How Does Covector Existence Relate to Tensor Dimensions in Winitzki's Lemma 3?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Tensors
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on understanding the existence of a covector in the context of Winitzki's Lemma 3 from his book on linear algebra. Participants are exploring the implications of tensor dimensions and the relationship between covectors and basis vectors, particularly focusing on the proof outlined in Section 1.7.3.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Peter expresses confusion about demonstrating the existence of a covector \( f^* \in V^* \) such that \( f^* ( v_j ) = \delta_{ j_1 j } \) and seeks assistance to understand this from first principles.
  • Lavinia explains that if a basis \( e_{i} \) exists for the vector space, then the dual basis consists of linear maps \( \pi_{i} \) defined by \( \pi_{i}(e_{j}) = \delta_{ij} \), suggesting that these covectors correspond to the basis vectors.
  • Another participant critiques Winitzki's notation, arguing that the same symbol \( f^* \) is used for different maps, which could lead to confusion. They propose defining a new function \( g^{j_1} \) to clarify the existence of the covector.
  • This participant asserts that the existence of such a covector follows from linearity and the spanning property of the basis, and they provide a method to define the covector based on the basis vectors.
  • Peter acknowledges the help received and notes that the clarification regarding notation has significantly improved his understanding of the proof.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the clarity of Winitzki's notation and the approach to proving the existence of the covector. While some find the explanations helpful, others remain uncertain about the relevance of certain exercises and examples provided in the text. The discussion does not reach a consensus on the best approach to demonstrate the existence of the covector.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved issues regarding the notation used by Winitzki and the assumptions underlying the exercises referenced. The discussion reflects varying levels of comfort with the material and differing interpretations of the proof's requirements.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading Segei Winitzki's book: Linear Algebra via Exterior Products ...

I am currently focused on Section 1.7.3 Dimension of a Tensor Product is the Product of the Dimensions ... ...

I need help in order to get a clear understanding of an aspect of the proof of Lemma 3 in Section 1.7.3 ...

The relevant part of Winitzki's text reads as follows:
?temp_hash=9370430caeb830ed3fa7ba46922fa5c7.png

?temp_hash=9370430caeb830ed3fa7ba46922fa5c7.png


In the above quotation from Winitzki we read the following:

" ... ... By the result of Exercise 1 in Sec. 6.3 there exists a covector [itex]f^* \in V^*[/itex] such that

[itex]f^* ( v_j ) = \delta_{ j_1 j }[/itex] for [itex]j = 1, \ ... \ ... \ , \ n[/itex] ... ... "I cannot see how to show that there exists a covector [itex]f^* \in V^*[/itex] such that

[itex]f^* ( v_j ) = \delta_{ j_1 j }[/itex] for [itex]j = 1, \ ... \ ... \ , \ n[/itex] ... ...Can someone help me to show this from first principles ... ?It may be irrelevant to my problem ... but I cannot see the relevance of Exercise 1 in Section 6 which reads as follows:
?temp_hash=9370430caeb830ed3fa7ba46922fa5c7.png
Exercise 1 refers to Example 2 which reads as follows:
?temp_hash=9370430caeb830ed3fa7ba46922fa5c7.png

?temp_hash=9370430caeb830ed3fa7ba46922fa5c7.png


BUT ... since I wish to show the result:

... ... ... "there exists a covector [itex]f^* \in V^*[/itex] such that

[itex]f^* ( v_j ) = \delta_{ j_1 j }[/itex] for [itex]j = 1, \ ... \ ... \ , \ n[/itex] ... ..."... from first principles the above example is irrelevant ... BUT then ... I cannot see its relevance anyway!Hope someone can help ... ...

Peter

===========================================================

*** NOTE ***

To help readers understand Winitzki's approach and notation for tensors I am providing Winitzki's introduction to Section 1.7 ... ... as follows ... ... :
?temp_hash=e67c8c3ac372f69967191c4fbbbc85c6.png

