- #1

- 257

- 16

- I
- Thread starter Robin04
- Start date

- #1

- 257

- 16

- #2

phyzguy

Science Advisor

- 4,615

- 1,569

- #3

fresh_42

Mentor

- 13,552

- 10,650

By more conditions, e.g. ##M=0## is possible in your setup. Do you look for an addition group?

- #4

- 257

- 16

- #5

fresh_42

Mentor

- 13,552

- 10,650

- #6

- 257

- 16

- #7

fresh_42

Mentor

- 13,552

- 10,650

##\{\,M\,|\,MG=GM\,\}## is already a group, say ##H##. Then ##G\in H## and ##H## is Abelian. But I have the strong feeling that you will not be satisfied.

- #8

- 257

- 16

The matrices are in ##\mathbb{R}^{n \times n}##. And as ##G## is given, I would like to express what the ##M## matrices must look like.

I'm not sure we're on the same page. I've been learning linear algebra for one month only, so I might not see your point immidiately. My teacher mentioned this problem and I found it interesting.##\{\,M\,|\,MG=GM\,\}## is already a group, say ##H##. Then ##G\in H## and ##H## is Abelian. But I have the strong feeling that you will not be satisfied.

The picture I have in mind is that a group is an algebraic structure which means that there is a set and a binary operation with the following properties

- closure for that operation

- associativity

- there is an inverse element for every element in the set

- there is an identity element in the set

So far, my problem is that I don't really see how the statement "matrices commuting with a given matrix form a group" fits into this picture. What is the set, what is the operation, etc.

- #9

fresh_42

Mentor

- 13,552

- 10,650

Tell me. My dictionary gave me aggresziv or eröszakos.Aggressive element is an element that makes every other element equal to itself. Like multiplying real numbers by zero. Not sure if aggressive element is the right term in English, I learnt it in Hungarian.

Easy: Let ##H:=\{\,M\in \mathbb{R}^{n \times n}\,|\,MG=GM\,\}##.The matrices are in ##\mathbb{R}^{n \times n}##. And as ##G## is given, I would like to express what the ##M## matrices must look like.

I'm not sure we're on the same page. I've been learning linear algebra for one month only, so I might not see your point immidiately. My teacher mentioned this problem and I found it interesting.

##M,N \in H \Longrightarrow M+N \in H##The picture I have in mind is that a group is an algebraic structure which means that there is a set and a binary operation with the following properties

- closure for that operation

##M+(N+P)=(M+N)+P##- associativity

##M \in H \Longrightarrow -M \in H##- there is an inverse element for every element in the set

##0\in H##- there is an identity element in the set

This is a rather boring solution, but if we must not invert the matrices, the more interesting multiplicative case isn't possible. The entire question including "aggressive" reminds me of algebras which are used in biology.So far, my problem is that I don't really see how the statement "matrices commuting with a given matrix form a group" fits into this picture. What is the set, what is the operation, etc.

Last edited:

- #10

- 257

- 16

It's aggresszív in Hungarian. I didn't find anything for agressive element, how do you call this in English?Tell me. My dictionary gave me aggresziv or eröszakos.

But how is this a proof that these rules also apply to commuting matrices too? Maybe it should be trivial but I don't see how the sum of two matrices that commute with ##G## also commutes with ##G##. Same for the other conditions.Easy: Let ##H:=\{\,M\in \mathbb{R}^{n \times n}\,|\,MG=GM\,\}##.

##M,N \in H \Longrightarrow M+N \in H##

##M+(N+P)=(M+N)+P##

##M \in H \Longrightarrow -M \in H##

##0\in H##

- #11

Stephen Tashi

Science Advisor

- 7,389

- 1,367

I think it's an "absorbing element". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absorbing_elementIt's aggresszív in Hungarian. I didn't find anything for agressive element, how do you call this in English?

- #12

Stephen Tashi

Science Advisor

- 7,389

- 1,367

If you interpret "is a group" to mean "is a group under the operation of multiplication" then the problem asks for a proof of a false statement. Begin by fixing the problem.

Let ##G## be an nxn matrix. Let ##S## be the set of nxn matrices such that ##m \in S## iff ##mG = Gm##.

If ##G## is the zero nxn matrix then ##S## is the set of all nxn matrices, which is not a group under the operation of multiplication.

Suppse ##G## is not an invertible matrix. The identity matrix ##I## is an element of ##S##. If ##S## were a group then it would contain ##GI= IG= G##. So ##S## would contain an matrix ##G## with no multiplicative inverse. Hence ##S## is not a multiplicative group.

----

If you interpret "is a group" to mean "is a group under the operation of addition", then, besides the trivial matters, you must show that if ##A \in S## and ##B \in S## then ##A+B \in S##.

