Put . Each belongs to the dual space , so it is a linear functional. For real numbers and vectors , this gives
The linearity of gives linearity in the second argument as well:
Thus is a bilinear form.
Its right radical of a bilinear form is exactly , because
If is a nondegenerate bilinear form, this kernel is zero. Since is a finite-dimensional vector space and , the rank-nullity theorem makes surjective.
Conversely, if is surjective, the same dimension equality makes it injective, so the right radical is zero. If lies in the left radical, then for every , because every is some . A nonzero can be included in a basis and detected by its coordinate functional, so this forces . Both radicals vanish, proving
For the given nondegenerate bilinear form, define the linear map
By part (a), is a linear isomorphism. The paper's bilinear orthogonal complement uses in the first argument; with this convention,
Here is the annihilator of a vector subspace . Since is a linear isomorphism, its restriction gives a linear isomorphism .
For completeness, choose a basis of and extend it to a basis of . In its dual basis , a linear functional vanishes on exactly when its first coefficients are zero. Therefore
Consequently
The argument includes and , and requires no symmetry assumption on the bilinear form.
No. On the real vector space , use the symmetric bilinear form
Its matrix of a bilinear form is , whose determinant is , so it is a nondegenerate bilinear form. Let
A vector belongs to the bilinear orthogonal complement exactly when . Hence
In particular, the claimed direct sum fails. The isotropic vector has zero self-pairing, although it pairs nontrivially with other vectors of .
The dimension identity in part (i) counts both vector subspaces but does not force their intersection of vector subspaces to be zero. For a symmetric bilinear form, is the radical of a bilinear form restricted to . Thus the precise criterion is
Indeed, trivial intersection of vector subspaces and part (i) give a sum of vector subspaces of dimension . A positive-definite bilinear form would guarantee this for every ; symmetry alone does not.
Write
on , where is the dual space. The dual pairing is linear separately in the vector and the linear functional. For example, for real numbers ,
Thus is a bilinear form. It is also an alternating bilinear form, since
To prove that this is a nondegenerate bilinear form, suppose pairs to zero with every . Setting gives for every , hence . Setting gives for every . If , basis extension supplies a coordinate functional with , a contradiction. Thus . The left radical is zero, and the displayed change of sign implies the right radical is zero as well. Hence is a nondegenerate bilinear form, making a symplectic vector space.
For the required example take the coordinate subspace
Using the definition of the bilinear orthogonal complement in part (b),
Therefore
This is a Lagrangian subspace. Its dimension is , exactly half of , so part (b)(i) is satisfied.
There is no contradiction with part (b)(ii): that part asks whether a direct sum is guaranteed, and the answer is already no. Moreover, when , the present alternating bilinear form is not a symmetric bilinear form. Choose and with ; then
It therefore does not satisfy the symmetry hypothesis of part (b)(ii). If , then , and both and hold trivially.

Articles by others on the same topic (0)

There are currently no matching articles.