Is matrixs multiplication random ?

ManishR
Messages
88
Reaction score
0
lets assume matrix A = [a]mxn and B = nxp

(AB)_{ij}=\sum_{r=1}^{n}A_{ir}B_{rj}

why is that ?

i guessed it would be

(AB)_{ij}=\sum_{r=1}^{n}A_{ir}B_{jr} where m=p.

so is there any logic behind that or its just random ?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
No, it isn't random. Look at a simple 2 x 2 example:

y1 = a11x1 + a12x2
y2 = a21x1 + a22x2

Now let
z1 = b11y1 + b12y2
z2 = b21y1 + b22xy2

You can write these both in matrix form y = Ax and z = By

Now solve for the z values in terms of the x values to write z = Cx.

You will see that C = BA given by the usual matrix multiplication. That is why matrices are multiplied the way they are.

[Edit] Fixed typo.
 
Last edited:
You mean C=BA, not AB.
 
LCKurtz said:
No, it isn't random. Look at a simple 2 x 2 example:

y1 = a11x1 + a12x2
y2 = a21x1 + a22x2

Now let
z1 = b11y1 + b12y2
z2 = b21y1 + b22xy2

You can write these both in matrix form y = Ax and z = By

Now solve for the z values in terms of the x values to write z = Cx.

You will see that C = AB given by the usual matrix multiplication. That is why matrices are multiplied the way they are.

You mean C=BA, not AB.
 
takahashi_s said:
You mean C=BA, not AB.

Yes, of course, thanks.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top