MAS212 Linear Algebra I Lecture Notes

Francis J. Wright, 2004

2. Vector Subspaces
Contents
Definition of Vector Subspace Examples of Vector Subspaces Intersections of Vector Subspaces Unions of Vector Subspaces Sums of Vector Subspaces Distributivity It is usually easiest to study an object from the outside rather than the inside; for example, we can see the shape of a object in three-dimensional space most easily by moving around and looking at its surface from different positions in the space. Similarly, it is usually easiest to study a vector space "from the outside" by considering it to be part of a larger vector space, which leads to the idea of a vector subspace. A vector subspace is a vector space that is embedded in a larger vector space, or equivalently a vector subspace is a subset of a vector space that is itself a vector space. A subset of a vector space automatically satisfies most of the vector space axioms, so the extra conditions that are required to ensure that it is a vector subspace are essentially the closure conditions to stop vectors "escaping" from the vector subspace into the larger vector space. Examples of vector subspaces of real three-dimensional Euclidean space are any straight line or plane through the origin, as illustrated in the following two figures.

If the subspace were not flat or did not include the origin then it would be possible for vectors constructed by applying the vector space operations of addition and scalar multiplication to "escape" from the subspace, which is not allowed because the subspace must be closed. The formal definition generalizes this geometrical notion.

Definition of Vector Subspace

A vector (or linear) subspace is a subset of a vector space that, together with the operations it inherits from the vector space, is also a vector space. Conditions for a Vector Subspace Let V be a vector space over a field K. A vector subspace U of V is a subset of V such that the following conditions hold: 0V U [zero-vector inclusion]; ( u1 + u2 ) U for all u1, u2 U [closure under addition]; k u U for all u U, k K [closure under scalar multiplication]. The first condition is necessary to ensure that the subset U is not empty and, in fact, the smallest possible vector space contains only the zero vector. Corollary The two closure conditions above are equivalent to the following single closure condition: ( k1 u1 + k2 u2 ) U for all u1, u2 U, k1, k2 K. Proof In the single closure condition, choosing k1 = k2 = 1 => closure under addition and choosing k1 = k, u1 = u, k2 = 0 => closure under scalar multiplication. Closure under scalar multiplication => k1 u1, k2 u2 U and closure under addition => ( k1 u1 + k2 u2 ) U for all u1, u2 U, k1, k2 K. Asides A corollary of some proposition is a consequence of that proposition that is almost obvious, but it may still need to be proved and cannot simply be assumed. Instead of the zero-vector inclusion condition above, we could require that a vector subspace be a non-empty subset and then deduce zero-vector inclusion, as follows. Closure under scalar multiplication implies that 0 u U for all u U, 0 K. Moreover, 0K v = 0V for all v V, which is an important corollary of the vector space axioms. The proof relies on distributivity as follows: ( 0 + 0 ) v = 0 v + 0 v => 0 v + 0 v = 0 v => 0 v + 0 v + ( 0 v ) = 0 v + ( 0 v ) => 0 v = 0.

Examples of Vector Subspaces

Trivial vector subspaces Let V be a vector space. Then the set { 0V } consisting of the zero vector in V alone and the set consisting of the entire vector space V are both vector subspaces of V. Special vector subspaces Let V = R3 = { (x, y, z) | x, y, z R }. Then the (x, y)-plane { (x, y, 0) | x, y R } V is a vector subspace of V (isomorphic to R2) and the x-axis { (x, 0, 0) | x R } V is a vector subspace of V (isomorphic to R). General vector subspaces More generally, any linear constraints of the form x + y + z = 0, , , R will generate a vector subspace of V = R3. For example, let U = { (x, y, z) | 2 x + y + z = 0 } V. Then U is a vector subspace of V. To prove this we must check that the vector subspace conditions (in some form) are satisfied: Zero-vector inclusion: 0V = ( 0, 0, 0 ), which satisfies the constraint because 2 ( 0 ) + 0 + 0 = 0, so 0V U. Closure under addition: Let u1 = ( x1, y1, z1 ), u2 = ( x2, y2, z2 ). Then u1 + u2 = ( x1 + x2, y1 + y2, z1 + z2 ). u1, u2 U => 2 x1 + y1 + z1 = 0, 2 x2 + y2 + z2 = 0. Adding gives 2 ( x1 + x2 ) + y1 + y2 + z1 + z2 = 0, so ( u1 + u2 ) U for all u1, u2 U. Closure under scalar multiplication: Let u = ( x, y, z ). Then k u = ( k x, k y, k z ). u U => 2 x + y + z = 0. Multiplying by k gives 2 k x + k y + k z = 0, so k u U for all u U, k K. To prove that a subset of a vector space is a vector subspace it is necessary to prove that all the vector subspace conditions are satisfied; to prove that a subset is not a vector subspace it is sufficient to show that any convenient special case of the vector subspace conditions is not satisfied, which is much easier! Any example of the failure of some assertion is called a counter-example. Constraints excluding the zero vector do not give vector subspaces! If a subset is specified by a constraint that is not completely linear then it will not be a vector subspace. For example, U = { (x, y, z) | 2 x + y + z = 1 } R3 is not a vector subspace of R3 because it does not include the zero vector: 2 ( 0 ) + 0 + 0 1. [Aside: U is called an affine subspace, meaning that it is flat but does not include the zero vector.] The following figure illustrates the set U. [If you are using Maple to view this document then the following 3D plot can be rotated with the mouse.]

