Solving Hard Matrix Prob: A+kB Invertible w/ Integer Entries

  • Thread starter Thread starter barbiemathgurl
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Hard Matrix
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around proving that for an invertible n x n matrix A with integer entries, and another integer matrix B, the expression A+kB is also invertible for any integer k. The determinant of A+kB is shown to be a polynomial function of k, specifically f(x) = det(A+xB), which takes values of ±1 for specific integers. By the Pigeonhole Principle, this implies that f(x) must be a constant polynomial, leading to the conclusion that det(A+kB) = 1 for all k. Additionally, it is emphasized that all integer matrices with a determinant of ±1 are invertible with integer entries. The discussion highlights the importance of determinants in establishing the invertibility of matrix expressions involving integer coefficients.
barbiemathgurl
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
i just can't figure this out.

given a n x n matrix (with n>1) "A" such that all entries are integers and A is invertible such that A^{-1} also has integer entries. Let B be another matrix with integer coefficients so that:
A+B, A+2B, A+3B, ... A+(n^2)B
Are all invertible with integer entries.

Show that,
A+kB
Is also invertible with integer enties for any integer k.

who the heck do you solve this?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
What can you say about the determinants of those matrices? Once you get this, use the fact that det(A+kB), with A,B known and k a variable, is a polynomial in k.
 
barbiemathgurl said:
i just can't figure this out.

given a n x n matrix (with n>1) "A" such that all entries are integers and A is invertible such that A^{-1} also has integer entries. Let B be another matrix with integer coefficients so that:
A+B, A+2B, A+3B, ... A+(n^2)B
Are all invertible with integer entries.

Show that,
A+kB
Is also invertible with integer enties for any integer k.

who the heck do you solve this?

Let M be an arbitrary square invertible matrix whose inverse and itself has integer entires. Then 1=\det (MM^{-1}) = \det(M)\det (M^{-1}) shows that \det (M) = \pm 1 because the determinant of this matrix must be an integer. Now define the function f(x) = \det (A+xB). This is a polyomial of at most n degree. Notice that f(0),f(1),f(2),...,f(n^2) are either 1 \mbox{ or }-1. By the strong form of the Pigeonhole Principle at least n+1 of them are either 1 or -1. Without lose of generality say its 1. That means f(x) must in fact be a constant polynomial because a polynomial of at most n degree cannot produce the same values for n+1 different values. So f(x)=1. That means f(k)=1 for no matter what k. So \det (A+kB)=1. Since the determinant is 1, it must mean the matrix is irreducible with integer coefficients (by the adjoint matrix formula).
 
Kummer, we try not to give complete solutions here, just hints. And incidentally, a slightly easier way to get the last step is to note that f(k)^2 is a polynomial of degreen n^2 which is 1 at n^2+1 points, so must be 1 identically, and so f(k)=+-1. Also it remains to show that all integer matrices with determinant +-1 are invertible with integer entries.
 
StatusX said:
Kummer, we try not to give complete solutions here, just hints.
Okay.

Also it remains to show that all integer matrices with determinant +-1 are invertible with integer entries.
Last line in my first post in paranthesis. I was being sloppy on that last line because I assumed that result was trivial. I should have been more explicit.
 
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