Vector Space, (not calc i guess)

In summary, The set of all polynomials of the form n_2x^2 + n_1x + n_0 where n_0,n_1,n_2 \epsilon Z (integers) is not a vector space because it is not closed under scalar multiplication, as the scalar must be from a field and not just integers.
  • #1
sjmacewan
35
0
We're working on vector spaces right now and this one problem is iving me a bit of trouble.

Is the following a vector space?

The set of all polynomials of the form [tex]n_2x^2 + n_1x + n_0[/tex]
where [tex]n_0,n_1,n_2 \epsilon Z [/tex](integers)Now I'm pretty sure that this is going to end up NOT being a vector space, by using the properties that we were given (too vague and numerous to list here) But I'm not entirely sure why. I know that when it's an element of the REALS as opposed to the INTEGERS it is a vector space, but i just don't know where to start in this case :(
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #3
sjmacewan said:
We're working on vector spaces right now and this one problem is iving me a bit of trouble.

Is the following a vector space?

The set of all polynomials of the form [tex]n_2x^2 + n_1 + n_0[/tex]
where [tex]n_0,n_1,n_2 \epsilon Z [/tex](integers)


Now I'm pretty sure that this is going to end up NOT being a vector space, by using the properties that we were given (too vague and numerous to list here) But I'm not entirely sure why. I know that when it's an element of the REALS as opposed to the INTEGERS it is a vector space, but i just don't know where to start in this case :(

Did you mean the set of all polynomials of the form [tex]n_2x^2 + n_1x + n_0[/tex]?
If it is a vector space, then, for any [tex]a \in \textbf{R}[/tex] and [tex]p \in S[/tex], where S is your set of polynomials, and p some polynomial from this set, you have [tex]a p \in S[/tex], which is not true, because [tex]n_{0}, n_{1}, n_{2}[/tex] stay integers only if a is an integer. Hm, though, I'm not sure if the scalar actually has to be a real number. Maybe there is something like a 'vector space over Z'?
 
Last edited:
  • #4
yes i did, sorry, i fixed it now. Thanks

And i have the 8 properties written down, I'm just sort of stumped when i try figuring them out. Using that link i would say that the first three are true:

1 it IS commutative
2 is DOES exhibit associativity of vector addition
3 there IS an additive identity (0)

but the forth one is the one that is starting to give me some troubles. I'm unsure of how to go about (dis)proving the existence of an additive inverse, it just seems like the negative values in the set of integers are going to throw it off...
edit: Why are you using [tex]a \in \textbf{R}[/tex]? That's throwing me off...i understand what it is that you're saying, i just don't see where that term came from...
 
Last edited:
  • #5
well... if you have [tex]n_2x^2 + n_1x + n_0[/tex] and you add in the negative of it [tex]-n_2x^2 + -n_1x + -n_0[/tex] you would end up with zero. Since [tex]-n_2x^2 + -n_1x + -n_0[/tex] would be in your set I think it proves that one.

EDIT: yes a vector space is closed so the scalar part doesn't work.
 
Last edited:
  • #6
the scalar has to be part of a field,, could use real, complex and rational numbers, but not integers.
 
  • #7
sjmacewan said:
yes i did, sorry, i fixed it now. Thanks

And i have the 8 properties written down, I'm just sort of stumped when i try figuring them out. Using that link i would say that the first three are true:

1 it IS commutative
2 is DOES exhibit associativity of vector addition
3 there IS an additive identity (0)

but the forth one is the one that is starting to give me some troubles. I'm unsure of how to go about (dis)proving the existence of an additive inverse, it just seems like the negative values in the set of integers are going to throw it off...



edit: Why are you using [tex]a \in \textbf{R}[/tex]? That's throwing me off...i understand what it is that you're saying, i just don't see where that term came from...

Hm, better wait for someone like Halls on that one. :biggrin: As stated, I'm actually not sure if the scalar has to be a real number.

Well, regarding the 'fourth one'.. Why do you think anything would be 'thrown off'? If you choose a polynomial with negative integer coefficients, let's say p1, then -p1 = (-1) * p1 has positive coefficients, and you have your additive inverse.
 
Last edited:
  • #8
ok, that proves my doubts about that one, thanks. I would ever even have noticed that the result doesn't have to be in the set, that seems really weird to me.
 
Last edited:
  • #9
dmoravec said:
the scalar has to be part of a field,, could use real, complex and rational numbers, but not integers.

Thanks, that's what I thought.. So, since there is no scalar multiplication in this vector space, i.e. the space is not closed for scalar multiplying, it is no vector space. Other conditions don't have to be tested, unless I'm missing something big. :smile:
 
Last edited:
  • #10
hmmm, i don't think i see why there's no scalar multiplying, could you explain why?
 
  • #11
if you have a polynomial [tex]n_2x^2 + n_1x + n_0[/tex]
and you multiply by 2.5 the coefficients are no longer integers and it is not in the set. Therefore the set is not closed under scalar multiplication and it can't be a vector space.
 
  • #12
oooooooohh, right! That's because the scalar that you're multiplying by doesn't have to be in the set. Right? I was assuming that you COULDN'T multiply by a non-integer during scalar multiplication because they aren't included in the set...
 
  • #13
can i get a confirmation of what i just said maybe? Am i right in saying that the multipliers for scalar multiplication don't have to be a member of the set?
 
  • #14
that is correct
 
  • #15
sjmacewan said:
oooooooohh, right! That's because the scalar that you're multiplying by doesn't have to be in the set. Right? I was assuming that you COULDN'T multiply by a non-integer during scalar multiplication because they aren't included in the set...

Vector spaces are defined over fields. You have a set S a field F, and you have a closed addition on S, and you have multiplication between elements of F and elements of S which returns elements of S. So yes, unless S is a field the scalars must come from some different field.

You can define vector spaces over themselves: for example, [itex]\mathbb{R}[/itex] is a vector space over the field [itex]\mathbb{R}[/itex] using standard multiplication and addition of real numbers.
 
  • #16
Vector space over WHAT FIELD? Offer all the information first.
 
  • #17
it was th reals, but i got it all now and it's making perfect sense. Thanks to everyone who helped!
 

1. What is a vector space?

A vector space is a mathematical structure that consists of a set of objects called vectors, which can be added together and multiplied by scalars (numbers). The vectors in a vector space must also satisfy certain properties, such as closure under addition and scalar multiplication, in order for it to be considered a valid vector space.

2. What are the basic operations in a vector space?

The basic operations in a vector space are vector addition and scalar multiplication. Vector addition involves adding two vectors together to obtain a new vector, while scalar multiplication involves multiplying a vector by a number to obtain a scaled version of the original vector.

3. What are the properties of a vector space?

A vector space must satisfy the following properties:

  • Closure under vector addition: the sum of two vectors in the space must also be in the space.
  • Associativity of vector addition: the order in which vectors are added does not matter.
  • Existence of an additive identity: there must be a vector called the zero vector that when added to any other vector gives back the original vector.
  • Existence of additive inverses: for every vector, there must be a corresponding vector that when added together gives the zero vector.
  • Closure under scalar multiplication: multiplying a vector by a scalar must result in a vector that is also in the space.
  • Distributivity of scalar multiplication over vector addition: multiplying a vector by a sum of scalars must be the same as adding the individual scalar multiplications.
  • Associativity of scalar multiplication: multiplying a vector by two scalars in succession must give the same result as multiplying by the product of the two scalars.
  • Existence of a multiplicative identity: there must be a scalar value of 1 that when multiplied by any vector gives back the original vector.

4. What is the difference between a vector space and a scalar space?

A vector space is a set of vectors that can be added and multiplied by scalars, while a scalar space is a set of numbers. In a vector space, the operations are performed on vectors, while in a scalar space, the operations are performed on individual numbers.

5. How are vectors represented in a vector space?

Vectors in a vector space can be represented in different ways, depending on the context and application. They can be represented geometrically as arrows with a magnitude and direction, or algebraically as ordered lists of numbers. In computer science and engineering, vectors are also often represented as column or row matrices. Ultimately, the representation of vectors in a vector space is not as important as the operations and properties that they satisfy.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
15
Views
945
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
10K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
20
Views
1K
Back
Top