Conditions for Surjective and Injective linear maps

malexj93
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hello,

I'm not sure if this should go under the HW/CW section, since it's not really a homework question, just a curiosity about certain kinds of functions. My specific question is this:

If M: U→V is injective and dim(U)=dim(V), does that imply that M is surjective (and therefore bijective) as well? And why is that?

I believe it does, but I can't seem to justify it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
malexj93 said:
Hello,

I'm not sure if this should go under the HW/CW section, since it's not really a homework question, just a curiosity about certain kinds of functions. My specific question is this:

If M: U→V is injective and dim(U)=dim(V), does that imply that M is surjective (and therefore bijective) as well? And why is that?

I believe it does, but I can't seem to justify it.

For finite-dimensional spaces, it is true. It is called the Fredholm alternative: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fredholm_alternative

Do you know the rank-nullity theorem? It follows easily from there.
 
Thanks, that's what I was looking for. I didn't know there was a theorem for that.
 
Think about it intuitively too. Say V=\{v_1,v_2,...,v_k\} is a basis for the Domain space. What is the image of V? are the elements of M(V) Linearly independent? It's a good exercise to figure this out. If they are, by the dimension condition you have found a basis.
 
Thread 'Determine whether ##125## is a unit in ##\mathbb{Z_471}##'
This is the question, I understand the concept, in ##\mathbb{Z_n}## an element is a is a unit if and only if gcd( a,n) =1. My understanding of backwards substitution, ... i have using Euclidean algorithm, ##471 = 3⋅121 + 108## ##121 = 1⋅108 + 13## ##108 =8⋅13+4## ##13=3⋅4+1## ##4=4⋅1+0## using back-substitution, ##1=13-3⋅4## ##=(121-1⋅108)-3(108-8⋅13)## ... ##= 121-(471-3⋅121)-3⋅471+9⋅121+24⋅121-24(471-3⋅121## ##=121-471+3⋅121-3⋅471+9⋅121+24⋅121-24⋅471+72⋅121##...
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
Back
Top