I S is set of all vectors of form (x,y,z) such that x=y or x =z. Basis?

Hall
Messages
351
Reaction score
87
##S## is a set of all vectors of form ##(x,y,z)## such that ##x=y## or ##x=z##. Can ##S## have a basis?

S contains either ##(x,x,z)## type of elements or ##(x,y,x)## type of elements.

Case 1: ## (x,x,z)= x(1,1,0)+z(0,0,1)##
Hencr, the basis for case 1 is ##A = \{(1,1,0), (0,0,1)##\}

And similarly for case 2 the basis would be ##A'= \{ (1,0,1), (0,1,0)\} ##.

But how to find the basis for ##S##? A union of A and A' would give us a set whose linear span would go beyond S and hence cannot be a basis for S. Can S have a basis? How do we find it?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
:welcome:

Perhaps you should check whether ##S## is a vector (sub-) space?
 
PeroK said:
:welcome:

Perhaps you should check whether ##S## is a vector (sub-) space?
##(x,x,z)##, ##(x,y,x)## ##\in S##

## (2x, x+y, x+z)## is not in S. S is not a subspace.

Oh yes, thanks.
 
I think that's 95% of a proof, but if you want to be very technical, you should prove the thing you wrote down isn't actually of the form (x'x',z') or (x',y',x'). This is typically done by actually picking specific x,y,z and observing that it doesn't work.

Also, in case you didn't realize, you didn't actually pick generic elements of S, since you forced x to be the same in both of them. In some cases you could get unlucky and trick yourself into thinking it is a subspace doing this (obviously it works out ok here)
 
Office_Shredder said:
I think that's 95% of a proof, but if you want to be very technical, you should prove the thing you wrote down isn't actually of the form (x'x',z') or (x',y',x'). This is typically done by actually picking specific x,y,z and observing that it doesn't work.

Also, in case you didn't realize, you didn't actually pick generic elements of S, since you forced x to be the same in both of them. In some cases you could get unlucky and trick yourself into thinking it is a subspace doing this (obviously it works out ok here)
Well, the 2nd paragraph is really pedantic. Thanks.
 
Hall said:
Well, the 2nd paragraph is really pedantic.
On the contrary, I think @Office_Shredder makes a cogent point.
 
Thread 'Derivation of equations of stress tensor transformation'
Hello ! I derived equations of stress tensor 2D transformation. Some details: I have plane ABCD in two cases (see top on the pic) and I know tensor components for case 1 only. Only plane ABCD rotate in two cases (top of the picture) but not coordinate system. Coordinate system rotates only on the bottom of picture. I want to obtain expression that connects tensor for case 1 and tensor for case 2. My attempt: Are these equations correct? Is there more easier expression for stress tensor...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Back
Top