Why does the determinant always equal zero for a square matrix of consecutive numbers?
$begingroup$
This works if the integers are listed in consecutive order either along the rows or columns. Why does the determinant of the square matrix always equal $0$ for $ n > 2 $?
linear-algebra matrices
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This works if the integers are listed in consecutive order either along the rows or columns. Why does the determinant of the square matrix always equal $0$ for $ n > 2 $?
linear-algebra matrices
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
I think you need dimension $n times n$ where $n ge 3.$
$endgroup$
– coffeemath
Jan 20 '18 at 4:15
5
$begingroup$
$detleft(begin{bmatrix}1&2\3&4end{bmatrix}right)=-2$
$endgroup$
– JMoravitz
Jan 20 '18 at 4:15
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This works if the integers are listed in consecutive order either along the rows or columns. Why does the determinant of the square matrix always equal $0$ for $ n > 2 $?
linear-algebra matrices
$endgroup$
This works if the integers are listed in consecutive order either along the rows or columns. Why does the determinant of the square matrix always equal $0$ for $ n > 2 $?
linear-algebra matrices
linear-algebra matrices
edited Jan 6 at 5:48
El borito
666216
666216
asked Jan 20 '18 at 4:11
P. L.P. L.
273
273
3
$begingroup$
I think you need dimension $n times n$ where $n ge 3.$
$endgroup$
– coffeemath
Jan 20 '18 at 4:15
5
$begingroup$
$detleft(begin{bmatrix}1&2\3&4end{bmatrix}right)=-2$
$endgroup$
– JMoravitz
Jan 20 '18 at 4:15
add a comment |
3
$begingroup$
I think you need dimension $n times n$ where $n ge 3.$
$endgroup$
– coffeemath
Jan 20 '18 at 4:15
5
$begingroup$
$detleft(begin{bmatrix}1&2\3&4end{bmatrix}right)=-2$
$endgroup$
– JMoravitz
Jan 20 '18 at 4:15
3
3
$begingroup$
I think you need dimension $n times n$ where $n ge 3.$
$endgroup$
– coffeemath
Jan 20 '18 at 4:15
$begingroup$
I think you need dimension $n times n$ where $n ge 3.$
$endgroup$
– coffeemath
Jan 20 '18 at 4:15
5
5
$begingroup$
$detleft(begin{bmatrix}1&2\3&4end{bmatrix}right)=-2$
$endgroup$
– JMoravitz
Jan 20 '18 at 4:15
$begingroup$
$detleft(begin{bmatrix}1&2\3&4end{bmatrix}right)=-2$
$endgroup$
– JMoravitz
Jan 20 '18 at 4:15
add a comment |
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Assuming that $ngeq 3$ and the integers are placed along the rows:
$$begin{bmatrix}
1&2&3&cdots&n\
n+1&n+2&n+3&cdots&n+n\
2n+1&2n+2&2n+3&cdots&2n+n\
vdots&vdots&vdots&ddots&vdots\
(n-1)n+1&(n-1)n+2&(n-1)n+3&cdots&n^2
end{bmatrix}$$
Consider the second row minus the first row. It will be $[n~n~n~n~dots~n]$
Now, consider the third row minus the first row. It will be $[2n~2n~2n~2n~dots~2n]$. It is a constant multiple of another row in the matrix, and as such the rows are not linearly independent.
Worded another way, letting $R_1,R_2,R_3$ denote the first, second and third rows respectively, we have $R_1-2R_2+R_3=0$, proving that they are linearly dependent on one another.
A matrix has nonzero determinant if and only if its rows are linearly independent. Since the rows are dependent on one another, the determinant must be zero.
Note: This does not work for $n=1$ or $n=2$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
The relation $R_1-2R_2+R_3=0$ holds even if the integer sequence does not start from $1$. Phrased differently, all the rows of this matrix are linear combinations of the vectors $(1,2,3,ldots,n)$ and $(1,1,1,ldots,1)$, so the rank of the matrix is two.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Jan 6 at 6:45
add a comment |
$begingroup$
At least for 3x3, I think this is why:
We start with the generic form...
$$
left[begin{array}{ccc}
x & x+1 & x+2 \
x+3 & x+4 & x+5 \
x+6 & x+7 & x+8 end{array}right]
$$
Then subtract the last row from the first...
$$
left[begin{array}{ccc}
x & x+1 & x+2 \
x+3 & x+4 & x+5 \
6 & 6 & 6 end{array}right]
$$
Then the second from the first...
$$
left[begin{array}{ccc}
x & x+1 & x+2 \
3 & 3 & 3 \
6 & 6 & 6 end{array}right]
$$
And we see clearly that the matrix is not full rank.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For $ngt 2$, it is easy to see that $R_k=R_{k-1}+n$... Thus by doing a couple row operations (namely subtracting $R_k$ from $R_{k+1}$ for a couple different choices of $k$) we get two rows whose entries are all $n$... then subtract one of these from the other to get a row of zeros...