Other nonlinear constraints do not give vector subspaces either! As another example, U = { (x, y) | y = x2 } R2 is not a vector subspace of R2 because it is not closed. Here are two examples (i.e. simple special cases) that show that it is not closed under addition: ( 1, 1 ) U and ( 2, 4 ) U but ( 1, 1 ) + ( 2, 4 ) = ( 3, 5 ) is not in U because 5 32; ( 1, 1 ) U and ( 1, 1 ) U but ( 1, 1 ) + ( 1, 1 ) = ( 0, 2 ) is not in U because 2 02. The following figure illustrates both these failures of closure.

U is also not closed under scalar multiplication, e.g. ( 1, 1 ) U but 2 ( 1, 1 ) = ( 2, 2 ) is not in U because 2 ( 2 )2. However, any single counter-example is sufficient to prove that U is not a vector subspace.

Vector subspaces of R2 In fact, the only vector subspaces of the vector space R2 are (a) the set containing only the zero vector, i.e. U = { 0 R2 }, (b) any straight line through the origin, i.e. U = { ( x, x ) R2 | x R } for any fixed , R, and (c) the whole plane R2, i.e. U = R2.

Intersections of Vector Subspaces

We can specify a subset by more than one constraint. For example, as above let V = R = { (x, y, z) | x, y, z R }, S = { (x, y, z) | 2 x + y + z = 0 } V, T = { (x, y, z) | x + 2 y + z = 0 } V, U = { ( x, y, z) | 2 x + y + z = 0, x + 2 y + z = 0 } V. We have already proved that S is a vector subspace of V. It is equally easy to prove that T is a vector subspace of V and almost equally easy to prove that U is a vector subspace of V. The vector subspace U is the intersection of the vector subspaces S and T, U = S T, because the intersection of two sets is the set that contains the elements that are in both sets and so satisfy the constraints on both sets. The following figure illustrates the vector subspaces S, T and U = S T. [If you are using Maple to view this document then the following 3D plot can be rotated with the mouse.]
3

We can formalize this as follows. Proposition: Intersections of Vector Subspaces are Vector Subspaces Let V be a vector space and let S and T be vector subspaces of V. Then their intersection S T is also a vector subspace of V. Proof

Let U = S T. We need to prove that the vector subspace conditions are satisfied for U. Zero-vector inclusion: 0 S and 0 T since S and T are vector subspaces, so 0 U; Closure under addition: u1, u2 U => (u1, u2 S and u1, u2 T) => (( u1 + u2 ) S and ( u1 + u2 ) T) since S and T are vector subspaces, so ( u1 + u2 ) U for all u1, u2 U; Closure under scalar multiplication: u U => (u S and u T) => (k u S and k u T) since S and T are vector subspaces, so k u U for all u U, k K. Example Let V = R3, S = { ( x, y, z ) R3 | x = y } and T = { ( x, y, z ) R3 | y = z }. S = { ( x, x, z ) R3 } is a vector subspace of V, since ( 0, 0, 0 ) S; (( x1, x1, z1 ) S and ( x2, x2, z2 ) S) => ( x1 + x2, x1 + x2, z1 + z2 ) S; ( x, x, z ) S => ( k x, k x, k z ) S. Similarly T = { ( x, y, y ) R3 } is a vector subspace of V. Therefore U = S T is a vector subspace of V, by the proposition on intersections of subspaces. It is easy to check this assertion explicitly. U = { ( x, y, z ) R3 | x = y = z } = { (x, x, x) | x R } is a vector subspace of V, since ( 0, 0, 0 ) U; (( x1, x1, z1 ) U and in( x2, x2, x2, U )) => in( x1 + x2, x1 + x2, x1 + x2, U ); in( x, x, x, U ) => in( k x, k x, k x, U ).

