Activate Now kera bear xxx premier media consumption. No subscription fees on our streaming service. Plunge into in a huge library of themed playlists highlighted in superb video, suited for discerning streaming mavens. With new releases, you’ll always keep current. Explore kera bear xxx chosen streaming in amazing clarity for a absolutely mesmerizing adventure. Access our video library today to stream special deluxe content with at no cost, no subscription required. Appreciate periodic new media and navigate a world of distinctive producer content intended for superior media savants. Make sure you see specialist clips—instant download available! See the very best from kera bear xxx visionary original content with exquisite resolution and featured choices.

You'll need to complete a few actions and gain 15 reputation points before being able to upvote To gain full voting privileges, Upvoting indicates when questions and answers are useful

What's reputation and how do i get it Is this statement true? just out of my curiosity? Instead, you can save this post to reference later.

Proof of kera = imb implies ima^t = kerb^t ask question asked 6 years ago modified 6 years ago

We actually got this example from the book, where it used projection on w to prove that dimensions of w + w perp are equal to n, but i don't think it mentioned orthogonal projection, though i could be wrong (maybe we are just assumed not to do any other projections at our level, or maybe it was assumed it was a perpendicular projection, which i guess is the same thing). Thank you arturo (and everyone else) I managed to work out this solution after completing the assigned readings actually, it makes sense and was pretty obvious Could you please comment on also, while i know that ker (a)=ker (rref (a)) for any matrix a, i am not sure if i can say that ker (rref (a) * rref (b))=ker (ab)

OPEN