This is taken from a problem in Introduction to Linear Algebra by Strang:
If an invertible matrix A commutes with C, show that A−1 commutes with C
This is what I tried to do, take note of the specific order in which I've multiplied the various matrices, as matrix multiplication is not commutative. (i.e.. left multiplication ≠ right multiplication)
Because A commutes with C, this means AC=CA
AC=CA⟹IAC=CAI⟹AA−1(AC)=(CA)A−1A (AA−1=I=A−1A)⟹A(A−1(AC))=((CA)A−1)A⟹A−1((AA−1)(AC))=A−1((CA)A−1)A) Left multiply by A−1⟹A−1A−1((AA−1)(AC))=A−1A−1(CA) Left multiply by A−1⟹A−1(C)=A−1A−1(CA)
But the problem comes up in the last step, as it not yet been proven that A−1 commutes with CA, and it would not constitute a proof to assume that A−1 commutes with CA, when we are trying to find out if A−1 commutes with C in the first place. If A−1 did commute with CA then we could proceed as follows.
Assuming A−1 commutes with CA⟹A−1(C)=(CA)A−1A−1⟹A−1(C)=(C)(AA−1)A−1⟹A−1(C)=(C)A−1q.e.d
For reference this was the official solution, which I'm quite sure makes the assumption that A−1 commutes with CA.
If AC=CA , multiply left and right by A−1 to find CA−1=A−1C
The above only works if left multiplication by A−1 is equivalent to right multiplication by A−1, which only occurs if it is assumed that A−1 commutes with CA
But I'm not satisfied with the above proof method in assuming A−1 commutes with CA, nor the official solution, which I'm sure is making the same assumption. Is there any possible way to complete the proof without making this assumption?
Answer
Suppose that AC=CA. Multiplying on the right by A−1, we get ACA−1=C, and then multiplying on the left by A−1, we get CA−1=A−1C.
No comments:
Post a Comment