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.

Let $\textbf A$ denote the space of symmetric $(n\times n)$ matrices over the field $\mathbb K$, and $\textbf B$ the space of skew-symmetric $(n\times n)$ matrices over the field $\mathbb K$. Then $\dim (\textbf A)=n(n+1)/2$ and $\dim (\textbf B)=n(n-1)/2$.

Short question: is there any short explanation (maybe with combinatorics) why this statement is true?

EDIT: $\dim$ refers to linear spaces.

share|improve this question
1  
Do you mean symmetric (not normal) in the title? And do you mean the $\dim$ of linear spaces of such matrices, not the $\dim$ of the matrices, right? –  enzotib Aug 23 '12 at 9:59
    
I did edit it - thanks for the reminder! –  Christian Ivicevic Aug 23 '12 at 10:02
    
You did not edit it correctly; $\mathbf A$ still refers to just one matrix, not a subspace. I will edit it for you. –  Marc van Leeuwen Aug 23 '12 at 12:38
    
And you should say that $\mathbb K$ is not of characteristic $2$, or otherwise symmetric and anti-symmetric matrices are the same thing and your equations cannot both be true. –  Marc van Leeuwen Aug 23 '12 at 12:40
add comment

4 Answers

up vote 4 down vote accepted

All square matrices of a given size $n$ constitute a linear space of dimension $n^2$, because every matrix element is a component in the canonical base, ie. the set of matrices having a single $1$ and all other elements $0$.

The skew-symmetric matrices have arbitrary elements on one side with respect of the diagonal, and those elements determine the other triangle of the matrix. So they are in number of $(n^2-n)/2=n(n-1)/2$, ($-n$ to remove the diagonal).

For the symmetric matrices the reasoning is the same, but we have to add the elements on the diagonal: $(n^2-n)/2+n=(n^2+n)/2=n(n+1)/2$.

share|improve this answer
add comment

This is a bit late, but I figured I would chime in since the other answers don't really give the combinatorial intuition asked for in the original question.

In order to specify a skew-symmetric matrix, we need to choose a number $A_{ij}$ for each set $\{i,j\}$ of distinct indices. How many such sets are there? Combinatorics tells us that there are $\left( \begin{array}{@{}c@{}} n \\ 2 \end{array} \right) = \frac{n(n-1)}{2}$ such sets.

Similarly, in order to specify a symmetric matrix, we need to choose a number $A_{ij}$ for each set $\{i,j\}$ of (not necessarily distinct) indices. We can encode such sets by adding a special symbol $n+1$ that indicates a repeated index. Thus, we need to choose a number $A_{ij}$ for each set $\{i,j\}$ of distinct symbols, where now a symbol is either an index ($1 , \ldots , n$), or our special symbol $n+1$ that is used for a repeated index. Combinatorics tells us that there are $\left( \begin{array}{@{}c@{}} n+1 \\ 2 \end{array} \right) = \frac{n(n+1)}{2}$ such sets.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Here is my two cents:


\begin{eqnarray} M_{n \times n}(\mathbb{R}) & \text{has form} & \begin{pmatrix} *&*&*&*&\cdots \\ *&*&*&*& \\ *&*&*&*& \\ *&*&*&*& \\ \vdots&&&&\ddots \end{pmatrix} \hspace{.5cm} \text{with $n^2$ elements}\\ \\ \\ Skew_{n \times n}(\mathbb{R}) & \text{has form} & \begin{pmatrix} 0&*'&*'&*'&\cdots \\ *&0&*'&*'& \\ *&*&0&*'& \\ *&*&*&0& \\ \vdots&&&&\ddots \end{pmatrix} \end{eqnarray} For this bottom formation the (*)s and (*')s are just operationally inverted forms of the same number, so the array here only takes $\frac{(n^2 - n)}{2}$ elements as an argument to describe it. This appears to be an array geometry question really... I suppose if what I'm saying is true, then I conclude that because $\dim(Skew_{n \times n}(\mathbb{R}) + Sym_{n \times n}(\mathbb{R})) = \dim(M_{n \times n}(\mathbb{R}))$ and $\dim(Skew_{n \times n}(\mathbb{R}))=\frac{n^2-n}{2}$ then we have that \begin{eqnarray} \frac{n^2-n}{2}+\dim(Sym_{n \times n}(\mathbb{R})))=n^2 \end{eqnarray} or \begin{eqnarray} \dim(Sym_{n \times n}(\mathbb{R})))=\frac{n^2+n}{2}. \end{eqnarray}

share|improve this answer
add comment

The dimension of symmetric matrices is $\frac{n(n+1)}2$ because they have one basis as the matrices $\{M_{ij}\}_{n \ge i \ge j \ge 1}$, having $1$ at the $(i,j)$ and $(j,i)$ positions and $0$ elsewhere. For skew symmetric matrices, the corresponding basis is $\{M_{ij}\}_{n \ge i > j \ge 1}$ with $1$ at the $(i,j)$ position, $-1$ at the $(j,i)$ position, and $0$ elsewhere.

Note that the diagonal elements of skew symmetric matrices are $0$, hence their dimension is $n$ less than the dimension of normal symmetric matrices.

share|improve this answer
    
But this is no explanation why the symmetric matrices have the specified $\dim$. –  Christian Ivicevic Aug 23 '12 at 10:03
    
Do you mean $n^2$? –  enzotib Aug 23 '12 at 10:04
    
Yeah, I didn't notice earlier that he asked for proofs of the dimensions too, and have edited. –  Rijul Saini Aug 23 '12 at 10:07
    
@RijulSaini: Thanks, but enzotib's answer seems to be easier to understand! –  Christian Ivicevic Aug 23 '12 at 10:13
add comment

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.