A vector v \mathbf{v} v is a thing in space — an arrow — that exists before you pick any basis. A coordinate vector is the list of numbers you write down to describe that same arrow once you've chosen a ruler-system (a basis). Change the basis → the arrow stays put, but the numbers change. Change of basis is the dictionary that translates one list of numbers into another for the same arrow.
Definition Coordinate vector
Let B = { b 1 , … , b n } \mathcal{B} = \{\mathbf{b}_1, \dots, \mathbf{b}_n\} B = { b 1 , … , b n } be an ordered basis of a vector space V V V . Every v ∈ V \mathbf{v}\in V v ∈ V has a unique expansion
v = c 1 b 1 + c 2 b 2 + ⋯ + c n b n . \mathbf{v} = c_1\mathbf{b}_1 + c_2\mathbf{b}_2 + \cdots + c_n\mathbf{b}_n. v = c 1 b 1 + c 2 b 2 + ⋯ + c n b n .
The coordinate vector of v \mathbf{v} v relative to B \mathcal{B} B is
[ v ] B = [ c 1 ⋮ c n ] . [\mathbf{v}]_{\mathcal{B}} = \begin{bmatrix} c_1 \\ \vdots \\ c_n\end{bmatrix}. [ v ] B = c 1 ⋮ c n .
WHY is it unique? Because B \mathcal{B} B is linearly independent . If two expansions existed, subtracting them gives a non-trivial combination equal to 0 \mathbf{0} 0 — contradicting independence. Uniqueness is the whole reason coordinates are well-defined.
You know [ v ] B [\mathbf{v}]_{\mathcal{B}} [ v ] B . You want [ v ] C [\mathbf{v}]_{\mathcal{C}} [ v ] C for another basis C \mathcal{C} C . We want a matrix P P P with
[ v ] C = P C ← B [ v ] B . [\mathbf{v}]_{\mathcal{C}} = \underset{\mathcal{C}\leftarrow\mathcal{B}}{P}\;[\mathbf{v}]_{\mathcal{B}}. [ v ] C = C ← B P [ v ] B .
Start from what [ v ] B [\mathbf{v}]_{\mathcal{B}} [ v ] B means :
v = c 1 b 1 + ⋯ + c n b n . \mathbf{v} = c_1\mathbf{b}_1 + \cdots + c_n\mathbf{b}_n. v = c 1 b 1 + ⋯ + c n b n .
Now take coordinates of both sides relative to C \mathcal{C} C . The coordinate map [ ⋅ ] C [\,\cdot\,]_{\mathcal{C}} [ ⋅ ] C is linear (proved below), so
[ v ] C = c 1 [ b 1 ] C + ⋯ + c n [ b n ] C . [\mathbf{v}]_{\mathcal{C}} = c_1[\mathbf{b}_1]_{\mathcal{C}} + \cdots + c_n[\mathbf{b}_n]_{\mathcal{C}}. [ v ] C = c 1 [ b 1 ] C + ⋯ + c n [ b n ] C .
The right side is exactly a matrix times [ c 1 ⋮ c n ] \begin{bmatrix}c_1\\\vdots\\c_n\end{bmatrix} c 1 ⋮ c n where the columns are [ b j ] C [\mathbf{b}_j]_{\mathcal{C}} [ b j ] C . Therefore:
Why coordinate maps are linear: writing u = ∑ a i b i \mathbf{u}=\sum a_i\mathbf{b}_i u = ∑ a i b i and w = ∑ d i b i \mathbf{w}=\sum d_i\mathbf{b}_i w = ∑ d i b i , then u + α w = ∑ ( a i + α d i ) b i \mathbf{u}+\alpha\mathbf{w}=\sum(a_i+\alpha d_i)\mathbf{b}_i u + α w = ∑ ( a i + α d i ) b i , so [ u + α w ] B = [ u ] B + α [ w ] B [\mathbf{u}+\alpha\mathbf{w}]_{\mathcal{B}} = [\mathbf{u}]_{\mathcal{B}}+\alpha[\mathbf{w}]_{\mathcal{B}} [ u + α w ] B = [ u ] B + α [ w ] B . Done.
