Another Carnival
The Secret Blogging Seminar is hosting the latest installment of the Carnival of Mathematics. They seem to have done a fair job of collecting links, with more (and more varied) entries than I remember seeing before. Enjoy.
Share this:
December 2, 2007 - Posted by John Armstrong | Uncategorized
3 Comments »
Leave a Reply Cancel reply
About this weblog
This is mainly an expository blath, with occasional high-level excursions, humorous observations, rants, and musings. The main-line exposition should be accessible to the “Generally Interested Lay Audience”, as long as you trace the links back towards the basics. Check the sidebar for specific topics (under “Categories”).
I’m in the process of tweaking some aspects of the site to make it easier to refer back to older topics, so try to make the best of it for now.
-
Recent Posts
- The Submodule of Invariants
- More New Modules from Old
- New Modules from Old
- Reducible Modules
- Irreducible Modules
- Lie Algebra Modules
- All Derivations of Semisimple Lie Algebras are Inner
- Decomposition of Semisimple Lie Algebras
- Back to the Example
- The Radical of the Killing Form
- The Killing Form
- Cartan’s Criterion
- A Trace Criterion for Nilpotence
- Uses of the Jordan-Chevalley Decomposition
- The Jordan-Chevalley Decomposition (proof)
Blogroll
Art
Astronomy
Computer Science
Education
Mathematics
- A Dialogue on Infinity
- A Singular Continuity
- Ars Mathematica
- Carter and Complexity
- Curious Reasoning
- Fightin’ the resistance of matter
- God Plays Dice
- Good Math, Bad Math
- Gowers's Weblog
- Gyre&Gimble
- Intrinsically Knotted
- Low Dimensional Topology
- Mathematics and physics
- Mathematics under the Microscope
- Michi’s blog
- Really Hard Sums
- Rigorous Trivialities
- Secret Blogging Seminar
- Sketches of Topology
- Steven Strogatz
- Sumidiot
- The Everything Seminar
- The Museum of Mathematics
- The n-Category Café
- The Universe of Discourse
- Theoretical Atlas
- This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics
- Topological Musings
- What's new
Me
Philosophy
Physics
Politics
Science
RSS Feeds
Feedback
Got something to say? Anonymous questions, comments, and suggestions at Formspring.me!Subjects
Archives
Site info
The Unapologetic MathematicianTheme: Andreas04 by Andreas Viklund. Blog at WordPress.com.

John, I have appreciated your help in the past and I would like to get your insight into yet another question I have concerning linear algebra.
What is the relationship between the set of all linear transformations on a vector space over a field F of dimension n and the set of all nxn matrices with entries from the same field F. Clearly, it is not a one-to-one relation. There may be many, possibly an infinite number of matrices that can represent the same linear transformation with respect to different basis of the space. What exactly is the relation?
Thank you for your time,
Jonathan Greenberg
When you’re dealing with
-linear functions between free
-modules (all vector spaces — modules over a field — are free), you can pick a basis for each of the domain and range as I discuss here. Once you do, then any such linear transformation can be written down uniquely as a matrix with respect to those bases, as I discuss in that link. Also, given a choice of bases any matrix corresponds to exactly one linear transformation.
But as you notice, there’s that choice of basis. Changing the basis of a free module is the same as applying an invertible linear transformation from that module to itself. That is,
is the space of linear transformations from a rank
module to a rank
module. Then there is an action of the group
(invertible
matrices with entries in
) on the one side, and an action of
on the other. What you’re really asking about is what the set of transformations looks like once we quotient out by these group actions.
And that’s where the story gets complicated. Over an algebraically closed field (like the complex numbers), the answer is contained in the Jordan normal form, which is a standard part of any good senior-level linear algebra course. It gives a canonical representative of each orbit of the group action. Beyond that it’s a huge mess. Sorry I can’t be more accurate.
John, thank you for your insight into my question. I will have to think about your answer as I study linear algebra in more depth.
JG