Solve Ax=b Matrix System of Equations: Help Needed

  • Thread starter Thread starter skujesco2014
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matrix
skujesco2014
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
Hi, all. I'm in desperate need of assistance with a matrix I can't get my head around of. I want to solve a system of equations of the type Ax=b, where

A=<br /> \begin{pmatrix}<br /> 2 &amp; 5 &amp; -3 \\<br /> 1 &amp; -2 &amp; 1 \\<br /> 7 &amp; 4 &amp; -3 <br /> \end{pmatrix}<br />

and where

b=<br /> \begin{pmatrix}<br /> -2 \\<br /> -1 \\<br /> -7 <br /> \end{pmatrix}<br />

that is, b is the negative of the first column. Written as it is above, A has zero determinant and the determinant formed when the k^{th} column of A is substituted by the vector b is clearly zero as well. A theorem says that in this case the system has infinite solutions. If one reduces the system to reduced row-echelon form the solutions can be parameterized as, for example, x_3=t, x_2=5t/9, x_1=t-1. An immediate solution by inspection is x=(-1,0,0)^T which one obtains letting t=0.

But let's give another value of t, for example, t=1 which gives x=(0,5/9,1)^T. This is one of the parameterized solutions and yet it does not satisfy the original system. It does, however, satisfy the reduced system obtained from the original by gaussian elimination and should be equivalent, i.e.,

<br /> \begin{cases}<br /> x_1 - x_3 &amp; = -1\\<br /> 9x_2 - 5x_3 &amp; = 0<br /> \end{cases}<br />

But shouldn't my parameterized solution satisfy both original and reduced systems, no matter what? Yet, the only satisfying solution for the original system seems to be x=(-1,0,0)^T. What am I not seeing here?

Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I've discovered my mistake! I've sinned against the elementary row operations on matrix A! The reduced system actually is

<br /> \begin{cases}<br /> x_1 -x_3/9&amp; = -1\\<br /> x_2-5x_3/9 &amp; = 0<br /> \end{cases}<br />

The displayed erroneous reduced system above was obtained after mistakenly adding a multiple of a row to a multiple of another row. This isn't an allowed elementary operation. It was very intriguing that this little mistake lead to the puzzle that inspired this post.
 
##\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...
When decomposing a representation ##\rho## of a finite group ##G## into irreducible representations, we can find the number of times the representation contains a particular irrep ##\rho_0## through the character inner product $$ \langle \chi, \chi_0\rangle = \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{g\in G} \chi(g) \chi_0(g)^*$$ where ##\chi## and ##\chi_0## are the characters of ##\rho## and ##\rho_0##, respectively. Since all group elements in the same conjugacy class have the same characters, this may be...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Back
Top