Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Comments on Is this topology basis dependent?

Parent

Is this topology basis dependent?

+4
−0

Consider a topological field $K$ and an algebraic(!) vector space $V$ over $K$, that is, $V$ has not (yet) a topology defined on it. I'm particularly interested in the case where $V$ has infinite dimension.

Now be $V^\ast$ the algebraic dual of $V$. Define a topology on $V^\ast$ through pointwise convergence, or equivalently, consider $V^\ast$ as subset under the subspace topology of $K^V$ under the product topology. This topology obviously makes $V^\ast$ a topological vector space over $K$.

Denote with $V^{[\ast]}$ the subspace of $V^\ast$ which consists of all $\phi\in V^\ast$ whose kernel has finite codimension, that is $V/\operatorname{ker}(\phi)$ has finite dimension. Obviously $V^{[\ast]}$ also is a topological vector space over $K$.

Now consider an arbitrary basis $\{b_i:i\in I\}$ of $V$ (where $I$ is an appropriate index set). Then one can define covectors $\{\omega_i:i\in I\}$ by $\omega_i(b_j)=\delta_{ij}$. Of course different bases ${b_i}$ lead to different covectors $\omega_i$.

However (if I made no error in my thoughts) in all cases $\{\omega_i:i\in I\}$ is a basis of $V^{[\ast]}$. Therefore the linear map $f:V\to V^{[\ast]}$ which maps $b_i$ to $\omega_i$ is a vector space isomorphism. Now we can define a set $U\subseteq V$ to be open if its image under $f$ is open. This topology then also makes $V$ a topological vector space over $K$.

My question now is:

Does this topology on $V$ depend on the choice of basis $\{b_i\}$?

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

0 comment threads

Post
+3
−0

First of all, the kernel of any $\phi\in V^\ast$ has codimension at most one; more precisely, $\ker\phi = V \Leftrightarrow \phi = 0$ and $\operatorname{codim}\ker\phi = 1$ if equalities are false. Hence $V^{[\ast]} = V^\ast$. Ī̲ suspect that by $V^{[\ast]}$ you really assume a basis-dependent thing, namely finite linear combinations of ${\omega_i}$ mentioned below. Such $\psi\in V^\ast$ that $\forall i\in I: \psi(b_i) = 1$ cannot be expressed in omegas unless $I$ is finite, but (looking at algebra alone) $\psi$ is not essentially different from any non-zero covector.

Secondly, your ${\omega_i}$ obviously are linearly independent. Although if $I$ is infinite, then ${\omega_i:i\in I}$ will not constitute a basis of $V^\ast$ (as explained above), your $f$ is anyway a monomorphism and you can pull the topology back to $V$ this way.

Thirdly, the topology is basis-dependent unless the dimension is finite. It follows from the fact that a hyperplane $\ker\phi$ (where $\phi\in V^\ast$) is closed* in $V$ if and only if $\phi$ is generated by ${\omega_i:i\in I}$; see the first paragraph again. Note that Ī̲ require {0} to be closed in $K$ to disqualify trivial topology.


* With my intuition it would be more convenient to check half-spaces: whether is $\phi > 0$ open and $\phi \le 0$ is closed. But $K$ isn’t an ordered field, alas.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

1 comment thread

General comments (1 comment)
General comments
celtschk‭ wrote over 3 years ago

Thank you for your answer (and sorry for my late reaction). Indeed I was after the space spanned by finite linear combinations of the $\omega_i$; I thought (incorrectly, as I now see) that I had found a base-independent characterisation, which would have meant that it is base independent. So IIUC, the topology is base dependent because the spanned subspace in $V^*$ is? So if I have two bases whose $\omega_i$ span the same subspace, the induced topology for those two bases is the same?