MHB Parametrization of a Reduced Matrix

Jundoe
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
I'm facing some doubts regarding the parametrization of a given matrix.

Let's say, the following matrix is reduced.

From:
$\begin{bmatrix}0 & 2 & -8\\0 & 2 & 0\\0 & 0 & 2\end{bmatrix}$

To:
$\begin{bmatrix}0 & 1 & 0\\0 & 0 & 1\\0 & 0 & 0\end{bmatrix}$

To Parametrize that I would do the following:

x2=0, x3=0

$\begin{bmatrix}x1\\x2\\x3\end{bmatrix}$= $\begin{bmatrix}0\\1\\1\end{bmatrix}$

But that doesn't seem right. For some reason when the matrix is bigger with more integers I can do it simply with chosen variables r, s, t... But with only zeroes like this I get super confused.

I would usually proceed with assigned variables, which may yield:

$\begin{bmatrix}x1\\x2\\x3\end{bmatrix}$= r $\begin{bmatrix}0\\1\\0\end{bmatrix}$ + s $\begin{bmatrix}0\\0\\1\end{bmatrix}$

But even this feels odd, seeing as I'm assigning a variable to a pivot.

Can someone please clarify this for me.
Thank You.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Jundoe said:
I'm facing some doubts regarding the parametrization of a given matrix.

Let's say, the following matrix is reduced.

From:
$\begin{bmatrix}0 & 2 & -8\\0 & 2 & 0\\0 & 0 & 2\end{bmatrix}$

To:
$\begin{bmatrix}0 & 1 & 0\\0 & 0 & 1\\0 & 0 & 0\end{bmatrix}$

To Parametrize that I would do the following:

x2=0, x3=0

$\begin{bmatrix}x1\\x2\\x3\end{bmatrix}$= $\begin{bmatrix}0\\1\\1\end{bmatrix}$

But that doesn't seem right. For some reason when the matrix is bigger with more integers I can do it simply with chosen variables r, s, t... But with only zeroes like this I get super confused.

I would usually proceed with assigned variables, which may yield:

$\begin{bmatrix}x1\\x2\\x3\end{bmatrix}$= r $\begin{bmatrix}0\\1\\0\end{bmatrix}$ + s $\begin{bmatrix}0\\0\\1\end{bmatrix}$

But even this feels odd, seeing as I'm assigning a variable to a pivot.

Can someone please clarify this for me.
Thank You.

Welcome to MHB, Jundoe! :)

I think you are trying to solve $x1$, $x2$, and $x3$ from:
$$\begin{bmatrix}0 & 2 & -8\\0 & 2 & 0\\0 & 0 & 2\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}x1\\x2\\x3\end{bmatrix}
= \begin{bmatrix}0\\0\\0\end{bmatrix}$$
Let me know if I am misunderstanding.

Row reduction turns this into:
$$\begin{bmatrix}0 & 1 & 0\\0 & 0 & 1\\0 & 0 & 0\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}x1\\x2\\x3\end{bmatrix}
= \begin{bmatrix}0\\0\\0\end{bmatrix}$$
You correctly deduced that $x2=0$ and $x3=0$.

However, after that you seem to give them a non-zero value, which can't be right.
What you do have, is that $x1$ has an unspecified value. Let's call it $r$. So $x1 = r$.
Then your solution should be:
$$\begin{bmatrix}x1\\x2\\x3\end{bmatrix}= r \begin{bmatrix}1\\0\\0\end{bmatrix}$$
 
I like Serena said:
However, after that you seem to give them a non-zero value, which can't be right.
What you do have, is that $x1$ has an unspecified value. Let's call it $r$. So $x1 = r$.
Then your solution should be:
$$\begin{bmatrix}x1\\x2\\x3\end{bmatrix}= r \begin{bmatrix}1\\0\\0\end{bmatrix}$$

Much clearer, thank you. I was aware of assigning free variables yet, for some odd reason, thought the zeroes were pretty much obsolete, and would ignore them instead of assigning them a variable.
 
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 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K