[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference rusure::math

Title:Mathematics at DEC
Moderator:RUSURE::EDP
Created:Mon Feb 03 1986
Last Modified:Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:2083
Total number of notes:14613

763.0. "Matrix Algebra" by PARITY::MOORADIAN () Tue Sep 29 1987 02:17

Here's a problem!

Let A be a nonsingular matrix.

Show that

	-1
det(A) = 1/det(A)

************************************************

Would this be the proper way to solve this problem?


nxn matrix A is nonsingular if and only if det(A)N.E.0

if det (A)=0 then det (A)**-1 is undefined

if 1/det(A)=0 then det(A)**-1 is singular

Therefore, when det(A**-1) N.E. 0 and 1/det(A) N.E.0
then A is nonsingular.

******************************************************

T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
763.1Part way thereAKQJ10::YARBROUGHWhy is computing so labor intensive?Tue Sep 29 1987 11:253
Well, you have dealt with the singularity, but not with the (in)equality. What
you need now is to establish that det(A) and 1/det(a**-1) have the SAME value
when either is finite and nonzero.
763.2CLT::GILBERTBuilderTue Sep 29 1987 13:0511
                                              -1
Let A be a non-singular square matrix.  Then A   is well-defined, and we have:

	     -1
	A x A   = I,

	              -1
	det(A) * det(A  ) = det(I) = 1, and

	     -1
	det(A  ) = 1/det(A).
763.3Need a stepCIMNET::KOLKERConan the LibrarianTue Sep 29 1987 16:486
    re .2
    
    I think you left out a step. You have to show that:
    
    det(A x B) = det(A) * det(B) where A,B are matrices of the appropriate
    order.
763.4Proofs by Mathematical Induction?PARITY::MOORADIANWed Sep 30 1987 00:1132
	
re .1,.2,.3

Thanks for your advice on this matrix problem, I'm

new to Linear Algebra and need advice as to how to go

about attempting to prove formulas.  I have learned

there are 3 types of ways of solving but supposedly

the best way to attempt to solve any problem is to

prove it through mathematical induction.  

Do most mathematicians prove through mathematical

induction?


					Michele

< Note 763.3 by CIMNET::KOLKER "Conan the Librarian" >
                                -< Need a step >-

    re .2
    
    I think you left out a step. You have to show that:
    
    det(A x B) = det(A) * det(B) where A,B are matrices of the appropriate
    order.

763.5Elementry proof that D(A*B) = D(A)*D(B)ENGINE::ROTHMay you live in interesting timesWed Sep 30 1987 10:2063
    Here's an elementry proof that DET(A*B) = DET(A)*DET(B) that can be
    used for the base problem.

    It's useful to recall the definition of the 'wedge product'
    (also called the exterior product, alternating product, Grassman
    product, etc.)  This is a generalization of the cross product in
    3 dimensions.  The wedge product of two n-dimensional vectors gives
    the oriented area spanned by the vectors.  If the vectors are linearly
    dependant (collinear), then they don't span any area and the product
    vanishes. The wedge product of 3 vectors gives the oriented 3-volume in
    n-space, and again vanishes if the vectors are coplanar or collinear
    (not linearly independant.)

    Let W(V1, V2, ...) be the wedge product of the vectors Vi.
    It has the properties:

    a)	It is multilinear, so that

	W(a*V1a+b*V1b, v2, v3, ...) = a*W(V1a, V2, ...) + b*(V1b, V2, ...).

    b)	It is antisymmetric, so transposing any pair of vectors negates
	the sign.

    c)	By using properties (a) and (b) it vanishes if the vectors are
	not linearly dependant.  In particular repeating a vector makes
	the product vanish.

    d)	It is associative, so that

	W(V1, V2, V3) = W(V1, W(V2, V3)) = W(W(V1, V2), V3)
	
    e)	The wedge product of k n-dimensional vectors is C(n,k) dimensional,
	the number of ways of choosing k things out of n.

    Think of a square matrix, A, as a set of n row (or column) vectors.
    Then DET(A) is the wedge product of all n vectors.  It is a scalar
    because there is only one way of choosing n things out of n.

    By definition the row vectors of the matrix product C = A*B can be
    thought of as weighted sums of the row vectors of B transformed by A.

	c[i] = SUM(k) a[i,k]*b[k]

    If you write out DET(C) as the wedge product of its row vectors, c[i],
    and plug in the individual sums above you'll get a huge summation of
    n^n wedge products.  But the key thing is that most of them vanish!
    The only ones surviving will be those with all distinct b[k]'s, (by
    property (c) above) and there are n! of those.  Further, all these
    products will involve permutations of the b[k]'s and can be permutated
    into order, multiplied by +/- 1 depending if the permutation is even or
    odd, and factored out of the sum.  But this is just DET(B), and the
    remaining sum of products of the A elements is just DET(A).

    Thus DET(A*B) = DET(A)*DET(B).

    It's important to think geometrically when reasoning about linear
    algebra.  Even though the geometric intuition doesn't constitute
    proof, it guides you in doing one, and will give a sanity check
    on it, since a result that doesn't make geometric sense is probably
    wrong.  Note also that most of the above argument is a matter of accurate
    definitions, the final proof itself being short.

    - Jim
763.6TLE::BRETTWed Sep 30 1987 11:1213
    
    "Do most mathematicians prove by induction"?
    
    (a) At least one mathematician proves by induction
    
    (b) If any mathematician proves by induction, then some mathematician
    	will copy him
    
    therefore
    
    (c) a countable infinity of mathematicians prove by induction.
    
    /Bevin
763.7CIMNET::KOLKERConan the LibrarianWed Sep 30 1987 13:508
    re .6
    
    What if mathematician A copies B who has copied A? :>))
    
    BTW here is a proof that the mathematician Herman Weyl is infinite.
    One of his detractors called him an ass. Since Herman is isomorphic
    to a proper subset of himself, he is infinite. QED.