Solve nxn Determinant Homework

  • Thread starter Thread starter cdummie
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Determinant
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around solving the determinant of a specific nxn matrix. An initial approach involved manipulating the last row and adding it to others, leading to a proposed solution of D_n=(-1)^{(n(n+1))/2}. However, this was challenged, emphasizing that adding a multiple of one column to another does not change the determinant, and that exchanging columns alters the sign of the determinant. The correct method involves recognizing the resulting triangular matrix with 1's on the diagonal after appropriate column exchanges, which introduces a factor of (-1) raised to the number of transpositions. Ultimately, the correct determinant can be computed from the transformed matrix, highlighting the importance of careful manipulation in determinant calculations.
cdummie
Messages
147
Reaction score
5

Homework Statement


I have to solve the following determinant
## D_n=\begin{vmatrix} 1 & 1 & 1 & \cdots & 1 & 1 & 1 \\ 1 & 1 & 1 & \cdots & 1 & 2 & 1 \\ 1 & 1 & 1 & \cdots & 2 & 1 & 1 \\ \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots \\ 1 & 2 & 1 & \cdots & 1 & 1 & 1 \\ 1 & 1 & 1 & \cdots & 1 & 1 & 0 \end{vmatrix} ##

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


So my idea was to multiply the last row by -1 and add it to every other row, that way, i had the following determinant:
##D_n= \begin{vmatrix} 0 & 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 1 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & \cdots & 1 & 0 & 1 \\ \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots \\ 0 & 1 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0 & 1 \\ 1 & 1 & 1 & \cdots & 1 & 1 & 0 \end{vmatrix} ##

So i have determinant with all zeros above diagonal, so solution to this should be product of all elements of diagonal (i should keep in mind that sign changes since this isn't "regular" diagonal), so i ended up with: ## D_n=(-1)^{\frac{n(n+1)}{2}} ##. Is this correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't think you are correct. Unless I'm wrong ##D_3 = -1##, but with your answer you get 1.
You don't change the determinant by adding to a column a multiple of another column, and you multiply the determinant by ##-1## by exchanging 2 columns. So after your transformation, you exchange columns ##(i,n+1-i)## for ##i = 1...\lfloor n/2 \rfloor## so that you have the determinant of a diagonal (EDIT: TRIANGULAR sorry) matrix that has only 1's on the diagonal, and ##\lfloor n/2 \rfloor## transpositions.
 
Last edited:
geoffrey159 said:
So after your transformation, you exchange columns ##(i,n+1-i)## for ##i = 1...\lfloor n/2 \rfloor## so that you have the determinant of a diagonal matrix that has only 1's on the diagonal, and ##\lfloor n/2 \rfloor## transpositions.
I don't understand what you mean, could you explain me this part?
 
In your attempt to a solution, you wrote

##D_n= \det(C_1,...,C_n) = \begin{vmatrix} 0 & 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 1 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & \cdots & 1 & 0 & 1 \\ \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots \\ 0 & 1 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0 & 1 \\ 1 & 1 & 1 & \cdots & 1 & 1 & 0 \end{vmatrix} ##

Now each time you exchange two columns, you multiply the determinant by -1. So that by permuting columns ##i## and ##n+1 - i## for all ##i = 1... \lfloor n/2 \rfloor##, you get

##D_n = (-1) ^ {\lfloor n/2 \rfloor } \det(C_n,C_{n-1},...,C_1) ##

and ## \det(C_n,C_{n-1},...,C_1) ## is very easy to compute.
 
  • Like
Likes cdummie

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K