Swapping roles gives P B ← C \underset{\mathcal{B}\leftarrow\mathcal{C}}{P} B ← C P , and
P B ← C = ( P C ← B ) − 1 . \underset{\mathcal{B}\leftarrow\mathcal{C}}{P} = \Big(\underset{\mathcal{C}\leftarrow\mathcal{B}}{P}\Big)^{-1}. B ← C P = ( C ← B P ) − 1 .
Why? Translating to C \mathcal{C} C then back to B \mathcal{B} B must do nothing: their product is I I I .
R n \mathbb{R}^n R n with the standard basis E \mathcal{E} E
Define B = [ b 1 ⋯ b n ] B=[\mathbf{b}_1\cdots\mathbf{b}_n] B = [ b 1 ⋯ b n ] (basis vectors as columns). Then
P E ← B = B , P B ← E = B − 1 . \underset{\mathcal{E}\leftarrow\mathcal{B}}{P}=B,\qquad \underset{\mathcal{B}\leftarrow\mathcal{E}}{P}=B^{-1}. E ← B P = B , B ← E P = B − 1 .
So B B B turns "B \mathcal{B} B -numbers" into "standard numbers", and B − 1 B^{-1} B − 1 does the reverse. For two non-standard bases:
P C ← B = C − 1 B . \underset{\mathcal{C}\leftarrow\mathcal{B}}{P}=C^{-1}B. C ← B P = C − 1 B .
Worked example Example 1 — basic
R 2 \mathbb{R}^2 R 2
B = { b 1 , b 2 } \mathcal{B}=\{\mathbf{b}_1,\mathbf{b}_2\} B = { b 1 , b 2 } with b 1 = [ 1 1 ] , b 2 = [ 1 − 1 ] \mathbf{b}_1=\begin{bmatrix}1\\1\end{bmatrix},\ \mathbf{b}_2=\begin{bmatrix}1\\-1\end{bmatrix} b 1 = [ 1 1 ] , b 2 = [ 1 − 1 ] . Find [ v ] B [\mathbf{v}]_{\mathcal{B}} [ v ] B for v = [ 4 2 ] \mathbf{v}=\begin{bmatrix}4\\2\end{bmatrix} v = [ 4 2 ] .
We need c 1 b 1 + c 2 b 2 = v c_1\mathbf{b}_1+c_2\mathbf{b}_2=\mathbf{v} c 1 b 1 + c 2 b 2 = v , i.e. B [ v ] B = v B\,[\mathbf{v}]_{\mathcal{B}}=\mathbf{v} B [ v ] B = v , so [ v ] B = B − 1 v [\mathbf{v}]_{\mathcal{B}}=B^{-1}\mathbf{v} [ v ] B = B − 1 v .
Why this step? In the standard basis the coordinates of v \mathbf{v} v are just its entries; B − 1 B^{-1} B − 1 converts standard→B \mathcal{B} B .
B = [ 1 1 1 − 1 ] , B − 1 = − 1 2 [ − 1 − 1 − 1 1 ] = 1 2 [ 1 1 1 − 1 ] . B=\begin{bmatrix}1&1\\1&-1\end{bmatrix},\quad B^{-1}=-\tfrac12\begin{bmatrix}-1&-1\\-1&1\end{bmatrix}=\tfrac12\begin{bmatrix}1&1\\1&-1\end{bmatrix}. B = [ 1 1 1 − 1 ] , B − 1 = − 2 1 [ − 1 − 1 − 1 1 ] = 2 1 [ 1 1 1 − 1 ] .
[ v ] B = 1 2 [ 1 1 1 − 1 ] [ 4 2 ] = [ 3 1 ] . [\mathbf{v}]_{\mathcal{B}}=\tfrac12\begin{bmatrix}1&1\\1&-1\end{bmatrix}\begin{bmatrix}4\\2\end{bmatrix}=\begin{bmatrix}3\\1\end{bmatrix}. [ v ] B = 2 1 [ 1 1 1 − 1 ] [ 4 2 ] = [ 3 1 ] .
