Page 31 - Linear Algebra Done Right
P. 31

Sums and Direct Sums
                                  First suppose that V = U 1 ⊕· · ·  U n . Clearly (a) holds
                         Proof:
                      (because of how sum and direct sum are defined). To prove (b), suppose
                      that u 1 ∈ U 1 ,...,u n ∈ U n and                                                     17
                                              0 = u 1 +· · ·+ u n .
                      Then each u j must be 0 (this follows from the uniqueness part of the
                      definition of direct sum because 0 = 0+· · ·+0 and 0 ∈ U 1 ,..., 0 ∈ U n ),
                      proving (b).
                         Now suppose that (a) and (b) hold. Let v ∈ V. By (a), we can write

                                              v = u 1 +· · ·+ u n

                      for some u 1 ∈ U 1 ,...,u n ∈ U n . To show that this representation is
                      unique, suppose that we also have

                                              v = v 1 + ··· + v n ,

                      where v 1 ∈ U 1 ,...,v n ∈ U n . Subtracting these two equations, we have

                                        0 = (u 1 − v 1 ) +· · ·+ (u n − v n ).
                      Clearly u 1 − v 1 ∈ U 1 ,...,u n − v n ∈ U n , so the equation above and (b)
                      imply that each u j − v j = 0. Thus u 1 = v 1 ,...,u n = v n , as desired.

                         The next proposition gives a simple condition for testing which pairs  Sums of subspaces are
                      of subspaces give a direct sum. Note that this proposition deals only  analogous to unions of
                      with the case of two subspaces. When asking about a possible direct  subsets. Similarly,
                      sum with more than two subspaces, it is not enough to test that any  direct sums of
                      two of the subspaces intersect only at 0. To see this, consider the  subspaces are
                      nonexample presented just before 1.8. In that nonexample, we had    analogous to disjoint
                                              3
                        3
                      F = U 1 + U 2 + U 3 , but F did not equal the direct sum of U 1 ,U 2 ,U 3 .  unions of subsets. No
                                                                                          two subspaces of a
                      However, in that nonexample, we have U 1 ∩U 2 = U 1 ∩U 3 = U 2 ∩U 3 ={0}
                      (as you should verify). The next proposition shows that with just two  vector space can be
                      subspaces we get a nice necessary and sufficient condition for a direct  disjoint because both
                      sum.                                                                must contain 0.So
                                                                                          disjointness is
                      1.9    Proposition: Suppose that U and W are subspaces of V. Then   replaced, at least in the
                      V = U ⊕ W if and only if V = U + W and U ∩ W ={0}.                  case of two subspaces,
                                                                                          with the requirement
                         Proof: First suppose that V = U ⊕ W. Then V = U + W (by the      that the intersection
                      definition of direct sum). Also, if v ∈ U ∩ W, then 0 = v + (−v), where  equals {0}.
   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36