Give a 2x2 matrix with Det(A)=+/-1 that is not orthogonal.

  • Thread starter Thread starter pyroknife
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matrix Orthogonal
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around finding a 2x2 matrix with a determinant of either +1 or -1 that is not orthogonal. Participants explore the properties of orthogonal matrices and the implications of the determinant condition.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss examples of matrices that meet the determinant condition, with some suggesting matrices with nonzero off-diagonal elements. Others question the interpretation of the ± symbol in the context of the determinant.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of potential matrix examples, with some participants providing guidance on constructing non-orthogonal matrices. Multiple interpretations of the determinant condition are being examined, and some participants are seeking verification of their reasoning.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express confusion regarding the requirement of the determinant being ±1, questioning whether both conditions must be satisfied simultaneously.

pyroknife
Messages
611
Reaction score
4
I attached the problem.
I only need help with part b), I provided part a) just to remind you guys what a orthogonal matrix was.

The only 2x2 matrix I can think of with a determinant of + or - 1 is something like

√1 0
0 1

The determinant of this would be √1 = + or - 1

The second part asks me to show that this matrix is not orthogonal thus A^-1≠A^T

A^T=
√1 0
0 1


To calculate A^-1 I set up the 2x2 matrix with the identify matrix on the right and reduce so the left becomes the I matrix.
√1 0 1 0
0 1 0 1


1 0 1/√1 0
0 1 0 1


But when I do this I get A^-1 =
1/√1 0
0 1


Is this still considered = to A^T =
√1 0
0 1
?
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.png
    Untitled.png
    8.7 KB · Views: 866
Physics news on Phys.org
√1 is 1. Try thinking of matrices with nonzero off-diagonal elements.
 
A 2x2 orthogonal matrix must satisfy:
[tex] \left(\begin{array}{cc}<br /> a & b \\<br /> <br /> c & d<br /> \end{array} \right) \cdot \left(\begin{array}{cc}<br /> a & c \\<br /> <br /> b & d<br /> \end{array}\right) = \left(\begin{array}{cc}<br /> a^2 + b^2 & a \, c + b \, d \\<br /> <br /> a \, c + b \, d & c^2 + d^2<br /> \end{array}\right) = \left(\begin{array}{cc}<br /> 1 & 0 \\<br /> <br /> 0 & 1<br /> \end{array}\right)[/tex]
You can simply make it non-orthogonal if you make the off-diagonal element to be non-zero, for example:
[tex] a \, c + b \, d = 1[/tex]
Now, the determinant is:
[tex] a \, d - b \, c = \pm1[/tex]
Solve these two equations for a, and b, for example, and you will get a two-parameter family of matrices that are non-orthogonal, but with determinant ±1.
 
You can write down a lot of simple examples without thinking half that hard.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure if I misinterpreted this problem when it says Det(A)=±1, does that mean the + and - have to be both satisfied?

or can I have a matrix that's simply
2 1
1 1
 
Dick said:
You can write down a lot of simple examples without thinking half that hard.

yes, you and I can. Please unquote the solution.
 
pyroknife said:
can I have a matrix that's simply
2 1
1 1

yes.
 
Oh will, I guess I was thinking too hard. Usually when they give ±, I assume that both conditions have to be met.

Can someone verify if I proved part a right? I'm second guessing myself.

Det(A^-1)=Det(A^t)
Since Det(A^t)=Det(A)
Det(A)=Det(A^-1)
Det(A^-1)=1/Det(A)
Thus
Det(A)=1/Det(A)
(Det(A))^2=1
Det(A)=±1
 
pyroknife said:
Oh will, I guess I was thinking too hard. Usually when they give ±, I assume that both conditions have to be met.

Can someone verify if I proved part a right? I'm second guessing myself.

Det(A^-1)=Det(A^t)
Since Det(A^t)=Det(A)
Det(A)=Det(A^-1)
Det(A^-1)=1/Det(A)
Thus
Det(A)=1/Det(A)
(Det(A))^2=1
Det(A)=±1

yes, it is correct.
 
  • #10
pyroknife said:
Oh will, I guess I was thinking too hard. Usually when they give ±, I assume that both conditions have to be met.

The [itex]\pm[/itex] operator is called plus or minus, not plus and minus :-p
 
  • #11
and imposing the conditions
[tex] x = 1 \wedge x = -1[/tex]
leads to a contradiction
[tex] 1 = -1[/tex]
so, that interpretation doesn't make sense.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K