DOCSLIB.ORG

Chapter 11 Duality and Polarity

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Chapter 11 Duality and Polarity Math 4520 Fall 2017 In previous sections we have seen the definition of an abstract projective plane, what it means for two planes to be equivalent, and at least two examples of seemingly different but equiv- alent projective planes, the extended Euclidean plane and the definition using homogeneous coordinates. Here we review some of these \models" for the projective plane and use those descriptions to define a \polarity", which is a kind of self-equivalence that interchanges points and lines. 11.1 Models of the projective plane Recall, for the definition of a projective plane, we did not require that incidence of a point and line necessarily be such that the point was an element of the line. If we want to insist, we could redefine all the lines so that each line is the collection of points that are incident to it, but in some models, that will come up shortly, it is convenient to allow ourselves the freedom of a more general incidence relation. Recall that our first model of the projective plane was the Extended Euclidean Plane. Once we created our ideal points and line at infinity, incidence was defined as \being a member of". In Chapter 9 we defined another model for \the" projective plane using homogeneous coordinates in some field. A projective point was defined as a line through the origin in the 3-dimensional vector space over the field. A projective line was defined as a plane in the vector space. Incidence was defined as set containment. Let us call this model the Homogeneous Model 1. We can alter this definition slightly and say that a projective point is the set of vectors on a line through the origin, except for the origin itself. We say that a projective line is a line through the origin with the origin removed. The line in the vector space corresponds to the [A; B; C] vector that makes up the coefficients of the equation that defines the plane in the Homogeneous Model 1. Thus incidence between a projective point and a .projective line is perpendicularity between the corresponding lines in the vector space. This definition has the advantage that points and lines are treated more equally, and the language of equivalence classes on the non-zero vectors in the 3-dimensional vector space can be used. We call this model the Homogeneous Model 2. 1 2 CHAPTER 11. DUALITY AND POLARITY MATH 4520 FALL 2017 In order to get a better understanding of more of the geometry than the incidence struc- ture, we can alter the above models even further in the case of real projective geometry. We can intersect the unit sphere in Euclidean 3-space with each of the classes in the Homoge- neous models 1 and 2. We say that two points p and q on the unit sphere in real 3-space are antipodal2 if q = −p. So two distinctCLASSICAL points GEOMETRIES on the unit sphere are antipodal if and only if they lie on a line through the origin. We say that a great circle is the intersection of a plane throughand only the if origin they lie with on a the line unit through sphere. the origin. We say that a great circle is the intersection Weof a now plane define through the the Sphere origin Model with the 1 forunit the sphere. real projective plane. Here a projective point We now define the Sphere Model 1 for the real projective plane. Here a projective point is ais pair a pair of antipodalof antipodal points points on on thethe realreal unit unit sphere. sphere. A Aprojective projective line lineis a great is a greatcircle circleon on the unitthe unit sphere. sphere. Incidence Incidence is is just just setset containment. Clearly Clearly this this model model is equivalent is equivalent to the to the HomogeneousHomogeneous2 ModelModel1 1 over over the the real realCLASSICAL field. field. SeeSeeGEOMETRIES FigureFigure 12.1.1 11.1 and only if they lie on a line through the origin. We say that a great circle is the intersection of a plane through the origin with the unit sphere. We now define the Sphere Model 1 for the real projective plane. Here a projective point is a pair of antipodal points on the real unit sphere. A projective line is a great circle on the unit sphere. Incidence is just set containment. Clearly this model is equivalent to the HomogeneousModel1 over the real field. SeeFigure 12.1.1 Figure 12.1.1 Figure 11.1 Finally v.'edefine the Sphere Model 2 for the real projective plane. Again a projective point is defined to be a pair of antipodalFigure points. 