As a mathematician I think of matrices as <mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mi mathva

uplakanimkk 2022-07-06 Answered
As a mathematician I think of matrices as F m × n , where F is a field and usually F = R or F = C . Units are not necessary.
However, some engineers have told me that they prefer matrices to have units such as metres, kg, pounds, dollars, etc. Assigning a unit of measurement to each entry to me seems restrictive (for instance if working with dollars then is A 2 allowed?).

Here are a few things that I would like to understand more deeply:
1. Are there examples where it is more appropriate to work with matrices that have units?
2. If units can only restrict the algebra, why should one assign units at all?
3. Is there anything exciting here, or is it just engineers trying to put physical interpretations on to matrix algebra?
You can still ask an expert for help

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

Solve your problem for the price of one coffee

  • Available 24/7
  • Math expert for every subject
  • Pay only if we can solve it
Ask Question

Answers (2)

Tristin Case
Answered 2022-07-07 Author has 15 answers
The point of having units in computations is to restrict what one can do, such that does doesn't end up inadvertently writing down a computation whose result depends on one's choice of units in an unexpected way.
In mathematics this is not done a lot, but mathematics can certainly do it if we want to. What you do is to work with matrices (etc) over the field of rational functions of n variables, and assign one of the variables to stand for each of your fundamental units. That is, we're working in the field of fractions of the polynomial ring R [ m , s , k g , A , ].
The fraction field contains all of the (unitless) real numbers, as well as all of the unitful measuremens such as 2s or 4000m or 35 m s 2 . It also contains a lot of nonsensical elements such as 42 k g 3 m + 8 s , but that doesn't really bother us, because we know that the field-of-fractions construction still keeps the entire system consistent.
We can then define that the computation we're speaking of is well-formed if we can prove that the output always can be written as a real vector (or matrix or whatever) times a scalar such as 1 m s , which defines the dimension we expect (on physical grounds) that the answer must have.
Once this proof (known to physicists and engineers as dimensional analysis) has been carried out, we can then use an evaluation homomorphism to map all of the unit-variables to 1, so they disappear from the formulas and the actual calculation can be done on ordinary real numbers.
Whether this is exciting or not is subjective.
Not exactly what you’re looking for?
Ask My Question
cambrassk3
Answered 2022-07-08 Author has 1 answers
Think about A x = b (not solving it, just the equation itself). If x j and b i have units, then a i j x j has the units of b i . Hence a i j has the units of b i / x j . So if x is a vector of times and b is a vector of positions then the entries of A are velocities (or at least have those units).
I do not really understand how to interpret the idea that the matrix itself has units, however.
Not exactly what you’re looking for?
Ask My Question

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

You might be interested in

asked 2022-06-14
Assume X is a continuous random variable which have a density function. Assume Y _ is a random vector which also have a density function. And finally assume we have a joint density function of the random variable and the random vector.
How can I find a function ϕ, such that E [ | X ϕ ( Y _ ) | | Y _ ] would be minimal?
I'm not sure where to start. I do know that the asnwer should be that ϕ ( Y _ ) should be a median of F X | Y _ , but Im not sure how to prove it. Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
asked 2022-03-16
Classify each of the following by type of variables and level of measurement.
a. Monthly payment: $1427
b. Annual family income: $86, 000
asked 2022-06-22
Assume that X is uniformly distributed on (0, 1) and that the conditional distribution of Y given X=x is a binomial distribution with parameters (n,x). Then we say that Y has a binomial distribution with fixed size n and random probability parameter.
I have to find the marginal distribution of Y. So I have to use that:
P ( Y = y ) = x = y P ( Y = y | X = x ) P ( X = x )
But when we have that X is uniformly distributed I think the sum becomes a integral so we get:
P ( Y = y ) = 0 1 ( n y ) x y ( 1 x ) n y d x
But what to do next? I think maybe take the binomial coefficient out from the integral, but how then using this to find the marginal distribution of Y? Hope anyone can help me? Do I also have to use that Y has a binomial distribution with fixed size n and random probability parameter?
asked 2022-06-12
Say we have a sequence of random variables ( X n ) with mean μ n and variance σ n 2 , that converges in probability towards a random variable X. Can we reason that mean and variance sequences are bounded? Do we need some other assumptions, for example, E ( | X | ) < , or perhaps if we assume that each X n is normal? Thank you in advance.
asked 2022-05-22
Suppose f n : X [ 0 , ] is measurable for n = 1 , 2 , 3 , , f 1 f 2 f 3 0, f n ( x ) f ( x ) as n , for every x X, and f 1 L 1 ( μ ). Prove that then
(*) lim n X f n d μ = X f d μ
and show that this conclusion does not follow if the condition " f 1 L 1 ( μ )" is omitted.

Let E consist of the points x X at which f 1 ( x ) < . By the dominated convergence theorem,
E f n d μ E f d μ .
Since f 1 L 1 ( μ ), μ ( E c ) = 0, and hence (*) follows.
Let X = { 1 , 2 , 3 , }, and let μ be the counting measure. For each n, define f n : X [ 0 , ] by
f n ( x ) = { ( x n ) 0 ( x < n ) .
Then lim f n = 0, and X f n d μ = for all n.
Is this correct?
asked 2022-05-29
Let ( Ω , A , ν ) be a measure space. Show that if the measure over the space Ω is 0 < ν ( Ω ) < , then
Q = 1 ν ( Ω ) ν
is a probability measure.
I don't see how this is indeed a probability measure. For it to be a probability measure indeed it has to
1. Return values in [0,1].
2. Satisfy countable additivity.
3. Implied measure of should be 0.
The only thing I currently know is that ν is a measure and that it is finite (and greater than 0) over Ω. This one seems quite tough.
asked 2022-04-12
For Questions 1 and 2, you will read an operational hypothesis. Identify the independent variable (IV), dependent variable (DV), and unit of analysis (UA). For each variable (IV and DV), indicate the appropriate level of measurement.
There is a relationship between political affiliation (on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 = very liberal and 10 = very conservative) and U.S. geographic regions, such that people living in the Northeast are more likely to consider themselves liberal than people living in the South.
1. IV:
2. DV:
3. UA:
4. Level of Measurement (IV):
5. Level of Measurement (DV):