Projection Formula












1












$begingroup$


Does someone know if in the problem the projection of x onto U is defined like that :




$x_u = displaystyle frac{langle x,urangle}{u. u}$ $u$




Problem:




Let $U,Vsubsetmathbb C^n$ be two subspaces, such that $mathbb C^n = U+V$ and further assume $Ucap V = {0}$.



Show that every $xinmathbb C^n$ can be written as $x=x_u+x_v$ with $x_uin U$ and $x_vin V$ and that this decomposition is unique.











share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    That formula is for a projection onto a vector, not a subspace. So you need vectors to make it work (hint: use a basis). This, however, might not be the best approach to this problem.
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Burr
    Jan 5 at 11:06
















1












$begingroup$


Does someone know if in the problem the projection of x onto U is defined like that :




$x_u = displaystyle frac{langle x,urangle}{u. u}$ $u$




Problem:




Let $U,Vsubsetmathbb C^n$ be two subspaces, such that $mathbb C^n = U+V$ and further assume $Ucap V = {0}$.



Show that every $xinmathbb C^n$ can be written as $x=x_u+x_v$ with $x_uin U$ and $x_vin V$ and that this decomposition is unique.











share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    That formula is for a projection onto a vector, not a subspace. So you need vectors to make it work (hint: use a basis). This, however, might not be the best approach to this problem.
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Burr
    Jan 5 at 11:06














1












1








1





$begingroup$


Does someone know if in the problem the projection of x onto U is defined like that :




$x_u = displaystyle frac{langle x,urangle}{u. u}$ $u$




Problem:




Let $U,Vsubsetmathbb C^n$ be two subspaces, such that $mathbb C^n = U+V$ and further assume $Ucap V = {0}$.



Show that every $xinmathbb C^n$ can be written as $x=x_u+x_v$ with $x_uin U$ and $x_vin V$ and that this decomposition is unique.











share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




Does someone know if in the problem the projection of x onto U is defined like that :




$x_u = displaystyle frac{langle x,urangle}{u. u}$ $u$




Problem:




Let $U,Vsubsetmathbb C^n$ be two subspaces, such that $mathbb C^n = U+V$ and further assume $Ucap V = {0}$.



Show that every $xinmathbb C^n$ can be written as $x=x_u+x_v$ with $x_uin U$ and $x_vin V$ and that this decomposition is unique.








projection






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Jan 5 at 11:55









Matt Samuel

37.8k63665




37.8k63665










asked Jan 5 at 11:00









KaiKai

446




446








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    That formula is for a projection onto a vector, not a subspace. So you need vectors to make it work (hint: use a basis). This, however, might not be the best approach to this problem.
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Burr
    Jan 5 at 11:06














  • 2




    $begingroup$
    That formula is for a projection onto a vector, not a subspace. So you need vectors to make it work (hint: use a basis). This, however, might not be the best approach to this problem.
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Burr
    Jan 5 at 11:06








2




2




$begingroup$
That formula is for a projection onto a vector, not a subspace. So you need vectors to make it work (hint: use a basis). This, however, might not be the best approach to this problem.
$endgroup$
– Michael Burr
Jan 5 at 11:06




$begingroup$
That formula is for a projection onto a vector, not a subspace. So you need vectors to make it work (hint: use a basis). This, however, might not be the best approach to this problem.
$endgroup$
– Michael Burr
Jan 5 at 11:06










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















1












$begingroup$

If $xin mathbb{C}^n$, then since $mathbb{C}^n = U+V$ there must exist $x_uin U$ and $x_vin v$ such that
$$x=x_u+x_v$$
Suppose now that there exist alternative $y_u,y_v$ with
$$x=y_u+y_v$$
Then
$$x-x=0=(x_u-y_u)+(x_v-y_v)$$
Hence
$$y_u-x_u=x_v-y_v$$
Since $U$ and $V$ are subspaces, $y_u-x_uin U$ and $x_v-y_vin V$. Thus these vectors are in $Ucap V={0}$, hence $y_u-x_u=x_v-y_v=0$, and hence the decomposition is unique.



