Suppose W is finite-dimensional and T∈L(V,W). Prove that T is injective if and only if there exists S∈L(W,V) such that ST is the identity map on V.
Suppose T is injective and define S(Tv)=v. If Tv1=Tv2 then (by injectivity) v1=v2 meaning S maps the same input to the same output thus it's a function (aka it's well defined).
It's easy to see S is linear (it "inherits" linearity from T)
- S(Tv1+Tv2)=S(T(v1+v2))=v1+v2
- S(λTv)=S(T(λv))=λv
Currently S is only defined on the range of T, we can extend it to be defined on the rest of W using 2.34 (this is where we need W to be finite-dimensional!): If W=range T⊕U and S is defined on range T we're free to define Su=0 for all u∈U. Now S∈L(W,V) as desired.
For the backwards direction suppose ST is the identity map, then Tv1=Tv2 implies S(Tv1)=S(Tv2)=v1=v2 so T is injective.
More generally for any function the existence of a left inverse is equivilant to injectivity. The interesting thing here is that the linear structure was preserved.
Old bad proof
Note that null T={0} is finite-dimensional, and range T⊆W is finite-dimensional, so 3b/16 implies V is finite-dimensional and thus by 3.22
dimV=range T
Let w1,…,wr be a basis for range T, since each wj is in the range of T we can let v1,…,vr be a list in V such that wj=Tvj, then define Swj=vj for all 1≤j≤r. Use 2.33 to extend to a basis w1,…,wm of W and finish definining S by setting Swj=0 for all r<j≤m.
The list v1,…,vr is independent, because
a1v1+⋯+arvr=0⟹T(a1v1+⋯+arvr)=0⟹a1w1+⋯+arwr=0⟹a1=⋯=ar=0apply T on both sideslinearityw1,…,wr are independent
Since dimrange T=dimV=r 2.39 implies the list v1,…,vr forms a basis for V. Now can finally show ST is the identity!
STv=ST(a1v1+⋯+arvr)=a1S(Tv1)+⋯+arS(Tvr)=a1v1+⋯+arvr=vsince v1,…,vr is a basislinearityby definition of S
This completes the forward direction.
Now suppose S exists such that ST is the identity map on V. Clearly null T⊆null ST={0} so T is injective by 3.16. This completes the backwards direction.
This took me ~1h, way too long! I diden't realize that V coulden't be infinite-dimensional since it would force null T to be infinite-dimensional, since range T⊆W is clearly finite-dimensional.
I'm proud of this solution though, my first solution was to define S as the inverse of T, then show it's well defined and linear. I like this solution much better since linearity is obvious (we just defined S in terms of W's basis).
edit: what the hell ^ this is garbage why was I ever proud of this, the only new thing here is linear structure being preserved. left inverses existing being the same as injectivity is true for all functions