?temp_hash=e67c8c3ac372f69967191c4fbbbc85c6.png

?temp_hash=e67c8c3ac372f69967191c4fbbbc85c6.png
 

Attachments

  • Winitzki - 1 - Lemma 3 - Section 1.7.3 - PART 1      ....png
    Winitzki - 1 - Lemma 3 - Section 1.7.3 - PART 1 ....png
    17.9 KB · Views: 677
  • Winitzki - 2 - Lemma 3 - Section 1.7.3 - PART 2      ....png
    Winitzki - 2 - Lemma 3 - Section 1.7.3 - PART 2 ....png
    87.1 KB · Views: 807
  • Winitzki - Exercise 1 - Section 1.6            ....png
    Winitzki - Exercise 1 - Section 1.6 ....png
    5.2 KB · Views: 580
  • Winitzki - 1 - Example 2 - Section 1.6 - PART 1      ....png
    Winitzki - 1 - Example 2 - Section 1.6 - PART 1 ....png
    30.1 KB · Views: 716
  • Winitzki - 2 - Example 2 - Section 1.6 - PART 2      ....png
    Winitzki - 2 - Example 2 - Section 1.6 - PART 2 ....png
    4.7 KB · Views: 572
  • Winitzki - 1 - Section 1.7 - PART 1     ....png
    Winitzki - 1 - Section 1.7 - PART 1 ....png
    50.4 KB · Views: 684
  • Winitzki - 2 - Section 1.7 - PART 2     ....png
    Winitzki - 2 - Section 1.7 - PART 2 ....png
    44.9 KB · Views: 695
  • Winitzki - 3 - Section 1.7 - PART 3     ....png
    Winitzki - 3 - Section 1.7 - PART 3 ....png
    47.3 KB · Views: 677
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Math Amateur said:
In the above quotation from Winitzki we read the following:

" ... ... By the result of Exercise 1 in Sec. 6.3 there exists a covector [itex]f^* \in V^*[/itex] such that

[itex]f^* ( v_j ) = \delta_{ j_1 j }[/itex] for [itex]j = 1, \ ... \ ... \ , \ n[/itex] ... ... "I cannot see how to show that there exists a covector [itex]f^* \in V^*[/itex] such that

[itex]f^* ( v_j ) = \delta_{ j_1 j }[/itex] for [itex]j = 1, \ ... \ ... \ , \ n[/itex] ... ...Can someone help me to show this from first principles ... ?
Read what lavinia explained here:
lavinia said:
If one has a basis ##e_{i}## for the vectors space, then a basis for the vector space of covectors - called the dual basis are the linear maps ##π_{i}## defined by ##π_{i}(e_{j}) = δ_{ij}## This is the covector that assigns 1 to the i'th basis vector and zero to all of the others - as mentioned already above. For each choice of basis ##e_{i}## one has a corresponding choice of basis ##π_{i}## for the vector space of covectors.

The covectors ##v_{i}## mentioned above are the same as the covectors ##π_{i}##. So the function that picks out the i'th coordinate of a vector with respect to a basis is a covector.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Math Amateur
Math Amateur said:
In the above quotation from Winitzki we read the following:

" ... ... By the result of Exercise 1 in Sec. 6.3 there exists a covector [itex]f^* \in V^*[/itex] such that

[itex]f^* ( v_j ) = \delta_{ j_1 j }[/itex] for [itex]j = 1, \ ... \ ... \ , \ n[/itex] ... ... "I cannot see how to show that there exists a covector [itex]f^* \in V^*[/itex] such that

[itex]f^* ( v_j ) = \delta_{ j_1 j }[/itex] for [itex]j = 1, \ ... \ ... \ , \ n[/itex] ... ...Can someone help me to show this from first principles ... ?
Firstly, the author's use of notation is unhelpful, because they are using ##f^*## for two very different maps, one from ##V## to ##\mathbb{R}## and one from ##V\otimes W## to ##\mathbb{R}##. They should use different symbols for the two different maps.

Let's assume ##f^*## refers only to the first map. We show there exists such a map (which is a covector) simply by defining its operation on a set of basis vectors, and then extending it to cover the whole of the domain ##V## using the linearity rules. To be very clear, let's use a different symbol. Given a basis ##B\equiv \{v_1,...,v_n\}## for ##V##, we first define a function ##g^{j_1}:B\to\mathbb{R}## by

$$g^{j_1}(v_k)=\delta_k^{j_1}$$

for ##k\in\{1,...,n\}##.

Then we define ##f^*## to be the linear function from ##V## to ##\mathbb{R}## that agrees with ##g^{j_1}## on ##B##. It is a basic result of linear algebra (no tensors required) that such a function exists and is unique. If you are not comfortable just accepting that fact, a proof should be easy to find in any decent linear algebra text, or it's easy to prove from scratch. The existence follows from the fact that ##\{v_1,...,v_n\}## spans ##V##. To prove uniqueness, assume there are two such extension functions. Then their difference is also a linear function from ##V## to ##\mathbb{R}## and, by looking at its operation on the basis vectors, it's easily seen to be identically zero.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Math Amateur
Thanks Samy and Andrew ... appreciate the help ...

Still working through the Lemma ... but I must say Andrew, your point on the notation really changed things for me ... I now have a pretty good understanding regarding what is going on in the proof of Lemma 3 ...

Thanks again,

Peter
 

Similar threads

Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K