Concept of linear mappings are confusing meChange of Basis ConfusionProve that a linear map for complex polynomials is diagonalizableEigenvalues of three given linear operatorsTransforming coordinate system vs objectsCan an $ntimes n$ matrix be reduced to a smaller matrix in any sense?Overview of Linear AlgebraLinear Transformation vs MatrixPruning SubsetsChange of basis formula - intuition/is this true?Linear Algebra:Vector Space

How old can references or sources in a thesis be?

How do you conduct xenoanthropology after first contact?

How to make payment on the internet without leaving a money trail?

A Journey Through Space and Time

Is there really no realistic way for a skeleton monster to move around without magic?

What do you call a Matrix-like slowdown and camera movement effect?

What does "enim et" mean?

What do you call something that goes against the spirit of the law, but is legal when interpreting the law to the letter?

What is the offset in a seaplane's hull?

What are these boxed doors outside store fronts in New York?

Patience, young "Padovan"

Is it legal to have the "// (c) 2019 John Smith" header in all files when there are hundreds of contributors?

Circuitry of TV splitters

Schwarzchild Radius of the Universe

New order #4: World

How can bays and straits be determined in a procedurally generated map?

What is the white spray-pattern residue inside these Falcon Heavy nozzles?

Can I interfere when another PC is about to be attacked?

N.B. ligature in Latex

Can an x86 CPU running in real mode be considered to be basically an 8086 CPU?

declaring a variable twice in IIFE

How can the DM most effectively choose 1 out of an odd number of players to be targeted by an attack or effect?

XeLaTeX and pdfLaTeX ignore hyphenation

If Manufacturer spice model and Datasheet give different values which should I use?



Concept of linear mappings are confusing me


Change of Basis ConfusionProve that a linear map for complex polynomials is diagonalizableEigenvalues of three given linear operatorsTransforming coordinate system vs objectsCan an $ntimes n$ matrix be reduced to a smaller matrix in any sense?Overview of Linear AlgebraLinear Transformation vs MatrixPruning SubsetsChange of basis formula - intuition/is this true?Linear Algebra:Vector Space













6












$begingroup$


I'm so confused on how we can have a 2x3 matrix A, multiply it by a vector in $Bbb R^3$ and then end up with a vector in $Bbb R^2$. Is it possible to visualize this at all or do I need to sort of blindly accept this concept as facts that I'll accept and use?
Can someone give a very brief summarization on why this makes sense? Because I just see it as, in a world (dimension) in $Bbb R^3$, we multiply it by a vector in $Bbb R^3$, and out pops a vector in $Bbb R^2$.



Thanks!










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    maybe think of multiplying a matrix by a vector as a special case of multiplying a matrix by a matrix
    $endgroup$
    – J. W. Tanner
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Is it the definition of matrix multiplication that gives you trouble? Have you tried doing a multiplication and seeing what you get? Do you understand that we can have a function like $f(x,y,z)=(x-2y+z, 2x+4y-z)$ which maps $mathbb R^3$ to $mathbb R^2$?
    $endgroup$
    – John Douma
    3 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    I think it's just visualizing it that gives me trouble. Like simple vector addition, I can easily say, oh ok just add the $x_1$ unit to the other $x_1$ unit and it stretches towards $x_1$'s side! But in this case, just multiplying a vector by something in one dimension and getting a vector in another dimensions just confuses me. And I do know we can have a function like that, it's just intuitively I guess I don't really understand it
    $endgroup$
    – ming
    36 mins ago















6












$begingroup$


I'm so confused on how we can have a 2x3 matrix A, multiply it by a vector in $Bbb R^3$ and then end up with a vector in $Bbb R^2$. Is it possible to visualize this at all or do I need to sort of blindly accept this concept as facts that I'll accept and use?
Can someone give a very brief summarization on why this makes sense? Because I just see it as, in a world (dimension) in $Bbb R^3$, we multiply it by a vector in $Bbb R^3$, and out pops a vector in $Bbb R^2$.



Thanks!










