Determine whether the given vectors form a basis

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around determining whether a set of vectors in R3 forms a basis. The vectors in question are w1 = (2, 1, 2), w2 = (1, -2, -3), and w3 = (5, 0, 1). Participants are examining the conditions for linear independence and the implications of echelon forms.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning the linear independence of the vectors and discussing the implications of echelon forms. One participant asserts that the vectors are linearly independent based on the absence of free variables and the lack of scalar multiples among them. Another participant challenges this assertion by providing a linear combination that suggests dependence.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active with participants exploring different interpretations of linear independence and the properties of echelon forms. Some guidance has been offered regarding the distinction between echelon form and reduced echelon form, which has led to a better understanding among participants.

Contextual Notes

There is a noted confusion regarding the definitions and characteristics of echelon forms, which is being clarified in the discussion. The original poster references a checklist for determining a basis, which is being scrutinized by others.

robertjford80
Messages
388
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



w1 = 2 1 2
w2 = 1 -2 -3
w3 = 5 0 1

for
R3


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



The books says the above is not a basis, why not? There are no free variables, none of the vectors are multiples of the other, they are linearly independent and the number of unknowns equals the number of equations. That check list to me signals a basis
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What makes you think they are lineally independent?
 
As I already said: There are no free variables, none of the vectors are multiples of the other

This is what I get in Reduced Ech form

1 -2 -3
0 5 -4
0 0 -6
 
Actually is:
w_3=2w_1+w_2
 
In echelon form I get
\left( \begin{matrix}<br /> 1 &amp; -2 &amp; -3 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 5 &amp; 8 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0<br /> \end{matrix} \right)

Also be careful with difference between echelon form and reduced echelon form. The matrix you wrote (and the one above) is in echelon form, as every pivot has only zeros below it. Whereas in reduced echelon form the piviot is the only non zero entry in the column i.e. the above matrix becomes:

\left( \begin{matrix}<br /> 1 &amp; 0 &amp; \frac{1}{5} \\<br /> 0 &amp; 1 &amp; \frac{8}{5} \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0<br /> \end{matrix} \right)
 
Ok, I understand now.

Also thanks for the tip about echelon form and reduced echelon form, I thought they were the same.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K