What is the Zero Vector in a Vector Space with Unconventional Operations?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on determining if a given set of real numbers with unconventional operations can form a vector space. The operations defined are x(+)y=xy and c(.)x=xc, leading to confusion about the zero vector. Participants suggest that the zero vector in this context could be defined as 1, as it satisfies the property v + 0 = v under the defined operations. There are concerns about the implications of using all real numbers versus just positive reals, particularly regarding additive inverses. The conversation emphasizes the need to clarify the properties of the operations to properly assess the vector space criteria.
B18
Messages
118
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Determine if they given set is a vector space using the indicated operations.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


Set {x: x E R} with operations x(+)y=xy and c(.)x=xc
The (.) is the circle dot multiplication sign, and the (+) is the circle plus addition sign.

I tried to use axioms 1,2,3,6,7,8,9,10 to prove it isn't a vector space and have not found anything yet. I am not entirely sure how I can define the 0 vector which is why i haven't tried axioms 4, and 5.

Anyone able to steer me down the right path on this one?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
B18 said:

Homework Statement


Determine if they given set is a vector space using the indicated operations.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


Set {x: x E R} with operations x(+)y=xy and c(.)x=xc
The (.) is the circle dot multiplication sign, and the (+) is the circle plus addition sign.

I tried to use axioms 1,2,3,6,7,8,9,10 to prove it isn't a vector space and have not found anything yet. I am not entirely sure how I can define the 0 vector which is why i haven't tried axioms 4, and 5.

Anyone able to steer me down the right path on this one?

Nobody can say, because we do not know what book you are using and do not know exactly what is the content of Axioms 1,2,3, etc. Different books sometimes have slightly different axioms and will often number them differently.
 
ImageUploadedByPhysics Forums1425442787.977196.jpg

Here is the list of axioms I'm using. I never thought of that. Thanks Ray.
 
B18 said:
View attachment 79922
Here is the list of axioms I'm using. I never thought of that. Thanks Ray.

You say you did axiom 6? ##(-1)## is in ##R##. What is ##\frac{1}{2} \odot (-1)##? Are you sure you don't mean ##R## to be the positive reals? And why don't you think about trying 1 as a '0 vector'.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes B18
The "0" vector has the property that v+ 0= v for any vector v. Here, that must be that v times "0" is equal to v. So what number has that property? Of course, every vector must have an "additive inverse" which, since "addition of vectors" is here defined as their product, means there is likely to be a problem with the number 0. That is one reason Dick asked about whether the vectors were not the positive reals rather than all real numbers.
 
  • Like
Likes B18
Dick said:
You say you did axiom 6? ##(-1)## is in ##R##. What is ##\frac{1}{2} \odot (-1)##? Are you sure you don't mean ##R## to be the positive reals? And why don't you think about trying 1 as a '0 vector'.
Wow, that one flew right past me. Apparently I wasn't thinking about exponent rules enough. The set is all real numbers though, nothing indicating that it is only positives.
 
B18 said:
Wow, that one flew right past me. Apparently I wasn't thinking about exponent rules enough. The set is all real numbers though, nothing indicating that it is only positives.
Can you post a photo of the problem? If the set involved is all real numbers, you're going to have problems with things like ##.5 \odot (-1)##, which is ##(-1)^.5##. Also not stated in this thread is the field that the scalars come from.
 
Sure thing!
ImageUploadedByPhysics Forums1425500220.542684.jpg
 
HallsofIvy said:
The "0" vector has the property that v+ 0= v for any vector v. Here, that must be that v times "0" is equal to v. So what number has that property? Of course, every vector must have an "additive inverse" which, since "addition of vectors" is here defined as their product, means there is likely to be a problem with the number 0. That is one reason Dick asked about whether the vectors were not the positive reals rather than all real numbers.
In this case the zero vector would have to be equal to 1?
 
  • #10
Yes, the "zero vector", with this definition of vector addition, must be the number "1".
 
  • #11
HallsofIvy said:
Yes, the "zero vector", with this definition of vector addition, must be the number "1".
So (B18), keeping in mind that 1 in this space acts like 0, what do you have to "add" to a number x so that ##x \oplus ? = 1##? IOW, what do you have to "add" to a number x to get "zero"? Hope that doesn't boggle your mind too much!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K