Is $ f(A) = A + 2A^{T} $ an isomorphism of $ mathbb R^{5,5} $ onto itself?
I have problem with prove or disprove this hypothesis:
Is the linear transformation $ f in L(mathbb R^{5,5},mathbb R^{5,5}) $
$$ f(A) = A + 2A^{T} $$
an isomorphism of the space $ mathbb R^{5,5} $ onto itself?
In order to be an isomorphism, $f$ must be injective and surjective.
Checking if it is surjective:
Assume that as a result we want to get:
$$mathbf{Q} =
begin{bmatrix}
q_{11} & q_{12} & cdots & q_{1n} \
q_{21} & q_{22} & cdots & q_{2n} \
vdots & vdots & ddots & vdots \
q_{m1} & q_{m2} & cdots & q_{mn}
end{bmatrix} $$
and we put as argument $$ mathbf{A} =
begin{bmatrix}
a_{11} & a_{12} & cdots & a_{1n} \
a_{21} & a_{22} & cdots & a_{2n} \
vdots & vdots & ddots & vdots \
a_{m1} & a_{m2} & cdots & a_{mn}
end{bmatrix} $$
then choose $i,j$. Factors $a_{ij}$ $a_{ji}$ $q_{ij}$ $q_{ji}$ are only in this linear system:
$$q_{ij} = a_{ij} + 2a_{ji} wedge q_{ji} = a_{ji} + 2a_{ij}$$
so $$ a_{ij} = frac{2q_{ij}-q_{ji}}{3} $$ and $$ a_{ji} = frac{2q_{ji}-q_{ij}}{3} $$
so the factors $ a_{ij}$ $ a_{ji}$ are determined unambiguously. So it is surjective.
But how to deal with checking injectivity?
Suppose that $$ A+2A^T=B+2B^T $$
$$ A-B = 2(A^T-B^T) $$
and I don't know how to finish that.
linear-algebra matrices vector-space-isomorphism
add a comment |
I have problem with prove or disprove this hypothesis:
Is the linear transformation $ f in L(mathbb R^{5,5},mathbb R^{5,5}) $
$$ f(A) = A + 2A^{T} $$
an isomorphism of the space $ mathbb R^{5,5} $ onto itself?
In order to be an isomorphism, $f$ must be injective and surjective.
Checking if it is surjective:
Assume that as a result we want to get:
$$mathbf{Q} =
begin{bmatrix}
q_{11} & q_{12} & cdots & q_{1n} \
q_{21} & q_{22} & cdots & q_{2n} \
vdots & vdots & ddots & vdots \
q_{m1} & q_{m2} & cdots & q_{mn}
end{bmatrix} $$
and we put as argument $$ mathbf{A} =
begin{bmatrix}
a_{11} & a_{12} & cdots & a_{1n} \
a_{21} & a_{22} & cdots & a_{2n} \
vdots & vdots & ddots & vdots \
a_{m1} & a_{m2} & cdots & a_{mn}
end{bmatrix} $$
then choose $i,j$. Factors $a_{ij}$ $a_{ji}$ $q_{ij}$ $q_{ji}$ are only in this linear system:
$$q_{ij} = a_{ij} + 2a_{ji} wedge q_{ji} = a_{ji} + 2a_{ij}$$
so $$ a_{ij} = frac{2q_{ij}-q_{ji}}{3} $$ and $$ a_{ji} = frac{2q_{ji}-q_{ij}}{3} $$
so the factors $ a_{ij}$ $ a_{ji}$ are determined unambiguously. So it is surjective.
But how to deal with checking injectivity?
Suppose that $$ A+2A^T=B+2B^T $$
$$ A-B = 2(A^T-B^T) $$
and I don't know how to finish that.
linear-algebra matrices vector-space-isomorphism
add a comment |
I have problem with prove or disprove this hypothesis:
Is the linear transformation $ f in L(mathbb R^{5,5},mathbb R^{5,5}) $
$$ f(A) = A + 2A^{T} $$
an isomorphism of the space $ mathbb R^{5,5} $ onto itself?
In order to be an isomorphism, $f$ must be injective and surjective.
