Print this page and work through it on paper. Revealed answers are never printed, so you can check one question and still print a clean sheet.

  1. Show the solution to question 1

    (a) Solve for the identity. The zero vector is whatever satisfies for every . That reads , so and :

    The additive inverse of is the with , i.e. , so and :

    Check: ✓.

    The answers are not the familiar ones because the axioms define by its behaviour under , not by its appearance. The pair is an ordinary nonzero vector of : indeed , so it is not an identity. By the elementary-consequences proposition the zero vector is unique, so is the only candidate.

    (b) Axioms 5, 6, 8. Axiom 5: ✓.

    Axiom 6: , and . Equal ✓.

    Axiom 8: the left side is . The right side is

    Equal ✓.

    (c) The disguise. Take , a bijection with inverse . Then

    and .

    So converts into and into ordinary scaling. Every axiom is an identity between expressions built from the two operations; applying the bijection to both sides turns it into the same identity in with the usual operations, where it is known to hold, and applying brings it back. That is why all eight hold — exactly as does the work for the positive reals under multiplication. Consistency check: , the zero of .

    Because preserves linear combinations, it carries a basis of to a basis of and back. The preimages of and are and , so

    Direct check: and , so , which runs through every vector of exactly once as runs through . That is the unique-representation theorem, so it is a basis. Note that the nonzero vector is a basis vector.

  2. Show the solution to question 2

    (a) Subspace. The zero polynomial has , so . One-step test: if and , then

    so . Hence is a subspace. In coefficients, lies in exactly when — a single homogeneous linear equation, which is the shape a subspace condition always has.

    (b) Not a subspace. The zero matrix satisfies , so the quick zero-vector test does not disqualify ; closure has to be checked. Now , so , but

    so . Closure under scalar multiplication fails (and so does closure under addition, since ). The condition is quadratic in the entries, not linear, which is the underlying reason.

    (c) Not a subspace. where and . Each is a subspace (a homogeneous linear condition, and a span). Neither contains the other: but not in , and but not in since its coordinates sum to . By the proposition on unions of subspaces, is therefore not a subspace.

    Concretely, closure under addition fails:

    whose coordinates sum to and are not all equal, so the sum lies in neither nor .

    (d) Subspace. The zero function is bounded (by ). One-step test: suppose and for all . Then for all , by the triangle inequality,

    a constant, so is bounded. Hence is a subspace. Note the test only requires that some bound exist; the bound for the combination may depend on and , and the bounds for and need not be the same.

  3. Show the solution to question 3

    (a) Subspaces. The zero function satisfies and also , so it lies in both and . One-step test for : if then

    for every , so . For the same computation gives . Both are subspaces.

    (b) The sum is all of . Given any define

    Then , so ; and , so ; and by adding the two fractions. Hence every is in , i.e. .

    The sum is direct. Let . For every , (even) and (odd), so , , . Thus , and by the direct-sum criterion .

    (The criterion is what saves work: it replaces checking uniqueness of every decomposition by one intersection computation.)

    (c) Expand: and . Then

    and indeed ✓. As always, the even part collects the even-degree terms and the odd part the odd-degree ones.

    For : if then is again a polynomial of degree at most (replacing by only changes the signs of the odd coefficients), so and lie in . Thus , and the intersection of the two pieces sits inside , so the sum is direct.

    Dimensions: is even exactly when is the zero polynomial, and since is independent (a sublist of the monomial basis) that forces . So , of dimension . Likewise , of dimension . By the dimension formula for a direct sum, ✓.

  4. Show the solution to question 4

    (a) Row-reduce the augmented matrix with kept general, so that both questions are answered by one reduction:

    using , , then (and ). The system is consistent exactly when the last entry vanishes, so

    Sanity check: and , so both spanning vectors lie on the plane ✓.

    For the condition is , i.e. . Back-substituting with : and . Check: ✓. For every other the reduced matrix has a row with and the vector is not in the span.

    (b) Compare coefficients. A combination is

    Two polynomials are equal exactly when their coefficients agree, so hitting means solving

    Add all three: , so . Subtracting each original equation from this gives

    The system is solvable for every , so the three polynomials span . (Since , the counting corollary then says they are also a basis.)

    For take , : , , . Check:

  5. Show the solution to question 5

    (a) Use the determinant test. Put the vectors as the columns of a square matrix; by the independence recipe they are independent exactly when the determinant is nonzero. Expanding along the first row,

    Now is a root, and dividing out gives . (Check by expanding: ✓.) So the vectors are dependent exactly for and .

    : all three vectors equal , and is a relation with a nonzero coefficient.

    : the vectors are , , , and

    Sanity check on a value that should be independent: at the determinant is , and indeed are independent.

    (b) Dependent triple. For every real , , so

    a dependence relation with coefficients , not all zero.

    Independent pair. Suppose for all . Evaluate at : , so . Evaluate at : , so . The only relation is trivial, so the pair is independent. This is the linear dependence lemma in action: in the list the last vector lies in the span of its predecessors (), and removing it leaves an independent list.

    (c) Suppose for every real . At : . At : . Adding gives , so and then . Independent.

    Agreement on is irrelevant: it shows only that the particular combination vanishes on half the domain, whereas a dependence relation must vanish at every point of the domain, and for .

    On the domain the situation reverses. There at every point of the domain, so and are the same element of , and is a nontrivial relation: the two functions are dependent. The domain is part of the data of a function space, and changing it can change independence.

  6. Show the solution to question 6

    (a) Run the procedure.

    : nonzero, so not in . Keep.

    : in only if , which needs from the constants and from the -coefficients. Impossible. Keep.

    : . Delete.

    : every combination of has degree at most , and has degree . Not in the span. Keep.

    : the kept list is independent (each kept vector was outside the span of the earlier ones, so by the linear dependence lemma no relation is possible), and it has members in the -dimensional space . By the counting corollary it is a basis of , so is certainly in its span: explicitly . Delete.

    Basis of the span: . Since a deletion never changes the span (redundancy proposition), the span of the five polynomials equals the span of these three, which is by the counting argument just made. So the original list did span , and the three kept vectors are a basis of it.

    Confirmation by columns. In the monomial basis the coordinate vectors are , , , , . Row-reduce:

    This is already in echelon form with pivots in columns , and — exactly the vectors that were kept. ✓

    (b) In coordinates the two given matrices are and ; neither is a multiple of the other, so the pair is independent and both are kept. A general combination is .

    : equal to would need (first slot) and (last slot). Not in the span. Keep.

    : a combination would need (second slot) and (third slot). Not in the span. Keep.

    Now the kept list is independent with members, and . By the counting corollary it is already a basis, so the procedure can stop: and must lie in the span and would be deleted. Explicitly,

    both immediate from the entries. Basis: . Sanity check: the extension theorem promised a basis containing and , and this one does.

  7. Show the solution to question 7

    (a) There are two errors, and the second is the one that let the first go unnoticed.

    Step 1: “.” False: the monomial basis has five members, so . The constants count. This is the standard off-by-one, and it feeds a wrong input into Step 2, whose arithmetic then gives rather than once corrected. (Step 2 itself is a heuristic rather than a proof — two conditions cost two dimensions only if neither is a consequence of the other — but it is not the source of the wrong answer; part (b) shows the count is right.)

    Step 3: “Two independent vectors in form a basis of .” This misuses the counting corollary. That corollary says an independent list of exactly vectors is a basis — so it can only be applied once is known, and here it is being used to establish . The argument is circular. What the definition of basis actually requires is independence and spanning, and spanning was never checked. Independence alone gives only a lower bound: by the exchange lemma, an independent list in is no longer than a basis of , so . The “confirmation” confirmed nothing, because it silently assumed the conclusion of Step 2.

    (b) Claim: .

    If , then , so by the factor theorem with . Then forces , so with , and . Conversely any with has degree at most and vanishes at . This proves the claim.

