Is the dimension of two vector spaces the same if they have equal cardinality?

  • Thread starter Thread starter rhobymic
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cardinality
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on whether two vector spaces, V and W, with equal cardinality necessarily have the same dimension. One viewpoint argues that equal cardinality does not imply equal dimension, as dimension is determined by the cardinality of the basis vectors, not the entire space. Conversely, another perspective suggests that a bijection between V and W indicates an isomorphic transformation, which would imply equal dimensions. However, it is noted that a bijection does not have to be linear, as demonstrated by Cantor's proof that R and R² have the same cardinality despite differing dimensions. The conversation highlights the complexity of the relationship between cardinality and dimension in vector spaces.
rhobymic
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
This is not a homework question ...

If two vector spaces, say V and W, have equal cardinality |V|=|W| ... do they then have the same dimension? That is dim(V)=dim(W)?

I am struggling with making this call one way or the other. This is no area of expertise for me by any means so I know I am missing something important but here are my thoughts:

-> No it does not mean they have the same dim. Dimension is the value of the cardinality of the BASIS vectors of a vector space not the cardinality of the full vector space.


-> Yes it does because if |V|=|W| is true then there is a bijection between V and W and therefor an isomorphic linear transformation T between V and W. This would imply that T carries a basis from V into W and so V and W would have the same cardinality of basis vectors er go the same dimension...


I am still leaning towards "No" because I think the assumption that if V and W are bijective then there is an isomorphic linear transformation is probably not possible...

Thanks for any help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
rhobymic said:
This is not a homework question ...

If two vector spaces, say V and W, have equal cardinality |V|=|W| ... do they then have the same dimension? That is dim(V)=dim(W)?

I am struggling with making this call one way or the other. This is no area of expertise for me by any means so I know I am missing something important but here are my thoughts:

-> No it does not mean they have the same dim. Dimension is the value of the cardinality of the BASIS vectors of a vector space not the cardinality of the full vector space.

This is a nice observation, but it is not a proof. To answer the question as "no", you just need to come up with two vector spaces that have equal cardinality but not equal basis.

-> Yes it does because if |V|=|W| is true then there is a bijection between V and W and therefor an isomorphic linear transformation T between V and W. This would imply that T carries a basis from V into W and so V and W would have the same cardinality of basis vectors er go the same dimension...

I don't really see why an arbitrary bijection would be an isomorphism...
 
rhobymic said:
-> Yes it does because if |V|=|W| is true then there is a bijection between V and W and therefor an isomorphic linear transformation T between V and W. This would imply that T carries a basis from V into W and so V and W would have the same cardinality of basis vectors er go the same dimension...
Thanks for any help!
A bijection needs not be linear. In fact, Cantor proved that R and R2 have the same cardinality, and hence that all Rn (n>0) have the same cardinality. For a proof, see Theorem 2 here. (The proof is actually incomplete, since the author has forgotten the 0.99999...=1 problem. But it can be fixed.)
 
I am studying the mathematical formalism behind non-commutative geometry approach to quantum gravity. I was reading about Hopf algebras and their Drinfeld twist with a specific example of the Moyal-Weyl twist defined as F=exp(-iλ/2θ^(μν)∂_μ⊗∂_ν) where λ is a constant parametar and θ antisymmetric constant tensor. {∂_μ} is the basis of the tangent vector space over the underlying spacetime Now, from my understanding the enveloping algebra which appears in the definition of the Hopf algebra...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
9K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K