Finding Inverse Matrix by Definition

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on finding the inverse of a matrix by definition, specifically through the multiplication of a given matrix by a variable matrix to achieve the identity matrix. The example provided illustrates the process using a 3x3 matrix with specific entries, leading to a system of equations that can be solved through substitution and basic algebra. Participants emphasize the importance of correctly labeling matrix entries by their row and column indices rather than arbitrary letters.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of matrix multiplication
  • Familiarity with the concept of the identity matrix
  • Basic algebra skills for solving equations
  • Knowledge of matrix notation and indexing
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of the identity matrix in linear algebra
  • Learn about different methods for calculating matrix inverses, such as Gaussian elimination
  • Explore matrix notation and indexing conventions in mathematical literature
  • Investigate the implications of matrix inverses in solving linear systems
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in mathematics, particularly those studying linear algebra, as well as anyone interested in understanding matrix operations and their applications in solving equations.

shelovesmath
Messages
59
Reaction score
0
Hi fellow mathies,

So, I'm wondering if the way to find the inverse of a matrix by definition (instead of using a special algorithm/tacking on the identity matrix and reducing, etc), is to multiply the matrix by a variable matrix and have it equal the identity matrix.


So, for example:

this matrix

3 0 0
0 -1 3
0 -3 -1

multiplied by this matrix

a b c
d e f
g h i

would equal

1 0 0
0 1 0
0 0 1



would be

entry a is 3a+0+0=1
entry b is 3b+0+0=0
entry c is 3c + 0 + 0 =0
entry d is 0 -d + 3g = 0
entry 3 is 0 -e + +3h = 1
etc.

and then solve by substitution and basic algebra.

Thanks in advance :)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, that works. (Is that all you wanted to know?). I just wouldn't call the entries "a,b,c,d,3,...". I actually don't understand your labeling system (unless you meant e when you wrote 3). You should refer to the entries by row number and column number. For example, what you called "3" is row 2, column 2, i.e. the "22" entry of the product.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K