We consider the set
-   
This is the subset inside  containing all those points with coordinates
 containing all those points with coordinates  fulfilling the condition
 fulfilling the condition
-   
This condition has a clear meaning for every point  , it can be true or false. Hence, this is a well-defined subset. For example, the points
, it can be true or false. Hence, this is a well-defined subset. For example, the points
 and
 and   belong to the set, the point
belong to the set, the point  does not belong to the set. If we want to check for a point
 does not belong to the set. If we want to check for a point  whether it belongs to
 whether it belongs to  , we just have to check the condition. In this respect, the given description of
, we just have to check the condition. In this respect, the given description of  is very good. If instead we would like to have a good overview of
 is very good. If instead we would like to have a good overview of  as a whole, then this description is not so convincing. We claim that
 as a whole, then this description is not so convincing. We claim that  coincides with the set
 coincides with the set
-   
This second description presents the set as the set of all elements that can be built in a certain way, namely as a linear combination of the points
 and
 and   with arbitrary real coefficients. The advantage of this description is that one gets immediately an overview of all its elements. For example, it is clear that it contains infinitely many elements. However, in this description, it is more difficult to decide whether a given element belongs to the set or not.
with arbitrary real coefficients. The advantage of this description is that one gets immediately an overview of all its elements. For example, it is clear that it contains infinitely many elements. However, in this description, it is more difficult to decide whether a given element belongs to the set or not.
In order to show that both sets are identical, we have to show
 and
 and   .
For the first inclusion, let
.
For the first inclusion, let
 . 
Then
. 
Then
-   
Here, the equality in the first and in the second component is clear, and the equality in the third component is a reformulation of the starting equation
-   
Taking
 and
and
 ,
we see that
,
we see that
 . 
Now suppose that
. 
Now suppose that
 . 
This means that there is a representation
. 
This means that there is a representation
-   
with some real numbers
 .
In order to show that this point belongs to
.
In order to show that this point belongs to  , we have to show that it fulfills the defining equation of
, we have to show that it fulfills the defining equation of  . But this is clear because of
. But this is clear because of
-  