Linear algebra, determinants, and transposes

AI Thread Summary
To prove that det(A^t) = det(A), it's essential to understand the properties of determinants and how they behave under transposition. The determinant can be expressed as a sum of products of its diagonals, which remains unchanged when rows and columns are interchanged. Discussions highlight the need to apply the definition of determinants consistently across different matrix sizes, particularly for 2x2 and 3x3 matrices. Participants suggest writing out the determinant expressions for both A and A^t to demonstrate their equality. Ultimately, a clear understanding of the determinant's properties and definitions is crucial for the proof.
hgj
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Okay, I need to prove that det(A^t) = det(A). I can see that it's true because I know columns and rows are interchangable (meaning you can use columns or rows when taking determinants), but I don't know how to prove this fact. Any help would be very appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hgj said:
Okay, I need to prove that det(A^t) = det(A). I can see that it's true because I know columns and rows are interchangable (meaning you can use columns or rows when taking determinants), but I don't know how to prove this fact. Any help would be very appreciated.
Well, a determinant of a matrix is the sum of the products of its diagonals minus the products of its antidiagonals. How do these products change under a transpose?
 
\det{A}=\sum_{i=1}^{m}\left(-1\right)^{i+j}a_{ij}\det{A_{ij}}

Do you see what happens when you try to prove det(AT)=det(A) for 2x2 or 3x3 matrices? Use the definition.

Edit: To the above poster: Doesn't that definition only work for 3x3 matrices?
 
Last edited:
JoAuSc: that's only for 3x3 matrices.

apmcavoy: I don't believe that formula helps, at least not in a straightforward manner.

hgj: what are you using as the definition of a determinant? And have you yet proven that the determinant is multiplicative?
 
If A is an nxn matrix, then
detA = a11det(A11) - a21*det(A21) + ... + (-1)^(n+1)*an1*det(An1)
(sorry, I don't know how to make things subscripts on this, so the 11, 21,...,n1 are supposed to be subscripts)

That's the definition we're using for a determinant.
 
hgj said:
If A is an nxn matrix, then
detA = a11det(A11) - a21*det(A21) + ... + (-1)^(n+1)*an1*det(An1)
(sorry, I don't know how to make things subscripts on this, so the 11, 21,...,n1 are supposed to be subscripts)

That's the definition we're using for a determinant.

Ok, that's the same thing I posted above. I suppose you could write it out like you did for both A and AT, and then rearrange and show they are equal.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top