Register to reply

[sin(t) , cos(t), e^t] are these linearly dependent?

by Cecile
Tags: dependent, linearly, sint
Share this thread:
Cecile
#1
Apr4-05, 01:50 PM
P: 5
[sin(t) , cos(t), e^t] are these linearly dependent?


can someone solve this q?
I write

Asint+BcosT+C(e^t) = 0

but then i cannot proceed...
Phys.Org News Partner Mathematics news on Phys.org
'Moral victories' might spare you from losing again
Fair cake cutting gets its own algorithm
Effort to model Facebook yields key to famous math problem (and a prize)
dextercioby
#2
Apr4-05, 01:54 PM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 11,896
Yes,they are independent.What are u trying to do...?Post the text of the problem...

Daniel.
Cecile
#3
Apr4-05, 01:57 PM
P: 5
I'm trying to prove that they are whether dependent or independent. how can I show iy?

dextercioby
#4
Apr4-05, 02:01 PM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 11,896
[sin(t) , cos(t), e^t] are these linearly dependent?

Are u trying to prove that they can form a basis in some vector space...?Define the vector space.

Daniel.
Cecile
#5
Apr4-05, 02:06 PM
P: 5
No it just asks whether they are dep or in dependent.
for ex if it would have given me sets like v=(0,2,3) , u=(1,2,3,) & z=(1,1,0) then i could write
Av+Bu+Cz=0 and I could show that they are indep of not just by assuming one of the coef. is not zero. but i cannot show this with cos sin & e
arildno
#6
Apr4-05, 02:08 PM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
PF Gold
P: 12,016
Cecile: What is the DEFINITION of linear independence?
dextercioby
#7
Apr4-05, 02:09 PM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 11,896
Here's a nice way to do it.Use differential equations.Consider the homogenous,linear,constant coefficient ODE

[tex] \frac{d^{4}y(x)}{dx^{4}}-y(x)=0 [/tex]

Daniel.
Cecile
#8
Apr4-05, 02:12 PM
P: 5
if we dont have nontrivial solution for the combination of n vectors then these n vectors are said to be linearly dependent.

I know the DEFINITION just i cannot show that rule for sin cos & e
?!? am I not clear yet? :(
arildno
#9
Apr4-05, 02:19 PM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
PF Gold
P: 12,016
Remember the vector is the WHOLE function here; that is:
If you can show that the following equation,

[tex]a_{1}\sin(t)+a_{2}\cos(t)+a_{3}e^{t}=0[/tex]

in order to be valid (that is, holds) for ALL values of "t" implies that [tex]a_{1}=a_{2}=a_{3}=0[/tex]
then you have concluded that the three functions are linearly independent.
dextercioby
#10
Apr4-05, 02:22 PM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 11,896
Or you could just compute the wronskian...

Daniel.
Cecile
#11
Apr4-05, 02:25 PM
P: 5
thank you daniel:)
snoble
#12
Apr4-05, 02:44 PM
P: 127
Can I suggest an idea that doesn't involve the machinery of the Wronskian.
First consider the periodicity of the three functions. What can you conclude about the coefficient of [tex]e^x[/tex].
Now consider a root of cos. What does this tell you about the coefficient of sin. Now what must the coefficient of cos be?
Data
#13
Apr4-05, 03:01 PM
P: 998
Or a (very tiny little) bit cleaner, note that we just need

[tex]A\sin{x} + B\cos{x} + Ce^x \equiv 0 \Longrightarrow A=B=C=0[/tex]

setting [itex]x=0[/itex] immediately gives [itex]B+C = 0 \Longrightarrow B=-C[/itex]. But as you noted the limiting behaviour of [itex]e^x[/itex] at infinity implies [itex]C=0[/itex] so [itex]B=-C=0[/itex]. But then [itex]A\sin{x}\equiv 0[/itex] obviously implies [itex]A=0[/itex] so we're done.
matt grime
#14
Apr4-05, 03:22 PM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 9,396
Yes, thank goodness someone came up with the sensible and obvious approach. No nonn-trivial combination can be the zero *function*, and that can be gotten just from putting some values of x in.
HallsofIvy
#15
Apr4-05, 04:24 PM
Math
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
Thanks
PF Gold
P: 39,346
Saying that sin(x), cos(x), and ex are independent means that

In order for C1sin(x)+ C2cos(x)+ C3e[sup]x[/sub]= 0 for all x, we must have C1= C2= C3.

Take 3 different values for x:

x= 0 is especially easy: if x= 0, C1sin(x)+ C2cos(x)+ C3e[sup]x[/sub]= 0 becomes C2+ C3= 0.
If [tex]x= \frac{\pi}{2}[/b], [tex]C_1+ e^{\frac{\pi}{2}}C_3= 0[/tex].

Okay, [tex]C_2= -C_3[/tex] and [tex]C_1= -e^{\frac{\pi}{2}}C_3[/tex].
Now put those into the original equation and take x to be some third number. Solve that for C3. If C3= 0 then so must C1= 0 and
C2= 0 and the functions are independent.

Yes, using the Wronskian is simpler.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Linearly dependent Linear & Abstract Algebra 2
Linearly Dependent Calculus & Beyond Homework 2
Linearly dependent? Introductory Physics Homework 3
Linearly dependent vectors Introductory Physics Homework 15