Finding an explicit isomorphism between $mathbb R^4 / ker T$ and $mathbb R^2$
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I'm wondering if I have a valid answer to this.
It is exactly (e) of the following:
I first state that the two vector spaces are isomorphic because they have equal dimension. I then define a linear transform $S: mathbb R^4 / Ker T to mathbb R^2$ by
$$S begin{pmatrix}
0 \
a \
b \
0 \
end{pmatrix} to
begin{pmatrix}
a \
b \
end{pmatrix}: a,b in mathbb R$$
Where $begin{pmatrix}
0 \
a \
b \
0 \
end{pmatrix}$ is an arbitrary element in the departure space.
If this mapping translates basis to basis, this is an isomorphism.
$$
S begin{pmatrix}
0 \
a \
b \
0 \
end{pmatrix} to
begin{pmatrix}
a \
b \
end{pmatrix} in mathbb R^2 implies Sleft(a begin{pmatrix}
0 \
1 \
0 \
0 \
end{pmatrix} +
bbegin{pmatrix}
0 \
0 \
1 \
0 \
end{pmatrix}right) = a vec e_1 + b vec e_2 $$
$$
text{ as
$Sbegin{pmatrix}
0 \
1 \
0 \
0 \
end{pmatrix} =
begin{pmatrix}
1 \
0 \
end{pmatrix}$ and
$
Sbegin{pmatrix}
0 \
0 \
1 \
0 \
end{pmatrix} =
begin{pmatrix}
0 \
1 \
end{pmatrix}$}$$
Is this a valid answer?
proof-verification quotient-spaces vector-space-isomorphism
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I'm wondering if I have a valid answer to this.
It is exactly (e) of the following:
I first state that the two vector spaces are isomorphic because they have equal dimension. I then define a linear transform $S: mathbb R^4 / Ker T to mathbb R^2$ by
$$S begin{pmatrix}
0 \
a \
b \
0 \
end{pmatrix} to
begin{pmatrix}
a \
b \
end{pmatrix}: a,b in mathbb R$$
Where $begin{pmatrix}
0 \
a \
b \
0 \
end{pmatrix}$ is an arbitrary element in the departure space.
If this mapping translates basis to basis, this is an isomorphism.
$$
S begin{pmatrix}
0 \
a \
b \
0 \
end{pmatrix} to
begin{pmatrix}
a \
b \
end{pmatrix} in mathbb R^2 implies Sleft(a begin{pmatrix}
0 \
1 \
0 \
0 \
end{pmatrix} +
bbegin{pmatrix}
0 \
0 \
1 \
0 \
end{pmatrix}right) = a vec e_1 + b vec e_2 $$
$$
text{ as
$Sbegin{pmatrix}
0 \
1 \
0 \
0 \
end{pmatrix} =
begin{pmatrix}
1 \
0 \
end{pmatrix}$ and
$
Sbegin{pmatrix}
0 \
0 \
1 \
0 \
end{pmatrix} =
begin{pmatrix}
0 \
1 \
end{pmatrix}$}$$
Is this a valid answer?
proof-verification quotient-spaces vector-space-isomorphism
What is $F$? Is it $mathbb R$?
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 17 at 18:48
@JoséCarlosSantos an arbitrary field. I should’ve specified, my bad.
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 18:49
But you mention $mathbb R$ in the title.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 17 at 18:50
Yes, I’ll correct that.
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 18:52
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I'm wondering if I have a valid answer to this.
It is exactly (e) of the following:
I first state that the two vector spaces are isomorphic because they have equal dimension. I then define a linear transform $S: mathbb R^4 / Ker T to mathbb R^2$ by
$$S begin{pmatrix}
0 \
a \
b \
0 \
end{pmatrix} to
begin{pmatrix}
a \
b \
end{pmatrix}: a,b in mathbb R$$
Where $begin{pmatrix}
0 \
a \
b \
0 \
end{pmatrix}$ is an arbitrary element in the departure space.
If this mapping translates basis to basis, this is an isomorphism.
$$
S begin{pmatrix}
0 \
a \
b \
0 \
end{pmatrix} to
begin{pmatrix}
a \
b \
end{pmatrix} in mathbb R^2 implies Sleft(a begin{pmatrix}
0 \
1 \
0 \
0 \
end{pmatrix} +
bbegin{pmatrix}
0 \
0 \
1 \
0 \
end{pmatrix}right) = a vec e_1 + b vec e_2 $$
$$
text{ as
$Sbegin{pmatrix}
0 \
1 \
0 \
0 \
end{pmatrix} =
begin{pmatrix}
1 \
0 \
end{pmatrix}$ and
$
Sbegin{pmatrix}
0 \
0 \
1 \
0 \
end{pmatrix} =
begin{pmatrix}
0 \
1 \
end{pmatrix}$}$$
Is this a valid answer?
proof-verification quotient-spaces vector-space-isomorphism
I'm wondering if I have a valid answer to this.
