Determinant formula in monomials - can it be generalized?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the possibility of generalizing a determinant formula expressed in terms of monomials, specifically starting from a known formula for 2x2 matrices. Participants explore whether this monomial representation can be extended to higher-order determinants and discuss related concepts and methods.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • The original poster (OP) presents a specific formula for the determinant of a 2x2 matrix expressed as a sum of products of monomials and questions if this can be generalized to larger matrices.
  • One participant suggests multiplying the matrix by a specific constant matrix to derive a similar expression for the determinant, indicating a potential method for generalization.
  • The OP acknowledges the suggestion and reflects on the idea of using factors with multiple additive terms for generalization, indicating a shift in their approach to the problem.
  • Another participant mentions that after further exploration, they found that the use of additional matrices may not be necessary to answer the original question, but could provide alternative formulations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on a definitive generalization of the determinant formula. Multiple approaches and ideas are presented, but the discussion remains exploratory and unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the relationship of the discussed formula to Vandermonde's determinant, but the connections remain unclear. The exploration includes considerations of matrix manipulation and the structure of determinants, but specific assumptions and limitations are not fully addressed.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to mathematicians, students, or researchers exploring determinants, matrix theory, or algebraic expressions in mathematical contexts.

sal
Messages
78
Reaction score
2
Determinant formula in monomials -- can it be generalized?

I ran across this question in one of the Usenet groups (fr.sci.maths), and after doing a double take and realizing what was actually being asked I realized I don't know the answer, and after searching a bit I haven't turned it up, so I thought I'd post it here.

A cute formula for the determinant of a 2x2 matrix is:

<br /> \left| \begin{matrix}<br /> a &amp; b \\<br /> c &amp; d<br /> \end{matrix}<br /> \right| ~=~ {1 \over 2} \cdot \left( (a + b) (d - c) + (a - b) (d + c) \right) <br />

Of course this is the "usual" ab-cd formula factored into a sum of products of monomials. The question was whether this form of the formula can be generalized to higher orders?

I'm well aware of the formula using expansion in cofactors, and I know you can expand the determinant as a sum of products of all permutations of selections of one element from each row (or column), and I know it's the (signed) hypervolume of the hyperrectangle spanned by the column vectors. But I don't know any way in general to expand it as a sum of products of monomials analogous to this formula, and searching Google, the CRC Math Tables, and Artin's "Algebra" didn't turn anything up.

This looks vaguely like the formula for Vandermonde's determinant, but the relationship, if any, is too vague to tell me much.

Any ideas or comments will be appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org


you could multiply your matrix on the right by
<br /> \left( \begin{matrix}<br /> 1 &amp; -1 \\<br /> 1 &amp; 1<br /> \end{matrix}<br /> \right)<br />
(which has determinant 2) then use the usual formula for the determinant to get your expression.
Given any square matrix A, you could write det(A)=det(MAN)/det(MN) for constant matrices M,N to obtain similar expressions.
 


Thanks -- I think that leads in the right direction. In particular, I was thinking in terms of factors with just two additive terms, and getting nowhere fast trying to come up with generalizations; what you're suggesting leads to something where, for an NxN matrix, each factor would have N additive terms, which makes a lot more sense!

I'll fiddle with this a bit more in the morning and see if I get any farther with it.
 


sal said:
I'll fiddle with this a bit more in the morning and see if I get any farther with it.

After some fiddling, and playing around with alternative matrices for "N", I posted a response based on Gel's comments on fr.sci.physique (with due credit to Gel). The OP appreciated it. Thread may be found here:

http://groups.google.ca/group/fr.sc..."Expression+du+déterminant"#32069f45d8ab0d28"

It appears that use of "M" in addition to "N", as in "MAN", is unnecessary to narrowly answer the original question; it could, however, be used to produce a result in terms of summations on the components of the column vectors rather than the row vectors.

Thanks again.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

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