_i = mathbf{R}hat{e}_i$. This is because $mathbf{R}^T = mathbf{R}^{-1}$ so for example
                  $$begin{align*}
                  mathbf{U}'hat{f}_1 &= mathbf{R}mathbf{U}mathbf{R}^Tmathbf{R}hat{e}_1 \
                  &= mathbf{R}left(mathbf{U}hat{e}_1right) \
                  &= mathbf{R}(ahat{e}_1 + bhat{e}_2 + chat{e}_3) \
                  &= amathbf{R}hat{e}_1 + bmathbf{R}hat{e}_2 + cmathbf{R}hat{e}_3 \
                  &= ahat{f}_1 + bhat{f}_2 + chat{f}_3
                  end{align*}
                  $$






                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  The columns of $mathbf{U}$ tell you what happens to the coordinate vectors $hat{e}_1,hat{e}_2,hat{e}_3$. For example, if the first column is $[a,b,c]^T$, then $mathbf{U}hat{e}_1 = ahat{e}_1 + bhat{e}_2 + chat{e}_3$.



                  The matrix $mathbf{U}'$ is the matrix that behaves the same way on the rotated coordinate basis $hat{f}_i = mathbf{R}hat{e}_i$. This is because $mathbf{R}^T = mathbf{R}^{-1}$ so for example
                  $$begin{align*}
                  mathbf{U}'hat{f}_1 &= mathbf{R}mathbf{U}mathbf{R}^Tmathbf{R}hat{e}_1 \
                  &= mathbf{R}left(mathbf{U}hat{e}_1right) \
                  &= mathbf{R}(ahat{e}_1 + bhat{e}_2 + chat{e}_3) \
                  &= amathbf{R}hat{e}_1 + bmathbf{R}hat{e}_2 + cmathbf{R}hat{e}_3 \
                  &= ahat{f}_1 + bhat{f}_2 + chat{f}_3
                  end{align*}
                  $$







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered 17 hours ago









                  Callus

                  4,403922




                  4,403922






























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                      Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                      Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3061638%2fthe-difference-between-applying-a-rotation-matrix-to-a-vector-and-to-a-matrix%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Mario Kart Wii

                      The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth/Afterbirth

                      What does “Dominus providebit” mean?