    Writing ,

    so the three polynomials span . They are independent: their degrees are , so in a relation the coefficient of is , forcing ; then the coefficient of is , forcing ; then . Independent and spanning, so a basis, and

    Sanity check against the corrected heuristic: ✓. The two conditions really are independent of each other — satisfies the first and not the second — which is why the heuristic count happens to be right.

    (c) The pair , is an independent list in , which proves exactly that — nothing more. It does not span: vanishes at , so it lies in , but every combination has degree at most , so is outside their span. Adjoining it gives the basis of part (b) — the extension theorem carried out by hand.

  8. Show the solution to question 8

    (a) and has three members, so by the counting corollary it suffices to show independence. Suppose is the zero polynomial. Expanding,

    and a polynomial is zero exactly when all its coefficients are: , then gives , then gives . Independent, hence a basis. (Equivalently: the three have distinct degrees , so no nontrivial relation can cancel the top-degree term.)

    (b) The columns of are the -coordinates of the -vectors: , , . So

    For the other direction express each monomial in : ; ; . The columns are therefore , , :

    Product, row by row: row of the first against the columns of the second gives ; row gives ; row gives . So ✓, as the change-of-coordinates theorem requires.

    (c) . We have -coordinates and want -coordinates, so the matrix is — read the arrow: in, out:

    Directly: by the expansion in (a), must equal . Top down: ; so ; so . Both routes give . Check: ✓.

    (d) If then , and evaluating at kills every term but the first: . Hence .

    So . Those two are independent, being a sublist of the basis , so they form a basis of and . Sanity check: one homogeneous linear condition on a -dimensional space costs one dimension, and has , matching its first -coordinate . This is the point of choosing a basis adapted to the problem: in the subspace is visible as a coordinate hyperplane, which it is not in .

  9. Show the solution to question 9

    (a) Row is times row , so row-reduces to : one pivot, .

    : the nonzero row of the reduced matrix, — the line .

    : solve ; with free, , so — the line . (Rank Theorem check: columns ✓.)

    : the pivot column of the original matrix, — the line . (The second column adds nothing.)

    : reduces to , so solve : — the line . Dimension ✓.

    (b) Input plane. Draw the line through the origin and , labelled , and the line through the origin and , labelled . They are perpendicular, as the fundamental theorem predicts: .

    The system is the two equations and , which are the same equation. Its solution set is the line , through and ; in parametric form . Draw it dashed: it is parallel to (same direction vector) but does not pass through the origin, so it is a translate of the null space and not a subspace — exactly “particular solution plus null space”.

    Output plane. Draw the line through the origin and , labelled , and the line through the origin and , labelled ; again perpendicular, since . Mark : it equals , so it lies on . Mark : it would need , impossible ( and ), so it lies off the line.

    Consistency: is consistent exactly when . So is consistent (its solutions are the dashed line in the input plane) and is not. The left null space gives the same verdict by a dot product: while , and a vector of must be orthogonal to .

    (c) The two lines meet only at the origin: a common point satisfies , so and , giving , . So and the sum is direct by the direct-sum criterion. Its dimension is by the direct-sum dimension formula, and a subspace of full dimension is the whole space (subspace-dimension theorem). Hence .

    Decompose : the equations are and . From the second , so , , . Check: ✓.

    Now , the first column. The row-space part alone gives

    the same answer, because the null-space part is sent to . The matrix sees only the row-space component of its input: a rank- machine in a costume.

  10. Show the solution to question 10

    (a) is a subspace of (the sum proposition), so by the subspace-dimension theorem . Now apply the dimension formula for a sum:

    So is a subspace of dimension at least . It therefore has a basis with at least one vector, and a basis vector is nonzero (a list containing is dependent). Hence .

    This is the “two planes in must share a line” fact in general form: . The bound is sharp — with the intersection can be trivial, as two distinct lines through the origin in show.