12.1.1 However, a projective line is defined to Finallybe a pair we of define Finallyantipodal v.'e thedefine points. Sphere the Sphere Incidence Model Model 2 2is for perpendicularity. the the real real projective projective plane. Again plane. a projective Again a projective point isWe defined summarizepoint to is bedefined this a pair into betheof a pairfollowing antipodal of antipodal table. points. points. However, However, a projective a projective line is defined line to is defined to be be a pair of antipodal points. Incidence is perpendicularity. a pair of antipodalWe summarize points. this Incidence in the following is perpendicularity. table. We summarize this in Figure 11.2. The Plane Points Lines Incidence The Plane Points Lines Incidence Extended Finite points Ordinary points Extended Finite points Ordinary points Euclidean EuclideanPlane Plane & ideal& ideal points points atat && the the line line at at "is a member"is a memberof" of" infinityinfinity infinityinfinity Homogeneous Lines through Planes through Set containment Homogeneous Lines through Planes through Set containment coordinates 1 O O coordinates 1 O O Homogeneous Lines through O Lines through O Perpendicularity coordinates 2 except O except 0 Homogeneous Lines through O Lines through O Perpendicularity coordinates 2 exceptAntipodal O Greatexcept circles on 0 Sphere model 1 points on the the sphere Set contajnment Antipodalsphere Great circles on Sphere model 1 pointsAntipodal on the Antipodalthe sphere Set contajnment Sphere model 2 spherepoints on the points on the Perpendicularity sphere sphere Antipodal Antipodal Sphere model 2 points on the points on the Perpendicularity sphere Figure 11.2 sphere It is a good exercise to convince yourself that all of these models for the real projective plane are equivalent. 11.2. POLARITIES DUALITY AND POLARITY 3 3 11.2 PolaritiesIt is a good exercise to convince yourself that all of these models for the real projective plane are equivalent. Recall that our axioms for a projective plane had a symmetry with respect points and lines. In fact, the12.2 word Polarities \point" and the word \line" can be interchanged and the axioms remain the same. AnyRecall statement that our axioms in projective for a projective geometry plane had can a symmetry reverse thewith wordsrespect points \line" and and \point" lines. In fact, the word "point" and the word "line" can be interchanged and the axioms and it shouldremain make the same. sense. Any But statement will one in projective statement geometry be true can whenreverse the the words other "line" is? Ifand the truth of one statement"point" follows and it should directly make from sense. the But original will one threestatement axioms, be true thewhen answer the other will is? beIf yes. But some of thethe statements truth of one statement that we follows proved, directly for examplefrom the original Pascal's three Theorem, axioms, the relied answer on will using more be yes. But some of the statements that we proved, for example Pascal's Theorem, relied than our threeon using axioms. more than So our we three look axioms. for a more So we explicitlook for a way more of explicit relating way of the relating points the and lines. points and lines. Figure 11.3 Recall from Chapter 11 that a collineation between projective planes was an incidence preserving function taking points to points and lines to lines. Here we define a similar notion but with points and lines being interchanged. Let 71"be any projective plane and let Recall from Chapter 11 that a0: : collineation {points of 7!"} -+ between {lines of 7!" projective} planes was an incidence preserving function taking points to points and lines to lines. Here we define a similar notion but with pointsbe a one-to-one and lines onto being function interchanged. suchthat for any Let pointπ bep of any 7!' and projective any line 1 plane of 7!', p andand let1 are incident if and only if o.(p) and 0.(1) are incident, where we use a to denote the inverse of a. Such a function is called a polarity. For a point p we call o.(p) the polar of p, and for a line I we call 0.(1) theα :polefpoints of I. Note of πthatg ! the f linesexistence of πofg such a polarity says that, in a certain sense, points and lines are interchangeable. We present a few examples. Let us take the Homogeneous Coordinates Model I. We can be a one-to-onetake the onto polar functionof a line through such thatthe origin for anyto be pointthe planep throughof π and the anyorigin line perpendicularl of π, p and l are incident ifto and that only line, ifandα (sop )the and pole αof( lplane) are is incident,the line through where thewe origin use perpendicularα to denote to it. the inverse of For the Sphere Model I, the polar of a pair of antipodal points is the great circle α.
Recommended publications
  • An Introduction to Topology the Classification Theorem for Surfaces by E

