Elementary linear algebra and linear maps exercise.
$begingroup$
Let $E$ and $F$ be two finite dimensional vector spaces and $f: E to F$ a linear transformation. If $v_1, ... , v_r in E$ are linearly independent, prove that $operatorname*{Im} f = left langle f(v_1), ... , f(v_r) right rangle Leftrightarrow E = operatorname*{Ker} f + left langle v_1,... ,v_r right rangle$.
I have tried both using Grassman's formula and the rank-nullity theorem with the corresponding inequalities due to the fact that $v_1, ... , v_r in E$ are linearly independent, but I don't get a consistent proof for any of the implications.
NOTE: If $u_1, ... , u_n$ are vectors, $left langle u_1,...,u_n right rangle$ denotes the LINEAR SPAN of the vectors.
linear-algebra linear-transformations
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $E$ and $F$ be two finite dimensional vector spaces and $f: E to F$ a linear transformation. If $v_1, ... , v_r in E$ are linearly independent, prove that $operatorname*{Im} f = left langle f(v_1), ... , f(v_r) right rangle Leftrightarrow E = operatorname*{Ker} f + left langle v_1,... ,v_r right rangle$.
I have tried both using Grassman's formula and the rank-nullity theorem with the corresponding inequalities due to the fact that $v_1, ... , v_r in E$ are linearly independent, but I don't get a consistent proof for any of the implications.
NOTE: If $u_1, ... , u_n$ are vectors, $left langle u_1,...,u_n right rangle$ denotes the LINEAR SPAN of the vectors.
linear-algebra linear-transformations
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $E$ and $F$ be two finite dimensional vector spaces and $f: E to F$ a linear transformation. If $v_1, ... , v_r in E$ are linearly independent, prove that $operatorname*{Im} f = left langle f(v_1), ... , f(v_r) right rangle Leftrightarrow E = operatorname*{Ker} f + left langle v_1,... ,v_r right rangle$.
I have tried both using Grassman's formula and the rank-nullity theorem with the corresponding inequalities due to the fact that $v_1, ... , v_r in E$ are linearly independent, but I don't get a consistent proof for any of the implications.
NOTE: If $u_1, ... , u_n$ are vectors, $left langle u_1,...,u_n right rangle$ denotes the LINEAR SPAN of the vectors.
linear-algebra linear-transformations
$endgroup$
Let $E$ and $F$ be two finite dimensional vector spaces and $f: E to F$ a linear transformation. If $v_1, ... , v_r in E$ are linearly independent, prove that $operatorname*{Im} f = left langle f(v_1), ... , f(v_r) right rangle Leftrightarrow E = operatorname*{Ker} f + left langle v_1,... ,v_r right rangle$.
I have tried both using Grassman's formula and the rank-nullity theorem with the corresponding inequalities due to the fact that $v_1, ... , v_r in E$ are linearly independent, but I don't get a consistent proof for any of the implications.
NOTE: If $u_1, ... , u_n$ are vectors, $left langle u_1,...,u_n right rangle$ denotes the LINEAR SPAN of the vectors.
linear-algebra linear-transformations
linear-algebra linear-transformations
edited Jan 7 at 13:39
Marc Ballestero Ribó
asked Jan 7 at 12:50
Marc Ballestero RibóMarc Ballestero Ribó
175
175
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I have tried both using Grassman's formula and the relationship between the dimension of the kernel, image, and domain of a linear map (dimE=dimImf+dimKerf) with the corresponding inequalities due to the fact that v1,...,vr∈E are linearly independent, but I don't get a consistent proof for any of the implications.
None of those are going to be sufficient, because they're all results about dimensions, and we don't want a result about dimensions. There's a possibility that you could use it, combined with other results, but it's not actually needed here, and probably shouldn't be the first approach you think of.
Instead, first note that, if $E = mathrm{Ker}(f) + langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$, then we can choose some $w_1,ldots,w_{n-r}inmathrm{Ker}(f)$ to extend $langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$ to a basis of $E$. Then for any $u = sum alpha_iv_i + sumbeta_iw_i$, we have $f(u) = sumalpha_if(v_i)+sumbeta_if(w_i) = sumalpha_if(v_i)$ since $w_iinmathrm{Ker}(f)$, and note that this lies in $langle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$, so $mathrm{Im}(f)subseteqlangle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$. The reverse inclusion is simple.