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    maybe think of multiplying a matrix by a vector as a special case of multiplying a matrix by a matrix
    $endgroup$
    – J. W. Tanner
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Is it the definition of matrix multiplication that gives you trouble? Have you tried doing a multiplication and seeing what you get? Do you understand that we can have a function like $f(x,y,z)=(x-2y+z, 2x+4y-z)$ which maps $mathbb R^3$ to $mathbb R^2$?
    $endgroup$
    – John Douma
    3 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    I think it's just visualizing it that gives me trouble. Like simple vector addition, I can easily say, oh ok just add the $x_1$ unit to the other $x_1$ unit and it stretches towards $x_1$'s side! But in this case, just multiplying a vector by something in one dimension and getting a vector in another dimensions just confuses me. And I do know we can have a function like that, it's just intuitively I guess I don't really understand it
    $endgroup$
    – ming
    36 mins ago













6












6








6





$begingroup$


I'm so confused on how we can have a 2x3 matrix A, multiply it by a vector in $Bbb R^3$ and then end up with a vector in $Bbb R^2$. Is it possible to visualize this at all or do I need to sort of blindly accept this concept as facts that I'll accept and use?
Can someone give a very brief summarization on why this makes sense? Because I just see it as, in a world (dimension) in $Bbb R^3$, we multiply it by a vector in $Bbb R^3$, and out pops a vector in $Bbb R^2$.



Thanks!










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




I'm so confused on how we can have a 2x3 matrix A, multiply it by a vector in $Bbb R^3$ and then end up with a vector in $Bbb R^2$. Is it possible to visualize this at all or do I need to sort of blindly accept this concept as facts that I'll accept and use?
Can someone give a very brief summarization on why this makes sense? Because I just see it as, in a world (dimension) in $Bbb R^3$, we multiply it by a vector in $Bbb R^3$, and out pops a vector in $Bbb R^2$.



Thanks!







linear-algebra






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked 3 hours ago









mingming

4356




4356







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    maybe think of multiplying a matrix by a vector as a special case of multiplying a matrix by a matrix
    $endgroup$
    – J. W. Tanner
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Is it the definition of matrix multiplication that gives you trouble? Have you tried doing a multiplication and seeing what you get? Do you understand that we can have a function like $f(x,y,z)=(x-2y+z, 2x+4y-z)$ which maps $mathbb R^3$ to $mathbb R^2$?
    $endgroup$
    – John Douma
    3 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    I think it's just visualizing it that gives me trouble. Like simple vector addition, I can easily say, oh ok just add the $x_1$ unit to the other $x_1$ unit and it stretches towards $x_1$'s side! But in this case, just multiplying a vector by something in one dimension and getting a vector in another dimensions just confuses me. And I do know we can have a function like that, it's just intuitively I guess I don't really understand it
    $endgroup$
    – ming
    36 mins ago












  • 1




    $begingroup$
    maybe think of multiplying a matrix by a vector as a special case of multiplying a matrix by a matrix
    $endgroup$
    – J. W. Tanner
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Is it the definition of matrix multiplication that gives you trouble? Have you tried doing a multiplication and seeing what you get? Do you understand that we can have a function like $f(x,y,z)=(x-2y+z, 2x+4y-z)$ which maps $mathbb R^3$ to $mathbb R^2$?
    $endgroup$
    – John Douma
    3 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    I think it's just visualizing it that gives me trouble. Like simple vector addition, I can easily say, oh ok just add the $x_1$ unit to the other $x_1$ unit and it stretches towards $x_1$'s side! But in this case, just multiplying a vector by something in one dimension and getting a vector in another dimensions just confuses me. And I do know we can have a function like that, it's just intuitively I guess I don't really understand it
    $endgroup$
    – ming
    36 mins ago







1




1




$begingroup$
maybe think of multiplying a matrix by a vector as a special case of multiplying a matrix by a matrix
$endgroup$
– J. W. Tanner
3 hours ago




$begingroup$
maybe think of multiplying a matrix by a vector as a special case of multiplying a matrix by a matrix
$endgroup$
– J. W. Tanner
3 hours ago