    An Introduction to Topology the Classification Theorem for Surfaces by E

    An Introduction to Topology An Introduction to Topology The Classification theorem for Surfaces By E. C. Zeeman Introduction. The classification theorem is a beautiful example of geometric topology. Although it was discovered in the last century*, yet it manages to convey the spirit of present day research. The proof that we give here is elementary, and its is hoped more intuitive than that found in most textbooks, but in none the less rigorous. It is designed for readers who have never done any topology before. It is the sort of mathematics that could be taught in schools both to foster geometric intuition, and to counteract the present day alarming tendency to drop geometry. It is profound, and yet preserves a sense of fun. In Appendix 1 we explain how a deeper result can be proved if one has available the more sophisticated tools of analytic topology and algebraic topology. Examples. Before starting the theorem let us look at a few examples of surfaces. In any branch of mathematics it is always a good thing to start with examples, because they are the source of our intuition. All the following pictures are of surfaces in 3-dimensions. In example 1 by the word “sphere” we mean just the surface of the sphere, and not the inside. In fact in all the examples we mean just the surface and not the solid inside. 1. Sphere. 2. Torus (or inner tube). 3. Knotted torus. 4. Sphere with knotted torus bored through it. * Zeeman wrote this article in the mid-twentieth century. 1 An Introduction to Topology 5.
  • Projective Geometry: a Short Introduction

    Projective Geometry: a Short Introduction

    Projective Geometry: A Short Introduction Lecture Notes Edmond Boyer Master MOSIG Introduction to Projective Geometry Contents 1 Introduction 2 1.1 Objective . .2 1.2 Historical Background . .3 1.3 Bibliography . .4 2 Projective Spaces 5 2.1 Definitions . .5 2.2 Properties . .8 2.3 The hyperplane at infinity . 12 3 The projective line 13 3.1 Introduction . 13 3.2 Projective transformation of P1 ................... 14 3.3 The cross-ratio . 14 4 The projective plane 17 4.1 Points and lines . 17 4.2 Line at infinity . 18 4.3 Homographies . 19 4.4 Conics . 20 4.5 Affine transformations . 22 4.6 Euclidean transformations . 22 4.7 Particular transformations . 24 4.8 Transformation hierarchy . 25 Grenoble Universities 1 Master MOSIG Introduction to Projective Geometry Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Objective The objective of this course is to give basic notions and intuitions on projective geometry. The interest of projective geometry arises in several visual comput- ing domains, in particular computer vision modelling and computer graphics. It provides a mathematical formalism to describe the geometry of cameras and the associated transformations, hence enabling the design of computational ap- proaches that manipulates 2D projections of 3D objects. In that respect, a fundamental aspect is the fact that objects at infinity can be represented and manipulated with projective geometry and this in contrast to the Euclidean geometry. This allows perspective deformations to be represented as projective transformations. Figure 1.1: Example of perspective deformation or 2D projective transforma- tion. Another argument is that Euclidean geometry is sometimes difficult to use in algorithms, with particular cases arising from non-generic situations (e.g.
  • Robot Vision: Projective Geometry

