Cardinality vs. Dimension, Solution of homogeneous equations

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around understanding the relationship between cardinality and dimension in the context of vector spaces, particularly in relation to systems of linear equations over the field Zp. The original poster attempts to clarify these concepts while addressing a specific problem regarding the number of distinct solutions to a system of linear equations.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the definitions of cardinality and dimension, questioning whether they are equivalent. The original poster considers the implications of having more unknowns than equations and attempts to relate the dimension of the solution space to the number of variables.

Discussion Status

Some participants provide clarifications about the definitions of cardinality and dimension, noting that while the dimension of a vector space is defined by the size of a basis, the cardinality refers to the number of elements in the space. There is ongoing exploration of specific examples to illustrate these concepts, and participants are engaging with the problem without reaching a consensus on all points.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of finite-dimensional vector spaces and the implications of different numbers of equations and unknowns on the dimension of the solution space. There is a focus on understanding the definitions and their applications in the context of linear algebra.

Locoism
Messages
77
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Show that the number of distinct solutions of a system of linear equations (in any number of equations, and unknowns) over the field Zp is either 0, or a power of p.


The Attempt at a Solution



First off, I was wondering whether there is any difference between "cardinality" of a vector space and "dimension". Aren't both just the size of the basis? (the cardinality of V = dim(V)??)
This is just because my prof keeps switching between both and confusing the rest of us.

for the question, suppose the system is m equations in n unknowns.
The case of 0 is trivial, so if we take the subset W of Zpn of solutions over Zp, W is a vector space, and dim(W) = n.
I'm not sure how to put this technically, but for each unknown more than the number of equations (say we parametrize them) we have p possible choices, and thus pt solutions.

There's something missing, but am I on the right track?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No. The cardinality of V isn't equal to the dimension of V. Easy counterexample: an n-dimensional vector space over Z/pZ has p^n elements (which is essentially what you've noticed with your W). What is true is that the cardinality of a basis for V is equal to the dimension of V (and this is the definition of dimension).

Anyway, you've basically solved the problem, although you've said some questionable things. You've noticed W is a finite-dimensional vector space over Z/pZ, which is correct. If the dimension of W is t (it's not necessarily n), then you can choose a basis w_1,...,w_t for W. Any element of W will thus look like a_1w_1+...+a_tw_t with a_i in Z/pZ. Now count these suckers.
 
morphism said:
No. The cardinality of V isn't equal to the dimension of V. Easy counterexample: an n-dimensional vector space over Z/pZ has p^n elements (which is essentially what you've noticed with your W). What is true is that the cardinality of a basis for V is equal to the dimension of V (and this is the definition of dimension).
Oh ok thank you. So what is cardinality then (talking about a vector space)?

morphism said:
If the dimension of W is t (it's not necessarily n), then you can choose a basis w_1,...,w_t for W. Any element of W will thus look like a_1w_1+...+a_tw_t with a_i in Z/pZ. Now count these suckers.
So then the dimension is pt! It makes sense to say dim(W) = t, but I don't understand why it isn't n:
The system is in n unknowns, and as you said, you can form a basis {w1, w2,...,wt}. But in the standard basis, you would have {e1,...,en}, thus dim(W) = n since all bases of W have the same cardinality. Why not n?
 
Locoism said:
Oh ok thank you. So what is cardinality then (talking about a vector space)?
The cardinality of a vector space is just its cardinality as a set.
So then the dimension is pt! It makes sense to say dim(W) = t, but I don't understand why it isn't n:
The system is in n unknowns, and as you said, you can form a basis {w1, w2,...,wt}. But in the standard basis, you would have {e1,...,en}, thus dim(W) = n since all bases of W have the same cardinality. Why not n?
Try solving
x_1 + x_2 = 0
x_1 + x_2 + x_3 = 0
in Z/2Z, for example. Is dimW=3?
 
morphism said:
The cardinality of a vector space is just its cardinality as a set.
Thank you, makes perfect sense.
morphism said:
Try solving
x_1 + x_2 = 0
x_1 + x_2 + x_3 = 0
in Z/2Z, for example. Is dimW=3?
Oh alright. Essentially saying dimW = t is just saying it is finite dimensional.
 

Similar threads

Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K