Checking if it is surjective:
Assume that as a result we want to get:
$$mathbf{Q} =
begin{bmatrix}
q_{11} & q_{12} & cdots & q_{1n} \
q_{21} & q_{22} & cdots & q_{2n} \
vdots & vdots & ddots & vdots \
q_{m1} & q_{m2} & cdots & q_{mn}
end{bmatrix} $$
and we put as argument $$ mathbf{A} =
begin{bmatrix}
a_{11} & a_{12} & cdots & a_{1n} \
a_{21} & a_{22} & cdots & a_{2n} \
vdots & vdots & ddots & vdots \
a_{m1} & a_{m2} & cdots & a_{mn}
end{bmatrix} $$
then choose $i,j$. Factors $a_{ij}$ $a_{ji}$ $q_{ij}$ $q_{ji}$ are only in this linear system:
$$q_{ij} = a_{ij} + 2a_{ji} wedge q_{ji} = a_{ji} + 2a_{ij}$$
so $$ a_{ij} = frac{2q_{ij}-q_{ji}}{3} $$ and $$ a_{ji} = frac{2q_{ji}-q_{ij}}{3} $$
so the factors $ a_{ij}$ $ a_{ji}$ are determined unambiguously. So it is surjective.
But how to deal with checking injectivity?
Suppose that $$ A+2A^T=B+2B^T $$
$$ A-B = 2(A^T-B^T) $$
and I don't know how to finish that.
linear-algebra matrices vector-space-isomorphism
I have problem with prove or disprove this hypothesis:
Is the linear transformation $ f in L(mathbb R^{5,5},mathbb R^{5,5}) $
$$ f(A) = A + 2A^{T} $$
an isomorphism of the space $ mathbb R^{5,5} $ onto itself?
In order to be an isomorphism, $f$ must be injective and surjective.
Checking if it is surjective:
Assume that as a result we want to get:
$$mathbf{Q} =
begin{bmatrix}
q_{11} & q_{12} & cdots & q_{1n} \
q_{21} & q_{22} & cdots & q_{2n} \
vdots & vdots & ddots & vdots \
q_{m1} & q_{m2} & cdots & q_{mn}
end{bmatrix} $$
and we put as argument $$ mathbf{A} =
begin{bmatrix}
a_{11} & a_{12} & cdots & a_{1n} \
a_{21} & a_{22} & cdots & a_{2n} \
vdots & vdots & ddots & vdots \
a_{m1} & a_{m2} & cdots & a_{mn}
end{bmatrix} $$
then choose $i,j$. Factors $a_{ij}$ $a_{ji}$ $q_{ij}$ $q_{ji}$ are only in this linear system:
$$q_{ij} = a_{ij} + 2a_{ji} wedge q_{ji} = a_{ji} + 2a_{ij}$$
so $$ a_{ij} = frac{2q_{ij}-q_{ji}}{3} $$ and $$ a_{ji} = frac{2q_{ji}-q_{ij}}{3} $$
so the factors $ a_{ij}$ $ a_{ji}$ are determined unambiguously. So it is surjective.
But how to deal with checking injectivity?
Suppose that $$ A+2A^T=B+2B^T $$
$$ A-B = 2(A^T-B^T) $$
and I don't know how to finish that.
linear-algebra matrices vector-space-isomorphism
linear-algebra matrices vector-space-isomorphism
edited yesterday
greedoid
38.2k114797
38.2k114797
asked yesterday
VirtualUser
49111
49111
add a comment |
add a comment |
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
Hint:
Check if the kernel of this transformation is trivial. This is enough to establish if it is isomorphism:
$$begin{eqnarray}
f(A) =0
&implies &A=-2A^T \
&implies &A^T=(-2A^T)^T \
&implies &A^T = -2A \
&implies &A =4A \
&implies &A=0
end{eqnarray}
$$
By trivial you mean $ vec{0} $?
– VirtualUser
yesterday
Yes, that is correct.
– greedoid
yesterday
Chm.. can you explain this step? $ A^T = -2A rightarrow A =4A $
– VirtualUser
yesterday
Just plug second line in first
– greedoid
yesterday
Ahh, that's great, but unfortunately I can't use that because I haven't got this theorem on my lecture... But it is really smart
– VirtualUser
yesterday
|
show 1 more comment
You have $A-B = 2(A-B)^top$.
