Undergrad Smallest subspace if a plane and a line are passing through the origin

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around determining the smallest vector space that includes both a plane (P) and a line (L) through the origin. If the line lies within the plane, the smallest subspace is the plane itself. If the line does not lie in the plane, the smallest subspace is the span of both the plane and the line, which is a three-dimensional space. Participants clarify that the focus should be on the span of P and L rather than their intersection. Understanding the concept of spanning is crucial for solving this problem correctly.
sindhuja
Messages
3
Reaction score
2
Hi all, I am a beginner in Linear Algebra. I am solving problems on vector spaces and subspaces from the book Introduction to Linear Algebra by Gilbert Strang. I have come across the following question:

Suppose P is a plane through (0,0,0) and L is a line through (0,0,0). The smallest vector space containing both P and L is either ______ or ______.

My understanding: If L lies on P, then the smallest subspace is L. If L does not lie on P, then the smallest subspace is the zero vector (0,0,0). I am aware I am missing something here. Could someone please clarify what I am missing? Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
sindhuja said:
Hi all, I am a beginner in Linear Algebra. I am solving problems on vector spaces and subspaces from the book Introduction to Linear Algebra by Gilbert Strang. I have come across the following question:

Suppose P is a plane through (0,0,0) and L is a line through (0,0,0). The smallest vector space containing both P and L is either ______ or ______.

My understanding: If L lies on P, then the smallest subspace is L.
Think again. We want P AND L to be included.
sindhuja said:
If L does not lie on P, then the smallest subspace is the zero vector (0,0,0).
Same problem. We are talking about a space that is spanned by P and L. You are talking about their intersection.
sindhuja said:
I am aware I am missing something here. Could someone please clarify what I am missing? Thanks in advance!
 
@fresh_42 Right! Thank you for bringing that to my attention!
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K