MHB Finding element of inverse matrix

Click For Summary
To find the element in the first row and fourth column of the inverse matrix B, the discussion focuses on using the properties of matrix multiplication without determinants. The dot product of the first three rows of matrix A with the fourth column of B must equal zero, while the dot product of the fourth row of A with the same column must equal one. This leads to the equation 1*b1 = 1, indicating that b1 equals 1. The conversation highlights a straightforward approach to solving for elements of the inverse matrix through matrix properties. The method avoids the use of determinants or adjoints, demonstrating an alternative technique for finding specific elements in an inverse matrix.
Yankel
Messages
390
Reaction score
0
Hello all,

I have this matrix A

\[A=\begin{pmatrix} 1 &2 &3 &4 \\ 9 &8 &2 &0 \\ 17 &2 &0 &0 \\ 1 &0 &0 &0 \end{pmatrix}\]

B is defined as the inverse of A. I need to find the element in the first row and fourth column of B, without using determinants, so without using adjoint.

How should I do it then ?

Thanks !
 
Physics news on Phys.org
We know that the dot-product of the first 3 rows of $A$ with the fourth column of $B$ is 0, and the dot product of the fourth row of $A$ with the fourth column of $B$ is 1.

let's call this column vector $(b_1,b_2,b_3,b_4)$. We need to find $b_1$. From the last sentence of my previous paragraph, we know that:

$1b_1 + 0b_2 + 0b_3 + 0b_4 = 1$.

Your conclusion?
 
I didn't see this. Nice one, thanks !
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K