I can't verify a relationship between cofactor and determinant

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between cofactors and determinants in the context of linear algebra and tensor calculus. Participants explore various mathematical expressions and properties related to these concepts, including cofactor expansion and the inverse of matrices.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses difficulty in verifying the relationship between cofactors and determinants, referencing a specific source.
  • Another participant suggests that a typo may be present and provides equations that relate cofactors to determinants, indicating that the cofactor matrix can be expressed in terms of the determinant and the inverse of the metric.
  • A different participant explains that the inverse of a metric is derived from the matrix of cofactors divided by the determinant, contributing to the discussion on the relationship between these concepts.
  • Further elaboration is provided by a participant referencing a specific text, detailing the determinant's expression using Levi-Civita symbols and discussing the implications of anti-symmetry in the context of the determinant calculation.
  • Another participant expresses gratitude for the information shared and indicates a desire to study the provided insights further.
  • A participant acknowledges their learning curve in expressing mathematical notation correctly, specifically regarding the cofactor notation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants present multiple viewpoints and mathematical expressions regarding the relationship between cofactors and determinants, with no consensus reached on the verification of these relationships. The discussion remains unresolved with competing interpretations and approaches.

Contextual Notes

Some mathematical steps and assumptions are not fully resolved, particularly regarding the derivation of the determinant and its relation to cofactors. The discussion includes references to specific mathematical texts and symbols that may require further clarification for complete understanding.

Kisok
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
In "General Relativity" by Hobson, et. al., in p. 66, we find a sentence starting "If we denote the value of the determinant ... " in the lower part of the page. I can not verify this assertion. Please help me the verification.
On that sentence, cofactor of an element of a metric is derived. But I can not verify it. Here I attached the copy of the page.
 

Attachments

  • 그림1.png
    그림1.png
    44.3 KB · Views: 451
  • 그림2.png
    그림2.png
    31.7 KB · Views: 531
Physics news on Phys.org
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: Kisok
It’s because the inverse of ##g_{\mu\nu}## is ##g^{\mu\nu}##, and the inverse of a matrix is given by the matrix of cofactors divided by the determinant.
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: Kisok
Rund and Lovelock ("Tensors, Differential Forms, and Variational Principles") have a good section on this in chapter 4

I hope you are familiar with Levi-Civita pseudo-tensors (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levi-Civita_symbol)

The determinant of the n-by-n matrix ##g_{\alpha\beta}## is given by:

##g = \epsilon^{\mu_1,\dots,\mu_n}g_{1\mu_1}\dots g_{n\mu_n}##

Now consider the following object:

##\omega^{\alpha\beta}=\sum_s\delta^\beta_s \epsilon^{\mu_1,\dots,\mu_{s-1},\alpha,\mu_{s+1},\dots,\mu_n}g_{1\mu_1}\dots g_{s-1,\mu_{s-1}}g_{s+1,\mu_{s+1}}\dots g_{n\mu_n}##

##g_{\kappa,\alpha}\omega^{\alpha\beta}=\sum_s \delta^\beta_s \epsilon^{\mu_1,\dots,\mu_n}g_{1\mu_1}\dots g_{s-1,\mu_{s-1}}\: g_{\kappa,\mu_s} \:g_{s+1,\mu_{s+1}}\dots g_{n\mu_n}##

Due to anti-symmetry of Levi-Civita, the only non-zero term in the ##\sum_s## is the one with ##s=\kappa##, but thet term is only non-zero if ##s=\beta=\kappa##. Now if all of this works, then we get the earlier expression for the determinant, so:

##g_{\kappa,\alpha}\omega^{\alpha\beta}=g\delta^\beta_\kappa##

So ##\omega^{\alpha\beta}=g g^{\alpha\beta}##, the inverse times the determinant. The co-factor matrix is here somewhere, but you don't need it to proceed. Note that from the above definition of the determinant

##\partial_c g = \partial_c g_{\beta \alpha}\sum_s\delta^\beta_s \epsilon^{\mu_1,\dots,\mu_{s-1},\alpha,\mu_{s+1},\dots,\mu_n}g_{1\mu_1}\dots g_{s-1,\mu_{s-1}}g_{s+1,\mu_{s+1}}\dots g_{n\mu_n} = g g^{\beta\alpha} \partial_c g_{\alpha\beta}##

Which is what you were after (once we use ##g_{\alpha\beta}=g_{\beta\alpha}##)
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and Kisok
Thank you for all the replies there. I will study the precious information and suggestions given by all of you. :smile:
 
Cryo said:
gαβ
Cryo said:
Rund and Lovelock ("Tensors, Differential Forms, and Variational Principles") have a good section on this in chapter 4

I hope you are familiar with Levi-Civita pseudo-tensors (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levi-Civita_symbol)

The determinant of the n-by-n matrix ##g_{\alpha\beta}## is given by:

##g = \epsilon^{\mu_1,\dots,\mu_n}g_{1\mu_1}\dots g_{n\mu_n}##

Now consider the following object:

##\omega^{\alpha\beta}=\sum_s\delta^\beta_s \epsilon^{\mu_1,\dots,\mu_{s-1},\alpha,\mu_{s+1},\dots,\mu_n}g_{1\mu_1}\dots g_{s-1,\mu_{s-1}}g_{s+1,\mu_{s+1}}\dots g_{n\mu_n}##

##g_{\kappa,\alpha}\omega^{\alpha\beta}=\sum_s \delta^\beta_s \epsilon^{\mu_1,\dots,\mu_n}g_{1\mu_1}\dots g_{s-1,\mu_{s-1}}\: g_{\kappa,\mu_s} \:g_{s+1,\mu_{s+1}}\dots g_{n\mu_n}##

Due to anti-symmetry of Levi-Civita, the only non-zero term in the ##\sum_s## is the one with ##s=\kappa##, but thet term is only non-zero if ##s=\beta=\kappa##. Now if all of this works, then we get the earlier expression for the determinant, so:

##g_{\kappa,\alpha}\omega^{\alpha\beta}=g\delta^\beta_\kappa##

So ##\omega^{\alpha\beta}=g g^{\alpha\beta}##, the inverse times the determinant. The co-factor matrix is here somewhere, but you don't need it to proceed. Note that from the above definition of the determinant

##\partial_c g = \partial_c g_{\beta \alpha}\sum_s\delta^\beta_s \epsilon^{\mu_1,\dots,\mu_{s-1},\alpha,\mu_{s+1},\dots,\mu_n}g_{1\mu_1}\dots g_{s-1,\mu_{s-1}}g_{s+1,\mu_{s+1}}\dots g_{n\mu_n} = g g^{\beta\alpha} \partial_c g_{\alpha\beta}##

Which is what you were after (once we use ##g_{\alpha\beta}=g_{\beta\alpha}##)
Thank you so much. Not being able to prove this was driving me crazy.

Oh, and I believe that ##\omega^{\alpha\beta}## is the co-factor. (I am new to this forum and may not have yet figured out how to express omega to the alpha, beta correctly.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
matrixbud said:
(I am new to this forum and may not have yet figured out how to express omega to the alpha, beta correctly.
You have figured it out! :smile:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
962