When can two endomorphisms on different vector spaces be identified The Next CEO of Stack...

What connection does MS Office have to Netscape Navigator?

Why do remote companies require working in the US?

Rotate a column

Does it take more energy to get to Venus or to Mars?

Make solar eclipses exceedingly rare, but still have new moons

Sending manuscript to multiple publishers

Why is the US ranked as #45 in Press Freedom ratings, despite its extremely permissive free speech laws?

Is there a difference between "Fahrstuhl" and "Aufzug"

How does the mv command work with external drives?

Is 'diverse range' a pleonastic phrase?

Why don't programming languages automatically manage the synchronous/asynchronous problem?

Would a galaxy be visible from outside, but nearby?

Should I tutor a student who I know has cheated on their homework?

Novel about a guy who is possessed by the divine essence and the world ends?

How to safely derail a train during transit?

Inappropriate reference requests from Journal reviewers

What was the first Unix version to run on a microcomputer?

Example of a Mathematician/Physicist whose Other Publications during their PhD eclipsed their PhD Thesis

How do I make a variable always equal to the result of some calculations?

What does convergence in distribution "in the Gromov–Hausdorff" sense mean?

Interfacing a button to MCU (and PC) with 50m long cable

Are there any limitations on attacking while grappling?

Can I equip Skullclamp on a creature I am sacrificing?

If the heap is initialized for security, then why is the stack uninitialized?



When can two endomorphisms on different vector spaces be identified



The Next CEO of Stack OverflowSystems of linear equations: What did the author mean?Can vector spaces over different fields be isomorphic?How can I determine the number of wedge products of $1$-forms needed to express a $k$-form as a sum of such?Mapping vector spaces over two different fields?Can two 'different' vector spaces have the same vector?Cyclic Vector Spaces and EndomorphismsA bijection between two different basis for different vector spacesDiagonalizable vector-space-endomorphisms.Theorem 2.20 in Friedberg's Linear AlgebraCharacterize all the pairs $(A,B)$ which satisfy $bigwedge^k A=bigwedge^k B neq 0$












1












$begingroup$


Suppose $dim V = dim W$. Given $phi:Vrightarrow V$ and $psi:Wrightarrow W$ when do we have bijective linear maps $a,b:Vrightarrow W$ such that
$$require{AMScd}
begin{CD}
V @>phi>> V \
@VaVV @VVbV \
W @>psi>>W
end{CD}
$$

commutes?



My intuition says that if the rank of $phi$ and $psi$ match there should exist $a,b$. Of course with $a=b$, this requires that $phi,psi$ are similar (after identifying $V$ and $W$ in any way you like), but with $aneq b$ allowed, it seems this is much weaker.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    $a=b=0$ is always an option for every choice of $phi$ and $psi$.
    $endgroup$
    – user647486
    Mar 16 at 18:20












  • $begingroup$
    Sorry, isomorphisms $a,b$
    $endgroup$
    – Joshua Tilley
    Mar 16 at 18:26
















1












$begingroup$


Suppose $dim V = dim W$. Given $phi:Vrightarrow V$ and $psi:Wrightarrow W$ when do we have bijective linear maps $a,b:Vrightarrow W$ such that
$$require{AMScd}
begin{CD}
V @>phi>> V \
@VaVV @VVbV \
W @>psi>>W
end{CD}
$$

commutes?



My intuition says that if the rank of $phi$ and $psi$ match there should exist $a,b$. Of course with $a=b$, this requires that $phi,psi$ are similar (after identifying $V$ and $W$ in any way you like), but with $aneq b$ allowed, it seems this is much weaker.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    $a=b=0$ is always an option for every choice of $phi$ and $psi$.
    $endgroup$
    – user647486
    Mar 16 at 18:20












  • $begingroup$
    Sorry, isomorphisms $a,b$
    $endgroup$
    – Joshua Tilley
    Mar 16 at 18:26














1












1








1





$begingroup$


Suppose $dim V = dim W$. Given $phi:Vrightarrow V$ and $psi:Wrightarrow W$ when do we have bijective linear maps $a,b:Vrightarrow W$ such that
$$require{AMScd}
begin{CD}
V @>phi>> V \
@VaVV @VVbV \
W @>psi>>W
end{CD}
$$

commutes?



