LA - Identity Maps and Injectivity

  • Thread starter Thread starter MushroomPirat
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Identity
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of linear transformations, specifically focusing on the injectivity of a transformation T from a finite-dimensional vector space V to another vector space W. The original poster seeks to prove that T is injective if and only if there exists a transformation S such that the composition ST acts as the identity map on V.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of T being injective and the conditions under which ST can be defined as the identity map. There are attempts to construct a suitable S and to clarify the logical steps needed to establish the proof.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided feedback on the original proof attempts, questioning the definitions and logical conclusions drawn. A revised proof has been suggested, which includes defining S in a way that aligns with the properties of injectivity and linear independence.

Contextual Notes

There is an emphasis on the need for clarity in defining the transformation S and ensuring that the properties of linear transformations are correctly applied. The discussion also highlights the importance of understanding the relationship between the dimensions of the vector spaces involved.

MushroomPirat
Messages
9
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Suppose that [itex]W[/itex] is finite dimensional and [itex]T:V\rightarrow W[/itex]. Prove that [itex]T[/itex] is injective if and only if there exists [itex]S:W\rightarrow V[/itex] such that [itex]ST[/itex] is the identity map on [itex]V[/itex].


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



First, suppose that [itex]T[/itex] is injective and let [itex]Tu=Tv[/itex] for [itex]u,v\in V[/itex]. Clearly, [itex]Tu-Tv=0[/itex] and thus [itex]S(Tu-Tv)=0[/itex]. From this, we can see that [itex]STu=STv[/itex]. However, since [itex]T[/itex] is injective, then [itex]u=v[/itex]. Therefore, there exists an [itex]S[/itex] such that [itex]ST[/itex] is the identity map on [itex]V[/itex]. In the other direction, suppose [itex]ST[/itex] is the identity map on [itex]V[/itex], and let [itex]Tu=Tv[/itex]. From the previous argument, we can see that [itex]STu=STv[/itex], and thus [itex]u=v[/itex], so [itex]T[/itex] is injective.


I think the second part of my proof is right, going from identity map to injectivity, but I'm just not sure about my argument for the first half.

Thanks for your help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
MushroomPirat said:
First, suppose that [itex]T[/itex] is injective and let [itex]Tu=Tv[/itex] for [itex]u,v\in V[/itex]. Clearly, [itex]Tu-Tv=0[/itex] and thus [itex]S(Tu-Tv)=0[/itex]. From this, we can see that [itex]STu=STv[/itex]. However, since [itex]T[/itex] is injective, then [itex]u=v[/itex]. Therefore, there exists an [itex]S[/itex] such that [itex]ST[/itex] is the identity map on [itex]V[/itex].

I can't see how you concluded that. The only thing you can conclude is that STu=STu. The thing you must show is that STu=u!
In fact, you haven't even defined a suitable S! You must first define a candidate S, and only then can you show that ST is the identity. So, how would you define such an S?

In the other direction, suppose [itex]ST[/itex] is the identity map on [itex]V[/itex], and let [itex]Tu=Tv[/itex]. From the previous argument, we can see that [itex]STu=STv[/itex], and thus [itex]u=v[/itex], so [itex]T[/itex] is injective.

This is ok.
 
Thanks for your help micromass. I thought about your advice and came up with a different proof:

Suppose T is injective and let [itex](v_1,...,v_n)[/itex] be a basis of V. Because this basis is linearly independent and T is injective, then [itex](Tv_1,...,Tv_n)[/itex] is also linearly independent (this was a result from a previous problem). Because T is injective, then dim V = dim rangeT [itex]\leq[/itex] dimW. Extend the previous list to a basis [itex](Tv_1,...,Tv_n,w_1,...,w_m)[/itex] of W. Now, define [itex]S: W\rightarrow V[/itex] such that [itex]STv_i=v_i[/itex] for all i=1,...,n, and [itex]Sw_j=0[/itex] for all j=1,...,m. Thus, if u is an arbitrary element of V, written as [itex]u=a_1v_1+...+a_nv_n[/itex] then [itex]STu=ST(a_1v_1+...+a_nv_n)=a_1v_1+...+a_nv_n[/itex] so ST must be the identity map on V.
 
MushroomPirat said:
Thanks for your help micromass. I thought about your advice and came up with a different proof:

Suppose T is injective and let [itex](v_1,...,v_n)[/itex] be a basis of V. Because this basis is linearly independent and T is injective, then [itex](Tv_1,...,Tv_n)[/itex] is also linearly independent (this was a result from a previous problem). Because T is injective, then dim V = dim rangeT [itex]\leq[/itex] dimW. Extend the previous list to a basis [itex](Tv_1,...,Tv_n,w_1,...,w_m)[/itex] of W. Now, define [itex]S: W\rightarrow V[/itex] such that [itex]STv_i=v_i[/itex] for all i=1,...,n, and [itex]Sw_j=0[/itex] for all j=1,...,m. Thus, if u is an arbitrary element of V, written as [itex]u=a_1v_1+...+a_nv_n[/itex] then [itex]STu=ST(a_1v_1+...+a_nv_n)=a_1v_1+...+a_nv_n[/itex] so ST must be the identity map on V.

Now that looks good to me.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K