If we have some finite dimensional vector space V and linear transformation $F: V\to V$, and we know that F is injective, we immediately know that it is also bijective (same goes if we know that F is surjective).
I'm curious if a same rule applies if V is infinite dimensional vector space, and we know that F is injective/surjective, does it again immediately imply that F is also bijective (intuitively I think it does)?

share|cite|improve this question
    
Note that the same phenomenon occurs for functions of sets. – Mathmo123 3 hours ago
    
You might want to read about en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilbert%27s_paradox_of_the_Grand_Hotel – Drunix 1 hour ago

No, it does not. Consider the space $\ell_\infty$ of bounded sequences of real numbers. The map

$$S:\ell_\infty\to\ell_\infty:\langle x_0,x_1,x_2,\ldots\rangle\mapsto\langle 0,x_0,x_1,x_2,\ldots\rangle$$

that shifts each sequence one term to the right and adds a leading $0$ term is linear, injective, and clearly not surjective.

share|cite|improve this answer

No it does not, take for example the linear operator $D$, the derivative map from

$$C^\infty(\Bbb R)\to C^\infty(\Bbb R)$$

Then this map is clearly surjective by the FTC, but it is not injective as the derivative of any constant is $0$, so the null-space is non-trivial.

share|cite|improve this answer
    
As a nitpicky comment: this one doesn't exactly address the OP's question (well, not literally) because he asked about operators on the same space $V\to V$. – zipirovich 11 hours ago
    
@zipirovich fair enough, I'll change the codomain to match the domain, the rest of the result is still true without alteration. Thanks! – Adam Hughes 11 hours ago
    
In that case you'll have to make your space something like $C^{\infty}(\mathbb{R})$. Otherwise, it's not well-defined because over reals the derivative of a function is not necessarily differentiable again. – zipirovich 11 hours ago
    
@zipirovich ah yes, of course. Thanks again! – Adam Hughes 11 hours ago
    
You're welcome! :-) – zipirovich 11 hours ago

It does not.

Take the space of the real sequences, and the transformation

$T(u) = v$ where $v_n = u_{n+1}$

Then $T$ is surjective, but it's not injective.

share|cite|improve this answer
1  
Neat, together with Brian M. Scott's answer, we have $TS=\mathrm{id}$ but $ST\ne\mathrm{id}$. – Rahul 11 hours ago

Another counter-example, taken from algebra:

Let $K$ be a field, and consider the infinite dimensional $K$-vector space of polynomials in one indeterminate, $V=K[X]$. Multiplication by $X$ is a linear map, which is injective, but not surjective, since polynomials with a non-zero constant term are not attained.

share|cite|improve this answer

Here's another example of a surjective but not bijective map, also on $V=K[X]$, the vector space of polynomials over a field. Taking the formal derivative of a polynomial is a surjective linear map, but not a bijection since for example all constant polynomials are mapped to zero.

share|cite|improve this answer

Abstract example: take a basis $(b_i)_{i\in I}$ of the space. Let be $J\subset I$ with $|J| = |I|$ and $\sigma:I\longrightarrow J$ a bijection. The linear function defined by $$S(b_i) = b_{\sigma(i)},$$ is injective but not surjective while $$T(b_i) = b_{\sigma^{-1}(i)},i\in J,$$ $$T(b_i) = 0,i\in I\setminus J,$$ is surjective but not injective.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.