My intuition says that if the rank of $phi$ and $psi$ match there should exist $a,b$. Of course with $a=b$, this requires that $phi,psi$ are similar (after identifying $V$ and $W$ in any way you like), but with $aneq b$ allowed, it seems this is much weaker.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




Suppose $dim V = dim W$. Given $phi:Vrightarrow V$ and $psi:Wrightarrow W$ when do we have bijective linear maps $a,b:Vrightarrow W$ such that
$$require{AMScd}
begin{CD}
V @>phi>> V \
@VaVV @VVbV \
W @>psi>>W
end{CD}
$$

commutes?



My intuition says that if the rank of $phi$ and $psi$ match there should exist $a,b$. Of course with $a=b$, this requires that $phi,psi$ are similar (after identifying $V$ and $W$ in any way you like), but with $aneq b$ allowed, it seems this is much weaker.







linear-algebra linear-transformations






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Mar 16 at 19:01









egreg

185k1486206




185k1486206










asked Mar 16 at 18:13









Joshua TilleyJoshua Tilley

563313




563313












  • $begingroup$
    $a=b=0$ is always an option for every choice of $phi$ and $psi$.
    $endgroup$
    – user647486
    Mar 16 at 18:20












  • $begingroup$
    Sorry, isomorphisms $a,b$
    $endgroup$
    – Joshua Tilley
    Mar 16 at 18:26


















  • $begingroup$
    $a=b=0$ is always an option for every choice of $phi$ and $psi$.
    $endgroup$
    – user647486
    Mar 16 at 18:20












  • $begingroup$
    Sorry, isomorphisms $a,b$
    $endgroup$
    – Joshua Tilley
    Mar 16 at 18:26
















$begingroup$
$a=b=0$ is always an option for every choice of $phi$ and $psi$.
$endgroup$
– user647486
Mar 16 at 18:20






$begingroup$
$a=b=0$ is always an option for every choice of $phi$ and $psi$.
$endgroup$
– user647486
Mar 16 at 18:20














$begingroup$
Sorry, isomorphisms $a,b$
$endgroup$
– Joshua Tilley
Mar 16 at 18:26




$begingroup$
Sorry, isomorphisms $a,b$
$endgroup$
– Joshua Tilley
Mar 16 at 18:26










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

This is essentially the change of bases.



Suppose that $phi$ and $psi$ have the same rank $k$. Take a basis ${v_1,dots,v_n}$ of $V$ such that ${phi(v_1),dots,phi(v_k)}$ is a basis of the range of $phi$.



Choose similarly a basis ${w_1,dots,w_n}$ for $W$.



Now complete ${phi(v_1),dots,phi(v_k)}$ to a basis ${phi(v_1),dots,phi(v_k),v_{k+1}',dots,v_n'}$ of $V$. Similarly, complete ${psi(w_1),dots,psi(w_k)}$ to a basis ${psi(w_1),dots,psi(w_k),w_{k+1}',dots,w_n'}$ of $W$.



Define $a$ by $a(v_i)=w_i$; define $b$ by $b(phi(v_i))=psi(w_i)$ for $i=1,2,dots,k$ and $b(v_i')=w_i'$ for $i=k+1,dots,n$.



Then $a$ and $b$ induce bijective linear maps and, for $i=1,2,dots,n$,
$$
b(phi(v_i))=psi(w_i)=psi(a(v_i))
$$



Can you show the converse?



Without bases, you can use complements. Write $V=V_1opluskerphi$, so $phi$ induces an injective linear map $V_1to V$, with the same image as $phi$. Write $V=operatorname{im}phioplus V_2$.



Do similarly for $psi$, writing $W=W_1opluskerpsi=operatorname{im}psioplus W_2$.



