- #1
mahler1
- 222
- 0
I have doubts regarding a statement related to the following proposition: Let ##(V,<,>)## be a finite dimensional vector space equipped with an inner product and let ##f:V \to V## be a linear transformation, then the following statements are equivalent:
1)##<f(v),f(w)>=<v,w>## for all ##v,w \in V##
2) ##f^* \circ f=f \circ f^*=id_V##
I've read and understood the proof of the equivalence between these two statements but I have a major doubt with the following: In the part 1) ##\implies## 2), in the textbook they prove 1) ##\implies f^* \circ f=id_V## and then affirm "As V is a finite dimensional vector space, ##f^* \circ f=id_V \implies f \circ f^*=id_V##. I don't understand why that implication is true, I would appreciate if someone could explain it to me.
1)##<f(v),f(w)>=<v,w>## for all ##v,w \in V##
2) ##f^* \circ f=f \circ f^*=id_V##
I've read and understood the proof of the equivalence between these two statements but I have a major doubt with the following: In the part 1) ##\implies## 2), in the textbook they prove 1) ##\implies f^* \circ f=id_V## and then affirm "As V is a finite dimensional vector space, ##f^* \circ f=id_V \implies f \circ f^*=id_V##. I don't understand why that implication is true, I would appreciate if someone could explain it to me.