I Properties of Tensor Products - Cooperstein, Theorem 10.3

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading Bruce N. Coopersteins book: Advanced Linear Algebra (Second Edition) ... ...

I am focused on Section 10.2 Properties of Tensor Products ... ...

I need help with an aspect of the proof of Theorem 10.3 regarding a property of tensor products ... ...The relevant part of Theorem 10.3 reads as follows:
?temp_hash=33b5ae1cfdc2f7ac325b528ac71daf3b.png

In the above text from Cooperstein (Second Edition, page 355) we read the following:" ... ... The map f is multilinear and therefore by the universality of Y there is a linear map T \ : \ Y \longrightarrow X such thatT(v_1 \otimes \ ... \ v_s \otimes w_1 \otimes \ ... \ w_t )

= (v_1 \otimes \ ... \ v_s ) \otimes (w_1 \otimes \ ... \ w_t )

... ... ... "
My question is as follows:

What does Cooperstein mean by "the universality of Y" and how does the universality of Y justify the existence of the linear map T \ : \ Y \longrightarrow X ... and further, if T does exist, then how do we know it has the form shown ...

Hope someone can help ...

Peter
*** Note ***

Presumably, Cooperstein is referring to some "universal mapping property" or "universal mapping problem" such as he describes in his Section 10.1 Introduction to Tensor Products as follows:
?temp_hash=33b5ae1cfdc2f7ac325b528ac71daf3b.png

?temp_hash=33b5ae1cfdc2f7ac325b528ac71daf3b.png
... ... BUT ... ... there is no equivalent of the logic surrounding the mapping j ... unless we are supposed to assume the existence of j and its relation to the existence of T ... ?Indeed reading Cooperstein's definition of a tensor product ... it reads like the tensor product is the solution to the UMP ... but I am having some trouble fitting the definition and the UMP to the situation in Theorem 10.3 ...

Again, hope someone can help ...

Peter
 

Attachments

  • Cooperstein - 1 - Theorem 10.3 - PART 1       ....png
    Cooperstein - 1 - Theorem 10.3 - PART 1 ....png
    45.1 KB · Views: 1,259
  • Cooperstein - 1 - Universal Mapping Problem  - PART 1     ....png
    Cooperstein - 1 - Universal Mapping Problem - PART 1 ....png
    51.5 KB · Views: 648
  • Cooperstein - 2 - Universal Mapping Problem  - PART 2     ....png
    Cooperstein - 2 - Universal Mapping Problem - PART 2 ....png
    29.4 KB · Views: 584
Physics news on Phys.org
I will state it with 2 vector spaces for simplicity.

The tensor product ##V \otimes W##, where ##V,W## are vector spaces, has the following universal property:
If ##f: V \times W \to U## is a bilinear map to a vector space ##U##, then there is a unique linear map ##T : V \otimes W \to U## such that ##f(v,w)=T(v \otimes w)##.

(Prop 5.1 in https://people.maths.ox.ac.uk/hitchin/hitchinnotes/Differentiable_manifolds/Chapter_2.pdf)
(See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tensor_product#Universal_property )
 
  • Like
Likes Math Amateur
Thanks Samy ... that looks pretty directly applicable to Theorem 10.3 ...

Appreciate your help ...

Peter
 
Math Amateur said:
I am reading Bruce N. Coopersteins book: Advanced Linear Algebra (Second Edition) ... ...

I am focused on Section 10.2 Properties of Tensor Products ... ...

