I Notation for systems of simultaneous equations

Benjamin Irwin
What notation would I need to use in order to write a mathematical statement to define a System S of simultaneous equations - let's say ax+by=c and ex+fy=g.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You just did it.

Matrix notation makes it neater, but the meaning is the same.
 
Usually the system is denoted with:

##\begin{cases} ax + by = c \\ dx + ey = f\end{cases}##

or ##\begin{pmatrix} a & b \\ d & e \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} x \\ y \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} c \\ f \end{pmatrix}##
 
  • Like
Likes Benjamin Irwin
If T is a linear transformation and v and w are vector, one can simply write T(v) = w.
 

Thread '##(A/\mathfrak{a})_{\mathfrak{p}/\mathfrak{a}}## and its isomorphism?'

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...
View full post »

Thread 'Questions about non existence of GCDs vs (coimages, cokernels)'

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...
View full post »

Thread 'Trouble understanding an online solution to an exercise in Dummit & Foote'

##\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...
View full post »

Similar threads

I Manipulation of 2nd, 3rd & 4th order tensor using Index notation
Replies
5
Views
2K
I Trouble with a passage in Zariski & Samuel's Commutative algebra text
Replies
4
Views
608
I Meaning of the notations: ##\mathbb{Z}[\frac{1}{a}]##
Replies
1
Views
440
I Notation questions about kernel, cokernel, image and coimage
Replies
7
Views
615
I Question about "A Group Epimorphism is Surjective"
Replies
13
Views
568
I Symbol for matrix representative of a tensor
Replies
5
Views
3K
I Meaning of ##\coprod_{x\in\mathrm{Spec}R}R/\mathfrak{p}_x##
Replies
11
Views
744
I What does V^G mean in linear algebra?
Replies
3
Views
3K
I Vector that satisfies systems of equations simultaneously
Replies
9
Views
2K
I Bra-Ket Notation Manipulations: Quantum State Expansion
Replies
8
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top