Can Linear Independence Affect Pivot Positions in Matrix Columns?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the relationship between linear independence and pivot positions in an n x n matrix A. It is established that if a vector v in Rn is not a linear combination of the columns of A, then at least one column of A cannot be a pivot column. The participant references the Invertible Matrix Theorem and discusses the implications of theorem 4 and theorem 8 in proving this relationship. The conclusion emphasizes the necessity of understanding the transition between these theorems when addressing linear independence and pivot positions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of linear combinations and vector spaces
  • Familiarity with the Invertible Matrix Theorem
  • Knowledge of row echelon form (REF) and reduced row echelon form (RREF)
  • Basic proof techniques in linear algebra
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Invertible Matrix Theorem in detail
  • Learn about the implications of pivot positions in matrix theory
  • Explore the concepts of linear independence and span in vector spaces
  • Practice proving statements involving linear combinations and matrix properties
USEFUL FOR

Students of linear algebra, educators teaching matrix theory, and anyone interested in the foundational concepts of linear independence and its effects on matrix properties.

Cali210
Messages
1
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



So the question is, Prove the following:

Let A be an n x n matrix. If there exists a vector v in Rn that is not a linear
combination of the columns of A, then at least one column of A is not a pivot column.

Homework Equations



The only relevant theorem I think is the invertible matrix theorem, which i attached.
I also attached theorem 4 (book has different names)

The Attempt at a Solution



So far, I started with

- Let A be a n x n matrix and v be a vector in Rn that is not a linear combination of the columns of A
- then there is not a pivot position in every row of rref A (theorem 8 not g to not c)
- then there is at most n-1 pivot positions (out of n rows)
- then at least one column of rref A is not a pivot position (square matrix).

the question i have is, am i allowed to jump from my first sentence to my second sentence without any justification?

For some reason, I am thinking that I'm supposed to go from (theorem 4 not b to not a)
and then, since theorem 4a is equivalent to theorem 8g, then jump from (theorem 8 not g to not c). But am i allowed to use and jump from theorem 4 to theorem 8? since theorem 4 is for a m x n matrix, while theorem 8 is n x n matrix?

Also, in theorem 4 there's a statement " each b in Rm is a linear combination of the columns of A", which is the assumption i started with. What would be the equivalent statement in theorem 8, if there is any?

Sorry, this is probably a basic proof question, but I'm just horrible at proving something, so I wanted to make sure I was on the right path.
 

Attachments

  • 103thm2.8.jpg
    103thm2.8.jpg
    29.3 KB · Views: 485
  • 103thm1.4.4.jpg
    103thm1.4.4.jpg
    13.7 KB · Views: 479
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
What about span?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K