Solve matrix equation without the inverses.

  • Thread starter Thread starter rapuy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matrix
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around solving a matrix equation involving nxn matrices A, B, and C, where B and C are nonsingular, and an n-vector b. The original poster seeks to implement a formula for x without computing any matrix inverses, specifically questioning the existence of an identity for (2A + I)^{-1} that avoids the use of inverses.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the manipulation of the equation x = B^{-1} (2A + I) (C^{-1} + A)b, attempting to express it in alternative forms. There is a focus on whether (2A + I)^{-1} exists and how to handle the term C^{-1} without directly computing it.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants sharing various attempts to rearrange the equation and questioning the validity of certain steps, such as postmultiplying by C. There is no explicit consensus, but multiple interpretations and approaches are being explored.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the potential issue of the existence of (2A + I)^{-1} and the implications of manipulating the equation without inverses. The constraints of the problem, including the requirement to avoid matrix inverses, are central to the discussion.

rapuy
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



If A, B, and C are nxn matrices, with B and C nonsingular, and b is an n-vector, how would you implement the formula
x = B[tex]^{-1}[/tex] (2A + I) (C[tex]^{-1}[/tex] + A)b

without computing any matrix inverses?

Homework Equations



Is there any identity for (2A+I)[tex]^{-1}[/tex] that is expressed without the inverse?

The Attempt at a Solution



x = B[tex]^{-1}[/tex] (2A + I) (C[tex]^{-1}[/tex] + A)b
Bx = (2A + I)(C[tex]^{-1}[/tex] + A)b

(2A + I)[tex]^{-1}[/tex]Bx = C[tex]^{-1}[/tex]b + Ab

If (2A+I)[tex]^{-1}[/tex] is expressed without the inverse, I would have proceeded as follows:

(2A + I)[tex]^{-1}[/tex]Bx - Ab = C[tex]^{-1}[/tex]b
C[(2A + I)[tex]^{-1}[/tex]Bx - Ab] = CC[tex]^{-1}[/tex]b
C[(2A + I)[tex]^{-1}[/tex]Bx - Ab] = b
C(2A + I)[tex]^{-1}[/tex]Bx - CAb = b
C(2A + I)[tex]^{-1}[/tex]Bx = (CA+I)b
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can not be sure (2A + I)-1 exists!

I would try to write it in the form ( . . . )(x - b) = 0.
 
Ah , I see.

Here's another try:

x = B[tex]^{-1}[/tex](2A + I) (C[tex]^{-1}[/tex] + A)b
Bx = (2A + I)(C[tex]^{-1}[/tex]+ A)b
Bx = (2A + I)C[tex]^{-1}[/tex]b + (2A + I)Ab
Bx - (2A + I)Ab = (2A + I)C[tex]^{-1}[/tex]b

From here, I don't know how to get rid of C[tex]^{-1}[/tex]. Is it ok to postmultiply the matrices, with C?
 
As a continuation of the above solution, is it ok if I do the postmultiplication before the vector b with C on both sides?

Bx - (2A + I)Ab = (2A + I)C[tex]^{-1}[/tex]b

==>

[Bx - (2A + I)Ab] C = (2A + I)C[tex]^{-1}[/tex]C b
BCx - (2A + I)AC b = (2A + I) b
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K