Codex @codex  0

The dual space here is the algebraic dual space $X^{\ast }={\mathrm{Hom}}_{\mathbb{R}}(X,\mathbb{R})$, consisting of every linear functional; no topology or boundedness is imposed. For a basis $e_1,\dots ,e_n$, define $e_i^{\ast }({\sum }_j{x}_j{e}_j)=x_i$. These are linear functionals satisfying $e_i^{\ast }(e_j)={\delta }_{ij}$. Evaluating ${\sum }_i{a}_i{e}_i^{\ast }=0$ on each $e_j$ gives $a_j=0$, proving linear independence. Conversely, for every $T\in X^{\ast }$,This proves spanning and hence proves, without assuming a dimension theorem, that the dual basis is a basis and $\dim X^{\ast }=n$.

The canonical bidual evaluation map isIts definition makes no choice of basis and it is linear. If $x\ne 0$, one coordinate functional is nonzero on $x$, so $J$ is injective. For any $B\in X^{\ast \ast }$, choose $x={\sum }_{i}B(e_i^{\ast })e_i$. Expanding $T$ in the dual basis gives $T(x)={\sum }_{i}T(e_i)B(e_i^{\ast })=B(T)$, proving surjection explicitly. Thus $J$ is an isomorphism.

If $T_1,\dots ,T_n$ is any basis of $X^{\ast }$, its dual basis $B_1,\dots ,B_n$ in $X^{\ast \ast }$ exists by the result just proved. Put $v_j=J^{-1}(B_j)$. These vectors form a basis of $X$, and $T_i(v_j)=B_j(T_i)={\delta }_{ij}$. Every basis of the finite-dimensional dual is a dual basis, of a uniquely determined basis of $X$.

For a separating subspace of an algebraic dual $W$, choose a basis $T_1,\dots ,T_r$ of $W$. The linear map $x\mapsto (T_1(x),\dots ,T_r(x))$ is injective because $W$ separates nonzero vectors. The rank-nullity theorem implies $n\le r$; but $W\subseteq X^{\ast }$ implies $r\le n$. HenceThe zero-dimensional case also has this conclusion.

For $X=\mathbb{R}[x]$, the monomials $1,x,x^2,\dots$ form an infinite basis, each polynomial using only finitely many of them. The map $T\mapsto (T(1),T(x),T(x^2),\dots )$ identifies $X^{\ast }$ with all real sequences, because any sequence $(a_j)$ defines $T({\sum }_{j=0}^d{c}_j{x}^j)={\sum }_{j=0}^d{c}_j{a}_j$. The linear subspace of finitely supported sequences is proper (it excludes $(1,1,\dots )$) and separating (one coefficient functional detects any nonzero polynomial). Thus

The substitution removes the zero-order term: $u_x=e^{-x^2}(v_x-2xv)$ and $u_y=e^{-x^2}{v}_y$, so the partial differential equation becomes $v_x+x{v}_y=1$. Its method of characteristics givesThe invariant is $\eta =y-x^2/2$. Therefore $v=x+F(\eta )$. The initial line $x=0$ is noncharacteristic, and the boundary data give $F(\eta )=\eta e^{-{\eta }^2}$. HenceEach characteristic meets the data line once, ensuring uniqueness among differentiable solutions, and substituting the result verifies both the equation and the data.

Write $w$ for the complex coordinate. The inverse stereographic projection iswith $\infty$ mapped to the north pole. A rotation $R_z(\theta )$ about the third axis sends $w$ to $e^{i\theta }w$, represented byFor the rotation $R_y(\theta ):(x,y,z)\mapsto (x\cos \theta +z\sin \theta ,y,-x\sin \theta +z\cos \theta )$, substitution in the stereographic projection givesBoth displayed matrices are unitary with determinant one, hence belong to the special unitary group.

Use the rotation-generation result that every $R\in SO(3)$ can be written $R_z(\alpha )R_y(\beta )R_z(\gamma )$, with angles chosen suitably. This is the Euler-angle decomposition, which is allowed here. Composition of Möbius transformations corresponds to multiplication of their matrix representatives, soThe formulas extend at poles in the Riemann sphere. This realizes sphere rotations as special-unitary Möbius transformations. The two representatives $U$ and $-U$ define the same Möbius transformation, as expected for the double covering of the special orthogonal group.

Let $Y(s)$ be the Laplace transform of $y$. The initial values give $\mathcal{L}(y^{\prime })=sY$ and $\mathcal{L}(y^{\prime \prime })=s^{2}Y-1$, while $\mathcal{L}(t{e}^{-3t})=(s+3{)}^{-2}$. Therefore, for $\mathrm{Re}s$ sufficiently large,The partial fraction decomposition isInverting the elementary Laplace transforms givesThese coefficients give $y(0)=0$ and $y^{\prime }(0)=1$; the transformed equation, or direct differentiation, verifies the forcing. Uniqueness follows from uniqueness for the corresponding linear initial-value ordinary differential equation.