Nusc
- 752
- 2
Prove that, if [tex]AA^T = A^TA = I_n[/tex], then [tex]\det{A} = \pm 1[/tex].
This is daunting.
This is daunting.
Last edited:
The discussion revolves around the properties of square matrices, specifically addressing whether a square matrix \( A \) that satisfies the conditions \( AA^T = A^TA = I_n \) can have a determinant of \( \pm 1 \). The conversation includes attempts to prove this property and touches on related matrix concepts.
While there is a general agreement on the assertion that \( \det{A} = \pm 1 \) follows from the given conditions, the discussion also reveals a lack of consensus on the clarity and correctness of the proofs and related concepts, with some participants expressing confusion and seeking further clarification.
Participants express uncertainty regarding the assumptions made in their proofs and the definitions of matrix properties, indicating that the discussion may be limited by varying levels of understanding and familiarity with the material.
Nusc said:Prove that any scalar multiple of a symmetric matrix is symmetric.
Let [tex]A = (a_i_j)[/tex]
Since [tex]A[/tex] is symmetric, [tex]A = A^T[/tex].
Then [tex]A^T = (a_i_j)[/tex].
Therefore, [tex](cA) = c(A) = c(A^T) = (cA^T)[/tex]
Was it necessary to show that [tex]A = (a_i_j)[/tex] and [tex]A^T = (a_i_j)[/tex]? Is [tex]A^T = (a_i_j)[/tex] even right? I can't express myself mathematically
Nusc said:Prove that, if A and B are two matrices such that A + B and AB are defined, then both A and B are square matrices.
- Let A be an m x r matrix and B an r x n matrix such that,
[tex]A_m_x_rB_r_x_n = (AB)_m_x_n[/tex]
- We know that the sum A + B of the two matrices is the m x n matrix
How do I express them together to show that they are square?
Palindrom said:Since AB is defined, as you yourself wrote, we must have m=n. (Because the product is an mxn*mxn, which is only defined when m=n).
Both matrices are therefor nxn, square matrices!
Nusc said:The r in A is the jth column and in B it's the ith row. So when you say m=n, are you referring to the r's?
And if I were to prove that any scalar multiple of a diagonal matrix is a diagonal matrix, how is that different from, say, letting [tex]A = (a_i_j)[/tex] be any m x n matrix and c any real number?
A diagonal matrix is a square matrix that all of its nonzero entries are on the diagonal.
Then [tex]cA = c(a_i_j) = (ca_i_j)[/tex] but it may not be diagonal.