A A problem in multilinear algebra

  • Thread starter Thread starter steenis
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Algebra
steenis
Messages
312
Reaction score
18
TL;DR
A one-to-one correspondence between bilinear non-degenerate maps and invertible linear maps
I have the following problem in multilinear algebra:
Let ##W## and ##V## be real finite-dimensional vector spaces, ##V^*## is the dual space of ##V##
Let ##L:W \times V \rightarrow \mathbb{R}## be a non-degenerate bilinear map
Define ##g:W \rightarrow V^*## by ##g(w)(v)=L(w,v)##
To prove: ##g## is an isomorphism

The map ##g## is obviously linear
##g## is injective, because if ##g(w)=0## for ##w \in W##, then for all ##v \in V## we have that ##g(w)(v)=L(w,v)=0##, so, because ##L## is non-degenerate, we have ##w=0##
Remains to prove that ##g## is surjective

If ##dim W=dim V=n##, then we are ready, because in that case ##dim W=dim V^*=n## and ##g## is surjective if and only if ##g## is injective. On the other hand, if ##g## is bijective, then ##g## is an isomorphism and ##dim W=dimV=dim V^*##. However, it is not a-priori given that ##W## and ##V## have the same dimension

Can anybody help me with this problem, can the statement be proven or is the statement not true?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You are correct. The difficulty is that we only can conclude ##\dim W \leq \dim V##.
What happens if you consider ##h\, : \,V\longrightarrow W^*## with ##h(v)(w):=L(w,v)##?
 
In the same way, ##h## is injective and therefore ##dim V \leq dim W##. Now we have ##dim W=dim V=dim V^*##, thus the map ##g## is surjective and therefore an isomorphism (##h## is also an isomorphism)
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K