The Determinant of a Matrix of Matrices

EngWiPy
Messages
1,361
Reaction score
61
Hi,

Suppose we have the following matrix:

\begin{center}\begin{pmatrix}\mathbf{L}&\mathbf{A}^T\\\mathbf{A}&\mathbf{0}\end{pmatrix}\end{center}

where L is n-by-n matrix, A is m-by-n matrix. How to find the determinant of this square matrix?

Thanks in advance
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
det(-AA')
 
Some Pig said:
det(-AA')

Thank you for replying, but can you elaborate more, please?
 
Terms containing elements of L will contains zeroes,
so terms only containing elements of A and A'.
The negative sign indicates orders of the elements.
 
Some Pig said:
Terms containing elements of L will contains zeroes...

Why is that?
 
Some Pig said:
det(-AA')

This is wrong.

Counterexample:

L = \begin{pmatrix} 2 &amp; 0 \cr 0 &amp; 2 \end{pmatrix} \quad <br /> A = \begin{pmatrix} 1 \cr 0\end{pmatrix}

Working out the 3x3 determinant shows the mistake in the "proof" that it was right. The only non-zero product in the determinant does contain an element of L.

I don't think there is any "simple" formula for this.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Back
Top