Help with Subspace: Find U of R^2 Closed Under Mult.

  • Thread starter Thread starter gravenewworld
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Subspace
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around finding a subset U of R^2 that is closed under scalar multiplication but not a subspace. Participants note that for U to be a subspace, it must include the zero vector and be closed under both scalar multiplication and vector addition. A suggested example is the set {(x,y) | xy=0}, which meets the criteria of being closed under multiplication while not being closed under addition. It is emphasized that subsets closed under scalar multiplication typically consist of lines through the origin, with only single lines being proper subsets that remain closed under addition. The conversation highlights the challenge of identifying such subsets while adhering to the mathematical properties required.
gravenewworld
Messages
1,128
Reaction score
27
I have been trying this problem for hours. I can't believe I can't get it. The question is "Find a subset U of R^2 such that U is closed under scalar multiplication but is not a subspace of R^2". I know that for U to be a subspace 0 must be an element of U and U has to be closed under scalar multiplication and vector addition. If U is closed under scalar multiplication then it must contain O vector right? So I have to think of a subset that is not closed under addition, but is closed under multiplication right? I can not think of any. Does anyone have an idea of one that satifies these properties?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Can you think of any subsets of R^2 that aren't closed under addition?

Study your examlpes of sets closed under multiplication. Can you identify any properties they have in common? Can you then try to come up with a new example without that property?
 
I can think of subsets of R^2 that aren't closed under addition, but the fact that the set is closed under scalar multiplicaton always messes things up for me. For example {(x1,x2): x1,x2 don't=0}. I know that this isn't closed under addition because (x1,x2)+(-x1,-x2)=0 vector. But this also isn't closed under scalar multiplicaiton because 0 is an element of the field R, and 0(x1,x2)=(0,0). I have thought of examples that aren't closed under addition, but they always violate the fact that they must be closed under multiplication.
 
Hrm. Well, is there a way to take an arbitrary set and turn it into a set that is closed under multiplication?
 
The set {(x,y)|xy=0}, satisfies the required properties. This is just the set you suggested plus the element (0,0).

In order to be closed under scalar multiplication, the set has to be a union of straight lines passing through (0,0). The only proper subsets of that kind that are closed under addition are the ones that consist of only one such line.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Fred. I knew it had to be something real simple that I was completely over looking.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top