    (b) Existence. Let . By the subspace-dimension theorem is finite-dimensional, so it has a basis . This list is independent in , so by the extension theorem there are such that

    is a basis of ; by the dimension theorem . Put , a subspace by the span theorem.

    : every is a combination of the basis; the first sum lies in and the second in .

    The sum is direct: let . Then for some scalars (as ) and for some scalars (as ). Subtracting,

    is a relation among the members of a basis of , so every and is zero and . Thus , and by the direct-sum criterion .

    Dimension of any complement. If is any subspace with , the dimension formula for a direct sum gives , so

    independently of which complement was chosen. (For the constructed above this is , as it should be.)

    (c) Take , the -axis, and the two candidates and .

    : a common vector is , forcing . : forces and then . Both intersections are trivial, so both sums are direct by the criterion. Each direct sum has dimension , so by the subspace-dimension theorem each equals : .

    The complements differ, since . In fact every line through the origin other than itself is a complement of . The decomposition of a vector depends on the complement: using but using — same vector, different filing system.

  11. Show the solution to question 11

    (a) Row-reduce. gives ; gives ; then gives :

    If there are pivots in columns : and, by the Rank Theorem with columns, . If the last row vanishes, pivots are in columns and : and .

    When , is a -dimensional subspace of , hence equal to by the subspace-dimension theorem. Every lies in , and is consistent exactly when .

    (b) The four subspaces for . The echelon form is

    which is already reduced (the entry above the second pivot is ). Pivot columns and ; free columns and .

    : the pivot-position columns of the original , never of :

    : the nonzero rows of (row operations preserve the row space):

    : solve with , free. The equations and give , , so and the basis is

    Check against the original : has entries , , , all ✓; and has entries , , , all ✓.

    : apply the null-space recipe to , whose rows are the columns of :

    via (which zeroes row ), (giving ), then . With free: and , so the basis is

    (c) Orthogonality. Rows against null vectors: ; ; ; ✓. Columns against the left null vector: ; ✓.

    Dimensions: ; ; . Row space and null space live in with ; column space and left null space live in with ✓.

    (d) Column space as an equation. Let . This is the null space of the matrix , which has rank , so by the Rank Theorem . By (c) both basis vectors of satisfy the equation, so . Both are -dimensional, and a subspace of the same dimension is the whole space (subspace-dimension theorem), so .

    Hence is consistent exactly when . For : , consistent. For : , inconsistent.

    Confirmation: we need . The first coordinate gives , the second gives so , and the third checks: ✓. Since those are columns and of , one solution is ; the full solution set is , a -dimensional translate.

  12. Show the solution to question 12

    (a) The inclusions. Take , so for some . Then is applied to the vector , so . Hence .

    Take , so . Then , so . Hence .

    The rank bound. By the subspace-dimension theorem a subspace has dimension at most that of any space containing it. From the first inclusion,

    From the second, . Both and have columns, so the Rank Theorem applied to each gives

    Together, .

    (b) Take , so for some . Then , so . Hence (both are subspaces of , since is square).

    Write . By the subspace-dimension theorem , and by the Rank Theorem . So , i.e. , i.e. .

    In words: a matrix that squares to zero must send everything it produces into what it destroys, so its output cannot occupy more than half the space.

    (c) Take . Then , and (one nonzero column). The bound says — attained.

    For even write and define on the standard basis by

    concretely , the matrix whose only nonzero entries are ones on a diagonal shifted places to the right (for : , and for it is the matrix above). Then and , so kills every basis vector, and a matrix that sends every standard basis vector to has all columns zero: . Its columns are zero columns followed by , which are independent, so and . The bound in (b) is sharp for every even .

    (d) is . By (a), , and because is a subspace of (subspace-dimension theorem). So

    By the Invertible Matrix Theorem, an matrix is invertible if and only if its rank is . The rank of is less than , so is not invertible.

    Illustration with , : , , and

    whose rank is (the columns coincide) and whose determinant is . The other product is a perfectly good invertible matrix — the bound only constrains the larger product, and it is the shape that dooms it.

Full solutions sheet →