5.3  The Double Dual

In a finite-dimensional space, the dual basis gives an isomorphism V≅V∗, sending vi to φi. But that isomorphism depends on the basis: change the basis and the same vector goes to a different functional. Nothing stops us from taking duals twice. The dual V∗ is a vector space, so it has a dual of its own, V∗∗, and two chosen bases give V≅V∗≅V∗∗. This section shows that the composite isomorphism V→V∗∗ needs no choice at all: it is built from evaluation alone. We use it to make one meaning of the word “natural” precise, and to prove that a subspace can be recovered from its annihilator. At the end we see that in infinite dimension the construction still makes sense, but it is no longer an isomorphism.

5.3.1. Measuring the measurements

We have studied a space V and its space of measurements V∗=L(V,F) (Definition 5.1.2). The next object is the space of measurements of V∗.

Look at the expression φ(v), with φ∈V∗ and v∈V. It has two inputs. If we fix φ and let v vary, we get the functional φ itself. If we fix v and let φ vary, we get a rule that takes a functional and returns a number. For example, take v=(3,−1)∈R2. A functional on R2 is φ(x,y)=ax+by for unique a,b (Theorem 5.1.1), and the rule returns φ(3,−1)=3a−b. So the fixed vector (3,−1) measures each measurement. This rule appears every time we test a vector against functionals, so it deserves a name.

A vector measures a functional by letting the functional act on it.

Definition 5.3.1 (Double Dual and Evaluation Map)

Let V be a vector space over F. The double dual of V is V∗∗:=(V∗)∗, the space of linear functionals on V∗.

For v∈V, evaluation at v is the function evv:V∗→F,evv(φ):=φ(v). The evaluation map of V is evV:V→V∗∗,v↦evv. When only one space is in play we write ev for evV.

In words, clause by clause:

  • V∗∗ consists of linear maps V∗→F. Its elements take a whole functional as input.
  • evv is defined on V∗, not on V. The vector v is fixed once and for all; the variable is φ.
  • The evaluation map sends each vector v to the function evv. A vector in the subscript, evv, gives a single element of V∗∗; a space in the subscript, evV, gives the whole map.

Well-definedness. The definition claims that evv∈V∗∗, so we must check that evv is linear. The operations on V∗=L(V,F) are pointwise (Definition 2.4.1). So for φ,ψ∈V∗ and a,b∈F, evv(aφ+bψ)=(aφ+bψ)(v)=aφ(v)+bψ(v)=aevv(φ)+bevv(ψ). Notice what the definition did not use: no basis, no coordinates, no choice of any kind. Only v and the meaning of “functional” appear.

Example (Evaluation in Three Spaces)
  • (a) Let V=Fn. Describe evx for x∈Fn in terms of row vectors.
  • (b) Let V=R[x]≤2, and let (φ0,φ1,φ2) be the dual basis of (1,x,x2), so that φk(p) is the coefficient of xk in p (Example (Dual Bases in R[x]≤2)). Compute evx2 on φ0,φ1,φ2 and on the functional ε3(p)=p(3). Which element of V∗∗ is evx2?
  • (c) Describe ev0, and the evaluation map of V={0}.

Solution.

  • (a) By Theorem 5.1.1, every φ∈(Fn)∗ has the form φ(y)=a⊤y for a unique a∈Fn. So evx(φ)=a⊤x: the vector x measures the row a⊤ by standing to its right in the product. The same product a⊤x is read as “a⊤ measures x” or “x measures a⊤”, depending on which factor we hold fixed.

  • (b) evx2(φk)=φk(x2), the coefficient of xk in x2. So the values on φ0,φ1,φ2 are 0,0,1. Also evx2(ε3)=ε3(x2)=9. A linear functional on V∗ is determined by its values on the basis (φ0,φ1,φ2) of V∗ (Theorem 2.1.5). The values 0,0,1 say that evx2 is the third vector of the dual basis of (φ0,φ1,φ2) (Theorem 5.1.3). In the same way, ev1 and evx are the first and second vectors of that dual basis. We will see that this is no accident.

  • (c) ev0(φ)=φ(0)=0 for every φ, because a linear map sends 0 to 0 (Theorem 2.1.1). So ev0 is the zero functional on V∗. If V={0}, the only functional on V is the zero functional, so V∗={0} and V∗∗={0}, and evV is the only map {0}→{0}. This degenerate case is a first sign that ev loses nothing: the only vector it sends to zero is 0.

Here is a nonexample by minimal change. On V=R2, replace evv by qv(φ):=φ(v)2. It is still a function V∗→R, and it is still built without any choice. But take v=(1,0) and φ(x,y)=x. Then qv(2φ)=22=4, while 2qv(φ)=2. The clause that fails is linearity on V∗, so qv∉V∗∗.

Why this definition. Given only a vector v and a functional φ, the one number we can form without choosing anything is φ(v); anything else, such as φ(v)2, is built from it and usually breaks linearity. The pointwise operations of Definition 2.4.1 are exactly what make φ↦φ(v) linear. The name “double dual” is literal: it is the dual of the dual.

Warning. Two different “evaluations”. On V=R[x]≤2, the functional ε3:p↦p(3) lies in V∗: it evaluates polynomials at a number. The element evp:φ↦φ(p) lies in V∗∗: it evaluates functionals at a polynomial. They meet in one number, evp(ε3)=p(3)=ε3(p), read from opposite sides. Also, evv is not the vector v: it is a function on V∗.

Quick check. Let v=(1,2)∈R2. Compute evv(φ) for φ(x,y)=3x−y. Is there a nonzero ψ∈(R2)∗ with evv(ψ)=0?

Solution. evv(φ)=φ(1,2)=3−2=1. Yes: ψ(x,y)=2x−y is nonzero and ψ(1,2)=0. A single evv kills many functionals; what the next theorem says is that for v≠0 it does not kill all of them.

5.3.2. The evaluation map never loses information

The first result says that ev is a linear map, and that it is injective in every vector space, of any dimension.

Theorem 5.3.1 (The Evaluation Map Is Linear and Injective)

Let V be any vector space over F. Then the evaluation map evV:V→V∗∗ is linear and injective.

Idea. Linearity is an identity between two elements of V∗∗, that is, between two functions on V∗; compare them at an arbitrary φ. For injectivity, use the kernel test. If evv=0, then every functional vanishes at v. This is the signature move of the chapter: to show a vector is zero, test it against every functional. In finite dimension Theorem 5.1.5 does the job. In general we repeat its proof with the Basis Extension Theorem for arbitrary spaces.

Proof. Linear. Let u,v∈V and a,b∈F. For every φ∈V∗, since φ is linear and the operations on V∗∗ are pointwise (Definition 2.4.1), evau+bv(φ)=φ(au+bv)=aφ(u)+bφ(v)=(aevu+bevv)(φ). Two functions on V∗ that agree at every φ are equal, so evau+bv=aevu+bevv.

Injective. By Theorem 2.2.3 it suffices to show that evv=0 implies v=0. We prove the contrapositive. Let v≠0. If V is finite-dimensional, Theorem 5.1.5 (a) gives φ∈V∗ with φ(v)=1. In general, {v} is linearly independent, so by Theorem 1.8.2 there is a basis B of V with v∈B. By Theorem 2.1.6, which allows infinite bases, there is a linear map φ:V→F with φ(v)=1 and φ(b)=0 for every b∈B∖{v}. In either case φ∈V∗ and evv(φ)=φ(v)=1≠0, so evv≠0. This proves that evV is injective.

In infinite dimension the proof repeats the remark after Theorem 5.1.5, and Zorn’s Lemma enters through Theorem 1.8.2. In finite dimension no choice principle is needed.

So every vector v is completely remembered by the list of all its measurements φ(v). In finite dimension a count turns “injective” into “bijective”.

Theorem 5.3.2 (The Double Dual Isomorphism)

Let V be a finite-dimensional vector space over F. Then the evaluation map evV:V→V∗∗ is an isomorphism. Moreover, if B=(v1,…,vn) is a basis of V with dual basis B∗=(φ1,…,φn), then (evv1,…,evvn) is the dual basis of B∗.

Idea. Count instead of check. The dual basis has as many vectors as the basis, so dim⁡V∗=dim⁡V, and the same holds one level up. An injective linear map between spaces of the same finite dimension is bijective. For the second statement, “dual basis” is the condition θi(φj)=δij, and for θi=evvi that condition is the definition of φj read backwards.

Proof. Let n=dim⁡V. By Corollary 5.1.4, V∗ is finite-dimensional with dim⁡V∗=n, and applying it again to V∗ gives dim⁡V∗∗=n. By Theorem 5.3.1, evV is linear and injective. Since dim⁡V=dim⁡V∗∗ is finite, Corollary 2.3.2 (e) shows that evV is bijective, hence an isomorphism (Definition 2.5.2).

For the second statement, evvi(φj)=φj(vi)=δji=δij for all i,j, by the definition of the dual basis. By the uniqueness in Theorem 5.1.3 (a), applied to the basis B∗ of V∗, the dual basis of B∗ (Definition 5.1.3) is the only list (θ1,…,θn) in V∗∗ with θi(φj)=δij. Hence it is (evv1,…,evvn), as claimed.

The theorem says: every linear functional on V∗ is evaluation at exactly one vector. To find the vector, read off its coordinates from the values on a dual basis. For instance, on V=R[x]≤2 with the coefficient functionals φ0,φ1,φ2 of Example (Evaluation in Three Spaces), let θ∈V∗∗ be the functional with θ(φ0)=2, θ(φ1)=0, θ(φ2)=−1. By the second statement, θ=2ev1−evx2=ev2−x2, since both sides agree on the basis (φ0,φ1,φ2) and ev is linear. So, for example, θ(ε2)=ε2(2−x2)=−2, where ε2(p)=p(2). Part (b) of Example (Evaluation in Three Spaces) was the case θ=evx2.

5.3.3. What “natural” means

Both V≅V∗ and V≅V∗∗ hold in finite dimension, and both follow from counting dimensions. Yet they are very different isomorphisms. The difference is whether a choice is needed.

The isomorphism V→V∗ depends on the basis. For a basis B=(v1,…,vn) of V, let ΘB:V→V∗ be the linear map with ΘB(vi)=φi (Theorem 2.1.5). It sends a basis to a basis, so it is an isomorphism, by the argument in the proof of Theorem 2.5.4. Now take V=R, a space of dimension 1. With the basis (1), the dual basis is φ(t)=t, and Θ(1)(1) is t↦t. With the basis (2), the dual basis is φ(t)=t/2, since that is the functional sending 2 to 1. So Θ(2)(2)=(t↦t/2), and by linearity Θ(2)(1)=12Θ(2)(2) is t↦t/4. The same vector 1 goes to two different functionals. Every basis is as good as any other, so none of these isomorphisms is preferred.

The isomorphism V→V∗∗ does not. Build it the same way, choosing bases twice. First ΘB:V→V∗ sends vi↦φi. Then, using the basis B∗ of V∗, the map ΘB∗:V∗→V∗∗ sends each φi to the i-th vector of the dual basis of B∗. By Theorem 5.3.2, that vector is evvi. So the composite ΘB∗ΘB sends vi↦evvi for every i. The linear map evV does the same, so by the uniqueness part of Theorem 2.1.5, ΘB∗ΘB=evVfor every basis B of V. Each factor depends on B, but the composite does not: the two choices cancel. This is the first meaning of natural: an isomorphism is natural if it can be defined without choosing anything, and evV is defined by the formula evv(φ)=φ(v) alone.

There is a second, sharper meaning. A choice-free construction should be compatible with every linear map: if T:V→W, then first applying T and then identifying W with W∗∗ should agree with first identifying V with V∗∗ and then applying “the map that T induces on double duals”. To state this we need to know how a linear map acts on functionals. That is the dual map, the subject of the next section, where we prove that ev is compatible with every linear map, and see that no family of isomorphisms V→V∗ can be.

Quick check. In V=R with the basis B=(2), compute ΘB∗ΘB(1) as an element of V∗∗, and evaluate it on ψ(t)=5t. Compare with ev1(ψ).

Solution. The dual basis of B is φ1(t)=t/2, so ΘB(1)=12ΘB(2)=12φ1. The dual basis of B∗=(φ1) is the θ∈V∗∗ with θ(φ1)=1, and ev2(φ1)=φ1(2)=1, so θ=ev2 and ΘB∗(φ1)=ev2. Hence ΘB∗ΘB(1)=12ev2=ev1, using linearity of ev. On ψ it gives ev1(ψ)=ψ(1)=5. The factor 12 from the first step and the factor 2 hidden in ev2 cancel, exactly as the general computation predicts.

Remark. Because evV is natural, it is common to identify a finite-dimensional V with V∗∗, and to regard a vector v as the functional φ↦φ(v) on V∗. We will do this only with an explicit “under the identification v↔evv”, as in the next corollary.

5.3.4. Consequences in finite dimension

Throughout this subsection, V is finite-dimensional. The isomorphism evV lets us run arguments about V∗ “one level up” and bring the answer back to V.

The dual basis construction goes from a basis of V to a basis of V∗. Does every basis of V∗ arise this way? A list of n independent measurements should be the coordinate functions of some basis, and the double dual shows it is.

Corollary 5.3.3 (Every Basis of the Dual Is a Dual Basis)

Let V be a finite-dimensional vector space over F, and let (ψ1,…,ψn) be a basis of V∗. Then there is exactly one basis (v1,…,vn) of V whose dual basis is (ψ1,…,ψn), that is, with ψi(vj)=δijfor all i,j.

Idea. Go up one level, where the problem is already solved. The basis (ψ1,…,ψn) of V∗ has a dual basis (θ1,…,θn) in V∗∗. Every θj is evaluation at some vector, because ev is surjective. Those vectors are the answer, since θj(ψi)=δij says ψi(vj)=δij. Uniqueness is a “test against functionals” argument.

Proof. Existence. Here V∗ is finite-dimensional (Corollary 5.1.4). By Theorem 5.1.3 applied to V∗, there is a basis (θ1,…,θn) of V∗∗ with θj(ψi)=δij. By Theorem 5.3.2, evV is an isomorphism, so there are unique vj∈V with evvj=θj. Its inverse is an isomorphism (Theorem 2.5.3), so (v1,…,vn) is a basis of V by Theorem 2.5.2. For all i,j, ψi(vj)=evvj(ψi)=θj(ψi)=δij. By the uniqueness in Theorem 5.1.3 (a), the dual basis of (v1,…,vn) is (ψ1,…,ψn).

Uniqueness. Suppose (u1,…,un) is also a basis with ψi(uj)=δij. Fix j. Then ψi(vj−uj)=δij−δij=0 for every i. Every φ∈V∗ is a combination of the ψi, so φ(vj−uj)=0 for every φ∈V∗. By Theorem 5.1.5 (b), vj−uj=0. Hence uj=vj for every j.

In coordinates this is a matrix inversion, the mirror image of Example (The Dual Basis Is Read Off the Inverse Matrix). There, a basis was given and its dual basis appeared as the rows of an inverse matrix. Here the functionals are given, and the basis appears as the columns of an inverse matrix.

Example (A Basis With Prescribed Dual Basis)

On V=R[x]≤2, consider the functionals ψ1(p)=p(0),ψ2(p)=p(1),ψ3(p)=p′(1). Show that (ψ1,ψ2,ψ3) is a basis of V∗, and find the basis (p1,p2,p3) of V whose dual basis it is.

Solution. Write down a matrix. For p=a+bx+cx2, with [p]E=(a,b,c) in E=(1,x,x2), ψ1(p)=a,ψ2(p)=a+b+c,ψ3(p)=b+2c. So ψi(p)=ri[p]E, where ri is row i of A=(100111012). Translate the condition. Let P be the 3×3 matrix whose j-th column is [pj]E. By Theorem 0.9.2, the (i,j) entry of AP is ri[pj]E=ψi(pj). So the condition ψi(pj)=δij says exactly AP=I3.

Solve. Row reduction (Theorem 3.4.6) gives A−1=(100−22−11−11), and one checks AA−1=I3, so A is invertible by Theorem 3.4.5. Multiplying AP=I3 on the left by A−1 forces P=A−1. Since the columns of the invertible matrix P are independent, (p1,p2,p3) is a basis of V (via the coordinate isomorphism, Corollary 2.5.5). By the uniqueness in Theorem 5.1.3 (a), its dual basis is (ψ1,ψ2,ψ3), which in particular is a basis of V∗. Reading the columns, p1=1−2x+x2=(1−x)2,p2=2x−x2,p3=x2−x. Check. p1(0)=1, p1(1)=0, p1′(1)=0; p2(0)=0, p2(1)=1, p2′(1)=2−2=0; p3(0)=0, p3(1)=0, p3′(1)=1.

So every p∈R[x]≤2 is p=p(0)p1+p(1)p2+p′(1)p3: the coordinates of p in this basis are the three measurements.

The next consequence is the one we will use most. A subspace U determines the set U0 of functionals vanishing on it. Going back, the functionals in U0 vanish together on some set of vectors, which contains U. Is it exactly U?

Corollary 5.3.4 (The Annihilator of the Annihilator)

Let V be a finite-dimensional vector space over F, and let U be a subspace of V. Write U00:=(U0)0⊆V∗∗. Then U00=evV(U)={evu:u∈U}. So, under the identification v↔evv, we have U00=U. Equivalently, U={v∈V:φ(v)=0 for every φ∈U0}.

Idea. One inclusion is a tautology: if u∈U and φ kills U, then evu(φ)=φ(u)=0. For the other, count. The dimension formula applied twice, once in V and once in V∗, gives dim⁡U00=dim⁡U, and ev is injective, so dim⁡evV(U)=dim⁡U too. One inclusion plus equal dimension gives equality.

Proof. Let n=dim⁡V, so dim⁡V∗=n by Corollary 5.1.4.

Inclusion. Let u∈U. For every φ∈U0, evu(φ)=φ(u)=0 by Definition 5.2.1. Hence evu∈(U0)0, and evV(U)⊆U00.

Dimensions. By Theorem 5.2.2 in V, dim⁡U0=n−dim⁡U. By Theorem 5.2.2 in the n-dimensional space V∗, applied to its subspace U0, dim⁡U00=n−dim⁡U0=n−(n−dim⁡U)=dim⁡U. The restriction of evV to U is linear and injective (Theorem 5.3.1), so it is an isomorphism onto its image evV(U), and dim⁡evV(U)=dim⁡U (Theorem 2.5.4). So evV(U) is a subspace of U00 of the same finite dimension, and Theorem 1.6.8 gives evV(U)=U00.

The equivalent form. Let v∈V. Then φ(v)=0 for every φ∈U0 if and only if evv∈U00=evV(U), if and only if evv=evu for some u∈U. Since evV is injective, this happens if and only if v∈U.

The last form says: a subspace is exactly the common zero set of the functionals that vanish on it. No vector outside U sneaks through all the equations. In section 6 of this chapter this becomes the statement that every subspace of Fn is the solution set of a homogeneous linear system. An immediate consequence is that the annihilator loses no information.

Corollary 5.3.5 (Subspaces Are Determined by Their Annihilators)

Let V be a finite-dimensional vector space, and let U and W be subspaces of V. Then U=W if and only if U0=W0.

Proof. (⇒) is immediate. (⇐) Suppose U0=W0. By Corollary 5.3.4, U={v:φ(v)=0 for all φ∈U0}={v:φ(v)=0 for all φ∈W0}=W.

Quick check. Is Corollary 5.3.5 still true if U and W are allowed to be arbitrary subsets of V?

Solution. No. In R2, take U={(1,0)} and W={(2,0)}. A functional φ(x,y)=ax+by vanishes at (1,0) exactly when a=0, and at (2,0) exactly when 2a=0, that is, again when a=0. So U0=W0 but U≠W. An annihilator only sees the span, U0=(spanU)0 (Theorem 5.2.3 (b)).

5.3.5. Infinite dimension: the evaluation map is not surjective

Nothing in Definition 5.3.1 or Theorem 5.3.1 needed finite dimension. The count in Theorem 5.3.2 did.

Warning. V≅V∗∗ through ev is a finite-dimensional fact. For V=F[x], the evaluation map is injective but not surjective: there is a linear functional on F[x]∗ that is not evaluation at any polynomial. The next example constructs one.

Example (A Functional on F[x]∗ That Is Not an Evaluation)

Let φk∈F[x]∗ (k∈N) be the coordinate functionals, φk(p)= the coefficient of xk in p, and let ε1(p)=p(1), as in Proposition 5.1.6. Show that there is θ∈F[x]∗∗ with θ≠evp for every p∈F[x].

Solution. Step 1: S={φk:k∈N}∪{ε1} is linearly independent. By Proposition 5.1.6, the φk form an independent set and ε1∉span{φk:k∈N}. Let L be a finite list of distinct elements of S. If ε1 is not in L, then L is independent. Otherwise, list ε1 last; the others are independent and ε1 is not in their span, so L is independent by Lemma 1.5.3.

Step 2: build θ. By Theorem 1.8.2 there is a basis B of F[x]∗ containing S. By Theorem 2.1.6 for the (infinite) basis B, there is a linear θ:F[x]∗→F with θ(ε1)=1 and θ(β)=0 for every β∈B∖{ε1}. In particular θ(φk)=0 for all k.

Step 3: θ is not an evaluation. Suppose θ=evp for some p∈F[x]. Then for every k, the coefficient of xk in p is φk(p)=evp(φk)=θ(φk)=0. So p=0, and θ=ev0=0. This contradicts θ(ε1)=1. Hence θ∉ev(F[x]), and ev is not surjective.

The functional θ exists, but nobody can write it down: it comes from Zorn’s Lemma through Theorem 1.8.2. The deeper reason for the failure is size. F[x]∗ is so much bigger than F[x] (Exercise (C4: How large is F[x]∗?) identifies it with the whole sequence space FN) that F[x]∗∗ is bigger still, and in fact no isomorphism F[x]≅F[x]∗∗ exists at all, a statement about the sizes of bases that we do not prove. In finite dimension, sizes cannot grow, and the evaluation map is the perfect dictionary of Theorem 5.3.2.

5.3.6. Exercises

A. Check your understanding

Exercise (A1)
  • (a) Define evv for v∈V, and the evaluation map evV. In which space does evv live?
  • (b) State a hypothesis on V under which evV is an isomorphism, and a space for which it is not.
  • (c) True or false: if V is finite-dimensional and v≠0, then evv(φ)≠0 for every nonzero φ∈V∗. Justify your answer.
  • (d) True or false: if U and W are subspaces of R5 with U0=W0, then U=W. Justify your answer.
  • (e) Name the method used to prove U00=evV(U) in Corollary 5.3.4.

Solution.

  • (a) evv:V∗→F, evv(φ)=φ(v), and evV:V→V∗∗, v↦evv (Definition 5.3.1). evv lives in V∗∗.

  • (b) If V is finite-dimensional, evV is an isomorphism (Theorem 5.3.2). For V=F[x] it is not surjective (Example (A Functional on F[x]∗ That Is Not an Evaluation)).

  • (c) False. It says only that some φ has φ(v)≠0 (Theorem 5.3.1). In R2, v=(1,2) and φ(x,y)=2x−y≠0 give evv(φ)=0.

  • (d) True, by Corollary 5.3.5, since R5 is finite-dimensional.

  • (e) One inclusion plus equal dimension: evV(U)⊆U00 directly, then dim⁡U00=dim⁡U=dim⁡evV(U) from the dimension formula for annihilators (twice) and injectivity of ev, and Theorem 1.6.8.

B. Practice

Exercise (B1: A basis with a given dual basis)
  • (a) Let ψ1(x,y)=2x+y and ψ2(x,y)=x+y on R2. Find the basis (v1,v2) of R2 whose dual basis is (ψ1,ψ2).
  • (b) Let ψ1(p)=p(0) and ψ2(p)=∫01p(x)dx on R[x]≤1. Find the basis (p1,p2) of R[x]≤1 whose dual basis is (ψ1,ψ2).

Solution.

  • (a) As in Example (A Basis With Prescribed Dual Basis), ψi(v)=riv with ri the rows of A=(2111), and the condition ψi(vj)=δij says AP=I2 for P=(v1v2). Here 2⋅1−1⋅1=1≠0, so by Theorem 0.9.8 A−1=(1−1−12), P=A−1, so v1=(1,−1) and v2=(−1,2). These are independent (the columns of an invertible matrix), hence a basis. Check: ψ1(v1)=1, ψ2(v1)=0, ψ1(v2)=0, ψ2(v2)=1. By the uniqueness part of Theorem 5.1.3, the dual basis of (v1,v2) is (ψ1,ψ2).

  • (b) For p=a+bx, ψ1(p)=a and ψ2(p)=a+12b. So A=(1011/2) and P=A−1=(10−22), whose columns are the coordinates of p1=1−2x and p2=2x in (1,x). Check: p1(0)=1, ∫01(1−2x)dx=1−1=0, p2(0)=0, ∫012xdx=1. As in (a), (p1,p2) is a basis with dual basis (ψ1,ψ2).

Exercise (B2: U00=U for a line)

Let U=span((1,2,−1))⊆R3.

  • (a) Find a basis of U0.
  • (b) Find all v∈R3 with φ(v)=0 for every φ∈U0, and check that the answer is U.
  • (c) Hence verify that U00=ev(U), and confirm the dimension count.

Solution.

  • (a) A functional φ(x,y,z)=ax+by+cz (Theorem 5.1.1) lies in U0 if and only if it vanishes at (1,2,−1) (Theorem 5.2.3 (b)), that is, a+2b−c=0. The solutions are (a,b,c)=s(−2,1,0)+t(1,0,1), so φ1(x,y,z)=2x−y and φ2(x,y,z)=x+z span U0 (we replaced (−2,1,0) by its negative). They are independent, since neither is a multiple of the other, so (φ1,φ2) is a basis of U0. This matches dim⁡U0=3−1=2 (Theorem 5.2.2).

  • (b) Every φ∈U0 is a combination of φ1,φ2, so φ(v)=0 for all φ∈U0 if and only if φ1(v)=φ2(v)=0, that is, 2x−y=0 and x+z=0. With x=t: y=2t, z=−t, so v=t(1,2,−1). The set is exactly U.

  • (c) Let θ∈U00⊆(R3)∗∗. By Theorem 5.3.2, θ=evv for some v, and θ∈(U0)0 means φ(v)=0 for all φ∈U0. By (b), v∈U, so U00⊆ev(U); the reverse inclusion is immediate from Definition 5.2.1. Dimensions: dim⁡U00=3−dim⁡U0=1=dim⁡U.

Exercise (B3: Recognizing an evaluation)

Let V=R[x]≤2, with the coefficient functionals φ0,φ1,φ2 of Example (Evaluation in Three Spaces). Let θ∈V∗∗ be the linear functional with θ(φ0)=1, θ(φ1)=−3, θ(φ2)=2. Find p∈V with θ=evp. Hence compute θ(ε1) and θ(ψ), where ε1(q)=q(1) and ψ(q)=q′(0).

Solution. By Theorem 5.3.2, (ev1,evx,evx2) is the dual basis of (φ0,φ1,φ2). Hence ev1−3evx+2evx2 takes the values 1,−3,2 on φ0,φ1,φ2. So does θ, and a linear functional is determined by its values on a basis (Theorem 2.1.5). Since ev is linear (Theorem 5.3.1), θ=ev1−3evx+2evx2=evp,p=1−3x+2x2. Hence θ(ε1)=ε1(p)=1−3+2=0 and θ(ψ)=ψ(p)=p′(0)=−3.

