MHB Linear system of equations: Echelon form/Solutions

mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Hey! 😊

I am looking at the following exercise but I think that I miss something.

The statement is the following:

We are given the following system of equations: \begin{align*}2a-2c+d-2e=&-2 \\ -2c-2d+2e=&\ \ \ \ \ 3 \\ d+2e=&-2\end{align*}

1) Is the system in echelon form? Justify.
2) Solve the linear system of equations over $\mathbb{R}$.
3) How many solutions has the system?
The system in matrix form is: \begin{equation*}\begin{pmatrix}\left.\begin{matrix}2 & -2 & 1 & -2 \\ 0 & -2 & -2 & 2 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 & 2\end{matrix}\right|\begin{matrix}-2 \\ 3\\ -2\end{matrix}\end{pmatrix}\end{equation*}
So the system is in echelon form, or not?

Isn't it trivial? Or do I miss something?

Does maybe the fact that the variable $b$ is missing important here?

:unsure:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hey mathmari!

It looks like an introductory exercise for using echelon forms to solve a system of equations.
First it checks whether the word 'echelon' is understood, and then it asks to apply the corresponding method.
In other words, I don't think you're missing anything. 🤔
 
It doesn't matter at all what you call the letters representing the unknown numbers!

So, no, it doesn't matter that there is no "b". If the equations were
2a−2b+c−2d=-2
−2b−2c+2d= 3
c+2d=−2
The solution set would be exactly the same!

Personally, I would not bother writing the equations in matrix form.
The last equation, c+ 2d= -2 says that c= -2d- 2.
Then -2b- 2c+ d= 3 becomes -2b= 2c- d+ 3= -2d- 2- d+ 3= -3d+ 1 and then b= (3/2)d- 1/2.
And 2a- 2b+ c- 2d= -2 becomes 2a= 2b- c+ 2d- 2= 3d- 1+ 2d+ 2- 2d= 3d- 3 so
a= (3/2)d- 3/2.

Or, using the labels "a", "c", "d", and "e", as originally, and writing the solution in terms of parametera "t" (you have 4 unknowns with only three equations so the "degrees of freedom" is 4- 3= 1 and there is one parameter.)
a= (3/2)t- 3/2
c= (3/2)t- 3/2
d= - 2t- 2
e= t.
 
The system is in row echelon form, but not in reduced row echelon form. In fact, some textbooks, (for example, Nicholson, W. Keith. Linear Algebra with Applications. 2019) require that the leading coefficients are 1 even in regular row echelon form.
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K