Not (null T) is a subspace of V?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Ahmad Kishki
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Subspace
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around whether the set of vectors in a vector space V that a linear operator T does not map to the zero vector in another vector space W can be considered a subspace. Participants explore definitions and properties of subspaces, particularly focusing on closure under addition and scalar multiplication, as well as the inclusion of the additive identity.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes defining a set X as the collection of vectors in V that T does not map to the zero vector in W, questioning if this set can be a subspace.
  • Concerns are raised about whether X includes the additive identity and if it satisfies closure under scalar multiplication.
  • Another participant suggests that defining X such that its intersection with the null space of T is the zero vector could resolve the issues with the initial definition.
  • A later reply emphasizes the necessity of including the zero vector in any subspace, indicating that the original definition of X was flawed for excluding it.
  • It is noted that the set of vectors not in a subspace U generally does not form a subspace.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that the original definition of X is problematic due to the exclusion of the zero vector. However, there is no consensus on the implications of this for the broader question of whether X can be defined in a way that allows it to be a subspace.

Contextual Notes

Participants discuss the requirements for a set to be a subspace, including closure properties and the presence of the additive identity, without resolving the broader implications of these definitions.

Ahmad Kishki
Messages
158
Reaction score
13
If T is a linear operator L(V,W) then can we say that all the vectors (in the vector space V) that T does not map to the zero vector (in the vector space W) form a subspace call it X?

If a collection of vectors forms a subspace then they must satisfy closure under vector addition and scalar multiplication and there must also exist an additive identity. Taking this into consideration, it is clear that the elements of X are closed under addition (but multiplication not so sure), but its not clear (to me atleast) if W has an additive identity.

Why is X closed?
Suppose the set {x1,x2,...} is a basis for X then the action of T on any linear combination of this set will not lead to a zero vector in W (by linearity of T)

However, if we can never get a zero vector in W by T on X then since T is linear we cannot have the scalar zero multiplying the elements of X since T(0*x)=0 (required for linearity) where x ε X. Hence the additive identity doesn't belong to X?

If this doesn't work can someone suggest an alternative definition for X such that this would work?
My present definition is X = { v ε V : Tv =\=0} .

Thank you :) my motivation here is purely aesthetic i just wanted to write V=(null T)⊕ X

Note: I wasnt able to write "is an element of" so i represented it by epsilon ε
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If i define X such that the intersection of X with null T is the zero vector then this definition works this leads to V = null T ⊕ X. But i am still interested in what went wrong with the earlier definition?
 
I suppose you simply need to declare that the zero vector is in all three spaces. Adding the zero vector into X should take care of your requirements for X to be a subspace.
 
The problem with your earlier definition was just that...it didn't include the zero vector. Every vector space includes the additive identity, and any linear operator acting on the zero vector must return zero, so you can be sure zero was not in X.
 
Yeah, thank you :)
 
Often you see this referred to as the column space of the operator T.
 
In general, given subspace U of vector space, V, the set of all vectors that are NOT in U does NOT form a subspace.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K