How Do We Know the Annihilator Operation Is Associative?

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Set
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the proof of Proposition 11.3.5 from D. J. H. Garling's "A Course in Mathematical Analysis: Volume II: Metric and Topological Spaces, Functions of a Vector Variable," specifically regarding the associativity of the annihilator operation. Participants clarify that the proof assumes the equality $$(A^{ \bot } )^{ \bot \bot } = (A^{ \bot \bot } )^{ \bot } = A^{ \bot \bot \bot }$$ is valid. The key insight provided is that both conditions for membership in $(A^\bot)^{\bot\bot}$ and $(A^{\bot\bot})^\bot$ are equivalent, as they both require $\langle x,y\rangle = 0$ for all $y$ in $A^{\bot\bot}.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of metric spaces and normed spaces
  • Familiarity with the concept of annihilators in linear algebra
  • Knowledge of inner product notation and properties
  • Basic comprehension of mathematical proofs and propositions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of annihilators in linear algebra
  • Review the definitions and examples of metric spaces
  • Examine the implications of associativity in mathematical operations
  • Explore additional proofs in Garling's book for deeper insights
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of advanced linear algebra, and anyone studying metric and normed spaces who seeks to understand the properties of annihilator operations.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading D. J. H. Garling's book: "A Course in Mathematical Analysis: Volume II: Metric and Topological Spaces, Functions of a Vector Variable" ... ...

I am focused on Chapter 11: Metric Spaces and Normed Spaces ... ...

I need some help in order to understand Garling's proof of Proposition 11.3.5 - 5 ...

Garling's statement and proof of Proposition 11.3.5 reads as follows:View attachment 8965I can follow Garling's proof of Proposition 11.3.5 - 5 (except that when he refers to (iii) and (iv) ... he means 3 and 4 ...)

... ... BUT ... the proof assumes $$(A^{ \bot } )^{ \bot \bot } = (A^{ \bot \bot } )^{ \bot } = A^{ \bot \bot \bot }$$ ... ...How do we know that this is the case ... that is, true ... ?

Peter
 

Attachments

  • Garling - Proposition 11.3.5 ... Annihilator ... .,.png
    Garling - Proposition 11.3.5 ... Annihilator ... .,.png
    15.2 KB · Views: 143
Physics news on Phys.org
Peter said:
... ... BUT ... the proof assumes $$(A^{ \bot } )^{ \bot \bot } = (A^{ \bot \bot } )^{ \bot } = A^{ \bot \bot \bot }$$ ... ...

$A^{\bot\bot\bot}$ is just a shorthand way of writing $(A^{ \bot } )^{ \bot \bot }$ or $(A^{ \bot \bot } )^{ \bot}$ – if both are equal. And they are, being equal to $A^\bot$.
 
Last edited:
Peter said:
the proof assumes $$(A^{ \bot } )^{ \bot \bot } = (A^{ \bot \bot } )^{ \bot } = A^{ \bot \bot \bot }$$ ... ...How do we know that this is the case ... that is, true ... ?
To see that the annihilator operation is associative, notice that the condition for $x\in (A^\bot)^{\bot\bot}$ is the same as the condition for $x\in(A^{\bot\bot})^\bot$. In both cases, the condition is that $\langle x,y\rangle = 0$ for all $y$ in $A^{\bot\bot}$.
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K