When is a subset a subspace in a vector space?

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

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the conditions under which a subset ##\mathbb{W}## of a vector space ##\mathbb{V}## qualifies as a subspace. Participants explore the implications of closure under addition and scalar multiplication, as well as the existence of the zero vector in the subset.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that if ##\mathbb{W}## is non-empty and closed under addition and scalar multiplication, then it should be a subspace of ##\mathbb{V}##.
  • Concerns are raised about the implications of closure under scalar multiplication, particularly regarding the zero vector's presence in ##\mathbb{W}##.
  • One participant questions how the same operations in ##\mathbb{W}## and ##\mathbb{V}## can imply that if ##\vec{0}## is in ##\mathbb{V}##, it must also be in ##\mathbb{W}##.
  • Another participant suggests that the relationship between the zero vector in ##\mathbb{V}## and ##\mathbb{W}## is due to the subset property and the shared operations.
  • There is a discussion about the necessity of the zero vector being in ##\mathbb{W}## and how this relates to the properties of vector spaces.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about the implications of closure under scalar multiplication for the zero vector in ##\mathbb{W}##.
  • A later reply indicates that the understanding of the zero vector's behavior in ##\mathbb{W}## becomes clearer with further explanation.
  • One participant proposes a revision to a previous claim regarding the properties of the zero vector in the context of the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of closure under scalar multiplication and the presence of the zero vector in the subset. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the exact reasoning behind these implications.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the importance of the properties of vector spaces and the nuances involved in applying these properties to subsets. There is an acknowledgment of the need for clarity regarding the zero vector's role in the context of subsets.

Kaguro
Messages
221
Reaction score
57
Let ##\mathbb{V}## be a vector space and ##\mathbb{W}## be a subset of ##\mathbb{V}##, with the same operations.

Claim:
If ##\mathbb{W}## is non-empty, closed under addition and scalar multiplication, then ##\mathbb{W}## is a subspace of ##\mathbb{V}##.

A set is a vector space if it satisfies 10 properties:

  1. Closure under addition
  2. Closure under scalar multiplication
  3. Commutativity under addition
  4. Associativity under addition
  5. Existence of additive identity
  6. Existence of additive inverse
  7. Distributivity for scalar multiplication over addition in scalars
  8. Distributivity for scalar multiplication over addition in vectors
  9. Associativity under scalar multiplication
  10. Identity for scalar multiplication

The properties 1 and 2 are given. 3,4,7,8,9,10 are easily verified as ##\mathbb{W}## and ##\mathbb{V}## share same operations. For example 3:

Let ##\vec u , \vec v \epsilon \mathbb{W}##
$$ \vec u + \vec v (in~ \mathbb{W}) \\
= \vec u + \vec v (in~ \mathbb{V}) \text{(same operation)} \\
= \vec v + \vec u (in~ \mathbb{V}) (\mathbb{V} \text{is a vector space.)} \\
= \vec v + \vec u (in~ \mathbb{W}) ~\text{(same operation)} \\
$$

The problem is 5 and 6.
The book I'm using ( S. Andrilli and D. Hecker) says:-

Let ##\vec u~ \epsilon ~\mathbb{W}##
$$ \Rightarrow~~ 0\vec u ~ \epsilon ~\mathbb{W} ~\text{(closed under scalar multiplication.)}\\
\Rightarrow ~~ 0\vec u ~ \epsilon ~ \mathbb{V} ~\text{(property of subset)}\\
\Rightarrow ~~ \vec 0 ~\epsilon ~ \mathbb{V} ~\text{(property of vector space. Which we proved earlier.)}\\
\Rightarrow ~~ \vec 0 ~ \epsilon ~ \mathbb{W}~ \text{(as they share the same operations)}$$

what??

How can same operations imply that if ##\vec 0## is in ##\mathbb{V}## it also must be in ##\mathbb{W}## ??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Kaguro said:
Let ##\mathbb{V}## be a vector space and ##\mathbb{W}## be a subset of ##\mathbb{V}##, with the same operations.

Claim:
If ##\mathbb{W}## is non-empty, closed under addition and scalar multiplication, then ##\mathbb{W}## is a subspace of ##\mathbb{V}##.

