4

Hoffman and Kunze, Exercise 3, Chapter 3.6 is in the section called "The Double Dual" and on first reading it sounds very straightforward. But I really struggled with it, particularly to find a solution that uses the double dual.

After some 20 hours of effort I came up with the following. If anybody has the wherewithal to check this proof I'd really appreciate it. I'm looking for a careful reading of it to see if it's really right or not. Thank you.

Exercise: Let $S$ be a set, $F$ a field, and $V(S;F)$ the space of all functions from $S$ into $F$: $$(f+g)(x)=f(x)+g(x)$$ $$(cf)(x)=cf(x).$$ Let $W$ be any $n$-dimensional subspace of $V(S;F)$. Show that there exist points $x_1,\dots,x_n$ in $S$ and functions $f_1,\dots,f_n$ in $W$ such that $f_i(x_j)=\delta_{ij}$.

Solution: Let $s\in S$. We first show that the function \begin{alignat*}{1} \phi_s:&W\rightarrow F\\ &w\mapsto w(s) \end{alignat*} is a linear functional on $W$ (in other words for each $s$, we have $\phi_s\in W^*$).

Let $w_1,w_2\in W$, $c\in F$. Then $\phi_s(cw_1+w_2)=(cw_1+w_2)(s)$ which by definition equals $cw_1(s)+w_2(s)$ which equals $c\phi_s(w_1)+\phi_s(w_2)$. Thus $\phi_s$ is a linear functional on $W$.

Suppose $\phi_s(w)=0$ for all $s\in S$, $w\in W$. Then $w(s)=0$ $\forall$ $s\in S$, $w\in W$, which implies $\dim(W)=0$. So as long as $n>0$, $\exists$ $s_1\in S$ such that $\phi_{s_1}(w)\not=0$ for some $w\in W$. Equivalently there is an $s_1\in S$ and a $w_1\in W$ such that $w_1(s_1)\not=0$. This means $\phi_{s_1}\not=0$ as elements of $W^*$. It follows that $\langle\phi_{s_1}\rangle$, the subspace of $W^*$ generated by $\phi_{s_1}$, has dimension one. By scaling if necessary, we can further assume $w_1(s_1)=1$.

Now suppose $\forall$ $s\in S$ that we have $\phi_s\in\langle\phi_{s_1}\rangle$, the subspace of $W^*$ generated by $\phi_{s_1}$. Then for each $s\in S$ there is a $c(s)\in F$ such that $\phi_s=c(s)\phi_{s_1}$ in $W^*$. Then for each $s\in S$, $w(s)=c(s)w(s_1)$ for all $w\in W$. In particular $w_1(s)=c(s)$ (recall $w_1(s_1)=1$). Let $w\in W$. Let $b=w(s_1)$. Then $w(s)=c(s)w(s_1)=bw_1(s)$ $\forall$ $s\in S$. Notice that $b$ depends on $w$ but does not depend on $s$. Thus $w=bw_1$ as functions on $S$ where $b\in F$ is a fixed constant. Thus $w\in\langle w_1\rangle$, the subspace of $W$ generated by $w_1$. Since $w$ was arbitrary, it follows that $\dim(W)=1$. Thus as long as $\dim(W)\geq 2$ we can find $w_2\in W$ and $s_2\in S$ such that $\langle w_1,w_2\rangle$ (the subspace of $W$ generated by $w_1,w_2$) and $\langle\phi_{s_1},\phi_{s_2}\rangle$ (the subspace of $W^*$ generated by $\{\phi_{s_1},\phi_{s_2}\}$) both have dimension two. Let $W_0=\langle w_1,w_2\rangle$. Then we've shown that $\{\phi_{s_1},\phi_{s_2}\}$ is a basis for $W_0^*$. Therefore there's a dual basis $\{F_1,F_2\}\subseteq W_0^{**}$; so that $F_i(\phi_{s_j})=\delta_{ij}$, $i,j\in\{1,2\}$. By Theorem 17, $\exists$ corresponding $w_1,w_2\in W$ so that $F_i=L_{w_i}$ (in the notation of Theorem 17). Therefore, $\delta_{ij}=F_i(\phi_{s_j})=L_{w_i}(\phi_{s_j})=\phi_{s_j}(w_i)=w_i(s_j)$, for $i,j\in\{1,2\}$.

Now suppose $\forall$ $s\in S$ that we have $\phi_s\in\langle\phi_{s_1},\phi_{s_2}\rangle\subseteq W^{*}$. Then $\forall$ $s\in S$, there are constants $c_1(s),c_2(s)\in F$ and we have $w(s)=c_1(s)w(s_1)+c_2(s)w(s_2)$ for all $w\in W$. Similar to the argument in the previous paragraph, this implies $\dim(W)\leq 2$ (for $w\in W$ let $b_1=w(s_1)$ and $b_2=w(s_2)$ and argue as before). Therefore, as long as $\dim(W)\geq3$ we can find $s_3$ so that $\langle\phi_{s_1},\phi_{s_2},\phi_{s_3}\rangle\subseteq W^*$, the subspace of $W^*$ generated by $\phi_{s_1},\phi_{s_2},\phi_{s_3}$, has dimension three. And as before we can find $w_3\in W$ such that $w_i(s_j)=\delta_{ij}$, for $i,j\in\{1,2,3\}$.

Continuing in this way we can find $n$ elements $s_1,\dots,s_n\in S$ such that $\phi_{s_1},\dots,\phi_{s_n}$ are linearly independent in $W^{*}$ and corresponding elements $w_1,\dots,w_n\in W$ such that $w_i(s_j)=\delta_{i,j}$. Let $f_i=w_i$ and we are done.

Gregory Grant
  • 14,874
  • 1
    Well okay I guess nobody wants to read my proof. But Hoffman and Kunze is a timeless classic so I know eventually somebody's going to come looking for the solution to this problem. Somebody who has been assigned it for class is likely to read it carefully. So I'll just let it float until then. Curiously as far as I can tell nobody has ever posted a solution to the problem anywhere in the world. – Gregory Grant Nov 13 '17 at 23:58
  • 1
    Regarding the last sentence of your comment : https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/121704/a-question-about-an-n-dimensional-subspace-of-mathbbfs?noredirect=1&lq=1 – Arnaud D. Nov 14 '17 at 15:25
  • There is an incorrect solution here as well, I guess. I began reading the proof, but I found it hard to follow wrt notation, unless I used pencil paper – Andres Mejia Nov 14 '17 at 15:27
  • @AndresMejia I searched pretty hard on the web for solutions but didn't find those. Unfortunately none of those could be the solution H&K was looking for since they did not use the double dual. I already had one solution somebody gave me that did not use the double dual I really want to find the soultion H&K had in mind. My solution as written above does use it, so maybe it's what they had in mind, who knows... – Gregory Grant Nov 14 '17 at 15:34
  • @ArnaudD. Thank you, see my comment above. – Gregory Grant Nov 14 '17 at 15:34
  • @AndresMejia Thanks for trying to read it, it was in fact wrong and I've updated it this morning with hopefully a correct proof. – Gregory Grant Nov 14 '17 at 15:34

0 Answers0