Understanding proof about A(adj A) elements

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter CoolFool
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Elements Proof
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the theorem that states for any matrix A, the product A(adj A) results in a diagonal matrix where the diagonal elements are the determinant |A|, and all off-diagonal elements are zero. The proof involves understanding how the elements of A(adj A) are derived from the cofactors of A and the properties of determinants, particularly that a matrix with two identical rows has a determinant of zero. The confusion arises from the construction of a matrix B, which illustrates these properties but may seem disconnected from the original matrix A.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of matrix operations, specifically matrix multiplication.
  • Familiarity with determinants and their properties, particularly for square matrices.
  • Knowledge of cofactors and adjugate matrices in linear algebra.
  • Basic concepts of linear independence and row operations in matrices.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of adjugate matrices and their role in matrix multiplication.
  • Learn about determinants and their calculation methods for various matrix sizes.
  • Explore linear independence and its implications on determinants and matrix rank.
  • Investigate the relationship between matrix row operations and determinant values.
USEFUL FOR

Students of linear algebra, mathematicians, and educators looking to deepen their understanding of matrix theory and determinants.

CoolFool
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hey everyone,
I've been going thru a linear alg textbook and there's this one theorem I can't quite follow. It proves that the elements of A(adj A) are |A| if on the diagonal and are 0 if not. Therefore, A(adj A) = |A|I.

The first part shows that along the diagonal of this product A(adj A), the resulting elements are |A| because they are determined by multiplying the row vector of A by its corresponding cofactors of the corresponding column in adj A. This first part I understand, even if I didn't put it very clearly.

The main theorem is: for any matrix A, \sum^{n}_{k=1}a_{tk}c_{ik} = \delta_{ti}|A|, where \delta_{ti} is 1 if t = i, and 0 otherwise.

As an example, a 3x3 matrix B is constructed by replacing the second row vector of A with any of A's row vectors, including its second row vector. If the second row vector is replaced with itself, B=A and so if you multiply that row by its corresponding column of adj A, you get |A|, which we already know.

So far I follow, though constructing B as an example seems awkward. But the next step confuses me. Now, we have to prove that the elements not on the diagonal are equal to zero. The example is that if B's second row is replaced with another row, B has two identical rows and you can subtract one from the other and get a zero row vector, which means that |B| = 0. The rule where a matrix with 2 identical rows has a determinant of zero makes sense to me, but I don't get why the construction of B has anything to do with A(adj A). That's what throws me off: I don't understand the connection between this product and B.

What am I missing? I feel like it's right in front of me but I can't see it!
Thanks for your help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Suppose we want to calculate the element at place ij in A(adj A), with i =/= j. Then, we take the scalar product of row i in A and column j in adj A. The latter column consists of the cofactors of the elements of row j in A. But if we take the scalar product of a row with the cofactors of another row in the same matrix, the result is 0, as you said you understand. Thus, the desired element in A(adj A) is 0.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
6K