0

So, I have to prove the following result that I found in my book:

Let $f:V \to W$ be a linear map and let $V$ be a finite dimensional vector space. Then:

$\dim(Ker(f)) + rank(f) = \dim(V)$


Proof Attempt:

Let $\dim(V) = n$. Since $Ker(f)$ is a subspace of $V$, it is finite-dimensional so let us have $\dim(Ker(f)) = m$.

Let $A = (v_1,v_2,...,v_n)$ be a basis of $V$ and let $B = (u_1,u_2,....,u_m)$ be a basis of $Ker(f)$. Let $w \in Im(f)$. Then, there exists a vector $v \in V$ such that $f(v) = w$. Since any vector $v$ can be written as a linear combination of the vectors in $A$, it is the case that every vector in $Im(f)$ can be written as a linear combination of the vectors $(f(v_1),....,f(v_n))$. This shows that Im(f) must be finite-dimensional since there are a list of vectors, linearly independent or not, that do span it.

Now, $B$ forms a linearly independent list of vectors in $V$ and $L(A+B) = V$, where $A+B$ simply means that we are combining both lists of vectors together.

By the Basis Extension Theorem, we can take vectors from $A$ and adjoin them to $B$ in order to form a list, called B', that is a basis for $V$. In particular, we need $n-m$ vectors from $A$ in order to do this. So, we have our new list written as follows:

$B' = (u_1,....,u_m,v_{j_1},....v_{j_{n-m}})$

Since any vector in $V$ can be written as a linear combination of the vectors in $B'$, it follows that any vector in $Im(f)$ can be written as a linear combination of the vectors $(f(u_1),....,f(u_m),f(v_{j_1}),.....,f(v_{j_{n-m}}))$. In other words, the linear hull of these vectors is equal to $Im(f)$.

However, if we consider any vector $v$ that is formed by the linear combination of the vectors in $B'$ and act on it with $f$, then we are left with:

$f(v) = \sum_{k=1}^{n-m} \beta_k v_{j_k}$

The reason for that is because $\forall i \in \{1,...,m\}: f(u_i) = 0$. So, we have a list of length $n-m$ that spans $Im(f)$ and is also a linearly independent list. Hence, it forms a basis for $Im(f)$. So, we have:

$rank(f) = n - m = \dim(V) - \dim(Ker(f))$

$\implies \dim(Ker(f)) + rank(f) = \dim(V)$

That proves the desired result.

I need feedback on the proof I have above. Is it correct? If it is, is there a shorter way to approach the problem? If it isn't, what's the exact flaw and what can I do to fix it? Is the proof clear or have I been too ambiguous in certain instances?

  • 5
  • I will certainly have a look at that link later. For now, I just want to know if my argument above works or not. If it does, that's great. If it doesn't, what can I do to fix it? – Abhijeet Vats Feb 26 '20 at 15:11
  • You're not quite understanding the purpose in posting the proof. That's similar to the notion that I should simply refer to a textbook for the proof. The point isn't that there are correct proofs. The point is if my proof is correct and if my wording is correct. Someone looking through my proof and criticizing anything wrong that I have done is going to benefit me more than just looking through proofs written by others and comparing them to mine. – Abhijeet Vats Feb 26 '20 at 15:21
  • Also, I just looked at the link and it is certainly going to be useful for me in gaining some intuition about the result. However, the given answers don't provide proofs of the result. Certainly, it's not a duplicate because the individual who asked the question was looking for intuition, not for a verification of the above result. – Abhijeet Vats Feb 26 '20 at 15:25
  • Read the comments as well. The answer provided here already is there. – PinkyWay Feb 26 '20 at 15:26
  • No! You are not seeing the point! I have not accepted the answer given for this question precisely because it doesn't tell me if my proof is correct or not! I do not know what the 'Isomorphism Theorem' is. I could learn it (I certainly should) but it doesn't directly deal with the question that I have posed! So, I will certainly look at it after my proof has been verified to be correct by others. – Abhijeet Vats Feb 26 '20 at 15:31
  • I'm just telling you if your proof seems correct to me, iz doesn't mean anything. Collect all the information already provided by users more competent than me. There is nothing else to već added. You also ask for a shorter way... I linked the previous post. – PinkyWay Feb 26 '20 at 15:34
  • I'm using the notation that's utilized by the book. – Abhijeet Vats Feb 26 '20 at 15:38
  • $A=(v_1,v_2,\ldots, v_n)$ is a single point and I haven't seen this notation before. – PinkyWay Feb 26 '20 at 15:40
  • That's strange, because there are 2 linear algebra textbooks that utilize it (Linear Algebra by Klaus Janich and Linear Algebra by Anne Schilling). Also, you're not incorrect about what it refers to but in context, it's entirely fine. I've also asked similar questions asking for the verification of my proof. There are no other users that have said anything, so I don't quite see why you should. Furthermore, the time you've spent in giving me reasons not to have my proof verified could have well been spent on verifying my proof (if you are able to verify it, of course). – Abhijeet Vats Feb 26 '20 at 15:42
  • Can you list vectors in, for example, $\mathbb R^1$. If not, does it mean $\mathbb R^1$ Is infinite-dinensional? – PinkyWay Feb 26 '20 at 15:42
  • ?? In my proof, $A = (v_1,v_2,\ldots,v_n)$ refers to the list of basis vectors V. Since V is finite-dimensional, I can list the basis vectors. – Abhijeet Vats Feb 26 '20 at 15:44
  • Also, comments are, as far as i know, not meant for extended discussion (at least, that's what another stackexchange site I was in works with) so you might want to collate your criticisms into an answer and that will be rather helpful, I think. – Abhijeet Vats Feb 26 '20 at 15:45
  • May I ask, how do you write down the coordinates? – PinkyWay Feb 26 '20 at 15:46
  • That's not a relevant question because we're not dealing with coordinate spaces like $F^n$. But an element in $F^n$, where $F$ is a field, would just be an n-tuple $(a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_n)$, where $a_1,a_2,\ldots a_n \in F$. – Abhijeet Vats Feb 26 '20 at 15:49
  • Also, in a set, linearly independent vectors don't spann anything. My comments are to short for an answer. – PinkyWay Feb 26 '20 at 15:49
  • Your comments are irrelevant because that is the notation that has been adopted by the book that I'm using. I have even given you the name of the textbook that i use and you can have a look in there. In context, it's entirely valid to use that bit of notation. As I've said, I've used it in my other questions and no one has really pointed to any issues in doing that. – Abhijeet Vats Feb 26 '20 at 15:52
  • 1
    I can put my comments together and base my answer on your questions. – PinkyWay Feb 26 '20 at 15:52