$begingroup$
Is it the definition of matrix multiplication that gives you trouble? Have you tried doing a multiplication and seeing what you get? Do you understand that we can have a function like $f(x,y,z)=(x-2y+z, 2x+4y-z)$ which maps $mathbb R^3$ to $mathbb R^2$?
$endgroup$
– John Douma
3 hours ago





$begingroup$
Is it the definition of matrix multiplication that gives you trouble? Have you tried doing a multiplication and seeing what you get? Do you understand that we can have a function like $f(x,y,z)=(x-2y+z, 2x+4y-z)$ which maps $mathbb R^3$ to $mathbb R^2$?
$endgroup$
– John Douma
3 hours ago













$begingroup$
I think it's just visualizing it that gives me trouble. Like simple vector addition, I can easily say, oh ok just add the $x_1$ unit to the other $x_1$ unit and it stretches towards $x_1$'s side! But in this case, just multiplying a vector by something in one dimension and getting a vector in another dimensions just confuses me. And I do know we can have a function like that, it's just intuitively I guess I don't really understand it
$endgroup$
– ming
36 mins ago




$begingroup$
I think it's just visualizing it that gives me trouble. Like simple vector addition, I can easily say, oh ok just add the $x_1$ unit to the other $x_1$ unit and it stretches towards $x_1$'s side! But in this case, just multiplying a vector by something in one dimension and getting a vector in another dimensions just confuses me. And I do know we can have a function like that, it's just intuitively I guess I don't really understand it
$endgroup$
– ming
36 mins ago










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















4












$begingroup$

For the moment don't think about multiplication and matrices.



You can imagine starting from a vector $(x,y,z)$ in $mathbbR^3$ and mapping it to a vector in $mathbbR^2$ this way, for example:
$$
(x, y, z) mapsto (2x+ z, 3x+ 4y).
$$



Mathematicians have invented a nice clean way to write that map. It's the formalism you've learned for matrix multiplication. To see what $(1,2,3)$ maps to, calculate the matrix product
$$
beginbmatrix
2 & 0 & 1 \
3 & 4 & 0
endbmatrix
beginbmatrix
1 \
2 \
3
endbmatrix
=
beginbmatrix
5\
11
endbmatrix.
$$



You will soon be comfortable with this, just as you are now with whatever algorithm you were taught for ordinary multiplication. Then you will be free to focus on understanding what maps like this are useful for.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    So in really simple terms, is (5, 11) a vector in 2 dimensions, that just "looks" like the vector (1, 2, 3) in 3 dimensions?
    $endgroup$
    – ming
    32 mins ago


















4












$begingroup$

A more intuitive way is to think of a matrix "performing" on a vector, instead of a matrix "multiplying" with a vector.



Let's give an example. You have some triples of real numbers:



(1,2,3), (2,5,1), (3,5,9), (2,9,8)


and you "forget" the third coordinate:



(1,2), (2,5), (3,5), (2,9)


Surprisingly, this is an example of "matrix performance." Can you find
a matrix $M$ that "forgets" the second coordinate?



Answer:




The matrix is $$left(beginarrayl1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 1 & 0 endarrayright)$$




Explanation:




To get the first row, think about what happens under matrix multiplication to the vector $(1,0,0)$. The next two rows are similar.




We call such a matrix $M$ a projection.
We may visualize the projection as such.



Projection; Image from www.math4all.in



Can you see what it means to "forget" the
third coordinate?



The important part of
a projection is linearity:



  • You may project the addition of two vectors, or you may
    add the projection of two vectors and you get the same result.

  • Similarly, you may project a scaled vector, or scale the vector
    and then project it, and you get the same result.

We call a function with the linearity property a linear function.



In symbols, for any linear $f$,



  • $f(v + w) = f(v) + f(w)$

  • $f(cv) = cf(v)$

We see that the projection defined above is a
linear function.
Actually, you can check that every matrix is a linear function.
Perhaps it is more surprising that every linear function is a matrix. You may think of a matrix as a way to represent some linear function.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    This was really helpful, thanks! Now if we "forget" about that third element, does that mean that the third dimension just totally disappears? The z-axis is just removed completely?
    $endgroup$
    – ming
    34 mins ago


















0












$begingroup$

A linear mapping has the property that it maps subspaces to subspaces.



