I'm confused about the axiom for the additive inverse and zero vector. If I define a vector space with normal addition but scalar multiplication like so: k(x, y) = (kx, 0).

One axiom says: There is a special object in V, denoted 0 and called the zero vector, such that for all u in V we have u + 0 = u. Since vector addition is normal, 0 in this case is (0, 0).

However another axiom says: For every u in V there is another object in V, denoted -u and called the negative of u, such that u + (-1)u = 0. However, u + (-1)u = (x, y) + (-x, 0) = (0, y) which doesn't equal the zero vector.

Does this mean this axiom fails? The textbook I read this from does not say this axiom fails. Why?


You are wrong. What the “other axiom” says is that for each $u\in V$, there is a $u'\in V$ such that $u+u'=0$. It does not say that $u'=(-1)u$.


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.