Using Cramer's rule to solve linear equations with complex coefficients?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the application of Cramer's rule to solve linear equations that include complex coefficients. Participants explore how to incorporate complex numbers into the matrix entries and the implications for solving the equations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant inquires whether complex coefficients can be directly used as matrix entries in Cramer's rule, providing an example of a system of equations with complex numbers.
  • Another participant confirms that it is indeed straightforward to use complex numbers as elements in the determinants calculated for Cramer's rule.
  • A third participant elaborates on the mathematical framework of Cramer's rule, explaining the role of the adjoint matrix and determinants, noting that complex numbers can be included in the entries.
  • A follow-up post discusses the limitations of Cramer's rule, indicating that while not every equation can be solved, it is possible to find a vector that relates to the solution through the determinant.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the applicability of Cramer's rule to complex coefficients, but there is no consensus on the broader implications or limitations of solving equations using this method.

Contextual Notes

Some participants mention that not all equations can be solved using Cramer's rule, and there are conditions under which solutions may only yield vectors along a specific line rather than exact solutions.

Noone1982
Messages
82
Reaction score
0
Howdy,

I got down Cramer's rule down fine, now I need to extend it to include equations that have complex coefficients. Do I let each matrix entry be something like, "5 + 2i" or is there something more than that?

For example,

say we have

(2+3i)x + (5+3i)y + (9-6i)z = 10 + i
(4+3i)x + (5-3i)y + (9-6i)z = 5 + i
(6+2i)x + (4+3i)y + (5+6i)z = 10 + 2i

Perhaps I let each entry be just the coefficient infront of x, y and z?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You got it: it's that simple. Just put complex numbers as elements of the determiniants you calculate for Cramer's rule.
 
here is cramers rule: if A is a square matrix with entries in any commutative ring, not necesarily a field, and if adj(A) is its "adjoint matrix" (whose (j,i) entry is (-1)^(i+j) times the determinant of the matrix obtained from A by deleting the ith row and jth column of A),
then adj(A).A = A.adj(A) = d.I, where d is he determinant of A, and I is the identity matrix.

as a corollary, if d is invertible, then a solution of the vector equation Av=w, is v = d^(-1)adj.A.w.

for example the entries can be complex numbers. or polynomials with entries in a field. or integers.
 
as a corollary, although not every equation can be solved, you can always solve, if not for a v that gives you w, at least for a v that gives you dw, where d = detA.

e.g. if the 2x2 matrix has rows [ 2 3], [3, 1], then d = 2.1 - 3.3 = -7.

thus adjA is the matrix with rows [ 1 -3], [ -3 2]. then A.adjA = [-7 0], [0 -7]. so given AX = w, if we set X = adjA.w, at least we get AX = dw.

i.e. if w = [1 1], and we set X =[-2 -1], then A.w = [-7 -7], instead of [1 1].

so at least you can solv e for some vector on the line joining w to the origin, although some times this only gives [0 0].
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K