I have seen a proof of the fact that for an invertible matrix A, An is also invertible and
(An)−1=(A−1)n.
The proof was by induction and it was mentioned that one has to use induction because one has that it is true for all n.
I am wondering why one has to use induction. Why can't one just say that
(An)(A−1)n=(AA−1)n=In=I
where one has used that A and A−1 by definition commute. Isn't this enough to show that An is also invertible and (An)−1=(A−1)n?
Answer
your proof is fine (to me, at least). I think if you wanted to be super rigorous, you'd need to use induction anyways to fully show that (An)(A−1)n=(AA−1)n because even though A and A−1 commute, you need to be sure it holds for arbitrarily large products of the two.
Honestly though, like I said, your proof is fine how it is.
No comments:
Post a Comment