Proving Onto-ness of Linear Transformations

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the onto-ness of linear transformations, specifically the theorem stating that a linear transformation T: V -> W is onto if and only if the image of T equals W.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster seeks guidance on how to prove the theorem, expressing uncertainty about the proof process. Participants discuss the definition of "onto" and its implications, questioning the notation used to express the relationship between T and W.

Discussion Status

Participants are exploring the meaning of "onto" and the appropriate notation for expressing the theorem. Some clarification has been provided regarding the correctness of the notation T(V) = W, although there is no consensus on the tutor's reaction to it.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of a tutor's feedback on notation, which may influence the original poster's confidence in their understanding. The original poster has not yet found a formal proof and is relying on peer discussion for guidance.

Zoe-b
Messages
91
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I have this theorem in my notes but no proof and can't work out how to prove it (or find a proof via google):

Let T: V -> W be a linear transformation. Then T is onto iff I am (T) = W.


Homework Equations


not sure.

The Attempt at a Solution


I've only used this to prove other stuff.. so ideas on where to start proving this would be good. I understand the general idea that for T to be onto the image of T must contain the whole of W.. is that it?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
So, what does "onto" mean?
 
It means for all w in W there exists v in V st T(v) = w
.. am I being really slow?

Edit: Is it correct just to write
T(V) = W since T is onto
so I am T = W

?
 
Zoe-b said:
Edit: Is it correct just to write
T(V) = W since T is onto
so I am T = W

?

Yes, this is correct, but did you understand what you wrote?
 
yeah I do, only I don't think my tutor liked the notation T(V) = W when I used it last time. But maybe I used it wrong then..
 
Hmm, strange, there is nothing wrong with writing T(V)=W... So I have no idea why your tutor dislikes that...
 
Ok, well as long as its considered right in general :P Thanks!
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K