Symmetric, Skew-symmetric and Alternating Forms
We define a form to be
- symmetric if B(v, w) = B(w, v) for all v, w in V;
- alternating if B(v, v) = 0 for all v in V;
- skew-symmetric if B(v, w) = −B(w, v) for all v, w in V;
Proposition: Every alternating form is skew-symmetric. Proof: this can be seen by expanding B(v+w, v+w).
If the characteristic of F is not 2 then the converse is also true: every skew-symmetric form is alternating. If, however, char(F) = 2 then a skew-symmetric form is the same as a symmetric form and there exist symmetric/skew-symmetric forms which are not alternating.
A bilinear form is symmetric (resp. skew-symmetric) if and only if its coordinate matrix (relative to any basis) is symmetric (resp. skew-symmetric). A bilinear form is alternating if and only if its coordinate matrix is skew-symmetric and the diagonal entries are all zero (which follows from skew-symmetry when char(F) ≠ 2).
A bilinear form is symmetric if and only if the maps B1, B2: V → V* are equal, and skew-symmetric if and only if they are negatives of one another. If char(F) ≠ 2 then one can decompose a bilinear form into a symmetric and a skew-symmetric part as follows
where B* is the transpose of B (defined above).
Also if char(F) ≠ 2 then one can define a quadratic form in terms of its associated symmetric form. One can likewise define quadratic forms corresponding to skew-symmetric forms, Hermitian forms, and skew-Hermitian forms; the general concept is ε-quadratic form.
Read more about this topic: Unimodular Form
Famous quotes containing the word forms:
“That food has always been, and will continue to be, the basis for one of our greater snobbisms does not explain the fact that the attitude toward the food choice of others is becoming more and more heatedly exclusive until it may well turn into one of those forms of bigotry against which gallant little committees are constantly planning campaigns in the cause of justice and decency.”
—Cornelia Otis Skinner (19011979)