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
First of all it is not always true. For example determinant of $$ begin{bmatrix} 1&2\3&4\ end{bmatrix} $$
is $-2$
When you have a larger matrix and the rows become linearly dependent due to the arrangement of consecutive numbers then the determinant is zero.
You can see that from elementary row operations.
Note that in general, the sum of the first row and the third row is twice the second row therefore, these three rows are linearly dependent.
For example in $$ begin{bmatrix} 1&2&3\4&5&6\7&8&9 end{bmatrix} $$
we get
$R_1 + R_3 =2R_2$, thus $R_1 + R_3 -2R_2 = [0,0,0]$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
It would probably be useful to describe what row operations are needed to see that the determinant is zero. Otherwise, your explanation «the determinant is zero because you can generate a row of sería using row operations» applies to every matrix with zero determinant and is therefore not very useful!
$endgroup$
– Mariano Suárez-Álvarez
Jan 20 '18 at 4:45
$begingroup$
@MarianoSuárez-Álvarez I have mentioned that multiple reduction of rows results in two equal rows or a row of all zero's. In my example of the $ 3times 3$ matrix, if you subtract the first row from the second row you get a row of $3$ 's and if you subtract the first row from the third row you get a row of $6$'s, hence the linear dependence.
$endgroup$
– Mohammad Riazi-Kermani
Jan 20 '18 at 5:12
$begingroup$
My point is, for every single matrix with zero determinant you can say that you get zero because "multiple reduction of does results in two equal rows or a row of all zeros" so that your answer would be immensely improved if you actually explained in it (and not in a comment) how exactly that happens for these specific matrices.
$endgroup$
– Mariano Suárez-Álvarez
Jan 20 '18 at 5:54
$begingroup$
@MarianoSuárez-Álvarez Done! Thanks for your constructive comments.
$endgroup$
– Mohammad Riazi-Kermani
Jan 20 '18 at 6:09
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Alternatively, using arithmetic mean, for $3times 3$ matrix determinant:
$$begin{vmatrix}
x+1 & x+2 & x+3 \
x+4 & x+5 & x+6 \
x+7 & x+8 & x+9 end{vmatrix}=0,$$
because: $C_1+C_3=2C_2$, which shows linear dependence of the column vectors.
For $4times 4$ matrix determinant:
$$begin{vmatrix}
x+1 & x+2 & x+3 & x+4 \
x+5 & x+6 & x+7 & x+8 \
x+9 & x+10 & x+11 & x+12 end{vmatrix}=0, text{because: }
C_1+C_4=C_2+C_3.$$
In geneal, for $(2n+1)times (2n+1), n>0,$ matrix determinant:
$$begin{vmatrix}
x+1&cdots &x+(n+1) &cdots &x+(2n+1)\
x+(2n+1)+1&cdots&x+(2n+1)+n+1&cdots&x+2(2n+1)\
vdots&vdots&vdots &vdots&vdots\
x+2n(2n+1)+1&cdots &x+2n(2n+1)+n+1&cdots&x+(2n+1)^2
end{vmatrix}=0,\
text{because: } C_1+C_{2n+1}=C_{n+1}.$$
Can you write the generalization for $(2n)times (2n),n>0,$ matrix determinant?
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2612982%2fwhy-does-the-determinant-always-equal-zero-for-a-square-matrix-of-consecutive-nu%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Assuming that $ngeq 3$ and the integers are placed along the rows:
$$begin{bmatrix}
1&2&3&cdots&n\
n+1&n+2&n+3&cdots&n+n\
2n+1&2n+2&2n+3&cdots&2n+n\
vdots&vdots&vdots&ddots&vdots\
(n-1)n+1&(n-1)n+2&(n-1)n+3&cdots&n^2
end{bmatrix}$$
Consider the second row minus the first row. It will be $[n~n~n~n~dots~n]$
Now, consider the third row minus the first row. It will be $[2n~2n~2n~2n~dots~2n]$. It is a constant multiple of another row in the matrix, and as such the rows are not linearly independent.