This implies $a_{ij} - b_{ij} = 2 (a_{ji} - b_{ji}) = 4(a_{ij} - b_{ij})$, so...
add a comment |
You're already done. Since the map is from $mathbb R^{5times 5}$ to $mathbb R^{5times 5}$, checking that it's surjective (that it has full rank) also tells you that it's injective (that it has nullity $0$) by the rank-nullity theorem.
add a comment |
Hint:
It suffices to check that $f$ is surjective. For any matrix $B$ we have
$$fleft(-frac13B + frac23B^Tright) = B$$
It you are wondering how we got this, assume $A+2A^T = B$. Then $A^T + 2A = B^T$ so $$B + B^T = 3(A+A^T)$$
Now it follows $$A = B^T - (A+A^T) = B^T - frac13(B + B^T) = -frac13B + frac23B^T$$
This seems to already be contained in the question post.
– Misha Lavrov
yesterday
@MishaLavrov Oops, I missed it. Still, here it is done slightly cleaner, without coordinates.
– mechanodroid
yesterday
add a comment |
When you say
$$
a_{ij}=frac{2q_{ji}-q_{ij}}{3}
$$
(I fixed the indices) is “determined unambiguously”, you have proved both surjectivity and injectivity. There is at most one matrix $mathbf{A}$ such that $f(mathbf{A})=mathbf{Q}$. And there is one, determined in the way you did (after fixing the small mistake).
On the other hand, a linear map $Lcolon Vto V$, where $V$ is a finite dimensional vector space, is injective if and only if it is surjective, because of the rank-nullity theorem. Therefore just one of the properties needs to be checked for.
You don't need to go to the level of matrix entries in order to prove surjectivity. Given $Q$ you want to find $A$ such that $f(A)=Q$, that is, $A+2A^T=Q$. If such matrix exists, then also
$$
A^T+2A=Q^T
$$
and so $2A^T+4A=2Q^T$; thus
$$
Q-2Q^T=A+2A^T-2A^T-4A=-3A
$$
so
$$
A=frac{1}{3}(2Q^{T}-Q)
$$
is the only possible one. Since
$$
fleft(frac{1}{3}(2Q^{T}-Q)right)=Q
$$
as it can be readily checked, you have surjectivity and injectivity.
Checking directly for injectivity is easier, though.
add a comment |
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
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3062109%2fis-fa-a-2at-an-isomorphism-of-mathbb-r5-5-onto-itself%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Hint:
Check if the kernel of this transformation is trivial. This is enough to establish if it is isomorphism:
$$begin{eqnarray}
f(A) =0
&implies &A=-2A^T \
&implies &A^T=(-2A^T)^T \
&implies &A^T = -2A \
&implies &A =4A \
&implies &A=0
end{eqnarray}
$$
By trivial you mean $ vec{0} $?
– VirtualUser
yesterday
Yes, that is correct.
– greedoid
yesterday
Chm.. can you explain this step? $ A^T = -2A rightarrow A =4A $
– VirtualUser
yesterday
Just plug second line in first
– greedoid
yesterday
Ahh, that's great, but unfortunately I can't use that because I haven't got this theorem on my lecture... But it is really smart
– VirtualUser
yesterday
|
show 1 more comment
Hint:
Check if the kernel of this transformation is trivial. This is enough to establish if it is isomorphism:
$$begin{eqnarray}
f(A) =0
&implies &A=-2A^T \
&implies &A^T=(-2A^T)^T \
&implies &A^T = -2A \
&implies &A =4A \
&implies &A=0
end{eqnarray}
$$
By trivial you mean $ vec{0} $?
– VirtualUser
yesterday
Yes, that is correct.
