I can't find the connection between the Riesz Representation Theorem and inner product spaces and the adjoint transformation. what I understood that dual spaces enables us to have an transpose operator, but I can't understand why the the adjoint operator is "adjoint" and the connection with conjugate part in the inner product complex field. how can I also develop an intuition about how the adjoint operator behaves with inner product space over field C or R? can someone please help me connect the dots and develop an intuition about how the adjoint behaves? (in the context go finite spaces) thank you
2026-03-25 19:00:19.1774465219
adjoint transformation intuition
251 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in INNER-PRODUCTS
- Inner Product Same for all Inputs
- How does one define an inner product on the space $V=\mathbb{Q}_p^n$?
- Inner Product Uniqueness
- Is the natural norm on the exterior algebra submultiplicative?
- Norm_1 and dot product
- Is Hilbert space a Normed Space or a Inner Product Space? Or it have to be both at the same time?
- Orthonormal set and linear independence
- Inner product space and orthogonal complement
- Which Matrix is an Inner Product
- Proof Verification: $\left\|v-\frac{v}{\|v\|}\right\|= \min\{\|v-u\|:u\in S\}$
Related Questions in ADJOINT-OPERATORS
- How to prove that inequality for every $f\in C^\infty_0(\Bbb{R})$.
- Necessary condition for Hermician lin operators
- Is it true that a functor from a locally small category with a left adjoint is representable?
- Showing that these inner product induced norms are equivalent
- Do unitarily equivalent operators have the same spectrum?
- Showing that $\inf_{\|x\|=1}\langle Tx,x\rangle$ and $\sup_{\|x\|=1}\langle Tx,x\rangle$ are eigenvalues of $T$ (in particular when they are $0$)
- Let $T:\mathbb C^3\to\mathbb C^3$.Then, adjoint $T^*$ of $T$
- Role of the interval for defining inner product and boundary conditions in Sturm Liouville problems.
- Checking the well-definedness of an adjoint operator
- Either a self-adjoint operator has $n$ eigenvector or not at all
Related Questions in DUAL-SPACES
- Why is necessary ask $F$ to be infinite in order to obtain: $ f(v)=0$ for all $ f\in V^* \implies v=0 $
- How to conclude that $\ell_\infty$ is not separable from this exercise?
- Dual of linear map into a tensor product
- Basis of vector spaces in perfect pairing
- How to find a dual basis given a basis?
- $T \in \mathcal L(V,W)$ is surjective $\iff ($range $T)^0 = \{0\}$
- Restrict $g$ to a dense subclass in $\|f\|_p=\text{sup}\{|\int_Xfg|:\|g\|_{p'}\leq 1\}$
- $(\text{Im}(T^*))^0 = \ker(T)$?
- Unit ball in dual space is weak*separable
- Co- and contravariance of vectors vs co- and contravariant functors
Related Questions in RIESZ-REPRESENTATION-THEOREM
- Riez representation theorem does not hold on infinite-dimensional vector spaces example
- Equivalence of representations
- Prove the original Riesz Representation using the bilinear form
- Dual of $L^p$ space avoiding reflexivity and Radon-Nikodym Theorem
- Question in Proof of Riesz Representation Theorem
- Proving the Riesz Representation Theorem for $\ell^p$.
- Riesz isomorphism and dual map
- Examples of when the Riesz representation theorem doesn't hold
- Riesz representation theorem - yet another "counter example"
- Special Case of the Riesz Representation Theorem
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
First let's start with the transpose operator. The transpose can be defined without reference to an inner product and only requires the vector space structure. The way to think about the tranpose is that it turns a linear map $f$ from $V$ to $W$ into a linear map $f^T$ from $W^*$ to $V^*$, and it does this in the most "natural" way possible.
If words, if we are trying to define a map from $W^*$ to $V^*$ we start with a function $g \in W^*$ and we want to turn this into a function that acts on vectors in $V$ and returns a real number. Well we know that $g$ can act on vectors in $W$ and we know that using $f$ we can turn vectors in $V$ into vectors in $W$ and chaining these together gives us a way to let $g$ act on vectors in $V$!
In symbols, what we just did above is define $f^T(g)(v) = g(f(v))$. We first use $f$ to map $v$ from a vector in $V$ to a vector in $W$ and then we use our element $g \in W^*$ to map it to a real number.
Now the Hermitian adjoint operator is a way of turning a function $f: V \to W$ into a function $f^*: W \to V$. The best way of thinking about this operator is through the transpose. The transpose gives us an operator $f^T: W^* \to V^*$. To turn this into a map from $W$ to $V$, we need to fix isomorphisms between $W$ and $W^*$ and $V$ and $V^*$. To map a vector $w$ from $W$ to $V$, you use the isomorphism between $W$ and $W^*$ to map $w$ to $w' \in W^*$, then you use the tranpose to map it to a vector $v' \in V^*$ and then you use the isomorphism between $V$ and $V'$ to map it to a vector $v \in V$.
