Proving h:V*->K^n is Bijective

  • Thread starter Thread starter boombaby
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of a function h: V* -> K^n, where V is a finite dimensional vector space over the field K and V* is its dual space. The function h is defined in terms of the evaluation of linear functions on a basis of V. The original poster seeks clarification on the surjectivity of h, despite understanding its injectivity.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster questions the surjectivity of h and seeks to understand why for any vector in K^n, there exists a corresponding linear function in V* that maps to it. Other participants explore the relationship between linear transformations and their definitions based on basis elements.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered insights into the nature of linear transformations and the role of basis elements in defining linear maps. There is an acknowledgment of the original poster's progress in understanding the topic, but no explicit consensus has been reached on the proof of surjectivity.

Contextual Notes

The original poster expresses a lack of familiarity with linear transformations, which may influence their understanding of the concepts discussed. There is also a mention of textbooks stating the bijectivity of h as "obvious," indicating a potential gap in the original poster's knowledge.

boombaby
Messages
129
Reaction score
0
Let V be a finite dimensional vector space over the field K, V* be the dual space, the set of all linear functions on V. Now define a h:V*->K^n by h(f)=(f(e_1),f(e_2),...f(e_n)), where e_i is the basis of V. It is known that h(xf+yg)=xh(f)+yh(g), where x,y is in K and f,g in V*. It is told that h is bijective. I understand h is injective, but do not understand why it is surjective? it might be quite simple, all the books just says it is OBVIOUS, but I just don't get it...
More precisely, given x=(x_1, x_2,...,x_n) in K^n, why there is a f in V* such that h(f)=x, or equivalently, f(e_i)=x_i ?
Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
boombaby said:
why there is a f in V* such that ... f(e_i)=x_i ?
Thanks!
Aren't expressions exactly like that how you normally go about specifying a linear transformation?
 
yea, thanks. I think get it now...in case I made something wrong, check it please, thanks
since I'm not having much knowledge on linear transformation. This is how I'm thinking:
there's a isomorphism g:V->K^n such that g(e_1)=(1,0,...,0), g(e_2)=(0,1,0...0)...g(e_n)=(0,0,...,1).
given (a_1,a_2,...,a_n) in K^n, there's a linear function f:K^n->K such that f(g(e_1))=a_1,...f(g(e_n))=a_n and f has the form f((x_1,x_2,...,x_n))=a_1*x_1+...a_n*x_n. This is done by solving a system of linear equations.
f(g(v)):V->K is the linear function I need. (linearity is easy to check)

Is this the right way to prove it? Is it possible to have a more explicit form of f?
Thanks
 
Last edited:
That's explicit enough, isn't it? The reason textbooks don't elaborate on why h is bijection is because it really is obvious! Any linear map defined on V is completely determined by its action on a basis; and vice versa, once you define the values of a function on the basis of V, you can extend it (uniquely) to a linear map.
 
thanks. it's more clear now
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K