Is a vector space a subspace of itself? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)vector space and its subspaceHow to determine vector space?Vector Space vs SubspaceProving a subset is a subspace of a Vector SpaceSubspace of a vector space DefinitionProof these operations is not a vector spaceVector Space definitionAre all vector spaces also a subspace?Understand the definition of a vector subspaceDoes multiplying by the zero vector ALWAYS yield the zero vector?
Why can't wing-mounted spoilers be used to steepen approaches?
Simulating Exploding Dice
How do I design a circuit to convert a 100 mV and 50 Hz sine wave to a square wave?
Identify 80s or 90s comics with ripped creatures (not dwarves)
Is there a way to generate uniformly distributed points on a sphere from a fixed amount of random real numbers per point?
Windows 10: How to Lock (not sleep) laptop on lid close?
What is the padding with red substance inside of steak packaging?
Is 'stolen' appropriate word?
Fixing different display colors within string
"... to apply for a visa" or "... and applied for a visa"?
Can a flute soloist sit?
Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?
How to handle characters who are more educated than the author?
Is it ethical to upload a automatically generated paper to a non peer-reviewed site as part of a larger research?
Why did Peik Lin say, "I'm not an animal"?
Drawing vertical/oblique lines in Metrical tree (tikz-qtree, tipa)
Is it ok to offer lower paid work as a trial period before negotiating for a full-time job?
Do I have Disadvantage attacking with an off-hand weapon?
Voltage transmission
different output for groups and groups USERNAME after adding a username to a group
Do working physicists consider Newtonian mechanics to be "falsified"?
How to make Illustrator type tool selection automatically adapt with text length
Am I ethically obligated to go into work on an off day if the reason is sudden?
How many cones with angle theta can I pack into the unit sphere?
Is a vector space a subspace of itself?
The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)vector space and its subspaceHow to determine vector space?Vector Space vs SubspaceProving a subset is a subspace of a Vector SpaceSubspace of a vector space DefinitionProof these operations is not a vector spaceVector Space definitionAre all vector spaces also a subspace?Understand the definition of a vector subspaceDoes multiplying by the zero vector ALWAYS yield the zero vector?
$begingroup$
We know that a subspace is a vector space that follows the same addition and multiplication rules as $Bbb V$, but is a vector space a subspace of itself?
Also, I'm getting confused doing the practice questions, on when we prove that something is a vector space by using the subspace test and when we prove V1 - V10.
Edit: V1 - V10 are the ten axioms of what makes something a vector space. So for example in $Bbb R^2$, we have that $vecx + vecy = vecy + vec x$, etc..
linear-algebra vector-spaces
asked Apr 9 at 1:59
mingming
4606
$endgroup$
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
We know that a subspace is a vector space that follows the same addition and multiplication rules as $Bbb V$, but is a vector space a subspace of itself?
Also, I'm getting confused doing the practice questions, on when we prove that something is a vector space by using the subspace test and when we prove V1 - V10.
Edit: V1 - V10 are the ten axioms of what makes something a vector space. So for example in $Bbb R^2$, we have that $vecx + vecy = vecy + vec x$, etc..
linear-algebra vector-spaces
asked Apr 9 at 1:59
mingming
4606
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
How do you define a subspace of a vector space?
$endgroup$
– Brian
Apr 9 at 2:02
3
$begingroup$
Is a set a subset of itself?? What’s V1-V10?
$endgroup$
– J. W. Tanner
Apr 9 at 2:16
2
$begingroup$
The term "proper" subspace is often used to denote a subspace space that is not the entire vector space.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Apr 9 at 2:19
4
$begingroup$
As other commenters have noted, your question lacks context. Please edit your question to include more context, lest your question be closed. Please give a definition of a subspace. Please explain what V1 - V10 means. If you are working from a particular text, a citation to that text would be helpful, too.
$endgroup$
– Xander Henderson
Apr 9 at 3:39
3
$begingroup$
@CompuChip That's not a usage of "proper set" that I'm accustomed to, but I can certainly imagine it being used by certain fields of maths. I would instead say "proper, non-trivial" to mean not the whole set/space, and not the empty set/$0$ subspace.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Apr 9 at 8:57
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
We know that a subspace is a vector space that follows the same addition and multiplication rules as $Bbb V$, but is a vector space a subspace of itself?
Also, I'm getting confused doing the practice questions, on when we prove that something is a vector space by using the subspace test and when we prove V1 - V10.
Edit: V1 - V10 are the ten axioms of what makes something a vector space. So for example in $Bbb R^2$, we have that $vecx + vecy = vecy + vec x$, etc..
linear-algebra vector-spaces
asked Apr 9 at 1:59
mingming
4606
$endgroup$
We know that a subspace is a vector space that follows the same addition and multiplication rules as $Bbb V$, but is a vector space a subspace of itself?
Also, I'm getting confused doing the practice questions, on when we prove that something is a vector space by using the subspace test and when we prove V1 - V10.
Edit: V1 - V10 are the ten axioms of what makes something a vector space. So for example in $Bbb R^2$, we have that $vecx + vecy = vecy + vec x$, etc..
linear-algebra vector-spaces
linear-algebra vector-spaces
asked Apr 9 at 1:59
mingming
4606
asked Apr 9 at 1:59
mingming
4606
edited Apr 9 at 16:40
ming
asked Apr 9 at 1:59
mingming
4606
asked Apr 9 at 1:59
mingming
4606
asked Apr 9 at 1:59
mingming
4606
4606
1
$begingroup$
How do you define a subspace of a vector space?
$endgroup$
– Brian
Apr 9 at 2:02
3
$begingroup$
Is a set a subset of itself?? What’s V1-V10?
$endgroup$
– J. W. Tanner
Apr 9 at 2:16
2
$begingroup$
The term "proper" subspace is often used to denote a subspace space that is not the entire vector space.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Apr 9 at 2:19
4
$begingroup$
As other commenters have noted, your question lacks context. Please edit your question to include more context, lest your question be closed. Please give a definition of a subspace. Please explain what V1 - V10 means. If you are working from a particular text, a citation to that text would be helpful, too.
$endgroup$
– Xander Henderson
Apr 9 at 3:39
3
$begingroup$
@CompuChip That's not a usage of "proper set" that I'm accustomed to, but I can certainly imagine it being used by certain fields of maths. I would instead say "proper, non-trivial" to mean not the whole set/space, and not the empty set/$0$ subspace.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Apr 9 at 8:57
|
show 3 more comments
1
$begingroup$
How do you define a subspace of a vector space?
$endgroup$
– Brian
Apr 9 at 2:02
3
$begingroup$
Is a set a subset of itself?? What’s V1-V10?
$endgroup$
– J. W. Tanner
Apr 9 at 2:16
2
$begingroup$
The term "proper" subspace is often used to denote a subspace space that is not the entire vector space.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Apr 9 at 2:19
4
$begingroup$
As other commenters have noted, your question lacks context. Please edit your question to include more context, lest your question be closed. Please give a definition of a subspace. Please explain what V1 - V10 means. If you are working from a particular text, a citation to that text would be helpful, too.
$endgroup$
– Xander Henderson
Apr 9 at 3:39
3
$begingroup$
@CompuChip That's not a usage of "proper set" that I'm accustomed to, but I can certainly imagine it being used by certain fields of maths. I would instead say "proper, non-trivial" to mean not the whole set/space, and not the empty set/$0$ subspace.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Apr 9 at 8:57
1
1
$begingroup$
How do you define a subspace of a vector space?
$endgroup$
– Brian
Apr 9 at 2:02
$begingroup$
How do you define a subspace of a vector space?
$endgroup$
– Brian
Apr 9 at 2:02
3
3
$begingroup$
Is a set a subset of itself?? What’s V1-V10?
$endgroup$
– J. W. Tanner
Apr 9 at 2:16
$begingroup$
Is a set a subset of itself?? What’s V1-V10?
$endgroup$
– J. W. Tanner
Apr 9 at 2:16
2
2
$begingroup$
The term "proper" subspace is often used to denote a subspace space that is not the entire vector space.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Apr 9 at 2:19
$begingroup$
The term "proper" subspace is often used to denote a subspace space that is not the entire vector space.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Apr 9 at 2:19
4
4
$begingroup$
As other commenters have noted, your question lacks context. Please edit your question to include more context, lest your question be closed. Please give a definition of a subspace. Please explain what V1 - V10 means. If you are working from a particular text, a citation to that text would be helpful, too.