I need help with an aspect of the proof of Theorem 10.3 regarding a property of tensor products ... ...The relevant part of Theorem 10.3 reads as follows:
?temp_hash=33b5ae1cfdc2f7ac325b528ac71daf3b.png

In the above text from Cooperstein (Second Edition, page 355) we read the following:" ... ... The map f is multilinear and therefore by the universality of Y there is a linear map T \ : \ Y \longrightarrow X such thatT(v_1 \otimes \ ... \ v_s \otimes w_1 \otimes \ ... \ w_t )

= (v_1 \otimes \ ... \ v_s ) \otimes (w_1 \otimes \ ... \ w_t )

... ... ... "
My question is as follows:

What does Cooperstein mean by "the universality of Y" and how does the universality of Y justify the existence of the linear map T \ : \ Y \longrightarrow X ... and further, if T does exist, then how do we know it has the form shown ...

Hope someone can help ...

Peter
*** Note ***

Presumably, Cooperstein is referring to some "universal mapping property" or "universal mapping problem" such as he describes in his Section 10.1 Introduction to Tensor Products as follows:
?temp_hash=33b5ae1cfdc2f7ac325b528ac71daf3b.png

?temp_hash=33b5ae1cfdc2f7ac325b528ac71daf3b.png
... ... BUT ... ... there is no equivalent of the logic surrounding the mapping j ... unless we are supposed to assume the existence of j and its relation to the existence of T ... ?Indeed reading Cooperstein's definition of a tensor product ... it reads like the tensor product is the solution to the UMP ... but I am having some trouble fitting the definition and the UMP to the situation in Theorem 10.3 ...

Again, hope someone can help ...

Peter
Samy_A said:
I will state it with 2 vector spaces for simplicity.

The tensor product ##V \otimes W##, where ##V,W## are vector spaces, has the following universal property:
If ##f: V \times W \to U## is a bilinear map to a vector space ##U##, then there is a unique linear map ##T : V \otimes W \to U## such that ##f(v,w)=T(v \otimes w)##.

(Prop 5.1 in https://people.maths.ox.ac.uk/hitchin/hitchinnotes/Differentiable_manifolds/Chapter_2.pdf)
(See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tensor_product#Universal_property )

Hi Samy,

I was too quick to indicate that I understood what you said and the implications of what you said ... ...

... indeed ... I need some further help ...

I cannot see how what you have said leads to T having the property that

T(v_1 \otimes \ ... \ v_s \otimes w_1 \otimes \ ... \ w_t )

= (v_1 \otimes \ ... \ v_s ) \otimes (w_1 \otimes \ ... \ w_t )Can you explain why T has the above property?Hope you can help ...

Peter
 
It is a direct application of the universality of the tensor product. In sloppy language, that principle means that a multilinear map on a cartesian product of vector spaces defines ("can be extended to") a linear map on the tensor product of these vector spaces.

In the proof, they define ##f: V_1 \times \dots \times V_s \times W_1 \times \dots \times W_t \to X=V \otimes W## by ##f(v_1,\dots ,v_s,w_1,\dots ,w_t)=(v_1 \otimes \dots \otimes v_s ) \otimes (w_1 \otimes \dots \otimes w_t)##.

This ##f## is clearly multilinear. Therefore, there exists a linear ##T: V_1 \otimes \dots \otimes V_s \otimes W_1 \otimes \dots \otimes W_t \to X## such that ##T(v_1 \otimes \dots \otimes v_s \otimes w_1 \otimes \dots \otimes w_t) =f(v_1,\dots ,v_s,w_1,\dots ,w_t)=(v_1 \otimes \dots \otimes v_s ) \otimes (w_1 \otimes \dots \otimes w_t) ##
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Math Amateur
Oh! , OK Samy, Thanks ...

Most important principle ... seems to be used again and again in proofs of properties of tensor products ...

Peter
 
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
When decomposing a representation ##\rho## of a finite group ##G## into irreducible representations, we can find the number of times the representation contains a particular irrep ##\rho_0## through the character inner product $$ \langle \chi, \chi_0\rangle = \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{g\in G} \chi(g) \chi_0(g)^*$$ where ##\chi## and ##\chi_0## are the characters of ##\rho## and ##\rho_0##, respectively. Since all group elements in the same conjugacy class have the same characters, this may be...
Back
Top