MHB Proving a Vector in $\Bbb R^2$ is of the Form $au+bv$

  • Thread starter Thread starter Niamh1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Form Vector
Niamh1
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Let $a, b \in \Bbb R$ and $u, v \in \Bbb R^2$, with $u = (0, 1)$ and $v = (1, 0)$. Show that every vector in $\Bbb R^2$ is of the form $au + bv$. Under what conditions is this true for general vectors $u = (u_1, u_2)$ and $v = (v_1, v_2)$?

No idea where to begin. Would appreciate any help.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Any point in $\mathbb{R}^2$ can be described as the coordinates of the tip of a vector. As any vector can be the hypotenuse of the triangle formed by such a vector and two perpendicular vectors (with either $a$ or $b$ being $0$ if our vector is vertical or horizontal), we can describe any vector with the vector sum given.

What if $<u_1,u_2>$ and $<v_1,v_2>$ are orthogonal? What if they are not orthogonal?

Does that help?
 
Let $w=(w_1,w_2)$ be an arbitrary vector. With your notation, when can you find $a,\,b$ with $w=au+bv$. That is the system in unknowns a and b has a (unique) solution:
$$u_1a+v_1b=w_1$$
$$u_2a+v_2b=w_2$$

Since this is linear algebra you should know that the answer is that the determinant $u_1v_2-v_1u_2\neq0$.
 
##\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...
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...
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top