    Robot Vision: Projective Geometry

    Robot Vision: Projective Geometry Ass.Prof. Friedrich Fraundorfer SS 2018 1 Learning goals . Understand homogeneous coordinates . Understand points, line, plane parameters and interpret them geometrically . Understand point, line, plane interactions geometrically . Analytical calculations with lines, points and planes . Understand the difference between Euclidean and projective space . Understand the properties of parallel lines and planes in projective space . Understand the concept of the line and plane at infinity 2 Outline . 1D projective geometry . 2D projective geometry ▫ Homogeneous coordinates ▫ Points, Lines ▫ Duality . 3D projective geometry ▫ Points, Lines, Planes ▫ Duality ▫ Plane at infinity 3 Literature . Multiple View Geometry in Computer Vision. Richard Hartley and Andrew Zisserman. Cambridge University Press, March 2004. Mundy, J.L. and Zisserman, A., Geometric Invariance in Computer Vision, Appendix: Projective Geometry for Machine Vision, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1992 . Available online: www.cs.cmu.edu/~ph/869/papers/zisser-mundy.pdf 4 Motivation – Image formation [Source: Charles Gunn] 5 Motivation – Parallel lines [Source: Flickr] 6 Motivation – Epipolar constraint X world point epipolar plane x x’ x‘TEx=0 C T C’ R 7 Euclidean geometry vs. projective geometry Definitions: . Geometry is the teaching of points, lines, planes and their relationships and properties (angles) . Geometries are defined based on invariances (what is changing if you transform a configuration of points, lines etc.) . Geometric transformations
  • COMBINATORICS, Volume

    COMBINATORICS, Volume

    http://dx.doi.org/10.1090/pspum/019 PROCEEDINGS OF SYMPOSIA IN PURE MATHEMATICS Volume XIX COMBINATORICS AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Providence, Rhode Island 1971 Proceedings of the Symposium in Pure Mathematics of the American Mathematical Society Held at the University of California Los Angeles, California March 21-22, 1968 Prepared by the American Mathematical Society under National Science Foundation Grant GP-8436 Edited by Theodore S. Motzkin AMS 1970 Subject Classifications Primary 05Axx, 05Bxx, 05Cxx, 10-XX, 15-XX, 50-XX Secondary 04A20, 05A05, 05A17, 05A20, 05B05, 05B15, 05B20, 05B25, 05B30, 05C15, 05C99, 06A05, 10A45, 10C05, 14-XX, 20Bxx, 20Fxx, 50A20, 55C05, 55J05, 94A20 International Standard Book Number 0-8218-1419-2 Library of Congress Catalog Number 74-153879 Copyright © 1971 by the American Mathematical Society Printed in the United States of America All rights reserved except those granted to the United States Government May not be produced in any form without permission of the publishers Leo Moser (1921-1970) was active and productive in various aspects of combin• atorics and of its applications to number theory. He was in close contact with those with whom he had common interests: we will remember his sparkling wit, the universality of his anecdotes, and his stimulating presence. This volume, much of whose content he had enjoyed and appreciated, and which contains the re• construction of a contribution by him, is dedicated to his memory. CONTENTS Preface vii Modular Forms on Noncongruence Subgroups BY A. O. L. ATKIN AND H. P. F. SWINNERTON-DYER 1 Selfconjugate Tetrahedra with Respect to the Hermitian Variety xl+xl + *l + ;cg = 0 in PG(3, 22) and a Representation of PG(3, 3) BY R.
  • Collineations in Perspective

    Collineations in Perspective

    Collineations in Perspective Now that we have a decent grasp of one-dimensional projectivities, we move on to their two di- mensional analogs. Although they are more complicated, in a sense, they may be easier to grasp because of the many applications to perspective drawing. Speaking of, let's return to the triangle on the window and its shadow in its full form instead of only looking at one line. Perspective Collineation In one dimension, a perspectivity is a bijective mapping from a line to a line through a point. In two dimensions, a perspective collineation is a bijective mapping from a plane to a plane through a point. To illustrate, consider the triangle on the window plane and its shadow on the ground plane as in Figure 1. We can see that every point on the triangle on the window maps to exactly one point on the shadow, but the collineation is from the entire window plane to the entire ground plane. We understand the window plane to extend infinitely in all directions (even going through the ground), the ground also extends infinitely in all directions (we will assume that the earth is flat here), and we map every point on the window to a point on the ground. Looking at Figure 2, we see that the lamp analogy breaks down when we consider all lines through O. Although it makes sense for the base of the triangle on the window mapped to its shadow on 1 the ground (A to A0 and B to B0), what do we make of the mapping C to C0, or D to D0? C is on the window plane, underground, while C0 is on the ground.
  • Duality, Part 1: Dual Bases and Dual Maps Notation

