Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Theorem from Hoffman and Kunze

  1. Sep 25, 2009 #1
    Let V and W be n-dimensional vector spaces over the field F of complex/real numbers. Then the space of linear transformations L(V,W) is finite dimensional and has dimension mn.

    Let B = {[tex]\alpha 1, \alpha 2 ... , \alpha n[/tex]} and B' = {[tex]\beta 1, \beta 2,... \beta m[/tex]} be ordered bases for V and W respectively. For each pair of integers (p,q) with 1[tex]\leq[/tex] p [tex]\leq[/tex] m and 1 [tex]\leq[/tex] q [tex]\leq[/tex] n, we define a linear transformation E(p,q) from V into W by

    E(p,q)([tex]\apha i[/tex]) = 0, if i[tex]\neq[/tex] q
    =[tex]\beta p[/tex], if i = q


    According to theorem, there is a unique linear transformation from V into W satisfying these conditions. The claim is that the mn transformations E(p,q) form a basis for L(V,W).

    Let T be a linear transformation from V into W. For each j, 1 [tex]\leq[/tex] j [tex]\leq[/tex] n, let A(i,j),....,A(m,j) be the coordinates of the vector T[tex]\alpha i[/tex] in the ordered basis B', i.e.,

    T[tex]\alpha j [/tex] = [tex]\sum^{m}_{p=1}[/tex]A(p,j) [tex]\beta p[/tex].

    We wish to show that
    T = [tex]\sum^{m}_{p=1} \sum^{n}_{q=1}[/tex] A(p,q) E(p,q) .... (1)

    Let U be the linear transformation in the right hand member of (1). Then for each j

    U[tex]\alpha[/tex]j = [tex]\sum_{p} \sum_{q} A(p,q) E(p,q)(\alpha[/tex]j)

    = [tex]\sum_{p} \sum_{q} A(p,q) \delta[/tex](j,q)([tex]\beta[/tex]p)

    = [tex]\sum^{m}_{p=1}[/tex]A(p,j) [tex]\beta p[/tex]

    = T[tex]\alpha[/tex]j

    and consequently U = T. Now (1) shows that the E(p,q) span L(V,W); we must prove that they are independent [ THIS IS THE PART THAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND. I COULD FOLLOW UP TO HERE]. But this is clear from what we did above; for, if the linear transformation

    U = [tex]\sum_{p} \sum_{q}[/tex] A(p,q) E(p,q)

    is the zero transformation, then U[tex]\alpha[/tex]j = 0 for each j, so

    [tex]\sum^{m}_{p=1}[/tex]A(p,j) [tex]\beta p[/tex] = 0

    and the independence of the [tex]\beta[/tex]p implies that A(p,j) = 0 for every p and j.


    Now let me explain a little more clearly what I don't understand with a rather simple example.

    Let S be the set of ordered pairs (a,1) with 1[tex]\leq[/tex] a [tex]\leq[/tex] n, a is an integer, and F be the set of real numbers.

    Now let me define a function f(i,j), f: S [tex]\rightarrow[/tex] F, such that

    f (i,j) [(a,1)] = [tex]\delta(j,a)[/tex]

    This could be represented as a space of nx1 column matrices with 1s in the jth position.

    What I am trying to point out is that f(1,1) maps to the matrix [1 0 0 0..... 0], but so does f(1,2). If both of them map to the same fellow, how the heck are the two linearly independent?
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2009
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 26, 2009 #2
    Okay, wait. I see a flaw in my argument. It doesn't matter if two f(i,j) map to the same vector in F. That ought to be a good thing actually since that just says we can even construct linear transformations which aren't 1:1. So that's that. But I still don't understand how the mn linear transformations are linearly independent. I fully understand how the span the space of linear transformations. I just can't connect the dots.
  4. Sep 26, 2009 #3
    DONE. You can delete this thread now. I was able to prove it right after posting it here as usual.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook