Well, on a computer, you wouldn't multiply row 2 by 1/6, but when doing things by hand, that's what I would do next. It makes it slightly easier to contemplate the next step of getting a zero in the 3,2 position.
Hmm. I double-checked your earlier work, and I think you made a mistake. Your original system is this:
After performing the following elementary row operations, as you suggested:
2R1-R2 -> R2
3R1-R3 -> R3,
I get this:
The reason I thought there was an error, was because the original matrix definitely has a solution, but your simplified matrix after those two row operations was inconsistent. So, at this point, I would divide row 2 by 5. What do you get then?
yes it's correct u always when u get some results just put them in your starting system of equations and see is it solution that u get the right one
edit: I apologize, I'm not gonna do that again