So it will map a line to a line or $0$, a plane to a plane, a line, or $0$, and so on.



By definition, linear mappings “play nice” with addition and scaling. These properties allow us to reduce statements about entire vector spaces down to bases, which are quite “small” in the finite dimensional case.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













    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%2f3179032%2fconcept-of-linear-mappings-are-confusing-me%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes








    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    4












    $begingroup$

    For the moment don't think about multiplication and matrices.



    You can imagine starting from a vector $(x,y,z)$ in $mathbbR^3$ and mapping it to a vector in $mathbbR^2$ this way, for example:
    $$
    (x, y, z) mapsto (2x+ z, 3x+ 4y).
    $$



    Mathematicians have invented a nice clean way to write that map. It's the formalism you've learned for matrix multiplication. To see what $(1,2,3)$ maps to, calculate the matrix product
    $$
    beginbmatrix
    2 & 0 & 1 \
    3 & 4 & 0
    endbmatrix
    beginbmatrix
    1 \
    2 \
    3
    endbmatrix
    =
    beginbmatrix
    5\
    11
    endbmatrix.
    $$



    You will soon be comfortable with this, just as you are now with whatever algorithm you were taught for ordinary multiplication. Then you will be free to focus on understanding what maps like this are useful for.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      So in really simple terms, is (5, 11) a vector in 2 dimensions, that just "looks" like the vector (1, 2, 3) in 3 dimensions?
      $endgroup$
      – ming
      32 mins ago















    4












    $begingroup$

    For the moment don't think about multiplication and matrices.



    You can imagine starting from a vector $(x,y,z)$ in $mathbbR^3$ and mapping it to a vector in $mathbbR^2$ this way, for example:
    $$
    (x, y, z) mapsto (2x+ z, 3x+ 4y).
    $$



    Mathematicians have invented a nice clean way to write that map. It's the formalism you've learned for matrix multiplication. To see what $(1,2,3)$ maps to, calculate the matrix product
    $$
    beginbmatrix
    2 & 0 & 1 \
    3 & 4 & 0
    endbmatrix
    beginbmatrix
    1 \
    2 \
    3
    endbmatrix
    =
    beginbmatrix
    5\
    11
    endbmatrix.
    $$



    You will soon be comfortable with this, just as you are now with whatever algorithm you were taught for ordinary multiplication. Then you will be free to focus on understanding what maps like this are useful for.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      So in really simple terms, is (5, 11) a vector in 2 dimensions, that just "looks" like the vector (1, 2, 3) in 3 dimensions?
      $endgroup$
      – ming
      32 mins ago













    4












    4








    4





    $begingroup$

    For the moment don't think about multiplication and matrices.



    You can imagine starting from a vector $(x,y,z)$ in $mathbbR^3$ and mapping it to a vector in $mathbbR^2$ this way, for example:
    $$
    (x, y, z) mapsto (2x+ z, 3x+ 4y).
    $$



    Mathematicians have invented a nice clean way to write that map. It's the formalism you've learned for matrix multiplication. To see what $(1,2,3)$ maps to, calculate the matrix product
    $$
    beginbmatrix
    2 & 0 & 1 \
    3 & 4 & 0
    endbmatrix
    beginbmatrix
    1 \
    2 \
    3
    endbmatrix
    =
    beginbmatrix
    5\
    11
    endbmatrix.
    $$



    You will soon be comfortable with this, just as you are now with whatever algorithm you were taught for ordinary multiplication. Then you will be free to focus on understanding what maps like this are useful for.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    For the moment don't think about multiplication and matrices.



