Nice little proof, can any one do it?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter rusticle
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that a linear transformation F is one-to-one if and only if its kernel contains only the zero vector. The scope includes theoretical aspects of linear transformations and proof techniques.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that to show F is one-to-one, one must demonstrate that the kernel of F contains only the zero vector.
  • One participant suggests using a proof by contradiction to show that if F is one-to-one and has non-zero vectors in its kernel, it leads to a contradiction.
  • Another participant emphasizes that the proof does not require advanced algebra, focusing instead on the basic properties of linear transformations.
  • It is mentioned that proving F(0) = 0 is essential, which implies that the zero vector is in the kernel of F.
  • Participants discuss the implications of having a vector in the kernel and what it means for the transformation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the approach to proving the statement, but there is uncertainty regarding the specific steps and the level of algebra required. The discussion remains unresolved as participants explore different proof strategies.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions about the properties of linear transformations are not explicitly stated, and there may be dependencies on definitions that are not clarified in the discussion.

rusticle
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
A linear transformation F is said to be one-to-one if it satisfies the following condition: if F(u) = F(v) then u = v. Prove that F is one-to-one if and only if Ker(F) = {0}.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, what are your thoughts about this?
 
To help you along a bit:

a) IF one-to one..
You are to show that this implies the kernel of F contains just the 0 element.

Now, you can prove that this must be true, by way of contradiction:

ASSUME that the i) linear transformation F is both ii) one-to-one AND has iii) non-zero vectors in its kernel.

Show that i)+iii) implies that F is NOT one-to-one!
 
hmmm yeah my friend posed this proof to me and asked me to try and find a good solution to it if i could, to be honest i have idea! its possible that i just lack the algebra to do so
 
Um, this proof doesn't really require any algebra, just the basic properties that define a linear transformation. For the reverse direction, suppose F(u) = F(v) so that F(u) - F(v) = F(u-v).

For the forward direction, you could also prove that F(0) = 0, which means that {0} is contained in Ker(F), so you just have to prove that Ker(F) is contained in {0}. Let v be in Ker(F), find out what this means and remember that you should have proved 0 = F(0).
 
ah thanks snipez90, pretty sure I've got it out!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K