Various edits
Source Link
J W
  • 4.2k
  • 2
  • 17
  • 41

The dimension theorem (the rank-nullity theorem) can be explained in many ways. I consider it as a consequence of the first isomorphism theorem/splitting lemma. When I teach undergrad matrix-theoretic linear algebra, I start with the equation $Ax=b,$ and I tell my students that the dimension theorem basically tellssays that the number of total variables equals the sum of the number of free variables and the number of "non-free" variables. They find this statement very easy. If I teach a "formal/proof-based" undergrad mathematics class, I tell my students that the dimension theorem basically tells us how much "stuff" we need to put inside the nullspaces to extend it to the given vector space.

Today I found a very good analogy: In some sense, the dimension theorem is the linear algebraic analog of the Pigeonhole Principle. Note that for any finite set $A,$ the function $f: A \rightarrow A$ is injective iff surjective iff bijective. It's a consequence of the Pigeonhole Principle. The dimension theorem gives a similar kind of conclusion for a finite-dimensional vector space $V,$ and any linear map $T: V \rightarrow V.$

Now, could you help me by providing a couple of more analogies that can be explained to an undergrad junior? Thank you so much. Please stay safe.

The dimension theorem (the rank-nullity theorem) can be explained in many ways. I consider it as a consequence of the first isomorphism theorem/splitting lemma. When I teach undergrad matrix-theoretic linear algebra, I start with the equation $Ax=b,$ and I tell my students that dimension theorem basically tells that the number of total variables equals the sum of the number of free variables and the number of "non-free" variables. They find this statement very easy. If I teach a "formal/proof-based" undergrad mathematics class, I tell my students that the dimension theorem basically tells us how much "stuff" we need to put inside the nullspaces to extend it to the given vector space.

Today I found a very good analogy: In some sense, the dimension theorem is the linear algebraic analog of the Pigeonhole Principle. Note that for any finite set $A,$ the function $f: A \rightarrow A$ is injective iff surjective iff bijective. It's a consequence of the Pigeonhole Principle. The dimension theorem gives a similar kind of conclusion for a finite-dimensional vector space $V,$ and any linear map $T: V \rightarrow V.$

Now, could you help me by providing a couple of more analogies that can be explained to an undergrad junior? Thank you so much. Please stay safe.

The dimension theorem (the rank-nullity theorem) can be explained in many ways. I consider it as a consequence of the first isomorphism theorem/splitting lemma. When I teach undergrad matrix-theoretic linear algebra, I start with the equation $Ax=b,$ and I tell my students that the dimension theorem basically says that the number of total variables equals the sum of the number of free variables and the number of "non-free" variables. They find this statement very easy. If I teach a "formal/proof-based" undergrad mathematics class, I tell my students that the dimension theorem basically tells us how much "stuff" we need to put inside the nullspaces to extend it to the given vector space.

Today I found a very good analogy: In some sense, the dimension theorem is the linear algebraic analog of the Pigeonhole Principle. Note that for any finite set $A,$ the function $f: A \rightarrow A$ is injective iff surjective iff bijective. It's a consequence of the Pigeonhole Principle. The dimension theorem gives a similar kind of conclusion for a finite-dimensional vector space $V,$ and any linear map $T: V \rightarrow V.$

Now, could you help me by providing a couple of more analogies that can be explained to an undergrad junior? Thank you so much. Please stay safe.

Various edits
Source Link
J W
  • 4.2k
  • 2
  • 17
  • 41

The dimension Theoremtheorem and pedagogy

This is a pedagogical question. I apologize if this kind of post does not go with the norm of Stackexchange.

Note that theThe dimension theorem  ( thethe rank nullity-nullity theorem) can be explained in many ways. I consider it as a consequence of the first isomorphism theorem/splitting lemma. When I teach undergrad matrix-theoretic linear algebra, I start with the equation $Ax=b,$ and I tell my students that dimension theorem basically tells that the number of total variables equals the sum of the number of free variables and the number of "non-free" variables. They find this statement very easy. If I teach a "formal/proof-based" undergrad mathematics class, I tell my students that the dimension theorem basically tells us how much "stuff" we need to put inside the nullspaces to extend it to the given vector space.