– greedoid
yesterday
Chm.. can you explain this step? $ A^T = -2A rightarrow A =4A $
– VirtualUser
yesterday
Just plug second line in first
– greedoid
yesterday
Ahh, that's great, but unfortunately I can't use that because I haven't got this theorem on my lecture... But it is really smart
– VirtualUser
yesterday
|
show 1 more comment
Hint:
Check if the kernel of this transformation is trivial. This is enough to establish if it is isomorphism:
$$begin{eqnarray}
f(A) =0
&implies &A=-2A^T \
&implies &A^T=(-2A^T)^T \
&implies &A^T = -2A \
&implies &A =4A \
&implies &A=0
end{eqnarray}
$$
Hint:
Check if the kernel of this transformation is trivial. This is enough to establish if it is isomorphism:
$$begin{eqnarray}
f(A) =0
&implies &A=-2A^T \
&implies &A^T=(-2A^T)^T \
&implies &A^T = -2A \
&implies &A =4A \
&implies &A=0
end{eqnarray}
$$
edited yesterday
answered yesterday
greedoid
38.2k114797
38.2k114797
By trivial you mean $ vec{0} $?
– VirtualUser
yesterday
Yes, that is correct.
– greedoid
yesterday
Chm.. can you explain this step? $ A^T = -2A rightarrow A =4A $
– VirtualUser
yesterday
Just plug second line in first
– greedoid
yesterday
Ahh, that's great, but unfortunately I can't use that because I haven't got this theorem on my lecture... But it is really smart
– VirtualUser
yesterday
|
show 1 more comment
By trivial you mean $ vec{0} $?
– VirtualUser
yesterday
Yes, that is correct.
– greedoid
yesterday
Chm.. can you explain this step? $ A^T = -2A rightarrow A =4A $
– VirtualUser
yesterday
Just plug second line in first
– greedoid
yesterday
Ahh, that's great, but unfortunately I can't use that because I haven't got this theorem on my lecture... But it is really smart
– VirtualUser
yesterday
By trivial you mean $ vec{0} $?
– VirtualUser
yesterday
By trivial you mean $ vec{0} $?
– VirtualUser
yesterday
Yes, that is correct.
– greedoid
yesterday
Yes, that is correct.
– greedoid
yesterday
Chm.. can you explain this step? $ A^T = -2A rightarrow A =4A $
– VirtualUser
yesterday
Chm.. can you explain this step? $ A^T = -2A rightarrow A =4A $
– VirtualUser
yesterday
Just plug second line in first
– greedoid
yesterday
Just plug second line in first
– greedoid
yesterday
Ahh, that's great, but unfortunately I can't use that because I haven't got this theorem on my lecture... But it is really smart
– VirtualUser
yesterday
Ahh, that's great, but unfortunately I can't use that because I haven't got this theorem on my lecture... But it is really smart
– VirtualUser
yesterday
|
show 1 more comment
You have $A-B = 2(A-B)^top$.
This implies $a_{ij} - b_{ij} = 2 (a_{ji} - b_{ji}) = 4(a_{ij} - b_{ij})$, so...
add a comment |
You have $A-B = 2(A-B)^top$.
This implies $a_{ij} - b_{ij} = 2 (a_{ji} - b_{ji}) = 4(a_{ij} - b_{ij})$, so...
add a comment |
You have $A-B = 2(A-B)^top$.
This implies $a_{ij} - b_{ij} = 2 (a_{ji} - b_{ji}) = 4(a_{ij} - b_{ij})$, so...
You have $A-B = 2(A-B)^top$.
This implies $a_{ij} - b_{ij} = 2 (a_{ji} - b_{ji}) = 4(a_{ij} - b_{ij})$, so...
answered yesterday
angryavian
39.1k23180
39.1k23180
add a comment |
add a comment |
You're already done. Since the map is from $mathbb R^{5times 5}$ to $mathbb R^{5times 5}$, checking that it's surjective (that it has full rank) also tells you that it's injective (that it has nullity $0$) by the rank-nullity theorem.
add a comment |
You're already done. Since the map is from $mathbb R^{5times 5}$ to $mathbb R^{5times 5}$, checking that it's surjective (that it has full rank) also tells you that it's injective (that it has nullity $0$) by the rank-nullity theorem.
add a comment |
You're already done. Since the map is from $mathbb R^{5times 5}$ to $mathbb R^{5times 5}$, checking that it's surjective (that it has full rank) also tells you that it's injective (that it has nullity $0$) by the rank-nullity theorem.