    Duality, Part 1: Dual Bases and Dual Maps Notation

    Duality, part 1: Dual Bases and Dual Maps Notation F denotes either R or C. V and W denote vector spaces over F. Define ': R3 ! R by '(x; y; z) = 4x − 5y + 2z. Then ' is a linear functional on R3. n n Fix (b1;:::; bn) 2 C . Define ': C ! C by '(z1;:::; zn) = b1z1 + ··· + bnzn: Then ' is a linear functional on Cn. Define ': P(R) ! R by '(p) = 3p00(5) + 7p(4). Then ' is a linear functional on P(R). R 1 Define ': P(R) ! R by '(p) = 0 p(x) dx. Then ' is a linear functional on P(R). Examples: Linear Functionals Definition: linear functional A linear functional on V is a linear map from V to F. In other words, a linear functional is an element of L(V; F). n n Fix (b1;:::; bn) 2 C . Define ': C ! C by '(z1;:::; zn) = b1z1 + ··· + bnzn: Then ' is a linear functional on Cn. Define ': P(R) ! R by '(p) = 3p00(5) + 7p(4). Then ' is a linear functional on P(R). R 1 Define ': P(R) ! R by '(p) = 0 p(x) dx. Then ' is a linear functional on P(R). Linear Functionals Definition: linear functional A linear functional on V is a linear map from V to F. In other words, a linear functional is an element of L(V; F). Examples: Define ': R3 ! R by '(x; y; z) = 4x − 5y + 2z. Then ' is a linear functional on R3. Define ': P(R) ! R by '(p) = 3p00(5) + 7p(4). Then ' is a linear functional on P(R). R 1 Define ': P(R) ! R by '(p) = 0 p(x) dx.
  • Recognizing Surfaces

    Recognizing Surfaces

    RECOGNIZING SURFACES Ivo Nikolov and Alexandru I. Suciu Mathematics Department College of Arts and Sciences Northeastern University Abstract The subject of this poster is the interplay between the topology and the combinatorics of surfaces. The main problem of Topology is to classify spaces up to continuous deformations, known as homeomorphisms. Under certain conditions, topological invariants that capture qualitative and quantitative properties of spaces lead to the enumeration of homeomorphism types. Surfaces are some of the simplest, yet most interesting topological objects. The poster focuses on the main topological invariants of two-dimensional manifolds—orientability, number of boundary components, genus, and Euler characteristic—and how these invariants solve the classification problem for compact surfaces. The poster introduces a Java applet that was written in Fall, 1998 as a class project for a Topology I course. It implements an algorithm that determines the homeomorphism type of a closed surface from a combinatorial description as a polygon with edges identified in pairs. The input for the applet is a string of integers, encoding the edge identifications. The output of the applet consists of three topological invariants that completely classify the resulting surface. Topology of Surfaces Topology is the abstraction of certain geometrical ideas, such as continuity and closeness. Roughly speaking, topol- ogy is the exploration of manifolds, and of the properties that remain invariant under continuous, invertible transforma- tions, known as homeomorphisms. The basic problem is to classify manifolds according to homeomorphism type. In higher dimensions, this is an impossible task, but, in low di- mensions, it can be done. Surfaces are some of the simplest, yet most interesting topological objects.
  • The Real Projective Spaces in Homotopy Type Theory

