Prove Basis to Basis Isomorphism

  • Thread starter Thread starter iamalexalright
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Basis Isomorphism
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that a linear transformation \( t \) from vector space \( V \) to vector space \( W \) is an isomorphism if and only if it maps a basis of \( V \) to a basis of \( W \). The participants explore the properties of linear transformations, particularly focusing on surjectivity and injectivity in relation to the bases of the respective vector spaces.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the necessity of showing that \( t \) is bijective by proving it is both surjective and injective. They consider the implications of the transformation mapping basis elements and question how to formally demonstrate these properties.

Discussion Status

Several participants have provided insights into the proof structure, suggesting that if \( t \) is an isomorphism, it should map basis elements of \( V \) to basis elements of \( W \). There is an ongoing exploration of the relationship between the kernel of \( t \) and the linear independence of the basis elements, as well as the need for a more formal approach in some areas.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of dimensions in the context of isomorphisms and discuss the implications of the rank-nullity theorem. There is an acknowledgment of the need to prove both directions of the bi-conditional statement regarding the isomorphism and the mapping of bases.

iamalexalright
Messages
157
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Let [tex]t \in L(V,W)[/tex]. Prove that t is an isomorphism iff it carries a basis for V to a basis for W.

Homework Equations


L(V,W) is the set of all linear transformations from V to W

The Attempt at a Solution


So I figured I would assume I have a transformation from a basis for V to a basis for W and prove that it is bijective (and hence isomorphic).

So let [tex]B_{v} = \{v_{i} | i \in I\}[/tex] be a basis for V and
[tex]B_{w} = \{w_{j} | j \in J\}[/tex] be a basis for W

So t is surjective if im(t) = W so...
[tex]im(t) = \{tv_{i} | v_{i} \in B_{v}\} =[/tex]
[tex]\{w_{j} | w_{j} \in B_{w}\}[/tex]
Since B_w spans W can I simply say then that, given above, the next line would be:
= W
so im(t) = W

Now to prove it is injective I need to show that ker(t) = {0}
[tex]tv_{i} = tv_{j}[/tex] implies
[tex]t(v_{i} - v_{j}) = 0[/tex] implies
[tex]v_{i} - v_{j} \in ker(t)[/tex]

If ker(t) = {0} then implies v_i = v_j but this doesn't seem like a formal way to prove this... any help?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
iamalexalright said:

Homework Statement


Let [tex]t \in L(V,W)[/tex]. Prove that t is an isomorphism iff it carries a basis for V to a basis for W.


Homework Equations


L(V,W) is the set of all linear transformations from V to W


The Attempt at a Solution


So I figured I would assume I have a transformation from a basis for V to a basis for W and prove that it is bijective (and hence isomorphic).

So let [tex]B_{v} = \{v_{i} | i \in I\}[/tex] be a basis for V and
[tex]B_{w} = \{w_{j} | j \in J\}[/tex] be a basis for W

So t is surjective if im(t) = W so...
[tex]im(t) = \{tv_{i} | v_{i} \in B_{v}\} =[/tex]
[tex]\{w_{j} | w_{j} \in B_{w}\}[/tex]
Since B_w spans W can I simply say then that, given above, the next line would be:
= W
so im(t) = W

Now to prove it is injective I need to show that ker(t) = {0}
[tex]tv_{i} = tv_{j}[/tex] implies
[tex]t(v_{i} - v_{j}) = 0[/tex] implies
[tex]v_{i} - v_{j} \in ker(t)[/tex]

If ker(t) = {0} then implies v_i = v_j but this doesn't seem like a formal way to prove this... any help?

So, you have assumed that if [tex]v_i[/tex] is a basis element of V then its image under t is [tex]w_i[/tex], which is a basis element of W. Now, observe that, by assumption, no two basis elements of V are mapped to the same basis element in W. Now, write your [tex]v_i,v_j[/tex] as a linear combo of vectors in V and then use the linearity of t to distribute it across the linear combo.

Also, you need to prove that if t is an isomorphism, then it maps a basis of V to a basis of W, that is, the image of the basis of V under T forms a basis of W.
 
So i did assume it was 1-1.

okay, well for v_i in the Basis of V:

[tex]t(a_{1}v_{1} + ... + a_{n}v_{n} =[/tex]
[tex]a_{1}tv_{1} + ... + a_{n}tv_{n}[/tex]

If it is an isomorphism then the ker(t) should be zero:

[tex]ker(t) = \{v \in B_{v} | tv = 0\}[/tex]
so:
[tex]a_{1}tv_{1} + ... + a_{n}tv_{n} = 0[/tex]
since I assume t maps to a basis in W then the only solution to this is when a1...an = 0 so that implies that the ker(t) = {0}, yes?