Today I found a very good Analogyanalogy: In some sense, the dimension theorem is the linear algebraic analog of the Pigeonhole Principle. Note that for any finite set $A,$ the function $f: A \rightarrow A$ is injective iff surjective iff bijective. It's a consequence of Pigeonhole's Principalthe Pigeonhole Principle. The dimension theorem gives a similar kind of conclusion for a finite-dimensional vector space $V,$ and any linear map $T: V \rightarrow V.$

Now, could you help me by providing a couple of more analogies that can be explained to an undergrad junior? Thank you so much. Please stay safe.

The dimension Theorem and pedagogy

This is a pedagogical question. I apologize if this kind of post does not go with the norm of Stackexchange.

Note that the dimension theorem( the rank nullity theorem) can be explained in many ways. I consider it as a consequence of the first isomorphism theorem/splitting lemma. When I teach undergrad matrix-theoretic linear algebra, I start with the equation $Ax=b,$ and I tell my students that dimension theorem basically tells that the number of total variables equals the sum of the number of free variables and the number of "non-free" variables. They find this statement very easy. If I teach a "formal/proof-based" undergrad mathematics class, I tell my students that the dimension theorem basically tells us how much "stuff" we need to put inside the nullspaces to extend it to the given vector space.

Today I found a very good Analogy: In some sense, the dimension theorem is the linear algebraic analog of the Pigeonhole Principle. Note that for any finite set $A,$ the function $f: A \rightarrow A$ is injective iff surjective iff bijective. It's a consequence of Pigeonhole's Principal. The dimension theorem gives a similar kind of conclusion for finite-dimensional vector space $V,$ and any linear map $T: V \rightarrow V.$

Now, could you help me by providing a couple of more analogies that can be explained to an undergrad junior? Thank you so much. Please stay safe.

The dimension theorem and pedagogy

The dimension theorem  (the rank-nullity theorem) can be explained in many ways. I consider it as a consequence of the first isomorphism theorem/splitting lemma. When I teach undergrad matrix-theoretic linear algebra, I start with the equation $Ax=b,$ and I tell my students that dimension theorem basically tells that the number of total variables equals the sum of the number of free variables and the number of "non-free" variables. They find this statement very easy. If I teach a "formal/proof-based" undergrad mathematics class, I tell my students that the dimension theorem basically tells us how much "stuff" we need to put inside the nullspaces to extend it to the given vector space.

Today I found a very good analogy: In some sense, the dimension theorem is the linear algebraic analog of the Pigeonhole Principle. Note that for any finite set $A,$ the function $f: A \rightarrow A$ is injective iff surjective iff bijective. It's a consequence of the Pigeonhole Principle. The dimension theorem gives a similar kind of conclusion for a finite-dimensional vector space $V,$ and any linear map $T: V \rightarrow V.$

Now, could you help me by providing a couple of more analogies that can be explained to an undergrad junior? Thank you so much. Please stay safe.

Post Migrated Here from math.stackexchange.com (revisions)
Source Link
James
James

The dimension Theorem and pedagogy

This is a pedagogical question. I apologize if this kind of post does not go with the norm of Stackexchange.

Note that the dimension theorem( the rank nullity theorem) can be explained in many ways. I consider it as a consequence of the first isomorphism theorem/splitting lemma. When I teach undergrad matrix-theoretic linear algebra, I start with the equation $Ax=b,$ and I tell my students that dimension theorem basically tells that the number of total variables equals the sum of the number of free variables and the number of "non-free" variables. They find this statement very easy. If I teach a "formal/proof-based" undergrad mathematics class, I tell my students that the dimension theorem basically tells us how much "stuff" we need to put inside the nullspaces to extend it to the given vector space.

Today I found a very good Analogy: In some sense, the dimension theorem is the linear algebraic analog of the Pigeonhole Principle. Note that for any finite set $A,$ the function $f: A \rightarrow A$ is injective iff surjective iff bijective. It's a consequence of Pigeonhole's Principal. The dimension theorem gives a similar kind of conclusion for finite-dimensional vector space $V,$ and any linear map $T: V \rightarrow V.$

Now, could you help me by providing a couple of more analogies that can be explained to an undergrad junior? Thank you so much. Please stay safe.