# Confused about choice of vector in a proof.

Luna=Luna
This is probably going to be a very simple question, i just need justification for a seemingly simple step in a proof.

The statement is as follows:

An endomorphism $T$ of an inner product space is ${0}$ if and only if $\langle b|T|a\rangle = 0$ for all $|a\rangle$ and $|b\rangle$.

Now it is obvious if $T$ is $0$ then $\langle b|T|a\rangle = 0$

For the converse proof if $\langle b|T|a\rangle = 0$ for all $|a\rangle$ and $b\rangle$ then $T = 0$, it starts by choosing $|b\rangle = T|a\rangle$.

Why is this valid, i guess a very naive reasoning would be doesn't this only prove it for the case that $|b\rangle = T|a\rangle$.

Homework Helper
Gold Member
For the converse proof if $\langle b|T|a\rangle = 0$ for all $|a\rangle$ and $b\rangle$ then $T = 0$, it starts by choosing $|b\rangle = T|a\rangle$.

Why is this valid, i guess a very naive reasoning would be doesn't this only prove it for the case that $|b\rangle = T|a\rangle$.

In the converse we're already given that $\langle b|T|a\rangle = 0$ for all $|a\rangle$ and $b\rangle$. We don't have to prove anything for all ##|b\rangle##. We just consider ##T|a\rangle## and find that its norm must be zero for all ##|a\rangle##. Therefore ##T|a\rangle## is the zero vector for all ##|a\rangle##, hence ##T## is the zero map.

1 person