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
Heat distributions help researchers to understand curved space
Professor quantifies how 'one thing leads to another'
Team announces construction of a formal computer-verified proof of the Kepler conjecture
dextercioby
#2
Apr4-05, 01:54 PM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 11,926
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: 11,926
[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: 11,926
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: 11,926
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: 39,544
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