Need help with linear independence proof

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around proving that if a set of vectors (v1, ...vn) is linearly independent, then the transformed set (v1-v2, v2-v3, ...vn-1-vn, vn) is also linearly independent. The proof is suggested to be approached by contradiction, where if the second set were not independent, it would lead to a linear combination equating to zero, implying the original set is dependent. Additional guidance is provided to ensure that when expanding the vectors, a nonzero coefficient is maintained. A related problem about the noninvertible operators on a finite-dimensional vector space is also mentioned, emphasizing the need for a similar proof strategy. The conversation highlights key methods for proving linear independence and the importance of careful expansion in proofs.
dyanmcc
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I don't know how to do the following proof:

If (v1, ...vn) are linearly independent in V, then so is the list (v1-v2, v2-v3, ...vn-1 -vn, vn).

I can do the proof if I replace 'linearly independent' with 'spans V' ...so what connection am I missing?

Thanks much!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Prove it by contradiction. If the second set of vectors was not linearly independent, then you can write 0 as a linear combination of those vectors. Then simply expand out each vector to show that this implies v1...vn are also linearly dependent.
 
Great thanks. Here's another one for you...Prove that if V is finite dimensional with dim V > 1, then the set of noninvertible operators on V is not a subspace of L(V)
 
What have you done for that second problem dyanmcc? Start by thinking about matrices.
 
0rthodontist said:
Prove it by contradiction. If the second set of vectors was not linearly independent, then you can write 0 as a linear combination of those vectors. Then simply expand out each vector to show that this implies v1...vn are also linearly dependent.
Also be sure to prove that there is still a nonzero coefficient when you expand the vectors out. (look at the FIRST nonzero coefficient before expansion)
 
Last edited:
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K