Prove that Wm is a subspace of R2?

  • Thread starter Thread starter krozer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Subspace
krozer
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
I need help with this problem that I don't know how to solve.

Homework Statement



For each positive integer m, it's defined a subset of R2 as Wm={(mx,x)|x in R}
(a) Prove that each Wm is a subspace of R2.
(b) ¿Is the union of all Wm a subspace of R2?. Prove it.

Homework Equations



None.

The Attempt at a Solution



Trying to prove (a)
To prove Wm is a subspace we know we have to show that
(1) 0 vector is in Wm
(2) Given u,v in Wm; then u+v is an element of Wm
(3) Given u in Wm, k in R, then k*u is an element of Wm

I don't know how to prove (2)
I have a problem proving (3), if we choose k in R, if k is negative, then km is negative and we'd have Wm=((km)x,x) with km negative, then ku for some u in Wm is not an element of Wm.

Trying to prove (b)
I have no idea at all.

Thanks for your time.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
To prove (2), you need to write out what u and v "look like" since they are elements of W_m. For (3), I think you're making a mistake in your multiplication. Normally the definition is
<br /> c(x,y) = (cx, cy) \; .<br />

For (b), try to think of what W_m represents geometrically. If you're having trouble with it, you can always try drawing an example for a specific value of m.
 
spamiam said:
To prove (2), you need to write out what u and v "look like" since they are elements of W_m. For (3), I think you're making a mistake in your multiplication. Normally the definition is
<br /> c(x,y) = (cx, cy) \; .<br />

For (b), try to think of what W_m represents geometrically. If you're having trouble with it, you can always try drawing an example for a specific value of m.


Thanks, proving (2) giving u is an element of Wm then u=(mx,x) x in R, now I know how to prove Wm is a subspace. Proving 3, you're right I forgot about the second coordinate.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top