Linearly dependent set of vectors?

In summary: So, the summary is that in the original set of vectors \{v_1,v_2,v_3\}, we know that there exists a non-trivial solution to the vector equation av_1 + bv_2 + cv_3 = 0. So, when we take a linear combination of the vectors in the set \{v_1,(v_1+v_2),v_3\}, we can also find a non-trivial solution, proving that it is also a set of dependent vectors. This is shown through two different methods, one using the original coefficients a,b,c and the other using different coefficients r,m,n. In both cases, we can see that at least one of the coefficients must be non
  • #1
sutupidmath
1,630
4
suppose that [tex]\{ v_1,v_2,v_3\}[/tex] is a set of dependent vectors. Prove that [tex] \{v_1,(v_1+v_2),v_3\}[/tex] is also a set of dependent vectors?

Ok, I have two ways of going about it. My concern is about the first one, it looks like it is not correct the way i did it, i think so, because i managed to find some kind of counter example, but i cannot see why it doesn't hold,because it looks logical to me.
Method 1.

Since [tex]\{ v_1,v_2,v_3\}[/tex] lin. dependent set, we know that the vector equation:

[tex]av_1+bv_2+cv_3=0[/tex] has a non trivial solution, that is at least one of a,b,c is a non-zero scalar. Now, let's take a linear combination of the vectors [tex] \{v_1,(v_1+v_2),v_3\}[/tex]

[tex] av_1+b(v_1+v_2)+cv_3=0[/tex] my goal is to show that this eq. has a nontrivial sol. that is that one of, a,b,c must be nonzero. So:

[tex] av_1+b(v_1+v_2)+cv_3=0=>av_1+bv_1+bv_2+cv_3=0=>(av_1+bv_2+cv_3)+bv_1=0=>0+bv_1=0[/tex] SO, i concluded then that [tex]v_1=0, or, b=0[/tex] Then if [tex] v_1=0[/tex] we know that every set that contains the zero vector is dependent, so i concluded that the set [tex] \{v_1,(v_1+v_2),v_3\}[/tex] is also dependent. On the other hand, if b=0, then either a, or c must be different from zero, so again this set is lin. dependent.

I am not convinced that this works because of this:

Let[tex]v_1=[1,2,3]^T,v_2=[2,-1,4]^T,v_3=[0,5,2]^T[/tex] then none of these vectors is zero, and they are also lin. dependent. so if i try to follow the same logic as above, in here to show that the set [tex] \{v_1,(v_1+v_2),v_3\}[/tex] is lin. dependent i end up with a contradiction:

[tex] bv_2=0[/tex] but, b is not necessarly zero. SO, where have i gone wrong? I mean why the above doesn't work?

Here is the second method that i used to prove that, this is way shorter, I again took a lin. comb on the vectors in the set:[tex] \{v_1,(v_1+v_2),v_3\}[/tex]

THat is:[tex] av_1+b(v_1+v_2)+cv_3=0[/tex] then after a little manipulation we have:

[tex] (a+b)v_1+bv_2+cv_3=0[/tex] now since [tex]v_1,v_2,v_3[/tex] are lin.dependent then one of a+b, b, c must be different from zero. SO, we can automatically conclude that

:[tex] av_1+b(v_1+v_2)+cv_3=0[/tex] has nontrivial sol, hence it it dependent set.



Please enlighten me, i am kind of confused?

Thnx in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
sutupidmath said:
suppose that [tex]\{ v_1,v_2,v_3\}[/tex] is a set of dependent vectors. Prove that [tex] \{v_1,(v_1+v_2),v_3\}[/tex] is also a set of dependent vectors?

Ok, I have two ways of going about it. My concern is about the first one, it looks like it is not correct the way i did it, i think so, because i managed to find some kind of counter example, but i cannot see why it doesn't hold,because it looks logical to me.
Method 1.

Since [tex]\{ v_1,v_2,v_3\}[/tex] lin. dependent set, we know that the vector equation:

[tex]av_1+bv_2+cv_3=0[/tex] has a non trivial solution, that is at least one of a,b,c is a non-zero scalar. Now, let's take a linear combination of the vectors [tex] \{v_1,(v_1+v_2),v_3\}[/tex]

[tex] av_1+b(v_1+v_2)+cv_3=0[/tex] my goal is to show that this eq. has a nontrivial sol. that is that one of, a,b,c must be nonzero.
It looks like you're using a,b,c for two different things.

