Verifying Subspace Properties of S+T

  • Thread starter Thread starter charlies1902
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Subspace
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around verifying the properties of the sum of two subspaces, S and T, in the context of vector spaces. The original poster is attempting to confirm whether certain conditions hold for the zero vector, the sum of vectors from the subspaces, and scalar multiplication within the combined subspace S+T.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster outlines three conditions to verify: the inclusion of the zero vector, the closure under addition of vectors from S+T, and the closure under scalar multiplication. Some participants question the definitions and notations used, particularly regarding the representation of sums of vectors.

Discussion Status

Participants are engaged in clarifying the original poster's understanding of the problem. There is a focus on ensuring that the definitions of vectors and subspaces are correctly applied. Some guidance has been offered regarding the wording of arguments, but no consensus has been reached on the notation used.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of an attachment that was initially missing, which may contain additional context or details relevant to the problem. Participants are also addressing potential confusion regarding the notation used to express sums of vectors.

charlies1902
Messages
162
Reaction score
0
The problem has been attached. I am having difficulty expressing myself. The professor said for this problem, it would be best if I use words to answer it.

1. I must verify the 0 vector is in S+T. Since S and T are subspaces, the 0 vector must exist in both S and T. Thus 0+0=0 and 0 vector is in S+T



2. I must verify that if X and Y are subspaces in S+T, then I need to check if X+Y is still in the subspace S+T.
Note: X and Y are of the form S+T, which yields the following:
So I define X as U1+U2, where U1 is in S and U2 is in T.
I define Y as V1+V2, where V1 is in S and V2 is in T.
X+Y=[U1+V1, U2+V2] Since U1 and V1 are both in S, then U1+V1 is in S. Since U2 and V2 are both in T, then U2+V2 are both in T. Thus X+Y is in S.



3. Lastly I must verify that if Y is in S+T, then I need to check if cY is in S+T, where c is some scalar. Using the same Y=V1+V2 where V1 is in S and V2 is in T. I get cY=c(V1+V2)=cV1+cV2, this satisfies that cV1 is in S and cV2 is in T. Thus cY is in S+T.


Is this correct?
Also, if a certain part is incorrect, can you refer clearly to the part or quote just that part? I get confused easily.

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
charlies1902 said:
The problem has been attached.
Where? There is no attachment. You seem to be trying to prove "If S and T are vector spaces then S+ T is a vector space but what does the "+" mean here? A S and T assumed to be subspaces of some larger space? If so then S+ T is the "direct sum" (more commonly written S⊕ T), the set of all vectors of the form v= s+ t where s is in S and t is in T.

I am having difficulty expressing myself. The professor said for this problem, it would be best if I use words to answer it.

1. I must verify the 0 vector is in S+T. Since S and T are subspaces, the 0 vector must exist in both S and T. Thus 0+0=0 and 0 vector is in S+T.
Okay, that is good.



2. I must verify that if X and Y are subspaces in S+T, then I need to check if X+Y is still in the subspace S+T.
NO, you don't! You must verify that if x and y are vectors in S+ T, then x+ y is still a vector in S+ T.

Note: X and Y are of the form S+T, which yields the following:
So I define X as U1+U2, where U1 is in S and U2 is in T.
I define Y as V1+V2, where V1 is in S and V2 is in T.
This makes sense if X, Y, U1, and V1 are vectors not subspaces.

X+Y=[U1+V1, U2+V2] Since U1 and V1 are both in S, then U1+V1 is in S. Since U2 and V2 are both in T, then U2+V2 are both in T. Thus X+Y is in S.



3. Lastly I must verify that if Y is in S+T, then I need to check if cY is in S+T, where c is some scalar. Using the same Y=V1+V2 where V1 is in S and V2 is in T. I get cY=c(V1+V2)=cV1+cV2, this satisfies that cV1 is in S and cV2 is in T. Thus cY is in S+T.


Is this correct?
Also, if a certain part is incorrect, can you refer clearly to the part or quote just that part? I get confused easily.

Thanks.
As long as you understand that all of your X, Y, U1, and U2 are vectors, not subspaces, then you proof will work.
 
Sorry, I always do that, I have attached it now.
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.png
    Untitled.png
    3.6 KB · Views: 438
HallsofIvy said:
NO, you don't! You must verify that if x and y are vectors in S+ T, then x+ y is still a vector in S+ T.

.

Oops, I meant to say "vectors," not subspaces.
 
charlies1902 said:
So I define X as U1+U2, where U1 is in S and U2 is in T.
I define Y as V1+V2, where V1 is in S and V2 is in T.
X+Y=[U1+V1, U2+V2]
I'm not sure what the notation in the last line is supposed to mean.
 
vela said:
I'm not sure what the notation in the last line is supposed to mean.

U1, U2, V1, V2 are vectors.

When I add X+Y, this yields U1+V1, U2+V2


Is that what you were asking?
 
I'm saying your notation doesn't make sense. Is it supposed to be an order paired of vectors?
 
vela said:
I'm saying your notation doesn't make sense. Is it supposed to be an order paired of vectors?
Uh, I defined X and Y in the same form as S+T. I included a picture in the 3rd post on this thread. I'm not sure what you mean by an ordered pair?
What I was trying to show with X+Y=[U1+V1, U2+V2], is that since U1 and V1 were in S, then U1+V1 must be in S, and since U2 and V2 are in T, then U2+V2 must be in T, thus X+Y is in S+T.
 
I know what you mean. I'm saying you shouldn't write "X+Y=[U1+V1, U2+V2]". What you wrote in words
Since U1 and V1 are both in S, then U1+V1 is in S. Since U2 and V2 are both in T, then U2+V2 are both in T. Thus X+Y is in S.
is sufficient. If you want to be a bit more explicit, you can say "Thus X+Y = (U1+V1)+(U2+V2) is in S."

In other words, I know what mathematical object (U1+V1)+(U2+V2) is. On the other hand, what exactly is [U1+V1, U2+V2] supposed to be? You didn't define what [ , ] means.
 
  • #10
vela said:
I know what you mean. I'm saying you shouldn't write "X+Y=[U1+V1, U2+V2]". What you wrote in words
is sufficient. If you want to be a bit more explicit, you can say "Thus X+Y = (U1+V1)+(U2+V2) is in S."

In other words, I know what mathematical object (U1+V1)+(U2+V2) is. On the other hand, what exactly is [U1+V1, U2+V2] supposed to be? You didn't define what [ , ] means.

Oh I see, I think I'll stick with the words rather than using that. So my statement would be sufficient to show that X+Y is in S+T?

I'm also trying to explain the 3rd condition in words. I repasted the part below:
3. Lastly I must verify that if Y is in S+T, then I need to check if cY is in S+T, where c is some scalar. Using the same Y=V1+V2 where V1 is in S and V2 is in T. I get cY=c(V1+V2)=cV1+cV2, this satisfies that cV1 is in S and cV2 is in T. Thus cY is in S+T.
Is this worded correctly?
 
  • #11
Instead of "this satisfies that cV1 is in S and cV2 is in T", I'd say, "Because S and T are subspaces, cV1 and cV2 are elements of S and T, respectively." It's a bit clearer and states explicitly what your logic is. But, yeah, your argument is fine.
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K