Check: 3 b 1 + 1 b 2 = [ 3 3 ] + [ 1 − 1 ] = [ 4 2 ] . 3\mathbf{b}_1+1\mathbf{b}_2=\begin{bmatrix}3\\3\end{bmatrix}+\begin{bmatrix}1\\-1\end{bmatrix}=\begin{bmatrix}4\\2\end{bmatrix}. 3 b 1 + 1 b 2 = [ 3 3 ] + [ 1 − 1 ] = [ 4 2 ] . ✓
Worked example Example 2 — between two non-standard bases
B \mathcal{B} B as above, C = { c 1 , c 2 } \mathcal{C}=\{\mathbf{c}_1,\mathbf{c}_2\} C = { c 1 , c 2 } with c 1 = [ 1 0 ] , c 2 = [ 1 2 ] \mathbf{c}_1=\begin{bmatrix}1\\0\end{bmatrix},\ \mathbf{c}_2=\begin{bmatrix}1\\2\end{bmatrix} c 1 = [ 1 0 ] , c 2 = [ 1 2 ] . Find P C ← B \underset{\mathcal{C}\leftarrow\mathcal{B}}{P} C ← B P .
Use P = C − 1 B P=C^{-1}B P = C − 1 B . Why? Columns of P P P are [ b j ] C = C − 1 b j [\mathbf{b}_j]_{\mathcal{C}}=C^{-1}\mathbf{b}_j [ b j ] C = C − 1 b j , stacking gives C − 1 B C^{-1}B C − 1 B .
C = [ 1 1 0 2 ] , C − 1 = [ 1 − 1 2 0 1 2 ] . C=\begin{bmatrix}1&1\\0&2\end{bmatrix},\quad C^{-1}=\begin{bmatrix}1&-\tfrac12\\0&\tfrac12\end{bmatrix}. C = [ 1 0 1 2 ] , C − 1 = [ 1 0 − 2 1 2 1 ] .
P = C − 1 B = [ 1 − 1 2 0 1 2 ] [ 1 1 1 − 1 ] = [ 1 2 3 2 1 2 − 1 2 ] . P=C^{-1}B=\begin{bmatrix}1&-\tfrac12\\0&\tfrac12\end{bmatrix}\begin{bmatrix}1&1\\1&-1\end{bmatrix}=\begin{bmatrix}\tfrac12&\tfrac32\\\tfrac12&-\tfrac12\end{bmatrix}. P = C − 1 B = [ 1 0 − 2 1 2 1 ] [ 1 1 1 − 1 ] = [ 2 1 2 1 2 3 − 2 1 ] .
Verify column 1 = [ b 1 ] C =[\mathbf{b}_1]_{\mathcal{C}} = [ b 1 ] C : does 1 2 c 1 + 1 2 c 2 = 1 2 [ 1 0 ] + 1 2 [ 1 2 ] = [ 1 1 ] = b 1 \tfrac12\mathbf{c}_1+\tfrac12\mathbf{c}_2=\tfrac12\begin{bmatrix}1\\0\end{bmatrix}+\tfrac12\begin{bmatrix}1\\2\end{bmatrix}=\begin{bmatrix}1\\1\end{bmatrix}=\mathbf{b}_1 2 1 c 1 + 2 1 c 2 = 2 1 [ 1 0 ] + 2 1 [ 1 2 ] = [ 1 1 ] = b 1 ? ✓
Worked example Example 3 — Forecast-then-Verify (polynomials)
V = P 2 V=P_2 V = P 2 , B = { 1 , t , t 2 } \mathcal{B}=\{1,t,t^2\} B = { 1 , t , t 2 } , C = { 1 , 1 + t , 1 + t + t 2 } \mathcal{C}=\{1,\,1+t,\,1+t+t^2\} C = { 1 , 1 + t , 1 + t + t 2 } . Take p ( t ) = 2 + 3 t + t 2 p(t)=2+3t+t^2 p ( t ) = 2 + 3 t + t 2 .