Worded another way, letting $R_1,R_2,R_3$ denote the first, second and third rows respectively, we have $R_1-2R_2+R_3=0$, proving that they are linearly dependent on one another.
A matrix has nonzero determinant if and only if its rows are linearly independent. Since the rows are dependent on one another, the determinant must be zero.
Note: This does not work for $n=1$ or $n=2$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
The relation $R_1-2R_2+R_3=0$ holds even if the integer sequence does not start from $1$. Phrased differently, all the rows of this matrix are linear combinations of the vectors $(1,2,3,ldots,n)$ and $(1,1,1,ldots,1)$, so the rank of the matrix is two.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Jan 6 at 6:45
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Assuming that $ngeq 3$ and the integers are placed along the rows:
$$begin{bmatrix}
1&2&3&cdots&n\
n+1&n+2&n+3&cdots&n+n\
2n+1&2n+2&2n+3&cdots&2n+n\
vdots&vdots&vdots&ddots&vdots\
(n-1)n+1&(n-1)n+2&(n-1)n+3&cdots&n^2
end{bmatrix}$$
Consider the second row minus the first row. It will be $[n~n~n~n~dots~n]$
Now, consider the third row minus the first row. It will be $[2n~2n~2n~2n~dots~2n]$. It is a constant multiple of another row in the matrix, and as such the rows are not linearly independent.
Worded another way, letting $R_1,R_2,R_3$ denote the first, second and third rows respectively, we have $R_1-2R_2+R_3=0$, proving that they are linearly dependent on one another.
A matrix has nonzero determinant if and only if its rows are linearly independent. Since the rows are dependent on one another, the determinant must be zero.
Note: This does not work for $n=1$ or $n=2$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
The relation $R_1-2R_2+R_3=0$ holds even if the integer sequence does not start from $1$. Phrased differently, all the rows of this matrix are linear combinations of the vectors $(1,2,3,ldots,n)$ and $(1,1,1,ldots,1)$, so the rank of the matrix is two.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Jan 6 at 6:45
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Assuming that $ngeq 3$ and the integers are placed along the rows:
$$begin{bmatrix}
1&2&3&cdots&n\
n+1&n+2&n+3&cdots&n+n\
2n+1&2n+2&2n+3&cdots&2n+n\
vdots&vdots&vdots&ddots&vdots\
(n-1)n+1&(n-1)n+2&(n-1)n+3&cdots&n^2
end{bmatrix}$$
Consider the second row minus the first row. It will be $[n~n~n~n~dots~n]$
Now, consider the third row minus the first row. It will be $[2n~2n~2n~2n~dots~2n]$. It is a constant multiple of another row in the matrix, and as such the rows are not linearly independent.
Worded another way, letting $R_1,R_2,R_3$ denote the first, second and third rows respectively, we have $R_1-2R_2+R_3=0$, proving that they are linearly dependent on one another.
A matrix has nonzero determinant if and only if its rows are linearly independent. Since the rows are dependent on one another, the determinant must be zero.
Note: This does not work for $n=1$ or $n=2$.
$endgroup$
Assuming that $ngeq 3$ and the integers are placed along the rows:
$$begin{bmatrix}
1&2&3&cdots&n\
n+1&n+2&n+3&cdots&n+n\
2n+1&2n+2&2n+3&cdots&2n+n\
vdots&vdots&vdots&ddots&vdots\
(n-1)n+1&(n-1)n+2&(n-1)n+3&cdots&n^2
end{bmatrix}$$
Consider the second row minus the first row. It will be $[n~n~n~n~dots~n]$
Now, consider the third row minus the first row. It will be $[2n~2n~2n~2n~dots~2n]$. It is a constant multiple of another row in the matrix, and as such the rows are not linearly independent.
Worded another way, letting $R_1,R_2,R_3$ denote the first, second and third rows respectively, we have $R_1-2R_2+R_3=0$, proving that they are linearly dependent on one another.
A matrix has nonzero determinant if and only if its rows are linearly independent. Since the rows are dependent on one another, the determinant must be zero.