    The Real Projective Spaces in Homotopy Type Theory

    The real projective spaces in homotopy type theory Ulrik Buchholtz Egbert Rijke Technische Universität Darmstadt Carnegie Mellon University Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Abstract—Homotopy type theory is a version of Martin- topology and homotopy theory developed in homotopy Löf type theory taking advantage of its homotopical models. type theory (homotopy groups, including the fundamen- In particular, we can use and construct objects of homotopy tal group of the circle, the Hopf fibration, the Freuden- theory and reason about them using higher inductive types. In this article, we construct the real projective spaces, key thal suspension theorem and the van Kampen theorem, players in homotopy theory, as certain higher inductive types for example). Here we give an elementary construction in homotopy type theory. The classical definition of RPn, in homotopy type theory of the real projective spaces as the quotient space identifying antipodal points of the RPn and we develop some of their basic properties. n-sphere, does not translate directly to homotopy type theory. R n In classical homotopy theory the real projective space Instead, we define P by induction on n simultaneously n with its tautological bundle of 2-element sets. As the base RP is either defined as the space of lines through the + case, we take RP−1 to be the empty type. In the inductive origin in Rn 1 or as the quotient by the antipodal action step, we take RPn+1 to be the mapping cone of the projection of the 2-element group on the sphere Sn [4].
  • Finite Projective Geometry 2Nd Year Group Project

    Finite Projective Geometry 2Nd Year Group Project

    Finite Projective Geometry 2nd year group project. B. Doyle, B. Voce, W.C Lim, C.H Lo Mathematics Department - Imperial College London Supervisor: Ambrus Pal´ June 7, 2015 Abstract The Fano plane has a strong claim on being the simplest symmetrical object with inbuilt mathematical structure in the universe. This is due to the fact that it is the smallest possible projective plane; a set of points with a subsets of lines satisfying just three axioms. We will begin by developing some theory direct from the axioms and uncovering some of the hidden (and not so hidden) symmetries of the Fano plane. Alternatively, some projective planes can be derived from vector space theory and we shall also explore this and the associated linear maps on these spaces. Finally, with the help of some theory of quadratic forms we will give a proof of the surprising Bruck-Ryser theorem, which shows that if a projective plane has order n congruent to 1 or 2 mod 4, then n is the sum of two squares. Thus we will have demonstrated fascinating links between pure mathematical disciplines by incorporating the use of linear algebra, group the- ory and number theory to explain the geometric world of projective planes. 1 Contents 1 Introduction 3 2 Basic Defintions and results 4 3 The Fano Plane 7 3.1 Isomorphism and Automorphism . 8 3.2 Ovals . 10 4 Projective Geometry with fields 12 4.1 Constructing Projective Planes from fields . 12 4.2 Order of Projective Planes over fields . 14 5 Bruck-Ryser 17 A Appendix - Rings and Fields 22 2 1 Introduction Projective planes are geometrical objects that consist of a set of elements called points and sub- sets of these elements called lines constructed following three basic axioms which give the re- sulting object a remarkable level of symmetry.
  • Cramer Benjamin PMET

    Cramer Benjamin PMET

    Just-in-Time-Teaching and other gadgets Richard Cramer-Benjamin Niagara University http://faculty.niagara.edu/richcb The Class MAT 443 – Euclidean Geometry 26 Students 12 Secondary Ed (9-12 or 5-12 Certification) 14 Elementary Ed (1-6, B-6, or 1-9 Certification) The Class Venema, G., Foundations of Geometry , Preliminaries/Discrete Geometry 2 weeks Axioms of Plane Geometry 3 weeks Neutral Geometry 3 weeks Euclidean Geometry 3 weeks Circles 1 week Transformational Geometry 2 weeks Other Sources Requiring Student Questions on the Text Bonnie Gold How I (Finally) Got My Calculus I Students to Read the Text Tommy Ratliff MAA Inovative Teaching Exchange JiTT Just-in-Time-Teaching Warm-Ups Physlets Puzzles On-line Homework Interactive Lessons JiTTDLWiki JiTTDLWiki Goals Teach Students to read a textbook Math classes have taught students not to read the text. Get students thinking about the material Identify potential difficulties Spend less time lecturing Example Questions For February 1 Subject line WarmUp 3 LastName Due 8:00 pm, Tuesday, January 31. Read Sections 5.1-5.4 Be sure to understand The different axiomatic systems (Hilbert's, Birkhoff's, SMSG, and UCSMP), undefined terms, Existence Postulate, plane, Incidence Postulate, lie on, parallel, the ruler postulate, between, segment, ray, length, congruent, Theorem 5.4.6*, Corrollary 5.4.7*, Euclidean Metric, Taxicab Metric, Coordinate functions on Euclidean and taxicab metrics, the rational plane. Questions Compare Hilbert's axioms with the UCSMP axioms in the appendix. What are some observations you can make? What is a coordinate function? What does it have to do with the ruler placement postulate? What does the rational plane model demonstrate? List 3 statements about the reading.
  • 7 Combinatorial Geometry

