Linear Algebra Vector Spaces: Prove equivalence

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the equivalence of three statements related to linear algebra and vector spaces: that the null space of matrix A is zero (N(A)=0), that A is nonsingular, and that the equation Ax=b has a unique solution for each b in R^n. Participants outline a proof strategy involving showing that each statement implies the next. They establish that if N(A)=0, then the columns of A are linearly independent, leading to A being invertible. The implications from A being nonsingular to the uniqueness of solutions for Ax=b are also discussed, with hints provided for proving the final implication that a unique solution implies N(A)=0. The conversation emphasizes the interconnections between invertibility, linear dependence, and the properties of solutions in linear equations.
Luxe
Messages
10
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Prove that the following are equivalent:
1. N(A)=0
2. A is nonsingular
3. Ax=b has a unique solution for each b that exists in R^n.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


I think you prove this by showing that 1 implies 2, 2 implies 3, & 3 implies 1.
But after that I don't know how to prove that.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Start by trying one of the three implications you must show.
For example, for 1 implies 2, what does N(A) = 0 tell you about the equation Ax=0? Can you imply this to determine that A is invertible?
 
if N(A)=0 then in the equation Ax=0, x equals 0. But then how do you show that A is invertible from that?
 
What does Ax=0 tell you about the columns of A? Let a1, ..., an be some vector in A, and the components of x are x1,..., xn. Then from Ax=0, you get equations of the form a1x1 + ... + anxn = 0, and from N(A)=0 you get that all the xi's are 0. What can you conclude from this?
 
Ok I think I figured the first part out:
The columns of A are linearly independent.
So, A is row equivalent to the identity matrix, and Ax=0 and Ix=0 have only the solution, x=0. So, the A=E1E2...Ek, which says that the product of invertiable matrices is invertiable and E is invertiable, so A is invertable.

So, then How do you imply that 2 equals 3, and 3 equals 1?
 
Give them a try, pick one of the two. What have you done so far?

For example, 2 to 3:
A is non singular, So A-1 exists. Then multiply Ax=b by A-1 . What does this imply? Is this unique?
 
Last edited:
And the other directions are probably similar. It's all a matter of shuffling between invertibility, linear dependence, etc.
 
ok, i think that for 2 implies 3. A being nonsingular says that A inverse exists. So, then you can show that x= (inverseA)*B which proves #3. Is this right?

Now, the one I am stuck on is 3 implies 1. Any hints to get me started?
 
Yes, you are correct and it is easy to understand that this is in fact a unique solution (since for all other solutions you can simply left multiply by A-1 to get the same conclusion.

I have not yet thought about 3 to 1. Think about it. Maybe there is some trick you can use from what you already proved in this problem.

You are assuming that Ax=b has a unique solution. Then b=0 also has a unique solution, and you know what it is.
 
  • #10
I still have no idea on the last one. I have looked all through my book...
 
  • #11
Luxe said:
ok, i think that for 2 implies 3. A being nonsingular says that A inverse exists. So, then you can show that x= (inverseA)*B which proves #3. Is this right?
That shows that Ax=b has a solution. You should prove that this solution is unique.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K