2 Answers2

1

By Isomorphim's Theorem we have that $V/Ker f = Im f$. So we have that $dim(V/Ker f)=dim(Im f)$. But we have that $dim(V/ker f)= dim(V)-dim(ker f)$. So we have that $dim(V)=dim(ker f)+dim(Im f)$.

  • 1
    you could've searched and see there already exist 5 answers to the same question. – PinkyWay Feb 26 '20 at 15:18
  • Thank you for the alternate proof. While it will take me some time to learn the Isomorphism Theorem (I don't think it'll be covered in my text anytime soon), I'll keep this as a reference. – Abhijeet Vats Feb 26 '20 at 16:10
1

long comment

Use the conventional notation:

Let $\mathbb F$ be a vector space over the field $\mathbb F$. You should write that (I tell you this because most of the users here use different notation): $$\mathbb F:=\{(u_1,\ldots,u_n):u_i\in\mathbb F,\forall i\in\{1,\ldots,n\}$$ Then: We can have a linearly (in)dependent set $S$ and a vector space $V$ s.t. $\operatorname{span}(S)=V$ $S$ can be an extended base and therefore, linearly dependent, but only the base vectors span the vector space. So,ofcourse, your argument holds, according to the base Extension theorem. I would just shorten your proof on terms of reducing the text and involving more symbols because it would be readable. This ist just my own view, not an answer. But, all that can be found on other posts. I can add some of my literature to compare it for our own good. I'll be glad to discuss more.

PinkyWay
  • 4,565
  • 1
    Thank you for verifying the proof. I'll certainly work on trying to shorten it. I'll also take note of alternative notations that are used. – Abhijeet Vats Feb 26 '20 at 16:07
  • @AbhijeetVats, thank you and n ice to meet you! (: – PinkyWay Feb 26 '20 at 16:08
  • :) Thanks for your assistance. Nice to meet you as well. Actually, I'm not too sure if you're in it but since you are a student as well, would you like to join a Mathematics discord server? It's a rather big one with many, many people in it. – Abhijeet Vats Feb 26 '20 at 16:09
  • @AbhijeetVats, I would be glad! Can you give me a link or something? – PinkyWay Feb 26 '20 at 16:10
  • https://discord.gg/CMDmHp Here's the link. Afterwards, we may compare our literature so that both of us can benefit from it. I'm going to be a first year math student soon, so I'd like to get a range of materials to refer to. – Abhijeet Vats Feb 26 '20 at 16:12
  • By the way, when you do get time, perhaps we can compare literature on various topics in math so that we may both improve :) – Abhijeet Vats Feb 26 '20 at 17:26
  • 1
    Sure, I've seen, if you click the cite button and enter a few words regarding the topic you have a question on, the results appear immediately. – PinkyWay Feb 26 '20 at 17:35