Solving Systems of Equations: Cramer's Rule vs Standard Method

  • Thread starter Thread starter FrankJ777
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cramer's rule
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the comparison between Cramer's Rule and the standard method of solving systems of equations, specifically the Ax=b approach using matrix inversion. The standard method is favored for its straightforwardness and convenience, while Cramer's Rule is questioned for its applicability and efficiency. The consensus indicates that Cramer's Rule is less practical for larger systems due to its computational complexity, but it can be useful for theoretical understanding and specific cases where determinants are easily calculated.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of linear algebra concepts, specifically systems of equations
  • Familiarity with matrix operations, including inversion
  • Knowledge of determinants and their role in Cramer's Rule
  • Basic proficiency in mathematical notation and terminology
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the computational complexity of Cramer's Rule versus matrix inversion methods
  • Learn about the applications of determinants in solving linear systems
  • Explore numerical methods for solving large systems of equations
  • Investigate alternative methods such as Gaussian elimination and their efficiencies
USEFUL FOR

Students in mathematics or engineering fields, particularly those studying linear algebra or circuits, as well as educators seeking to clarify the differences between solving methods for systems of equations.

FrankJ777
Messages
140
Reaction score
6
I'm taking a circuits class, and my instructor suggests using Cramer's rule to solve systems of equations. I've just been using the standard method of Ax=b, A^{-1}b=x, where invert the A matrix and multiply it by the b vector. It seems more straight forward and is of course much more convenient than using Cramer's rule. Is there any reason to use one method over the other. Can Cramer's rule solve some systems that the other method can't? I'm just curious and want to make sure I'm not missing anything.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
check wikipedia page. It is stated clearly.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K