We first deal with 2x2 matrices. Let the matrix be written as
|a, b|
|a, b|,
where a, b ∈ R, the real numbers (or C, the complex numbers, if we're dealing with that field). An invertible matrix has non-zero determinant. But the determinant of the matrix given above is
ab - ab = 0.
Hence it cannot be invertible.
Now we introduce an induction hypothesis, whereby all n x n matrices with two identical rows are not invertible. Let M be an (n + 1) x (n + 1) matrix and let the k-th row be one of the rows that is not identical to another (if one cannot pick one, then the case is trivial); observe that its determinant is calculated as
Σ [(-1)^(i + k + 2)] * m(1, i) * det(M(k, i))
the sum being taken from i = 1, ..., (n + 1), where m(k, i) is the i-th element of the k-th row, M(k, i) is the n x n matrix obtained by eliminating the k-th row and the i-th column from M, and det() denotes the determinant of a matrix. However, since each M(k, i) has two identical rows, we know det(M(k, i)) = 0 for i = 1, ..., (n + 1). Thus the determinant of M is zero, and so it's not invertible.
Hence, by induction, the result follows.
2007-03-28 03:17:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by MHW 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
right here is an hassle-free thank you to coach that no longer each 2 invertible matrices upload as much as a diverse. Take any invertible matrix A. Now, the destructive of A is yet another invertible matrix. The sum A + (-A) is the empty matrix, that's singular. QED.
2016-12-08 13:04:18
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
If a square matrix, A, has 2 identical rows, its
determinant is 0.
But A^-1 = A_adj/ det(A),
so A^-1 doesn't exist.
2007-03-28 05:39:36
·
answer #3
·
answered by steiner1745 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
a square (n x n) matrix with 2 identical rows is
equivalent to an (n-1 x n) matrix...does this give ya a hint?
:)
2007-03-28 03:17:46
·
answer #4
·
answered by mikedotcom 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
det = 0 so not invertible
suppose its n*n .. you have at most n-1 basis vectors locked into the matrix, and there is another whole dimension that is projected onto the n-1 dimensional plane ... if you tried to invert it ... you are projecting from n-1 dimensions to n dimensions and you haven't got enough information for a one-one mapping.
2007-03-28 03:18:13
·
answer #5
·
answered by hustolemyname 6
·
1⤊
0⤋