2024-08-18

725: For Vectors Space, Generator of Space, and Linearly Independent Subset Contained in Generator, Generator Can Be Reduced to Be Basis with Linearly Independent Subset Retained

<The previous article in this series | The table of contents of this series | The next article in this series>

description/proof of that for vectors space, generator of space, and linearly independent subset contained in generator, generator can be reduced to be basis with linearly independent subset retained

Topics


About: vectors space

The table of contents of this article


Starting Context



Target Context


  • The reader will have a description and a proof of the proposition that for any vectors space, any generator of the space, and any linearly independent subset contained in the generator, the generator can be reduced to be a basis with the linearly independent subset retained.

Orientation


There is a list of definitions discussed so far in this site.

There is a list of propositions discussed so far in this site.


Main Body


1: Structured Description


Here is the rules of Structured Description.

Entities:
F: { the fields }
V: { the F vectors spaces }
S: { the generators of V}
S: S, { the linearly independent subsets of V}
//

Statements:
BV(SBSB{ the bases of V})
//


2: Natural Language Description


For any field, F, any F vectors space, V, any generator of V, S, and any linearly independent subset, SV, such that SS, there is a basis, BV, such that SBS.


3: Note


V does not need to be finite-dimensional.


4: Proof


Whole Strategy: Step 1: define the subset of Pow(S), S, such that each element contains S and is linearly independent; Step 2: apply Zorn's lemma to S and get any maximal element as B; Step 3: see that B spans S.

Step 1:

Let us define S:={pPow(S)|Spp{ the linearly independent subsets of V}}.

Step 2:

Let us see that S satisfies the conditions for Zorn's lemma.

S is nonempty because SS. Let SS be any nonempty chain, which means that for each S1,S2S, S1S2 or S2S1. SS? S={pS|pS(pp)}, so, SPow(S). SS, obviously. S is linearly independent, because for each finite subset, {p1,...,pn}S, there are some S1S,...,SnS such that p1S1,...,pnSn, but as S is a chain, there is an Sk such that SjSk for each j{1,...,n}, so, {p1,...,pn}Sk, and as Sk is linearly independent, j{1,...,n}cjpj=0 has only all zero cj s. So, SS.

By Zorn's lemma, there is a maximal element, BS.

SBS.

B is linearly independent as it is an element of S.

Step 3:

Let us see that B spans S.

Let pSB be any.

B{p} is linearly dependent, because otherwise, B would not be maximal, because it would be B{p}S while BB{p}.

So, there is a finite subset, {b1,...,bn,p}B{p}, such that j{1,...,n}cjbj+cp=0 has a not-all-zero (c1,...,cn,c). In fact, c0, because j{1,...,n}cjbj=0 would imply that all the cj s were 0, because B was linearly independent. So, p=c1j{1,...,n}cjbj.

As S spans V, B spans V.

So, B is a basis of V.


References


<The previous article in this series | The table of contents of this series | The next article in this series>