Note: This does not work for $n=1$ or $n=2$.
edited Jan 6 at 6:16
El borito
666216
666216
answered Jan 20 '18 at 4:24
JMoravitzJMoravitz
48.1k33886
48.1k33886
$begingroup$
The relation $R_1-2R_2+R_3=0$ holds even if the integer sequence does not start from $1$. Phrased differently, all the rows of this matrix are linear combinations of the vectors $(1,2,3,ldots,n)$ and $(1,1,1,ldots,1)$, so the rank of the matrix is two.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Jan 6 at 6:45
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The relation $R_1-2R_2+R_3=0$ holds even if the integer sequence does not start from $1$. Phrased differently, all the rows of this matrix are linear combinations of the vectors $(1,2,3,ldots,n)$ and $(1,1,1,ldots,1)$, so the rank of the matrix is two.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Jan 6 at 6:45
$begingroup$
The relation $R_1-2R_2+R_3=0$ holds even if the integer sequence does not start from $1$. Phrased differently, all the rows of this matrix are linear combinations of the vectors $(1,2,3,ldots,n)$ and $(1,1,1,ldots,1)$, so the rank of the matrix is two.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Jan 6 at 6:45
$begingroup$
The relation $R_1-2R_2+R_3=0$ holds even if the integer sequence does not start from $1$. Phrased differently, all the rows of this matrix are linear combinations of the vectors $(1,2,3,ldots,n)$ and $(1,1,1,ldots,1)$, so the rank of the matrix is two.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Jan 6 at 6:45
add a comment |
$begingroup$
At least for 3x3, I think this is why:
We start with the generic form...
$$
left[begin{array}{ccc}
x & x+1 & x+2 \
x+3 & x+4 & x+5 \
x+6 & x+7 & x+8 end{array}right]
$$
Then subtract the last row from the first...
$$
left[begin{array}{ccc}
x & x+1 & x+2 \
x+3 & x+4 & x+5 \
6 & 6 & 6 end{array}right]
$$
Then the second from the first...
$$
left[begin{array}{ccc}
x & x+1 & x+2 \
3 & 3 & 3 \
6 & 6 & 6 end{array}right]
$$
And we see clearly that the matrix is not full rank.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
At least for 3x3, I think this is why:
We start with the generic form...
$$
left[begin{array}{ccc}
x & x+1 & x+2 \
x+3 & x+4 & x+5 \
x+6 & x+7 & x+8 end{array}right]
$$
Then subtract the last row from the first...
$$
left[begin{array}{ccc}
x & x+1 & x+2 \
x+3 & x+4 & x+5 \
6 & 6 & 6 end{array}right]
$$
Then the second from the first...
$$
left[begin{array}{ccc}
x & x+1 & x+2 \
3 & 3 & 3 \
6 & 6 & 6 end{array}right]
$$
And we see clearly that the matrix is not full rank.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
At least for 3x3, I think this is why:
We start with the generic form...
$$
left[begin{array}{ccc}
x & x+1 & x+2 \
x+3 & x+4 & x+5 \
x+6 & x+7 & x+8 end{array}right]
$$
Then subtract the last row from the first...
$$
left[begin{array}{ccc}
x & x+1 & x+2 \
x+3 & x+4 & x+5 \
6 & 6 & 6 end{array}right]
$$
Then the second from the first...
$$
left[begin{array}{ccc}
x & x+1 & x+2 \
3 & 3 & 3 \
6 & 6 & 6 end{array}right]
$$
And we see clearly that the matrix is not full rank.
$endgroup$
At least for 3x3, I think this is why:
We start with the generic form...
$$
left[begin{array}{ccc}
x & x+1 & x+2 \
x+3 & x+4 & x+5 \
x+6 & x+7 & x+8 end{array}right]
$$
Then subtract the last row from the first...
$$
left[begin{array}{ccc}
x & x+1 & x+2 \
x+3 & x+4 & x+5 \
6 & 6 & 6 end{array}right]
$$
Then the second from the first...
$$
left[begin{array}{ccc}
x & x+1 & x+2 \
3 & 3 & 3 \
6 & 6 & 6 end{array}right]
$$
And we see clearly that the matrix is not full rank.
edited Jan 6 at 5:37
El borito
666216
666216
answered Jan 20 '18 at 4:23
CampbellCampbell
705
705
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For $ngt 2$, it is easy to see that $R_k=R_{k-1}+n$... Thus by doing a couple row operations (namely subtracting $R_k$ from $R_{k+1}$ for a couple different choices of $k$) we get two rows whose entries are all $n$... then subtract one of these from the other to get a row of zeros...