$endgroup$
– Xander Henderson
Apr 9 at 3:39
$begingroup$
As other commenters have noted, your question lacks context. Please edit your question to include more context, lest your question be closed. Please give a definition of a subspace. Please explain what V1 - V10 means. If you are working from a particular text, a citation to that text would be helpful, too.
$endgroup$
– Xander Henderson
Apr 9 at 3:39
3
3
$begingroup$
@CompuChip That's not a usage of "proper set" that I'm accustomed to, but I can certainly imagine it being used by certain fields of maths. I would instead say "proper, non-trivial" to mean not the whole set/space, and not the empty set/$0$ subspace.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Apr 9 at 8:57
$begingroup$
@CompuChip That's not a usage of "proper set" that I'm accustomed to, but I can certainly imagine it being used by certain fields of maths. I would instead say "proper, non-trivial" to mean not the whole set/space, and not the empty set/$0$ subspace.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Apr 9 at 8:57
|
show 3 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I'm guessing that V1 - V10 are the axioms for proving vector spaces.
To prove something is a vector space, independent of any other vector spaces you know of, you are required to prove all of the axioms in the definition. Not all operations that call themselves $+$ are worthy addition operations; just because you denote it $+$ does not mean it is (for example) associative, or has an additive identity.
There is a lot to prove, because there's a lot to gain. Vector spaces have a simply enormous amount of structure, and that structure gives us a really rich theory and powerful tools. If you have an object that you wish to understand better, and you can show it is a vector space (or at least, related to a vector space), then you'll instantly have some serious mathematical firepower at your fingertips.
Subspaces give us a shortcut to proving a vector space. If you have a subset of a known vector space, then you can prove just $3$ properties, rather than $10$. We can skip a lot of the steps because somebody has already done them previously when showing the larger vector space is indeed a vector space. You don't need to show, for example, $v + w = w + v$ for all $v, w$ in your subset, because we already know this is true for all vectors in the larger vector space.
I'm writing this, not as a direct answer to your question (which Jose Carlos Santos has answered already), but because confusion like this often stems from some sloppiness on the above point. I've seen many students (and, lamentably, several instructors) fail to grasp that showing the subspace conditions on a set that is not clearly a subset of a known vector space does not prove a vector space. The shortcut works because somebody has already established most of the axioms beforehand, but if this is not true, then the argument is a fallacy.
You can absolutely apply the subspace conditions on the whole of a vector space provided you've proven it's a vector space already with axioms V1 - V10.
answered Apr 9 at 2:54
Theo BenditTheo Bendit
20.9k12355
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Ohh okay I think I understand. So when we prove that something is a subspace of say $Bbb R^2$, we don't have to prove that $c(vecx + vecy) = cvecx + cvecy$ because we already know that's true inside of $Bbb R^2$ and we know this subspace is a vector space INSIDE of $Bbb R^2$ following all its rules.
$endgroup$
– ming
Apr 9 at 16:37
1
$begingroup$
But then for questions like "A sequence is a infinite list of real numbers. For example 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 is a sequence, and so is 1, -1, 2, -2, 4, -4. We define addition and scalar multiplication so that...." We actually don't have any known information/facts about this vector space so then we need to prove all ten axioms?
$endgroup$
– ming
Apr 9 at 16:39
$begingroup$
@ming Exactly. Couldn't put it better myself.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Yes, every vector space is a vector subspace of itself, since it is a non-empty subset of itself which is closed with respect to addition and with respect to product by scalars.
answered Apr 9 at 2:06
José Carlos SantosJosé Carlos Santos
174k23133243
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3180447%2fis-a-vector-space-a-subspace-of-itself%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I'm guessing that V1 - V10 are the axioms for proving vector spaces.
To prove something is a vector space, independent of any other vector spaces you know of, you are required to prove all of the axioms in the definition. Not all operations that call themselves $+$ are worthy addition operations; just because you denote it $+$ does not mean it is (for example) associative, or has an additive identity.
There is a lot to prove, because there's a lot to gain. Vector spaces have a simply enormous amount of structure, and that structure gives us a really rich theory and powerful tools. If you have an object that you wish to understand better, and you can show it is a vector space (or at least, related to a vector space), then you'll instantly have some serious mathematical firepower at your fingertips.