Unions of Vector Subspaces

Unlike an intersection, a union of vector subspaces is generally not a vector subspace. As explained before, this is most easily proved by a counter-example, which is an example that proves that a claim is false. Suppose we claim that a union of vector subspaces is a vector subspace. Then a single example for which this claim is false, such as the following, suffices to disprove the claim. Let V = R2, S = { ( x, y ) R2 | y = 0 }, T = { ( x, y ) R2 | x = 0 }. Then S is the x-axis and T is the y -axis. The set U = S T , which is the union of the coordinate axes, is not a vector subspace of R2. One example that fails to satisfy the vector subspace conditions is sufficient to prove this claim. For example, ( 1, 0 ) U and ( 0, 1 ) U but ( 1, 0 ) + ( 0, 1 ) = ( 1, 1 ) is not in U.

Sums of Vector Subspaces

We define the sum of the two subsets S and T of a vector space to be the set of all vectors that can be written as a sum of a vector in S and a vector in T as follows. This concept is most useful in the special case of a direct sum, to which we return in Lectures 4. Definition of the Sum of Subsets of a Vector Space If S and T are subsets of a vector space then S + T = { s + t | s S, t T }. Note that S + T = T + S, since vector addition commutes.

Proposition: a Sum of Vector Subspaces is a Vector Subspace If S, T are vector subspaces of a vector space V then S + T is also a vector subspace of V. Proof Let U = S + T. We need to prove that the vector subspace conditions are satisfied for U. Zero-vector inclusion: 0 S and 0 T since S and T are vector subspaces, so ( 0 = 0 + 0 ) ( U = S + T ). Closure under addition: u1, u2 U => u1 = s1 + t1, u2 = s2 + t2 for some s1, s2 S, t1, t2 T. Hence u1 + u2 = (s1 + t1) + (s2 + t2) = (s1 + s2) + (t1 + t2). But ( s1 + s2 ) S and ( t1 + t2 ) T since S and T are vector subspaces, so ( u1 + u2 ) U for all u1, u2 U. Closure under scalar multiplication: u U => (u = s + t for some s S and t T) => k u = k s + k t. But k s S and k t T since S and T are vector subspaces, so k u U for all u U, k K. Example Let V = R2, S = { (x, 0) | x R }, T = { (0, y) | y R } (i.e. the two coordinate axes as before). Then S + T = { (x, 0) + (0, y) | x R, y R } = { (x, y) | x, y R } = R2 = V. The proposition asserts that S + T = { (x, y) | x, y R } is a vector subspace of V = R2, which is clearly true because S + T = R2. Note also that S T = { (0, 0) } is a (trivial) vector subspace.

Distributivity*
An operation is distributive relative to a rule of combination if performing the operation on the combination is equivalent to performing the operation on each element of the combination and then combining the results. For example, multiplication distributes over addition in a field, i.e. a . ( b + c ) = ( a . b ) + ( a . c ), and scalar multiplication distributes over both vector addition and scalar addition in a vector space; similarly intersection distributes over union in set theory A ( B C ) = ( A B ) ( A C ). We have just considered intersections and sums of vector subspaces, which raises the question: does intersection distribute over addition of vector subspaces? The answer is no, as we now prove by giving a simple counter-example, continuing the above example. We recall that V = R2, S = { (x, 0) | x R }, T = { (0, y) | y R }. Consider the line L = { (x, x) | x R }, where S, T and L are all vector subspaces of R2. Then L S = { 0 } and L T = { 0 }, so ( L S ) + ( L T ) = { 0 }. However, L ( S + T ) = L R2 = L. Hence L ( S + T ) ( L S ) + ( L T ) and intersection does not distribute over addition of vector subspaces.