Easy method to show orthogonality of a matrix

dapias09
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
Hi, I know how the properties of an orthogonal matrix, the transpose ot the matrix is equal to its inverse. The problem is that the teacher gaves me a 3x3 matrix expressed in terms of many cosines and sines of three angles, I want to know how can I prove that the matrix is orthogonal without having to do the product between the matrix and its transpose.

Thanks for your help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can always check that the columns form an orthonormal basis. This implies that your matrix is orthogonal. So you only need to calculate a few inner products.
 
micromass said:
You can always check that the columns form an orthonormal basis. This implies that your matrix is orthogonal. So you only need to calculate a few inner products.

But this is actually the same as multiplying the matrix with its transpose. In fact it's the exact same sequence of operations.

OP, I don't think there are any shortcuts to this problem unless you know some fancy group theory. Just multiply it out. All the sines and cosines should either cancel or combine into \sin^2 a + \cos^2 a = 1.
 
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
Back
Top