Efficiently Compute the Inverse of a Matrix Using Tricky Techniques

  • Thread starter Thread starter peterlam
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Inverse Matrix
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the computation of the inverse of a matrix C, derived from the square of the entries of the inverse matrix B of an invertible matrix A. It is established that C is not necessarily invertible, leading to the conclusion that one cannot compute the inverse of C directly from A. When considering A as positive definite, the properties of B and C being positive definite are noted, but this does not change the inability to derive C's inverse from A. The conversation emphasizes the complexity of determinants and the implications of squaring matrix entries on invertibility. Ultimately, no general result can be guaranteed for computing the inverse of C from A.
peterlam
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Suppose A is a invertible n-by-n matrix. Let B be the inverse of A, i.e. B = A^(-1).It is trivial that A = B^(-1).

If we construct a matrix C whose entry is the square of corresponding entry of B, i.e. C_ij = (B_ij)^2, then we compute the inverse of C.

We can compute the inverse of C directly from A without going through the inverse operation twice?

Thank you!
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
C is not necessarily invertible, so the answer to your question is "no".

For example
B = \begin{matrix} 1 & -1 \cr 1 & 1 \end{matrix}

C = \begin{matrix} 1 & 1 \cr 1 & 1 \end{matrix}
 
What if we only consider A is positive definite? Then B is positive definite and C should be positive definite too.

Can we compute the inverse of C directly from A in this case?

Thank you!
 
In my counterexample B is positive definite.

x^T B x = x_1^2 + x_2^2

You can write any inverse matrix explicitly in terms of determinants of the matrix and submatrices (this is equivalent to Cramer's rule for solving equations). Think about how a derminant is calculated, and what happens to it if you square all the entries in the matrix. I think it is very unlikely you will get any general result about this.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top