Subspaces give us a shortcut to proving a vector space. If you have a subset of a known vector space, then you can prove just $3$ properties, rather than $10$. We can skip a lot of the steps because somebody has already done them previously when showing the larger vector space is indeed a vector space. You don't need to show, for example, $v + w = w + v$ for all $v, w$ in your subset, because we already know this is true for all vectors in the larger vector space.
I'm writing this, not as a direct answer to your question (which Jose Carlos Santos has answered already), but because confusion like this often stems from some sloppiness on the above point. I've seen many students (and, lamentably, several instructors) fail to grasp that showing the subspace conditions on a set that is not clearly a subset of a known vector space does not prove a vector space. The shortcut works because somebody has already established most of the axioms beforehand, but if this is not true, then the argument is a fallacy.
You can absolutely apply the subspace conditions on the whole of a vector space provided you've proven it's a vector space already with axioms V1 - V10.
answered Apr 9 at 2:54
Theo BenditTheo Bendit
20.9k12355
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Ohh okay I think I understand. So when we prove that something is a subspace of say $Bbb R^2$, we don't have to prove that $c(vecx + vecy) = cvecx + cvecy$ because we already know that's true inside of $Bbb R^2$ and we know this subspace is a vector space INSIDE of $Bbb R^2$ following all its rules.
$endgroup$
– ming
Apr 9 at 16:37
1
$begingroup$
But then for questions like "A sequence is a infinite list of real numbers. For example 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 is a sequence, and so is 1, -1, 2, -2, 4, -4. We define addition and scalar multiplication so that...." We actually don't have any known information/facts about this vector space so then we need to prove all ten axioms?
$endgroup$
– ming
Apr 9 at 16:39
$begingroup$
@ming Exactly. Couldn't put it better myself.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I'm guessing that V1 - V10 are the axioms for proving vector spaces.
To prove something is a vector space, independent of any other vector spaces you know of, you are required to prove all of the axioms in the definition. Not all operations that call themselves $+$ are worthy addition operations; just because you denote it $+$ does not mean it is (for example) associative, or has an additive identity.
There is a lot to prove, because there's a lot to gain. Vector spaces have a simply enormous amount of structure, and that structure gives us a really rich theory and powerful tools. If you have an object that you wish to understand better, and you can show it is a vector space (or at least, related to a vector space), then you'll instantly have some serious mathematical firepower at your fingertips.
Subspaces give us a shortcut to proving a vector space. If you have a subset of a known vector space, then you can prove just $3$ properties, rather than $10$. We can skip a lot of the steps because somebody has already done them previously when showing the larger vector space is indeed a vector space. You don't need to show, for example, $v + w = w + v$ for all $v, w$ in your subset, because we already know this is true for all vectors in the larger vector space.
I'm writing this, not as a direct answer to your question (which Jose Carlos Santos has answered already), but because confusion like this often stems from some sloppiness on the above point. I've seen many students (and, lamentably, several instructors) fail to grasp that showing the subspace conditions on a set that is not clearly a subset of a known vector space does not prove a vector space. The shortcut works because somebody has already established most of the axioms beforehand, but if this is not true, then the argument is a fallacy.
You can absolutely apply the subspace conditions on the whole of a vector space provided you've proven it's a vector space already with axioms V1 - V10.
answered Apr 9 at 2:54
Theo BenditTheo Bendit
20.9k12355
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Ohh okay I think I understand. So when we prove that something is a subspace of say $Bbb R^2$, we don't have to prove that $c(vecx + vecy) = cvecx + cvecy$ because we already know that's true inside of $Bbb R^2$ and we know this subspace is a vector space INSIDE of $Bbb R^2$ following all its rules.
$endgroup$
– ming
Apr 9 at 16:37
1
$begingroup$
But then for questions like "A sequence is a infinite list of real numbers. For example 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 is a sequence, and so is 1, -1, 2, -2, 4, -4. We define addition and scalar multiplication so that...." We actually don't have any known information/facts about this vector space so then we need to prove all ten axioms?
$endgroup$
– ming
Apr 9 at 16:39
$begingroup$
@ming Exactly. Couldn't put it better myself.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I'm guessing that V1 - V10 are the axioms for proving vector spaces.
To prove something is a vector space, independent of any other vector spaces you know of, you are required to prove all of the axioms in the definition. Not all operations that call themselves $+$ are worthy addition operations; just because you denote it $+$ does not mean it is (for example) associative, or has an additive identity.
