Minimum Absolute Value of a nxn Matrix Determinant

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on finding the minimum absolute value of the determinant of an n by n matrix filled with the numbers 1 to n^2, each appearing exactly once. Participants clarify that the matrix entries consist of all integers from 1 to n^2. For a 2x2 matrix, various arrangements are explored, yielding different determinant values. A strategy is suggested for larger matrices, involving placing the largest numbers along the main diagonal and smaller numbers in off-diagonal positions. The conclusion states that for n ≥ 3, the minimum absolute value of the determinant is 0.
skymariner
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
The following matrix problem occurred to me. I figured out the answer and would like to pose the problem. It's easy but would be best for an undergrad math major. The question: Consider a square n by n matrix with entries 1, 2, ..., n squared. Find a way to arrange these entries so that the absolute value of the determinate of this matrix is a minimum.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
"a square n by n matrix with entries 1, 2, ..., n squared"

could you explain this a little better? Do you mean that the matrix have entries 1,2,3,...,n^2, and do all appear and only once?
 
Yes, the entries consist of all the numbers 1 to n^2 and each number occurs only once.
 
Let's see it for a 2x2 matrix. Since a transposition of rows and columns does not change the value of the matrix, and a transposition of row or columns changes the sign, it is sufficient to consider how many different rows we can form. For a 2x2 matrix, we can form the first row in 3 ways (pairing one fixed element with the other 3 elements) and the second row can be formed in the 2 possible permutations of the remaining elements, so 3x2 = 6 possible determinants. Here they are:
<br /> \left|\begin{array}{cc}<br /> 1 &amp; 2 \\<br /> <br /> 3 &amp; 4<br /> \end{array}\right| = 4 - 6 = -2<br />

<br /> \left|\begin{array}{cc}<br /> 1 &amp; 2 \\<br /> <br /> 4 &amp; 3<br /> \end{array}\right| = 3 - 8 = -5<br />

<br /> \left|\begin{array}{cc}<br /> 1 &amp; 3 \\<br /> <br /> 2 &amp; 4<br /> \end{array}\right| = 4 - 6 = -2<br />

<br /> \left|\begin{array}{cc}<br /> 1 &amp; 3 \\<br /> <br /> 4 &amp; 2<br /> \end{array}\right| = 2 - 12 = -10<br />

<br /> \left|\begin{array}{cc}<br /> 1 &amp; 4 \\<br /> <br /> 2 &amp; 3<br /> \end{array}\right| = 3 - 8 = -5<br />

<br /> \left|\begin{array}{cc}<br /> 1 &amp; 4 \\<br /> <br /> 3 &amp; 2<br /> \end{array}\right| = 2 - 12 = -10<br />

I don't see how to generalize it at this point. I would think we need to add the biggest numbers n^{2}, (n - 1)^{2}, \ldots, n^{2} - n +1 along the main diagonal, then the next along the third to the main diagonal and start inserting the smallest elements along the odd diagonals.
 
I don't want to spoil other people's fun with this so I'll give the answer without a proof:
When n >= 3, the minimum absolute value of the determinant is 0.
 
Here is a little puzzle from the book 100 Geometric Games by Pierre Berloquin. The side of a small square is one meter long and the side of a larger square one and a half meters long. One vertex of the large square is at the center of the small square. The side of the large square cuts two sides of the small square into one- third parts and two-thirds parts. What is the area where the squares overlap?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K