Proving an exhausting relation in Algebra.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tomer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Algebra Relation
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving the derivative of a determinant function, specifically F'(x) = ∑k=1ndet(Ak), where Ak is derived from matrix A by replacing the k'th row with the derivatives of the functions in that row. The user, Tomer, initially attempts to use mathematical induction to prove this relationship but struggles with the complexity of the indices. An alternative approach using the definition of the determinant is suggested, highlighting the importance of the sign element in the determinant expansion.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of matrix determinants and properties
  • Familiarity with the concept of derivatives in calculus
  • Knowledge of mathematical induction techniques
  • Experience with sigma notation and permutations in algebra
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of determinants in linear algebra
  • Learn about the application of mathematical induction in proofs
  • Explore the definition of determinants using permutations and the sign function
  • Investigate advanced topics in multivariable calculus related to matrix derivatives
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in mathematics, particularly those focused on algebra and calculus, as well as anyone involved in theoretical proofs involving determinants and derivatives.

Tomer
Messages
198
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Hello, thanks for reading.

So, here's the problem. I'm given n2 functions fij(x), and the matrix A = (fij)
I get the definition of a new function: F(x) = detA

I need to prove, that F'(x) = \sum^{n}_{k=1}det(A_{k})
Where Ak is a matrix identical to A, with only the k'th row being replaces with the row of the derivatives of the functions on the k'th row of A (bothersome!)

Homework Equations



Other than the expansion formula for a determinate I can't think of any.

The Attempt at a Solution



Seeing no other choice, I've tried proving this with induction. The problem is, I get lost in a maze of indexes and cannot seem to prove it.

for n=2 it's easy to show.
I assume it holds for n-1 and want to prove it for n.

That's as far as I got:

Here A^{ij} is the minor of A at ij.

F'(x) = (detA)' = (\sum_{k=1}^{n}f_{k1}detA^{k1})' = \sum_{k=1}^{n}[f'_{k1}detA^{k1} + f_{k1}(detA^{k1})']

Now if we use the notation Fij(x) = det(A^{ij}), we get according to the induction assumtion:

= \sum_{k=1}^{n}[f'_{k1}detA^{k1} + f_{k1}\sum_{k=1}^{n}detA_{k}^{k1}]

And that's where I've pretty much given up. I doubt I'm on the right track.

Does anyone see a way out?

Thanks a lot! Tomer
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What about proving it with the definition of the determinant:

\det(A)=\sum_{\sigma\in S_n}{sgn(\sigma)f_{1,\sigma(1)}f_{2,\sigma(2)}...f_{n,\sigma(n)}}

This should be a lot easier...
 
I now realize I forgot the "sign" element in the expansion of the determinate above (how terribly bothersome!).

What is this "sigma" notation?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K