My Math Forum Show matrix row equivalence

 Linear Algebra Linear Algebra Math Forum

 May 6th, 2017, 02:26 PM #1 Newbie   Joined: May 2017 From: Prague Posts: 2 Thanks: 0 Show matrix row equivalence Greetings. I'm trying to find a sequence of elementary row operations to show row equivalence of matrices \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 & 4 & 1 \\ 1 & 0 & 8 & 6 \\ \end{pmatrix} and \begin{pmatrix} -2 & 1 & -11 & -8 \\ -1 & 2 & 2 & 2 \\ \end{pmatrix} Unfortunately, the closest result I've come to is transforming the second matrix to \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 & 5 & 4 \\ 1 & 0 & 8 & 6 \\ \end{pmatrix} Can anyone help me find the right sequence or at least give a hint? Thanks for your help.
 May 7th, 2017, 04:07 AM #2 Newbie   Joined: Nov 2013 Posts: 29 Thanks: 1 Well think about it, you've already matched one of the two row vectors. So that means if the two matrices are equivalent then you'd have to show the remaining vectors (since there are two row vector) match in each matrix. So do you think the first row vector from the first matrix [0 1 4 1] Can ever be transformed into [0 1 5 4]? Another way to ask this question is "Are these two vectors scaler multiples of each other?" And in fact they aren't. The first two entries match but if you tried to scale the vectors so that the 3rd entries match, the second entries would stop matching. So these matrices aren't equivalent
May 7th, 2017, 05:11 AM   #3
Newbie

Joined: May 2017
From: Prague

Posts: 2
Thanks: 0

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Gamegeck Well think about it, you've already matched one of the two row vectors. So that means if the two matrices are equivalent then you'd have to show the remaining vectors (since there are two row vector) match in each matrix. So do you think the first row vector from the first matrix [0 1 4 1] Can ever be transformed into [0 1 5 4]? Another way to ask this question is "Are these two vectors scaler multiples of each other?" And in fact they aren't. The first two entries match but if you tried to scale the vectors so that the 3rd entries match, the second entries would stop matching. So these matrices aren't equivalent
I came to the same conclusion and asked my teacher this question, but she replied these matrices are row equivalent and there is a way to show that. She also mentioned the possibility of adding an extra column to these matrices, but I didn't understand what she meant.

May 7th, 2017, 09:14 AM   #4
Senior Member

Joined: Sep 2015
From: CA

Posts: 1,265
Thanks: 650

Quote:
 Originally Posted by ZsoSahaal I came to the same conclusion and asked my teacher this question, but she replied these matrices are row equivalent and there is a way to show that. She also mentioned the possibility of adding an extra column to these matrices, but I didn't understand what she meant.
you've got the two matrices in reduced row echelon form (one swap away from it anyway).

Two row equivalent matrices in reduced row echelon form will be equal.

Your two rre matrices are not equal and thus not row equivalent.

I'd press your teacher further on what she means.

 Tags equivalence, matrices, matrix, row, rowequivalnce, show

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post tawirma98 Linear Algebra 1 October 5th, 2016 04:59 PM annakar Linear Algebra 0 January 10th, 2013 10:58 AM Jack Spicer Applied Math 8 February 3rd, 2012 06:23 AM mathHuji Linear Algebra 0 February 6th, 2011 05:32 AM brunojo Linear Algebra 2 May 28th, 2009 03:04 PM

 Contact - Home - Forums - Cryptocurrency Forum - Top