1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Homework Help: Linear Algebra exam problem: is my answer correct?

  1. Oct 5, 2011 #1
    This was a problem on a midterm I just took.

    1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data

    Let f and g be linear transformations such that f: C^n ---> C^m is injective and g: C^m ---> C^n is onto (C = complex numbers).

    Prove or disprove with a counterexample: g composed with f is an isomorphism.

    3. The attempt at a solution

    I claim the proposition is false.

    Let g: C^1 --> C^1 be such that g(z) ={ 0 if z=0, z -(1+i) if z does not = 0}.
    Let f: C^1 --> C^1 be such that f(z) = z.

    Clearly, f is injective. I claim that g is onto, since if y is complex, there exists a complex z such that g(z) = y. Namely, z = y + (1+i). However, since both g(0)=g(1+i)=0, g is not injective.

    Hence, g composed with f is not injective, since g(f(0))=g(f(1+i)), and thus cannot be an isomorphism since it is not bijective (not invertible).

    How does that look?
  2. jcsd
  3. Oct 5, 2011 #2


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Pretty bad. There's no value of z such that g(z)=(-(1+i)), so g isn't onto. And g certainly isn't linear.
  4. Oct 5, 2011 #3
    oh damn, yeah that's brutal.

    so without providing a proof, is the proposition true or false?
  5. Oct 5, 2011 #4
    In my head I convinced myself that if g isn't injective it ruins the isomorphism but i'm starting to think that's a serious mind-lapse.
  6. Oct 5, 2011 #5


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    If g is onto then m<=n. What does f injective tell you about m and n?
  7. Oct 5, 2011 #6
    g is onto, but in general if we restrict the domain of g to some subset of C^m, there's no reason to suspect that it remains onto as a map to C^n. f isn't necessarily onto, so it's image may be some subset of C^m, and therefore the image of g composed with f will not necessarily be all of C^n. Therefore I suspect the composition is not necessarily an isomorphism. One example you could consider, I think would be if f mapped from C^1 to C^2 where z mapped to (z,0). Then you could consider a g that maps from C^2 to C^1 mapping (z1,z2) to z2. The composition of these will map everything in C^1 to 0.
  8. Oct 5, 2011 #7
    f inj -> ker(f)=0 -> n = m - 0 = m ---> lin trans between vect spaces of same dim is isomorphism.

  9. Oct 5, 2011 #8


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Sure, once you conclude m=n then both f and g are isomorphisms.
  10. Oct 5, 2011 #9
    but we can't restrict domain of g, since 1) the domain is given as C^m and still, if we argue that f may restrict g's domain in the composition, see above for proof no.

    uhggggg nothing worse than absolutely butchering a pretty simple problem.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook