Find Inverse of 2x2 Matrix: Step-by-Step Guide

  • Thread starter Thread starter hoffmann
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Inverse Matrix
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on finding the inverse of a 2x2 matrix represented as [a b; c d]. The user seeks assistance in deriving the formula for the inverse using Gauss-Jordan elimination, specifically the formula (1/ad-bc)M(a,b,c,d). The conversation highlights the algebraic challenges faced during the process, with users providing step-by-step guidance on manipulating the augmented matrix [a b; c d | 1 0; 0 1]. Key steps include row operations to simplify the matrix and achieve the identity matrix on the left side.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of 2x2 matrix operations
  • Familiarity with Gauss-Jordan elimination technique
  • Knowledge of matrix inversion concepts
  • Basic algebra skills for manipulating equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the inverse of a 2x2 matrix using the formula (1/ad-bc)M(a,b,c,d)
  • Practice Gauss-Jordan elimination with various 2x2 matrices
  • Explore matrix row operations and their effects on augmented matrices
  • Learn about the properties of matrix inverses and their applications
USEFUL FOR

Students studying linear algebra, educators teaching matrix theory, and anyone looking to improve their skills in matrix operations and inversions.

hoffmann
Messages
65
Reaction score
0
I need to find the inverse of a 2x2 matrix of the form [a b ; c d]

I'm halfway there, but the algebra gets really messy. Could anyone help me out by doing the problem step by step? Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm not going to do the problem for you, but I can give you a hint... you should be find that the inverse is of the form (1/ad-bc)M(a,b,c,d), where M(a,b,c,d) is a pretty simple 2x2 matrix.
 
thanks for the reply. I'm aware of the formula. in fact, I'm trying to derive the formula to prove to myself that i can do gauss jordan elimination. i just got stuck midway because the algebra gets pretty messy. here's where i am in the process:

[ a b ; c d | 1 0 ; 0 1 ] -->
[ a b ; (ac/c) (ad/c) | 1 0 ; 0 (a/c) ] -->
[ a b ; 0 ((ad/c)/c) -b | -1 (a/c) ] -->
...

i went a couple of steps ahead and i must not be doing something right. i'd appreciate if someone could lay it out for me on the site. thanks!
 
hoffmann said:
[ a b ; c d | 1 0 ; 0 1 ] -->
[ a b ; (ac/c) (ad/c) | 1 0 ; 0 (a/c) ] -->
[ a b ; 0 ((ad/c)/c) -b | -1 (a/c) ] -->
I don't see how you got that. Starting from the matrix above that, multiply the 2nd row by -1 and add it to the first row. See how to continue from there?

EDIT: Please don't double-post threads. You've already posted this here:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=258994
 
Last edited:
I am studying the mathematical formalism behind non-commutative geometry approach to quantum gravity. I was reading about Hopf algebras and their Drinfeld twist with a specific example of the Moyal-Weyl twist defined as F=exp(-iλ/2θ^(μν)∂_μ⊗∂_ν) where λ is a constant parametar and θ antisymmetric constant tensor. {∂_μ} is the basis of the tangent vector space over the underlying spacetime Now, from my understanding the enveloping algebra which appears in the definition of the Hopf algebra...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K