wu :: forums (http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~wwu/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi)
riddles >> putnam exam (pure math) >> Converse for independent functions
(Message started by: ecoist on Dec 28th, 2006, 8:42pm)

Title: Converse for independent functions
Post by ecoist on Dec 28th, 2006, 8:42pm
One way to show that n real-valued functions fi are linearly independent is to somehow find n elements xi in the common domain of these functions such that the nxn matrix A=(fi(xj)) is nonsingular.  What about the converse?  Given n linearly independent real-valued functions fi with common domain D, do there always exist n elements di in D such that the nxn matrix A=(fi(dj)) is nonsingular?

Title: Re: Converse for independent functions
Post by Eigenray on Dec 29th, 2006, 12:47am
Essentially this is the statement that the functions are linearly independent iff the rank of the n x |D| "matrix" (fi(dj)) is n.

Let k be the dimension of the column span, i.e., the largest k for which there exist x1,...,xk such that the n x k matrix A=(fi(xj)) has rank k.  Then k < n.  Suppose that k < n.  We show that the fi are linearly dependent.

Since A is n x k with k<n, there is some non-zero vector v of Rn such that vtA = 0, i.e., for each j=1..k,

[sum]i vi fi(xj) = 0.

But for any y in D, the maximality of k implies that the column vector F(y) = (fi(y)) is in the column span of A, so F(y) = Aw for some w in Rk (depending on y).  That is, for each i=1..n,

fi(y) = [sum]j fi(xj)wj.

But now vtF(y) = vtAw = 0.  Since this holds for all y, it follows [sum] vi fi is identically 0, and the fi are linearly dependent.



Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.4!
Forum software copyright © 2000-2004 Yet another Bulletin Board