Prove that range ##T'## = ##(\text{null}\ T)^0##

In summary, the statement "range ##T'## = ##(\text{null}\ T)^0##" asserts that the range of the adjoint operator T' is equal to the annihilator of the null space of the original operator T. This relationship highlights the duality between the range of an operator and its null space, emphasizing that the properties of linear transformations in finite-dimensional vector spaces can be effectively analyzed through their adjoint counterparts.
  • #1
zenterix
765
84
Homework Statement
Prove the following theorem (Axler, Linear Algebra Done Right, Theorem 3.109)

Suppose ##V## and ##W## are finite-dimensional and ##T\in L(V,W)##. Then

(a) ##\text{dim range}\ T' = \text{dim range}\ T##

(b) ##\text{range}\ T'=(\text{null}\ T)^0##
Relevant Equations
(a)

##\text{dim null}\ T' = \text{dim null}\ T + \text{dim}\ W-\text{dim}\ V\tag{1}##

##=\text{dim} W'-\text{dim range}\ T'\tag{2}##

##=\text{dim}\ W-\text{dim range}\ T'\tag{3}##

From (1) and (3) we have

##\text{dim range}\ T'=\text{dim}\ V-\text{dim null}\ T=\text{dim range}\ T\tag{4}##
My question is about item (b).

(b)

Here is what I drew up to try to visualize the result to be proved

1698618821100.png


The general idea, I think, is that

1) ##(\text{null}\ T)^0## and ##\text{range}\ T'## are both subspaces of ##V'=L(V,\mathbb{F})##.

2) We can show that they have the same dimension.

3)We can show that ##\text{range}\ T' \subseteq (\text{null}\ T)^0##

4) From (2) and (3) we can prove that the two subspaces are in fact the same subspace.

Honestly, I did steps (1)-(3) myself and was looking for a way to infer (4) but didn't realize that I could use (2) and (3) to do so, so I looked at the proof in the book.

I'd like to know if there is another way to infer (4).

Here is what I have

##(\text{null}\ T)^0## is by definition all the linear functionals in ##V'## that map ##\text{null}\ T## to 0 in ##\mathbb{F}##.

For every ##\varphi\in W'##, the linear functional ##\varphi\circ T## maps ##\text{null}\ T## to 0 in ##\mathbb{F}##, so ##\varphi\circ T## is in ##(\text{null}\ T)^0##.

Now, at this point, it could be that there are other elements in ##(\text{null}\ T)^0## that are not one of the ##\varphi\circ T##.

How can I prove that this is not possible (in an alternative manner to (4))?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I think I found the answer to my question. It uses the dimensions as well.

Let's use a proof by contradiction.

Suppose there were an ##\alpha\in (\text{null }\ T)^0## that is not in ##\text{range}\ T'##.

From (a) we know that range ##T'## and range ##T## have the same dimension and so are isomorphic.

In addition, we have dim ##V## = dim null ##T## + dim range ##T##.

However, the dimension of the complement of null ##T## in ##V## also has dimension dim range ##T##.

Thus this complement is isomorphic with range ##T##.

Let ##v_1,...,v_n## be a basis for this complement subspace. ##\alpha\in(\text{null}\ T)^0## maps these to the scalars ##f_1, ..., f_n## in ##\mathbb{F}##.

##T## maps ##v_1,...,v_n## to ##w_1, ...,w_n## in range ##T##.

Let's define a ##\varphi\in W'## by ##\varphi(w_i)=f_i## for ##i=1,...,n##.

Then, ##\varphi\circ T## maps ##v_1,...,v_n## to ##f_1,...,f_n## and so ##\varphi\circ T=\alpha##.

Thus, ##\alpha\in \text{range}\ T'##, contradicting our initial assumption.

We can then infer, by proof by contradiction, that all vectors in ##(\text{null }\ T)^0## are in range ##T'##.

And since we have proved that range ##T'\subseteq (\text{null}\ T)^0## we can conclude that

$$\text{range}\ T'=(\text{null}\ T)^0$$
 
Back
Top