Is Answer to Subspace Question Acceptable?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jackdamack10
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Subspace
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around determining whether specific sets defined in \(\mathbb{R}^3\) are subspaces. The original poster presents a set defined by the equation \(x^2 + y^2 + z^2 = 0\) and questions the validity of their reasoning regarding its subspace status. Another participant introduces a different set defined by the condition \(xy = 0\) and explores the implications of this condition on subspace properties.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to verify if their conclusion about the first set being a subspace is complete, expressing uncertainty about assuming \(x, y, z\) are zero. Another participant clarifies that the only element in the first set is \((0,0,0)\) and suggests a more definitive approach to proving subspace properties. The second set raises questions about the necessity of assuming specific values for \(x, y, z\) when checking subspace conditions, with one participant emphasizing the importance of maintaining generality in the proof.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, providing insights and alternative perspectives on how to approach the verification of subspace conditions. There is a clear exchange of ideas regarding the assumptions that can or cannot be made, particularly in relation to the second set defined by \(xy = 0\). No explicit consensus has been reached, but productive dialogue is ongoing.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the constraints of the definitions of subspaces and the implications of specific conditions on the elements of the sets in question. The original poster's uncertainty about assumptions reflects common challenges in understanding subspace criteria.

jackdamack10
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
I just wanted to know if my answer is acceptable.

Q: S={(x,y,z) E [itex]\mathbb{R}^{3}[/itex] l x^2 + y^2 +z ^2 =0}
Is it a subspace of [itex]\mathbb{R}^{3}[/itex]?


My answer:

It is a subspace if x=0, y =0, z= 0

Let u=(0,0,0) u2=(0,0,0) and k be a scalar

u + u2 = (0,0,0) Closed under addition

ku = k(0,0,0) = (0,0,0) Closed under scalar multiplication



Is my answer complete? I'm not sure if I'm allowed to assume that the values of x,y,z are 0.

Thank you in advance
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
jackdamack10 said:
Is my answer complete? I'm not sure if I'm allowed to assume that the values of x,y,z are 0.

Actually, S={(x,y,z) E [itex]\mathbb{R}^{3}[/itex] l x^2 + y^2 +z ^2 =0} = {(0,0,0)}

I.e. (0,0,0) is the only element in that set. It is made clear if you recall that x²+y²+z²=R² describe a sphere of radius R. Here R=0. The only point "on" a sphere of radius 0 is (0,0,0).

So, with this in mind, instead of the tentative "It is a subspace if x=y=z=0", start the proof with: "The only element of S is (0,0,0)", and then go on to show that the 3 conditions for S to be a subspace of R^3 are satisfied (like you did).
 
Last edited:
Ok thanks.

What if I have a multiplication:

S={(x,y,z) E R^3 l xy =0}.
To prove that this is a subspace (or not a subspace), the only way I know to do so is by assuming a value for x, y and z before checking if it's closed under scalar mutiplication adn addition. Is there another way?
 
You can use [tex]a=(a_1,a_2,a_3), b=(b_1,b_2,b_3)[/tex] and since either x or y must be 0 to satisfy your condition of xy=0, you can have the condition that either [tex]a_1[/tex] or [tex]a_2[/tex] must be zero, and similarly for [tex]b_1[/tex] and [tex]b_2[/tex]. Then show that a and b are closed under scalar addition and multiplication, and you have proofed it for all of the values in the subspace
 
jackdamack10 said:
Ok thanks.

What if I have a multiplication:

S={(x,y,z) E R^3 l xy =0}.
To prove that this is a subspace (or not a subspace), the only way I know to do so is by assuming a value for x, y and z before checking if it's closed under scalar mutiplication adn addition. Is there another way?

You must never assume a particular value of (x,y,z). You must always work your ways through the 3 conditions while assuming the most general form possible for (x,y,z).

First condition: Is (0,0,0) in S? Consider (x=0,y=0,z=0). Then xy=0, so (0,0,0) is in S. *check*

Second condition: Consider two vectors [itex]\vec{u}_1 = (x_1,y_1,z_1)[/itex] and [itex]\vec{u}_2 = (x_2,y_2,z_2)[/itex] in S. Because they are in S, they have the property that [itex]x_1 y_1 = 0[/itex] and [itex]x_2 y_2 = 0[/itex]. According to the definition of addition in [itex]\mathbb{R}^3[/itex], we have [itex]\vec{u}_1+\vec{u}_2 = (x_1+x_2,y_1+y_2,z_1+z_2)[/itex]. Now the condition: Does [itex](x_1+x_2)(y_1+y_2)=0[/itex]?. Let's see: In view of the "axiom of distributivity" in [itex]\mathbb{R}[/itex], [itex](x_1+x_2)(y_1+y_2)=x_1y_1+x_1y_2+x_2y_1+x_2y_2[/itex]. We know by hypothesis that [itex]x_1y_1 = x_2y_2=0[/itex]. But what about the other two terms? It could be that [itex]x_1\neq 0, \ y_1 = 0, \ x_2 = 0, \ y_2 \neq 0[/itex]. In this case, [itex]x_1y_1 = 0[/itex] and [itex]x_2y_2 = 0[/itex] are indeed satisfied but [itex]x_1y_2 \neq 0[/itex]. Conclusion: [itex]\vec{u}_1+\vec{u}_2 \notin S \ \forall \vec{u}, \ \vec{u}_2 \ \Rightarrow[/itex] S is not a subspace of [itex]\mathbb{R}^3[/itex] because condition 2 (closed under addition) is not met.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
64
Views
7K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
6K