Clearly we didn't need projection here. Indeed this proof works for infinite dimensional vector spaces as well, as well as vector spaces over an arbitrary field (not necessarily real or complex numbers, or even characteristic $0$), and an inner product is not required.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thank you very much for your answer,but I still cannot understand how this proves that the sum of the two projections equals x . That's why I am asking what actually is x onto U ?
    $endgroup$
    – Kai
    Jan 5 at 16:12










  • $begingroup$
    @Kai Because the whole space is equal to $U+V$, by definition every vector is the sum of a vector in $U$ and a vector in $V$. This proof shows that it's unique. It's not a projection onto $U$. Protection onto $U$ essentially removes the orthogonal complement of $U$, which might not be $V$, so the component in $U$ wouldn't necessarily be the projection.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt Samuel
    Jan 5 at 16:18













Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3062612%2fprojection-formula%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









1












$begingroup$

If $xin mathbb{C}^n$, then since $mathbb{C}^n = U+V$ there must exist $x_uin U$ and $x_vin v$ such that
$$x=x_u+x_v$$
Suppose now that there exist alternative $y_u,y_v$ with
$$x=y_u+y_v$$
Then
$$x-x=0=(x_u-y_u)+(x_v-y_v)$$
Hence
$$y_u-x_u=x_v-y_v$$
Since $U$ and $V$ are subspaces, $y_u-x_uin U$ and $x_v-y_vin V$. Thus these vectors are in $Ucap V={0}$, hence $y_u-x_u=x_v-y_v=0$, and hence the decomposition is unique.



Clearly we didn't need projection here. Indeed this proof works for infinite dimensional vector spaces as well, as well as vector spaces over an arbitrary field (not necessarily real or complex numbers, or even characteristic $0$), and an inner product is not required.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thank you very much for your answer,but I still cannot understand how this proves that the sum of the two projections equals x . That's why I am asking what actually is x onto U ?
    $endgroup$
    – Kai
    Jan 5 at 16:12










  • $begingroup$
    @Kai Because the whole space is equal to $U+V$, by definition every vector is the sum of a vector in $U$ and a vector in $V$. This proof shows that it's unique. It's not a projection onto $U$. Protection onto $U$ essentially removes the orthogonal complement of $U$, which might not be $V$, so the component in $U$ wouldn't necessarily be the projection.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt Samuel
    Jan 5 at 16:18


















1












$begingroup$

If $xin mathbb{C}^n$, then since $mathbb{C}^n = U+V$ there must exist $x_uin U$ and $x_vin v$ such that
$$x=x_u+x_v$$
Suppose now that there exist alternative $y_u,y_v$ with
$$x=y_u+y_v$$
Then
$$x-x=0=(x_u-y_u)+(x_v-y_v)$$
Hence
$$y_u-x_u=x_v-y_v$$
Since $U$ and $V$ are subspaces, $y_u-x_uin U$ and $x_v-y_vin V$. Thus these vectors are in $Ucap V={0}$, hence $y_u-x_u=x_v-y_v=0$, and hence the decomposition is unique.



Clearly we didn't need projection here. Indeed this proof works for infinite dimensional vector spaces as well, as well as vector spaces over an arbitrary field (not necessarily real or complex numbers, or even characteristic $0$), and an inner product is not required.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thank you very much for your answer,but I still cannot understand how this proves that the sum of the two projections equals x . That's why I am asking what actually is x onto U ?
    $endgroup$
    – Kai
    Jan 5 at 16:12










  • $begingroup$
    @Kai Because the whole space is equal to $U+V$, by definition every vector is the sum of a vector in $U$ and a vector in $V$. This proof shows that it's unique. It's not a projection onto $U$. Protection onto $U$ essentially removes the orthogonal complement of $U$, which might not be $V$, so the component in $U$ wouldn't necessarily be the projection.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt Samuel
    Jan 5 at 16:18
















1












1








1





$begingroup$

If $xin mathbb{C}^n$, then since $mathbb{C}^n = U+V$ there must exist $x_uin U$ and $x_vin v$ such that
$$x=x_u+x_v$$
Suppose now that there exist alternative $y_u,y_v$ with
$$x=y_u+y_v$$
Then
$$x-x=0=(x_u-y_u)+(x_v-y_v)$$
Hence
$$y_u-x_u=x_v-y_v$$
Since $U$ and $V$ are subspaces, $y_u-x_uin U$ and $x_v-y_vin V$. Thus these vectors are in $Ucap V={0}$, hence $y_u-x_u=x_v-y_v=0$, and hence the decomposition is unique.



