Is Row Echelon Form an Upper Triangular Matrix?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ichigo444
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Echelon Form Row
Click For Summary
Row echelon form is indeed an upper triangular matrix, characterized by zeros below the main diagonal. The determinant of a matrix in row echelon form can be either 1 or 0, depending on the values on the diagonal, which do not need to be 1s. Row operations can alter the determinant; multiplying a row changes the determinant by that factor, while swapping rows multiplies it by -1, and adding a multiple of one row to another does not affect the determinant. The discussion highlights the relationship between row echelon form and determinants, emphasizing the impact of row operations. Understanding these concepts is essential for matrix analysis and linear algebra.
ichigo444
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Is row echelon form an upper triangular matrix? if so, does this mean that its determinant could be 1 or 0? Even if its row equivalent has a different determinant? Please Answer and thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, a "row echelon" matrix has all "0"s below the main diagonal- "upper triangular". The numbers on the diagonal do NOT have to be "1"s.

You can always reduce a matrix to row echelon form by row operations and those may affect the determinant:

If you multiply a row by a number, the determinant is multiplied by that number.

If you swap two rows, the determinant is multiplied by -1.

If you add a multiple of one row to another, the determinant is not changed.
 
Right! Thank you! This is my first post and i find this site helpful. Thanks!
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K