I think he proving by contradiction, suppose L.D then get L.I

Printable View

- January 24th 2010, 11:13 AM450081592
- January 24th 2010, 11:24 AMRaoh
- January 24th 2010, 02:38 PMBruno J.
One way to prove that is to show that , which is what I did. If are linearly dependent then must be linearly dependent. Thus if is linearly independent we must necessarily have that are also linearly independent.

The proof is given. Which part don't you understand? - January 25th 2010, 06:02 AMHallsofIvy
- January 26th 2010, 04:25 AMRaoh
if and were dependent, ,therefore and will be in with a dimension less than 2,hence they can't be independent.

is that what you're trying to say(Thinking)

P.S: i like your proof i just can't see through it.(Headbang)