Vector Space, (not calc i guess)

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around determining whether a specific set of polynomials, defined by integer coefficients, constitutes a vector space. Participants are exploring the properties of vector spaces and how they apply to this set of polynomials.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are examining the properties of vector spaces, particularly focusing on closure under addition and scalar multiplication. They discuss the implications of using integer coefficients versus real coefficients and question the necessity of scalars being part of the same set.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of the properties of vector spaces, with some participants providing insights into specific properties such as commutativity, associativity, and the existence of an additive identity. The discussion is productive, with participants questioning assumptions and clarifying concepts related to scalar multiplication and the nature of the field over which the vector space is defined.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of homework rules, which may limit the depth of exploration into the properties of vector spaces. There is a noted confusion regarding the role of scalars in relation to the set of polynomials being discussed.

sjmacewan
Messages
34
Reaction score
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
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:
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:
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:
the scalar has to be part of a field,, could use real, complex and rational numbers, but not integers.
 
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:
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:
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!
 

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
11K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
761
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K