Proof on det(AB) = det(A)*det(B)

  • Thread starter Thread starter unscientific
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the relationship det(AB) = det(A)det(B) for nxn matrices A and B. Participants are exploring various approaches to understand and demonstrate this property of determinants.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to express the columns of the product matrix AB in terms of the columns of matrix A. There are suggestions to utilize definitions of determinants and elementary matrices for a clearer proof. Some participants are questioning how to relate the coefficients in the linear combinations to the elements of matrix B.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants sharing insights and hints to guide each other. Some have successfully expressed columns of AB as linear combinations of A's columns, while others are still grappling with the implications of this representation. There is no explicit consensus yet, but productive directions are being explored.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of linear combinations and determinants, with references to previous problems that may influence their understanding. There is mention of constraints related to the dimensionality of the matrices involved.

unscientific
Messages
1,728
Reaction score
13

Homework Statement



Let A and B be nxn matrices, show that det(A)=det(A)det(B).

determinant_product.png




Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



determinant_product2.png


I'm not sure how to express each column as a linear combination of vectors purely from A, or even from B. It's more of the dot product form: aT°b
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think you should tell us what your "general definition of the determinant" is. It's probably easiest to go directly from there.
 
Dick said:
I think you should tell us what your "general definition of the determinant" is. It's probably easiest to go directly from there.

But i think we should first express the columns of matrix AB in terms of the columns of matrix A? (I'm not sure where B comes in) then somehow show that it is a linear combination, then make use of result 13. Then I think result 14 comes in when you get something that is just jumbled up, which simply gives det (AB) = sgn(P)*det(A)*det(B)

det(A) = Ʃ sgn(P) AP(1)1AP(2)2...
 
bumpp
 
As you noted, the first column of AB is
$$\begin{pmatrix}
\sum_{k=1}^n a_{1k}b_{k1} \\
\sum_{k=1}^n a_{2k}b_{k1} \\
\vdots \\
\sum_{k=1}^n a_{nk}b_{k1}
\end{pmatrix} =
\begin{pmatrix}
a_{11}b_{11} + a_{12}b_{21} + a_{13}b_{31} + \cdots + a_{1n}b_{n1} \\
a_{21}b_{11} + a_{22}b_{21} + a_{23}b_{31} + \cdots + a_{2n}b_{n1} \\
\vdots \\
a_{n1}b_{11} + a_{n2}b_{21} + a_{n3}b_{31} + \cdots + a_{nn}b_{n1}
\end{pmatrix}.$$ Express that in the form ##c_1\vec{a}_1 + c_2\vec{a}_2 + \cdots + c_n\vec{a}_n## where ##\vec{a}_k## is the kth column of A. How are the ##c_i##'s related to the elements of B?
 
vela said:
As you noted, the first column of AB is
$$\begin{pmatrix}
\sum_{k=1}^n a_{1k}b_{k1} \\
\sum_{k=1}^n a_{2k}b_{k1} \\
\vdots \\
\sum_{k=1}^n a_{nk}b_{k1}
\end{pmatrix} =
\begin{pmatrix}
a_{11}b_{11} + a_{12}b_{21} + a_{13}b_{31} + \cdots + a_{1n}b_{n1} \\
a_{21}b_{11} + a_{22}b_{21} + a_{23}b_{31} + \cdots + a_{2n}b_{n1} \\
\vdots \\
a_{n1}b_{11} + a_{n2}b_{21} + a_{n3}b_{31} + \cdots + a_{nn}b_{n1}
\end{pmatrix}.$$ Express that in the form ##c_1\vec{a}_1 + c_2\vec{a}_2 + \cdots + c_n\vec{a}_n## where ##\vec{a}_k## is the kth column of A. How are the ##c_i##'s related to the elements of B?

So, the first column of AB = b11##\vec{a}_1## + b21##\vec{a}_2## + ... + bn1##\vec{a}_n##

kth-column = b1k##\vec{a}_1## + b2k##\vec{a}_2## + ... + bnk##\vec{a}_n##

I'm just not used to the idea of having "columns within a column", it sort of makes it more than nxn-dimensional.

Also, the earlier problem of

det(A) = λdet(B) + μdet(C)

only had one "special column" in matrix B and C that had a coefficient, while the rest were simply ##\vec{a}_1, \vec{a}_2, ... \vec{a}_n##
 
Last edited:
Good! So you've done what the first part of the hint suggested, expressing the columns of AB as linear combinations of the columns of A. Now just follow through with the rest of the hint.
 
vela said:
Good! So you've done what the first part of the hint suggested, expressing the columns of AB as linear combinations of the columns of A. Now just follow through with the rest of the hint.

Also, the earlier problem of

det(A) = λdet(B) + μdet(C)

only had one "special column" in matrix B and C that had a coefficient, while the rest were simply ##\vec{a}_1, \vec{a}_2, ... \vec{a}_n##

while in the new form, it's literally in every column.
 
  • #10
I think I got it:

We can simply rearrange the columns of matrix AB so as to separate them into the vectors ##\vec{a}_1, \vec{a}_2, \vec{a}_3 ...## and by result of problem 14, that's not going to change the absolute value of the determinant.

That would solve the dimensional crisis.

24mrcwi.png

Explanation why the product of b's = det(B)

2hp25ns.png


Consider the kth bracket, any permutation within that bracket is equivalent to a permutation of Q(k).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
8K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K