AAt Invertibility: Implications for A Inverse

  • Thread starter Thread starter JosephR
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Inverse
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of the invertibility of the product of a matrix A and its transpose, AAt. The original poster is tasked with demonstrating that if AAt lacks an inverse, then A itself must also lack an inverse.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationship between the invertibility of AAt and A, with one participant attempting to derive a conclusion through algebraic manipulation. Others question the assumptions made regarding the invertibility of AAt and suggest considering alternative approaches, such as using determinants.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing hints and exploring different angles of reasoning. There is an acknowledgment of the complexity of proving the statement due to its negative form, and some participants suggest considering the contrapositive for clarity.

Contextual Notes

One participant notes that they have not yet studied determinants, which may limit their approach to the problem. The discussion also highlights the challenge of working with negative statements in mathematical proofs.

JosephR
Messages
10
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Show that if AAt(where At is the transpose of A) has no inverse,Then A itself cannot have an inverse

2. The attempt at a solution

Here's what i did

AAt.(AAt)-1=AAt.At-1A-1=AA-1=I

thus AAt has an inverse IF and only IF A is invertible and since AAT has no inverse then A has no inverse ...

i thinkt it's somehow wrong the teacher told me that i assumed that AAt is invertible but it's given without an inverse ..any suggestions would be appreciated :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
JosephR said:

Homework Statement



Show that if AAt(where At is the transpose of A) has no inverse,Then A itself cannot have an inverse

2. The attempt at a solution

Here's what i did

AAt.(AAt)-1=AAt.At-1A-1=AA-1=I

thus AAt has an inverse IF and only IF A is invertible and since AAT has no inverse then A has no inverse ...

i thinkt it's somehow wrong the teacher told me that i assumed that AAt is invertible but it's given without an inverse ..any suggestions would be appreciated :)

You've assumed it's invertible by writing down (AAT)-1

Hint: Consider determinants...
 
i haven't taken determinant till now.. is there any other way to do it ?
 
You want to prove "If AAT does NOT have an inverse, then A itself does NOT have an inverse". With all those "not"s, that's what I would call a "negative" statement. It is almost easier to prove the contraposative of a "negative" statement than the statement itself because then you can make a "positive" statement.

Here the contrapositive is "If A has an inverse then so does AAT."
 
you mean i should assume that A is invertible and prove that AAT is invertible also ...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K