By assumption $dim V_1=dim W_1$ and $dim V_2=dim W_2$. Choose suitably the isomorphisms, noting that $phi$ and $psi$ induce isomorphisms $V_1tooperatorname{im}phi$ and $W_1tooperatorname{im}psi$. However this is not really different from choosing bases.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    The converse is nice and easy: $win textrm {im} left( psi right)$ iff $ w in b left(textrm {im} left(phiright) $ by the diagram, so since the images are related by an isomorphism, they have the same dimension.
    $endgroup$
    – Joshua Tilley
    Mar 19 at 12:42












  • $begingroup$
    The particular bases seem to do no work in the argument, could you provide a proof just in terms of the relevant subspaces: the kernels and images?
    $endgroup$
    – Joshua Tilley
    Mar 19 at 12:43










  • $begingroup$
    @JoshuaTilley What's the problem with the bases?
    $endgroup$
    – egreg
    Mar 19 at 12:50










  • $begingroup$
    Nothing, but many bases will work, it is the subspaces that are important. I'm thinking there is a cleaner argument without invoking a basis. Nonetheless, the current argument is of course fine.
    $endgroup$
    – Joshua Tilley
    Mar 19 at 12:52










  • $begingroup$
    @JoshuaTilley I added a pattern for the proof.
    $endgroup$
    – egreg
    Mar 19 at 14:00



















1












$begingroup$

Then that condition is just equivalence of $phi$ and $psi$, which is equivalent to having the same rank.



To show this, take a basis $e_i^V$, $iin I_1$ of the kernel of $phi$ and extend it to a basis $e_i^V$, $iin I_1cup I_2$ of $V$. Then, the elements of the basis that are not in the kernel are mapped to a basis $f_i^V$, $iin J_1$ of the range of $phi$. Let's assume that we index them such that $phi(e_i^V)=f_i^V$ for $iin I_1$. Extend also this basis to a basis $f_i^V$, $iin J_1cup J_2$ of $V$ (but the $V$ that is the codomain of $phi$).



Do the same business with $W$ and $psi$ to obtain bases $e_i^W$, $iin I_1cup I_2$ and $f_i^W$, $iin J_1cup J_2$. Assume that we also repeated the construction such that $psi(e_i^W)=f_i^W$, for $iin I_1$. Note that I used the same index sets, since the ranks are assumed equal. Therefore, the sets of indexes required have the same cardinality. So, we can just take them equal.



Finally define $a(e_i^V)=e_i^W$ and $b(f_i^V)=f_i^W$ and extend them by linearity.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$














    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3150645%2fwhen-can-two-endomorphisms-on-different-vector-spaces-be-identified%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    2












    $begingroup$

    This is essentially the change of bases.



    Suppose that $phi$ and $psi$ have the same rank $k$. Take a basis ${v_1,dots,v_n}$ of $V$ such that ${phi(v_1),dots,phi(v_k)}$ is a basis of the range of $phi$.



    Choose similarly a basis ${w_1,dots,w_n}$ for $W$.



    Now complete ${phi(v_1),dots,phi(v_k)}$ to a basis ${phi(v_1),dots,phi(v_k),v_{k+1}',dots,v_n'}$ of $V$. Similarly, complete ${psi(w_1),dots,psi(w_k)}$ to a basis ${psi(w_1),dots,psi(w_k),w_{k+1}',dots,w_n'}$ of $W$.



    Define $a$ by $a(v_i)=w_i$; define $b$ by $b(phi(v_i))=psi(w_i)$ for $i=1,2,dots,k$ and $b(v_i')=w_i'$ for $i=k+1,dots,n$.



    Then $a$ and $b$ induce bijective linear maps and, for $i=1,2,dots,n$,
    $$
    b(phi(v_i))=psi(w_i)=psi(a(v_i))
    $$



    Can you show the converse?



    Without bases, you can use complements. Write $V=V_1opluskerphi$, so $phi$ induces an injective linear map $V_1to V$, with the same image as $phi$. Write $V=operatorname{im}phioplus V_2$.



    Do similarly for $psi$, writing $W=W_1opluskerpsi=operatorname{im}psioplus W_2$.



