Why this property of the product of two matrices

senmeis
Messages
72
Reaction score
2
Hello,

The product of a 2x5 matrix P and a 5x3 matrix B shall be a 2x3 zero matrix. P and B are all matrices of integers.

P = [6 2 -5 -6 1;3 6 1 -6 -5]

One possible B is [0 -4 0;3 0 0;-1 -1 3;2 -3 -2;1 1 3]

This solution B has a property: det(PPt) = det(BtB) = 7778

The question is: What does this property mean? How to get another B with this property?

Senmeis
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I really don't know how you got B or why you refer to it as a "solution". Solution to what problem? Just having the property that det(PPt) = det(BtB)?
 
Pb=0
 
Post-multiply B by any 3x3 matrix C, i.e., D=BC, and you'll have another 5x3 matrix D that satisfies PD=0. If C is unimodular (determinant = ±1), then det(D)=±det(B), so det(DTD)=det(BTB)=7778.

See if you can take this further to ensure that all elements of D are integers.
 
Last edited:
Yes, you are right, but I still don’t know if this property is by chance. More important, I can’t even get another B that fulfills this property.

Senmeis
 
No, it is not by chance. Matrix multiplication is associative: (PB)C = P(BC). If PB=0 then P(BC) must necessarily be zero as well.
 
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...

Similar threads

Back
Top