Forecast: C \mathcal{C} C "stacks" terms, so I expect smallish coordinates. Let's verify.
Solve a ( 1 ) + b ( 1 + t ) + c ( 1 + t + t 2 ) = 2 + 3 t + t 2 a(1)+b(1+t)+c(1+t+t^2)=2+3t+t^2 a ( 1 ) + b ( 1 + t ) + c ( 1 + t + t 2 ) = 2 + 3 t + t 2 .
t 2 t^2 t 2 : c = 1 c=1 c = 1 . Why? Only c 3 \mathbf{c}_3 c 3 has a t 2 t^2 t 2 .
t t t : b + c = 3 ⇒ b = 2 b+c=3\Rightarrow b=2 b + c = 3 ⇒ b = 2 .
const: a + b + c = 2 ⇒ a = − 1 a+b+c=2\Rightarrow a=-1 a + b + c = 2 ⇒ a = − 1 .
So [ p ] C = [ − 1 2 1 ] [p]_{\mathcal{C}}=\begin{bmatrix}-1\\2\\1\end{bmatrix} [ p ] C = − 1 2 1 . The forecast (small numbers) holds; note one is negative — coordinates needn't be positive.
P P P 's columns are the new basis vectors c j \mathbf{c}_j c j ."
Why it feels right: you're going to C \mathcal{C} C , so surely C \mathcal{C} C 's vectors go in. The fix: the columns are the old vectors b j \mathbf{b}_j b j , expressed in the new coordinates: [ b j ] C [\mathbf{b}_j]_{\mathcal{C}} [ b j ] C . The matrix consumes B \mathcal{B} B -numbers, so it must be built from B \mathcal{B} B .
B − 1 C B^{-1}C B − 1 C instead of C − 1 B C^{-1}B C − 1 B .
Why it feels right: both letters appear; order seems arbitrary. The fix: check units. P C ← B = C − 1 B \underset{\mathcal{C}\leftarrow\mathcal{B}}{P}=C^{-1}B C ← B P = C − 1 B . Read right-to-left: B B B sends B \mathcal{B} B →standard, C − 1 C^{-1} C − 1 sends standard→C \mathcal{C} C . The inner "standard" cancels.
Common mistake Thinking the vector itself changes.
Why it feels right: the numbers visibly change. The fix: only the description changes. v \mathbf{v} v , the geometric arrow, is invariant — that invariance is exactly what forces [ v ] C = P [ v ] B [\mathbf{v}]_{\mathcal{C}}=P[\mathbf{v}]_{\mathcal{B}} [ v ] C = P [ v ] B .
Recall Quick self-test (cover the answers)
Q: What are the columns of P C ← B \underset{\mathcal{C}\leftarrow\mathcal{B}}{P} C ← B P ? → [ b j ] C [\mathbf{b}_j]_{\mathcal{C}} [ b j ] C .
Q: In R n \mathbb{R}^n R n with bases-as-columns B , C B,C B , C , what is P C ← B \underset{\mathcal{C}\leftarrow\mathcal{B}}{P} C ← B P ? → C − 1 B C^{-1}B C − 1 B .
Q: Relation between P C ← B \underset{\mathcal{C}\leftarrow\mathcal{B}}{P} C ← B P and P B ← C \underset{\mathcal{B}\leftarrow\mathcal{C}}{P} B ← C P ? → inverses.
Q: Why is [ v ] B [\mathbf{v}]_{\mathcal{B}} [ v ] B unique? → basis is linearly independent.
What is the coordinate vector [ v ] B [\mathbf{v}]_{\mathcal{B}} [ v ] B ? The unique column of scalars
c i c_i c i such that
v = ∑ c i b i \mathbf{v}=\sum c_i\mathbf{b}_i v = ∑ c i b i .
Why are coordinates unique? Because a basis is linearly independent, so the expansion is unique.
What are the columns of the change-of-basis matrix P C ← B P_{\mathcal{C}\leftarrow\mathcal{B}} P C ← B ? The old basis vectors expressed in the new basis:
[ b j ] C [\mathbf{b}_j]_{\mathcal{C}} [ b j ] C .
