MHB How Do You Prove (det A)aij = Cij(A) for an Orthogonal Matrix with det(A)=+1?

ognik
Messages
626
Reaction score
2
Hi, the question (from math methods for physicists) is: If A is orthogonal and det(A)=+1, show that (det A)aij = Cij(A).

I know that if det(A)=+1, then we are looking at a rotation.
(Side question - I have seen that det(A) =-1 can be a reflection, but is 'mostly not reflections'; what does det(A)=-1 most often indicate then? A link to something simple that covers this would be nice :-) - I couldn't find anything)

But my main issue is to prove the above. I want to do this using indexing, so I tried:
By defn: det A = $ \sum_{}^{}{a}_{ij}({-1})^{i+j}{C}_{ij}(A) $
Then (det A)aij = $ {a}_{ij} \sum_{}^{}{a}_{ij}({-1}^{i+j}){C}_{ij}(A) $ ...

What struck me immediately is I don't know how to treat what happens when an indexed element is outside the summation? I am reasonably sure that aij is a single element here, so I can't include it in the summation. I can almost see an argument that by multiplying by the aijth element, I am 'selecting' only that element's cofactor out of the summation - but that seems too flimsy to me, would appreciate a better understanding.

Another side question is that I have the definition of a cofactor as: $ {C}_{ij}(A)=({-1})^{i+j}{M}_{ij}(A) $ Where {M}_{ij} is the minor...
It seems to me that $ ({-1})^{i+j} $ shouldn't be in both $ \sum_{}^{}{a}_{ij}({-1})^{i+j}{C}_{ij}(A) $ AND $ {C}_{ij}(A)=({-1})^{i+j}{M}_{ij}(A) $ ?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ognik said:
Hi, the question (from math methods for physicists) is: If A is orthogonal and det(A)=+1, show that (det A)aij = Cij(A).

I know that if det(A)=+1, then we are looking at a rotation.
(Side question - I have seen that det(A) =-1 can be a reflection, but is 'mostly not reflections'; what does det(A)=-1 most often indicate then? A link to something simple that covers this would be nice :-) - I couldn't find anything)

But my main issue is to prove the above. I want to do this using indexing, so I tried:
By defn: det A = $ \sum_{}^{}{a}_{ij}({-1})^{i+j}{C}_{ij}(A) $
Then (det A)aij = $ {a}_{ij} \sum_{}^{}{a}_{ij}({-1}^{i+j}){C}_{ij}(A) $ ...

What struck me immediately is I don't know how to treat what happens when an indexed element is outside the summation? I am reasonably sure that aij is a single element here, so I can't include it in the summation. I can almost see an argument that by multiplying by the aijth element, I am 'selecting' only that element's cofactor out of the summation - but that seems too flimsy to me, would appreciate a better understanding.

Another side question is that I have the definition of a cofactor as: $ {C}_{ij}(A)=({-1})^{i+j}{M}_{ij}(A) $ Where {M}_{ij} is the minor...
It seems to me that $ ({-1})^{i+j} $ shouldn't be in both $ \sum_{}^{}{a}_{ij}({-1})^{i+j}{C}_{ij}(A) $ AND $ {C}_{ij}(A)=({-1})^{i+j}{M}_{ij}(A) $ ?

Thanks

Hi ognik!

It seems to me we shouldn't worry much which summation applies to find $\det A$.
That's because we already know that $\det A = 1$.

Anyway, to answer your side questions first.
You are quite right that you have a superfluous $({-1})^{i+j}$ in your summation for $\det A$.
And if you have an indexed element outside of the summation, it should use different indices.

So it should be:
$$(\det A)a_{ij} = {a}_{ij} \sum_{k,l}^{}{a}_{kl}(-1)^{k+l}{M}_{kl}(A) = {a}_{ij} \sum_{k,l}^{}{a}_{kl}{C}_{kl}(A)$$To get back to your problem, perhaps you can use that an orthogonal matrix has the property that $A^{-1}=A^T$.
And that an inverse is given by $A^{-1}=\frac{1}{\det A}\big(C(A)\big)^T$.
 
Hi and thanks. I wasn't sure I could use that inverse relationship as it hasn't been covered in the text yet, but I can't see any other way. Having said that, i think I need some more understanding as you will see:
$$ If\: A^-1 =\frac{1}{\left| A \right|}.{C}^{T}\;then\:\left| A \right|\left({A}^{-1}\right)={C}^{T} $$
$$ Then \:\left| A \right|\left({A}^{-1}\right)_{ij} ={C}^{T}_{ij}\:\:but\:{C}^{T}_{ij}={C}_{ji}$$
So for what I am trying to prove, somehow $$\left({A}^{-1}\right)_{ij}\:must\:=A_{ji} $$
but I don't know why that would be true?
 
..sorry, of course I do! For an orthog matrix
$$ {A}^{-1}={A}^{T} \therefore ({A}^{-1})_{ij}={A}^{T}_{ij}={A}_{ji} $$
Thanks for your help (BTW, how do I add a thanks?)
 
Good! :)

Every post has a thanks button at the bottom right.
 
I also found that after I posted, one of those days ...
Would appreciate it if you had a look at http://mathhelpboards.com/advanced-applied-mathematics-16/confirm-equation-numerov-method-14831.html ... thanks again :-)
 
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 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K