For which $2\times 3$ matrices $A,B$ does $\operatorname{rref}(A) + \operatorname{rref}(B) = \operatorname{rref}(A+B)$ hold? Let $A$ and $B$ be $2\times 3$ matrices. For which $A$ and $B$ does the following equation hold?
$$\operatorname{rref}(A)+ \operatorname{rref}(B) = \operatorname{rref}(A+B)$$
($\operatorname{rref}$ is the operation that makes a matrix in reduced row echelon form.)
This problem is from Strang's Introduction to Linear Algebra book, and he says about this problem in the book that, it is silly. I don't know why he said that but I couldn't figure this out for a while. I'd appreciate your help.
Thanks from now.
 A: In equational terms, there are elementary matrices $E,F,G$ such that each of the following terms are in rref, $$EA+FB=G(A+B)\tag{1}.$$ The key is that the sum of two rrefs is not usually an rref.
If $A=0$ or $B=0$ then the problem is trivial. So suppose $A,B\ne0$ and suppose wolog that $B$'s first non-zero column is at or to the right of $A$'s.
Facts

*

*The first row operation on $A$ reduces its first non-zero column to $(1,0)^\top$. The same column of $B$ cannot be non-zero as well, for otherwise its first row operation would also reduce it to $(1,0)^\top$ and the sum of both rrefs would have a column of $(2,0)^\top$. Hence $B$'s first non-zero column is after $A$'s; so $A$ can have at most one leading zero column, and $B$ must have a leading zero column.

*The first non-zero column of $A+B$ is identical to that of $A$.

*The first $(1,0)^\top$ in rref$(A+B)$ occurs at the same column as $A$'s and must be produced by the same row operations as those for $A$.

*Any column $v$ of $A$ is reduced to $Ev=(r,0)^\top$ iff $v$ is a multiple $r$ of the first non-zero column of $A$.

Case 1. A second row operation is needed on $A$, by multiplying the second row by a constant to reduce some column to $(0,1)^\top$ and then reduce the component above it to $0$. For the same reason as above, this same column of $B$ must be $(0,0)^\top$. Thus, two columns of $A+B$ agree with those of $A$, and so exactly the same row operations have to be used to reduce $A+B$ to an rref. Thus $E=G$, so $FB=GB=EB$ by (1), which means that the same row operations $E$ can be used on $B$ to reduce it to rref.
Case 2. It can happen that after this one row operation, the result is a rref, i.e., $\begin{pmatrix}1&*&*\\0&0&0\end{pmatrix}$. So all three columns of $A$ are multiples of the first one. This operation also reduces the first column of $A+B$ to $(1,0)^\top$, and it does not affect $B$'s first column. More operations may be needed on $B$ to reduce it to rref, and these are precisely the ones needed to reduce $A+B$ to rref. Thus $G=F$, so $EA=GA=FA$, and once again we can assume $E=F=G$.
Thus in both cases, $E=F=G$. This forces some columns of $B$ to be the same as $A$'s. For example, since $B$ has rref with a $(1,0)^\top$, then that column must be the same as $A$'s first non-zero column (by fact 4.).
Using the facts above, one can see that $B$ must have one or two zero columns, one column that agrees with the first non-zero column of $A$, and possibly a third non-zero column. Here are the five possibilities for $A+B$ and their reduced forms:
\begin{align}
\begin{pmatrix}a_{11}&a_{12}&a_{13}\\a_{21}&a_{22}&a_{23}\end{pmatrix}
+\begin{pmatrix}0&0&a_{11}\\0&0&a_{21}\end{pmatrix}&\stackrel{rref}{\mapsto}\begin{pmatrix}1&0&*\\0&1&*\end{pmatrix}\\
\begin{pmatrix}a_{11}&ca_{11}&a_{13}\\a_{21}&ca_{21}&a_{23}\end{pmatrix}
+\begin{pmatrix}0&a_{11}&0\\0&a_{21}&0\end{pmatrix}&\stackrel{rref}{\mapsto}\begin{pmatrix}1&*&0\\0&0&1\end{pmatrix}\\
\begin{pmatrix}a_{11}&ca_{11}&0\\a_{21}&ca_{21}&0\end{pmatrix}
+\begin{pmatrix}0&a_{11}&a_{13}\\0&a_{21}&a_{23}\end{pmatrix}&\stackrel{rref}{\mapsto}\begin{pmatrix}1&*&0\\0&0&1\end{pmatrix}\\
\begin{pmatrix}a_{11}&ca_{11}&da_{11}\\a_{21}&ca_{21}&da_{21}\end{pmatrix}
+\begin{pmatrix}0&a_{11}&ba_{11}\\0&a_{21}&ba_{21}\end{pmatrix}&\stackrel{rref}{\mapsto}\begin{pmatrix}1&*&*\\0&0&0\end{pmatrix}\\
\begin{pmatrix}0&a_{12}&a_{13}\\0&a_{22}&a_{23}\end{pmatrix}
+\begin{pmatrix}0&0&a_{12}\\0&0&a_{22}\end{pmatrix}&\stackrel{rref}{\mapsto}\begin{pmatrix}0&1&*\\0&0&0\end{pmatrix}\\
\end{align} (The third possibility needs a bit more argumentation, which I've skipped.)
Silly? Well, almost an hour writing an answer for what? a silly (+1)...maybe :)
