How Can You Prove the Commutative Property of Vector Addition in Rn Spaces?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Shenlong08
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Law Vectors
Shenlong08
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
I'm having trouble with a proof : u+v=v+u
using the definition of a vector space (excluding the commutitive axiom of course), thus I have the other 9 axioms to work with.

I'm not even sure if I'm using one of the axioms right; since I cannot say that u+v=v+u, I don't think that I should say that u+(-u)=(-u)+u=0...which is what I've been trying to use.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
not sure what you are trying to do. Are you trying to prove the commutitive axiom from all the others?

Because if you are don't, it is an axiom for a reason, that is it cannot not be proven from the others, if it could it would not be an axiom, it would be a theorem and the commutitive axiom would not be in the definition.
 
let u={u1, u2...,un)
v={v1,v2...,vn)
then u+v= {u1+v1, u2+v2,...,un+vn} (vector addition)
or, u+v= {v1+v1, v2+u2,...,vn+un} (commutative property of addition on R)
therefore, u+v=v+u (vector addition)
 
Please, be careful about these, this is not a proof, this is exactly what mrandersdk has stated before. Note that, the two addition signs "+", (one for the addition u+v and one for the additions u_i+v_i that you used are different). We define the vector addition as such, it does not follow from the other axioms.

I can define the scalar addition as subtraction, then you don't have commutativity in that weird vector set (Since I destroyed the commutativity, it is not a vector space anymore, because commutativity is an axiom)
 
vdgreat said:
let u={u1, u2...,un)
v={v1,v2...,vn)
then u+v= {u1+v1, u2+v2,...,un+vn} (vector addition)
or, u+v= {v1+v1, v2+u2,...,vn+un} (commutative property of addition on R)
therefore, u+v=v+u (vector addition)
This is assuming that the vector space is Rn which was not given.
 
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
When decomposing a representation ##\rho## of a finite group ##G## into irreducible representations, we can find the number of times the representation contains a particular irrep ##\rho_0## through the character inner product $$ \langle \chi, \chi_0\rangle = \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{g\in G} \chi(g) \chi_0(g)^*$$ where ##\chi## and ##\chi_0## are the characters of ##\rho## and ##\rho_0##, respectively. Since all group elements in the same conjugacy class have the same characters, this may be...
Back
Top