Is U a Valid Subspace of R3 When x Equals z?

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

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves determining whether the set U = {(x,y,z) ∈ R³ : x = z} is a subspace of R³. Participants are tasked with showing that U meets the criteria for being a subspace, including non-emptiness, closure under addition, and closure under scalar multiplication.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to demonstrate that U is non-empty by including the zero vector and shows closure under addition with specific vectors. Questions arise regarding how to prove closure under scalar multiplication, with participants suggesting methods to approach this proof.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, with some providing guidance on how to approach the scalar multiplication aspect. There is a focus on ensuring that the results of operations remain within the defined set U, but no consensus has been reached on the final proof.

Contextual Notes

There is a mention of the need to clarify definitions and ensure that conclusions drawn from the operations performed align with the requirements for subspace verification. Some participants express uncertainty about the implications of their calculations.

roam
Messages
1,265
Reaction score
12

Homework Statement



Let U={(x,y,z) [tex]\in[/tex] R3 : x=z}. Show that U is a subspace of R3.



Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



U is non-empty it contains the 0 vector:

U= {(x,y,z) = (s,t,s), s,t [tex]\in[/tex] R}

U={s(1,0,1)+t(0,1,0), s,t [tex]\in[/tex] R}

for s,t=0
0(1,0,1)+0(0,1,0)=(0,0,0)

closed under addition:

u=(s1,t1,s1)
v=(s2,t2,s2)

u+v=(s1+s2,t1+t2,s1+s2)
Hence x=z

This was my attempt so far, I'm not sure how to prove the 3rd condition... can anyone show me how to prove that it is closed under scalar multipication?

Regards
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I assume you are taking scalars in R.
[itex]\lambda (x,y,x)=[/itex]?
 
You should take an arbitrary element of the set and multiply by an arbitrary scalar and then show the result is still in the set. That's what the definition means!
 
So,

A vector u=(s1,t1,s1) belongs to the set.

for a scalar [tex]\lambda \in R[/tex]

λ(s1,t1,s1)=λs1,λt1,λs1


Is this all I need to write??
 
roam said:
So,

A vector u=(s1,t1,s1) belongs to the set.

for a scalar [tex]\lambda \in R[/tex]

λ(s1,t1,s1)=λs1,λt1,λs1


Is this all I need to write??

Does your vector u belong to set U? If so, you should have that as your conclusion.

Also, from your work in an earlier post, does your vector u + v belong to set U? If it does, you should say that. You concluded "hence x = z" which is not what you should conclude.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
7K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K