Lin. Algebra - Sum of Dim. of Three Subspaces

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around proving the formula for the dimension of the sum of three subspaces, U1, U2, and U3, in a finite-dimensional vector space. Participants express confidence in the validity of the formula, noting its similarity to the dimension formula for sets. There is a concern about the necessity of providing a counterexample if the formula is incorrect, but the consensus is that it holds true. One user mentions completing their proof but is unable to locate previous discussions on the topic. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the underlying principles of linear algebra in relation to subspaces.
steelphantom
Messages
158
Reaction score
0
Another linear algebra question! What a surprise! :rolleyes:

Homework Statement


If U1, U2, U3, are subspaces of a finite-dimensional vector space, then show

dim(U1 + U2 + U3) = dimU1 + dimU2 + dimU3 - dim(U1 \cap U2) - dim(U1 \cap U3) - dim(U2 \cap U3) + dim(U1 \cap U2 \cap U3)

or give a counterexample.

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution


I have the proof of the sum of the dimension of two subspaces in my book, so I would assume I would proceed in much the same way, but that "or give a counterexample" is making me just a little bit uneasy. I'm 90% sure that this is true, because basically the same formula holds for sets. Could anyone tell me if this is true before I proceed with my proof? It's going to be a long one if I use the same method the book did.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This has been asked more than once today, and I'll give you the same answer others have given. It is the same formula as for sets. And for the same reasons if you pick a compatible basis for the vector space. Proceed with your proof.
 
Dick said:
This has been asked more than once today, and I'll give you the same answer others have given. It is the same formula as for sets. And for the same reasons if you pick a compatible basis for the vector space. Proceed with your proof.

Thanks for the response. I finished my proof, but where was this question asked earlier today? I didn't see it in the Homework Help or Linear Algebra forums.
 
steelphantom said:
Thanks for the response. I finished my proof, but where was this question asked earlier today? I didn't see it in the Homework Help or Linear Algebra forums.

Hmmm. Now I can't find it. It may be under an obscure title. BTW, I didn't mean to say that you should have searched for other posts before asking. I was only saying my response wasn't original.
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
Replies
11
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
7K