For R n \mathbb{R}^n R n with B , C B,C B , C holding basis vectors as columns, P C ← B = ? P_{\mathcal{C}\leftarrow\mathcal{B}}=? P C ← B = ? How do P C ← B P_{\mathcal{C}\leftarrow\mathcal{B}} P C ← B and P B ← C P_{\mathcal{B}\leftarrow\mathcal{C}} P B ← C relate? They are inverses of each other.
Does changing basis change the vector? No — only its coordinate description changes; the vector is invariant.
Why is the coordinate map linear? Adding/scaling vectors adds/scales their
B \mathcal{B} B -coefficients termwise.
Recall Feynman: explain to a 12-year-old
Imagine the same toy on a treasure map. One friend measures from the door, another from the window. The toy hasn't moved, but the two friends write down different "steps left, steps up" numbers. Change of basis is the little rulebook that turns one friend's numbers into the other's — just translating directions, never moving the toy.
Mnemonic Remember the order
"New columns of Old, then C-inverse-B."
Columns = old vectors b j \mathbf{b}_j b j in new clothes. And C − 1 B C^{-1}B C − 1 B : the C − 1 C^{-1} C − 1 "lands" you in C \mathcal{C} C , B B B "launches" from B \mathcal{B} B .
Basis and dimension — coordinates exist only once a basis is fixed.
Linear independence — guarantees coordinate uniqueness.
Invertible matrices — B , C B,C B , C invertible because their columns are bases.
Similar matrices and diagonalization — A ′ = P − 1 A P A'=P^{-1}AP A ′ = P − 1 A P is change of basis for operators .
Linear transformations and their matrices — coordinate maps make abstract maps concrete.
old vectors in new coords
Columns are b_j in C coords
Standard basis shortcut P equals B
Intuition Hinglish mein samjho
Dekho, ek vector v \mathbf{v} v asal mein ek arrow hai jo space mein already exist karta hai — basis choose karne se pehle . Jab hum koi basis B \mathcal{B} B pick karte hain, tab us arrow ko describe karne ke liye numbers ki list milti hai, jise hum coordinate vector [ v ] B [\mathbf{v}]_{\mathcal{B}} [ v ] B kehte hain. Yeh list isliye unique hoti hai kyunki basis linearly independent hota hai — do alag descriptions possible hi nahi.
Ab change of basis ka matlab: arrow wahi ka wahi rehta hai, sirf numbers badalte hain jab basis badalta hai. Translation matrix P C ← B \underset{\mathcal{C}\leftarrow\mathcal{B}}{P} C ← B P ke columns kya hote hain? Purane basis vectors b j \mathbf{b}_j b j , lekin naye basis ki language mein likhe huye, yaani [ b j ] C [\mathbf{b}_j]_{\mathcal{C}} [ b j ] C . Yahi sabse common galti hai — log naye vectors daal dete hain, jabki purane daalne hote hain (kyunki matrix purane numbers ko khaata hai).
R n \mathbb{R}^n R n mein agar B B B aur C C C apne basis vectors ko columns mein rakhein, to formula seedha hai: P C ← B = C − 1 B \underset{\mathcal{C}\leftarrow\mathcal{B}}{P}=C^{-1}B C ← B P = C − 1 B . Right se padho — B B B tumhe B \mathcal{B} B se standard mein le jaata hai, phir C − 1 C^{-1} C − 1 standard se C \mathcal{C} C mein. Beech ka "standard" cancel ho jaata hai. Aur reverse matrix uska inverse hota hai, kyunki idhar jaake wapas aana = kuch nahi karna = I I I .
Yeh topic kyun matter karta hai? Kyunki diagonalization (A ′ = P − 1 A P A'=P^{-1}AP A ′ = P − 1 A P ), eigenbasis, aur har "achhe coordinates mein problem aasaan ho jaati hai" wali trick — sab change of basis hi hai. Ek baar yeh clear, to poori linear algebra clean lagne lagti hai.