Linear transformation, show surjection and ker=0.

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving properties of a linear map from a vector space of polynomials to a quotient of polynomial rings. Participants are exploring the conditions under which this map is surjective and has a trivial kernel, focusing on concepts from linear algebra and polynomial algebra.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a linear map from a vector space of polynomials to a quotient ring and seeks to prove its surjectivity and that its kernel is zero.
  • Another participant questions the conditions under which an element in the quotient is zero and whether elements equivalent to zero lie in the image of the natural inclusion.
  • Clarifications are sought regarding terms like "natural inclusion" and "preimage," indicating some confusion about the terminology used.
  • A suggestion is made to show that the map is injective by identifying elements in the polynomial ring that map to zero in the quotient.
  • Participants discuss the implications of polynomial division and the structure of the ideal generated by certain polynomials in relation to the kernel of the map.
  • One participant asserts that the kernel is trivial based on the definition of the vector space and its subset relation to the polynomial ring.
  • Another participant emphasizes the need to count dimensions or identify a suitable basis for the quotient to demonstrate surjectivity.
  • Further attempts are made to apply polynomial division to show equivalence classes in the quotient ring.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding the definitions and implications of the terms used in the discussion. While some points are clarified, there is no consensus on the overall proof strategy or the specific conditions needed to establish surjectivity and the triviality of the kernel.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the definitions of terms and the implications of polynomial division, indicating that assumptions may be missing or that the discussion is dependent on specific interpretations of the mathematical concepts involved.

grimster
Messages
39
Reaction score
0
I have a linear map from [itex]$ V\rightarrow K[X_{1},...,X_{n}]\rightarrow K[X_{1},...,X_{n}]/I.$[/itex]

how do i prove that a linear map from [itex]$ V=\{$[/itex]polynomials with [itex]$\deg _{x_{i}}f\prec q\}$[/itex] to [itex]$ K[X_{1},..X_{n}]/I.$[/itex] where I is the ideal generated by the elements [itex]$ X_{i}^{q}-X_{i},1\leq i\leq n.,$[/itex] is both surjective and that the kernel is zero. V is a vector space over K. Have [itex]$ dim_{k}V=\{$[/itex]the number of different monomials\}= [itex]$ q^{n}.$[/itex] and [itex]$ \mid V\mid =q^{q^{n}}.$[/itex] K is a field with q elements.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
An element in the quotient is zero if and only if what? Do any of the elements equivalent to zero lie in the image of the natural inclusion? Given any element in the quotient, can you think of some element in the preimage that maps to it?

That is given some element f in the ring k[x_1,..,X_n] can you think of a polynomial g with degree less than q such that f and g are equivalent in the qoutient?
 
"An element in the quotient is zero if and only if what?"
-i'm not sure what you mean. the zero map? f(a)=0 for all a?

"Do any of the elements equivalent to zero lie in the image of the natural inclusion?"
-what do you mean by natural inclusion? i don't think I've heard that expression before.


"preimage"
-is that the same as inverse image?

"That is given some element f in the ring k[x_1,..,X_n] can you think of a polynomial g with degree less than q such that f and g are equivalent in the qoutient?"
-how does this help show that the linear map from [itex]$ V=\{$[/itex]polynomials with [itex]$\deg _{x_{i}}f\prec q\}$[/itex] to [itex]$ K[X_{1},..X_{n}]/I.$[/itex] where I is the ideal generated by the elements [itex]$ X_{i}^{q}-X_{i},1\leq i\leq n.,$[/itex] is both surjective and that the kernel is zero.
 
I think you need to go back to basics.

Let R be the polynomial ring, and let R/I be the quotient.

You're trying to show the map V to R to R/I is an isomorphism.

So show that the map to R/I is injective. It is injective iff the only element mapping to 0 in the quotient is 0 in V. To do this you need to describe the elements in R that map to 0 in the qoutient. Do it. Now, does the map V to R send any element other than 0 to something tha maps to zero? If you followed my last post you'd know the answer.

Now, to show surjectivity you need to show that everything in the quotient has some preimage in V, ie some element in the equivlance class in the quotient is in the image of the map V to R. So do it: hint polynomial division.


If it helps why not consider special case.

n=1, p=2.


A basis of R/I is 1,x, since ever polynomial in k[x] is equal to one of the form

ax+b+ P(x)(x^2-x)

by the polynomial divisoin algorithm,

thus the only things that get sent to 0 are multiples of x^2 - x.

so obviously V here is isomorphic to R/I
 
Last edited:
from R to R/I the only elements that are mapped to 0, are the ones with <Xi^q -Xi> as a factor? or the ideal I? is that right?
 
edit...
 
Last edited:
matt grime said:
I think you need to go back to basics.

Let R be the polynomial ring, and let R/I be the quotient.

You're trying to show the map V to R to R/I is an isomorphism.

So show that the map to R/I is injective. It is injective iff the only element mapping to 0 in the quotient is 0 in V. To do this you need to describe the elements in R that map to 0 in the qoutient. Do it. Now, does the map V to R send any element other than 0 to something tha maps to zero? If you followed my last post you'd know the answer.

Now, to show surjectivity you need to show that everything in the quotient has some preimage in V, ie some element in the equivlance class in the quotient is in the image of the map V to R. So do it: hint polynomial division.


If it helps why not consider special case.

n=1, p=2.


A basis of R/I is 1,x, since ever polynomial in k[x] is equal to one of the form

ax+b+ P(x)(x^2-x)

by the polynomial divisoin algorithm,

thus the only things that get sent to 0 are multiples of x^2 - x.

so obviously V here is isomorphic to R/I

ok, this is what i have so far.

[itex]$\ker \left( \varphi :V\longrightarrow k[X_{1},...,X_{n}]\right) =0$[/itex]
per definition since V is defined as a subset of [itex]$ k[X_{1},...,X_{n}]$.[/itex]

then we have:
[itex]$\ker \left( \psi :V\longrightarrow k[X_{1},...,X_{n}]/I\right) =\left\{ x\in V:\psi (x)=0\right\} =\left\{ x\in V:\varphi (x)\in I\right\} =0.$[/itex]

so that proves that the kernel is trivial. then all i have to do is show that it is surjective.
 
It now suffices to count dimension, or as I said eariler pick a nice basis of the quotient.
 
so the "kernel thing" is correct? all i have to show now is surjection?
 
  • #10
matt grime said:
It now suffices to count dimension, or as I said eariler pick a nice basis of the quotient.

ok, I've tried to do this, but i can't figure it out.

this was what i tried:



let [itex]$ f(x_{1},...,x_{n})$[/itex] be a polynomial in R

by euclidian division we get

[itex]$ f(x_{1}..x_{n})=Q_{1}(x_{1},,x_{n})\ast (x_{1}^{q}-x_{1})+R_{1}(x_{1},,x_{n})$[/itex]

[itex]$ Q_{1}$[/itex] and [itex]$ R_{1}$[/itex] r in R and deg [itex]$ R_{1}$[/itex] in [itex]$ x_{1}<q$[/itex]


in R/I, P and R[itex]$ _{1}$[/itex] have the same class

divide now [itex]$ R_{1}$[/itex] by [itex]$ x_{2}^{q}-x_{2}$[/itex] ...


at the end u get [itex]$ R_{n}$[/itex] in R with degree \TEXTsymbol{<}q in [itex]$ x_{1}...x_{n}$[/itex]

P and [itex]$ R_{n}$[/itex] have the same class
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K