C. Going deeper

Exercise (C1: Subspaces of V and of V∗)

Let V be a finite-dimensional vector space over F. Prove that U↦U0 is a bijection from the set of subspaces of V to the set of subspaces of V∗, and that it reverses inclusions in both directions: U⊆W if and only if W0⊆U0.

Hint: for surjectivity, given a subspace X⊆V∗, consider U={v∈V:φ(v)=0 for all φ∈X}.

Solution. Let n=dim⁡V=dim⁡V∗ (Corollary 5.1.4). By Proposition 5.2.1, U0 is a subspace of V∗, so the map is well defined.

Injective. This is Corollary 5.3.5.

Inclusions. If U⊆W, then W0⊆U0 by Theorem 5.2.3 (a). Conversely, suppose W0⊆U0, and let u∈U. Every φ∈W0 lies in U0, so φ(u)=0. By Corollary 5.3.4 (the equivalent form, for W), u∈W. Hence U⊆W.

Surjective. Let X be a subspace of V∗, and let U={v∈V:φ(v)=0 for all φ∈X}. For v∈V, v∈U if and only if evv(φ)=0 for all φ∈X if and only if evv∈X0, where X0⊆V∗∗. So U=evV−1(X0), and since evV is an isomorphism (Theorem 5.3.2), U is a subspace and evV restricts to an isomorphism U→X0. By Theorem 5.2.2 in V∗, dim⁡U=dim⁡X0=n−dim⁡X. By definition of U, every φ∈X vanishes on U, so X⊆U0. By Theorem 5.2.2 in V, dim⁡U0=n−dim⁡U=dim⁡X. By Theorem 1.6.8, X=U0. This proves the claim.

Exercise (C2: Spans cut out by equations)

Let V be finite-dimensional and S⊆V any subset.

  • (a) Prove that {v∈V:φ(v)=0 for every φ∈S0}=span(S).
  • (b) Deduce: a vector v lies in span(S) if and only if every functional that vanishes on S vanishes at v.
  • (c) Show by an example that (a) can fail if “span(S)” is replaced by “S”.

Solution.

  • (a) span(S) is a subspace (Theorem 1.3.1), and S0=(spanS)0 by Theorem 5.2.3 (b). Applying Corollary 5.3.4 to U=span(S), {v:φ(v)=0 ∀φ∈S0}={v:φ(v)=0 ∀φ∈(spanS)0}=span(S).

  • (b) This is (a) read for a single vector v.

  • (c) Take S={(1,0)}⊆R2. Then S0 consists of the functionals (x,y)↦by, and their common zero set is the whole x-axis, which contains (2,0)∉S.

Exercise (C3: Where finite dimension is needed)

Let V=F[x], let φk and ε1 be as in Example (A Functional on F[x]∗ That Is Not an Evaluation), and let X=span{φk:k∈N}⊆V∗.

Solution.

  • (a) If φ(p)=0 for all φ∈X, then in particular φk(p)=0 for every k, so every coefficient of p is 0 and p=0. Conversely φ(0)=0 for every φ.

  • (b) Suppose X=U0. Every φ∈X=U0 vanishes on U, so U⊆{p:φ(p)=0 ∀φ∈X}={0} by (a). Hence U={0} and U0=V∗ (every functional vanishes at 0). But ε1∈V∗ and ε1∉X, by Proposition 5.1.6. So X≠V∗=U0, a contradiction.

  • (c) The dimension count. In Exercise (C1: Subspaces of V and of V∗) we used that evV is surjective and that dim⁡U+dim⁡U0=dim⁡V to force X=U0 from X⊆U0. Here U={0} and X⊊U0=V∗: the inclusion holds, but there is no finite dimension to compare, and a proper subspace of an infinite-dimensional space can be “as large as” the whole space.

Found a typo or a mistake? Report it, or read this page’s source

The text of this book is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0.