Linear Independence and Intersections of Sets

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around proving that the intersection of two linearly independent sets of vectors, E' and E'', is also linearly independent. A contradiction approach is used, assuming that the intersection E' ∩ E'' is linearly dependent, which leads to the conclusion that E' must also be dependent, contradicting its independence. The proof suggests considering the case when the intersection is empty separately. Additionally, it is noted that leveraging existing theorems can simplify the proof, as any non-empty subset of a linearly independent set remains independent. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding linear independence in vector spaces.
TranscendArcu
Messages
277
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Let E' and E'' be linearly independent sets of vectors in V. Show that E' \cap E'' is linearly independent.

The Attempt at a Solution

To show a contradiction, let E' \cap E'' be linearly dependent. Also let A be all of the vectors in E' \cap E''. Thus, A \subseteq E' and A \subseteq E''. Because A is linearly dependent, there exists A_1,...,A_n distinct vectors in A such that

a_1 A_1 + ... + a_n A_n = \vec0, where a_1,...,a_n are not all zero. But if such a nontrivial linear combination of vectors in A exists, then E' must be linearly dependent since A \subseteq E'. But this is contrary to our definition that E' is linearly independent. This is similarly contradictory for E''. Thus, it is shown that E' \cap E'' cannot be linearly dependent and must rather be linearly independent.

First of all, I don't know if this proof is correct (although it seems conceivable to me). Also, I didn't know how to prove the problem statement directly, so I had to do it by contradiction. If anyone could give me a hint as to how to do this directly, I would be grateful.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your proof seems to do the job, though I recommend you consider the case when E'\cap E'' is empty separately first.

If you have some theorems at your disposal then you can shorten up your proof considerably by simply noting that a non-empty subset of a linearly independent set is itself linearly independent.
 
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 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K