You could describe the above construction with the following diagram: $\require{AMScd}$ \begin{CD} W^* @>{f^T}>> V^*\\ @VV{\cong}V @VV{\cong}V\\ W @>{f^*}>> V \end{CD}
Now the connection with inner product spaces and the Riesz Representation Theorem is that an inner product on a vector space $V$ gives you a "natural" way to define an isomorphism between $V$ and $V^*$.
For every vector $v \in V$, we can define the map $\varphi_v: V \to K$ (where $K$ is the base field) by $\varphi_v(\cdot) = \langle \cdot,v \rangle$. By the linearity of the inner product, $\varphi_v$ is an element of the dual space $V^*$. In addition the map from $V$ to $V^*$ given by $v \to \varphi_v$ is (anti)-linear and by the non-degeneracy of the inner product, it is injective. The Riesz Representation Theorem says that this injection is also a surjection and therefore a bijection. This means that whenever we have an inner product we can define $\varphi_v$ for every $v \in V$ and the map sending $v$ to $\varphi_v$ is a bijection between $V$ and $V^*$.
Now putting these two concepts together (the tranpose and the connection between inner product spaces and dual spaces), we can define the transpose $f^T$ without the inner product structure as a map from $W^* \to V^*$. The inner product structure gives us isomorphisms between $V$ and $V^*$ and $W$ and $W^*$, and chaining these isomorphisms together with the tranpose we can get a Hermitian adjoint map $f^*$ which maps $W$ to $V$.
EDIT: Added connection with $\mathbb{C}$.
Whenever we start writing linear transformations as matrices we first have to fix a basis. This also gives an alternate way of defining an isomorphism between $V$ and $V^*$ (search for "dual basis") and it is a useful exercise to verify that these two isomorphisms between $V$ and $V^*$ agree if and only if the basis that you started with is orthonormal when the base field is $\mathbb{R}$. In this case, let $v_1,\ldots,v_n$ be an orthonormal basis for $V$ and let $v^1,\ldots,v^n$ be its dual basis. Similarly, let $w_1,\ldots,w_m$ be an orthonormal basis for $W$ and let $w^1,\ldots,w^n$ be its dual basis.
Now if we let the matrix representation of $f$ be
$$\begin{bmatrix} f_{11} & \ldots & f_{1n} \\ \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\ f_{m1} & \ldots & f_{mn} \end{bmatrix}$$
then we have $f(v_i) = \sum_j f_{ji} w_j$. Now if we consider the transpose we have
$$f^T(w^i)(v_k) = w^i(f(v_k)) = w^i\left( \sum_j f_{jk} w^j \right) = f_{ik} = \left( \sum_j f_{ij} v^j \right)(v_k)$$
so
$$f^T(w^i) = \sum_j f_{ij} v^j$$
so the matrix representation of $f^T$ is exactly the traditional transpose of the matrix representation of $f$.
Now let us consider the adjoint in the case of $K = \mathbb{C}$. In this case we have that the map from $v$ to $\varphi_v$ is anti-linear.
Let $w = \sum_i c_i w_i$. Then $\varphi_w = \sum_i \overline{c_i} w^i$. Now if we apply $f^T$ to this we get
$$f^T(\varphi_w) = f^T\left(\sum_i \overline{c_i} w^i\right) = \sum_j \left(\sum_i \overline{c_i}f_{ij}\right) v^j$$
Finally, when we apply the anti-linear isomorphism between $V$ and $V^*$ we get that
$$ f^*(w) = \left(\sum_i c_i\overline{f_{ij}}\right) v^j $$
so the matrix representation of $f^*$ is
$$\begin{bmatrix} \overline{f_{11}} & \ldots & \overline{f_{1m}} \\ \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\ \overline{f_{n1}} & \ldots & \overline{f_{nm}} \end{bmatrix}$$
which is the conjugate transpose. The basic intuition is that the isomorphism between $W$ and $W^*$ conjugates all of the coefficients of $w$, then this is fed through the transposed matrix $f^T$ and then all of the coefficients are conjugated once again which flips the coefficients of $w$ back and conjugates the coordinates of $f^T$.
EDIT 2: For completeness, I figured I would add why the adjoint as I defined it above is equivalent to the traditional definition of the adjoint as the unique operator $f^*$ such that for all $v,w$ we have
$$\langle f(v), w \rangle = \langle v, f^*(w) \rangle.$$
If you look at the commutative diagram above, we will start with an element $w \in W$ in the bottom left and trace it using the two paths to the top right. First, we can go right to $f^*(w) \in V$. Then we can use the isomorphism between $V$ and $V^*$ to go up to $\varphi_{f^*(w)}$.
Alternatively, we could first go up using the isomorphism between $W$ and $W^*$ to get to $\varphi_w$ and then move right to get to $f^T(\varphi_w)$ so we have that
$$ f^T(\varphi_w) = \varphi_{f^*(w)} $$
as elements of $V^*$. Now evaluating both sides on $v \in V$ gives
$$ \langle f(v), w \rangle = \varphi_w(f(v)) = f^T(\varphi_w)(v) = \varphi_{f^*(w)}(v) = \langle v, f^*(w) \rangle $$
as desired.