Why is the dimension of the vector space , 0?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The dimension of the zero vector space, denoted as dim[{0}], is defined to be zero because it lacks a basis. While the zero vector itself is present, the only possible basis is the empty set, which does not span the space. This definition is crucial for maintaining consistency in linear algebra, particularly in the context of the rank-nullity theorem. The discussion highlights the importance of understanding that the zero subspace is treated differently from other vector spaces, despite the apparent contradiction in definitions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector spaces and their properties
  • Familiarity with the concept of a basis in linear algebra
  • Knowledge of linear independence and spanning sets
  • Basic comprehension of the rank-nullity theorem
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the concept of vector space bases and their definitions
  • Learn about linear independence and how it applies to bases
  • Explore the rank-nullity theorem and its implications in linear algebra
  • Investigate degenerate cases in mathematics and their treatment in various contexts
USEFUL FOR

Students of linear algebra, mathematics educators, and anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of vector spaces and their dimensions.

Dosmascerveza
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
In other words, why is dim[{0}]=0. My math professor explained that since the 0 vector is just a POINT in R2 that the zero subspace doesn't have a basis and therefore has dimension zero. This is not satisfactory.

For example, I know R2 has a dimension 2, P_n has dimension n+1, M_(2,2) has dimension 4. These numbers make sense to me but if the zero subspace contain the zero vector why does it not have a basis?

Can someone explain this concept to me a bit further
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Convention. It makes, among other things, the rank-nullity theorem work.
 
So you say dim[{o}]=0 because you've defined it that way. So the definition of dimension is different for the zero subspace than for every other V space? But how can there be two definitions of dimension be used in the same sense?
 
Dosmascerveza said:
the zero subspace doesn't have a basis and therefore has dimension zero.
That statement is false; are you sure you heard him correctly? The zero subspace does have a basis -- the empty set.
 
I heard him correctly. He made no mention of the empty set. He may have taken some "liberties" to keep it simple for the country-folk.
 
Hurkyl said:
That statement is false; are you sure you heard him correctly? The zero subspace does have a basis -- the empty set.

Isn't the basis supposed to span the vector space? The empty set does not even span the the null-vector.
In any case, {0} can hardly be treated as a basis, because it is not linearly independent! It is common however to treat trivial cases with "arbitrary" definitions to make general rules hold for these cases as well. Compare with the convention 0^0 = 0 in power series.
 
Jarle said:
Isn't the basis supposed to span the vector space? The empty set does not even span the the null-vector.
The linear combination of no terms is equal to zero.

Dosmascerveza said:
I heard him correctly. He made no mention of the empty set. He may have taken some "liberties" to keep it simple for the country-folk.
I guess I don't find that too surprising -- many people seem to vehemently detest dealing with degenerate cases.
 
Well thanks Hurkyl! I will approach him with your assertion and we will go from there. I hope pressing for some deeper answers won't adversely affect my grade.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
8K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K