Definition talk:Zero Vector/Also known as

Null vector

We are still underdeveloped, but I would like to point out that a null vector, in general, is not a zero vector. This will become apparent if we ever venture into relativistic physics. For Euclidean spaces there is no issue.--Julius (talk) 15:02, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Well okay, but this is what I have in the $100$-year-old 1921: C.E. Weatherburn: Elementary Vector Analysis:

"A zero vector, or null vector, is one whose module is zero."

(Note the old-fashioned "module" for "modulus" or "magnitude".)

I appreciate that this is a text with a lot of obsolete ideas in it (when it came out, the branch of mathematics known as vector analysis had not long been around), but it is at my fingertips and it has the basics of vector algebra explored in detail -- most of my other works on my shelf take all this stuff as background and do not cover it in detail.

If you have the definition of "null vector" at hand, and want to enter it into $\mathsf{Pr} \infty \mathsf{fWiki}$, and can explain what the differences are between a null vector and a zero vector, and under what circumstances they are the same, and then put a note on this page to warn the reader that they are not always the same, and present a link to the page explaining it all, please feel free. I am not up to speed here yet.

Again, this is one reason why I am beginning to feel I am unqualified to continue contributing to {{ProofWiki} -- I just don't have the requisite level of knowledge. --prime mover (talk) 15:50, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

I will see what I can do, but this needs some pseudo-Riemannian geometry, which requires Riemannian geometry. I think we can leave this for now, because even among professional mathematicians only a minority deals with non-zero null vectors. On the other hand, relativists and cosmologists see such things almost every day. We can wait.--Julius (talk) 15:59, 3 February 2021 (UTC)