Prove that a matrix can be reduced to RRE and CRE

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of an m x n matrix A and its ability to be transformed into both row reduced echelon form and column reduced echelon form through a series of elementary row and column operations. Participants are exploring the implications of these transformations and the relationships between the matrices involved.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the transformation of matrix A into row reduced echelon form and subsequently into column reduced echelon form, questioning the correctness of their reasoning and the relationships between the matrices P, Q, and R.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of the validity of the statements made regarding the transformations of the matrix. Some participants express uncertainty about the proof's completeness and seek clarification on what constitutes a proof in this context.

Contextual Notes

Participants are grappling with the definitions and implications of the transformations, as well as the need for rigorous proof rather than mere statements about the process. There is an acknowledgment of the need for clarity in the proof structure.

Buffu
Messages
851
Reaction score
147

Homework Statement



Let ##A## be an ##m \times n## matrix. Show that by means of a finite number of elementary row/column operations ##A## can be reduced to both "row reduced echelon" and "column reduced echelon" matrix ##R##. i.e ##R_{ij} = 0## if ##i \ne j##, ##R_{ii} = 1 ##, ##1 \le i \le r##, ##R_{ii} = 0## if ##i > r##. Also show that ##R = PAQ## where ##P## and ##Q## are invertible ##m\times m## and ##n \times n## matrices respectively.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution



Since I know I can pass ##A## to a row reduced echelon matrix in finite number of operations.
Lets say the row reduced echelon form of ##A## is ##R^{\prime}##. Then ##R^\prime = PA##.

Also since nothing is special about rows, therefore I can say that a matrix can be passed on to column reduced echelon in finite number of steps. Therefore I can pass ##R^\prime## to a column reduced form ##R## in finite number of steps. Let's say ##R = QR^\prime##

From above I can say ##A## can be passed to a column and row reduced echelon form in finite number of steps and ##R = QPA##.

Is this correct ? I think it is wrong since I used a lot of words and also I got ##R = QPA## not ##R = PAQ##.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Buffu said:

Homework Statement



Let ##A## be an ##m \times n## matrix. Show that by means of a finite number of elementary row/column operations ##A## can be reduced to both "row reduced echelon" and "column reduced echelon" matrix ##R##. i.e ##R_{ij} = 0## if ##i \ne j##, ##R_{ii} = 1 ##, ##1 \le i \le r##, ##R_{ii} = 0## if ##i > r##. Also show that ##R = PAQ## where ##P## and ##Q## are invertible ##m\times m## and ##n \times n## matrices respectively.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution



Since I know I can pass ##A## to a row reduced echelon matrix in finite number of operations.
Lets say the row reduced echelon form of ##A## is ##R^{\prime}##. Then ##R^\prime = PA##.

Also since nothing is special about rows, therefore I can say that a matrix can be passed on to column reduced echelon in finite number of steps. Therefore I can pass ##R^\prime## to a column reduced form ##R## in finite number of steps. Let's say ##R = QR^\prime##

From above I can say ##A## can be passed to a column and row reduced echelon form in finite number of steps and ##R = QPA##.

Is this correct ? I think it is wrong since I used a lot of words and also I got ##R = QPA## not ##R = PAQ##.

So, you can have ##R = QPA,## and this can be written as ##R = P_1 A Q_1##, where ##P_1 = QP## and ##Q_1 = I## (the ##n \times n## identity matrix).
 
Ray Vickson said:
So, you can have ##R = QPA,## and this can be written as ##R = P_1 A Q_1##, where ##P_1 = QP## and ##Q_1 = I## (the ##n \times n## identity matrix).

Then the proof is correct ?
 
Buffu said:
Then the proof is correct ?

What proof? All you did was make statements; you did not really "prove" anything.
 
Ray Vickson said:
What proof? All you did was make statements; you did not really "prove" anything.

No I did not get what you are saying. Isn't statements like " You can pass from from A to a row/column reduced form in finite steps " is proven to be true.
So I just need to combine these types of statements to form a proof.
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K