Formulation of a proof of subspaces

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the proof that a set defined as \( y + W \) is a subspace of a vector space \( V \) if and only if \( y \) is an element of the subspace \( W \). Participants are exploring the implications of this definition and the conditions under which the set retains the properties of a subspace.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the proof structure, considering both directions of the implication. Some express uncertainty about how to demonstrate that \( y + W \) is a subspace when \( y \notin W \), contemplating proof by contradiction. Others suggest examining the consequences of \( 0 \in y + W \) and how it relates to \( y \) being in \( W \).

Discussion Status

There is active engagement with various lines of reasoning. Some participants have provided insights into the implications of the definitions, while others are questioning the stability of the condition of going through the origin in relation to translations of subspaces. The discussion is ongoing, with no explicit consensus reached yet.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the delicate nature of the conditions involved, particularly regarding the translation of subspaces and the implications of \( y \) being included in \( W \). There is also mention of the broader context of cosets and their properties, which adds another layer to the discussion.

GlassBones
Messages
16
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Let W be a subspace of a vector space V, let y be in V and define the set y + W = \{x \in V | x = y +w, \text{for some } w \in W\} Show that y + W is a subspace of V iff y \in W.

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution


Let W be a subspace of a vector space V, let y be in V and define the set y + W = \{x \in V | x = y +w,\text{for some } w \in W\}.
proof(←)
if y \in W then any vector in x \in y + W will satisfy x=y+w such that y,w \in W. Since W is a subspace and is closed under addition, all the vectors in y+W must also be in W, i.e. y + W = W.

proof(→)
...I'm stuck here. I'm thinking to do proof by contradiction? y + W is a subspace and y \not\in W. I'm thinking to find a property it violates? But I don't know how to do this. Any hints on how I should proceed?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
GlassBones said:

Homework Statement


Let W be a subspace of a vector space V, let y be in V and define the set y + W = \{x \in V | x = y +w, \text{for some } w \in W\} Show that y + W is a subspace of V iff y \in W.

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution


Let W be a subspace of a vector space V, let y be in V and define the set y + W = \{x \in V | x = y +w,\text{for some } w \in W\}.
proof(←)
if y \in W then any vector in x \in y + W will satisfy x=y+w such that y,w \in W. Since W is a subspace and is closed under addition, all the vectors in y+W must also be in W, i.e. y + W = W.

proof(→)
...I'm stuck here. I'm thinking to do proof by contradiction? y + W is a subspace and y \not\in W. I'm thinking to find a property it violates? But I don't know how to do this. Any hints on how I should proceed?
If ##y\notin W##, how would you construct ##0 \in y+W\,?##
 
I can make 0 by making y + w to both be 0.
Since w = 0 and w is in W, y cannot be 0. So I cannot construct 0 without y in W.

I can also make zero by using the additive inverse of y to be -w. But that would mean y should be in W.

Is this the correct reasoning?
 
GlassBones said:

Homework Statement


Let W be a subspace of a vector space V, let y be in V and define the set y + W = \{x \in V | x = y +w, \text{for some } w \in W\} Show that y + W is a subspace of V iff y \in W.

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution


Let W be a subspace of a vector space V, let y be in V and define the set y + W = \{x \in V | x = y +w,\text{for some } w \in W\}.
proof(←)
if y \in W then any vector in x \in y + W will satisfy x=y+w such that y,w \in W. Since W is a subspace and is closed under addition, all the vectors in y+W must also be in W, i.e. y + W = W.

proof(→)
...I'm stuck here. I'm thinking to do proof by contradiction? y + W is a subspace and y \not\in W. I'm thinking to find a property it violates? But I don't know how to do this. Any hints on how I should proceed?

Similar to what Fresh wrote: you are translating a subspace by y . A subspace goes through the origin; if you shift it /translate it by y, you are adding y to each vector.
 
Yes. Maybe a bit complicated, but yes. The last part is relevant: If ##0\in y+W## then ##-y\in W## and all multiples as well, so ##(-1)\cdot (-y)=y \in W##, which is your contradiction. You don't need cases here.

But you can also skip the contradiction part, as you practically have concluded:
##y+W## subspace ##\Longrightarrow 0\in y+W \Longrightarrow -y \in W \Longrightarrow y\in W##
which had to be shown. The contradiction construction is a bit artificial.
 
I don't know if this is overkill, but the condition of going through the origin is "unstable", meaning it is delicate and broken with minor changes, such as, here, translation.But this is motivation and not a proof, obviously.
 
WWGD said:
the condition of going through the origin is "unstable",
Did I hear Zariski here? :biggrin:

The interesting part - which wasn't asked for - would have been to prove that ##\{\,y+W\,|\,y\in V\,\}## itself build a vector space.
 
fresh_42 said:
Did I hear Zariski here? :biggrin:

The interesting part - which wasn't asked for - would have been to prove that ##\{\,y+W\,|\,y\in V\,\}## itself build a vector space.

A spanning set, but definitely not eine minimalkeit
 
WWGD said:
Similar to what Fresh wrote: you are translating a subspace by y . A subspace goes through the origin; if you shift it /translate it by y, you are adding y to each vector.
Huh, didn't see it like that. Makes sense

fresh_42 said:
Yes. Maybe a bit complicated, but yes. The last part is relevant: If ##0\in y+W## then ##-y\in W## and all multiples as well, so ##(-1)\cdot (-y)=y \in W##, which is your contradiction. You don't need cases here.

But you can also skip the contradiction part, as you practically have concluded:
##y+W## subspace ##\Longrightarrow 0\in y+W \Longrightarrow -y \in W \Longrightarrow y\in W##
which had to be shown. The contradiction construction is a bit artificial.
It seems clear now thanks!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: WWGD
  • #10
WWGD said:
A spanning set, but definitely not eine minimalkeit
So? I was surprised that it didn't come. The author introduces cosets and then asked why a coset (other than ##W##) isn't a subspace? A bit lame, don't you think so?
 
  • #11
fresh_42 said:
So? I was surprised that it didn't come. The author introduces cosets and then asked why a coset (other than ##W##) isn't a subspace? A bit lame, don't you think so?
Ok, good point, did not think of that.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K