MHB Is V a Subspace of P2?

  • Thread starter Thread starter rayne1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Subspace
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on whether the set V, defined as V = {({x}^{2}-1)p(x) | p(x) ∈ P2}, is a subspace of P2. While the initial argument shows that V meets the criteria for being a subspace, it is clarified that V cannot be a subspace of P2 because it can generate polynomials of degree higher than 2, such as x^4 - x^2. However, V can still be considered a subspace of larger polynomial spaces like R[x] or F[x]. The importance of finding a basis for V is emphasized, noting that every vector space has a basis and that V has a dimension of at most 5. Ultimately, the discussion highlights the distinction between being a subspace of a specific vector space and being a vector space in its own right.
rayne1
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
$$V = \{({x}^{2}-1)p(x) | p(x) \in {P}_{2}\}$$ show that V is a subspace of ${P}_{2}$I tried:
$({x}^{2}-1)(0) = 0$ so 0 is in ${P}_{2}$ (axiom 1 is satisfied). If p(x) and q(x) are in ${P}_{2}$, then $({x}^{2}-1)p(x) + ({x}^{2}-1)q(x) = ({x}^{2}-1)(p(x)+q(x))$ and since $p(x)+q(x) \in {P}_{2}$, axiom 2 is satisfied. Finally, if $p(x) \in {P}_{2}$ then $ap(x)$ (a is a scalar) is also in ${P}_{2}$. Since all three axioms are met, V is a subspace of ${P}_{2}.$

Is what I did correct?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Well you showed it is a subspace of *something* but it's *not* a subspace of $P_2$, since we have:

$x^2 \in P_2$, but certainly $x^4 - x^2 = (x^2 - 1)x^2 \not\in P_2$, since it has degree $4$.
 
Deveno said:
Well you showed it is a subspace of *something* but it's *not* a subspace of $P_2$, since we have:

$x^2 \in P_2$, but certainly $x^4 - x^2 = (x^2 - 1)x^2 \not\in P_2$, since it has degree $4$.

Ok, then is it still possible to find a basis and dimension of V if it is not a subspace of ${P}_{2}$?
 
Sure. If your underlying field is $\Bbb R$, then $V$ would be a subspace of $\Bbb R[x]$. Otherwise, if its some *other* field $F$, then $V$ is a subspace of $F[x]$.

But a set need not be a subspace of some *other* vector space in order to be a vector space-it's just that we have fewer axioms to check if we're checking for a subspace (only 3 conditions), instead of the 8,9 or 10 axioms you often see listed in textbooks.

EVERY VECTOR SPACE HAS A BASIS.

I cannot stress enough the importance of this. The proof involves the axiom of choice for "arbitrary" vector spaces, but for finite-dimensional spaces, it's practically "true by definition" (since finite-dimensional *means* we have a finite basis).

Of course, $\Bbb R[x]$ (or $F[x]$ for that matter) is not finite-dimensional. But the subspace of polynomials of degree at most $n$ (for any positive integer $n$) *is* finite-dimensional, with dimension $n+1$ (so $P_2$ has dimension 3, one possible basis is $\{1,x,x^2\}$).

In your case, "your" $V$ has dimension at most $5$ (it is a subspace of $P_4$). If $\{x^2 - 1, x^3 - x,x^4 - x^2\}$ are linearly independent over your field, then $V$ has dimension at least $3$ (can you see this?).

So you have two cases (perhaps) to rule out (if you prove my statement above)-can you do this?
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

Replies
48
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K