(linear algebra) is this rref? or did I solve it wrong?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The original poster is working with a matrix A and attempting to reduce it to reduced row echelon form (rref). They also need to find the four fundamental subspaces of the matrix.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster describes their reduction steps and expresses uncertainty about whether their result qualifies as rref, particularly questioning the presence of a non-zero entry in the last row. They also inquire about the process for determining the four fundamental subspaces.
  • Some participants suggest further reduction steps and clarify that the presence of a non-zero row does not necessarily disqualify the matrix from being in rref.
  • Others discuss the implications of the matrix being an augmented matrix versus a transformation matrix, raising questions about the context of the problem.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing insights into the reduction process and the nature of the matrix. There is no explicit consensus, but several participants are exploring different interpretations and clarifying concepts related to rref and the fundamental subspaces.

Contextual Notes

There is some confusion regarding whether the matrix A is an augmented matrix for a system of equations or a transformation matrix, which affects the interpretation of the results. The original poster is also uncertain about the requirements for finding the fundamental subspaces.

kira137
Messages
16
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I was given
| 1 2 -1 2 |
| 2 4 1 -2 | = A
| 3 6 0 -6 |

and reduce it to rref.

Also I had to find all four fundamental subspaces of A.

2. The attempt at a solution

so I did

R2 - 2R1
R3 - 3R1
R3 - R2

and got

| 1 2 -1 2 |
| 0 0 3 -6 |
| 0 0 0 -6 |

... Arent rref suppose to have all zero row at the bottom? I don't think this is rref because of that -6 in row 3...

and I'm not very sure about how to go about four fundamental subspaces. Am I suppose to solve for C(A), N(A), C(A^T), N(A^T)? and am I suppose to solve for dim for each of them or special solutions?

thank you for replies in adavance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, you don't always end up with rows of zeros at the bottom. By the way, you're not done reducing the matrix. The first non-zero entry in a row should be equal to 1.

Your textbook should tell you what the four fundamental subspaces are and how to find them. Have you looked in there for the answer to your question?
 
Since last row has -6 you can divide it by -6, i.e R3 = -1/6 * R3

Row 2 is clearly divisible by 3, so R2 = 1/3 * R2, you get [0 0 1 -2]. By adding 2*R3 + R2 = R2 you eliminate the -2. Long story short you can check your results by plugging it back into the original equation. Your system of linear equations is inconsistent and has NO solution, because you have a row of zeroes and 1 at the end, i.e

0*x1 + 0*x2 + 0*x3 = 1

If you had a row of all zeroes at the end, your system has infinitely many solutions, i.e
0*x1 + 0*x2 + 0*x3 = 0

**Make sure you take a minute to re-read what I just wrote, tattoo it on your hand somewhere and don't ever forget it**

This is the result of reduced row echelon formation performed on your matrix:
| 1 2 0 0 |
| 0 0 1 0 |
| 0 0 0 1 |
 
cronxeh said:
Your system of linear equations is inconsistent and has NO solution, because you have a row of zeroes and 1 at the end
This is only true if A is the augmented matrix for a system of linear equations. It's not true if A is a mapping from R4 to R3.
 
vela said:
This is only true if A is the augmented matrix for a system of linear equations. It's not true if A is a mapping from R4 to R3.

I'm sorry. I wasn't aware there exists a reason why one would want to rref a transformation matrix?
 
cronxeh said:
I'm sorry. I wasn't aware there exists a reason why one would want to rref a transformation matrix?
One reason would be to find the four fundamental subspaces. :) You can also reduce it to determine the rank and nullity of the mapping.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K