There is a lot to prove, because there's a lot to gain. Vector spaces have a simply enormous amount of structure, and that structure gives us a really rich theory and powerful tools. If you have an object that you wish to understand better, and you can show it is a vector space (or at least, related to a vector space), then you'll instantly have some serious mathematical firepower at your fingertips.
Subspaces give us a shortcut to proving a vector space. If you have a subset of a known vector space, then you can prove just $3$ properties, rather than $10$. We can skip a lot of the steps because somebody has already done them previously when showing the larger vector space is indeed a vector space. You don't need to show, for example, $v + w = w + v$ for all $v, w$ in your subset, because we already know this is true for all vectors in the larger vector space.
I'm writing this, not as a direct answer to your question (which Jose Carlos Santos has answered already), but because confusion like this often stems from some sloppiness on the above point. I've seen many students (and, lamentably, several instructors) fail to grasp that showing the subspace conditions on a set that is not clearly a subset of a known vector space does not prove a vector space. The shortcut works because somebody has already established most of the axioms beforehand, but if this is not true, then the argument is a fallacy.
You can absolutely apply the subspace conditions on the whole of a vector space provided you've proven it's a vector space already with axioms V1 - V10.
answered Apr 9 at 2:54
Theo BenditTheo Bendit
20.9k12355
$endgroup$
I'm guessing that V1 - V10 are the axioms for proving vector spaces.
To prove something is a vector space, independent of any other vector spaces you know of, you are required to prove all of the axioms in the definition. Not all operations that call themselves $+$ are worthy addition operations; just because you denote it $+$ does not mean it is (for example) associative, or has an additive identity.
There is a lot to prove, because there's a lot to gain. Vector spaces have a simply enormous amount of structure, and that structure gives us a really rich theory and powerful tools. If you have an object that you wish to understand better, and you can show it is a vector space (or at least, related to a vector space), then you'll instantly have some serious mathematical firepower at your fingertips.
Subspaces give us a shortcut to proving a vector space. If you have a subset of a known vector space, then you can prove just $3$ properties, rather than $10$. We can skip a lot of the steps because somebody has already done them previously when showing the larger vector space is indeed a vector space. You don't need to show, for example, $v + w = w + v$ for all $v, w$ in your subset, because we already know this is true for all vectors in the larger vector space.
I'm writing this, not as a direct answer to your question (which Jose Carlos Santos has answered already), but because confusion like this often stems from some sloppiness on the above point. I've seen many students (and, lamentably, several instructors) fail to grasp that showing the subspace conditions on a set that is not clearly a subset of a known vector space does not prove a vector space. The shortcut works because somebody has already established most of the axioms beforehand, but if this is not true, then the argument is a fallacy.
You can absolutely apply the subspace conditions on the whole of a vector space provided you've proven it's a vector space already with axioms V1 - V10.
answered Apr 9 at 2:54
Theo BenditTheo Bendit
20.9k12355
answered Apr 9 at 2:54
Theo BenditTheo Bendit
20.9k12355
answered Apr 9 at 2:54
Theo BenditTheo Bendit
20.9k12355
answered Apr 9 at 2:54
Theo BenditTheo Bendit
20.9k12355
20.9k12355
1
$begingroup$
Ohh okay I think I understand. So when we prove that something is a subspace of say $Bbb R^2$, we don't have to prove that $c(vecx + vecy) = cvecx + cvecy$ because we already know that's true inside of $Bbb R^2$ and we know this subspace is a vector space INSIDE of $Bbb R^2$ following all its rules.
$endgroup$
– ming
Apr 9 at 16:37
1
$begingroup$
But then for questions like "A sequence is a infinite list of real numbers. For example 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 is a sequence, and so is 1, -1, 2, -2, 4, -4. We define addition and scalar multiplication so that...." We actually don't have any known information/facts about this vector space so then we need to prove all ten axioms?
$endgroup$
– ming
Apr 9 at 16:39
$begingroup$
@ming Exactly. Couldn't put it better myself.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
2 days ago
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
Ohh okay I think I understand. So when we prove that something is a subspace of say $Bbb R^2$, we don't have to prove that $c(vecx + vecy) = cvecx + cvecy$ because we already know that's true inside of $Bbb R^2$ and we know this subspace is a vector space INSIDE of $Bbb R^2$ following all its rules.