A set is a vector space if it satisfies 10 properties:

  1. Closure under addition
  2. Closure under scalar multiplication
  3. Commutativity under addition
  4. Associativity under addition
  5. Existence of additive identity
  6. Existence of additive inverse
  7. Distributivity for scalar multiplication over addition in scalars
  8. Distributivity for scalar multiplication over addition in vectors
  9. Associativity under scalar multiplication
  10. Identity for scalar multiplication

The properties 1 and 2 are given. 3,4,7,8,9,10 are easily verified as ##\mathbb{W}## and ##\mathbb{V}## share same operations. For example 3:

Let ##\vec u , \vec v \epsilon \mathbb{W}##
$$ \vec u + \vec v (in~ \mathbb{W}) \\
= \vec u + \vec v (in~ \mathbb{V}) \text{(same operation)} \\
= \vec v + \vec u (in~ \mathbb{V}) (\mathbb{V} \text{is a vector space.)} \\
= \vec v + \vec u (in~ \mathbb{W}) ~\text{(same operation)} \\
$$

The problem is 5 and 6.
The book I'm using ( S. Andrilli and D. Hecker) says:-

Let ##\vec u~ \epsilon ~\mathbb{W}##
$$ \Rightarrow~~ 0\vec u ~ \epsilon ~\mathbb{W} ~\text{(closed under scalar multiplication.)}\\
\Rightarrow ~~ 0\vec u ~ \epsilon ~ \mathbb{V} ~\text{(property of subset)}\\
\Rightarrow ~~ \vec 0 ~\epsilon ~ \mathbb{V} ~\text{(property of vector space. Which we proved earlier.)}\\
\Rightarrow ~~ \vec 0 ~ \epsilon ~ \mathbb{W}~ \text{(as they share the same operations)}$$

what??

How can same operations imply that if ##\vec 0## is in ##\mathbb{V}## it also must be in ##\mathbb{W}## ??

If ##W## is closed under scalar multiplication and it is non-empty then ##\exists \ \vec{w} \in W## and ##0 \vec{w} = \vec{0} \in W##.

An important subtlety is that you know that ##0 \vec{w} = \vec{0}## because ##W \subset V## and this property holds for all vectors in ##V##, hence all vectors in ##W##.

You can show that ##-\vec{w} \in W## by a similar argument with the scalar ##-1##.
 
PeroK said:
If WW is closed under scalar multiplication, and it is non-empty then ∃ →w∈W\exists \ \vec{w} \in W and 0→w=→0∈W0 \vec{w} = \vec{0} \in W.

That's the problem, I don't know that 0##\vec w = \vec 0## in W because it is not a Vector Space yet.
 
Kaguro said:
The problem is 5 and 6.
The book I'm using ( S. Andrilli and D. Hecker) says:-

Let ##\vec u~ \epsilon ~\mathbb{W}##
$$ \Rightarrow~~ 0\vec u ~ \epsilon ~\mathbb{W} ~\text{(closed under scalar multiplication.)}\\
\Rightarrow ~~ 0\vec u ~ \epsilon ~ \mathbb{V} ~\text{(property of subset)}\\
\Rightarrow ~~ \vec 0 ~\epsilon ~ \mathbb{V} ~\text{(property of vector space. Which we proved earlier.)}\\
\Rightarrow ~~ \vec 0 ~ \epsilon ~ \mathbb{W}~ \text{(as they share the same operations)}$$

what??

How can same operations imply that if ##\vec 0## is in ##\mathbb{V}## it also must be in ##\mathbb{W}## ??
What is said here is, that ##0_\mathbb{V} = 0 \cdot w =: 0_\mathbb{W}## is the same vector.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeroK
Kaguro said:
That's the problem, I don't know that 0##\vec w = \vec 0## in W because it is not a Vector Space yet.

PeroK said:
An important subtlety is that you know that ##0 \vec{w} = \vec{0}## because ##W \subset V## and this property holds for all vectors in ##V##, hence all vectors in ##W##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Kaguro
Oh! Of course..
Now when you put it this way, it seems clear!

Thank you both!:smile:
 
Kaguro said:
Let ##\vec u~ \epsilon ~\mathbb{W}##
$$ \Rightarrow~~ 0\vec u ~ \epsilon ~\mathbb{W} ~\text{(closed under scalar multiplication.)}\\
\Rightarrow ~~ 0\vec u ~ \epsilon ~ \mathbb{V} ~\text{(property of subset)}\\
\Rightarrow ~~ \vec 0 ~\epsilon ~ \mathbb{V} ~\text{(property of vector space. Which we proved earlier. ***)}\\
\Rightarrow ~~ 0\vec u = \vec{0} ~\text{(property of vector space. Which we proved earlier.+++)}\\\Rightarrow ~~ \vec 0 ~ \epsilon ~ \mathbb{W}~ \text{(as they share the same operations)}$$

Actually, I would say this is not quite right. I would replace the statement marked *** with the one marked +++.
 
PeroK said:
Actually, I would say this is not quite right. I would replace the statement marked *** with the one marked +++.
Yes, the for all elements is the important thing.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K