- #1

mathwizarddud

- 25

- 0

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- Thread starter mathwizarddud
- Start date

- #1

mathwizarddud

- 25

- 0

- #2

rock.freak667

Homework Helper

- 6,223

- 31

Even though I was never taught linear algebra fully, to do this problem I would consider what would make the matrix A invertible and what would it mean if the RRE form wasn't the identity matrix.

But I am not sure if that would be a valid proof.

- #3

Defennder

Homework Helper

- 2,592

- 5

This isn't too hard to prove. You can start by asking yourself what a row operation on a matrix translates to in matrix algebra. And what do the matrices corresponding to the row-operations amount to when they row-reduce A to I?

As for the "forward" conjecture, well I can think of something some might find objectionable. If it does not row-reduce A to I, it the RRE form has a row of zeros. That means that the determinant is 0 and hence it is not invertible. I'm sure there's a better way to do this.

Share:

- Replies
- 40

- Views
- 2K

- Replies
- 13

- Views
- 648

- Replies
- 10

- Views
- 396

- Replies
- 23

- Views
- 627

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 415

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 585

- Replies
- 5

- Views
- 470

- Replies
- 15

- Views
- 620

- Replies
- 8

- Views
- 702

- Replies
- 20

- Views
- 655