Solution space to homogenous equations.

  • Thread starter Thread starter CalculusSandwich
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Space
CalculusSandwich
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Ok so my question was:

The directions state:

Find the solution space of the following systems of linear homogeneous equations:

x-y+z-w=0
2x+y-z+2w=0
2y+3z+w=0

Is the same as finding the solutions, because I did that and got (-z, -3z, 3z, z). So i said
the solution space is actually the subspace you get. For instance, this problem yields a one dimensional subspace.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And someone responded:

I don't think that solution set is right.

The vector -1,-3,3,1 does not give you 0 when used as weights in the original equation. It is a system of 4 unknowns in 3 rows there has to be a free variable somewhere. That means when you write your free variable in terms of the other variables, there should be a 0 in that solution set.

The solution (-1,-3,3,1) does not satisfy ax=0.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Am i right or am i wrong here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think you made an error somewhere. Substituting your answer into the first equation doesn't give 0. How did you get (-z, 3z, 3z, z) ?
 
CalculusSandwich said:
Ok so my question was:

The directions state:

Find the solution space of the following systems of linear homogeneous equations:

x-y+z-w=0
2x+y-z+2w=0
2y+3z+w=0

Is the same as finding the solutions, because I did that and got (-z, -3z, 3z, z). So i said
the solution space is actually the subspace you get. For instance, this problem yields a one dimensional subspace.
I suggest you try that again. That is not at all what I get.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And someone responded:

I don't think that solution set is right.

The vector -1,-3,3,1 does not give you 0 when used as weights in the original equation. It is a system of 4 unknowns in 3 rows there has to be a free variable somewhere. That means when you write your free variable in terms of the other variables, there should be a 0 in that solution set.

The solution (-1,-3,3,1) does not satisfy ax=0.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Am i right or am i wrong here?
 
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...
##\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...
Back
Top