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For $ngt 2$, it is easy to see that $R_k=R_{k-1}+n$... Thus by doing a couple row operations (namely subtracting $R_k$ from $R_{k+1}$ for a couple different choices of $k$) we get two rows whose entries are all $n$... then subtract one of these from the other to get a row of zeros...
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For $ngt 2$, it is easy to see that $R_k=R_{k-1}+n$... Thus by doing a couple row operations (namely subtracting $R_k$ from $R_{k+1}$ for a couple different choices of $k$) we get two rows whose entries are all $n$... then subtract one of these from the other to get a row of zeros...
$endgroup$
For $ngt 2$, it is easy to see that $R_k=R_{k-1}+n$... Thus by doing a couple row operations (namely subtracting $R_k$ from $R_{k+1}$ for a couple different choices of $k$) we get two rows whose entries are all $n$... then subtract one of these from the other to get a row of zeros...
answered Jan 20 '18 at 4:54
Chris CusterChris Custer
14.2k3827
14.2k3827
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
First of all it is not always true. For example determinant of $$ begin{bmatrix} 1&2\3&4\ end{bmatrix} $$
is $-2$
When you have a larger matrix and the rows become linearly dependent due to the arrangement of consecutive numbers then the determinant is zero.
You can see that from elementary row operations.
Note that in general, the sum of the first row and the third row is twice the second row therefore, these three rows are linearly dependent.
For example in $$ begin{bmatrix} 1&2&3\4&5&6\7&8&9 end{bmatrix} $$
we get
$R_1 + R_3 =2R_2$, thus $R_1 + R_3 -2R_2 = [0,0,0]$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
It would probably be useful to describe what row operations are needed to see that the determinant is zero. Otherwise, your explanation «the determinant is zero because you can generate a row of sería using row operations» applies to every matrix with zero determinant and is therefore not very useful!
$endgroup$
– Mariano Suárez-Álvarez
Jan 20 '18 at 4:45
$begingroup$
@MarianoSuárez-Álvarez I have mentioned that multiple reduction of rows results in two equal rows or a row of all zero's. In my example of the $ 3times 3$ matrix, if you subtract the first row from the second row you get a row of $3$ 's and if you subtract the first row from the third row you get a row of $6$'s, hence the linear dependence.
$endgroup$
– Mohammad Riazi-Kermani
Jan 20 '18 at 5:12
$begingroup$
My point is, for every single matrix with zero determinant you can say that you get zero because "multiple reduction of does results in two equal rows or a row of all zeros" so that your answer would be immensely improved if you actually explained in it (and not in a comment) how exactly that happens for these specific matrices.
$endgroup$
– Mariano Suárez-Álvarez
Jan 20 '18 at 5:54
$begingroup$
@MarianoSuárez-Álvarez Done! Thanks for your constructive comments.
$endgroup$
– Mohammad Riazi-Kermani
Jan 20 '18 at 6:09
add a comment |
$begingroup$
First of all it is not always true. For example determinant of $$ begin{bmatrix} 1&2\3&4\ end{bmatrix} $$
is $-2$
When you have a larger matrix and the rows become linearly dependent due to the arrangement of consecutive numbers then the determinant is zero.
You can see that from elementary row operations.
Note that in general, the sum of the first row and the third row is twice the second row therefore, these three rows are linearly dependent.
For example in $$ begin{bmatrix} 1&2&3\4&5&6\7&8&9 end{bmatrix} $$
we get
$R_1 + R_3 =2R_2$, thus $R_1 + R_3 -2R_2 = [0,0,0]$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
It would probably be useful to describe what row operations are needed to see that the determinant is zero. Otherwise, your explanation «the determinant is zero because you can generate a row of sería using row operations» applies to every matrix with zero determinant and is therefore not very useful!
$endgroup$
– Mariano Suárez-Álvarez
Jan 20 '18 at 4:45
$begingroup$
@MarianoSuárez-Álvarez I have mentioned that multiple reduction of rows results in two equal rows or a row of all zero's. In my example of the $ 3times 3$ matrix, if you subtract the first row from the second row you get a row of $3$ 's and if you subtract the first row from the third row you get a row of $6$'s, hence the linear dependence.
$endgroup$
– Mohammad Riazi-Kermani
Jan 20 '18 at 5:12
$begingroup$
My point is, for every single matrix with zero determinant you can say that you get zero because "multiple reduction of does results in two equal rows or a row of all zeros" so that your answer would be immensely improved if you actually explained in it (and not in a comment) how exactly that happens for these specific matrices.
$endgroup$
– Mariano Suárez-Álvarez
Jan 20 '18 at 5:54
$begingroup$
@MarianoSuárez-Álvarez Done! Thanks for your constructive comments.
$endgroup$
– Mohammad Riazi-Kermani
Jan 20 '18 at 6:09
add a comment |
$begingroup$
First of all it is not always true. For example determinant of $$ begin{bmatrix} 1&2\3&4\ end{bmatrix} $$
is $-2$
When you have a larger matrix and the rows become linearly dependent due to the arrangement of consecutive numbers then the determinant is zero.
You can see that from elementary row operations.
Note that in general, the sum of the first row and the third row is twice the second row therefore, these three rows are linearly dependent.
For example in $$ begin{bmatrix} 1&2&3\4&5&6\7&8&9 end{bmatrix} $$
we get
$R_1 + R_3 =2R_2$, thus $R_1 + R_3 -2R_2 = [0,0,0]$
$endgroup$
First of all it is not always true. For example determinant of $$ begin{bmatrix} 1&2\3&4\ end{bmatrix} $$
is $-2$
When you have a larger matrix and the rows become linearly dependent due to the arrangement of consecutive numbers then the determinant is zero.
You can see that from elementary row operations.
Note that in general, the sum of the first row and the third row is twice the second row therefore, these three rows are linearly dependent.
For example in $$ begin{bmatrix} 1&2&3\4&5&6\7&8&9 end{bmatrix} $$
we get
$R_1 + R_3 =2R_2$, thus $R_1 + R_3 -2R_2 = [0,0,0]$
edited Jan 20 '18 at 6:08
answered Jan 20 '18 at 4:29
Mohammad Riazi-KermaniMohammad Riazi-Kermani
41.6k42061
41.6k42061
$begingroup$
It would probably be useful to describe what row operations are needed to see that the determinant is zero. Otherwise, your explanation «the determinant is zero because you can generate a row of sería using row operations» applies to every matrix with zero determinant and is therefore not very useful!
$endgroup$
– Mariano Suárez-Álvarez
Jan 20 '18 at 4:45
$begingroup$
@MarianoSuárez-Álvarez I have mentioned that multiple reduction of rows results in two equal rows or a row of all zero's. In my example of the $ 3times 3$ matrix, if you subtract the first row from the second row you get a row of $3$ 's and if you subtract the first row from the third row you get a row of $6$'s, hence the linear dependence.
$endgroup$
– Mohammad Riazi-Kermani
Jan 20 '18 at 5:12
$begingroup$
My point is, for every single matrix with zero determinant you can say that you get zero because "multiple reduction of does results in two equal rows or a row of all zeros" so that your answer would be immensely improved if you actually explained in it (and not in a comment) how exactly that happens for these specific matrices.
$endgroup$
– Mariano Suárez-Álvarez
Jan 20 '18 at 5:54
$begingroup$
@MarianoSuárez-Álvarez Done! Thanks for your constructive comments.
$endgroup$
– Mohammad Riazi-Kermani
Jan 20 '18 at 6:09
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It would probably be useful to describe what row operations are needed to see that the determinant is zero. Otherwise, your explanation «the determinant is zero because you can generate a row of sería using row operations» applies to every matrix with zero determinant and is therefore not very useful!
$endgroup$
– Mariano Suárez-Álvarez
Jan 20 '18 at 4:45
$begingroup$
@MarianoSuárez-Álvarez I have mentioned that multiple reduction of rows results in two equal rows or a row of all zero's. In my example of the $ 3times 3$ matrix, if you subtract the first row from the second row you get a row of $3$ 's and if you subtract the first row from the third row you get a row of $6$'s, hence the linear dependence.
$endgroup$
– Mohammad Riazi-Kermani
Jan 20 '18 at 5:12
$begingroup$
My point is, for every single matrix with zero determinant you can say that you get zero because "multiple reduction of does results in two equal rows or a row of all zeros" so that your answer would be immensely improved if you actually explained in it (and not in a comment) how exactly that happens for these specific matrices.
$endgroup$
– Mariano Suárez-Álvarez
Jan 20 '18 at 5:54
$begingroup$
@MarianoSuárez-Álvarez Done! Thanks for your constructive comments.
$endgroup$
– Mohammad Riazi-Kermani
Jan 20 '18 at 6:09
$begingroup$
It would probably be useful to describe what row operations are needed to see that the determinant is zero. Otherwise, your explanation «the determinant is zero because you can generate a row of sería using row operations» applies to every matrix with zero determinant and is therefore not very useful!
$endgroup$
– Mariano Suárez-Álvarez
Jan 20 '18 at 4:45
$begingroup$
It would probably be useful to describe what row operations are needed to see that the determinant is zero. Otherwise, your explanation «the determinant is zero because you can generate a row of sería using row operations» applies to every matrix with zero determinant and is therefore not very useful!
$endgroup$
– Mariano Suárez-Álvarez
Jan 20 '18 at 4:45
$begingroup$
@MarianoSuárez-Álvarez I have mentioned that multiple reduction of rows results in two equal rows or a row of all zero's. In my example of the $ 3times 3$ matrix, if you subtract the first row from the second row you get a row of $3$ 's and if you subtract the first row from the third row you get a row of $6$'s, hence the linear dependence.
$endgroup$
– Mohammad Riazi-Kermani
Jan 20 '18 at 5:12
$begingroup$
@MarianoSuárez-Álvarez I have mentioned that multiple reduction of rows results in two equal rows or a row of all zero's. In my example of the $ 3times 3$ matrix, if you subtract the first row from the second row you get a row of $3$ 's and if you subtract the first row from the third row you get a row of $6$'s, hence the linear dependence.
$endgroup$
– Mohammad Riazi-Kermani
Jan 20 '18 at 5:12
$begingroup$
My point is, for every single matrix with zero determinant you can say that you get zero because "multiple reduction of does results in two equal rows or a row of all zeros" so that your answer would be immensely improved if you actually explained in it (and not in a comment) how exactly that happens for these specific matrices.
$endgroup$
– Mariano Suárez-Álvarez
Jan 20 '18 at 5:54
$begingroup$
My point is, for every single matrix with zero determinant you can say that you get zero because "multiple reduction of does results in two equal rows or a row of all zeros" so that your answer would be immensely improved if you actually explained in it (and not in a comment) how exactly that happens for these specific matrices.
$endgroup$
– Mariano Suárez-Álvarez
Jan 20 '18 at 5:54
$begingroup$
@MarianoSuárez-Álvarez Done! Thanks for your constructive comments.
$endgroup$
– Mohammad Riazi-Kermani
Jan 20 '18 at 6:09
$begingroup$
@MarianoSuárez-Álvarez Done! Thanks for your constructive comments.
$endgroup$
– Mohammad Riazi-Kermani
Jan 20 '18 at 6:09
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Alternatively, using arithmetic mean, for $3times 3$ matrix determinant:
$$begin{vmatrix}
x+1 & x+2 & x+3 \
x+4 & x+5 & x+6 \
x+7 & x+8 & x+9 end{vmatrix}=0,$$
because: $C_1+C_3=2C_2$, which shows linear dependence of the column vectors.
For $4times 4$ matrix determinant:
$$begin{vmatrix}
x+1 & x+2 & x+3 & x+4 \
x+5 & x+6 & x+7 & x+8 \
x+9 & x+10 & x+11 & x+12 end{vmatrix}=0, text{because: }
C_1+C_4=C_2+C_3.$$
In geneal, for $(2n+1)times (2n+1), n>0,$ matrix determinant:
$$begin{vmatrix}
x+1&cdots &x+(n+1) &cdots &x+(2n+1)\
x+(2n+1)+1&cdots&x+(2n+1)+n+1&cdots&x+2(2n+1)\
vdots&vdots&vdots &vdots&vdots\
x+2n(2n+1)+1&cdots &x+2n(2n+1)+n+1&cdots&x+(2n+1)^2
end{vmatrix}=0,\
text{because: } C_1+C_{2n+1}=C_{n+1}.$$
Can you write the generalization for $(2n)times (2n),n>0,$ matrix determinant?
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Alternatively, using arithmetic mean, for $3times 3$ matrix determinant:
$$begin{vmatrix}
x+1 & x+2 & x+3 \
x+4 & x+5 & x+6 \
x+7 & x+8 & x+9 end{vmatrix}=0,$$
because: $C_1+C_3=2C_2$, which shows linear dependence of the column vectors.
For $4times 4$ matrix determinant:
$$begin{vmatrix}
x+1 & x+2 & x+3 & x+4 \
x+5 & x+6 & x+7 & x+8 \
x+9 & x+10 & x+11 & x+12 end{vmatrix}=0, text{because: }
C_1+C_4=C_2+C_3.$$
In geneal, for $(2n+1)times (2n+1), n>0,$ matrix determinant:
$$begin{vmatrix}
x+1&cdots &x+(n+1) &cdots &x+(2n+1)\
x+(2n+1)+1&cdots&x+(2n+1)+n+1&cdots&x+2(2n+1)\
vdots&vdots&vdots &vdots&vdots\
x+2n(2n+1)+1&cdots &x+2n(2n+1)+n+1&cdots&x+(2n+1)^2
end{vmatrix}=0,\
text{because: } C_1+C_{2n+1}=C_{n+1}.$$
Can you write the generalization for $(2n)times (2n),n>0,$ matrix determinant?
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Alternatively, using arithmetic mean, for $3times 3$ matrix determinant:
$$begin{vmatrix}
x+1 & x+2 & x+3 \
x+4 & x+5 & x+6 \
x+7 & x+8 & x+9 end{vmatrix}=0,$$
because: $C_1+C_3=2C_2$, which shows linear dependence of the column vectors.
For $4times 4$ matrix determinant:
$$begin{vmatrix}
x+1 & x+2 & x+3 & x+4 \
x+5 & x+6 & x+7 & x+8 \
x+9 & x+10 & x+11 & x+12 end{vmatrix}=0, text{because: }
C_1+C_4=C_2+C_3.$$
In geneal, for $(2n+1)times (2n+1), n>0,$ matrix determinant:
$$begin{vmatrix}
x+1&cdots &x+(n+1) &cdots &x+(2n+1)\
x+(2n+1)+1&cdots&x+(2n+1)+n+1&cdots&x+2(2n+1)\
vdots&vdots&vdots &vdots&vdots\
x+2n(2n+1)+1&cdots &x+2n(2n+1)+n+1&cdots&x+(2n+1)^2
end{vmatrix}=0,\
text{because: } C_1+C_{2n+1}=C_{n+1}.$$
Can you write the generalization for $(2n)times (2n),n>0,$ matrix determinant?
$endgroup$
Alternatively, using arithmetic mean, for $3times 3$ matrix determinant:
$$begin{vmatrix}
x+1 & x+2 & x+3 \
x+4 & x+5 & x+6 \
x+7 & x+8 & x+9 end{vmatrix}=0,$$
because: $C_1+C_3=2C_2$, which shows linear dependence of the column vectors.
For $4times 4$ matrix determinant:
$$begin{vmatrix}
x+1 & x+2 & x+3 & x+4 \
x+5 & x+6 & x+7 & x+8 \
x+9 & x+10 & x+11 & x+12 end{vmatrix}=0, text{because: }
C_1+C_4=C_2+C_3.$$
In geneal, for $(2n+1)times (2n+1), n>0,$ matrix determinant:
$$begin{vmatrix}
x+1&cdots &x+(n+1) &cdots &x+(2n+1)\
x+(2n+1)+1&cdots&x+(2n+1)+n+1&cdots&x+2(2n+1)\
vdots&vdots&vdots &vdots&vdots\
x+2n(2n+1)+1&cdots &x+2n(2n+1)+n+1&cdots&x+(2n+1)^2
end{vmatrix}=0,\
text{because: } C_1+C_{2n+1}=C_{n+1}.$$
Can you write the generalization for $(2n)times (2n),n>0,$ matrix determinant?
answered Jan 6 at 8:13
farruhotafarruhota
20.7k2740
20.7k2740
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2612982%2fwhy-does-the-determinant-always-equal-zero-for-a-square-matrix-of-consecutive-nu%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
3
$begingroup$
I think you need dimension $n times n$ where $n ge 3.$
$endgroup$
– coffeemath
Jan 20 '18 at 4:15
5
$begingroup$
$detleft(begin{bmatrix}1&2\3&4end{bmatrix}right)=-2$
$endgroup$
– JMoravitz
Jan 20 '18 at 4:15