Clearly we didn't need projection here. Indeed this proof works for infinite dimensional vector spaces as well, as well as vector spaces over an arbitrary field (not necessarily real or complex numbers, or even characteristic $0$), and an inner product is not required.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



If $xin mathbb{C}^n$, then since $mathbb{C}^n = U+V$ there must exist $x_uin U$ and $x_vin v$ such that
$$x=x_u+x_v$$
Suppose now that there exist alternative $y_u,y_v$ with
$$x=y_u+y_v$$
Then
$$x-x=0=(x_u-y_u)+(x_v-y_v)$$
Hence
$$y_u-x_u=x_v-y_v$$
Since $U$ and $V$ are subspaces, $y_u-x_uin U$ and $x_v-y_vin V$. Thus these vectors are in $Ucap V={0}$, hence $y_u-x_u=x_v-y_v=0$, and hence the decomposition is unique.



Clearly we didn't need projection here. Indeed this proof works for infinite dimensional vector spaces as well, as well as vector spaces over an arbitrary field (not necessarily real or complex numbers, or even characteristic $0$), and an inner product is not required.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Jan 5 at 11:58









Matt SamuelMatt Samuel

37.8k63665




37.8k63665












  • $begingroup$
    Thank you very much for your answer,but I still cannot understand how this proves that the sum of the two projections equals x . That's why I am asking what actually is x onto U ?
    $endgroup$
    – Kai
    Jan 5 at 16:12










  • $begingroup$
    @Kai Because the whole space is equal to $U+V$, by definition every vector is the sum of a vector in $U$ and a vector in $V$. This proof shows that it's unique. It's not a projection onto $U$. Protection onto $U$ essentially removes the orthogonal complement of $U$, which might not be $V$, so the component in $U$ wouldn't necessarily be the projection.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt Samuel
    Jan 5 at 16:18




















  • $begingroup$
    Thank you very much for your answer,but I still cannot understand how this proves that the sum of the two projections equals x . That's why I am asking what actually is x onto U ?
    $endgroup$
    – Kai
    Jan 5 at 16:12










  • $begingroup$
    @Kai Because the whole space is equal to $U+V$, by definition every vector is the sum of a vector in $U$ and a vector in $V$. This proof shows that it's unique. It's not a projection onto $U$. Protection onto $U$ essentially removes the orthogonal complement of $U$, which might not be $V$, so the component in $U$ wouldn't necessarily be the projection.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt Samuel
    Jan 5 at 16:18


















$begingroup$
Thank you very much for your answer,but I still cannot understand how this proves that the sum of the two projections equals x . That's why I am asking what actually is x onto U ?
$endgroup$
– Kai
Jan 5 at 16:12




$begingroup$
Thank you very much for your answer,but I still cannot understand how this proves that the sum of the two projections equals x . That's why I am asking what actually is x onto U ?
$endgroup$
– Kai
Jan 5 at 16:12












$begingroup$
@Kai Because the whole space is equal to $U+V$, by definition every vector is the sum of a vector in $U$ and a vector in $V$. This proof shows that it's unique. It's not a projection onto $U$. Protection onto $U$ essentially removes the orthogonal complement of $U$, which might not be $V$, so the component in $U$ wouldn't necessarily be the projection.
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Jan 5 at 16:18






$begingroup$
@Kai Because the whole space is equal to $U+V$, by definition every vector is the sum of a vector in $U$ and a vector in $V$. This proof shows that it's unique. It's not a projection onto $U$. Protection onto $U$ essentially removes the orthogonal complement of $U$, which might not be $V$, so the component in $U$ wouldn't necessarily be the projection.
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Jan 5 at 16:18




















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3062612%2fprojection-formula%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

MongoDB - Not Authorized To Execute Command

How to fix TextFormField cause rebuild widget in Flutter

in spring boot 2.1 many test slices are not allowed anymore due to multiple @BootstrapWith