Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Please help with the problem in the book:
Let $W_1$ and $W_2$ be subspaces of a finite-dimensional vector space $V$. Determine necessary and sufficient conditions on $W_1$ and $W_2$ so that $\dim(W_1 ∩ W_2) = \dim(W_1)$.

Sorry if my post looked like a demand. My English is poor so I copied the exercise out of the book and did not change the wording of the question because I did not want to change the meaning (as I did in my last post). I was only requesting help/guidance and was not making any demands. I am studying the subject myself so its not a "homework" problem. Thank you to everyone who posted and helped.

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 1 down vote accepted

The dimension counting formula may come in handy:

$\operatorname{dim} (W_1 + W_2) = \operatorname{dim} (W_1) + \operatorname{dim} (W_2) - \operatorname{dim} (W_1 \cap W_2).$

Hence if $\operatorname{dim} (W_1) = \operatorname{dim} (W_1 \cap W_2)$, we have that $ \operatorname{dim}(W_1 + W_2) = \operatorname{dim} W_2$ by the formula above. Now $W_1 + W_2$ is defined to be the subspace of $V$ whose elements are of the form $w_1 + w_2$ where $w_i \in W_i$. Now how can this formula hold? If $W_1$ and $W_2$ intersect trivially the sum of the two spaces becomes direct so that in fact we are calculating $\operatorname{dim}(W_1 \oplus W_2) = \operatorname{dim} W_1 + \operatorname{dim} W_2$ .

Plugging this into the formula $\operatorname{dim} (W_1 + W_2) = \operatorname{dim} W_2$ we get that $\operatorname{dim} W_2 = 0$. So now if we don't want degenerate cases like that we may assume that $W_1$ and $W_2$ have non-trivial intersection. Your job now is to tell me why $\operatorname{dim} (W_1 + W_2) = \operatorname{dim} W_2$ implies that $W_1 \subset W_2$ assuming $W_2$ is not the zero space.

Hint: If $U$ is a subspace of $V$ and $\operatorname{dim} U = \operatorname{dim} V, $ then $U = V$.

Therefore you have found a necessary condition for your formula to hold. Is this condition sufficient? Well it should be clear from the dimension counting formula above because then $\operatorname{dim} (W_1 + W_2) = \operatorname{dim} W_2$ so that cancelling terms on both sides of the formula and rearranging we get

$$\operatorname{dim} W_1 = \operatorname{dim} (W_1 \cap W_2).$$

share|cite|improve this answer
I am assuming your question is not a homework problem. – user38268 Feb 8 '12 at 5:14
Benjamin, that seems a mighty big assumption – user16299 Feb 8 '12 at 7:12
@YemonChoi That it is not a homework problem? – user38268 Feb 8 '12 at 7:19
Yes. Why do you assume it is not? Everything here points towards homework, I would say. – Did Feb 8 '12 at 8:25
@DidierPiau Well usually I like to give the OP the benefit of the doubt. – user38268 Feb 8 '12 at 9:18

HINT: Suppose that $\dim(W_1\cap W_2)=m$. Take a basis $B$ for $W_1\cap W_2$; it has $m$ members. These members must be linearly independent (why?). Now if $\dim(W_1)$ is also $m$, so that $B$ is a linearly independent set of $m$ vectors in $W_1$, is $B$ a basis for $W_1$?

share|cite|improve this answer

$\bf Hint:$ $\operatorname{dim}(W_1\cap W_2)=\operatorname{dim}(W_1)$ if and only if $W_1\subset W_2$

share|cite|improve this answer

The dimension of the intersection is less or equal than the dimension of each subspace since it is a subspace of each one. If the dimension of the intersection is equal to the W1 , that means : the intersection is equal to W1 and this means that W1 is contained or equal to W2. Then the condition you want is this (necessary and sufficient).

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.