For the reverse implication, suppose that $E neq mathrm{Ker}(f) + langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$. Then there is some $u in E$ that does not lie in $mathrm{Ker}(f) + langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$. Now, if $f(u)$ lies in $langle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$, then there are some $alpha_1,ldots,alpha_r$ such that $f(u) = sumalpha_if(v_i) = f(sumalpha_iv_i)$. Thus, $w := u - sumalpha_iv_i$ has $f(w) = f(u) - f(sumalpha_iv_i) = 0$, so $winmathrm{Ker}(f)$. But then, $u = w + sumalpha_iv_i$, so $uinmathrm{Ker}(f)+langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$, a contradiction. Thus, $f(u)notinlangle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$, so $mathrm{Im}(f)neq langle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $U=langle v_1,dots,v_rrangle$ and $K=ker f$.
Grassmann’s formula tells you that $dim U+dim K=dim(U+K)+dim(Ucap K)$, so
$$
dim(U+K)=dim U+dim K-dim(Ucap K)=r+n-k
$$
where $n=dim K$ and $k=dim(Kcap N)$; let $s$ be the rank of $f$, so $dim E=s+n$ by the rank-nullity theorem.
We have $E=U+K$ if and only if $r+n-k=s+n$, that is, if and only if $r=k+s$.
We can also consider $f'colon Uto F$ (the restriction of $f$). The nullity of $f'$ is $k$; if $s'$ is the rank of $f'$, then $r=k+s'$. Clearly the image of $f'$ is a subspace of the image of $f$ and is spanned by $f(v_1),dots,f(v_r)$.
Therefore $r=k+s$ if and only if $s=s'$ that is, if and only if $operatorname{im}f=operatorname{im}f'=langle f(v_1),dots,f(v_r)rangle$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3064972%2felementary-linear-algebra-and-linear-maps-exercise%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I have tried both using Grassman's formula and the relationship between the dimension of the kernel, image, and domain of a linear map (dimE=dimImf+dimKerf) with the corresponding inequalities due to the fact that v1,...,vr∈E are linearly independent, but I don't get a consistent proof for any of the implications.
None of those are going to be sufficient, because they're all results about dimensions, and we don't want a result about dimensions. There's a possibility that you could use it, combined with other results, but it's not actually needed here, and probably shouldn't be the first approach you think of.
Instead, first note that, if $E = mathrm{Ker}(f) + langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$, then we can choose some $w_1,ldots,w_{n-r}inmathrm{Ker}(f)$ to extend $langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$ to a basis of $E$. Then for any $u = sum alpha_iv_i + sumbeta_iw_i$, we have $f(u) = sumalpha_if(v_i)+sumbeta_if(w_i) = sumalpha_if(v_i)$ since $w_iinmathrm{Ker}(f)$, and note that this lies in $langle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$, so $mathrm{Im}(f)subseteqlangle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$. The reverse inclusion is simple.
For the reverse implication, suppose that $E neq mathrm{Ker}(f) + langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$. Then there is some $u in E$ that does not lie in $mathrm{Ker}(f) + langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$. Now, if $f(u)$ lies in $langle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$, then there are some $alpha_1,ldots,alpha_r$ such that $f(u) = sumalpha_if(v_i) = f(sumalpha_iv_i)$. Thus, $w := u - sumalpha_iv_i$ has $f(w) = f(u) - f(sumalpha_iv_i) = 0$, so $winmathrm{Ker}(f)$. But then, $u = w + sumalpha_iv_i$, so $uinmathrm{Ker}(f)+langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$, a contradiction. Thus, $f(u)notinlangle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$, so $mathrm{Im}(f)neq langle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I have tried both using Grassman's formula and the relationship between the dimension of the kernel, image, and domain of a linear map (dimE=dimImf+dimKerf) with the corresponding inequalities due to the fact that v1,...,vr∈E are linearly independent, but I don't get a consistent proof for any of the implications.
None of those are going to be sufficient, because they're all results about dimensions, and we don't want a result about dimensions. There's a possibility that you could use it, combined with other results, but it's not actually needed here, and probably shouldn't be the first approach you think of.
Instead, first note that, if $E = mathrm{Ker}(f) + langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$, then we can choose some $w_1,ldots,w_{n-r}inmathrm{Ker}(f)$ to extend $langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$ to a basis of $E$. Then for any $u = sum alpha_iv_i + sumbeta_iw_i$, we have $f(u) = sumalpha_if(v_i)+sumbeta_if(w_i) = sumalpha_if(v_i)$ since $w_iinmathrm{Ker}(f)$, and note that this lies in $langle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$, so $mathrm{Im}(f)subseteqlangle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$. The reverse inclusion is simple.
