Linearly Dependent Sets: Answers to Your Questions

ichigo444
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Do all linearly dependent sets have elements that are linear combinations of each other? Or does this apply only to some of the Linearly Dependent sets?

And as a follow up question: How do you know if a set of 2x2 matrices is linearly dependent or linearly independent?

Thank you and may God bless you. :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The usual definition of "linearly dependent" is

"The vectors \{v_1, v_2, v_3,\cdot\cdot\cdot, v_n\} are linearly dependent if and only if there exist scalars a_1, a_2, a_3, \cdot\cdot\cdot, a_n, not all 0, such that a_1v_1+ a_2v_2+ a_3v_3+ \cdot\cdot\cdot+ a_nv_n= 0".

Suppose a_k is non-zero. Then we can write a_1v_1+ \cdot\cdot\cdot+ a_{k-1}v_{k-1}+ a_{k+1}v_{k+1}+ \cdot\cdot\cdot+ a_nv_n= -a_kv_k. Now, since a_k\ne 0, we can divide both sides of the equation by it to get v_k written as a linear combination of the other vectors in the set.

So, yes, if a set of vectors is linearly dependent, then at least one of them can be written as a linear combination of the others.

That works the other way, also- if at least one of the vectors can be written as a linear combination of the others, then they are linearly dependent. That can be used as an alternate definition of "linearly dependent".
 
Wow thank you good sir/ma'am. You have been answering all my question for what seems to be ages now. Thank you very much and may i know where you are from?
 
Sir may i add? May i use invertability as an alternative way of determining the linear independence of a set? Thank you again.
 
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
Back
Top