How can a column represent a vector in linear algebra?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the representation of vectors in linear algebra, specifically how column vectors can be understood as vectors within the context of solving systems of equations. Participants explore different approaches to this concept, including both row and column methods, while addressing the abstraction of columns as vectors.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about how a column can represent a vector, despite understanding vector arithmetic and the concept of vectors.
  • Another participant provides an example of a system of equations using column vectors to illustrate the representation.
  • A different approach is suggested using matrix notation to show the relationship between the equations and the vectors involved.
  • Further clarification is requested regarding why a specific column, such as \begin{pmatrix}2\\1\end{pmatrix}, is considered a vector and how it is abstracted as a vector quantity.
  • One participant outlines the properties of a vector space, detailing the axioms that define vector spaces and asserting that both row and column vectors belong to these spaces.
  • The same participant advises against associating vectors solely with arrows, noting that other mathematical objects, like polynomials, can also be considered vectors within their respective vector spaces.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the abstraction of column vectors as vectors. There are multiple perspectives on how to understand this concept, with some focusing on the mathematical properties of vector spaces and others on the practical representation in equations.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes various mathematical definitions and properties that may depend on specific contexts or interpretations, such as the nature of vector spaces and the abstraction of vectors beyond geometric representations.

vijay_singh
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
I am reading "Linear Algebra" by Strang. In the first lesson, he talks about how to solve equations with 2 unknowns and he shows 2 approaches i,e row approach and column approach. I understand the row approach because it makes sense. I understand the column approach too, but I don't understand how the "column" represents a vector?

BTW I do understand what a vector is and how the vector arithmetic works, but I some how cannot abstract the "column" into vector, in my mind. Can somebody please explain me?

example :

2x - y = 1
x + y = 5
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
How about

[itex] \begin{pmatrix}2\\1\end{pmatrix}x+\begin{pmatrix}-1\\1\end{pmatrix}y = \begin{pmatrix}1\\5\end{pmatrix}[/itex]
 
or so:

2 -1 x 1
1 1 . y = 5

?

So you can just solve the equations by back substitution, or you can simplify the matrices using the rules of matrix sweeping, which is actually just the same thing.
 
trambolin said:
How about

[itex] \begin{pmatrix}2\\1\end{pmatrix}x+\begin{pmatrix}-1\\1\end{pmatrix}y = \begin{pmatrix}1\\5\end{pmatrix}[/itex]

Thanks for responding. May be I didn't make it very clear in my question, it is not the solution of the problem but some part of approach which I can't understand. And following is what I don't understand

why is [itex] \begin{pmatrix}2\\1\end{pmatrix}[/itex] considered a "vector" (How is it abstracted as vector quantity?) in the equation you described in your earlier reply

[itex] \begin{pmatrix}2\\1\end{pmatrix}x+\begin{pmatrix}-1\\1\end{pmatrix}y = \begin{pmatrix}1\\5\end{pmatrix}[/itex]
 
Let F be a field. Then a vector space V over F is a set that satisfies the following properties:

1.) There exists a map + : V x V --> V such that for all u, v in V, +(u, v) is an element of V. For brevity, rewrite +(u, v) as u + v.
2.) For all u, v in V, u + v = v + u
3.) For all u, v, w in V, (u + v) + w = u + (v + w)
4.) There exists a map * : (F x V) --> V such that for r in F, v in V, *(r, v) is an element of V. We rewrite *(r,v) as r * v, or simply rv.
5.) For all r, s in F, v in V, (r + s) * v = r * v + s * v.
6.) For all r in F, u, v in V, r * (u + v) = r * u + r * v.
7.) For all r, s in F, v in V, r * (sv) = (rs) * v
8.) There exists an element 0 in V such that for all v in V, v + 0 = v.
9.) For all v in V, there exists an element w such that v + w = 0 = w + v. We denote w by -1.
10.) For all v in V, there 1 * v = v, where 1 is the identity element of F.

Any set and functions that satisfies these axioms is called a vector space over F. Any element of this set is then called a vector.

Your row vectors and column vectors both belong to vector spaces because they both belong to sets with operations that satisfy the properties above. You should begin to avoid the association of arrows with vectors, since not all vectors are equivalence classes of oriented segments. For example, the set of degree two polynomials is a vector space by letting F be the real or complex numbers.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K