Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Let $V$ be a vector space. Let $A$ be a symmetric bounded multi-linear operator from $V \times V \rightarrow \Bbb{R}$. Suppose that $A(v,v) \neq 0$ for all $v \in V \setminus \{0\}$. This let us produce an inner-product $(\cdot,A \cdot)$ on $V$, and hence we can view $V$ as an inner-product space. Does it follow that the representation of $A$ as an linear transformation from $V$ to $V$ is onto?

share|improve this question
    
I don't think you really mean "a symmetric bounded linear operator from $V \times V \to \mathbb R$". An inner product on $V$ (a vector space over the reals) is a bilinear map from $V \times V$ to $\mathbb R$, not a linear one. A linear operator from $V \times V$ to $\mathbb R$ can't have the property $A(v,v) \ne 0$ for all $v \in V \backslash \{0\}$ unless $V$ is one-dimensional. –  Robert Israel Aug 30 '11 at 1:57
    
Robert: You're correct. I changed the statement of the question to follow this. –  Q-the-curvature Aug 30 '11 at 2:07
add comment

2 Answers

up vote 2 down vote accepted

If $V$ is a real Hilbert space, the bounded symmetric bilinear form $A$ does correspond to a bounded self-adjoint linear operator $T$ by $A(x,y) = <x, Ty>$, and your condition $A(v,v) \ne 0$ for $v \in V \backslash \{0\}$ says $T$ is injective. The range of $T$ is dense in $V$, but might not be closed, so it's not necessarily surjective. For example, the operator on $L^2[0,1]$ given by $Tf(x) = x f(x)$ is self-adjoint and injective but not surjective, e.g. it doesn't contain the constant function $1$. In fact, a self-adjoint operator is surjective if and only if its spectrum is bounded away from 0.

If $V$ is not a Hilbert space, all you get is a bounded operator from $V$ into its dual $V^*$.

share|improve this answer
add comment

I'll assume $V$ is finite-dimensional, as other wise I don't know what to make of the matrix for $A$. If a linear operator on a finite-dimensional vector space is not onto, then it has a non-trivial kernel. Doesn't this answer the question?

share|improve this answer
1  
Gerry: I meant for V to be infinite-dimensional. It's my mistake that I used the word "matrix" (this is a bad habit I have from working with compact operators on Hilbert spaces). –  Q-the-curvature Aug 30 '11 at 2:13
add comment

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.