Do Orthogonal Subsets Spanning the Same Subspace Prove Equality?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter NATURE.M
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Subspaces
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the question of whether two orthogonal subsets \( S_{1} \) and \( S_{2} \) of \( \mathbb{R}^{n} \) that span the same subspace \( W \) can be shown to be equal by demonstrating mutual inclusion. Participants explore methods for proving the equality of spans of these subsets.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that showing \( S_{1} \subset S_{2} \) and \( S_{2} \subset S_{1} \) would suffice to prove \( S_{1} = S_{2} \) and thus that they span the same space.
  • Another participant counters that while this method works if the sets are equal, it is unlikely to be the case and proposes instead to show \( S_{1} \subset \text{span}(S_{2}) \), which implies \( \text{span}(S_{1}) \subset \text{span}(S_{2}) \).
  • A later reply acknowledges a correction in the notation used and reiterates the importance of showing the spans are equal.
  • Another participant points out that since the sets are orthogonal, knowing that one span is contained in the other is sufficient due to the dimension being equal to the number of elements in the sets.
  • One participant expresses understanding and appreciation for the clarification provided.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that showing mutual inclusion is not necessary if the spans are equal and that the orthogonality of the sets simplifies the proof. However, there is no consensus on the best method to demonstrate the equality of spans, with multiple approaches being discussed.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions about the properties of orthogonal sets and their spans are discussed, but the implications of these assumptions on the methods proposed remain unresolved.

NATURE.M
Messages
298
Reaction score
0
If I want to show two orthogonal subsets S[itex]_{1}[/itex] and S[itex]_{2}[/itex] of ℝ[itex]^{n}[/itex] both span the same subspace W of ℝ[itex]^{n}[/itex] does it suffice to show that
S[itex]_{1}[/itex][itex]\subset[/itex]S[itex]_{2}[/itex] and that S[itex]_{2}[/itex][itex]\subset[/itex]S[itex]_{1}[/itex], thus showing S[itex]_{1}[/itex] = S[itex]_{2}[/itex]
[itex]\Rightarrow[/itex] they span the same space.

If there's a better method, I'd like to know.
Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, that method would work if the two sets are equal but that will almost never be the case. Typically you would want to show that
[tex]S_1 \subset span(S_2)[/tex]
which immediately implies
[tex]span(S_1) \subset span(S_2)[/tex]
at which point since they both have the same size (if they don't then you didn't need to do any work) the two spans must be equal.
 
Office_Shredder said:
Yes, that method would work if the two sets are equal but that will almost never be the case. Typically you would want to show that
[tex]S_1 \subset span(S_2)[/tex]
which immediately implies
[tex]span(S_1) \subset span(S_2)[/tex]
at which point since they both have the same size (if they don't then you didn't need to do any work) the two spans must be equal.

After looking back at my post, I realize I should of wrote span(S[itex]_{1}[/itex]) [itex]\subset[/itex] span(S[itex]_{2}[/itex]) and vice versa. But anyways thanks.
 
OK then yeah you are doing more work than required. If they're orthogonal sets you know their spans have dimension equal to the number of elements. As soon as you have one span is contained in the other you are done, and you don't need to check the other direction.
 
okay that makes sense. thanks!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
958