Proof that a vector space W is the direct sum of Ker L and Im L

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving that a vector space W is the direct sum of the kernel (Ker P) and the image (Im P) of a linear map P: W → W, where P is a projection satisfying P² = P. The key steps involve expressing any vector w in W as w = P(w) + (w - P(w)), demonstrating that P(w) belongs to Im P and that (w - P(w)) belongs to Ker P. The conclusion is that W = Ker P + Im P and that their intersection is trivial, confirming the direct sum property.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of linear maps and projections in linear algebra.
  • Familiarity with the concepts of kernel and image of a linear transformation.
  • Knowledge of vector space properties and direct sums.
  • Basic proficiency in algebraic manipulation and proof techniques.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of linear transformations and their kernels and images.
  • Learn about the concept of direct sums in vector spaces.
  • Explore the implications of the projection property P² = P in linear algebra.
  • Practice constructing proofs in linear algebra, focusing on the use of definitions and known properties.
USEFUL FOR

Undergraduate students in mathematics, particularly those studying linear algebra, as well as educators and tutors seeking to clarify concepts related to vector spaces and linear transformations.

nilwill
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi there. I'm a long time reader, first time poster. I'm an undergraduate in Math and Economics and I am having trouble in Linear Algebra. This is the first class I have had that focuses solely on proofs, so I am in new territory.

Homework Statement



note Although the question doesn't state it, I think P is supposed to be a projection.

Let W be a vector space. Let P:W→W be a linear map s.t. P2=P.

Show that W= KerP + ImP and KerP\capImP

namely, W is the direct sum of KerP and ImP

Hint: To show W is the sum, write an element of W in the form w=w-P(w)+P(w)

Homework Equations



I am unsure of any relevant equations.

The Attempt at a Solution



KerP={z|P(z)=0}
ImP={P(v)|v\inW}

I am kind of fuzzy on the meaning of P2=P, and this is where I am stuck.

Would an example be something like:

P=\left( \begin{array}{cc} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{array} \right)P2=\left( \begin{array}{cc} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{array} \right) \times \left( \begin{array}{cc} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{array} \right) = \left( \begin{array}{cc} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{array} \right) =P?

From this example: for KerP=P(z)=0 , we would need to satisfy z+0=0, so z=0

For some v\inW, the ImP is P(v)=v.

KerP\capImP=0→ P(v)=P(z) iff v=0 so z=v where the two intersect.I am unsure where to go from here, or if I'm even doing this correctly. If someone could nudge me along towards and answer without giving the me the full proof, it would be much appreciated. I've been stuck on this problem for 4 hours over two days and I can't seem to figure it out.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
P2 = P is sometimes used as the definition of a projection.

we can always write w = P(w) + (w - P(w))

no matter what w is.

P(w) is clearly in Im(P), so all you have to do is show that

w - P(w) is in ker(P).

what is P(w - P(w))?
 
P:V→V and P2=P

Let me see if I can define this better: so if V is the direct sum of U + W

let P(v)=u

let I am P be a complete subset of U; if u is an element of U P(u)=u, so I am P =U

let Ker P be a complete subset of W; if v is an element of V and v is an element of W, the v=0+w for some element w in W, so Ker P =W

let v=P(v)+(v-P(v))
Since P(v) is in the I am P, then (v-P(v)) is in the Ker P

So P(v-P(v))=P(v)-P2(v)=P(v)-P(u)=u-u=0
therefore, v-P(v) is in the Ker P

Is this correct so far? Sorry for not using latex. I have only used it in creating this post and was stretched for time.

I think I can do the rest if I have set this up correctly.
 
nilwill said:
P:V→V and P2=P

Let me see if I can define this better: so if V is the direct sum of U + W

we're not worried about "direct sum" just yet, just the sum (or "join").

let P(v)=u

let I am P be a complete subset of U; if u is an element of U P(u)=u, so I am P =U

let Ker P be a complete subset of W; if v is an element of V and v is an element of W, the v=0+w for some element w in W, so Ker P =W

none of this makes much sense. and it's unnecessary.

let v=P(v)+(v-P(v))

you don't need to "let" v = P(v) + (v-P(v)) it ALWAYS is, by the rules of vector addition.

Since P(v) is in the I am P, then (v-P(v)) is in the Ker P

you don't KNOW this yet, you're trying to prove it. proofs start with what you know. in this case, what you know is:

v = P(v) + (v-P(v)) (simple algebra, always true, since P(v) + -(P(v)) is the 0-vector) and:
P(v) is in Im(P) (by the definition of what Im(P) is Im(P)= {u in W: u = P(v) for some v in W}.) and:
P2 = P (so P(P(v)) = P(v), you'll use this later).

those are your "knowns".

So P(v-P(v))=P(v)-P2(v)=P(v)-P(u)=u-u=0
therefore, v-P(v) is in the Ker P

why bring "u" into this?

Is this correct so far? Sorry for not using latex. I have only used it in creating this post and was stretched for time.

I think I can do the rest if I have set this up correctly.

in my last post, i asked you a question:

what is P(w - P(w))? you don't need any "extra letters" to answer this, you just need one certain fact about P.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
2K