>firstname.lastname@example.org (Daniel Grubb) wrote in message news:<email@example.com>... >> [...] >> >> The student should be able to give a rendition that is at least >> equivalent to the one given in the book and that uses precise language. >> If you can't say that a basis is an independent spanning set >> then you don't know what a basis is. If you can't give the quantifiers >> for the definition of independence, you won't be able to do a >> proof using independence. >> >> --Dan Grubb > >Let me try that one...independence means a group of vectors (in >homogenous form???) such that if they all equal the zero vector, then >the only possible way for that is the each coefficient of every vector >has to equal 0 too.
Nope. You're illustrating precisely why you're failing the class. That's _not_ the definition.
Actually from what you say here it seems pretty likely that you do know what linear independence _is_, but the way you're stating the definition is totally wrong. Knowing something doesn't help much if you can't explain it coherently. Next time you take the class try actually _learning_ the definitions of all the important terms, _precisely_. It _will_ help, whether you believe it or not.