Notes on Bases. In these notes instead of lists I work with finite sets. For the Steinitz exchange lemma see also its Wikipedia page. The Wikipedia's proof is very similar to the proof in the notes.
The cumulative effect of time spent engaged in creative pursuits is an amazing, often neglected aspect of life.
The school exists for us to engage in creative pursuits and experience the resulting amazing cumulative effect.
In class I presented a different proof of the Cauchy–Bunyakovsky–Schwarz inequality. The advantage of the proof in the notes is that it does not involve cases. However, it uses a theorem about quadratic polynomials which is commonly known but really proved, see Rigor in the context of quadratic functions.
As a side note here: Could the following statement be an interesting exercise in a college algebra or a precalculus class:
The concept of orthogonality is essential in each inner product space. Let $\mathcal{V}$ be an inner product space with the inner product $\langle\,\cdot\,,\cdot\,\rangle.$ For completeness we state the definition of an orthogonal set of vectors in an inner product space.
Proof. Let $u, v \in \mathcal{V}$ be arbitrary.
Case 1. $\langle u, u \rangle \gt 0$ or $\langle v, v \rangle \gt 0$. Case 1a. Assume $\langle u, u \rangle \gt 0$. Since the vector \[ \frac{\langle v, u \rangle}{\langle u, u \rangle} u \] is the orthogonal projection of the vector $v$ onto the subspace $\operatorname{span}\{u\}$, we have that the vectors \[ u \quad \text{and} \quad w = v - \frac{\langle v, u \rangle}{\langle u, u \rangle} u \] are orthogonal. That is \[ \langle w, u \rangle = \left\langle v - \frac{\langle v, u \rangle}{\langle u, u \rangle} u , u\right\rangle = \langle v, u \rangle - \frac{\langle v, u \rangle}{\langle u, u \rangle} \langle u, u \rangle = 0. \] Thus, the sum \[ \langle u, u \rangle v = \langle u, u \rangle w + \langle v, u \rangle u \] is an orthogonal sum. By the Pythagorean Theorem \[ \langle u, u \rangle^2 \langle v, v \rangle = \langle u, u \rangle^2 \langle w, w \rangle + |\langle v, u \rangle|^2 \langle u, u \rangle. \] Consequently, as \[ \langle u, u \rangle^2 \langle w, w \rangle \geq 0, \] we obtain \[ \langle u, u \rangle^2 \langle v, v \rangle \geq |\langle v, u \rangle|^2 \langle u, u \rangle. \] Dividing by $\langle u, u \rangle \gt 0$, we get the Cauchy–Bunyakovsky–Schwarz Inequality \[ \langle u, u \rangle \langle v, v \rangle \geq |\langle v, u \rangle|^2. \] The Case 1b. $\langle v, v \rangle \gt 0$ is proved similarly.
Case 2. Assume $\langle u, u \rangle = 0$ and $\langle v, v \rangle = 0$. Since for every $w \in \mathcal{V}$ we have $\langle w,w\rangle \geq 0$, with $w = u -\langle u, v \rangle v$ we have \begin{align*} 0 &\leq \bigl\langle u -\langle u, v \rangle v , u -\langle u, v \rangle v \bigr\rangle \\ & =\langle u,u \rangle - \langle v, u \rangle \langle u, v \rangle - \langle u, v \rangle \langle v, u \rangle +|\langle u, v \rangle|^2 \langle v,v \rangle \\ & = - 2 |\langle u, v \rangle|^2 \\ & \leq 0. \end{align*} Consequently, \[ \langle u, v \rangle = 0. \] Since, in this case, u \[ \langle u, v \rangle = 0, \quad \langle u, u \rangle = 0, \quad \langle v, v \rangle = 0, \] the Cauchy–Bunyakovsky–Schwarz Inequality holds in this case. This completes the proof of the Cauchy–Bunyakovsky–Schwarz Inequality.
Proof of the statement involving the equality is in the notes.
