Question on solving system of equations with constants....

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around solving systems of equations, specifically focusing on cases where constants are represented by symbols rather than numerical values. Participants explore methods for expressing variables in terms of these symbolic constants, discussing both theoretical and practical approaches.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that solving a system with numerical constants can be straightforward using Gaussian elimination, but expresses difficulty when constants are represented by symbols.
  • Another participant suggests that Cramer's Rule could be applicable for a 3x3 system, although they caution that it may become computationally unwieldy.
  • A later reply agrees with the utility of Cramer's Rule and appreciates the structured approach it offers, but acknowledges that it may still require significant manipulation.
  • One participant challenges the notion that elimination cannot be used, providing a detailed example of how elimination could be applied with symbolic constants, including specific row operations and conditions for success.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the effectiveness of elimination for systems with symbolic constants, as some support its use while others express skepticism. Multiple methods are discussed without agreement on a preferred approach.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention specific conditions under which certain methods may or may not work, such as the need for certain differences between constants to be non-zero. The discussion includes detailed mathematical steps that may depend on these conditions.

datahead8888
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
It's fairly straight forward to find information on how to solve a system of equations like this:

2x + 3y + 4z = 1
3x + 4y + 3z = 2
4x + 5y + 3z = 3

It has numerical constants in front of each term. You could use Gaussian elimination and solve for one, infinite, or no solutions. (The above example is completely random). It works because you can cancel terms out.

It's a bit less straightforward to find information on how to solve it when you have constants represented by symbols:
ua*x + ub*y + uc*z = 1
va*x + vb*y + vy*z = 2
x + y + z = 3

Here we want to solve for x, y, and z, each expressed in terms of ua/ub/uc/va/vb/vc only. You can't use elimination here because terms such as ua and va will not cancel out. (This example is slightly random too - I just need to learn the technique).

The only method I'm aware of is substitution, though it seems to spill onto multiple pages (the above system is simpler than what I need to solve). Is there any easier way to attack something like this? Any links to online references would be much appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For a 3 x 3 system such as you have here, Cramer's Rule isn't too bad. Because it's all determinants, though, it gets computationally unwieldy very quickly.
 
Ackbach said:
For a 3 x 3 system such as you have here, Cramer's Rule isn't too bad. Because it's all determinants, though, it gets computationally unwieldy very quickly.

That looks extremely helpful. It probably still requires mangling, but it least it gives a lot of order to the mangling. I especially like how wikipedia already has standard forms posted.

I'll post back if I have issues - thanks a lot!
 
I'm not so sure elimination doesn't work here. Assuming you meant subscripts $u_{a}$, etc., we have:

$$
\left[ \begin{array}{ccc|c} u_a &u_b &u_c &1 \\ v_a &v_b &v_c &2 \\ 1 &1 &1 &3 \end{array}\right]_{ \begin{align*}R_{1} & \leftrightarrow R_{3} \\ R_3 & \leftrightarrow R_2 \end{align*}} \to $$
$$ \left[\begin{array}{ccc|c}1 &1 &1 &3 \\ u_a &u_b &u_c &1 \\ v_a &v_b &v_c &2 \end{array}\right]_{ \begin{align*}-u_a R_1+R_2 &\mapsto R_2 \\ -v_a R_1 + R_3 &\mapsto R_3 \end{align*}} \to $$
$$\left[\begin{array}{ccc|c}1 &1 &1 &3 \\ 0 &u_b-u_a &u_c-u_a &1-3u_a \\ 0 &v_b-v_a &v_c-v_a &2-3v_a \end{array}\right]_{R_2/(u_b-u_a) \mapsto R_2} \to
\left[\begin{array}{ccc|c}1 &1 &1 &3 \\ 0 &1 &\frac{u_c-u_a}{u_b-u_a} &\frac{1-3u_a}{u_b-u_a} \\ 0 &v_b-v_a &v_c-v_a &2-3v_a \end{array}\right], \quad \text{for } u_b-u_a\not=0.
$$
Continuing on with the row operation $-(v_b-v_a)R_2+R_3 \mapsto R_3$ yields
$$\left[\begin{array}{ccc|c}1 &1 &1 &3 \\ 0 &1 &\frac{u_c-u_a}{u_b-u_a} &\frac{1-3u_a}{u_b-u_a} \\ 0 &0 &\frac{(v_a-v_b)(u_c-u_a)}{u_b-u_a}+v_c-v_a &\frac{(1-3u_a)(v_a-v_b)}{u_b-u_a}+2-3v_a \end{array}\right].$$
Now you can do back substitution to finish.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
10K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
11K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K