Proving Matrix Expressions: AX = XA

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving the matrix expression AX = XA for all matrices A in Mat_{n,n} over a field F, contingent upon the existence of a scalar s in F. Participants clarify that the original query lacked context regarding the variable s, which is essential for the proof. The confusion arose from a potential typographical error in the initial post, leading to misinterpretations of the matrix expression involved.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of matrix algebra and properties of matrices.
  • Familiarity with the notation and operations in Mat_{n,n} over a field F.
  • Knowledge of scalar multiplication in the context of matrices.
  • Basic concepts of linear transformations and commutativity in matrix operations.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of commutative matrices in linear algebra.
  • Explore the implications of scalar multiplication in matrix equations.
  • Learn about the role of eigenvalues and eigenvectors in matrix expressions.
  • Investigate the conditions under which matrices commute in Mat_{n,n}.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of linear algebra, and anyone interested in the properties of matrix operations and their proofs.

Mathman23
Messages
248
Reaction score
0
Hi

I got a question regarding a matrix expression:

Let X \in Mat_{n,n} (\mathbf{F}). Then I'm suppose to show AX = XA for all A \in Mat_{n,n} \mathbf{(F)} if and only if s \in \mathbf{F}

What is the best way of going about this?

/Fred
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Did you miswrite something? What matrix expression?
 
No, It is correctly typed.

/Fred

HallsofIvy said:
Did you miswrite something? What matrix expression?
 
You did mistype something. s appears in the last three symbols and nowhere before, and the X vanishes from the question.
 
Last edited:
When I first looked at it there was no matrix expression! May have been the server was slow in loading the LATEX. However, as Matt said, "if and only if s \in \mathbf{F} makes no sense as there is no "s" in the hypothesis.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K