Showing linear independence, correct logic?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around demonstrating the linear independence of two nonzero vectors in R^2, specifically focusing on the vectors u and Bv. The original poster attempts to show that the set {u, Bv} forms a basis for R^2 under the condition that no scalar multiple exists between u and v.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the implications of assuming B=0 and its effect on the basis status of the set {u, Bv}. They explore the consequences of the equation r1u + r2Bv = 0 and question the validity of certain assumptions regarding the values of r1 and r2.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of the implications of the assumptions made about B and the relationships between u and v. Some participants provide guidance on the necessity of B being non-zero to maintain the basis condition, while others reflect on the original problem statement to clarify their understanding.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of the condition that no scalar multiple exists between u and v, which is central to the discussion of linear independence and basis formation.

cookiesyum
Messages
72
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Let u and v be two nonzero vectors in R^2. If there is no c E R such that u = cv, show that {u, Bv} is a basis of R^2 and that R^2 is a direct sum of the subspaces generated by U = <u> and V = <v> respectively.

Homework Equations



Clearly, u and v are linearly independent. So...

The Attempt at a Solution



I want to show r1u + r2Bv = 0 implies r1 = r2 = 0. If B=0 (since v cannot equal 0), then the second term drops out and r1u =0. Because u is non-zero, r1=0. Back to the original statement, if r1=0, then the first term drops out and r2Bv = 0. Since v is non-zero, and assume B is non zero as well, r2 = 0. But what if B IS zero? I'm getting a little confused by this logic...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If B=0 then {u,Bv}={u,0} is NOT a basis. So, yes, you can assume B is not zero. So assume r1*u+r2*B*v=0. If r1=0 then r2*B*v=0. What can you conclude about r2? If r1 is NOT equal to zero then u=-r2*B*v/r1. What's wrong with that?
 
Then u is no longer non-zero! It makes sense, now. Thanks very much!
 
cookiesyum said:
Then u is no longer non-zero! It makes sense, now. Thanks very much!

No, you aren't quite getting it. The problem with writing u=-r2*B*v/r1 is that you were given that there is no number c such that u=c*v.
 
Oh ok, I see it. I should have read the question more carefully. Thanks for all the help!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K