How Does Squaring a Matrix Affect Its Determinant?

  • Thread starter Thread starter chapone
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
If A² = I, it can be proven that det A = ±1 for any n x n matrix, not just 2x2. The discussion emphasizes using the properties of determinants, specifically that det(AB) = det(A) * det(B), to derive the result. A counterexample is provided with a specific 2x2 matrix to illustrate that the argument for scalars does not directly apply to matrices. The concept of "order" in relation to matrices is clarified, indicating that A must be invertible. Understanding these principles is crucial for correctly interpreting the determinant in this context.
chapone
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
(Please help!) If A² = I, prove det A = ±1

If A² = I, show that det A = ±1

This book is very unclear, but I am assuming by "I" they mean the identity matrix with a size of 2x2. I have tried putting in A for row 1 column 1 - B for 1,2 - C for 2,1 and D for 2,2 multiplying and setting the results equal to the values of the identity matrix. I thought I was close, but now am doubting that I am going about this the right way. Any help is MUCH appreciated! Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, in this case, doing matrix arithmetic is going to be a lot easier than doing scalar arithmetic on the entries of the matrix.
 
Welcome to PF!

chapone said:
If A² = I, show that det A = ±1

This book is very unclear, but I am assuming by "I" they mean the identity matrix with a size of 2x2. I have tried putting in A for row 1 column 1 - B for 1,2 - C for 2,1 and D for 2,2 multiplying and setting the results equal to the values of the identity matrix. I thought I was close, but now am doubting that I am going about this the right way. Any help is MUCH appreciated! Thank you!

Hi chapone! Welcome to PF! :smile:

What makes you think they mean 2x2?

This theorem is true for any n x n matrix. :smile:

Do you know any formulas for determinants (for example, for det (AB))?
 
Take the determinant of both sides of A^{2} = I.

(Any don't make any assumptions beyond what the book gives you.)
 


a² = 1
a² - 1 = 0
(a - 1) (a + 1) = 0
a=1 and a = -1
then a = ±1
 


john the gree said:
a² = 1
a² - 1 = 0
(a - 1) (a + 1) = 0
a=1 and a = -1
then a = ±1
This is all well and good for a real number a, but the OP is working with a matrix A, not a scalar. As such, A \neq 1.
 


chapone got 3 good answers already, so I'll just add to what Mark44 said (also a good post, but not an answer for chapone) by providing a counterexample that shows that John's argument gets the wrong result for matrices:

\begin{pmatrix}0 & 1\\ 1 & 0\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}0 & 1\\ 1 & 0\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix}1 & 0\\ 0 & 1\end{pmatrix}
 


If A^2=1, then A is a matrix of order 2, which means that A is invertible.
 
Last edited by a moderator:


vigvig said:
If A^2=1, then A is a matrix of order 2
There are multiple meanings of the term "order", and your meaning here is not the meaning usually meant for matrices.
 
Last edited:
  • #10


D H said:
There are multiple meanings of the term "order", and your meaning here is not the meaning usually meant for matrices.

What do you mean? Order in the sense of "group order", meaning A generates a group of order 2. Implying A must be invertible
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K