Is Euclidean Space Inherently Geometric or Just a Vector Space?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion explores whether Euclidean space is inherently geometric or merely a vector space. Participants examine the relationship between vector spaces, geometry, and group theory, considering the implications of inner products and measures in defining geometric properties.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that Euclidean space, while a vector space, requires a geometric grid to define its geometric properties, questioning whether it can exist independently of such a structure.
  • Others argue that geometry necessitates a measure, typically an inner product, to define angles and distances, suggesting that the vector space itself is not the primary concern.
  • It is suggested that geometry can be defined on curved manifolds, indicating that the underlying structure can vary beyond traditional Euclidean space.
  • Some participants emphasize that a group does not need to operate on a set to be defined, and that group actions can provide insights into the properties of group elements.
  • A later reply discusses the necessity of a mapping (e.g., dot product) to establish geometric concepts like length and angle, and raises questions about the existence of metric spaces without group representations.
  • There is a mention of the relationship between local operations (like addition) and the global structure of geometry, suggesting that geometric properties emerge from the collective behavior of metrics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of Euclidean space and its relationship to geometry, with no consensus reached on whether it is inherently geometric or simply a vector space.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the importance of inner products and measures in defining geometry, but the discussion remains open regarding the foundational aspects of Euclidean space and its geometric interpretation.

  • #31
martinbn said:
What if it s given a connection, wouldn't that count as geometry?

martinbn said:
What if it s given a connection, wouldn't that count as geometry?

Yes - in a more general sense.

- One could have a connection that is compatible with a metric but is not a Levi_Civita connection

- One could have a connection on the tangent bundle that is not compatible with any metric. In this case I do not see how distance relations can be derived - but not sure. Still one has curvature and parallel translation,

This thread though seems to assume metric relations of some kind.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
8K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
758
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K