• Support PF! Buy your school textbooks, materials and every day products Here!

Linear transformation, isomorphic

  • Thread starter karnten07
  • Start date
213
0
1. Homework Statement

Let B be an invertible n x n matrix. Prove that the linear transformation L: Mn,n [tex]\rightarrow[/tex] Mn,n given by L(A) = AB, is an isomorphism.

3. The Attempt at a Solution

I know to show it is an isomorphism i need to show that L is both onto and one-to-one.

By the theorem that says:

Let T:V[tex]\rightarrow[/tex]W be a linear transformation with vector spaces V and W both of dimension n. Then T is one-to-one if and only if it is onto.

To prove both conditions needed for an isomorphism i can just prove it is one-to-one as in this case, 'V' and 'W' are the same dimension and so proving L is one-to-one also proves it is onto.

To prove it is one-to-one, i need to determine the kernel of L and show that it is {0}. To do this i need to use the fact that B is an invertible n x n matrix and L(A)=AB.

I need some guidance on how to use these features to show the kernel of L os {0}???
Thanks in advance
 

Answers and Replies

229
0
well suppose L(A) = L(C), so AB = CB, then ...some stuff... implies A = C, so L is 1-1, you can fill in the missing step

your way, suppose L(A) = 0, so AB = 0, so ....some stuff... implies A = 0, so kerL = {0} so it's 1-1, again you can fill in the missing step


note the missing step is the same in both approaches
 
Last edited:
213
0
well suppose L(A) = L(C), so AB = CB, then ...some stuff... implies A = C, so L is 1-1, you can fill in the missing step

your way, suppose L(A) = 0, so AB = 0, so ....some stuff... implies A = 0, so kerL = {0} so it's 1-1, again you can fill in the missing step


note the missing step is the same in both approaches
Does it have something to do with the fact that the rows and columns of the invertible matrices are linearly independant and so the kernel must be 0 because of this? Or do i have to use notation to do with the linear transformation conditions? Any more help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks
 
Hurkyl
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
14,843
17
I know to show it is an isomorphism i need to show that L is both onto and one-to-one.
You're overthinking it. In this case, I think it would be easier to directly prove it's an isomorphism, rather than use that indirect method.
 
Last edited:
HallsofIvy
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
41,738
897
If Ax= 0 and A is invertible, then x= ?
 
213
0
If Ax= 0 and A is invertible, then x= ?
I assume that x =0, but what is the significance of A being invertible?
 
200
0
I assume that x =0, but what is the significance of A being invertible?
you don't assume that x=0. remember, you need to show that IF Ax = 0 THEN x=0. the significance of A being invertible is that, in general, a matrix times a non-zero vector could be the zero vector. for example, if B = [itex] \left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{array}\right)[/itex] and [itex]x = \left(\begin{array}{c} 0 \\ 1 \end{array}\right)[/itex] then Bx = 0. notice, of course, that B is not invertible though.
 
HallsofIvy
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
41,738
897
If Ax= 0, and A is invertible, how would you solve the equation? If you don't know what A being invertible has to do with the solution to this equation, then you need to go back and review the basics of linear transformations.
 

Related Threads for: Linear transformation, isomorphic

  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
10
Views
714
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
534
Replies
1
Views
621
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
1K
Top