You're already done. Since the map is from $mathbb R^{5times 5}$ to $mathbb R^{5times 5}$, checking that it's surjective (that it has full rank) also tells you that it's injective (that it has nullity $0$) by the rank-nullity theorem.
answered yesterday
Misha Lavrov
43.9k555105
43.9k555105
add a comment |
add a comment |
Hint:
It suffices to check that $f$ is surjective. For any matrix $B$ we have
$$fleft(-frac13B + frac23B^Tright) = B$$
It you are wondering how we got this, assume $A+2A^T = B$. Then $A^T + 2A = B^T$ so $$B + B^T = 3(A+A^T)$$
Now it follows $$A = B^T - (A+A^T) = B^T - frac13(B + B^T) = -frac13B + frac23B^T$$
This seems to already be contained in the question post.
– Misha Lavrov
yesterday
@MishaLavrov Oops, I missed it. Still, here it is done slightly cleaner, without coordinates.
– mechanodroid
yesterday
add a comment |
Hint:
It suffices to check that $f$ is surjective. For any matrix $B$ we have
$$fleft(-frac13B + frac23B^Tright) = B$$
It you are wondering how we got this, assume $A+2A^T = B$. Then $A^T + 2A = B^T$ so $$B + B^T = 3(A+A^T)$$
Now it follows $$A = B^T - (A+A^T) = B^T - frac13(B + B^T) = -frac13B + frac23B^T$$
This seems to already be contained in the question post.
– Misha Lavrov
yesterday
@MishaLavrov Oops, I missed it. Still, here it is done slightly cleaner, without coordinates.
– mechanodroid
yesterday
add a comment |
Hint:
It suffices to check that $f$ is surjective. For any matrix $B$ we have
$$fleft(-frac13B + frac23B^Tright) = B$$
It you are wondering how we got this, assume $A+2A^T = B$. Then $A^T + 2A = B^T$ so $$B + B^T = 3(A+A^T)$$
Now it follows $$A = B^T - (A+A^T) = B^T - frac13(B + B^T) = -frac13B + frac23B^T$$
Hint:
It suffices to check that $f$ is surjective. For any matrix $B$ we have
$$fleft(-frac13B + frac23B^Tright) = B$$
It you are wondering how we got this, assume $A+2A^T = B$. Then $A^T + 2A = B^T$ so $$B + B^T = 3(A+A^T)$$
Now it follows $$A = B^T - (A+A^T) = B^T - frac13(B + B^T) = -frac13B + frac23B^T$$
answered yesterday
mechanodroid
27k62447
27k62447
This seems to already be contained in the question post.
– Misha Lavrov
yesterday
@MishaLavrov Oops, I missed it. Still, here it is done slightly cleaner, without coordinates.
– mechanodroid
yesterday
add a comment |
This seems to already be contained in the question post.
– Misha Lavrov
yesterday
@MishaLavrov Oops, I missed it. Still, here it is done slightly cleaner, without coordinates.
– mechanodroid
yesterday
This seems to already be contained in the question post.
– Misha Lavrov
yesterday
This seems to already be contained in the question post.
– Misha Lavrov
yesterday
@MishaLavrov Oops, I missed it. Still, here it is done slightly cleaner, without coordinates.
– mechanodroid
yesterday
@MishaLavrov Oops, I missed it. Still, here it is done slightly cleaner, without coordinates.
– mechanodroid
yesterday
add a comment |
When you say
$$
a_{ij}=frac{2q_{ji}-q_{ij}}{3}
$$
(I fixed the indices) is “determined unambiguously”, you have proved both surjectivity and injectivity. There is at most one matrix $mathbf{A}$ such that $f(mathbf{A})=mathbf{Q}$. And there is one, determined in the way you did (after fixing the small mistake).
On the other hand, a linear map $Lcolon Vto V$, where $V$ is a finite dimensional vector space, is injective if and only if it is surjective, because of the rank-nullity theorem. Therefore just one of the properties needs to be checked for.
You don't need to go to the level of matrix entries in order to prove surjectivity. Given $Q$ you want to find $A$ such that $f(A)=Q$, that is, $A+2A^T=Q$. If such matrix exists, then also
$$
A^T+2A=Q^T
$$
and so $2A^T+4A=2Q^T$; thus
$$
Q-2Q^T=A+2A^T-2A^T-4A=-3A
$$
so
$$
A=frac{1}{3}(2Q^{T}-Q)
$$
is the only possible one. Since
$$
fleft(frac{1}{3}(2Q^{T}-Q)right)=Q
$$
as it can be readily checked, you have surjectivity and injectivity.