    By assumption $dim V_1=dim W_1$ and $dim V_2=dim W_2$. Choose suitably the isomorphisms, noting that $phi$ and $psi$ induce isomorphisms $V_1tooperatorname{im}phi$ and $W_1tooperatorname{im}psi$. However this is not really different from choosing bases.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      The converse is nice and easy: $win textrm {im} left( psi right)$ iff $ w in b left(textrm {im} left(phiright) $ by the diagram, so since the images are related by an isomorphism, they have the same dimension.
      $endgroup$
      – Joshua Tilley
      Mar 19 at 12:42












    • $begingroup$
      The particular bases seem to do no work in the argument, could you provide a proof just in terms of the relevant subspaces: the kernels and images?
      $endgroup$
      – Joshua Tilley
      Mar 19 at 12:43










    • $begingroup$
      @JoshuaTilley What's the problem with the bases?
      $endgroup$
      – egreg
      Mar 19 at 12:50










    • $begingroup$
      Nothing, but many bases will work, it is the subspaces that are important. I'm thinking there is a cleaner argument without invoking a basis. Nonetheless, the current argument is of course fine.
      $endgroup$
      – Joshua Tilley
      Mar 19 at 12:52










    • $begingroup$
      @JoshuaTilley I added a pattern for the proof.
      $endgroup$
      – egreg
      Mar 19 at 14:00
















    2












    $begingroup$

    This is essentially the change of bases.



    Suppose that $phi$ and $psi$ have the same rank $k$. Take a basis ${v_1,dots,v_n}$ of $V$ such that ${phi(v_1),dots,phi(v_k)}$ is a basis of the range of $phi$.



    Choose similarly a basis ${w_1,dots,w_n}$ for $W$.



    Now complete ${phi(v_1),dots,phi(v_k)}$ to a basis ${phi(v_1),dots,phi(v_k),v_{k+1}',dots,v_n'}$ of $V$. Similarly, complete ${psi(w_1),dots,psi(w_k)}$ to a basis ${psi(w_1),dots,psi(w_k),w_{k+1}',dots,w_n'}$ of $W$.



    Define $a$ by $a(v_i)=w_i$; define $b$ by $b(phi(v_i))=psi(w_i)$ for $i=1,2,dots,k$ and $b(v_i')=w_i'$ for $i=k+1,dots,n$.



    Then $a$ and $b$ induce bijective linear maps and, for $i=1,2,dots,n$,
    $$
    b(phi(v_i))=psi(w_i)=psi(a(v_i))
    $$



    Can you show the converse?



    Without bases, you can use complements. Write $V=V_1opluskerphi$, so $phi$ induces an injective linear map $V_1to V$, with the same image as $phi$. Write $V=operatorname{im}phioplus V_2$.



    Do similarly for $psi$, writing $W=W_1opluskerpsi=operatorname{im}psioplus W_2$.



    By assumption $dim V_1=dim W_1$ and $dim V_2=dim W_2$. Choose suitably the isomorphisms, noting that $phi$ and $psi$ induce isomorphisms $V_1tooperatorname{im}phi$ and $W_1tooperatorname{im}psi$. However this is not really different from choosing bases.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      The converse is nice and easy: $win textrm {im} left( psi right)$ iff $ w in b left(textrm {im} left(phiright) $ by the diagram, so since the images are related by an isomorphism, they have the same dimension.
      $endgroup$
      – Joshua Tilley
      Mar 19 at 12:42












    • $begingroup$
      The particular bases seem to do no work in the argument, could you provide a proof just in terms of the relevant subspaces: the kernels and images?
      $endgroup$
      – Joshua Tilley
      Mar 19 at 12:43










    • $begingroup$
      @JoshuaTilley What's the problem with the bases?
      $endgroup$
      – egreg
      Mar 19 at 12:50










    • $begingroup$
      Nothing, but many bases will work, it is the subspaces that are important. I'm thinking there is a cleaner argument without invoking a basis. Nonetheless, the current argument is of course fine.
      $endgroup$
      – Joshua Tilley
      Mar 19 at 12:52










    • $begingroup$
      @JoshuaTilley I added a pattern for the proof.
      $endgroup$
      – egreg
      Mar 19 at 14:00














    2












    2








    2





    $begingroup$

    This is essentially the change of bases.



    Suppose that $phi$ and $psi$ have the same rank $k$. Take a basis ${v_1,dots,v_n}$ of $V$ such that ${phi(v_1),dots,phi(v_k)}$ is a basis of the range of $phi$.



    Choose similarly a basis ${w_1,dots,w_n}$ for $W$.



