0

# Linear Algebra Questions =\

Wed 13 May, 2009 01:26 pm
These questions are in my linear algebra book but i don't have the solutions and was wondering if anyone could help me.

Question 1:
this question is related to the elementary row operation on a matrix (multiply a row by a scalar, add the scalar multiple of one row to another, interchange two rows)
Q: Show that we can interchange any two rows in a matrix in 4 steps using the remaining two elementary row operations

Question 2:
regarding Orthogonal Matrices
Q:Find in terms of "n", the number of all n x n square orthogonal matrices with integers entries

Question 3:
regarding the 10 axioms that define a vector space
Q:Show , using the other 9 axioms, that in the definition of a vector space with regards to the 10 axioms, the axiom 3 (u + v = v + u [cumulative law]) is redundant.

Any help would be greatly appreciated and if possible, please take some time to explain how to get the answer, i don't just want the answer, i wanna know how to find it

Thank you
Mars
• Topic Stats
• Top Replies
Type: Question • Score: 0 • Views: 1,279 • Replies: 4
No top replies

mars90000000

1
Wed 13 May, 2009 04:00 pm
anyone give it a shot?
RealEyes

1
Thu 14 May, 2009 03:57 am
Quote:
Question 1:
this question is related to the elementary row operation on a matrix (multiply a row by a scalar, add the scalar multiple of one row to another, interchange two rows)
Q: Show that we can interchange any two rows in a matrix in 4 steps using the remaining two elementary row operations

Question 2:
regarding Orthogonal Matrices
Q:Find in terms of "n", the number of all n x n square orthogonal matrices with integers entries

Question 3:
regarding the 10 axioms that define a vector space
Q:Show , using the other 9 axioms, that in the definition of a vector space with regards to the 10 axioms, the axiom 3 (u + v = v + u [cumulative law]) is redundant.

I don't understand the problems in the manner they are presented. I would assume that I speak for the majority of common people when I say I work more efficiently with direct symbols rather than discussions on the parameters of how these symbols axiomatically operate (which in its self seems somewhat inheritly self-evident to me).

It's like the difference between learning English, and discussing each particle of a grammatical structure. The former is easier to learn intuitively rather than interpretively.

I'm a visual learner, so when dealing with mathematics, I always looked for visual patterns within the interactions of symbols. I have a harder time exploring thought via structured interpretation and descriptive break-down. I find that ambiguous descriptives tend to obfuscate the matter and muddle any potential to understand the subject as efficiently and fluently as one may desire. It starts to become so esoteric that you require a heavy background in whatever topic-area to even have the slightest clue what someone is attempting to describe. Descriptive teaching fails on so many different levels.

I am interested in how all of this works though. I took a browse through some of the material on algebraic matrixes and feel that yet again, there are intuitive patterns that are present that don't seem to be explored into enough.

Haven't you ever had that feeling when your teachers, from the moment you enter the school system to the time you follow school on your own terms, teach you a dozen different ways to do the same thing starting with what they assume is the easiest to pick up on?

If as children, we had all been exposed to the intricacies of mathematics from day one - we would all be masters of mathematics. We wouldn't need calculators, we could just automatically compute anything in our mind with outstanding accuracy and agility. The only problem is the way we teach things today. It's this horribly vague descriptive teaching method we use that prevents us from evolving our skills. It's a veil that holds us back from ever being enthusiastic about learning about higher mathematics for leisure.

If you show me a diagram representations of these questions, I think many people could answer them. But as it is, I might as well be using a shift cipher to imagine what you are trying to describe. Fight the system!
0 Replies

solipsister

1
Wed 20 May, 2009 05:03 am
@mars90000000,
spose i could try
q1 looks pretty easy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrix_(mathematics)

q2 now i'm struggling
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthogonal_matrix

q3 what was the question
High Seas

1
Tue 23 Jun, 2009 01:46 pm
@solipsister,
This was the question >
http://www90.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=u+%2B+v+%3D+v+%2B+u

Quote:
u + v = v + u
Input:
u + v  v + u
Result:
True
Generated by Wolfram|Alpha (www.wolframalpha.com) on June 23, 2009 from Champaign, IL.
© Wolfram Alpha LLC"A Wolfram Research Company
1

> but it was sloppily written by the original poster. You can plot the answers to the others on that site, btw.
0 Replies

### Related Topics

Evolution 101 - Discussion by gungasnake
Typing Equations on a PC - Discussion by Brandon9000
The Future of Artificial Intelligence - Discussion by Brandon9000
The well known Mind vs Brain. - Discussion by crayon851
Scientists Offer Proof of 'Dark Matter' - Discussion by oralloy
Blue Saturn - Discussion by oralloy
Bald Eagle-DDT Myth Still Flying High - Discussion by gungasnake
DDT: A Weapon of Mass Survival - Discussion by gungasnake

1. Forums
2. » Linear Algebra Questions =\