    You can imagine starting from a vector $(x,y,z)$ in $mathbbR^3$ and mapping it to a vector in $mathbbR^2$ this way, for example:
    $$
    (x, y, z) mapsto (2x+ z, 3x+ 4y).
    $$



    Mathematicians have invented a nice clean way to write that map. It's the formalism you've learned for matrix multiplication. To see what $(1,2,3)$ maps to, calculate the matrix product
    $$
    beginbmatrix
    2 & 0 & 1 \
    3 & 4 & 0
    endbmatrix
    beginbmatrix
    1 \
    2 \
    3
    endbmatrix
    =
    beginbmatrix
    5\
    11
    endbmatrix.
    $$



    You will soon be comfortable with this, just as you are now with whatever algorithm you were taught for ordinary multiplication. Then you will be free to focus on understanding what maps like this are useful for.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered 3 hours ago









    Ethan BolkerEthan Bolker

    45.8k553120




    45.8k553120











    • $begingroup$
      So in really simple terms, is (5, 11) a vector in 2 dimensions, that just "looks" like the vector (1, 2, 3) in 3 dimensions?
      $endgroup$
      – ming
      32 mins ago
















    • $begingroup$
      So in really simple terms, is (5, 11) a vector in 2 dimensions, that just "looks" like the vector (1, 2, 3) in 3 dimensions?
      $endgroup$
      – ming
      32 mins ago















    $begingroup$
    So in really simple terms, is (5, 11) a vector in 2 dimensions, that just "looks" like the vector (1, 2, 3) in 3 dimensions?
    $endgroup$
    – ming
    32 mins ago




    $begingroup$
    So in really simple terms, is (5, 11) a vector in 2 dimensions, that just "looks" like the vector (1, 2, 3) in 3 dimensions?
    $endgroup$
    – ming
    32 mins ago











    4












    $begingroup$

    A more intuitive way is to think of a matrix "performing" on a vector, instead of a matrix "multiplying" with a vector.



    Let's give an example. You have some triples of real numbers:



    (1,2,3), (2,5,1), (3,5,9), (2,9,8)


    and you "forget" the third coordinate:



    (1,2), (2,5), (3,5), (2,9)


    Surprisingly, this is an example of "matrix performance." Can you find
    a matrix $M$ that "forgets" the second coordinate?



    Answer:




    The matrix is $$left(beginarrayl1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 1 & 0 endarrayright)$$




    Explanation:




    To get the first row, think about what happens under matrix multiplication to the vector $(1,0,0)$. The next two rows are similar.




    We call such a matrix $M$ a projection.
    We may visualize the projection as such.



    Projection; Image from www.math4all.in



    Can you see what it means to "forget" the
    third coordinate?



    The important part of
    a projection is linearity:



    • You may project the addition of two vectors, or you may
      add the projection of two vectors and you get the same result.

    • Similarly, you may project a scaled vector, or scale the vector
      and then project it, and you get the same result.

    We call a function with the linearity property a linear function.



    In symbols, for any linear $f$,



    • $f(v + w) = f(v) + f(w)$

    • $f(cv) = cf(v)$

    We see that the projection defined above is a
    linear function.
    Actually, you can check that every matrix is a linear function.
    Perhaps it is more surprising that every linear function is a matrix. You may think of a matrix as a way to represent some linear function.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      This was really helpful, thanks! Now if we "forget" about that third element, does that mean that the third dimension just totally disappears? The z-axis is just removed completely?
      $endgroup$
      – ming
      34 mins ago















    4












    $begingroup$

    A more intuitive way is to think of a matrix "performing" on a vector, instead of a matrix "multiplying" with a vector.



    Let's give an example. You have some triples of real numbers:



    (1,2,3), (2,5,1), (3,5,9), (2,9,8)


    and you "forget" the third coordinate:



    (1,2), (2,5), (3,5), (2,9)


    Surprisingly, this is an example of "matrix performance." Can you find
    a matrix $M$ that "forgets" the second coordinate?



    Answer:




    The matrix is $$left(beginarrayl1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 1 & 0 endarrayright)$$




    Explanation:




    To get the first row, think about what happens under matrix multiplication to the vector $(1,0,0)$. The next two rows are similar.




    We call such a matrix $M$ a projection.
    We may visualize the projection as such.



