Jump to content

Inverse Matrices

Featured Replies

Show that if A ε Mnxn is nonsingular and t ≠ 0, then tA is nonsingular and (tA)-1 = (1/t)A-1.

 

 

I need to show an intense proof of this statement. Although I can grasp the concept in my head, I am unsure as to the mathematical reasons and theorems that prove this true.

 

 

Show that if A ε Mnxn is nonsingular and t ≠ 0, then tA is nonsingular and (tA)-1 = (1/t)A-1.

 

I am not going to do this for you, as it really isn't that hard. But I will give a few pointers.

 

Note that since [math]A[/math] is [math]n \times n[/math] then [math]\det(tA) = t^n \det(A)[/math]. So since [math]\det(A) \ne 0,\,\,\,t\,\, \ne 0[/math] then [math]t^n \ne 0 \Rightarrow \det(tA) \ne 0[/math]. But you must prove the premise [math]\det(tA) = t^n \det(A)[/math]. Can you do that?

 

For the second part, namely [math](tA)^{-1} = \frac{1}{t}A^{-1}[/math] you need only to prove that [math] (AB)^{-1} = B^{-1}A^{-1}[/math], remembering that you can treat [math]t[/math] as a [math]1 \times 1[/math] matrix. Recall that

 

1. [math]AA^{-1}= A^{-1}A =I[/math]

 

2. matrix algebra is associative

 

3. if [math] x[/math] is then treated as an element in a commutative ring, here most likely a field, then [math]xA = Ax[/math].

 

See how you get on

How disheartening it is to try and help a poster who then doesn't even acknowledge one's efforts, let alone act on them. Worse, it is downright rude. Ah well.

It happens, there isn't much that can be done about it beyond being satisfied that you made a worthy effort.

I am not going to do this for you, as it really isn't that hard. But I will give a few pointers.

 

Note that since [math]A[/math] is [math]n \times n[/math] then [math]\det(tA) = t^n \det(A)[/math]. So since [math]\det(A) \ne 0,\,\,\,t\,\, \ne 0[/math] then [math]t^n \ne 0 \Rightarrow \det(tA) \ne 0[/math]. But you must prove the premise [math]\det(tA) = t^n \det(A)[/math]. Can you do that?

 

For the second part, namely [math](tA)^{-1} = \frac{1}{t}A^{-1}[/math] you need only to prove that [math] (AB)^{-1} = B^{-1}A^{-1}[/math], remembering that you can treat [math]t[/math] as a [math]1 \times 1[/math] matrix. Recall that

 

1. [math]AA^{-1}= A^{-1}A =I[/math]

 

2. matrix algebra is associative

 

3. if [math] x[/math] is then treated as an element in a commutative ring, here most likely a field, then [math]xA = Ax[/math].

 

See how you get on

 

 

 

It is somewhat simpler to simply note that

 

[math] tA (\frac{1}{t} A^{-1}) = t \frac {1}{t} AA^{-1} = 1 \times I = I[/math]

 

This works for linear operators in general and not just matrices on a finite-dimensional space.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.