Answer 4x4 Determinant: a+b+c+d

  • Thread starter Thread starter archita
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Determinant
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves calculating the determinant of a 4x4 matrix with specific entries defined in terms of variables a, b, c, and d. The matrix is structured with diagonal elements incremented by one and the rest filled with the same variable values.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss various methods for calculating the determinant, including cofactor expansion and row-column operations. Some express frustration with the complexity of the calculations. Others suggest using Sylvester's theorem and question its application in this context.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring different interpretations of the determinant's value and the implications of using Sylvester's theorem. There is a recognition of potential errors in calculations, and some participants are reconsidering their approaches based on feedback.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention specific values for a, b, c, and d to test their calculations, leading to discrepancies in expected results. There is also a reference to the properties of determinants concerning matrix transposition and row operations.

archita
Messages
5
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


The determinant
a+1 a a a
b b+1 b b
c c c+1 c
d d d d+1
equals =?
option : a) 1+ a + b+ c+ d
b)a + b+ c+ d
c)a.b.c.d
d)1 + a.b.c.d



Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


[1] tried using finding the co factors...but the process becomes very length
[2] tried by row-column operations...as below , but nothing workd...
1 0 0 0 a a a a
0 1 0 0 + b b b b
0 0 1 0 c c c c
0 0 0 1 d d d d
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi archita, welcome to PF! :smile:

This forum supports LaTeX, which you can use to write equations and matrices in a much nicer format...For example, writing:

[$tex]\begin{pmatrix} a+1 & a & a & a \\ b & b+1 & b & b \\ c & c & c+1 & c \\ d & d & d &d+1 \end{pmatrix}[/$tex]

And deleting the $ signs gives:

[tex]\begin{pmatrix} a+1 & a & a & a \\ b & b+1 & b & b \\ c & c & c+1 & c \\ d & d & d &d+1 \end{pmatrix}[/tex]

...Now, for your question...Hint:

[tex]\begin{pmatrix} a+1 & a & a & a \\ b & b+1 & b & b \\ c & c & c+1 & c \\ d & d & d &d+1 \end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix} a & a & a & a \\ b & b & b & b \\ c & c & c & c \\ d & d & d &d \end{pmatrix}+I=I+\begin{pmatrix} a \\ b \\ c \\ d \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix}1 & 1 & 1 &1 \end{pmatrix}[/tex]

Where [itex]I[/itex] is the Identity matrix...use Sylvester's detrminant theorem :wink:
 
Last edited:
Then the answer would be one but that is none of the options. shouldn't this Sylvester use his theorem one row at a time?
 
JANm said:
Then the answer would be one but that is none of the options. shouldn't this Sylvester use his theorem one row at a time?

Sylvester's theorem does not give an answer of one...For two column vectors [itex]u[/itex] and [itex]v[/itex] of equal dimension, Sylvester's theorem states that :

[tex]\text{det}(I+uv^T)=1+v^T u[/tex]

In this case you would use [tex]u=\begin{pmatrix} a \\ b \\ c \\ d \end{pmatrix}[/tex] and [tex]v^T=\begin{pmatrix}1 & 1 & 1 &1 \end{pmatrix}[/tex]...surely you do not get one using this?
 
gabbagabbahey said:
Sylvester's theorem does not give an answer of one...For two column vectors [itex]u[/itex] and [itex]v[/itex] of equal dimension, Sylvester's theorem states that :

[tex]\text{det}(I+uv^T)=1+v^T u[/tex]

In this case you would use [tex]u=\begin{pmatrix} a \\ b \\ c \\ d \end{pmatrix}[/tex] and [tex]v^T=\begin{pmatrix}1 & 1 & 1 &1 \end{pmatrix}[/tex]...surely you do not get one using this?

Now I can see that the problem is solved! Clever Sylvester.
 
Still had my doubts. Couldn't there be a solution e: 1+a+b+c+d+ab+ac+ad+bc+bd+cd?

If I take a=1, b=2, c=3, d=4 and calculate the determinant the old way I get 46
 
JANm said:
Still had my doubts. Couldn't there be a solution e: 1+a+b+c+d+ab+ac+ad+bc+bd+cd?

If I take a=1, b=2, c=3, d=4 and calculate the determinant the old way I get 46

Then you're calculating the determinant incorrectly...using: a=1, b=2, c=3, d=4 and calculating the determinant "the old way" gives:

[tex]\begin{vmatrix} 2 & 1 & 1 & 1 \\ 2 & 3 & 2 & 2 \\ 3 & 3 & 4 & 3 \\ 4 & 4 & 4 & 5 \end{vmatrix}=\begin{array}{l} 2[3(4*5-3*4)-2(3*5-3*4)+2(3*4-4*4)]-1[2(4*5-3*4)-2(3*5-3*4)+2(3*4-4*4)] \\ +1[2(3*5-3*4)-3(3*5-3*4)+2(3*4-3*4)]-1[2(3*4-4*4)-3(3*4-4*4)+2(3*4-3*4)] \end{array}[/tex]

[tex]=2[24-6-8]-[16-6-8]+[6-9+0]-[-8+12+0]=20-2-3-4=11 \neq 46[/tex]
 
You are right my 46 is not just. Excel gave for the four to four matrix indeed 11 too.
So my solution e is not just and one of the four a..d is in this case.

I took (a+1)(b+1)(c+1)(d+1) +3abcd -(a+1)bcd -(b+1)acd -(c+1)abd -(d+1)abc,
a method which works for three by three matrixes but apparently not for 4 by 4.
 
thanks a ton :smile:
 
  • #10
Since this is a 4 by 4 matrix (even number of rows and columns) its determinant is the same as the determinant of the transpose,
[tex]\left|\begin{array}{cccc}a+ 1 & b & c & d \\ a & b+ 1 & c & d \\ a & b & c+ 1 & d \\ a & b & c & d+ 1 \end{array}\right\|[/tex]

Swapping two rows multiplies the determinant by -1 so doing that twice gives the same determinant,
[tex]\left|\begin{array}{cccc}a & b & c & d+1 \\ a & b & c+1 & d \\ a & b+1 & c & d \\ a+1 & b & c & d\end{array}\right|[/tex]

Subtract the first row from each of the other rows,
[tex]\left|\begin{array}{cccc} a & b & c & d+1 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 & -1 \\ 0 & 1 & 0 & -1 \\ 1 & 0 & 0 & -1\end{array}\right|[/tex]

and, finally, expand that on the first column.
 
  • #11
So that will be Det(1:4,1:4) = a * det(2:4,2:4) - det(2:4,1:3) ?
I'll check that!...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K