Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

In class we saw A 1-1 homomorphism from $\operatorname{Iso}(\mathbb{R})$ to $GL(2,\mathbb{R})$

$$\operatorname{Iso}(\mathbb{R})\cong \left\{ \begin{pmatrix}\pm1 & x\\ 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix}|x\in\mathbb{R}\right\}. $$

How can I get this result ? (It works, but it's probably not a guess, whats the idea ?)

Seeing this I think that there is a 1-1 homomorphism from $\operatorname{Iso}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ to $GL(3,\mathbb{R})$ , how can we find it ? (that's why I'm trying to gain a better understanding of $\operatorname{Iso}(\mathbb{R})$)

I could use some help with this.

share|improve this question
2  
$\text{Iso}(\mathbb{R}^n)$ embeds into $\text{GL}_{n+1}(\mathbb{R})$. The idea is to consider $(n+1) \times (n+1)$ matrices whose top left $n \times n$ block is a linear isometry, whose last row is $0, 0, ... 1$, and whose last column describes a translation; these matrices act on the set of column vectors which end in $1$, which gives the relevant copy of $\mathbb{R}^n$. –  Qiaochu Yuan Apr 27 '12 at 22:23
    
@QiaochuYuan can you please go into more details ? I can't see how this fits the case I gave, the last row is what you said and all the information needed for the translation is in the last column - but why it is $x 1$ and not another number ? why we take $+1,-1$ as $a_{11}$ ? I can't see how to generalize this even to $n=2$... –  Belgi Apr 27 '12 at 22:26
    
It's the semidirect product of the orthogonal group $O(n)$ (rotating) and $\mathbf R^n$ (translating). $O(1)$ is just $\pm1$. –  Dylan Moreland Apr 27 '12 at 22:29
    
Look at the matrix form below. Perhaps it will answer some of your questions about why $Iso(\mathbb{R})$ is put together the way it is. I'd recommend testing out a few points, especially in the case where $(x,y)=0$ or the orthogonal submatrix in the upper left corner is the identity. –  Brett Frankel Apr 27 '12 at 22:34

2 Answers 2

up vote 2 down vote accepted

How about: $$\operatorname{Iso}(\mathbb{R}^2)\cong \left\{ \begin{pmatrix}a & b & x\\ c & d & y\\ 0 & 0 & 1\end{pmatrix}\right\}. $$

where $$ \begin{pmatrix} a & b\\ c & d \end{pmatrix}\in O_2(\mathbb{R})$$

and $(x,y)$ is a vector in $\mathbb{R}^2$. Represent the point $(x_0, y_0)$ by the vector $(x_0,y_0, 1)$.

share|improve this answer
    
Indeed, multiplying the above matrix with $(x_0,y_0,1)$ really makes me see this, thanks! –  Belgi Apr 27 '12 at 22:40

The Mazur-Ulam theorem gives us that any isometry of $\mathbb R^n$ is of the form $f(x)=Ax+b$ where $A\in GL(n,\mathbb R)$ and $b\in \mathbb R^n$. Intuitively, this is just saying that every such isometry is a linear map composed with a translation. We can embed $GL(n,\mathbb R)$ in $GL(n+1,\mathbb R)$ by simply adding a $1$ in the bottom right corner and zeroes elsewhere on the last row and column. We can embed $\mathbb R^n$ in $GL(n+1,\mathbb R)$ by the map $$\begin{pmatrix} x_1\\\vdots\\ x_n\end{pmatrix}\mapsto \begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 & \cdots & x_1\\ & \ddots & \ddots & \vdots\\ 0 & \cdots & 1 & x_n\\ 0 &\cdots & 0 &1\\ \end{pmatrix}$$ which can be fairly easily verified by matrix multiplication. Putting these two together by multiplying the two matrices, we get an embedding $\mathrm{Iso}(\mathbb R^n)\to GL(n+1,\mathbb R)$. Note that combining two embeddings like this does not always work, but in this case it does because the images of the two embeddings intersect only at the identity $I\in GL(n+1,\mathbb R)$.

share|improve this answer
    
I am trying to understand the answer but I don't see where the rotations are coming into this matrix in the way you presented it as two embedings... –  Belgi Apr 27 '12 at 22:55
    
@Belgi Rotations are in $GL(n,\mathbb R)$, which we can embedd in $GL(n+1,\mathbb R)$ and then combine this embedding with the embedding of $\mathbb R^n$ by multiplying the results of the two embeddings. In the case $n=2$, this is precisely the embedding Brett gave. –  Alex Becker Apr 27 '12 at 22:57
    
@AlexBecker I must be confused: why is it $GL_n$ and not $O_n$? It seems to me that something like $\begin{pmatrix}2 & \\ & 1\end{pmatrix}$ won't preserve the metric. (Even with my confusion this was still a useful read: I didn't know that this theorem had a name!) –  Dylan Moreland Apr 28 '12 at 0:19
    
@DylanMoreland Isometries are in $O_n$ of course. However, since we just need an embedding and $O_n\subset GL_n$, we might as well use an embedding of $GL_n$. –  Alex Becker Apr 28 '12 at 0:55

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.