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.

Letting $F\subseteq K$ be fields, and $V$ a vector space over $K$. Certainly, $V$ is also a vector space over $F$. And if $\{e_1,...,e_n\}$ is a basis for $K$ over $F$ and $\mathcal{B}=\{v_1,...,v_m\}$ a basis for $V$ over $K$, we can show that the set of $e_iv_j$ is a basis for $V$ over $F$.

Question: If I have a transformation $T:V\rightarrow V$ over $K$ whose matrix with respect to $\mathcal B$ has entries $a_{ij}$, how can I find a nice matrix representation over $F$ with respect to the basis defined above? Certainly, there should be a nice way to order this induced basis to invoke a prettier block matrix type solution, but I'm having some trouble working out the details...

share|improve this question
add comment

1 Answer

Each entry of $T$ is a linear transformation $K \to K$ which is in particular $F$-linear, so can be expressed as a linear transformation over $F$ with respect to the basis $\{ e_1, ... e_n \}$. These are the blocks you want.

share|improve this answer
    
Ah, cool. But how do i express the $a_{ij}$ as transformations over $F$? Certainly each is a linear combination of the $e_i$, but I don't know where to go from there... –  AsinglePANCAKE Oct 9 '12 at 18:28
    
@AsinglePANCAKE: the same way as any other linear transformation. Look at what it does to a basis of $K$. –  Qiaochu Yuan Oct 9 '12 at 18:30
    
My ignorance shows through more and more. So if I have $a_{11}= b_{11}e_1+...+b_{n1}e_n$ then applying this to $e_1$ gives me the vector $(b_{11}e_1,...,b_{n1}e_n)^T$ with respect to the basis for $K$. This gives me an n by n block in place of each $ a{ij}$, but something feels pretty fishy still...(apologies, I'm on a bus on my phone) –  AsinglePANCAKE Oct 9 '12 at 18:49
    
No, applying this to $e_1$ gives $b_{11} e_1 e_1 + ... + b_{n1} e_n e_1$. Then you need to expand the products $e_i e_j$ in terms of the $e_i$. –  Qiaochu Yuan Oct 9 '12 at 20:04
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.