It is exactly (e) of the following:
I first state that the two vector spaces are isomorphic because they have equal dimension. I then define a linear transform $S: mathbb R^4 / Ker T to mathbb R^2$ by
$$S begin{pmatrix}
0 \
a \
b \
0 \
end{pmatrix} to
begin{pmatrix}
a \
b \
end{pmatrix}: a,b in mathbb R$$
Where $begin{pmatrix}
0 \
a \
b \
0 \
end{pmatrix}$ is an arbitrary element in the departure space.
If this mapping translates basis to basis, this is an isomorphism.
$$
S begin{pmatrix}
0 \
a \
b \
0 \
end{pmatrix} to
begin{pmatrix}
a \
b \
end{pmatrix} in mathbb R^2 implies Sleft(a begin{pmatrix}
0 \
1 \
0 \
0 \
end{pmatrix} +
bbegin{pmatrix}
0 \
0 \
1 \
0 \
end{pmatrix}right) = a vec e_1 + b vec e_2 $$
$$
text{ as
$Sbegin{pmatrix}
0 \
1 \
0 \
0 \
end{pmatrix} =
begin{pmatrix}
1 \
0 \
end{pmatrix}$ and
$
Sbegin{pmatrix}
0 \
0 \
1 \
0 \
end{pmatrix} =
begin{pmatrix}
0 \
1 \
end{pmatrix}$}$$
Is this a valid answer?
proof-verification quotient-spaces vector-space-isomorphism
proof-verification quotient-spaces vector-space-isomorphism
edited Nov 17 at 19:41
Bernard
116k637108
116k637108
asked Nov 17 at 18:36
sangstar
838214
838214
What is $F$? Is it $mathbb R$?
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 17 at 18:48
@JoséCarlosSantos an arbitrary field. I should’ve specified, my bad.
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 18:49
But you mention $mathbb R$ in the title.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 17 at 18:50
Yes, I’ll correct that.
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 18:52
add a comment |
What is $F$? Is it $mathbb R$?
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 17 at 18:48
@JoséCarlosSantos an arbitrary field. I should’ve specified, my bad.
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 18:49
But you mention $mathbb R$ in the title.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 17 at 18:50
Yes, I’ll correct that.
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 18:52
What is $F$? Is it $mathbb R$?
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 17 at 18:48
What is $F$? Is it $mathbb R$?
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 17 at 18:48
@JoséCarlosSantos an arbitrary field. I should’ve specified, my bad.
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 18:49
@JoséCarlosSantos an arbitrary field. I should’ve specified, my bad.
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 18:49
But you mention $mathbb R$ in the title.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 17 at 18:50
But you mention $mathbb R$ in the title.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 17 at 18:50
Yes, I’ll correct that.
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 18:52
Yes, I’ll correct that.
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 18:52
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
Your answer is not valid, since you don't even mention $F^4/ker T$ in it. An explicit isomorphism would be$$begin{array}{rccc}Psicolon&F^4/ker T&longrightarrow&F^2\&begin{pmatrix}a\b\c\dend{pmatrix}+ker T&mapsto&Tbegin{pmatrix}a\b\c\dend{pmatrix}.end{array}$$
Forgive me, I’m confused. Can you explain in more detail why, if I did mention what I didn’t mention, why it’s still not a valid answer? An why yours is a valid explicit isomorphism?
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 19:02
FIrst of all, there are two maps called $T$ in your answer. Not a good idea. Besides, you just claim that the domain of your second $T$ is $F^4/ker T$, but it is actually a subspace of $F^4$.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 17 at 19:06
Oh, you’re right. This exercise was a follow up to a previous exercise with defined $T$ such that the quotient space ended up being what I represented. I will update the question presently with the missing info.
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 19:09
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
Your answer is not valid, since you don't even mention $F^4/ker T$ in it. An explicit isomorphism would be$$begin{array}{rccc}Psicolon&F^4/ker T&longrightarrow&F^2\&begin{pmatrix}a\b\c\dend{pmatrix}+ker T&mapsto&Tbegin{pmatrix}a\b\c\dend{pmatrix}.end{array}$$
Forgive me, I’m confused. Can you explain in more detail why, if I did mention what I didn’t mention, why it’s still not a valid answer? An why yours is a valid explicit isomorphism?
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 19:02
FIrst of all, there are two maps called $T$ in your answer. Not a good idea. Besides, you just claim that the domain of your second $T$ is $F^4/ker T$, but it is actually a subspace of $F^4$.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 17 at 19:06
Oh, you’re right. This exercise was a follow up to a previous exercise with defined $T$ such that the quotient space ended up being what I represented. I will update the question presently with the missing info.
