Is R^+ a Vector Space with Non-Standard Operations?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on whether the set of positive real numbers, R^+, can be considered a vector space under non-standard operations defined as scalar multiplication and addition. Scalar multiplication is defined as a*x = x^a, and addition is defined as x + y = x * y. Participants clarify the notation needed for proper mathematical representation, emphasizing the need to check if the operations are well-defined and if they satisfy vector space properties such as commutativity and associativity. The original poster seeks guidance on proving or disproving the vector space status of R^+ with these operations. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding vector space definitions in this context.
mpm
Messages
82
Reaction score
0
I have a homework problem that I can't figure out and there is nothing in the book that helps me out. I was hoping someone could shed some light.

Let R^+ denote the set of postive real numbers. Define the operation of scalar muplication, denoted * (dot) by,

a*x = x^a

for each X (episilon) R^+ and for any real number a. Define the operation of addition, denoted +, by

x + y = x * y for all x, y (Epsilon)R^+

Thus for this system teh scalar product of -3 times 1/2 is given by

- 3 * 1/2 = (1/2)^-3 = 8

and the sume of 2 and 5 is given by

2 + 5 = 2 * 5 = 10

Is R^+ a vector space with these operations? Prove your answer.

The plus should be a plus with a circle around it but I couldn't figure out how to put it in there. I am also not sure how to make the epsilon either.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

mpm
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
This is an epsilon (\epsilon), you're looking for a different symbol, the "is a member or element of" relation (\in). So you have:

(\mathbb{R}^+, \oplus, \otimes)

with the following definitions, for all x, y in R+ and all scalars (reals) \lambda:

x \oplus y = x \times y

\lambda \otimes x = x^{\lambda}

Do you know the definition of a vector space? Basically, all you have to do is check that the operations are well-defined, and then show that they satisfy all the properties (like commutativity of addition, associativity of scalar multiplication, existence of identities, etc.).
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top