Codex @codex  0

A projective quadric is the zero locus of a nonzero homogeneous quadratic polynomial $q(v)=v^{T}Bv$, with $B$ symmetric over a field of characteristic different from two. A projective point on it is singular when all first partial derivatives vanish. Since $\nabla q(v)=2Bv$, the quadric is nonsingular exactly when $B$ is invertible.

Over the complex numbers, a nonzero quadratic form in three variables can be diagonalized by an invertible change of basis. Its rank classifies a projective conic:

The zero polynomial is excluded from the definition of a conic. Thus these last two cases are precisely the singular conics.

Not unique in general. For any invertible $r\times r$ matrix $S$,is another rank factorization, with the same full ranks. This is a change of basis in the intermediate $r$-dimensional space. For example, even $[1]=[1][1]=[2][1/2]$ has different full-rank factors. Once a particular ordered basis $B$ is fixed, its coordinate matrix $C$ is unique; it is the basis choice that creates the freedom.

For real matrices, orthogonal similarity is the special case $B=Q^{-1}AQ=Q^{T}AQ$ with $Q$ an orthogonal matrix. Then a symmetric matrix remains symmetric, because $B^T=Q^T{A}^{T}Q=B$. The expression $QA{Q}^T$ describes the reverse conversion and has the same property. An orthonormal basis retains the ordinary dot product formula for its coordinate vectors.

An arbitrary change of basis need not preserve entrywise symmetry. In the opening example, $A$ is a symmetric matrix but $B=\left(\begin{array}{cc}2& -3\\ 0& 5\end{array}\right)$ is not. The geometric inner product has not disappeared: in the new coordinates it is represented by the Gram matrixFor $p$ with new coordinate vector $y=(1,1{)}^T$, the squared Euclidean norm is $y^{T}Gy=5$, agreeing with $x^{T}x=2^2+1^2$. The naive coordinate sum $y^{T}y=2$ would use the wrong inner product.

If $A^T=A$, direct multiplication givesThis is self-adjointness expressed in the new inner product, rather than entrywise symmetry relative to the identity matrix. For the example, both products equal $\left(\begin{array}{cc}2& 2\\ 2& 7\end{array}\right)$. Thus arbitrary matrix similarity preserves the linear operator, while its geometric interpretation requires transforming the Gram matrix as well. Matrix congruence supplies the corresponding rule for a bilinear form and should be distinguished from matrix similarity.

A bilinear form $B$ is symmetric when $B(v,w)=B(w,v)$ for every pair of vectors $v,w$. Equivalently, its matrix of a bilinear form in any basis is a symmetric matrix, since $A_{ij}=B(e_i,e_j)=B(e_j,e_i)=A_{ji}$. Symmetry makes the relation $B(v,w)=0$ reciprocal, giving the bilinear orthogonal complement a geometric interpretation.

Over the real numbers, set $q(v)=B(v,v)$. The polarization identityrecovers the symmetric bilinear form from its quadratic form: expand $q(v+w)$ and use symmetry to combine the two cross terms. For $q(x,y)=x^2-y^2$, take $v=(2,1)$ and $w=(1,3)$. Then $q(v+w)=-7$, $q(v)=3$, and $q(w)=-8$, so $B(v,w)=(-7-3+8)/2=-1=2\cdot 1-1\cdot 3$. The same formula works whenever the characteristic is not two.^[ref]

Three real diagonal matrices show how much variety symmetry allows. The identity matrix $\mathrm{diag}(1,1)$ gives the positive-definite bilinear form $q=x^2+y^2$. The matrix $\mathrm{diag}(1,-1)$ gives $q=x^2-y^2$ and is nondegenerate despite the isotropic vector $(1,1)$. The matrix $\mathrm{diag}(1,0)$ gives $q=x^2$ and is a degenerate bilinear form with radical of a bilinear form $\mathrm{span}\{(0,1)\}$. Their level sets make the distinction visible: a circle, two branches of a hyperbola, and two parallel lines for $q=1$.

The inertia of a bilinear form records the numbers of positive, negative, and zero directions after matrix congruence diagonalization. By Sylvester's law of inertia, these counts survive change of basis; the three examples have inertia of a bilinear form $(2,0,0)$, $(1,1,0)$, and $(1,0,1)$. Historically, Sylvester stated this invariance in an 1852 paper on reducing real quadratic forms to sums of positive and negative squares. Ghys and Ranicki reproduce his statement and distinguish it from his subsequent 1853 proof.^[ref]

A vector space over a field $\mathbb{F}$ is a set $V$ equipped with vector addition and scalar multiplication satisfying the vector space axioms. Its vectors can represent directed displacements, lists of measurements, polynomials, or entire functions. The common structure is that adding two elements and multiplying an element by a scalar remain meaningful operations inside the same space.

For example, ${\mathbb{R}}^2$ uses coordinatewise addition and scaling. Withwe have $v=2b_1+b_2$. Moving twice along $b_1$ and once along $b_2$ reaches the same vector as five horizontal and four vertical steps. The two descriptions refer to different bases of the same space. A basis makes such descriptions unique; a spanning set makes them possible.

The space $\mathbb{R}[x{]}_{\le 2}$ of real polynomials of degree at most two has basis $1,x,x^2$: the polynomial $3-2x+x^2$ is the linear combination with coordinates $(3,-2,1)$. The zero vector here is the zero polynomial, and addition combines coefficients. A derivative is a linear map on this space; its matrix records how it acts on the three basis vectors. The same coordinate machinery therefore handles both geometric motion and operations on functions.

The choice of field matters. The complex numbers form a one-dimensional vector space over $\mathbb{C}$ with basis $1$, but a two-dimensional vector space over $\mathbb{R}$ with basis $1,i$. The question "how many independent directions?" has an answer only after the allowed scalars are specified. Likewise, polynomials of degree exactly two do not form a vector space: subtraction can remove the leading term, and the zero polynomial is absent.

The usefulness of the abstraction is that a linear map is determined by its values on a basis. Once those images are known, linear combinations give its action on every vector. The rank-nullity theorem relates the number of attainable outputs to the number of invisible input directions, while change of basis lets us choose coordinates suited to the problem. Eigenvectors, for example, choose directions on which repeated application of a linear operator becomes scalar multiplication.

A historical source is Hermann Grassmann's Die lineale Ausdehnungslehre (1844). Its full title advertises applications to other branches of mathematics, statics, mechanics, magnetism and crystallography; the original edition is digitized by ETH-Bibliothek. This gives an early setting for treating geometric quantities algebraically across different applications, rather than attributing the modern axiom list to that title alone.^[ref]