$endgroup$
– ming
Apr 9 at 16:37
1
$begingroup$
But then for questions like "A sequence is a infinite list of real numbers. For example 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 is a sequence, and so is 1, -1, 2, -2, 4, -4. We define addition and scalar multiplication so that...." We actually don't have any known information/facts about this vector space so then we need to prove all ten axioms?
$endgroup$
– ming
Apr 9 at 16:39
$begingroup$
@ming Exactly. Couldn't put it better myself.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
2 days ago
1
1
$begingroup$
Ohh okay I think I understand. So when we prove that something is a subspace of say $Bbb R^2$, we don't have to prove that $c(vecx + vecy) = cvecx + cvecy$ because we already know that's true inside of $Bbb R^2$ and we know this subspace is a vector space INSIDE of $Bbb R^2$ following all its rules.
$endgroup$
– ming
Apr 9 at 16:37
$begingroup$
Ohh okay I think I understand. So when we prove that something is a subspace of say $Bbb R^2$, we don't have to prove that $c(vecx + vecy) = cvecx + cvecy$ because we already know that's true inside of $Bbb R^2$ and we know this subspace is a vector space INSIDE of $Bbb R^2$ following all its rules.
$endgroup$
– ming
Apr 9 at 16:37
1
1
$begingroup$
But then for questions like "A sequence is a infinite list of real numbers. For example 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 is a sequence, and so is 1, -1, 2, -2, 4, -4. We define addition and scalar multiplication so that...." We actually don't have any known information/facts about this vector space so then we need to prove all ten axioms?
$endgroup$
– ming
Apr 9 at 16:39
$begingroup$
But then for questions like "A sequence is a infinite list of real numbers. For example 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 is a sequence, and so is 1, -1, 2, -2, 4, -4. We define addition and scalar multiplication so that...." We actually don't have any known information/facts about this vector space so then we need to prove all ten axioms?
$endgroup$
– ming
Apr 9 at 16:39
$begingroup$
@ming Exactly. Couldn't put it better myself.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
2 days ago
$begingroup$
@ming Exactly. Couldn't put it better myself.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Yes, every vector space is a vector subspace of itself, since it is a non-empty subset of itself which is closed with respect to addition and with respect to product by scalars.
answered Apr 9 at 2:06
José Carlos SantosJosé Carlos Santos
174k23133243
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Yes, every vector space is a vector subspace of itself, since it is a non-empty subset of itself which is closed with respect to addition and with respect to product by scalars.
answered Apr 9 at 2:06
José Carlos SantosJosé Carlos Santos
174k23133243
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Yes, every vector space is a vector subspace of itself, since it is a non-empty subset of itself which is closed with respect to addition and with respect to product by scalars.
answered Apr 9 at 2:06
José Carlos SantosJosé Carlos Santos
174k23133243
$endgroup$
Yes, every vector space is a vector subspace of itself, since it is a non-empty subset of itself which is closed with respect to addition and with respect to product by scalars.
answered Apr 9 at 2:06
José Carlos SantosJosé Carlos Santos
174k23133243
answered Apr 9 at 2:06
José Carlos SantosJosé Carlos Santos
174k23133243
answered Apr 9 at 2:06
José Carlos SantosJosé Carlos Santos
174k23133243
answered Apr 9 at 2:06
José Carlos SantosJosé Carlos Santos
174k23133243
174k23133243
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3180447%2fis-a-vector-space-a-subspace-of-itself%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
$begingroup$
How do you define a subspace of a vector space?
$endgroup$
– Brian
Apr 9 at 2:02
3
$begingroup$
Is a set a subset of itself?? What’s V1-V10?
$endgroup$
– J. W. Tanner
Apr 9 at 2:16
2
$begingroup$
The term "proper" subspace is often used to denote a subspace space that is not the entire vector space.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Apr 9 at 2:19
4
$begingroup$
As other commenters have noted, your question lacks context. Please edit your question to include more context, lest your question be closed. Please give a definition of a subspace. Please explain what V1 - V10 means. If you are working from a particular text, a citation to that text would be helpful, too.
$endgroup$
– Xander Henderson
Apr 9 at 3:39
3
$begingroup$
@CompuChip That's not a usage of "proper set" that I'm accustomed to, but I can certainly imagine it being used by certain fields of maths. I would instead say "proper, non-trivial" to mean not the whole set/space, and not the empty set/$0$ subspace.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Apr 9 at 8:57