What's wrong with my algebra here? (dealing with determinants)

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter iamsmooth
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Algebra Determinants
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of the determinant of a specific expression involving 3x3 invertible matrices A, B, and C. Participants explore the application of determinant properties and identify potential errors in the algebraic manipulation of these properties.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant asserts that the determinant of a product of matrices should be calculated using the property det(XY) = det(X)det(Y), suggesting that this was not applied correctly in the original post.
  • Another participant criticizes the original poster for ignoring determinant notation and making assumptions about matrix equality that do not hold.
  • There is a suggestion to rewrite the expression in a more organized manner to facilitate understanding and assistance.
  • A participant acknowledges a misunderstanding of the original poster's work, attributing it to the unclear notation used in the calculations.
  • One participant points out the importance of applying the determinant properties correctly, specifically mentioning the rule det(cA) = c^n det(A) for scalar multiplication of matrices.
  • The original poster expresses confusion about their approach and seeks clarification on their last steps and the order of operations.
  • A later reply provides advice on how to format mathematical expressions more clearly, suggesting the use of LaTeX for better presentation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the specific error in the original poster's calculations, and multiple viewpoints on the application of determinant properties are presented. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the exact nature of the mistake.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the importance of maintaining proper notation and applying determinant properties accurately, but specific assumptions or steps in the original poster's calculations remain unclear.

iamsmooth
Messages
103
Reaction score
0
Let A, B and C be 3x3 invertible matrices where det(A)=−4 ,det(B)=−2 and det(C) is some non-zero scalar. Find:

det[−2(A^2)^T x C^2 x B^−1 (C^−1)^2]

So (A^2)^T is just A^2 since the transpose's det is the same.
(C^-1)^2 = C^-2
C^-2 * C^2 = 1 (so just canceled it out)
Inverse of B = 1/-2 = -1/2
So we have det[-2(A^2) x B^-1

I then sub in -2(-4^2) x -1/2 = -2(16)/-2

Which evaluates to 16, however this answer is wrong :(

Don't know what I did wrong. Can anyone spot a mistake?

Thanks :D
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I didn't read the whole thing, but you appear to have used det(XY)=det X det Y incorrectly (or rather not at all), in at least one spot.
 
Your work is very sloppy, because you freely ignore determinant notation while canceling matrices and saying things like AT=A (things which you can't say about matrices, but you can say about their determinants)

But for all that, as far as I can tell it looks like you did the right thing up until here:
So we have det[-2(A^2) x B^-1]

You essentially re-write this as -2det(A2B-1) which isn't true
 
Ok, I'll keep trying. Thanks for the help so far :D
 
I still can't figure this out. Is this because of the order I'm doing the math? Is my bedmas wrong? >.> What's wrong with my last steps?

Sorry for the trouble and thanks for the help :D
 
Is this what you're trying to find? det[−2(A²)TC²B-1C-2]

Perhaps writing it out more organized and neat will make it easier to get help.
Use facts about determinants for your problem:

det(AB)=det(A)det(B)
det(A)=det(AT)
det(A-1)=1/det(A)
det(cA)=cnA, where n is the size of the matrix

It looks like you've used these in your solution but it's hard to tell since it's so sloppy and poorly written.

You've reduced it to det[−2(A²)B-1], so apply the first and last properties
 
I was actually wrong about the mistake I thought you made. (It's possible you made that mistake somewhere else, but you didn't make it where I thought you did). I read your post too quickly and I think the sloppy notation contributed to my misunderstanding. Still, you can't go wrong if you just apply the rules that VeeEight wrote down for you.
 
Oh man thanks a lot, that makes sense now. I forgot to apply the det(cA) = c^n.A rule, since our prof only vaguely mentioned it in one example.

Anyways, for future reference, is there an easy way to do the actual ascii math symbols that you did?

i.e. det[−2(A²)TC²B-1C-2]

That looks like it'd help a lot when I'm describing my problems, so it's not just messy looking. And yeah, sorry for my sloppy notation, I'll try and do better next time. Appreciate all the help :D
 
You can write A2 as A[*sup]2[*/sup] without the *'s. A better choice is to learn Latex so you can write it as [itex]A^2[/itex] (this is superior when you have long expression to write, but using sup tags - and sub tags for subscripts, is a good start)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K