    Projection; Image from www.math4all.in



    Can you see what it means to "forget" the
    third coordinate?



    The important part of
    a projection is linearity:



    • You may project the addition of two vectors, or you may
      add the projection of two vectors and you get the same result.

    • Similarly, you may project a scaled vector, or scale the vector
      and then project it, and you get the same result.

    We call a function with the linearity property a linear function.



    In symbols, for any linear $f$,



    • $f(v + w) = f(v) + f(w)$

    • $f(cv) = cf(v)$

    We see that the projection defined above is a
    linear function.
    Actually, you can check that every matrix is a linear function.
    Perhaps it is more surprising that every linear function is a matrix. You may think of a matrix as a way to represent some linear function.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      This was really helpful, thanks! Now if we "forget" about that third element, does that mean that the third dimension just totally disappears? The z-axis is just removed completely?
      $endgroup$
      – ming
      34 mins ago













    4












    4








    4





    $begingroup$

    A more intuitive way is to think of a matrix "performing" on a vector, instead of a matrix "multiplying" with a vector.



    Let's give an example. You have some triples of real numbers:



    (1,2,3), (2,5,1), (3,5,9), (2,9,8)


    and you "forget" the third coordinate:



    (1,2), (2,5), (3,5), (2,9)


    Surprisingly, this is an example of "matrix performance." Can you find
    a matrix $M$ that "forgets" the second coordinate?



    Answer:




    The matrix is $$left(beginarrayl1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 1 & 0 endarrayright)$$




    Explanation:




    To get the first row, think about what happens under matrix multiplication to the vector $(1,0,0)$. The next two rows are similar.




    We call such a matrix $M$ a projection.
    We may visualize the projection as such.



    Projection; Image from www.math4all.in



    Can you see what it means to "forget" the
    third coordinate?



    The important part of
    a projection is linearity:



    • You may project the addition of two vectors, or you may
      add the projection of two vectors and you get the same result.

    • Similarly, you may project a scaled vector, or scale the vector
      and then project it, and you get the same result.

    We call a function with the linearity property a linear function.



    In symbols, for any linear $f$,



    • $f(v + w) = f(v) + f(w)$

    • $f(cv) = cf(v)$

    We see that the projection defined above is a
    linear function.
    Actually, you can check that every matrix is a linear function.
    Perhaps it is more surprising that every linear function is a matrix. You may think of a matrix as a way to represent some linear function.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    A more intuitive way is to think of a matrix "performing" on a vector, instead of a matrix "multiplying" with a vector.



    Let's give an example. You have some triples of real numbers:



    (1,2,3), (2,5,1), (3,5,9), (2,9,8)


    and you "forget" the third coordinate:



    (1,2), (2,5), (3,5), (2,9)


    Surprisingly, this is an example of "matrix performance." Can you find
    a matrix $M$ that "forgets" the second coordinate?



    Answer:




    The matrix is $$left(beginarrayl1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 1 & 0 endarrayright)$$




    Explanation:




    To get the first row, think about what happens under matrix multiplication to the vector $(1,0,0)$. The next two rows are similar.




    We call such a matrix $M$ a projection.
    We may visualize the projection as such.



    Projection; Image from www.math4all.in



    Can you see what it means to "forget" the
    third coordinate?



    The important part of
    a projection is linearity:



    • You may project the addition of two vectors, or you may
      add the projection of two vectors and you get the same result.

    • Similarly, you may project a scaled vector, or scale the vector
      and then project it, and you get the same result.

    We call a function with the linearity property a linear function.