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 19:09
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Your answer is not valid, since you don't even mention $F^4/ker T$ in it. An explicit isomorphism would be$$begin{array}{rccc}Psicolon&F^4/ker T&longrightarrow&F^2\&begin{pmatrix}a\b\c\dend{pmatrix}+ker T&mapsto&Tbegin{pmatrix}a\b\c\dend{pmatrix}.end{array}$$
Forgive me, I’m confused. Can you explain in more detail why, if I did mention what I didn’t mention, why it’s still not a valid answer? An why yours is a valid explicit isomorphism?
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 19:02
FIrst of all, there are two maps called $T$ in your answer. Not a good idea. Besides, you just claim that the domain of your second $T$ is $F^4/ker T$, but it is actually a subspace of $F^4$.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 17 at 19:06
Oh, you’re right. This exercise was a follow up to a previous exercise with defined $T$ such that the quotient space ended up being what I represented. I will update the question presently with the missing info.
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 19:09
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Your answer is not valid, since you don't even mention $F^4/ker T$ in it. An explicit isomorphism would be$$begin{array}{rccc}Psicolon&F^4/ker T&longrightarrow&F^2\&begin{pmatrix}a\b\c\dend{pmatrix}+ker T&mapsto&Tbegin{pmatrix}a\b\c\dend{pmatrix}.end{array}$$
Your answer is not valid, since you don't even mention $F^4/ker T$ in it. An explicit isomorphism would be$$begin{array}{rccc}Psicolon&F^4/ker T&longrightarrow&F^2\&begin{pmatrix}a\b\c\dend{pmatrix}+ker T&mapsto&Tbegin{pmatrix}a\b\c\dend{pmatrix}.end{array}$$
answered Nov 17 at 18:59
José Carlos Santos
142k20112208
142k20112208
Forgive me, I’m confused. Can you explain in more detail why, if I did mention what I didn’t mention, why it’s still not a valid answer? An why yours is a valid explicit isomorphism?
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 19:02
FIrst of all, there are two maps called $T$ in your answer. Not a good idea. Besides, you just claim that the domain of your second $T$ is $F^4/ker T$, but it is actually a subspace of $F^4$.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 17 at 19:06
Oh, you’re right. This exercise was a follow up to a previous exercise with defined $T$ such that the quotient space ended up being what I represented. I will update the question presently with the missing info.
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 19:09
add a comment |
Forgive me, I’m confused. Can you explain in more detail why, if I did mention what I didn’t mention, why it’s still not a valid answer? An why yours is a valid explicit isomorphism?
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 19:02
FIrst of all, there are two maps called $T$ in your answer. Not a good idea. Besides, you just claim that the domain of your second $T$ is $F^4/ker T$, but it is actually a subspace of $F^4$.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 17 at 19:06
Oh, you’re right. This exercise was a follow up to a previous exercise with defined $T$ such that the quotient space ended up being what I represented. I will update the question presently with the missing info.
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 19:09
Forgive me, I’m confused. Can you explain in more detail why, if I did mention what I didn’t mention, why it’s still not a valid answer? An why yours is a valid explicit isomorphism?
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 19:02
Forgive me, I’m confused. Can you explain in more detail why, if I did mention what I didn’t mention, why it’s still not a valid answer? An why yours is a valid explicit isomorphism?
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 19:02
FIrst of all, there are two maps called $T$ in your answer. Not a good idea. Besides, you just claim that the domain of your second $T$ is $F^4/ker T$, but it is actually a subspace of $F^4$.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 17 at 19:06
FIrst of all, there are two maps called $T$ in your answer. Not a good idea. Besides, you just claim that the domain of your second $T$ is $F^4/ker T$, but it is actually a subspace of $F^4$.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 17 at 19:06
Oh, you’re right. This exercise was a follow up to a previous exercise with defined $T$ such that the quotient space ended up being what I represented. I will update the question presently with the missing info.
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 19:09
Oh, you’re right. This exercise was a follow up to a previous exercise with defined $T$ such that the quotient space ended up being what I represented. I will update the question presently with the missing info.
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 19:09
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.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- 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.
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%2f3002669%2ffinding-an-explicit-isomorphism-between-mathbb-r4-ker-t-and-mathbb-r%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
What is $F$? Is it $mathbb R$?
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 17 at 18:48
@JoséCarlosSantos an arbitrary field. I should’ve specified, my bad.
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 18:49
But you mention $mathbb R$ in the title.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 17 at 18:50
Yes, I’ll correct that.
– sangstar
Nov 17 at 18:52