Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I am also given that if $S$ and $T$ are subspaces of a vector field, then the above are equivalent

share|improve this question
4  
Are you sure this is about vector fields, not vector spaces? –  Hagen von Eitzen Jan 16 '13 at 16:58

2 Answers 2

Suppose $u \perp S$ and $v \perp T$; that is, $\langle u,s \rangle = 0$ and $\langle v,t \rangle = 0$ for all $s \in S$ and $t \in T$. You need to show that $u+v \perp S \cap T$; that is, $\langle u+v, x \rangle = 0$ for all $x \in S \cap T$. Can you do this?

Now suppose $S$ and $T$ are subspaces. Why does the converse to the above hold?

If you're still stuck, please post some of your working.

share|improve this answer
    
My problem is this, If I have that (S + T) perp is a subset of (S perp intersection T perp), can I conclude that: (S perp intersection T perp) perp is a subset of ( S + T )? If so, why? i.e. by which rule? –  user58503 Jan 16 '13 at 17:52
    
Yes - general if $A \subseteq B$ then $B^{\perp} \subseteq A^{\perp}$; and if $A$ is a subspace then $A^{\perp \perp} = A$. To see why this is true, just work from the definitions, in a similar way to how I did in my answer. –  Clive Newstead Jan 16 '13 at 19:00

If $x\in S^\perp+T^\perp$, then we can write $x=u+v$ with $u\in S^\perp$ and $v\in T^\perp$. Now if $r\in S\cap T$, then $u\perp r$ and $v\perp r$, hence $x=u+v\perp r$, i.e. $x\in(S\cap T)^\perp$.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

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.