When is Matrix C Not Invertible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter dcl
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The determinant of matrix C is calculated as det(C) = x^2 - 12x + 27. The determinant of 2C is determined to be 8 times det(C) for a 3x3 matrix. The matrix C is not invertible when det(C) equals zero, leading to the values x = 3 and x = 9. There is a clarification that the determinant of a scalar multiple of a matrix scales by the constant raised to the power of the matrix's dimension. The discussion confirms the calculations and concepts related to determinants and invertibility of matrices.
dcl
Messages
54
Reaction score
0
<br /> c = \left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c}<br /> {2 - x} &amp; 5 &amp; 1 \\<br /> { - 3} &amp; 0 &amp; x \\<br /> { - 2} &amp; 1 &amp; 2 \\<br /> \end{array}} \right]

a) Calculate det(C).
My answer was x^2 - 12x + 27.

b) Calculate det(2C).
Umm, would this just be 2*det(C)?
Couldn't find anything more helpful in my notes.

c) State the values for 'x' for which C is not invertible.
I believe the value for 'x' that would make this non invertable would be the solution that det(c) = 0. (A matrix has no inverse when the determinant = 0 yeh?)
which would be x = 9 or 3
is this correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I get the same answer as you on (a) and (c). I'm thinking that det(aC)=a^N det(c) where a is a constant and N is the "dimension" (wrong terminology? NxN matrix). If I am right about that, then for a 3x3 matrix, det(2C) = 8 det(C).

You may be thinking about the trace of a matrix: Tr(2C) = 2 Tr(C).
 
Last edited:
Hmm, yeh, what you're saying would make more sense.
Thanks for confirming the other answers.
 
Janitor is correct about (b). To see it, just consider what happens if C is the identity: 2I has 2 along the diagonal and 0 everywhere else, so the determinant is det(2I) = 8 = 23det(I).
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K