Understanding Subspace Basis and Counterexample

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Caspian
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Basis Subspace
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of subspace bases in vector spaces, specifically addressing a claim from a textbook regarding the existence of a basis for a subspace that is not a subset of a given basis for the larger vector space. Participants explore the implications of this claim through examples and counterexamples.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the validity of a textbook claim that a subspace W can have a basis not consisting of any vectors from a basis of \mathbb{R}^4.
  • Another participant clarifies that the claim refers to the absence of the basis vectors in the subspace W, not the span of those vectors.
  • A different participant suggests that while (1,2,3,4) is in the span of the basis vectors, it cannot be represented by them as a basis for the subspace W due to the dimensionality issue.
  • One participant emphasizes that a basis for W must consist of vectors from W, which none of the basis vectors from \mathbb{R}^4 are.
  • Another participant notes the existence of multiple bases for any vector space, indicating that a basis for W can be extended to a basis for V, but also that there can be bases for V that do not include any vectors from W.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing levels of understanding regarding the textbook claim, with some agreeing on the nature of basis vectors and their relation to subspaces, while others remain uncertain about the implications of the claim. The discussion does not reach a consensus on the initial confusion presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the importance of understanding the definitions of basis and subspace, as well as the implications of dimensionality in the context of vector spaces. There is an acknowledgment of the need for clarity regarding the relationship between the basis of a vector space and the basis of its subspaces.

Caspian
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
My book made the following claim... but I don't understand why it's true:

If [tex]v_1, v_2, v_3, v_4[/tex] is a basis for the vector space [tex]\mathbb{R}^4[/tex], and if [tex]W[/tex] is a subspace, then there exists a [tex]W[/tex] which has a basis which is not some subset of the [tex]v[/tex]'s.

The book provided a proof by counterexample: Let [tex]v_1 = (1, 0, 0, 0) ... v_2 = (0, 0, 0, 1)[/tex]. If [tex]W[/tex] is the line through [tex](1, 2, 3, 4)[/tex], then none of the [tex]v[/tex]'s are in [tex]W[/tex].

Is it just me, or does this not make any sense? First of all, (1,2,3,4) is a linear combination of (1,0,0,0)...(0,0,0,1), isn't it?

I'm very confused...

Any help would be greatly appreciated :).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, but that's not what they're saying. They're saying that none of the four [itex]v_i[/itex] vectors are in W. They're also saying that a basis vector of W (which must be a multiple of (1,2,3,4)) can't be equal to one of the [itex]v_i[/itex].

When they talk about the set of "v's" they really mean a set that only has four members, not the subspace they span.
 
Last edited:
Ok, ok... I get it. (1,2,3,4) is in the vector space spanned by (1,0,0,0)...(0,0,0,1), but these vectors aren't a basis for the subspace which is the line through (1,2,3,4) because these vectors span too much space.

Ok, I guess this was a dumb question. Thanks for your help :).
 
I don't think you fully get it yet.
Caspian said:
Ok, ok... I get it. (1,2,3,4) is in the vector space spanned by (1,0,0,0)...(0,0,0,1), but these vectors aren't a basis for the subspace which is the line through (1,2,3,4) because these vectors span too much space.
It should be obvious that B={(1,0,0,0),...,(0,0,0,1)} isn't a basis for W, since B spans the whole space R^4! So they can't be a basis for any proper subspace of V (indeed, they span "too much space").

But that's not what your book is asserting. They are only talking about a subset of B={(1,0,0,0),...,(0,0,0,1)}. So they're saying that even some subset of B cannot be a basis of W. Remember that a basis of W first of all consists of elements of W. None of the vectors in B are in W.
 
The point you need to keep in mind is that there exist an infinite number of different bases for any given vector space. If W is a subspace of V and we are given a basis for W, then we can extend that to a basis for V. That is, the basis for V will consist of all vectors in the basis for W together with some other vectors. But there can also exist bases for V that do not contain any of the vectors in the basis for W.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K