Semilinear Transformation, Kernel

LHeiner
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Hello

I'm trying to proof the following: f is a semilinear transformation between the vectorspaces V \rightarrow W,c^\ast \in W^\ast , G:=ker \ c^\ast. Show that f^{-1}(G)=ker(f^T(c^\ast )) and that the f-preimage of a hyperplane of W a hyperplane of V or V as a whole is.

Can you help me?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If I understand correctly: f^T(c^\ast ) = c^\ast \circ f
so that: ker(f^T(c^\ast))=ker(c^\ast \circ f)
which is all the vectors of V that are mapped by f into the kernel of c*.
Or: f^{-1}(ker(c\ast)) in other words...
for the second part, you should show that f^{-1}(ker (c\ast)) is a linear subspace of V, and then remember that every linear subspace of W can be represented as an intersection of kernels of some number of linear functionals, hence every inverse image is an intersection of some number of subspaces of V.
 
ilia1987 said:
If I understand correctly: f^T(c^\ast ) = c^\ast \circ f
so that: ker(f^T(c^\ast))=ker(c^\ast \circ f)
which is all the vectors of V that are mapped by f into the kernel of c*.
Or: f^{-1}(ker(c\ast)) in other words...
for the second part, you should show that f^{-1}(ker (c\ast)) is a linear subspace of V, and then remember that every linear subspace of W can be represented as an intersection of kernels of some number of linear functionals, hence every inverse image is an intersection of some number of subspaces of V.

thank you for your quick answer, but I'm not sure if i got it!

I mean if you say that ker(c^\ast \circ f) are all Vectors of V that are mapped by f into the kernel of c* it is already =f^{-1}(ker(c\ast)).

And for the second party I am confused, i didn't know that every linear subspace of W can be represented as an intersection of kernels of some number of linear functionals.
 
ker(c^\ast \circ f) = \{v|v\in V,c^\ast (f(v))=0\} = \{v|v\in V,f(v)\in ker(c^\ast)\} the last identity comes from the definition of kernel.

As for the second part, I'm not sure if it can be applied to any space W, but if W is finite dimensional with dimension n, then every linear functional's kernel has dimension n-1 or n, and for every n-1 dimensional subspace of W a linear functional can be found that has that subspace as its kernel (that defines that linear functional up to a multiplication by a scalar).

Try thinking of a linear functional acting on the space of nx1 column vectors as a row vector (1xn matrix), that matrix clearly has kernel>=n-1. And every matrix A nx(n-1) which is of full column rank has left kernel of dimension 1. The row vector that spans this kernel is a linear functional, the kernel of which is the column space of A. The same is true if the matrix A is nxm of full column rank, and the column space of A is the kernel of n-m linear functionals which span the left kernel of A, or, in other words, the intersection of the kernels of these n-m linear functionals.

But as for infinite dimensional linear spaces I don't have enough knowledge to give an answer. Basically each subspace of W would have to be the intersection of an infinite amount of kernels of linear functionals, and infinity tends to be strange, so you'd have to read about it yourself in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_space" .

Now, all you have to do is prove that f^{-1}(ker(c^\ast)) is a linear subspace of V and that's it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
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...
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...
Back
Top