Here is the second method that i used to prove that, this is way shorter, I again took a lin. comb on the vectors in the set:[tex] \{v_1,(v_1+v_2),v_3\}[/tex]

THat is:[tex] av_1+b(v_1+v_2)+cv_3=0[/tex] then after a little manipulation we have:

[tex] (a+b)v_1+bv_2+cv_3=0[/tex] now since [tex]v_1,v_2,v_3[/tex] are lin.dependent then one of a+b, b, c must be different from zero.
Why?
 
  • #3
morphism said:
It looks like you're using a,b,c for two different things.
Well, yeah, that is confusing, but i didn't mean for a,b,c to be the same things in both places. This means that we can use say r,m,n or any other constant in the second part. But, if we do so, then would what i did there hold?

I'm going to come back, after i have tried this way, i think things will change a little bit, if we don't use the same a,b,c.
 
  • #4
morphism said:
Why?
Because since v_1,v_2,V_3, are lin. dependent it means that the vect. eq.

(a+b)v_1+bv_2+cv_3=0, has nontrivial solutions.
RIght?
 
  • #5
sutupidmath said:
Because since v_1,v_2,V_3, are lin. dependent it means that the vect. eq.

(a+b)v_1+bv_2+cv_3=0, has nontrivial solutions.
RIght?
Yes, but that doesn't mean it only has nontrivial solutions!
 
  • #6
morphism said:
Yes, but that doesn't mean it only has nontrivial solutions!

Well, yeah that is true,but since ther are non-trivial solutions we know that those vectors are lin. dependent, that was my point.
 
  • #7
I think mathman's point was that you didn't show how this:
sutupidmath said:
[tex] (a+b)v_1+bv_2+cv_3=0[/tex] now since [tex]v_1,v_2,v_3[/tex] are lin.dependent then one of a+b, b, c must be different from zero.

implies this:

SO, we can automatically conclude that

:[tex] av_1+b(v_1+v_2)+cv_3=0[/tex] has nontrivial sol, hence it it dependent set.

I'll think of it this way:

We know that either or all of a+b, b, c must be non-zero. Suppose [tex]c \neq 0[/tex]. Then this means that in the original equation [tex]av_1 + b(v_1+v_2) + cv_3 = 0 [/tex] has non-trivial solutions. We already know that c is nonzero, so it doesn't matter whether a,b are themselves non zero. Hence the equation has non-zero solutions, namely c. The same reasoning applies for b. Supposing b is non-zero, then it doesn't matter what a,c are because it means in the vector equation that there is a non zero solution, namely b.

Based on this reasoning, we see that in order for there to be only the trivial solution, b and c must be zero, and a must also be zero. But a need not be zero. We can see from the modified equation (the one where you grouped coffefficients of vectors together) that if neither b,c are non-zero, then (a+b) has to be non-zero. And that means that [tex]a \neq -b[/tex]. Since we know that both b,c are necessarily 0, (because otherwise we would have already proven by above that the original equation has non-trivial solutions), then we can conclude that [tex]a \neq 0[/tex] after substituting [tex]b=0[/tex]. And this implies that [tex] \{v_1,(v_1+v_2),v_3\}[/tex] are also linearly dependent.
 

FAQ: Linearly dependent set of vectors?

What does it mean for a set of vectors to be linearly dependent?

A set of vectors is said to be linearly dependent if at least one of the vectors can be expressed as a linear combination of the others. In other words, one vector in the set can be written as a scalar multiple of another vector in the set.

How can I determine if a set of vectors is linearly dependent?

To determine if a set of vectors is linearly dependent, you can use the method of Gaussian elimination. This involves creating an augmented matrix with the vectors as columns and performing row operations to reduce the matrix to row-echelon form. If there is at least one row of all zeros, the set of vectors is linearly dependent.

Why is it important to understand linearly dependent sets of vectors?

Understanding linearly dependent sets of vectors is important because it allows us to determine if a system of equations has a unique solution. If a set of vectors is linearly dependent, the system will have infinitely many solutions, whereas if the set is linearly independent, there will be a unique solution.

Can a set of two vectors be linearly dependent?

Yes, a set of two vectors can be linearly dependent. It is possible for one vector to be a scalar multiple of the other, making the set linearly dependent. In fact, any set of vectors with more than two vectors can also be linearly dependent.

How can I use linearly dependent sets of vectors in real-world applications?

Linearly dependent sets of vectors have various applications in fields such as physics, engineering, and economics. For example, in physics, understanding linearly dependent vectors is crucial in determining the equilibrium of forces acting on a system. In economics, linearly dependent vectors are used to represent the relationship between different economic variables.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Back
Top