How Do You Find an Orthonormal Basis for a Subspace With a Sum Condition?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves finding an orthonormal basis for a subspace of R^3 defined by the condition that the components of vectors (a, b, c) satisfy a + b + c = 0.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the use of the Gram-Schmidt process and the selection of vectors that satisfy the given condition. There are questions about the number of vectors needed and the criteria for forming a basis.

Discussion Status

Participants are exploring various vector choices and their implications for forming a basis. Some have suggested specific vectors, while others are clarifying the dimensionality of the subspace and the requirements for linear independence.

Contextual Notes

There is confusion regarding the dimensionality of the subspace, with some participants initially suggesting the need for three vectors, while others clarify that the subspace is two-dimensional. The discussion also touches on the definitions of basis and orthonormality.

DWill
Messages
68
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Find an orthonormal basis for the subspace of R^3 consisting of all vectors (a, b, c) such that a + b + c = 0.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


I know how to find an orthonormal basis just for R^3 by taking the standard basis vectors (1, 0, 0), (0, 1, 0), and (0, 0, 1) and applying the Gram-Schmidt process to make them orthonormal. The condition that a + b + c must equal 0 is throwing me off, however. Can anyone give me any suggestions for how to approach problems like these? thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you know Gram-Schmidt, that's the hard part. What's so hard about about finding two vectors (a,b,c) such that a+b+c=0 to do Gram-Schmidt with? (1,-1,0) sounds like a good start. Give me another one.
 
I think I need 3 vectors, right? such that a + b + c = 0. Can I start with any vector? Or is there a reason why (1, -1, 0) is a good choice? If it can be any 3 vectors that add to 0 it should be simpler, but then I can't be sure they are a basis?
 
Why do you need 3 vectors? That's a subspace of R^3. It looks to me like it's two dimensional.
 
Ohh.. sorry I was being confused, I thought a, b, and c referred to vectors and not the components.

So I can choose (1, -1, 0) like you said and also (1, 0, -1)? I would still have to check if the 2 vectors I choose are actually a basis (span R^3 and are linearly independent) right?
 
Sure, exactly. That's a good choice. There aren't too many dumb choices. (1,-1,0) and (-1,1,0) would have been a dumb choice because they're linearly dependent. But you didn't make the dumb choice. Now do Gram-Schmidt.
 
I know how to find an orthonormal basis just for R^3 by taking the standard basis vectors (1, 0, 0), (0, 1, 0), and (0, 0, 1) and applying the Gram-Schmidt process to make them orthonormal.
If you apply Gram-Schmidt to these vectors, you'll just get the same ones. They are already orthogonal and have length 1.
 
DWill said:
Ohh.. sorry I was being confused, I thought a, b, and c referred to vectors and not the components.

So I can choose (1, -1, 0) like you said and also (1, 0, -1)? I would still have to check if the 2 vectors I choose are actually a basis (span R^3 and are linearly independent) right?

I'm not sure it's clear to you where Dick got the vectors he did. Start with your equation:
a + b + c = 0

If you solve for a, you get
Code:
a = -b - c, where b and c are arbitrary
b =  b
c =      c

That last two equations are obviously true.
To make things even more explicit,
Code:
a = -1b - 1c
b =  1b + 0c
c =  0b  +1 c

or,
[tex] \left[<br /> \begin{array}{ c }<br /> a \\<br /> b \\<br /> c<br /> \end{array} \right] = b\left[<br /> \begin{array}{ c }<br /> -1 \\<br /> 1 \\<br /> 0<br /> \end{array} \right] + c\left[<br /> \begin{array}{ c }<br /> -1 \\<br /> 0 \\<br /> 1<br /> \end{array} \right][/tex]
Voila, there's your basis.
 
DWill said:
Ohh.. sorry I was being confused, I thought a, b, and c referred to vectors and not the components.

So I can choose (1, -1, 0) like you said and also (1, 0, -1)? I would still have to check if the 2 vectors I choose are actually a basis (span R^3 and are linearly independent) right?

You need to review basic definitions. Those two vectors CAN'T be a basis for R^3 and can't span R^3 because that requires THREE vectors. You must have misread the original problem. As Dick said, the set of all (a, b, c) such that a+ b+ c= 0 is a two dimensional subspace of R^3. NO set of such vectors can be a basis for R^3. (1, -1, 0) and (1, 0, -1) form a basis for that two dimensional subspace.
 
  • #10
I'm currently doing the same problem so I figured I'd revive this old thread.

Once I have my two vectors,
u1=<-1,1,0> and u2=<-1,0,1>

I then go through the Gram-Schmidt process to find the normalized basis?
 
  • #11
If you already have a basis, you don't need Gram-Schmidt to find a normalized basis.

Do you know what the term "normalized" means?
 
  • #12
Mark44 said:
If you already have a basis, you don't need Gram-Schmidt to find a normalized basis.

Do you know what the term "normalized" means?

Sorry, I meant a orthonormal basis.
 
  • #13
OK, in that case you need to use G-S.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K