    Now complete ${phi(v_1),dots,phi(v_k)}$ to a basis ${phi(v_1),dots,phi(v_k),v_{k+1}',dots,v_n'}$ of $V$. Similarly, complete ${psi(w_1),dots,psi(w_k)}$ to a basis ${psi(w_1),dots,psi(w_k),w_{k+1}',dots,w_n'}$ of $W$.



    Define $a$ by $a(v_i)=w_i$; define $b$ by $b(phi(v_i))=psi(w_i)$ for $i=1,2,dots,k$ and $b(v_i')=w_i'$ for $i=k+1,dots,n$.



    Then $a$ and $b$ induce bijective linear maps and, for $i=1,2,dots,n$,
    $$
    b(phi(v_i))=psi(w_i)=psi(a(v_i))
    $$



    Can you show the converse?



    Without bases, you can use complements. Write $V=V_1opluskerphi$, so $phi$ induces an injective linear map $V_1to V$, with the same image as $phi$. Write $V=operatorname{im}phioplus V_2$.



    Do similarly for $psi$, writing $W=W_1opluskerpsi=operatorname{im}psioplus W_2$.



    By assumption $dim V_1=dim W_1$ and $dim V_2=dim W_2$. Choose suitably the isomorphisms, noting that $phi$ and $psi$ induce isomorphisms $V_1tooperatorname{im}phi$ and $W_1tooperatorname{im}psi$. However this is not really different from choosing bases.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$



    This is essentially the change of bases.



    Suppose that $phi$ and $psi$ have the same rank $k$. Take a basis ${v_1,dots,v_n}$ of $V$ such that ${phi(v_1),dots,phi(v_k)}$ is a basis of the range of $phi$.



    Choose similarly a basis ${w_1,dots,w_n}$ for $W$.



    Now complete ${phi(v_1),dots,phi(v_k)}$ to a basis ${phi(v_1),dots,phi(v_k),v_{k+1}',dots,v_n'}$ of $V$. Similarly, complete ${psi(w_1),dots,psi(w_k)}$ to a basis ${psi(w_1),dots,psi(w_k),w_{k+1}',dots,w_n'}$ of $W$.



    Define $a$ by $a(v_i)=w_i$; define $b$ by $b(phi(v_i))=psi(w_i)$ for $i=1,2,dots,k$ and $b(v_i')=w_i'$ for $i=k+1,dots,n$.



    Then $a$ and $b$ induce bijective linear maps and, for $i=1,2,dots,n$,
    $$
    b(phi(v_i))=psi(w_i)=psi(a(v_i))
    $$



    Can you show the converse?



    Without bases, you can use complements. Write $V=V_1opluskerphi$, so $phi$ induces an injective linear map $V_1to V$, with the same image as $phi$. Write $V=operatorname{im}phioplus V_2$.



    Do similarly for $psi$, writing $W=W_1opluskerpsi=operatorname{im}psioplus W_2$.



    By assumption $dim V_1=dim W_1$ and $dim V_2=dim W_2$. Choose suitably the isomorphisms, noting that $phi$ and $psi$ induce isomorphisms $V_1tooperatorname{im}phi$ and $W_1tooperatorname{im}psi$. However this is not really different from choosing bases.







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited Mar 19 at 14:00

























    answered Mar 16 at 19:11









    egregegreg

    185k1486206




    185k1486206












    • $begingroup$
      The converse is nice and easy: $win textrm {im} left( psi right)$ iff $ w in b left(textrm {im} left(phiright) $ by the diagram, so since the images are related by an isomorphism, they have the same dimension.
      $endgroup$
      – Joshua Tilley
      Mar 19 at 12:42












    • $begingroup$
      The particular bases seem to do no work in the argument, could you provide a proof just in terms of the relevant subspaces: the kernels and images?
      $endgroup$
      – Joshua Tilley
      Mar 19 at 12:43










    • $begingroup$
      @JoshuaTilley What's the problem with the bases?
      $endgroup$
      – egreg
      Mar 19 at 12:50










    • $begingroup$
      Nothing, but many bases will work, it is the subspaces that are important. I'm thinking there is a cleaner argument without invoking a basis. Nonetheless, the current argument is of course fine.
      $endgroup$
      – Joshua Tilley
      Mar 19 at 12:52










    • $begingroup$
      @JoshuaTilley I added a pattern for the proof.
      $endgroup$
      – egreg
      Mar 19 at 14:00


