Inspired by a question that I got in the class, I started the class by talking about the colors in relation to linear algebra. I love the application of vectors to COLORS so much that I wrote a webpage to celebrate it: Color Cube.
It is important to point out that in the red-green-blue coloring scheme, the following eighteen colors stand out. I present them in six steps with three colors in each step.
Today, there was a question related to this problem in Discussions on Canvas.
The statements $$-1 \lt \frac{u+v}{1 + u v} \ \ \land \ \ \frac{u+v}{1 + u v} \lt 1$$ and $$\left|\frac{u+v}{1 + u v}\right| \lt 1$$ are equivalent. I did not use the absolute value function in class since I do not see how it can be used it in proof. However, using the absolute value might be the simplest way to write what we need to prove $$|u|\lt 1 \ \land \ |v| \lt 1 \quad \Rightarrow \quad \left|\frac{u+v}{1 + u v} \right|\lt 1.$$
I did not use the absolute value function in the proof that I constructed. It does not mean that it cannot be used; just I do not see how. The absolute value function always hides two inequalities. When it comes to proofs involving the absolute value, I prefer to deal with two inequalities separately. Although, it might be more elegant to do one proof using the absolute value only. Sometimes it is possible, but it might require extra effort.
I feel that it is wrong on my part to push you towards proof that I came up with. However, I violated this rule today in class, and I suggested that you prove that $$u\in (-1,1) \ \land \ v\in (-1,1) \quad \Rightarrow \quad 1+uv \gt 0.$$ Then, I think it is useful to observe the following equivalences:
Assume that $$u\in (-1,1) \ \land \ v\in (-1,1).$$ The following two inequalities are equivalent $$-1 \lt \frac{u+v}{1 + u v} \quad \Leftrightarrow \quad -1-uv \lt u+v.$$ Also, the following two inequalities are equivalent $$\frac{u+v}{1 + u v} \lt 1 \quad \Leftrightarrow \quad u+v \lt 1+ uv.$$ Based on the last two equivalences, we need to prove the following two implications $$u\in (-1,1) \ \land \ v\in (-1,1) \quad \Rightarrow \quad 1 + u + v +uv \gt 0$$ and $$u\in (-1,1) \ \land \ v\in (-1,1) \quad \Rightarrow \quad 1 - u - v +uv \gt 0.$$ Sometimes one gets lucky in math, so the expressions $$1 + u + v +uv$$ and $$1 - u - v +uv$$ factor so beautifully conveniently (or, conveniently beautifully, I cannot decide which order of adverbs to use).
Only late this evening, I realized that a beautiful building could be created by putting together the four graphs we studied above.
Or, if the design fails as architecture, we can try to market it as a serving dish.
Next we prove that \[ \mathcal{U}_1\cap \mathcal{W}_1 = \{0_{\mathcal{V}}\}. \] Let $v \in \mathcal{U}_1\cap \mathcal{W}_1$ be arbitrary. Since $\mathcal{U}_1 \subseteq \mathcal{U}$ and $\mathcal{W}_1 \subseteq \mathcal{W},$ we deduce $v \in \mathcal{U}\cap \mathcal{W}.$ Thus \[ v \in (\mathcal{U}\cap \mathcal{W}) \cap \mathcal{U}_1 = \{0_{\mathcal{V}}\}. \] That is $v = 0_{\mathcal{V}}.$
Hence, the sum $\mathcal{U}_1 + \mathcal{W}_1$ is a direct sum.
