High School Inductive proof for multiplicative property of sdet

  • Thread starter Thread starter Korybut
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof Property
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the technical challenges faced in proving the multiplicative property of the super determinant (sdet) as outlined in Roger's book on supermanifolds. The author details their approach using specific super matrices, denoted as ##\mathcal{M}## and ##\mathcal{N}##, and highlights the complexity of the resulting expressions, particularly when computing ##sdet \mathcal{M} \, sdet \mathcal{N}##. Despite the invertibility of the matrices involved, the author struggles with the intricate computations required to establish equality order by order in ##N_{01}##.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of super matrices and super determinants
  • Familiarity with formal power series in linear algebra
  • Knowledge of matrix inversion and trace operations
  • Experience with mathematical proofs in advanced algebra
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of super determinants in detail
  • Learn about formal power series and their applications in linear algebra
  • Investigate advanced techniques for matrix inversion
  • Explore the concept of trace in the context of super matrices
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for mathematicians, theoretical physicists, and researchers working with supermanifolds, particularly those focusing on the properties of super determinants and advanced algebraic structures.

Korybut
Messages
74
Reaction score
4
TL;DR
Is it doable?
Hello!

Reading Roger's book on supermanifolds one can find sketch of the proof for multiplicative property of super determinant. Which looks as follows
Sdet.jpg

All the words sounds reasonable however when it comes to the direct computation it turns out to be technical mess and I am about to give up. I mean all the matrices that need to be inverted are invertible and can be represented as formal power series so everything is well-defined nonetheless resulting expressions are of insane technical complexity. Have someone tried this particular way of proving this property?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
To add some detail of my struggle. I represent my super matrices according to suggested in the proof way
##\mathcal{M}=\left(\begin{matrix}M_{00}+\beta_L A_{00} & M_{01}+\beta_L A_{01} \\
M_{10}+\beta_L A_{10} & M_{11}+\beta_L A_{11}\end{matrix}\right)##

##\mathcal{N}=\left(\begin{matrix}N_{00}+\beta_L B_{00} & N_{01}+\beta_L B_{01} \\
N_{10}+\beta_L B_{10} & N_{11}+\beta_L B_{11}\end{matrix}\right)##
Since it is clear that result will be only linear in ##A## or ##B## I will provide only the part that comes with ##A_{01}## (nothing particular special about ##A_{01}##. I just want to see what comes here). After straight-forward computation one has
##sdet\mathcal{M}\, sdet \mathcal{N}=sdet M\, sdet N\, \left(1-\beta_L A_{01}M_{11}^{-1} M_{10} \left(M_{00}-M_{01} M_{11}^{-1} M_{10}\right)^{-1}+\ldots \right)##
I know that one should actually "take the trace" but I will omit the indices for simplicity. Appearing here matrix ##M_{00}-M_{01} M_{11}^{-1} M_{10}## is invertible since ##M_{01} M_{11}^{-1} M_{10}## has no body. Its inverse looks as follows
##\left(M_{00}-M_{01} M_{11}^{-1} M_{10}\right)^{-1}=\sum_{p=0}^\infty \left(M_{00}^{-1} M_{01} M_{11}^{-1} M_{10}\right)^p M_{00}^{-1}##
Series has only finite amount of terms so one doesn't need to worry about convergence properties.

On the other hand one can compute ##sdet \mathcal{M} \mathcal{N}## and again examine what comes with ##A_{01}##. Since resulting formula is very involved I introduce following shorthand notation
##\mathcal{X}=M_{00} N_{00}+M_{01}N_{10}-\left(M_{00}N_{01}+M_{01}N_{11}\right) \left(M_{10}N_{01}+M_{11}N_{11}\right)^{-1}\left(M_{10} N_{00}+M_{11}N_{10}\right)##
This one of the parts that comes computing ##sdet MN##.

##\mathcal{Y}=N_{10}-N_11 \left(M_{10}N_{01}+M_{11}N_{11}\right)^{-1}\left(M_{10}N_{00}+M_{11}N_{10}\right)##.
Once again all the matrices that need to inverted are invertible as a formal series.

Using these notation result for computation ##sdet \mathcal{M}\mathcal{N}## looks as follows
##sdet \mathcal{M}\mathcal{N}=sdet MN\, \left(1+\beta_L A_{01} \mathcal{Y} \mathcal{X}^{-1}+\ldots \right)##

I've tried to show equality order by order in ##N_{01}##. It is not that hard to show that in zeroth order (i.e. ##N_{01}=0##) equality holds. However when it comes to first order it turns out to be too involved.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
660
Replies
7
Views
6K