    • $begingroup$
      The converse is nice and easy: $win textrm {im} left( psi right)$ iff $ w in b left(textrm {im} left(phiright) $ by the diagram, so since the images are related by an isomorphism, they have the same dimension.
      $endgroup$
      – Joshua Tilley
      Mar 19 at 12:42












    • $begingroup$
      The particular bases seem to do no work in the argument, could you provide a proof just in terms of the relevant subspaces: the kernels and images?
      $endgroup$
      – Joshua Tilley
      Mar 19 at 12:43










    • $begingroup$
      @JoshuaTilley What's the problem with the bases?
      $endgroup$
      – egreg
      Mar 19 at 12:50










    • $begingroup$
      Nothing, but many bases will work, it is the subspaces that are important. I'm thinking there is a cleaner argument without invoking a basis. Nonetheless, the current argument is of course fine.
      $endgroup$
      – Joshua Tilley
      Mar 19 at 12:52










    • $begingroup$
      @JoshuaTilley I added a pattern for the proof.
      $endgroup$
      – egreg
      Mar 19 at 14:00
















    $begingroup$
    The converse is nice and easy: $win textrm {im} left( psi right)$ iff $ w in b left(textrm {im} left(phiright) $ by the diagram, so since the images are related by an isomorphism, they have the same dimension.
    $endgroup$
    – Joshua Tilley
    Mar 19 at 12:42






    $begingroup$
    The converse is nice and easy: $win textrm {im} left( psi right)$ iff $ w in b left(textrm {im} left(phiright) $ by the diagram, so since the images are related by an isomorphism, they have the same dimension.
    $endgroup$
    – Joshua Tilley
    Mar 19 at 12:42














    $begingroup$
    The particular bases seem to do no work in the argument, could you provide a proof just in terms of the relevant subspaces: the kernels and images?
    $endgroup$
    – Joshua Tilley
    Mar 19 at 12:43




    $begingroup$
    The particular bases seem to do no work in the argument, could you provide a proof just in terms of the relevant subspaces: the kernels and images?
    $endgroup$
    – Joshua Tilley
    Mar 19 at 12:43












    $begingroup$
    @JoshuaTilley What's the problem with the bases?
    $endgroup$
    – egreg
    Mar 19 at 12:50




    $begingroup$
    @JoshuaTilley What's the problem with the bases?
    $endgroup$
    – egreg
    Mar 19 at 12:50












    $begingroup$
    Nothing, but many bases will work, it is the subspaces that are important. I'm thinking there is a cleaner argument without invoking a basis. Nonetheless, the current argument is of course fine.
    $endgroup$
    – Joshua Tilley
    Mar 19 at 12:52




    $begingroup$
    Nothing, but many bases will work, it is the subspaces that are important. I'm thinking there is a cleaner argument without invoking a basis. Nonetheless, the current argument is of course fine.
    $endgroup$
    – Joshua Tilley
    Mar 19 at 12:52












    $begingroup$
    @JoshuaTilley I added a pattern for the proof.
    $endgroup$
    – egreg
    Mar 19 at 14:00




    $begingroup$
    @JoshuaTilley I added a pattern for the proof.
    $endgroup$
    – egreg
    Mar 19 at 14:00











    1












    $begingroup$

    Then that condition is just equivalence of $phi$ and $psi$, which is equivalent to having the same rank.



    To show this, take a basis $e_i^V$, $iin I_1$ of the kernel of $phi$ and extend it to a basis $e_i^V$, $iin I_1cup I_2$ of $V$. Then, the elements of the basis that are not in the kernel are mapped to a basis $f_i^V$, $iin J_1$ of the range of $phi$. Let's assume that we index them such that $phi(e_i^V)=f_i^V$ for $iin I_1$. Extend also this basis to a basis $f_i^V$, $iin J_1cup J_2$ of $V$ (but the $V$ that is the codomain of $phi$).



    Do the same business with $W$ and $psi$ to obtain bases $e_i^W$, $iin I_1cup I_2$ and $f_i^W$, $iin J_1cup J_2$. Assume that we also repeated the construction such that $psi(e_i^W)=f_i^W$, for $iin I_1$. Note that I used the same index sets, since the ranks are assumed equal. Therefore, the sets of indexes required have the same cardinality. So, we can just take them equal.



