@MartinSleziak There's a reliable bot named Toasty that stops rooms from getting frozen. stackapps.com/q/10422 It's very easy for a room owner to set up.
@Færd I want to note this fails for continuous operators between Banach spaces, which your book might be interested in given it's about physics. Namely, the operator $T:\ell^1\to \ell^2$ given by $T(x) = x$ is an example where $T^\ast$ fails to be surjective.
This is from Sadri Hassani's Mathematical Physics. In Proposition 2.5.5, I get why "If T is surjective, then T∗ is injective", but I don't get why "If T is injective, then T∗ is surjective". Could anyone help me with that?
Hello! I am studying for an exam and had a question.
Let E be a subspace defined by the span of a set of vectors and F be the orthogonal complement of E. Is the null space of the projection matrix onto E the basis of F?
I had thought there was a commutative algebra room out there, but I couldn't spot it. Here is a commutative algebra request I dropped in the mathematics chat but I suspect it will get buried quickly: chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/62828054#62828054
Let M be an n × m real matrix. Consider the following: • Let k1 be the smallest number such that M can be factorized as A · B, where A is an n × k1 and B is a k1 × m matrix. • Let k2 be the smallest number such that $M =\sum_{i=1}^{k_2} u_i*v_i$, where each $u_i$ is an n × 1 matrix and each $v_i$ is an 1 × m matrix. • Let k3 be the column-rank of M. Can someone help me with proving k1 = k2 = k3?
I am trying to understand the continuity argument used in the second answer..any help is much appreciated? I am trying to understand why there cannot be a continuous path to the region $D_{a}<0$ and $D_{b}<0$ ?
Suppose $A,B \in M_{n}(\Bbb{R})$ such that $A = \left[C_{1}\middle|\frac{I}{0\dots0}\right], B= \left[C_{2}\middle|\frac{I}{0\dots0}\right]$ , where $A$ and $B$ have different first columns (represented as $C_{1}, C_{2}$).
Thus we have $B = A+ \xi e_{1}^T$, where $\xi$ is a $n \times 1$ column ve...
@sadman-ncc His exercises are thought-provoking and tend to make you think more about linear algebra in the context of abstract algebra (e.g. groups and modules), but a strong motivation is required
$\Bbb C [x]/(2x)$ is isomorphic to $\Bbb C$, which is a field. Anyway, you can easily see that $(x+y, x-y) = (x,y)$ which is obviously a maximal ideal. — CrostulAug 27, 2020 at 7:36
Anyone know how to prove a corner ring of a semiperfect ring is semiperfect? This post seems to think it is true, but I don't happen to see how to do it, if it is.
My first suggestion would have been Schaum's outline. However since you have gone through that already, another book I am quite fond of (which I think covers a good portion of the topics you mentioned) is "Linear Algebra Problem Book" by Paul Halmos:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Algebra-Problem-Dolci...
Hey guys! I would like a recommendation about a linear algebra book. So far I have studied Terence Tao's notes on linear algebra as well as the first three chapters of Hoffman and Kunze "Linear Algebra". Based on such considerations, could someone suggest me a natural follow-up to these books which is equally reader-friendly? Thanks in advance!
Hi everyone. I have a soft question. The direct product operation of finite groups up to isomorphism forms a commutative monoid. Do you think it's possible to take this as multiplicative and form a ring? In other words, is there an additive operation on finite groups?
@MartinSleziak : On a different note , are undergrads in maths expected to complete the whole of a book like , Dummit and foote , in one semester of algebra course ?
@MartinSleziak : Do you know of any such theorem or lemma ? I was basically confused about as to why there is another theorem which is same as the first property of the euclidian ring . Then I saw the difference was the greater than and greater than or equal to sign
A computational question: suppose you have a number field, $F$, and the minimal polynomial, $f$, of a primitive element, $x$, of $F$, so that you can represent elements of $F$ as rational polynomials in $x$ between which computations are done modulo $f$. Does taking the GCD's of polynomials whose coefficients are in $F$ using the basic Euclidean algorithm suffer from coefficient explosion?
I don't think it's going to get more "geometric" than splitting it into separate component vectors in the directions that $D$ scales in (or if its a symmetric mastrix, the directions that $S$ scales in) and projecting them independently and then adding them up.
Hey, I'm not sure if it's okay to request answers to questions here, but if someone has a great geometric understanding of Linear Algebra, I would REALLY appreciate an answer to this question: math.stackexchange.com/questions/3266970/…