I'm attempting to show that $\text{Col}(A) \neq \text{Col}(R)$ where $R$ is the reduced row-echelon form of $A$ in general. Now of course I could use a simple counterexample but I find those a bit boring and wanted to try to use a different method to stretch my logic a bit.
I'm attempting to structure it like a proof by contradiction. We know $R = (E_1E_2 \ldots E_k)A$ for some elementary matrices $E_n$. Thus suppose $\text{Col}(A) = \text{Col}(R)$ and there is some $\mathbf{v}$ in both sets:
\begin{align*} \exists u,p: A\mathbf{u} = R\mathbf{p} = \mathbf{v} &\implies (E_1E_2 \ldots E_k)A\mathbf{p} = A\mathbf{u} \\ &\implies A\mathbf{p} = (E_1E_2 \ldots E_k)^{-1}A\mathbf{u} \\ &\implies \mathbf{p} = (E_1E_2 \ldots E_k)^{-1}\mathbf{u} \end{align*}
But now I'm a bit stuck. How can I prove that this cannot be true for all possible $\mathbf{v}$? There does not appear to be any direct conflict with the dimensions of the elements involved, as the elementary matrices are $n \times n$ and the vectors $\mathbf{p}$ and $\mathbf{u}$ are $n \times 1$. Is such a proof possible?
Perhaps this approach would require more complicated or more general knowledge than I have at my introductory level, but a structure like this involving elementary matrices has worked for me before for similar proofs so I am a bit befuddled on what I'm missing here.
I'm aware of questions like this one but its answer uses a counterexample and the resources I can find from there are also of a similar form.