    In symbols, for any linear $f$,



    • $f(v + w) = f(v) + f(w)$

    • $f(cv) = cf(v)$

    We see that the projection defined above is a
    linear function.
    Actually, you can check that every matrix is a linear function.
    Perhaps it is more surprising that every linear function is a matrix. You may think of a matrix as a way to represent some linear function.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered 1 hour ago









    user156213user156213

    64338




    64338











    • $begingroup$
      This was really helpful, thanks! Now if we "forget" about that third element, does that mean that the third dimension just totally disappears? The z-axis is just removed completely?
      $endgroup$
      – ming
      34 mins ago
















    • $begingroup$
      This was really helpful, thanks! Now if we "forget" about that third element, does that mean that the third dimension just totally disappears? The z-axis is just removed completely?
      $endgroup$
      – ming
      34 mins ago















    $begingroup$
    This was really helpful, thanks! Now if we "forget" about that third element, does that mean that the third dimension just totally disappears? The z-axis is just removed completely?
    $endgroup$
    – ming
    34 mins ago




    $begingroup$
    This was really helpful, thanks! Now if we "forget" about that third element, does that mean that the third dimension just totally disappears? The z-axis is just removed completely?
    $endgroup$
    – ming
    34 mins ago











    0












    $begingroup$

    A linear mapping has the property that it maps subspaces to subspaces.



    So it will map a line to a line or $0$, a plane to a plane, a line, or $0$, and so on.



    By definition, linear mappings “play nice” with addition and scaling. These properties allow us to reduce statements about entire vector spaces down to bases, which are quite “small” in the finite dimensional case.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$

















      0












      $begingroup$

      A linear mapping has the property that it maps subspaces to subspaces.



      So it will map a line to a line or $0$, a plane to a plane, a line, or $0$, and so on.



      By definition, linear mappings “play nice” with addition and scaling. These properties allow us to reduce statements about entire vector spaces down to bases, which are quite “small” in the finite dimensional case.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$















        0












        0








        0





        $begingroup$

        A linear mapping has the property that it maps subspaces to subspaces.



        So it will map a line to a line or $0$, a plane to a plane, a line, or $0$, and so on.



        By definition, linear mappings “play nice” with addition and scaling. These properties allow us to reduce statements about entire vector spaces down to bases, which are quite “small” in the finite dimensional case.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        A linear mapping has the property that it maps subspaces to subspaces.



        So it will map a line to a line or $0$, a plane to a plane, a line, or $0$, and so on.



        By definition, linear mappings “play nice” with addition and scaling. These properties allow us to reduce statements about entire vector spaces down to bases, which are quite “small” in the finite dimensional case.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered 2 hours ago









        rschwiebrschwieb

        108k12103253




        108k12103253



























            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.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3179032%2fconcept-of-linear-mappings-are-confusing-me%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

            Magento 2 duplicate PHPSESSID cookie when using session_start() in custom php scriptMagento 2: User cant logged in into to account page, no error showing!Magento duplicate on subdomainGrabbing storeview from cookie (after using language selector)How do I run php custom script on magento2Magento 2: Include PHP script in headerSession lock after using Cm_RedisSessionscript php to update stockMagento set cookie popupMagento 2 session id cookie - where to find it?How to import Configurable product from csv with custom attributes using php scriptMagento 2 run custom PHP script

            Can not update quote_id field of “quote_item” table magento 2Magento 2.1 - We can't remove the item. (Shopping Cart doesnt allow us to remove items before becomes empty)Add value for custom quote item attribute using REST apiREST API endpoint v1/carts/cartId/items always returns error messageCorrect way to save entries to databaseHow to remove all associated quote objects of a customer completelyMagento 2 - Save value from custom input field to quote_itemGet quote_item data using quote id and product id filter in Magento 2How to set additional data to quote_item table from controller in Magento 2?What is the purpose of additional_data column in quote_item table in magento2Set Custom Price to Quote item magento2 from controller

            How to solve knockout JS error in Magento 2 Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?(Magento2) knockout.js:3012 Uncaught ReferenceError: Unable to process bindingUnable to process binding Knockout.js magento 2Cannot read property `scopeLabel` of undefined on Product Detail PageCan't get Customer Data on frontend in Magento 2Magento2 Order Summary - unable to process bindingKO templates are not loading in Magento 2.1 applicationgetting knockout js error magento 2Product grid not load -— Unable to process binding Knockout.js magento 2Product form not loaded in magento2Uncaught ReferenceError: Unable to process binding “if: function()return (isShowLegend()) ” magento 2