Some versions of gaussian elimination require you to reduce the right side of the system to the identity matrix rather than the row echelon form. What is the difference between this version and the one the lady above explained?
Watch the following video explain inverse matrices. pay attention to the inverse matrix part. you don't need to worry too much about rank, column space and nullspace. do pay attention about what it means for the inverse if the determinant is 0. do you have any questions?
how do you take the inverse of a 3x3 matrix
notice one of the things about matrices is that
There is a whole 3blue1brown video explaining Cramer's rule geometrically. You can dig into that if you want, it decided that one was probably a bridge too far. you are welcomed to watch it if you want. For Cramer's rule:
which of the following describes
How did the 3blue1brown videos explain why
For a linear transformation to be considered linear, the transformation needed
I'd mentioned that we are ripping through matrices at a decent clip. so I will set the scene for the next week - what are some tell tale signs a set of simultaneous equations are not linear.
how would you deal with simultaneous inequalities differently than you would simultaneous equalities?
categorize your understanding
algorithm for gaussian elimination
when to use gaussian elimination
what is cramers rule
how do you find the
how to find the determinencts of those matrices for cramers rule
When to use cramers rule
how are linear transformations related to matrices?
how do you break apart fractions
Ive got this
im fuzzy
so confused
other videos will want you to get your matrix to "reduced row echelon form" to make everything simple. What do you think reduced row echelon form is?
To find