Is this a linear system of equations?

nde
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone!

I have a question on whether a system of equations can be classified as linear. I have the following matrix:<br /> \begin{equation}<br /> \left[ \begin{array}{c} S_t(1) \\ S_t(2) \\ \vdots \\ S_t(\omega_N) \end{array} \right] = <br /> \begin{bmatrix} f(x_1, x_2, 1) &amp; f(x_2, x_3, 1) &amp; \cdots &amp; f(x_i, x_{i+1}, 1) \\ <br /> f(x_1, x_2, 2) &amp; f(x_2, x_3, 2) &amp; \cdots &amp; f(x_i, x_{i+1}, 2) \\<br /> \vdots &amp; \vdots &amp; \ddots &amp; \vdots \\ <br /> f(x_1, x_2, \omega_N) &amp; f(x_2, x_3, \omega_N) &amp; \cdots &amp; f(x_i, x_{i+1}, \omega_N) \\<br /> \end{bmatrix} <br /> \times <br /> \left[ \begin{array}{c} S_1 \\ S_2 \\ \vdots \\ S_i \end{array} \right]<br /> \label{equationsystem}<br /> \end{equation}<br />where f(x_i, x_{i+1}, \omega_N) is a non-linear function containing two exponential terms and S_i is unknown. Does this system of equations qualify as linear if I know x_i, x_{i+1} and \omega_N and plug it into f(x_i, x_{i+1}, \omega_N) to yield a numerical value (real number)?

If this is true, I should be able to figure out S_i by taking the inverse of the function marix and multiplying both sides with it.

I greatly appreciate your input. Thank you in advance for taking the time to answer this.

Kind regards.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes if the f(...) are considered constant coefficients then you can do the matrix inversion but if they are somehow dependent on the S unknowns then all bets are off.
 
Thanks for your reply. What do you mean when you say that the S_i are somehow dependent on the f? Could you please illustrate it with a simple example?
 
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
Back
Top