    7 Combinatorial Geometry

    7 Combinatorial Geometry Planes Incidence Structure: An incidence structure is a triple (V; B; ∼) so that V; B are disjoint sets and ∼ is a relation on V × B. We call elements of V points, elements of B blocks or lines and we associate each line with the set of points incident with it. So, if p 2 V and b 2 B satisfy p ∼ b we say that p is contained in b and write p 2 b and if b; b0 2 B we let b \ b0 = fp 2 P : p ∼ b; p ∼ b0g. Levi Graph: If (V; B; ∼) is an incidence structure, the associated Levi Graph is the bipartite graph with bipartition (V; B) and incidence given by ∼. Parallel: We say that the lines b; b0 are parallel, and write bjjb0 if b \ b0 = ;. Affine Plane: An affine plane is an incidence structure P = (V; B; ∼) which satisfies the following properties: (i) Any two distinct points are contained in exactly one line. (ii) If p 2 V and ` 2 B satisfy p 62 `, there is a unique line containing p and parallel to `. (iii) There exist three points not all contained in a common line. n Line: Let ~u;~v 2 F with ~v 6= 0 and let L~u;~v = f~u + t~v : t 2 Fg. Any set of the form L~u;~v is called a line in Fn. AG(2; F): We define AG(2; F) to be the incidence structure (V; B; ∼) where V = F2, B is the set of lines in F2 and if v 2 V and ` 2 B we define v ∼ ` if v 2 `.
  • Recent Developments in the Theory of Duality in Locally Convex Vector Spaces

    Recent Developments in the Theory of Duality in Locally Convex Vector Spaces

    [ VOLUME 6 I ISSUE 2 I APRIL– JUNE 2019] E ISSN 2348 –1269, PRINT ISSN 2349-5138 RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN THE THEORY OF DUALITY IN LOCALLY CONVEX VECTOR SPACES CHETNA KUMARI1 & RABISH KUMAR2* 1Research Scholar, University Department of Mathematics, B. R. A. Bihar University, Muzaffarpur 2*Research Scholar, University Department of Mathematics T. M. B. University, Bhagalpur Received: February 19, 2019 Accepted: April 01, 2019 ABSTRACT: : The present paper concerned with vector spaces over the real field: the passage to complex spaces offers no difficulty. We shall assume that the definition and properties of convex sets are known. A locally convex space is a topological vector space in which there is a fundamental system of neighborhoods of 0 which are convex; these neighborhoods can always be supposed to be symmetric and absorbing. Key Words: LOCALLY CONVEX SPACES We shall be exclusively concerned with vector spaces over the real field: the passage to complex spaces offers no difficulty. We shall assume that the definition and properties of convex sets are known. A convex set A in a vector space E is symmetric if —A=A; then 0ЄA if A is not empty. A convex set A is absorbing if for every X≠0 in E), there exists a number α≠0 such that λxЄA for |λ| ≤ α ; this implies that A generates E. A locally convex space is a topological vector space in which there is a fundamental system of neighborhoods of 0 which are convex; these neighborhoods can always be supposed to be symmetric and absorbing. Conversely, if any filter base is given on a vector space E, and consists of convex, symmetric, and absorbing sets, then it defines one and only one topology on E for which x+y and λx are continuous functions of both their arguments.