Proving/Disproving: U and V Intersection in Rn

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jkm89
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Intersection
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
2 replies · 8K views
jkm89
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
So for my homework I have to prove (or disprove) this statement:

If U, V are two subspaces of Rn then U [tex]\cap[/tex] V [tex]\neq[/tex] [tex]\phi[/tex].

I just want to make sure; [tex]\phi[/tex] is the null set right? The set with nothing in it?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jkm89 said:
So for my homework I have to prove (or disprove) this statement:

If U, V are two subspaces of Rn then U [tex]\cap[/tex] V [tex]\neq[/tex] [tex]\phi[/tex].

I just want to make sure; [tex]\phi[/tex] is the null set right? The set with nothing in it?

Yes it's the empty set. However the symbol isn't the greek letter phi, but a symbol of its own based on the letter Ø (a letter in some alphabets).

Compare
[tex]\phi \quad \emptyset[/tex]
The first is phi and the second is "empty set".

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_set#Notation" for a bit more information.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
rasmhop said:
Compare
[tex]\phi \quad \emptyset[/tex]
The first is phi and the second is "empty set".

This is why I got used to writing [tex]\varphi[/tex] for phi. Although I never learned if there is a proper time to use [tex]\phi[/tex] and a proper time to use [tex]\varphi[/tex].