Shortcut method for order 4 and above.

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter median27
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Method
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the search for shortcut methods for solving simultaneous equations represented by matrices of order 4 and above. Participants explore alternatives to traditional methods like Gaussian elimination and Gauss-Jordan elimination, particularly in the context of manual calculations in advanced engineering mathematics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Debate/contested, Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant inquires about simplified techniques for solving larger matrices, expressing frustration with the time taken and accuracy of traditional methods.
  • Another participant mentions that Cramer's rule is theoretically applicable but inefficient for larger matrices, suggesting Gaussian elimination as the most efficient method.
  • A different viewpoint argues that while Gaussian elimination is effective, iterative methods may provide quicker approximate solutions for larger matrices.
  • One participant shares their experience with manual calculations and describes a method of reducing higher-order matrices by eliminating variables one at a time, although they report inconsistencies in their results.
  • Another participant acknowledges the proposed reducing method but cautions about the increased risk of arithmetic errors and suggests sticking with Gauss-Jordan elimination for reliability.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing opinions on the efficiency and practicality of various methods for solving larger matrices. There is no consensus on the effectiveness of the proposed reducing method, with some supporting its potential while others recommend established techniques.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the limitations of manual calculations and the potential for arithmetic errors when employing non-standard methods. The discussion highlights the challenges of solving larger systems without computational tools.

median27
Messages
58
Reaction score
0
Is there shortcut methods for the solution of simultaneous equations when the given matrix is of order 4 and above? A more simplified technique other than Gaussian elimination and gauss-jordan method. Because when i solve orders ranging from 4 to 6, it takes me some time to finish it (30 mins and up) and barely get the right answers.

Thanks for your help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Cramer's rule works for any size matrices, but it's tedious. Gaussian elimination is usually the most efficient.
 
Cramer's rule is hopelessly inefficient compared with Gaussian elimination and gets even more inefficient as the matrix order increases.

It is an important theoretical result, but no practical use for numerical work.

Unless your matrix has some special properties that you can use, Gaussian elimination is as good as it gets to find an "exact" solution. For larger matrices there are iterative methods which will can be much quicker to find an approximate numerical solution.

But in "real" life nobody would ever solve a 4x4 system of equation by hand. That's what computers are for - or even programmable calculators, for systems as small as 4x4.
 
I'm on my advanced engineering mathematics subject and we are practiced to perform the calculations manually. My calculator can do the calculation but it only allows 3x3 matrices and can only be used for checking (for our professor required us to include the solution).

I've been experimenting on reducing higher ordered matrices (for fast and accurate solving) and came up with eliminating one variable at a time and substituting it to the remaining equations until it ends up with a 3x3 matrix (or atleast 2x2) then solve it by gauss jordan. But when i did the checking, my answer is not consistent for the rest of the equations other than the first one. But sometimes, it gives the correct answer.

Do you find my reducing method applicable (and only needs to be polished) or not?
 
median27 said:
Do you find my reducing method applicable (and only needs to be polished) or not?

You can do this (assuming that there exists a unique solution), but the chance for making arithmetic errors goes up, and you need to keep refining your matrix everytime you do this. I would stick with Gauss-Jordan elimination.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K