Is it possible to have a vector space with restricted scalars?

In summary: Right. I should have mentioned that in my post (In editing, I deleted more than I meant to). It is not valid to interpret the scalars as being restricted so that they are not a field. But I think that might be what the OP had in mind.
  • #1
jolly_math
51
5
Homework Statement
Is the following set of vectors a = (a1, ... a_n) in Rn subspaces of Rn (n≥3): all a such that a1 ≥ 0 ?
Relevant Equations
i) For vectors x and y in the subspace, x + y is in the subspace.
ii) For any vector x in the subspace, cx is in the subspace.
I don't understand the solution: that for (1, ..., 1) the additive inverse is (-1, ..., -1), so the condition is not satisfied (and it is not a subspace).

Which condition is not met?

Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
jolly_math said:
Homework Statement:: Is the following set of vectors a = (a1, ... a_n) in Rn subspaces of Rn (n≥3): all a such that a1 ≥ 0 ?
Relevant Equations:: i) For vectors x and y in the subspace, x + y is in the subspace.
ii) For any vector x in the subspace, cx is in the subspace.

I don't understand the solution: that for (1, ..., 1) the additive inverse is (-1, ..., -1), so the condition is not satisfied (and it is not a subspace).

Which condition is not met?

Thank you.
The one you listed as ii) in your relevant equations. If u is in the set, cu also has to be in the set as one criterion of being a subspace. The vector u = <1, 1, ..., 1> is in your set, but -1u is not in the set, so the set isn't a subspace of ##\mathbb R^n##.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes jolly_math, berkeman and topsquark
  • #3
The subset defined is not a vector space so it can not be a subspace. Check the properties of a vector space and you will see what they are talking about.
 
  • Like
Likes jolly_math
  • #4
FactChecker said:
The subset defined is not a vector space so it can not be a subspace. Check the properties of a vector space and you will see what they are talking about.
Since the given set is a subset of something that is a vector space, it's not necessary to confirm that all vector space properties are satisfied. All that needs to be checked are closure under vector addition and closure under scalar multiplication. For this problem, it's the latter property that fails.
 
  • Like
Likes PeroK
  • #5
Mark44 said:
Since the given set is a subset of something that is a vector space, it's not necessary to confirm that all vector space properties are satisfied. All that needs to be checked are closure under vector addition and closure under scalar multiplication. For this problem, it's the latter property that fails.
Good point. It is not clear to me that the problem statement does not imply a restriction on the scalar field of reals. The definition of the subset might imply a restriction on the field so that the scalar multipliers are no longer a field. That might be where the original confusion occurred.
 
  • #6
FactChecker said:
Good point. It is not clear to me that the problem statement does not imply a restriction on the scalar field of reals. The definition of the subset might imply a restriction on the field so that the scalar multipliers are no longer a field. That might be where the original confusion occurred.

The multipliers have to be a field to have a vector space. Trying to use something that's not a field gives surprisingly annoying behavior.
 
  • #7
Office_Shredder said:
The multipliers have to be a field to have a vector space. Trying to use something that's not a field gives surprisingly annoying behavior.
Right. I should have mentioned that in my post (In editing, I deleted more than I meant to). It is not valid to interpret the scalars as being restricted so that they are not a field. But I think that might be what the OP had in mind.
 

FAQ: Is it possible to have a vector space with restricted scalars?

What is a set of vectors as a subspace?

A set of vectors can be considered a subspace if it satisfies three conditions: it contains the zero vector, it is closed under vector addition, and it is closed under scalar multiplication. This means that any linear combination of vectors in the set will also be in the set.

How do you determine if a set of vectors is a subspace?

To determine if a set of vectors is a subspace, you can check if it satisfies the three conditions mentioned above. If it contains the zero vector, and any linear combination of vectors in the set results in another vector in the set, then it is considered a subspace.

Can a set of vectors be a subspace in multiple dimensions?

Yes, a set of vectors can be a subspace in any number of dimensions. The three conditions for a subspace to be satisfied are independent of the number of dimensions.

What is the difference between a vector space and a subspace?

A vector space is a set of vectors that satisfies all the properties of vector addition and scalar multiplication. A subspace, on the other hand, is a subset of a vector space that also satisfies these properties. In other words, a subspace is a smaller vector space within a larger vector space.

Can a set of vectors be a subspace if it does not contain the zero vector?

No, a set of vectors must contain the zero vector to be considered a subspace. This is because the zero vector is necessary for the closure under vector addition and scalar multiplication, which are essential properties of a subspace.

Back
Top