Now the image of t is simply tv, and since I assume tv is in a basis of W then the image spans W so I can write im(t) = W. Correct?

I still feel i am wrong
 
iamalexalright said:
So i did assume it was 1-1.

okay, well for v_i in the Basis of V:

[tex]t(a_{1}v_{1} + ... + a_{n}v_{n} =[/tex]
[tex]a_{1}tv_{1} + ... + a_{n}tv_{n}[/tex]

If it is an isomorphism then the ker(t) should be zero:

[tex]ker(t) = \{v \in B_{v} | tv = 0\}[/tex]
so:
[tex]a_{1}tv_{1} + ... + a_{n}tv_{n} = 0[/tex]
since I assume t maps to a basis in W then the only solution to this is when a1...an = 0 so that implies that the ker(t) = {0}, yes?

Now the image of t is simply tv, and since I assume tv is in a basis of W then the image spans W so I can write im(t) = W. Correct?

I still feel i am wrong

You have done enough to show that t is 1-1 and onto and hence an isomorphism. The only problem is that you need to be a *little* more formal in your proof that it is onto, but you have the idea.

I'd start by writing every element in W as the linear combo of a basis for W. Which basis? Well, given your assumptions (that is, T takes a basis for V to a basis for W) which basis do you think you should use?
 
Yeah, when I write it up I will take care of being a bit more formal

let [tex]u \in W[/tex]
then
[tex]u = a_{1}w_{1} + ... + a_{n}w_{n}[/tex]
where w is in a basis for W
then since [tex]w_{i} = b_{1}tv_{1} + ... + b_{n}tv_{n}[/tex] (v in basis for V)

we can combine and get:
[tex]u = a_{1}[b_{11}tv_{1} + ... b_{n1}tv_{n}] + ... + a_{n}[b_{1n}tv_{1} + ... + b_{nn}tv_{n}][/tex]

simplifying:
[tex]u = c_{1}tv_{1} + ... + c_{n}tv_{n} =[/tex]

Thanks for the help
 
One simplifying step:

You are saying that T maps SOME basis of V to SOME basis of W. So, you don't know what the bases are, but you know there exists a basis for V and a basis for W such that T(v_i)=w_i. Now, write your arbitrary element of W as a linear combination of the w_i's. This way you can skip the portion about combining the linear combinations.Now, if you haven't, you need to prove the other way of this bi-conditional statement. That is, assume that it is an isomorphism and show that it maps a basis of V onto a basis of W.
 
So if it is an isomorphism we know that

im(t) = W so each w in W can be written as a combination a_1*tv_1 + ... + a_n*tv_n

since the kernel(t) = {0} this implies only the zero vector is a solution to:
a_1* tv_1 + ... a_n* tv_n = 0

so then these vectors v_n are linearly independent. I don't know how to show that these span V however.

Eh... not so sure about these half of it..
 
iamalexalright said:
So if it is an isomorphism we know that

im(t) = W so each w in W can be written as a combination a_1*tv_1 + ... + a_n*tv_n

since the kernel(t) = {0} this implies only the zero vector is a solution to:
a_1* tv_1 + ... a_n* tv_n = 0

so then these vectors v_n are linearly independent. I don't know how to show that these span V however.

Eh... not so sure about these half of it..

It hasn't been said explicitly, but if T is an isomorphism from V to W, then what can you say about the dimensions of V and W. That is, which one, if any, is true:
dim(V) < dim(W)
dim(V) >dim(W)
dim(V) <= dim(W)
dim(V) >=dim(W)
dim(V) = dim(W)
(HINT: use nullity plus rank theorem and use the fact that ker(T)={0})

Now, as you pointed out a_1* tv_1 + ... a_n* tv_n = 0 implies that a_1=...=1_n=0. What does this say about these vectors? Now, look to see how many of these vectors you have. Do you have a basis?
 
The dimensions are the same

if the coeffecients being zero is the only way the linear combination of vectors is zero then the vectors are linearly independent. I have n vectors so assuming the dimension of my space is n then I have a basis.
 
  • #10
iamalexalright said:
The dimensions are the same

if the coeffecients being zero is the only way the linear combination of vectors is zero then the vectors are linearly independent. I have n vectors so assuming the dimension of my space is n then I have a basis.

Perfect! You have shown a)T is 1-1 b)every w in W is a linear combo of the T(v_i)'s, so T is onto.

You're done!
 
  • #11
: D
Thanks so much for the help!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K