Why Is the Set S Not a Basis for R^3?

  • Thread starter Thread starter will
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Basis
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around determining why specific sets of vectors are not considered bases for R^3. The original poster presents two sets of vectors, one containing the zero vector and the other containing four vectors, and seeks clarification on their linear independence and basis status.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of having the zero vector in a set and its effect on linear dependence. They also discuss the necessity of having exactly three linearly independent vectors for a basis in R^3.

Discussion Status

Some participants suggest looking into the concept of "rank" to provide a more elegant justification for the basis status of the sets. Others affirm that the original reasoning regarding linear independence aligns with the definition of a basis, indicating that the discussion is exploring different angles of the same concept.

Contextual Notes

The original poster expresses a desire for a more elegant answer, indicating a potential constraint in meeting the teacher's expectations for the explanation.

will
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


4) explain why S is not a basis for R^3
(a) S={(1,2,-1),(0,0,0),(1,0,1)}
(b) explain why S is not a basis for R^3
S={(2,4,5),(-1,3,6),(7,7,9),(-4,2,-4)}


Homework Equations

all proofs

The Attempt at a Solution



(a)**The set S is a set with the 0 vector, (0,0,0). Such a set is always dependent and can therefore never be a basis for R3.

The set without the zero vector S={(1,2,-1),(1,0,1} is also no basis for R3, it contains less vectors than the dimension of R3 (which is 3).

(b)**To have a bas you need only 3 vectors by having 4 that makes this system linearly dependent and there for it doesn't represent a base.. to make it a base one has to be eliminated and check if they have linear independency


"" is there a better more elegant answer, by justifying an Axion or a theorem" my teacher is so hard" thanks guys
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ahh, teachers :)

Okay, search for what "rank" means if you already don't know, then relate the number of linearly independent vectors in S to the rank of S (smaller, larger, equal...). This would be the elegant way of explaining it :)
 
will said:
"" is there a better more elegant answer, by justifying an Axion or a theorem" my teacher is so hard" thanks guys

The answers are elegant enough, it's just using definitions of "basis", "span", etc.
 
Did your teacher ask for a "more elegant" way? In each case you have said that the set of vectors is not a basis because it is not linearly independent. That's showing that the definition of "base" is not satisfied and is plenty "elegant".
(Of course, you do not need the other comments on "The set without the zero vector" and " to make it a base one has to be eliminated and check if they have linear independency" because those questions were not asked.)
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
12K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K