I'm terrible with proofs linear algebra problem

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the linear independence of a modified set of vectors derived from a known linearly independent set in linear algebra. The original poster presents an attempt to show that the set { v_1 - 2v_2 + v_3, v_2, v_3, ..., v_m } maintains linear independence.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the manipulation of vector expressions to demonstrate linear independence. There are discussions on the significance of showing that a specific equation has only the trivial solution. Questions arise about the clarity of definitions and the necessity of expressing equations correctly to draw conclusions about linear independence.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the original poster's proof attempt, providing feedback on the need for clearer expressions and definitions. Some guidance is offered regarding the structure of the proof and the importance of establishing the uniqueness of the solution to the linear combination. There is an ongoing exploration of the implications of the definitions of linear independence and dependence.

Contextual Notes

There are indications that some participants are questioning the original poster's understanding of linear independence and the requirements for proving it. The discussion reflects a mix of attempts to clarify definitions and the mathematical reasoning involved in the proof process.

dmatador
Messages
120
Reaction score
1
let { v_1, v_2, v_3, ... v_m } (m > 3) be linearly independent vectors in a vector space V. Prove that the set { v_1 - 2v_2 + v_3, v_2, v_3, ..., v_m } is also Linearly.







I did this:

a_1( v_1 - 2v_2 + v_3) + a_2(v_2) + a_3(v_3) + ... + a_m(v_m)
= a_1(v_1) - a_1(2v_2) + a_1(v_3) + a_2(v_2) + a_3(v_3) + ... +a_m(v_m)
= -a_1(2v_2) + a_1(v_3) + a_1(v_1) + a_2(v_2) + a_3(v_3) + ... +a_m(v_m)

and since we know the first part, we know that a_1(v_1) + a_2(v_2) + a_3(v_3) + ... +a_m(v_m) is Linearly independent so we know that a_1 = a_2 = a_3 = ... = a_m = 0. so we can see now that the first two terms have scalars a_1 and a_1 which equal zero to the second set of vectors is also Linearly independent.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You have to combine your like vectors here

-a_1(2v_2) + a_1(v_3) + a_1(v_1) + a_2(v_2) + a_3(v_3) + ... +a_m(v_m)

Becomes

a_1v_1 + (a_2-2a_1)v_2 + (a_3+a_1)v_3 + a_4v_4...

and then each coefficient here comes out to zero
 
To prove that a set of vectors {v1, v2, ..., vn} is linearly independent, you have to show that this equation has EXACTLY ONE SOLUTION for the constants c1, c2, ..., cn:
c1v1 + c2v2 + ... + cnvn = 0, namely, the solution where c1 = c2 = ... cn = 0.

The part about EXACTLY ONE SOLUTION is significant here, and is something that beginning linear algebra students miss. The definition for a set of linearly dependent vectors has the same equation as above, but there will be a solution to the equation where at least one of the constants isn't zero. That's too subtle for many linear algebra students.
 
Mark44 said:
To prove that a set of vectors {v1, v2, ..., vn} is linearly independent, you have to show that this equation has EXACTLY ONE SOLUTION for the constants c1, c2, ..., cn:
c1v1 + c2v2 + ... + cnvn = 0, namely, the solution where c1 = c2 = ... cn = 0.

The part about EXACTLY ONE SOLUTION is significant here, and is something that beginning linear algebra students miss. The definition for a set of linearly dependent vectors has the same equation as above, but there will be a solution to the equation where at least one of the constants isn't zero. That's too subtle for many linear algebra students.

although it may not be apparent in my attempt at a proof, i do know the definitions of linearly independent and linearly dependent. are you saying that what i have done does not necessarily prove that there is only one possible (trivial) solution? i can understand how a right answer works, but what is wrong with my answer?
 
I wasn't sure that you understood the definitions, since you didn't even have an equation. You had an expression, a_1( v_1 - 2v_2 + v_3) + a_2(v_2) + a_3(v_3) + ... + a_m(v_m), which you were manipulating.

The key thing is that you need to show that the equation a_1*v_1 + ... + a_m*v_m = 0 has one and only one solution.

