Calculating an n X n determinant

Click For Summary
To solve an n x n determinant, experimenting with smaller matrices (n=2, 3, 4) can reveal patterns that simplify the process. Instead of attempting to make the determinant triangular, expanding along the bottom row can be a more effective strategy. The Leibniz formula indicates that only certain terms survive based on permutations without zeroes. A helpful technique involves manipulating rows, such as multiplying the i-th row by -a_i and adding it to the first. This approach ultimately leads to a clearer understanding of the determinant calculation.
TGV320
Messages
40
Reaction score
26
Homework Statement
Help in order to solve a determinant
Relevant Equations
Determinants
Hello,

I need some advice because I just can't figure out how to solve the problem. I could try to make the determinant triangular by adding all the b together, but that doen't seem a good way of solving the problem. Is there any direction I should be thinking of?

1699948294438.jpg
Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why not calculate the determinant for ##n = 2, 3, 4## and see whether a pattern emerges?
 
  • Like
Likes TGV320, e_jane and topsquark
TGV320 said:
Homework Statement: Help in order to solve a determinant
Relevant Equations: Determinants

Hello,

I need some advice because I just can't figure out how to solve the problem. I could try to make the determinant triangular by adding all the b together, but that doen't seem a good way of solving the problem. Is there any direction I should be thinking of?

View attachment 335323Thanks
Hint: Follow PeroK's advice and find the determinant by expanding along the bottom row.

-Dan
 
  • Like
Likes TGV320, e_jane and PeroK
By considering the Leibniz formula, one can figure out that only some terms survive, where the permutations do not contain zeroes.
 
  • Like
Likes TGV320 and topsquark
Multiply the ##i^{th}## row by ##-a_i## and add it to the first. You just need to see what the top left element will be.
 
  • Like
Likes TGV320 and topsquark
Hi,
Thanks for the advice.
I have figured it out,though I never thought about getting the answer by experimenting on it, always thought it to n. That way of doing it with n=2 then 3 is quite illuminating.

1700045361111.jpg
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K