Putnam problem on matrices + invertibility

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mr Davis 97
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matrices
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
12 replies · 2K views
Mr Davis 97
Messages
1,461
Reaction score
44

Homework Statement


Let ##A## and ##B## be different ##n \times n## with real entries. If ##A^3 = B^3## and ##A^2 B = B^2 A##, can ##A^2 + B^2## be invertible?

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


So, first of all I am just trying to interpret the question correctly. Does "can ##A^2 + B^2## be invertible" mean "does there exist distinct matrices A and B such that ##A^2+B^2## is invertible" or does it mean "prove that ##A^2 + B^2## is invertible for all A and B"?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Mr Davis 97 said:

Homework Statement


Let ##A## and ##B## be different ##n \times n## with real entries. If ##A^3 = B^3## and ##A^2 B = B^2 A##, can ##A^2 + B^2## be invertible?

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


So, first of all I am just trying to interpret the question correctly. Does "can ##A^2 + B^2## be invertible" mean "does there exist distinct matrices A and B such that ##A^2+B^2## is invertible" or does it mean "prove that ##A^2 + B^2## is invertible for all A and B"?
It means, prove or disprove that ##C:=A^2+B^2## is invertible for all matrices ##A## and ##B## which satisfy the conditions ##A^3=B^3## and ##A^2B=B^2A##.

So either ##C## is never invertible, or we have to find a case, i.e. certain matrices ##A## and ##B## with these conditions, that make ##C## regular. Since this looks not quite easy, I assume the conditions on ##A## and ##B## force ##C## to be not invertible.

Correction: What if ##A## and ##B## are diagonal matrices?
 
fresh_42 said:
It means, prove or disprove that ##C:=A^2+B^2## is invertible for all matrices ##A## and ##B## which satisfy the conditions ##A^3=B^3## and ##A^2B=B^2A##.

So either ##C## is never invertible, or we have to find a case, i.e. certain matrices ##A## and ##B## with these conditions, that make ##C## regular. Since this looks not quite easy, I assume the conditions on ##A## and ##B## force ##C## to be not invertible.

Correction: What if ##A## and ##B## are diagonal matrices?
If A and B were diagonal, and if ##A^3 = B^3##, wouldn't that imply that ##A = B##, which violates the condition that ##A \neq B##?
 
fresh_42 said:
Oh, I missed this little word different. You should have written it ##A\neq B## in the first place. :wink:
Sorry, I just pasted the question word-for-word.

So as of right now should I be trying to show that ##\det(A^2 + B^2) = 0##, given the conditions?
 
Mr Davis 97 said:
Sorry, I just pasted the question word-for-word.

So as of right now should I be trying to show that ##\det(A^2 + B^2) = 0##, given the conditions?
No sorry, that was a joke. I once said: "I'm a guy, you have to shout!"

Anyway, it's far easier than that. What is ##(A^2+B^2)\cdot A## ?
 
fresh_42 said:
No sorry, that was a joke. I once said: "I'm a guy, you have to shout!"

Anyway, it's far easier than that. What is ##(A^2+B^2)\cdot A## ?
Well, ##(A^2 + B^2)A = A^3 + B^2 A = A^3 + A^2 B = A^2 (A+B)## or ##A^3 + B^2 A = B^3 + A^2 B = (A^2 + B^2)B##, but I don't see where any of those two expressions get me. What exactly am I trying to show, if I am not trying to show that ##\det (A^2 + B^2) = 0##? That ##\det (A^2 + B^2) \neq 0##
 
fresh_42 said:
You have ##(A^2+B^2)A=(A^2+B^2)B##. Why do you stop here? Write it with ##C=A^2+B^2## if this is easier. I don't think that you have a chance to get your hands on the determinant and if, certainly not the easy way.
So... we have CA = CB. If C were invertible, then A = B, which is a contradiction. Hence C is not invertible. Is that right?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: fresh_42
Mr Davis 97 said:
So... we have CA = CB. If C were invertible, then A = B, which is a contradiction. Hence C is not invertible. Is that right?
Yes. It's even shorter than mine. I wrote ##(A^2+B^2)(A-B) = C(A-B)=0## and with ##A \neq B## we have an element in the image of ##A-B## which is not zero, and thus has to be in the kernel of ##C=A^2+B^2##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Mr Davis 97
fresh_42 said:
Yes. It's even shorter than mine. I wrote ##(A^2+B^2)(A-B) = C(A-B)=0## and with ##A \neq B## we have an element in the image of ##A-B## which is not zero, and thus has to be in the kernel of ##C=A^2+B^2##.
So what got me stuck was that I was convinced that I should have been trying to prove something with determinants. How did you know that determinants wouldn't be involved? If I knew beforehand that using determinants would be futile, I could have gotten the answer quite easily.
 
Mr Davis 97 said:
So what got me stuck was that I was convinced that I should have been trying to prove something with determinants. How did you know that determinants wouldn't be involved? If I knew beforehand that using determinants would be futile, I could have gotten the answer quite easily.
We both used ##A \neq B## and as you have mentioned as answer to my suggestion of diagonal matrices, it's really necessary. But if we apply the determinant, e.g. on ##C(A-B)=0## we get ##\det C = 0## or ##\det (A-B) = 0##. But how can we exclude the second case? The determinant can well be zero without the matrices being equal. The same goes for your equation ##CA=CB## and then ##\det A = \det B##. The determinant "destroys" some properties in the sense that it makes some different matrices indistinguishable. As we now know that ##A^2+B^2## cannot be regular, there might be a way to operate with determinants, I just don't see one and the multiplication ##(A^2+B^2)A## was too tempting. I probably did too many calculations in groups in my life, so it became somehow natural to play with them as I saw the commutation conditions given.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Mr Davis 97
Mr Davis 97 said:
So what got me stuck was that I was convinced that I should have been trying to prove something with determinants. How did you know that determinants wouldn't be involved? If I knew beforehand that using determinants would be futile, I could have gotten the answer quite easily.

Usually we try to avoid determinants of sums, so try to stay away from things like ##\det(A+B)##. If you look at the horrible formulas for the determinant of a sum, you will see why.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Mr Davis 97 and fresh_42