2
$\begingroup$

I have this "matrix" and it is 1-dimensional. That is,

$${\bf B} = \mu_1 + \mu_2 - \lambda_A$$

where $\mu_1$, $\mu_2$, and $\lambda_A$ are scalars.

From a technical perspective in mathematics, am I allowed to call this a "matrix"?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ The meaning of $\mathbf{B}$ is not at all clear. $\endgroup$ – AJY Apr 12 '17 at 2:31
  • $\begingroup$ It has no particular meaning - It's a 1x1 "matrix" (as an example) $\endgroup$ – PiE Apr 12 '17 at 2:39
  • $\begingroup$ So $\mathbf{B}$ is just a scalar? $\endgroup$ – AJY Apr 12 '17 at 2:39
  • $\begingroup$ Yes. I just wanted to give the scalar matrix notation $\endgroup$ – PiE Apr 12 '17 at 2:40
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Well one of the big important things about matrices is that they encode linear transformations. For $1$-dimensional vector spaces, the only linear maps are just scalar multiplication, so the $1 \times 1$ matrix that encodes it is just that scalar. So yes, you can treat $\mathbf{B}$ as a $1 \times 1$ matrix that acts on a $1$-dimensional vector space, but that's just because it's a scalar. $\endgroup$ – AJY Apr 12 '17 at 2:44
3
$\begingroup$

(I'm assuming you're referring to real numbers here.) Any scalar $k\in \mathbf{R}$ can be thought of as a $1\times 1$ matrix. This is because it encodes a linear transformation $k:\mathbf{R}\to \mathbf{R}$ given by $k(x)=kx$. In particular, $k(x+y)=kx+ky=k(x)+k(y)$ and for any scalar $\lambda \in \mathbf{R}$, $k(\lambda x)=k\lambda x=\lambda k x=\lambda k(x)$.

So, in short: yes.

As an afterthought, I suppose this should work in any field $\mathbf{F}$ where we think of $\mathbf{F}$ as a $1-$dimensional vector space over itself.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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