How to prove that the determinant of K is also zero without using eigenvalues?

  • Thread starter Thread starter EmmaSaunders1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Algebra Determinant
EmmaSaunders1
Messages
45
Reaction score
0
Hi,

if vector b * matrix K = 0 (bK=o) what methods can one use to show that the determinant of K is therefore also zero, without using eigenvalues.

I have a feeling I am over complicating this.

Knd regards

Emma
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I assume b != 0. What else are you starting with? Are you allowed to use the fact that, for any square matrix K with determinant != 0, the equation Kx = y has a unique solution? If so, it is obvious that the solution to KTb = 0 is not unique, since KT0 = 0 also. Thus, the determinant of KT is 0, and since transposition doesn't change the determinant, the determinant of K must also be 0.
 
Sorry that's correct that b!=0

using for any square matrix K with determinant != 0, the equation Kx = y has a unique solution - is fine.

Im almost understand where your heading with this - would you please however clarify two steps;

you say KTb = 0 is not unique, since KT0 = 0 also. Thus, the determinant of KT is 0.

How do you know the value of the determinant from that statement alone,

Also is bK, the same as KTb, I noticed you switched the order of multiplication there.

Thanks for your help
 
Sorry, I should have written KTbT. I'm using the turnover rule for matrix multiplication: for any two matrices A and B, (AB)T = BTAT. In this case b is a row vector, a 1 x n matrix, and bT is a column vector, an n x 1 matrix. The only reason for doing it that way is that the uniqueness theorem is usually stated in terms of left multiplication and column vectors, but of course it also holds for right multiplication and row vectors.

you say KTb = 0 is not unique, since KT0 = 0 also. Thus, the determinant of KT is 0.

How do you know the value of the determinant from that statement alone
If the determinant of K (or KT) is not 0, the solution would be unique. Since the solution is not unique, the determinant must be 0.
 
Thats great - I really appreciate your help!
 
It can be proved directly using Kramer's rule. Write K=[k1;...;kn] (the kj are the rows) and let Kj be the matrix K with row j replaced with 0. Obviously det(Kj)=0 by row expansion.

Also 0=b*K=b1*k1+...+bn*kn, so det(Kj)=det([k1;...;b1*k1+...+bn*kn;...;kn])=det([k1;...;bj*kj;...;kn])=bj*det(K). Choose any j such that bj<>0 and this shows that det(K)=0.
 
Namaste & G'day Postulate: A strongly-knit team wins on average over a less knit one Fundamentals: - Two teams face off with 4 players each - A polo team consists of players that each have assigned to them a measure of their ability (called a "Handicap" - 10 is highest, -2 lowest) I attempted to measure close-knitness of a team in terms of standard deviation (SD) of handicaps of the players. Failure: It turns out that, more often than, a team with a higher SD wins. In my language, that...
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Back
Top