Does a Linear Combination of Vectors in an Infinite Set Have to Be Finite?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Bipolarity
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Infinite Set Span
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of linear combinations of vectors in the context of infinite sets spanning a vector space. Participants explore whether such combinations must be finite and the implications of topology on this concept.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that if an infinite set S spans a vector space V, then every vector in V can be expressed as a linear combination of vectors in S, questioning whether this combination must be finite.
  • One participant argues that infinite combinations cannot be used without invoking convergence and norms, which may not apply to arbitrary vector spaces.
  • Another participant suggests that without a well-defined topology for V, the definition of "spans" must be precise, indicating that it may imply finite linear combinations.
  • A participant introduces terminology, explaining that in an infinite-dimensional vector space, a Hamel basis allows for unique expressions of vectors as finite linear combinations, while noting that not all vector spaces can concretely specify such a basis.
  • It is mentioned that for infinite-dimensional topological vector spaces, the concept of a Schauder basis exists, but not all such spaces necessarily have a basis.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of finite combinations in the context of infinite sets spanning a vector space, with some asserting that definitions and topology play crucial roles in this determination. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these definitions.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the importance of topology in defining linear combinations and spans, as well as the distinctions between Hamel and Schauder bases in different types of vector spaces.

Bipolarity
Messages
773
Reaction score
2
Suppose that some infinite set S spans V. Then this means every vector in V is expressible as some linear combination of the vectors in S. Does this combination have to be finite?

It couldn't be infinite, because that necessarily invokes notions of convergence and norm which do not necessarily apply to an arbitrary vector space?

BiP
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That's correct. Assuming you have a well defined notion for them, the set of infinite linear combinations is what's called the completion of the span of S.
 
Bipolarity said:
Suppose that some infinite set S spans V. Then this means every vector in V is expressible as some linear combination of the vectors in S. Does this combination have to be finite?

It couldn't be infinite, because that necessarily invokes notions of convergence and norm which do not necessarily apply to an arbitrary vector space?

BiP
You haven't defined V well enough. If V has a topology, then completeness is meaningful.

Without a topology you need to be very precise in defining "spans". It may mean that every vector in V is expressible by a finite linear combination. Essentially the question is answered by "yes" by definition.
 
A bit of terminology may be in order.

For an infinite-dimensional vector space, a Hamel basis refers to a basis in the linear algebra sense: every element of the vector space can be expressed uniquely as a linear combination of a FINITE number of elements of the Hamel basis. Every vector space has a Hamel basis, as a consequence of Zorn's lemma, but in general it's not possible to specify one concretely.

As others have noted, if you want to allow infinite linear combinations, there needs to be a topology involved. For an infinite-dimensional topological vector space, one has the notion of a Schauder basis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schauder_basis But not every topological vector space necessarily has such a basis. If you impose more structure, then you can have a guarantee: for example, every Hilbert space has a basis in this sense (orthonormal, even).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
9K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K