MHB Proving A is Zero Matrix if B is Invertible & Same Size as A

  • Thread starter Thread starter blueman11
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matrix Zero
blueman11
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Show that if A and B are square matrices of the same size such that B is an
invertible matrix, then A must be a zero matrix.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
blueman11 said:
Show that if A and B are square matrices of the same size such that B is an
invertible matrix, then A must be a zero matrix.
We need information about how A and B are related. ie. AB = 0 or something.

-Dan
 
Thread 'Determine whether ##125## is a unit in ##\mathbb{Z_471}##'

Thread 'Determine whether ##125## is a unit in ##\mathbb{Z_471}##'

This is the question, I understand the concept, in ##\mathbb{Z_n}## an element is a is a unit if and only if gcd( a,n) =1. My understanding of backwards substitution, ... i have using Euclidean algorithm, ##471 = 3⋅121 + 108## ##121 = 1⋅108 + 13## ##108 =8⋅13+4## ##13=3⋅4+1## ##4=4⋅1+0## using back-substitution, ##1=13-3⋅4## ##=(121-1⋅108)-3(108-8⋅13)## ... ##= 121-(471-3⋅121)-3⋅471+9⋅121+24⋅121-24(471-3⋅121## ##=121-471+3⋅121-3⋅471+9⋅121+24⋅121-24⋅471+72⋅121##...
View full post »

Thread 'Trouble understanding an online solution to an exercise in Dummit & Foote'

##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
View full post »

Thread 'Questions about non existence of GCDs vs (coimages, cokernels)'

The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
View full post »

Similar threads

MHB 5.3 Show that a square matrix with a zero row is not invertible.
Replies
3
Views
2K
I Invertible Matrix Proof: A-Transpose * M * A (n by m)
Replies
11
Views
2K
MHB Proving Properties of 2x2 Matrices
Replies
5
Views
2K
MHB Proving or disproving this matrix V is invertible.
Replies
1
Views
1K
I Congruence for Symmetric and non-Symmetric Matrices for Quadratic Form
Replies
7
Views
2K
I Spectral theorem for Hermitian matrices-- special cases
Replies
2
Views
3K
How do you invert a 3D matrix? (Tensor inversion)
Replies
2
Views
2K
I Can one find a matrix that's 'unique' to a collection of eigenvectors?
Replies
33
Views
680
A Trace of the inverse of matrix products
Replies
2
Views
2K
MHB Check the statements about a 4x5 matrix with rank 2.
Replies
9
Views
5K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top