Sign in to follow this  
Zareon

Inverse of a matrix

Recommended Posts

Try to find a counterexample. Try real hard. Hint: There are no such beasts for matrices over the reals.

 

I think you're missing the point I`m making. There's no such thing for matrices (that's what I've just proved), but I can't believe the same holds for a general ring. I will try to find a counterexample.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kinda forgot this topic, but here's the counterexample I promised.

Consider the vector space l_2® consisting of the strings (x_1,x_2,...) with x_i real numbers.

Then define the linear operators R and L (the Rightshift and the Leftshift) by:

R(x_1,x_2,x_3,...)=(0,x_1,x_2,...)

L(x_1,x_2,x_3,...)=(x_2,x_3,x_4,...)

 

The set of linear operators on l_2 form a ring ofcourse and LR=1 but RL is not the identity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zareon,  in "Now suppose AB=I, then the equation Ax=b has a solution for any vector b. Just pick x=Cb, then Ax=A(Cb)=b" should it read "Just pick x=Bb"? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, chri5 said:

Zareon,  in "Now suppose AB=I, then the equation Ax=b has a solution for any vector b. Just pick x=Cb, then Ax=A(Cb)=b" should it read "Just pick x=Bb"? 

Read the date of the post  you are replying to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this