For example, let v_1 = (1, 0, 0), v_2 = (0, 1, 0, and v_3 = (1, 1, 0)
If I form the equation c_1*v1 + c_2*v2 + c_3*v_3 = 0, I can see that c_1 = 0, c_2= 0, and c_3 = 0 makes this equation a true statement. Can I conclude that the three vectors are linearly independent?

In fact, I can't, because there is another solution, c_1 = 1, c_2 = 1, and c_3 = -1. So my solution where all three constants were 0 is not the single, solitary, sole, unique, all by itsef solution to this equation.
 
what i meant was a_1( v_1 - 2v_2 + v_3) + a_2(v_2) + a_3(v_3) + ... + a_m(v_m) = 0

and i was trying to prove that a_i = 0. and then using the other set of vector's linear independence showed that the terms have only the solution of a_1 = a_2 = a_3 = 0.
 
but still, that is incorrect? i thought that since the a_i from the first set of vectors were trivial, then if that same linear independent set of vectors is in the second set of vectors, then the a_i that it had in common would be zero...?

i know i am being annoying probably, but i need to get this stuff...
 
Like I said in my post.

You haven't written that expression out in the form \lambda_1v_1 + \lambda_2v_2 +... and asked when it eqals zero, so you can't say anything about the coefficients yet,

Suppose the sum is equal to zero. Re-arrange it to get this

<br /> a_1v_1 + (a_2-2a_1)v_2 + (a_3+a_1)v_3 + a_4v_4...Now what, exactly, can you say must be zero?
 
  • #10
I think that you get the idea, but some of the stuff you said in your OP is incorrect or vague. No, I don't think you're being annoying. If you don't understand, it is not being annoying to ask questions to try to clear things up.


dmatador said:
Prove that the set { v_1 - 2v_2 + v_3, v_2, v_3, ..., v_m } is also Linearly.
Linearly what? independent? dependent?
dmatador said:
a_1( v_1 - 2v_2 + v_3) + a_2(v_2) + a_3(v_3) + ... + a_m(v_m)
= a_1(v_1) - a_1(2v_2) + a_1(v_3) + a_2(v_2) + a_3(v_3) + ... +a_m(v_m)
= -a_1(2v_2) + a_1(v_3) + a_1(v_1) + a_2(v_2) + a_3(v_3) + ... +a_m(v_m)
There's not a zero in sight here anywhere.
dmatador said:
and since we know the first part, we know that a_1(v_1) + a_2(v_2) + a_3(v_3) + ... +a_m(v_m) is Linearly independent so we know that a_1 = a_2 = a_3 = ... = a_m = 0. so we can see now that the first two terms have scalars a_1 and a_1 which equal zero to the second set of vectors is also Linearly independent.
The sum of the vectors is not linearly independent. It's the vectors themselves that are or are not linearly independent. The fact that a_1 = a_2 = a_3 = ... = a_m = 0 is immaterial. That happens whether the vectors are linearly independent or linearly dependent. What you have to establish is that there is no other solution for these constants (to prove linear independence).

You are given that the vectors v_1, ..., v_m are linearly independent. This means that a_1*v_1 _ a_2*v_2 + a_3*v_3 + ... + am_v_m = 0 has only the trivial solutions for the constants a_1, a_2, ..., a_m.

Let's look at this equation...
c_1*(v_1 - 2v_2 + v_3) + c_2*v_2 + c_3*v_3, ..., + c_m*v_m = 0 [Note: I can always do this for any set of vectors from the same vector space.]
<==> c_1*v_1 + (-2c_1 + c_2)*v_2 + (c_1 + c_3)*v_3 + c_4*v_4 + ... + c_m*v_m = 0

Now since {v_1, v_2, v_3, ..., v_m} is a linearly independent set of vectors, the only solution to the equation above is the trivial solution: c_1 = 0, -2c_1 + c_2 = 0, c_1 + c_3 = 0, c_4 = 0, ..., c_m = 0.
c_1 = 0 ==> c_2 = 0.
c_1 = 0 ==> c_3 = 0.
So all the constants are zero, and there is no other solution.
Therefore the set of vectors {v_1 - 2v_2 + v_3, v_2, v_3, ..., v_m} is linearly independent.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
34
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K