Proving Invertibility of Matrices: A Small Difference Makes a Big Impact

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Try hard
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Desperate
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the invertibility of matrices, specifically addressing how the condition v(A-B) being sufficiently small can ensure the invertibility of matrix B if matrix A is already invertible. It also explores the existence of a sequence of invertible matrices Ak that converge to any n*n matrix A, with the condition that v(A - Ak) approaches zero. Additionally, the participants discuss the implications of the determinant in relation to the defined metric v, suggesting a potential relationship between the determinant of products of matrices and the metric v.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of matrix theory and properties of invertible matrices
  • Familiarity with matrix norms, specifically the maximum absolute value norm v(C)
  • Knowledge of determinants and their significance in linear algebra
  • Basic concepts of topology as they apply to matrix spaces
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of matrix norms, particularly the maximum absolute value norm
  • Research the implications of the determinant in relation to matrix products
  • Explore the concept of convergence in sequences of matrices
  • Investigate the topology of matrix spaces and how metrics can define topological structures
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of linear algebra, and researchers interested in matrix theory and its applications in various fields such as engineering and computer science.

Try hard
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
For an n*n matrix C=(cij) over R or C, we define v(C)=Max|cij|

a.Show that if A is invertible, then B is invertible if v(A-B) is sufficiently small.

b. Show that for any, not necessarily invertible, n*n matix A, there is a sequence Ak of invertible matrices with v(A - Ak) -> 0 .
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If v(X)<e, it appears that a result along the lines of det(XY) < e^n * det(Y) is true. If so, you can use this for part a.

part b looks a little harder.

does this v define a (metric) topology on the nxn matrices?
 
thanks for the hint on part a, the v in part b is the same as in part a
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
11K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
8K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K