0
$\begingroup$

In our textbook I've seen this claim:

$v_1, v_2, \cdots , v_r$ span $R^n$ if and only if $v_1+\alpha *v_2, v_2, \cdots, v_r$ span $R^n$ for some $\alpha \in \mathbb{R}$

Now I've tried to prove it to myself and I'm having some difficulty with the left-to-right direction.

For the first direction I assumed: $v_1+\alpha *v_2, v_2, \cdots, v_r$ span $R^n$ so every vector in $R^n$ can be represented as a linear combination of those vectors, meaning a general vector $w$ in $R^n$ can be written as:

$\alpha_1 *(v_1 + \alpha*v_2 ) + \alpha_2 *v_2 + \cdots + \alpha_r*v_r = w$

$\Rightarrow \alpha_1 * v_1 + (\alpha_1*\alpha + \alpha_2)*v_2 + \cdots + \alpha_r*v_r = w$

meaning that $v_1, v_2, \cdots , v_r$ also span $R^n$

For the other direction I assumed that $v_1, v_2, \cdots , v_r$ span $R^n$ so for some $w \in R^n$ :

$\alpha_1 * v_1 + \alpha_2 * v_2 +\cdots+\alpha_r*v_r = w$

$\Rightarrow \alpha_1 *v_1 + (a+b)*v_2 +\cdots+\alpha_r*v_r = w$

$\Rightarrow \alpha_1 * v_1 +a*v_2 + b*v_2 +\cdots+\alpha_r*v_r = w$

$\Rightarrow \alpha_1 * (v_1 + \frac{a}{\alpha_1}*v_2) + b*v_2 + \cdots+\alpha_r*v_r = w$

which would prove that $v_1+\alpha *v_2, v_2, \cdots, v_r$ span $R^n$ but I have no guarantee that $\alpha_1\ne0$ or that such a combination where $\alpha_1\ne0$ even exists (as far as I know, maybe that's what I'm missing here)

any guidance would be appreciated!

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ The other implication is wrong unless $v_1+\alpha v_2\neq 0$. So you just have to chose one $\alpha$ such that it is true and call $v'_1=v_1+\alpha v_2$. $\endgroup$ – Tom-Tom Jun 25 '14 at 12:22
  • $\begingroup$ could you elaborate? what do you mean by the other implication (I'm not familiar with the word implication in this context)? If you're referring to the last lines as I wrote they are what I tried to assume but as I said couldn't since I have no guarantee that $\alpha_1\ne0$ $\endgroup$ – byentropy Jun 25 '14 at 12:27
2
$\begingroup$

Clearly $$ \langle v_{1} + \alpha v_{2}, v_{2}, \dots , v_{r} \rangle \subseteq \langle v_{1}, v_{2}, \dots , v_{r} \rangle, $$ where $\langle \cdots \rangle$ denotes the linear span.

Conversely $$ v_{1} = (v_{1} + \alpha v_{2}) - \alpha v_{2} \in \langle v_{1} + \alpha v_{2}, v_{2}, \dots , v_{r} \rangle, $$ so the other inclusion also holds.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, this certainly helped me see I was going at it the other way around, but I'm still wondering could I have also proved it as I tried? by reaching to $\alpha_1 * (v_1+\frac{\alpha}{\alpha_1}v_2)$ could I have known or assured that $\alpha_1\ne0$ as well? $\endgroup$ – byentropy Jun 25 '14 at 13:02
  • $\begingroup$ @byentropy, following your approach, if you can write an arbitrary $v$ as $c_1 v_1 + c_2 v_2 + \dots$, then you can also write it as $v = c_1 (v_1 + \alpha v_2) + (c_2 - c_1 \alpha) v_2 + \dots$. $\endgroup$ – Andreas Caranti Jun 25 '14 at 17:58

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.