    Finally define $a(e_i^V)=e_i^W$ and $b(f_i^V)=f_i^W$ and extend them by linearity.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      1












      $begingroup$

      Then that condition is just equivalence of $phi$ and $psi$, which is equivalent to having the same rank.



      To show this, take a basis $e_i^V$, $iin I_1$ of the kernel of $phi$ and extend it to a basis $e_i^V$, $iin I_1cup I_2$ of $V$. Then, the elements of the basis that are not in the kernel are mapped to a basis $f_i^V$, $iin J_1$ of the range of $phi$. Let's assume that we index them such that $phi(e_i^V)=f_i^V$ for $iin I_1$. Extend also this basis to a basis $f_i^V$, $iin J_1cup J_2$ of $V$ (but the $V$ that is the codomain of $phi$).



      Do the same business with $W$ and $psi$ to obtain bases $e_i^W$, $iin I_1cup I_2$ and $f_i^W$, $iin J_1cup J_2$. Assume that we also repeated the construction such that $psi(e_i^W)=f_i^W$, for $iin I_1$. Note that I used the same index sets, since the ranks are assumed equal. Therefore, the sets of indexes required have the same cardinality. So, we can just take them equal.



      Finally define $a(e_i^V)=e_i^W$ and $b(f_i^V)=f_i^W$ and extend them by linearity.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        1












        1








        1





        $begingroup$

        Then that condition is just equivalence of $phi$ and $psi$, which is equivalent to having the same rank.



        To show this, take a basis $e_i^V$, $iin I_1$ of the kernel of $phi$ and extend it to a basis $e_i^V$, $iin I_1cup I_2$ of $V$. Then, the elements of the basis that are not in the kernel are mapped to a basis $f_i^V$, $iin J_1$ of the range of $phi$. Let's assume that we index them such that $phi(e_i^V)=f_i^V$ for $iin I_1$. Extend also this basis to a basis $f_i^V$, $iin J_1cup J_2$ of $V$ (but the $V$ that is the codomain of $phi$).



        Do the same business with $W$ and $psi$ to obtain bases $e_i^W$, $iin I_1cup I_2$ and $f_i^W$, $iin J_1cup J_2$. Assume that we also repeated the construction such that $psi(e_i^W)=f_i^W$, for $iin I_1$. Note that I used the same index sets, since the ranks are assumed equal. Therefore, the sets of indexes required have the same cardinality. So, we can just take them equal.



        Finally define $a(e_i^V)=e_i^W$ and $b(f_i^V)=f_i^W$ and extend them by linearity.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        Then that condition is just equivalence of $phi$ and $psi$, which is equivalent to having the same rank.



        To show this, take a basis $e_i^V$, $iin I_1$ of the kernel of $phi$ and extend it to a basis $e_i^V$, $iin I_1cup I_2$ of $V$. Then, the elements of the basis that are not in the kernel are mapped to a basis $f_i^V$, $iin J_1$ of the range of $phi$. Let's assume that we index them such that $phi(e_i^V)=f_i^V$ for $iin I_1$. Extend also this basis to a basis $f_i^V$, $iin J_1cup J_2$ of $V$ (but the $V$ that is the codomain of $phi$).



        Do the same business with $W$ and $psi$ to obtain bases $e_i^W$, $iin I_1cup I_2$ and $f_i^W$, $iin J_1cup J_2$. Assume that we also repeated the construction such that $psi(e_i^W)=f_i^W$, for $iin I_1$. Note that I used the same index sets, since the ranks are assumed equal. Therefore, the sets of indexes required have the same cardinality. So, we can just take them equal.



        Finally define $a(e_i^V)=e_i^W$ and $b(f_i^V)=f_i^W$ and extend them by linearity.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Mar 16 at 19:12









        user647486user647486

        582110




        582110






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            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.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3150645%2fwhen-can-two-endomorphisms-on-different-vector-spaces-be-identified%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            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







            Popular posts from this blog

            Nidaros erkebispedøme

            Birsay

            Was Woodrow Wilson really a Liberal?Was World War I a war of liberals against authoritarians?Founding Fathers...