##G(A+B) = ? = ? = (A+B)G##Maybe it should be trivial but I don't see how the sum of two matrices that commute with G" role="presentation">G also commutes with G" role="presentation">G

- #13

- 46

- 17

Let ##G## be a ##n \times n## matrixLet's say we have a given matrix ##G##. I want to find a set of matrices ##M## so that ##MG = GM## and prove that this is a group. How can I approach this problem?

Define ##S## to be the set of ##n \times n## matrices with nonzero determinant: ##S = \{ n \times n \text{ matrix } A | \text{ } det(A) \neq 0 \}##

Define ##T## to be the set of ##n \times n## matrices with nonzero determinant that commute with ##G##: ##T = \{M \in S | \text{ } MG=GM \}##

It is easy to show that ##T## is a group

Questions:

Is it necessary that ##G \in S## ?. That is, is it necessary that ##det(G) \neq 0## ?

Does ##G## belong to ##T##, i.e., ##G \in T## ?

- #14

WWGD

Science Advisor

Gold Member

2019 Award

- 5,350

- 3,328

- #15

WWGD

Science Advisor

Gold Member

2019 Award

- 5,350

- 3,328

Doesn't every element in a group have an inverse? If Det(G)=0 , then G is not invertible.Let ##G## be a ##n \times n## matrix

Define ##S## to be the set of ##n \times n## matrices with nonzero determinant: ##S = \{ n \times n \text{ matrix } A | \text{ } det(A) \neq 0 \}##

Define ##T## to be the set of ##n \times n## matrices with nonzero determinant that commute with ##G##: ##T = \{M \in S | \text{ } MG=GM \}##

It is easy to show that ##T## is a group

Questions:

Is it necessary that ##G \in S## ?. That is, is it necessary that ##det(G) \neq 0## ?

Does ##G## belong to ##T##, i.e., ##G \in T## ?

- #16

fresh_42

Mentor

- 13,552

- 10,650

Commutator, but even this depends on the structure: ##[G,M]=GM-MG## or ##[G,M]=GMG^{-1}M^{-1}.##

- #17

fresh_42

Mentor

- 13,552

- 10,650

If ##\operatorname{det}G =0## then ##-G## is still the inverseDoesn't every element in a group have an inverse? If Det(G)=0 , then G is not invertible.

- #18

WWGD

Science Advisor

Gold Member

2019 Award

- 5,350

- 3,328

Is this the same as Centralizer?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centralizer_and_normalizer (See the first few lines, where it is also nammed commutant)Commutator, but even this depends on the structure: ##[G,M]=GM-MG## or ##[G,M]=GMG^{-1}M^{-1}.##

- #19

WWGD

Science Advisor

Gold Member

2019 Award

- 5,350

- 3,328

But I thought this was a multiplicative group. An additive group has every element invertible, doesn't it, by -G itself, right?If ##\operatorname{det}G =0## then ##-G## is still the inverse

- #20

fresh_42

Mentor

- 13,552

- 10,650

- #21

- 46

- 17

Obviously, ##T## is a multiplicative group, consisting of ##n \times n## matrices withLet ##G## be a ##n \times n## matrix

Define ##S## to be the set of ##n \times n## matrices with nonzero determinant: ##S = \{ n \times n \text{ matrix } A | \text{ } det(A) \neq 0 \}##

Define ##T## to be the set of ##n \times n## matrices with nonzero determinant that commute with ##G##: ##T = \{M \in S | \text{ } MG=GM \}##

It is easy to show that ##T## is a group

Questions:

Is it necessary that ##G \in S## ?. That is, is it necessary that ##det(G) \neq 0## ?

Does ##G## belong to ##T##, i.e., ##G \in T## ?

- #22

fresh_42

Mentor

- 13,552

- 10,650

That was one of the difficulties with the OP. It hasn't been specified, and to automatically assume invertible matrices if he talks about ##\mathbb{R}^{n\times n}## is a bit of a stretch.But I thought this was a multiplicative group. An additive group has every element invertible, doesn't it, by -G itself, right?

- #23

fresh_42

Mentor

- 13,552

- 10,650

Obviously, this is an unsupported assumption.Obviously, ##T## is a multiplicative group, consisting of ##n \times n## matrices withnonzerodeterminant.

- #24

WWGD

Science Advisor

Gold Member

2019 Award

- 5,350

- 3,328

But if you have an aditive group then, at least in my understanding, everything commutes.That was one of the difficulties with the OP. It hasn't been specified, and to automatically assume invertible matrices if he talks about ##\mathbb{R}^{n\times n}## is a bit of a stretch.

- #25

fresh_42

Mentor

- 13,552

- 10,650

No one said it won't be a boring solution. At least it is one which doesn't depend on assumptions made by others.But if you have an aditive group then, at least in my understanding, everything commutes.

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 1K

- Replies
- 5

- Views
- 4K

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 544

- Last Post

- Replies
- 7

- Views
- 4K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 5

- Views
- 10K

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 710

- Last Post

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 2K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 7

- Views
- 1K

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 2K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 1K