Linear Algebra Proof: Rank and Zero Matrix

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving that if rank(A) = d for a c x d matrix A and the product AB = 0 for a d x k matrix B, then B must equal the zero matrix. The proof relies on the properties of matrix rank and row echelon form. It is established that since A is not the zero matrix and the multiplication results in a zero matrix, the only solution for B is the zero matrix. Misunderstandings arise regarding the dimensions of B and the implications of matrix multiplication.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of matrix rank and its implications
  • Familiarity with row echelon form of matrices
  • Knowledge of matrix multiplication rules
  • Basic concepts of linear algebra proofs
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of matrix rank in detail
  • Learn about row echelon form and its applications in linear algebra
  • Explore examples of matrix multiplication leading to zero matrices
  • Review linear algebra proof techniques and common pitfalls
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in linear algebra, particularly those tackling proofs involving matrix properties and operations. This discussion is beneficial for anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of matrix rank and its implications in linear transformations.

jumbogala
Messages
414
Reaction score
4

Homework Statement


A is an c x d matrix. B is a d x k matrix.

If rank(A) = d and AB = 0, show that B = 0.

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution


My textbook has a solution but I don't understand it:

The rank of A is d, therefore A is not the zero matrix. (I asked my prof why d can't be equal to zero, he said it just couldn't...?)

If you left multiply A by some elementary matrix to bring it to row echelon form, you get a matrix that looks like:
[ 1 * * * ... *
0 1 * * ... *
0 0 1 * ... *
0 0 0 0 ... 0] (NOTE: * are arbitrary numbers)

And we will write B as a column (1 x k), consisting of [B1, ... , Bd]T

Multiply A and B together, and you get a column that looks like [R1, R2, ... 0, 0, 0]T

For AB = 0, then Ri = 0. Then since A is not zero, B is 0.

This proof seems to make no sense. Why are we writing B as 1 x k? It says in the question B is d x k! Also if A is not zero then why can't you say right off the bat that AB = 0 implies B =0?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jumbogala said:
Also if A is not zero then why can't you say right off the bat that AB = 0 implies B =0?

because these are matrices not numbers. for example
Code:
A= [0 1
   0 0]B=[1 0 
   0 0]
AB=0 yet neither A or B are 0.as to why they say 'write B as 1xk', maybe they mean write Bv (i.e. B times an arbitrary vector) as a 1xk?
 
Last edited:
But when A is in row echelon form and you multiply it by some B, the because the solutions are zero the entries of B must be zero??
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K