Linear independence of functions

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of linear independence of functions, specifically comparing the sets of functions ##\{x,e^x\}## and ##\{ex,e^x\}##. Participants explore the implications of the definition of linear independence and how it applies to these function sets, raising questions about intersections and the conditions under which functions can be considered linearly independent.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant asserts that both sets of functions have only the trivial solution when represented as a linear combination equal to zero, questioning the implications of the definition of linear independence.
  • Another participant argues that the intersection of functions is irrelevant to their linear independence, citing an example of two non-intersecting functions that are not independent.
  • A different viewpoint suggests that the presence of a specific point where one function is a multiple of another does not violate the definition, as the condition must hold for all values in the interval.
  • Some participants express confusion about the application of the "for all x" clause in the definition, emphasizing that it pertains to the uniformity of the solution across the interval.
  • There is a discussion about the equivalence of functions when multiplied by constants from the field, with some participants challenging the reasoning behind the argument that non-intersection implies linear dependence.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the implications of intersections for linear independence. Multiple competing views remain regarding the interpretation of the definition and the conditions under which functions can be considered linearly independent.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the importance of understanding the definition of linear independence in the context of specific intervals and the implications of function behavior at individual points versus across the entire interval.

Mr Davis 97
Messages
1,461
Reaction score
44
Is there a difference between the linear independence of ##\{x,e^x\}## and ##\{ex,e^x\}##? It can be shown that both only have the trivial solution when represented as a linear combination equal to zero. However, the definition of linear independence is: "Two functions are linearly independent on the interval ##I## if there exists only the trivial solution to ##c_1f_1 + c_2f_2 + ... + c_nf_n = 0## for all x in ##I##. In the first case, this is obvious since x and e^x never intersect, and so cannot be multiples of each other. However, doesn't the latter case violate this definition since ##e(1)## is a multiple of ##e^1##? I am just confused about the "for all x on I" statement at the end of the definition.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Mr Davis 97 said:
In the first case, this is obvious since x and e^x never intersect, and so cannot be multiples of each other.
Intersection or non-intersection is irrelevant. The graphs of ##f_1(x) = x^2+1 ## and ##f_2(x) = 2x^2+2## don't intersect, but ## (-2) f_1(x) + (1)f_2(x) = 0 ## at each value of ##x##.

However, doesn't the latter case violate this definition since ##e(1)## is a multiple of ##e^1##?
No. At x = 1, we have ##c_1 (ex) + c_2(e^x) = 0## for ##c_1 = 1## and ##c_2= -1##, but those values ##c_1, c_2## are not solutions that apply to each value of ##x## in some interval. They only work at one particular value of ##x##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Delta2
For linear independence, a multiplication with elements of your field does not matter at all: x and e*x are equivalent. You multiply them with an arbitrary constant ci anyway.
Mr Davis 97 said:
In the first case, this is obvious since x and e^x never intersect, and so cannot be multiples of each other.
I don't understand that argument. In fact, if two functions intersect (but are not identical), they cannot be multiples of each other. If they never intersect, they can (don't have to) be multiples of each other.
 
it does not violate the definition because
(-1)e x+(1)e^x=0 if x=1 but not for all x
that is confusing because the "for all x" applies to
##c_1f_1 + c_2f_2 + ... + c_nf_n = 0##
not
there exists only the trivial solution
 
Mr Davis 97 said:
"Two functions are linearly independent on the interval II if there exists only the trivial solution to c1f1+c2f2+...+cnfn=0c_1f_1 + c_2f_2 + ... + c_nf_n = 0 for all x in II.

you said correctly at the end '' for every ##x \in I## '' this must happen uniformly in ##I## ...
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Mr Davis 97

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
955
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K