For the reverse implication, suppose that $E neq mathrm{Ker}(f) + langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$. Then there is some $u in E$ that does not lie in $mathrm{Ker}(f) + langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$. Now, if $f(u)$ lies in $langle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$, then there are some $alpha_1,ldots,alpha_r$ such that $f(u) = sumalpha_if(v_i) = f(sumalpha_iv_i)$. Thus, $w := u - sumalpha_iv_i$ has $f(w) = f(u) - f(sumalpha_iv_i) = 0$, so $winmathrm{Ker}(f)$. But then, $u = w + sumalpha_iv_i$, so $uinmathrm{Ker}(f)+langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$, a contradiction. Thus, $f(u)notinlangle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$, so $mathrm{Im}(f)neq langle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I have tried both using Grassman's formula and the relationship between the dimension of the kernel, image, and domain of a linear map (dimE=dimImf+dimKerf) with the corresponding inequalities due to the fact that v1,...,vr∈E are linearly independent, but I don't get a consistent proof for any of the implications.
None of those are going to be sufficient, because they're all results about dimensions, and we don't want a result about dimensions. There's a possibility that you could use it, combined with other results, but it's not actually needed here, and probably shouldn't be the first approach you think of.
Instead, first note that, if $E = mathrm{Ker}(f) + langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$, then we can choose some $w_1,ldots,w_{n-r}inmathrm{Ker}(f)$ to extend $langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$ to a basis of $E$. Then for any $u = sum alpha_iv_i + sumbeta_iw_i$, we have $f(u) = sumalpha_if(v_i)+sumbeta_if(w_i) = sumalpha_if(v_i)$ since $w_iinmathrm{Ker}(f)$, and note that this lies in $langle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$, so $mathrm{Im}(f)subseteqlangle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$. The reverse inclusion is simple.
For the reverse implication, suppose that $E neq mathrm{Ker}(f) + langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$. Then there is some $u in E$ that does not lie in $mathrm{Ker}(f) + langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$. Now, if $f(u)$ lies in $langle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$, then there are some $alpha_1,ldots,alpha_r$ such that $f(u) = sumalpha_if(v_i) = f(sumalpha_iv_i)$. Thus, $w := u - sumalpha_iv_i$ has $f(w) = f(u) - f(sumalpha_iv_i) = 0$, so $winmathrm{Ker}(f)$. But then, $u = w + sumalpha_iv_i$, so $uinmathrm{Ker}(f)+langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$, a contradiction. Thus, $f(u)notinlangle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$, so $mathrm{Im}(f)neq langle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$.
$endgroup$
I have tried both using Grassman's formula and the relationship between the dimension of the kernel, image, and domain of a linear map (dimE=dimImf+dimKerf) with the corresponding inequalities due to the fact that v1,...,vr∈E are linearly independent, but I don't get a consistent proof for any of the implications.
None of those are going to be sufficient, because they're all results about dimensions, and we don't want a result about dimensions. There's a possibility that you could use it, combined with other results, but it's not actually needed here, and probably shouldn't be the first approach you think of.
Instead, first note that, if $E = mathrm{Ker}(f) + langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$, then we can choose some $w_1,ldots,w_{n-r}inmathrm{Ker}(f)$ to extend $langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$ to a basis of $E$. Then for any $u = sum alpha_iv_i + sumbeta_iw_i$, we have $f(u) = sumalpha_if(v_i)+sumbeta_if(w_i) = sumalpha_if(v_i)$ since $w_iinmathrm{Ker}(f)$, and note that this lies in $langle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$, so $mathrm{Im}(f)subseteqlangle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$. The reverse inclusion is simple.
For the reverse implication, suppose that $E neq mathrm{Ker}(f) + langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$. Then there is some $u in E$ that does not lie in $mathrm{Ker}(f) + langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$. Now, if $f(u)$ lies in $langle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$, then there are some $alpha_1,ldots,alpha_r$ such that $f(u) = sumalpha_if(v_i) = f(sumalpha_iv_i)$. Thus, $w := u - sumalpha_iv_i$ has $f(w) = f(u) - f(sumalpha_iv_i) = 0$, so $winmathrm{Ker}(f)$. But then, $u = w + sumalpha_iv_i$, so $uinmathrm{Ker}(f)+langle v_1,ldots,v_rrangle$, a contradiction. Thus, $f(u)notinlangle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$, so $mathrm{Im}(f)neq langle f(v_1),ldots,f(v_r)rangle$.
answered Jan 7 at 13:28
user3482749user3482749
4,3291119
4,3291119
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $U=langle v_1,dots,v_rrangle$ and $K=ker f$.
Grassmann’s formula tells you that $dim U+dim K=dim(U+K)+dim(Ucap K)$, so
$$
dim(U+K)=dim U+dim K-dim(Ucap K)=r+n-k
$$
where $n=dim K$ and $k=dim(Kcap N)$; let $s$ be the rank of $f$, so $dim E=s+n$ by the rank-nullity theorem.
We have $E=U+K$ if and only if $r+n-k=s+n$, that is, if and only if $r=k+s$.
We can also consider $f'colon Uto F$ (the restriction of $f$). The nullity of $f'$ is $k$; if $s'$ is the rank of $f'$, then $r=k+s'$. Clearly the image of $f'$ is a subspace of the image of $f$ and is spanned by $f(v_1),dots,f(v_r)$.
Therefore $r=k+s$ if and only if $s=s'$ that is, if and only if $operatorname{im}f=operatorname{im}f'=langle f(v_1),dots,f(v_r)rangle$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $U=langle v_1,dots,v_rrangle$ and $K=ker f$.
Grassmann’s formula tells you that $dim U+dim K=dim(U+K)+dim(Ucap K)$, so
$$
dim(U+K)=dim U+dim K-dim(Ucap K)=r+n-k
$$
where $n=dim K$ and $k=dim(Kcap N)$; let $s$ be the rank of $f$, so $dim E=s+n$ by the rank-nullity theorem.
We have $E=U+K$ if and only if $r+n-k=s+n$, that is, if and only if $r=k+s$.
We can also consider $f'colon Uto F$ (the restriction of $f$). The nullity of $f'$ is $k$; if $s'$ is the rank of $f'$, then $r=k+s'$. Clearly the image of $f'$ is a subspace of the image of $f$ and is spanned by $f(v_1),dots,f(v_r)$.
Therefore $r=k+s$ if and only if $s=s'$ that is, if and only if $operatorname{im}f=operatorname{im}f'=langle f(v_1),dots,f(v_r)rangle$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $U=langle v_1,dots,v_rrangle$ and $K=ker f$.
Grassmann’s formula tells you that $dim U+dim K=dim(U+K)+dim(Ucap K)$, so
$$
dim(U+K)=dim U+dim K-dim(Ucap K)=r+n-k
$$
where $n=dim K$ and $k=dim(Kcap N)$; let $s$ be the rank of $f$, so $dim E=s+n$ by the rank-nullity theorem.
We have $E=U+K$ if and only if $r+n-k=s+n$, that is, if and only if $r=k+s$.
We can also consider $f'colon Uto F$ (the restriction of $f$). The nullity of $f'$ is $k$; if $s'$ is the rank of $f'$, then $r=k+s'$. Clearly the image of $f'$ is a subspace of the image of $f$ and is spanned by $f(v_1),dots,f(v_r)$.
Therefore $r=k+s$ if and only if $s=s'$ that is, if and only if $operatorname{im}f=operatorname{im}f'=langle f(v_1),dots,f(v_r)rangle$.
$endgroup$
Let $U=langle v_1,dots,v_rrangle$ and $K=ker f$.
Grassmann’s formula tells you that $dim U+dim K=dim(U+K)+dim(Ucap K)$, so
$$
dim(U+K)=dim U+dim K-dim(Ucap K)=r+n-k
$$
where $n=dim K$ and $k=dim(Kcap N)$; let $s$ be the rank of $f$, so $dim E=s+n$ by the rank-nullity theorem.
We have $E=U+K$ if and only if $r+n-k=s+n$, that is, if and only if $r=k+s$.
We can also consider $f'colon Uto F$ (the restriction of $f$). The nullity of $f'$ is $k$; if $s'$ is the rank of $f'$, then $r=k+s'$. Clearly the image of $f'$ is a subspace of the image of $f$ and is spanned by $f(v_1),dots,f(v_r)$.
Therefore $r=k+s$ if and only if $s=s'$ that is, if and only if $operatorname{im}f=operatorname{im}f'=langle f(v_1),dots,f(v_r)rangle$.
answered Jan 7 at 15:17
egregegreg
186k1486208
186k1486208
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3064972%2felementary-linear-algebra-and-linear-maps-exercise%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown