0
$\begingroup$

This is the follow up question to this question (*)

According to page 2 of this link 1 and this link 2, $\mathbb{R^Z}$ (which is referred as $\mathbb{R^\infty}$ in link 1) has elements of the following form:

$$(y_k)_{k\mathbb{\in Z}}=(\dots y_{-1},y_0,y_{1}\dots)$$

Or more concisely:

$$y: \mathbb{Z}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$$ where there exists $(y_k)$ that have infinite nonzero components

The author in link 1 then begin a heuristic argument showing how one can naively attempt to construct a Hamel Basis for $\mathbb{R^Z}$, before concluding the construction does not end and then he mentioned it can be proved that the Hamel Basis of it is uncountable.

Further down in page 3 and 4, he uses Zorn's Lemma to show that all vector spaces have a maximal spanning set, hence a (Hamel) basis (assuming Axiom of Choice)

Now from (*), we found that $\mathbb{R^Z}$ is uncountable. Based on the author's heuristic argument, it make me suspect that the only set that can span $\mathbb{R^Z}$ need all nonzero elements in $\mathbb{R^Z}$. This sounds reasonable since such set is uncountable, which matches the requirement of the Hamel basis of $\mathbb{R^Z}$. Thus the question boils down to

What are the approaches that one should try to construct a proof of the statement in the title, or find counterexamples to it?

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

I don't think any Hamel basis is explicitly known. Anyway any two elements $(\dots,a,\dots,a,\dots)$ ($a$ everywhere) and $(\dots,b,\dots,b,\dots)$ are clearly linearly dependent.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ it is consistent with the failure of the axiom of choice that there is none. Which explains why no such basis can be explicitly given. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila May 25 '15 at 10:08

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.