wurth_skidder_23
- 39
- 0
Assume that [tex]m<n[/tex] and [tex]l_1,l_2,...,l_m[/tex] are linear functionals on an n-dimensional vector space
[tex]X[/tex].
Prove there exists a nonzero vector [tex]x[/tex] [tex]\epsilon[/tex] [tex]X[/tex] such that [tex]< x,l_j >=0[/tex] for [tex]1 \leq j \leq m[/tex]. What does this say about the solution of systems of linear equations?This implies
[tex]l_j(x)[/tex] [tex]\epsilon[/tex] [tex]X^\bot[/tex] for [tex]1 \leq j \leq m[/tex] or [tex]l_j(x)=0[/tex] for [tex]1 \leq j \leq m[/tex]. Since it is stated in the problem that [tex]l_1,l_2,...,l_m[/tex] are linear functionals on the vector space X, [tex]l_j(x)=0[/tex]. Does this reasoning even help me find the proof? I am stuck.
If you have trouble reading this, it is also at http://nirvana.informatik.uni-halle.de/~thuering/php/latex-online/olatex_33882.pdf
[tex]X[/tex].
Prove there exists a nonzero vector [tex]x[/tex] [tex]\epsilon[/tex] [tex]X[/tex] such that [tex]< x,l_j >=0[/tex] for [tex]1 \leq j \leq m[/tex]. What does this say about the solution of systems of linear equations?This implies
[tex]l_j(x)[/tex] [tex]\epsilon[/tex] [tex]X^\bot[/tex] for [tex]1 \leq j \leq m[/tex] or [tex]l_j(x)=0[/tex] for [tex]1 \leq j \leq m[/tex]. Since it is stated in the problem that [tex]l_1,l_2,...,l_m[/tex] are linear functionals on the vector space X, [tex]l_j(x)=0[/tex]. Does this reasoning even help me find the proof? I am stuck.
If you have trouble reading this, it is also at http://nirvana.informatik.uni-halle.de/~thuering/php/latex-online/olatex_33882.pdf
Last edited by a moderator: