Re: Linear algebra with pitfall..
- From: quasi <quasi@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2008 02:11:27 -0500
On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 01:16:37 -0500, quasi <quasi@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 00:46:30 -0500, quasi <quasi@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 00:42:09 -0500, quasi <quasi@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 00:30:52 -0500, quasi <quasi@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 04:09:39 GMT, rob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Rob Johnson)
wrote:
In article <ftp983$mcr$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"mina_world" <mina_world@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
A, B in Matrix_2x2.
E is identity matrix.
True or false.
(A+B)(A-B) = E ==> AB = BA.
True.
Since (A+B)(A-B) = E, A-B is invertible. Thus, there is a C so that
(A-B)C = E. Thus, A+B = (A+B)E = (A+B)(A-B)C = EC = C. Therefore,
we have that (A-B)(A+B) = E. This means that
(A+B)(A-B) = E = (A-B)(A+B)
A^2 + BA - AB - B^2 = A^2 + AB - BA - B^2
2 BA = 2 AB
AB = BA
Essentially the same argument, but perhaps slightly simpler to see,
(and what I should have seen right away) is the following ...
(A + B) (A - B) = E
=> A + B and A - B are inverses of each other
=> (A - B) (A + B) = E
=> (A + B) (A - B) = (A - B) (A + B)
=> AB = BA
(after expanding and simplifying)
Here's a quick followup.
If A, B are n x n matrices with complex coefficients such that
A*(B^2) = I
must A commute with B?
Ok, the answer is yes (I can prove it).
So now, let me ask this ...
Question:
If A,B are n x n matrices with complex coefficients such that
f(A,B)*g(A,B) = 1
for some nonconstant polynomials f,g in C[x,y], must A and B commute?
Remark: I suspect the answer is no.
If the answer happens to be yes (fat chance, but hey, you never know
(until you do)), we could allow f,g to be in C<x,y>, the ring of
polynomials, with coefficients in C, in the non-commuting variables
x,y, and then re-ask the same question.
Well, I see now that the idea is silly, without more restrictions.
For example, let f(x,y) = g(x,y) = x.
Thus, f(A,B)*g(A,B) = 1 => A^2 = I, but that doesn't imply AB = BA.
As a minimum, the functions f,g besides being non-constant, must such
that at least one of them is non-constant in A and one is non-constant
in B.
I don't really know where I'm going with this -- I'm just fooling
around with the idea.
I have in mind a simpler version of the above problem, but I'll start
it in a new thread.
quasi
.
- References:
- Linear algebra with pitfall..
- From: mina_world
- Re: Linear algebra with pitfall..
- From: Rob Johnson
- Re: Linear algebra with pitfall..
- From: quasi
- Re: Linear algebra with pitfall..
- From: quasi
- Re: Linear algebra with pitfall..
- From: quasi
- Re: Linear algebra with pitfall..
- From: quasi
- Linear algebra with pitfall..
- Prev by Date: g(f(x,y) ,y) = k*f(g (x,y) ,y) ...
- Next by Date: math -- f(A)*g(B) = I => AB = BA?
- Previous by thread: Re: Linear algebra with pitfall..
- Next by thread: Re: Linear algebra with pitfall..
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading