Results 1 to 8 of 8

Math Help - Determinant proof/evaluation ?

  1. #1
    Newbie Doktor_Faustus's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    16

    Determinant proof/evaluation ?

    Hi guys,

    I'm trying to answer the following:

    Prove the following identity without evaluating the determinants:
    [PHP]

    a + b c+d e+f a c e b d f
    p q r = p q r + p q r
    u v w u v w u v w
    [/PHP]

    It comes from the theorem that if A, B and C are n x n matrices who differ in only one row, the ith row, and assume the ith row of C can be obtained by adding corresponding entries in the ith rows of A and B then,

    det (C) = det (A) + det (B)

    I think I proved it by using co - factor expansion of the determinants on the right hand side of the identity above. I ended up with the following co-factor expansion:

    a + b ( qw - rv ) + c + d ( ru - pw ) + e + f ( pv - qu )

    And this equals the determinant on the left hand side with a + b being an entry and (qw- rv ) being a minor of that entry etc.

    Thus the proof is complete. Or is it ? My query is this: have I just evaluated the determinants without actually proving anything ? My understanding is that the result I showed above will hold for any integer, and therefore the identity is proved for all integers.

    Any help would be appreciated.

    Many thanks.

    PS anyone know how I can properly represent determinants on a post ?!?!
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    Newbie ajskim's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2010
    From
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    13
    Hmm, I'm not sure if that is sufficient, essentially you are calculating the determinants. Is there a way you can cite the general row adding proof? Or a version of that proof you can emulate?
    Last edited by ajskim; August 17th 2010 at 12:05 AM.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    A Plied Mathematician
    Joined
    Jun 2010
    From
    CT, USA
    Posts
    6,318
    Thanks
    5
    Awards
    2

    Just the Formatting Aspect of Your Question

    Here's how you can write a determinant: use LaTeX. Use the Advanced button, and click the TeX button. Here's a determinant:

    \det(M)=\left|\begin{matrix}1 &2 &3\\ 4 &5 &6\\ 7 &8 &9\end{matrix}\right|=1\left|\begin{matrix}5 &6\\ 8 &9\end{matrix}\right|-2\left|\begin{matrix}4 &6\\ 7 &9\end{matrix}\right|+3\left|\begin{matrix}4 &5\\ 7 &8\end{matrix}\right|=...

    You can double-click this determinant to get the LaTeX code that generated it.
    Last edited by Ackbeet; August 17th 2010 at 02:29 AM. Reason: Correct det notation on the LHS.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Joined
    Jul 2010
    From
    Vancouver
    Posts
    432
    Thanks
    17
    Are you trying to prove it for n by n matrices or just for the specific example? If you need to prove it for general n by n matrices, there is no way you can calculate the determinant, because you don't know the entries. However, you can expand it along row i. Then you can recognize that the obtained minor is the same for both matrices A and B and thus you can break up your determinant into two.

    Suppose you have an n by n matrix M. Let M(i,j) denote the minor obtained by removing row i and column j. Suppose the matrices A and B differ only in the entries of a certain row i. Then you surely have that A(i,j) = B(i,j) = C(i,j) since we have removed all the entries that make the determinants different.

    Now

    \displaystyle \det(C)

    \displaystyle = \sum_{j=1}^n (-1)^{i+j}C_{i,j}\det C(i,j) =

    \displaystyle = \sum_{j=1}^n (-1)^{i+j}(A_{i,j}+B_{i,j})\det C(i,j)

    \displaystyle = \sum_{j=1}^n (-1)^{i+j} A_{i,j}\det C(i,j) + \sum_{j=1}^n (-1)^{i+j} B_{i,j}\det C(i,j)

    \displaystyle = \sum_{j=1}^n (-1)^{i+j} A_{i,j}\det A(i,j) + \sum_{j=1}^n (-1)^{i+j} B_{i,j}\det B(i,j)

    \displaystyle = \det(A) + \det(B)

    I'm afraid that this still counts as a calculation of sorts, but its not an EXPLICIT one as we are not calculating the whole determinant, just a small portion of it.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  5. #5
    Newbie Doktor_Faustus's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    16
    Hi,

    Yes it's just for the specific example I quoted. The questions requires that you prove the identity.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  6. #6
    Newbie Doktor_Faustus's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by ajskim View Post
    Hmm, I'm not sure if that is sufficient, essentially you are calculating the determinants. Is there a way you can cite the general row adding proof? Or a version of that proof you can emulate?
    If you have Howard Anton's "Elementary Linear Algebra " refer to the chapter on determinants - page 93 in the fifth edition. Anton shows that for a 2x2 matrix det (C) = det (A) + det (B) when the matrices A and B differ only in a single row.

    Here it is:

    Consider two 2x2 matrices that differ only in a single row.

    A = a11 a12
    a21 a22

    B= a11 a12
    b21 b22

    det (A) + det (B) = (a11a22 - a12a21) + (a11b22 - a12b21 )

    = a11 ( a22 + b22 ) - a12 ( a21 + b21 )

    = det a11 a12
    a21+b21 a22+b22

    Sorry about the crappy formatting of the determinants. I haven't got used to using Latext yet.

    Cheers.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  7. #7
    Member
    Joined
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    91
    Another way, tailored to your original question, would be to write your determinants using the scalar triple product,

    \left|\begin{matrix} a_1&a_2&a_3\\b_1&b_2&b_3\\c_1&c_2&c_3\end{matrix}\  right|=\mathbf a.(\mathbf b\times\mathbf c) where \mathbf a=\left(\begin{matrix}a_1\\a_2\\a_3\end{matrix}\ri  ght), \mathbf b=\left(\begin{matrix}b_1\\b_2\\b_3\end{matrix}\ri  ght) and \mathbf c=\left(\begin{matrix}c_1\\c_2\\c_3\end{matrix}\ri  ght).

    The identity you require can be obtained by considering the formula

    (\mathbf a+\mathbf d).(\mathbf b\times\mathbf c)=\mathbf a.(\mathbf b\times\mathbf c)+\mathbf d.(\mathbf b\times\mathbf c)
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  8. #8
    Member ModusPonens's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    125
    Thanks
    14
    I think the intended answer is that it is because the determinant is a multilinear function of its vectors.
    Last edited by ModusPonens; August 23rd 2010 at 06:41 AM. Reason: adding "of its vectors"
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. Determinant Proof
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: February 18th 2010, 07:34 PM
  2. Another determinant proof, I'm afraid....
    Posted in the Algebra Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: September 28th 2009, 07:34 AM
  3. A 3 x 3 determinant proof
    Posted in the Algebra Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: September 27th 2009, 12:35 PM
  4. Determinant proof
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: July 14th 2009, 06:04 PM
  5. Determinant proof
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: March 7th 2009, 08:02 PM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum