Systematic way of extending a set to a basis

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around extending a set of vectors in R4. The original poster presents a set of three vectors, u1, u2, and u3, which are linearly independent and span R3 but not R4. The goal is to find an additional vector, w, that is not in the span of the existing vectors to complete the basis for R4.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to use a system of equations to find the vector w, expressing it in terms of linear combinations of the existing vectors. They also consider the approach of defining a set of vectors W that maps the coefficient matrix U into the zero vector. Some participants question the definitions of U and W and the reasoning behind using the UW=0 condition.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring different methods to extend the set of vectors. Some guidance has been offered regarding the orthogonality of the new vector to the existing ones as a potential approach, but there is no explicit consensus on the best method to apply.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the original poster expresses reluctance to use trial-and-error methods and seeks a more systematic approach. There is also mention of the flexibility in defining a basis, with some participants highlighting that a basis does not need to be orthogonal.

negation
Messages
817
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I want to extend the below U set of vectors to R4.
u1 = (0, 0, 0, -4), u2 = (0, 0, -4, 3), u3 = (3, 2, 3, -2).



The Attempt at a Solution



For a set of vectors to form a basis for Rn, the vectors must be LI and spans Rn(has n vectors)

u1, u2 and u3 are linearly independent and spans R3 but not R4.
To extend u1, u2 and u3 to R4. I require another vector, w. w\notin span{u1,u2,u3}

One of the solution is trial-and-error which I am not keen.


I started with this:

0λ1 + 0λ2 +3λ3 +λ4w1= 0
0λ1 + 0λ2 +2λ3 +λ4w2= 0
0λ1 -4λ2 +3λ3 + λ4w3= 0
-4λ1 +3λ2 -2λ3 + λ4w4 = 0

which is a brick wall.

The other approach I had was UW = 0
I want to find the W set of vectors that maps the coefficient matrix U into the zero-vector.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In the second approach, how are you defining U and what's stopping you from doing it?
 
vela said:
In the second approach, how are you defining U and what's stopping you from doing it?

There's nothing stopping me from doing so. The calculation can easily be done but I'd appreciate if anyone could shed some light on the idea behind using the definition of UW=0 to solve for the W set of vectors.
 
negation said:
There's nothing stopping me from doing so. The calculation can easily be done but I'd appreciate if anyone could shed some light on the idea behind using the definition of UW=0 to solve for the W set of vectors.
Well, again, you need to define what U and W are first. We can't read your mind.
 
negation said:

Homework Statement



I want to extend the below U set of vectors to R4.
u1 = (0, 0, 0, -4), u2 = (0, 0, -4, 3), u3 = (3, 2, 3, -2).



The Attempt at a Solution



For a set of vectors to form a basis for Rn, the vectors must be LI and spans Rn(has n vectors)

u1, u2 and u3 are linearly independent and spans R3 but not R4.
To extend u1, u2 and u3 to R4. I require another vector, w. w\notin span{u1,u2,u3}

One of the solution is trial-and-error which I am not keen.


I started with this:

0λ1 + 0λ2 +3λ3 +λ4w1= 0
0λ1 + 0λ2 +2λ3 +λ4w2= 0
0λ1 -4λ2 +3λ3 + λ4w3= 0
-4λ1 +3λ2 -2λ3 + λ4w4 = 0

which is a brick wall.

The other approach I had was UW = 0
I want to find the W set of vectors that maps the coefficient matrix U into the zero-vector.

There is a way that is easy in this problem, but is not really systematic and applicable to all problems without modification. Say the fourth vector you want is ##v = (v_1,v_2,v_3,v_4)##. If you want v to be orthogonal to all the u1, u2 and u3, then ##v \perp u1 \rightarrow v_4 = 0##.
So, now ##v = (v_1,v_2,v_3,0)##. The condition ##v \perp u2 \rightarrow v_3=0##. So, now ##v = (v_1,v_2,0,0)##, and ##v \perp u3 \rightarrow 3v_1+2v_2 = 0##. Take any v_1 and v_2 that satisfy this last equation; then v is perpendicular to all the ui, so is linearly independent of them.
 
A basis need not be orthogonal. i.e. (1,1), (1,0) is a basis for R2
 
Mugged said:
A basis need not be orthogonal. i.e. (1,1), (1,0) is a basis for R2

Nobody said it was. But adding vectors orthogonal to the original set is an easy solution.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
14K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K