What is the significance of the zero vector in a vector space?

  • Thread starter Thread starter 74197
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Vector Zero
74197
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Ok this is from a tutorial I am redoing again.

V5 = {(x, 1) | x ∈ R}, (x1, 1) ⊕ (x2, 1) := (x1 + x2, 1), c.(x, 1) := (cx, 1).

I understand that there exists a zero vector in this vector space, that comes in the form of (0,1). What I do not understand is why that is considered a zero vector for that vector space?

It is hard for me to 'see past' that 1 in the y-coordinate. Please ease my irritations, thank you :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
74197 said:
Ok this is from a tutorial I am redoing again.

V5 = {(x, 1) | x ∈ R}, (x1, 1) ⊕ (x2, 1) := (x1 + x2, 1), c.(x, 1) := (cx, 1).

I understand that there exists a zero vector in this vector space, that comes in the form of (0,1). What I do not understand is why that is considered a zero vector for that vector space?

It is hard for me to 'see past' that 1 in the y-coordinate. Please ease my irritations, thank you :)



According to what you defined \forall (x,1)\in V5\,\,,\,\,(x,1)\oplus (0,1)=(0,1)\oplus (x,1)=(x,1) and thus that is the zero vector in that set (supposedly, a vector space).

DonAntonio
 
The "zero vector" in any vector space, V, with vector addition \oplus is the vector, a, such that, for any v in V, a\oplus v= v. In other words, it is the "additive identity".

In this particular example, the "zero vector" is (0, 1): if v is any vector in this space, of the form (a, 1), then (a, 1)\oplus (0, 1)= (a+0, 1)= (a, 1)=v.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ah...I see now. It's not about the 'zero', it's more about the fact that the zero vector makes for an additive identity. Thank you Don and HoI :)
 
74197 said:
Ah...I see now. It's not about the 'zero', it's more about the fact that the zero vector makes for an additive identity. Thank you Don and HoI :)

And if you think about it ... what makes the usual zero, "zero?" It's just that zero satisfies the properties of the zero element in the field of the real numbers. Other than that, it's just a point on the real line exactly like any other point.

That's what abstraction does ... it makes you see familiar things in a new way.
 
Thread 'Determine whether ##125## is a unit in ##\mathbb{Z_471}##'
This is the question, I understand the concept, in ##\mathbb{Z_n}## an element is a is a unit if and only if gcd( a,n) =1. My understanding of backwards substitution, ... i have using Euclidean algorithm, ##471 = 3⋅121 + 108## ##121 = 1⋅108 + 13## ##108 =8⋅13+4## ##13=3⋅4+1## ##4=4⋅1+0## using back-substitution, ##1=13-3⋅4## ##=(121-1⋅108)-3(108-8⋅13)## ... ##= 121-(471-3⋅121)-3⋅471+9⋅121+24⋅121-24(471-3⋅121## ##=121-471+3⋅121-3⋅471+9⋅121+24⋅121-24⋅471+72⋅121##...
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
Back
Top