Next we prove that (prove this as an exercise) \[ \mathcal{U}+\mathcal{W} = (\mathcal{U}\cap \mathcal{W}) + \bigl( \mathcal{U}_1 \oplus \mathcal{W}_1 \bigr) \] and \[ (\mathcal{U}\cap \mathcal{W}) \cap \bigl( \mathcal{U}_1 \oplus \mathcal{W}_1 \bigr) = \{0_{\mathcal{V}}\}. \]
Let $u_1 \in \mathcal{U}_1$ and $w_1 \in \mathcal{W}_1$ be arbitrary and assume that $u_1+w_1 \in \mathcal{U}\cap \mathcal{W}.$ Set $v=u_1+w_1 \in \mathcal{U}\cap \mathcal{W}.$ The equality \[ u_1 = v - w_1 \] provides a rich reading: \[ v-w_1 \in \mathcal{W} \quad \text{since} \quad v \in \mathcal{U}\cap \mathcal{W} \subseteq \mathcal{W} \quad \text{and} \quad -w_1 \in \mathcal{W}_1 \subseteq \mathcal{W} \] and \[ v-w_1 = u_1 \in \mathcal{U} \quad \text{since} \quad u_1 \in \mathcal{U}_1 \subseteq \mathcal{U}. \] Thus, \[ v-w_1 = u_1 \in \mathcal{U}\cap \mathcal{W} \quad \text{and} \quad v-w_1 = u_1 \in \mathcal{U}_1. \] Since \[ (\mathcal{U}\cap \mathcal{W}) \cap \mathcal{U}_1 = \{0_{\mathcal{V}}\}, \] we deduce $v-w_1 = u_1 = 0_{\mathcal{V}}.$ Consequently, \[ w_1 = v \in (\mathcal{U}\cap \mathcal{W}) \cap \mathcal{W}_1 = \{0_{\mathcal{V}}\}. \] Thus, both $u_1 = 0_{\mathcal{V}}$ and $w_1 = 0_{\mathcal{V}}.$ This proves that \[ (\mathcal{U}\cap \mathcal{W}) \cap \bigl( \mathcal{U}_1 \oplus \mathcal{W}_1 \bigr) = \{0_{\mathcal{V}}\}, \] and consequently \[ \mathcal{U}+\mathcal{W} = (\mathcal{U}\cap \mathcal{W}) \oplus \bigl( \mathcal{U}_1 \oplus \mathcal{W}_1 \bigr). \]
Therefore, \[ \mathcal{U}+\mathcal{W} = (\mathcal{U}\cap \mathcal{W}) \oplus \bigl( \mathcal{U}_1 \oplus \mathcal{W}_1 \bigr) \]
Which functions are in $\mathcal{S}_1?$ For example, with $a=1$ and $b=0$, the function $\sin(x)$ is in the set $\mathcal{S}_1,$ with $a=1$ and $b=\pi$, the function $\sin(x+\pi) = -\sin(x)$ is in the set $\mathcal{S}_1.$ One can continue with specific values with $a$ and $b$ and plot individual functions.
Below I present 180 functions from $\mathcal{S}_1$ with the coefficients \begin{align*} a & \in \left\{\frac{1}{6}, \frac{1}{3}, \frac{1}{2}, \frac{2}{3}, \frac{5}{6}, 1, \frac{7}{6}, \frac{4}{3}, \frac{3}{2}, \frac{5}{3}, \frac{11}{6},2, \frac{13}{6}, \frac{7}{3}, \frac{5}{2} \right\}, \\ b & \in \left\{ 0, \frac{\pi}{6},\frac{\pi}{3},\frac{\pi}{2},\frac{2\pi}{3}, \frac{5\pi}{6}, \pi, \frac{7\pi}{6},\frac{4\pi}{3},\frac{3\pi}{2},\frac{5\pi}{3}, \frac{11\pi}{6} \right\} \end{align*}
Place the cursor over the image to see individaual functions.
We discussed Exercise 16 in Section 2A.
This exercise requires us to prove that the vector space of all continuous real-valued functions defined on the interval $[0,1]$ is infinite dimensional. Denote this space by $\mathcal{C}[0,1]$.
I suggested that Exercise 14 in the same section can be used. This exercise states that a vector space $\mathcal{V}$ is infinite-dimensional if and only if there is a sequence \[ v_1,\ldots, v_n,\ldots \] in $\mathcal{V}$ such that for every $m\in\mathbb{N}$ the vectors $v_1,\ldots, v_m$ are linearly independent.
Consider the subset of $\bigl\{v_1, v_2, \ldots, v_n\bigr\}$ defined as \[ \mathcal{P} = \bigl\{ v_k : k \in \{1,\ldots,n\} \land \delta_k = 1 \bigr\}. \] I claim that the set $\mathcal{P}$ has $d$ elements, that $\mathcal{P}$ is linearly independent and the span of $\mathcal{P}$ is identical to the span of $\bigl\{v_1, v_2, \ldots, v_n\bigr\}.$
In the Ode, the set $\mathcal{P}$ is the set of all yellow columns. In the context of matrices these columns are called the pivot columns of a matrix.
In fact, I would prefer to write the set $\mathcal{P}$ is a $d$-tuple. But how to do that? In plain English, from the $n$-tuple $\bigl(v_1, v_2, \ldots, v_n\bigr)$ I want to select those vectors $v_k$ that received $\delta_k =1$ in exactly the same order as their appear in the original $n$-tuple. Notice that this is done in the Ode just by visual inspection, so to say. Below is one way how to describe this process rigorously that I see now.
First define the function \[ \eta : \{1,\ldots,n\} \to \{0,1,\ldots,d\} \] by \[ \forall k\in \{1,\ldots,n\} \quad \eta_k = \sum_{j=1}^{k} \delta_j. \] Observe the facts: $0$ is in the range of $\eta$ if and only if $v_1 = 0_{\mathcal{V}}$ and $\{1,\ldots,d\}$ is a subset of the range of $\eta.$ Therefore \[ \forall p \in \{1,\ldots,d\} \quad \bigl\{ k \in \{1,\ldots,n\} : \eta_k = p \bigr\} \neq \emptyset. \] Define \[ \mu : \{1,\ldots,d\} \to \{1,\ldots,n\} \] by \[ \forall p \in \{1,\ldots,d\} \quad \mu_p = \min \bigl\{ k \in \{1,\ldots,n\} : \eta_k = p \bigr\}. \] Now we can write the set $\mathcal{P}$ as a $d$-tuple: \[ \bigl( v_{\mu_1}, \ldots, v_{\mu_d} \bigr). \]
Understanding a theorem, mathematical concept, or a problem is an individual act of creative sensemaking that engages all our senses and creativity.
These are my notes on Bases. In these notes instead of lists I work with finite sets. For the Steinitz exchange lemma see its Wikipedia page. The Wikipedia's proof is very similar to the proof in my notes.
For a finite set $S$ the symbol $|S|$ denotes the number of elements in that set. This notation is identical to the notation for the absolute value function. There should be no confusion since the reader should always consider the nature of the object which is enclosed by the vertical bars. If the object enclosed by the vertical bars is a real number, then the symbol is the absolute value of that real number; the object enclosed by the vertical bars is a complex number, then the symbol is the modulus of that complex number; the object enclosed by the vertical bars is a finite set, then the symbol is the number of elements of that set; see the Wikipedia page Cardinality.
I recall the definition of a vector space as I stated it in class. Here $\mathbb{F}$ is either $\mathbb{R}$ or $\mathbb{C}.$
Definition. A nonempty set $\mathcal{V}$ is said to be a vector space over $\mathbb{F}$ if it satisfies the following ten axioms.
Explanation of the abbreviations: AE--addition exists, AA--addition is associative, AC--addition is commutative, AZ--addition has zero, AO--addition has opposites, SE-- scaling exists, SA--scaling is associative, SD--scaling distributes over addition of real numbers, SD--scaling distributes over addition of vectors, SO--scaling with one.
In class I made the following daring claim: Each example of a vector space over $\mathbb{F}$ that I know is a subspace of a vector space $\mathbb{F}^D$ for some nonempty set $D.$
While talking to students during the office hour today, I realized that my daring claim is not true. Below I give an example of an exotic vector space for which I do not see how to present it as a subspace of $\mathbb{R}^D$ for some nonempty set $D.$