Checking directly for injectivity is easier, though.
add a comment |
When you say
$$
a_{ij}=frac{2q_{ji}-q_{ij}}{3}
$$
(I fixed the indices) is “determined unambiguously”, you have proved both surjectivity and injectivity. There is at most one matrix $mathbf{A}$ such that $f(mathbf{A})=mathbf{Q}$. And there is one, determined in the way you did (after fixing the small mistake).
On the other hand, a linear map $Lcolon Vto V$, where $V$ is a finite dimensional vector space, is injective if and only if it is surjective, because of the rank-nullity theorem. Therefore just one of the properties needs to be checked for.
You don't need to go to the level of matrix entries in order to prove surjectivity. Given $Q$ you want to find $A$ such that $f(A)=Q$, that is, $A+2A^T=Q$. If such matrix exists, then also
$$
A^T+2A=Q^T
$$
and so $2A^T+4A=2Q^T$; thus
$$
Q-2Q^T=A+2A^T-2A^T-4A=-3A
$$
so
$$
A=frac{1}{3}(2Q^{T}-Q)
$$
is the only possible one. Since
$$
fleft(frac{1}{3}(2Q^{T}-Q)right)=Q
$$
as it can be readily checked, you have surjectivity and injectivity.
Checking directly for injectivity is easier, though.
add a comment |
When you say
$$
a_{ij}=frac{2q_{ji}-q_{ij}}{3}
$$
(I fixed the indices) is “determined unambiguously”, you have proved both surjectivity and injectivity. There is at most one matrix $mathbf{A}$ such that $f(mathbf{A})=mathbf{Q}$. And there is one, determined in the way you did (after fixing the small mistake).
On the other hand, a linear map $Lcolon Vto V$, where $V$ is a finite dimensional vector space, is injective if and only if it is surjective, because of the rank-nullity theorem. Therefore just one of the properties needs to be checked for.
You don't need to go to the level of matrix entries in order to prove surjectivity. Given $Q$ you want to find $A$ such that $f(A)=Q$, that is, $A+2A^T=Q$. If such matrix exists, then also
$$
A^T+2A=Q^T
$$
and so $2A^T+4A=2Q^T$; thus
$$
Q-2Q^T=A+2A^T-2A^T-4A=-3A
$$
so
$$
A=frac{1}{3}(2Q^{T}-Q)
$$
is the only possible one. Since
$$
fleft(frac{1}{3}(2Q^{T}-Q)right)=Q
$$
as it can be readily checked, you have surjectivity and injectivity.
Checking directly for injectivity is easier, though.
When you say
$$
a_{ij}=frac{2q_{ji}-q_{ij}}{3}
$$
(I fixed the indices) is “determined unambiguously”, you have proved both surjectivity and injectivity. There is at most one matrix $mathbf{A}$ such that $f(mathbf{A})=mathbf{Q}$. And there is one, determined in the way you did (after fixing the small mistake).
On the other hand, a linear map $Lcolon Vto V$, where $V$ is a finite dimensional vector space, is injective if and only if it is surjective, because of the rank-nullity theorem. Therefore just one of the properties needs to be checked for.
You don't need to go to the level of matrix entries in order to prove surjectivity. Given $Q$ you want to find $A$ such that $f(A)=Q$, that is, $A+2A^T=Q$. If such matrix exists, then also
$$
A^T+2A=Q^T
$$
and so $2A^T+4A=2Q^T$; thus
$$
Q-2Q^T=A+2A^T-2A^T-4A=-3A
$$
so
$$
A=frac{1}{3}(2Q^{T}-Q)
$$
is the only possible one. Since
$$
fleft(frac{1}{3}(2Q^{T}-Q)right)=Q
$$
as it can be readily checked, you have surjectivity and injectivity.
Checking directly for injectivity is easier, though.
answered yesterday
egreg
178k1484201
178k1484201
add a comment |
add a comment |
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3062109%2fis-fa-a-2at-an-isomorphism-of-mathbb-r5-5-onto-itself%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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