Can Gauss-Jordan Elimination Help Me Find the Inverse of a 2x2 Matrix?

Click For Summary
Gauss-Jordan elimination can be used to find the inverse of a 2x2 matrix, but the process can become complex and messy. The discussion revolves around step-by-step algebraic manipulations, where participants help clarify the correct transformations needed to achieve the desired matrix form. Key points include ensuring that diagonal elements are set to 1 and managing variable tracking throughout the calculations. The final goal is to arrive at a matrix that accurately represents the inverse, which may differ from the standard formula if not executed correctly. Properly following the elimination steps is crucial to avoid errors in the algebra.
hoffmann
Messages
65
Reaction score
0
I need to find the inverse of a 2x2 matrix [a b ; c d] using Gauss-Jordan elimination.

I am halfway there but I'm stuck on the algebra because it gets really messy. Could anyone possibly do it step by step?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why don't you show us what you've got so far?
 
sure:

[ a b ; c d | 1 0 ; 0 1 ] -->
[ a b ; (ac/c) (ad/c) | 1 0 ; 0 (a/c) ] -->
[ a b ; 0 ((ad/c)/c) -b | -1 (a/c) ] -->
...

here's where I'm a little stuck. I'm bad at keeping track of every variable...i think i miss something along the way because of the messy algebra.
 
Assuming that your last line is supposed to be:
\begin{pmatrix} a & b &1 & 0 \\ 0 & \frac{ad}{c}-b & -1 & \frac{a}{c} \end{pmatrix}

then your doing fine so far. what is your next step?
 
here it is:

[ (a(((ad/c)-b)/b) (((ad/c)-b)/b) ; 0 ((ad/c) -b) | (((ad/c)-b)/b) 0 ; -1 (a/c) ]

look good?
 
Are you multiplying the top row by (ad/c-b)/b ? If so, you should get:
<br /> \begin{pmatrix} \frac{a(\frac{ad}{c}-b)}{b} &amp; (\frac{ad}{c}-b) &amp;\frac{(\frac{ad}{c}-b)}{b} &amp; 0 \\ 0 &amp; \frac{ad}{c}-b &amp; -1 &amp; \frac{a}{c} \end{pmatrix}<br />
 
ah right, so the next step is:

[ (a(((ad/c)-b)/b) - (((ad/c)-b)) 0 ; 0 ((ad/c) -b) | ((((ad/c)-b)/b) - (ad/c) -b) 0 ; -1 (a/c) ]

it's messy this way...sorry.
 
Wouldn't the step be to subtract the bottom row from the top row to get:
\begin{pmatrix} \frac{a(\frac{ad}{c}-b)}{b} &amp; 0 &amp;\frac{(\frac{ad}{c}-b)}{b}+1 &amp; \frac{-1}{c} \\ 0 &amp; \frac{ad}{c}-b &amp; -1 &amp; \frac{a}{c} \end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix} \frac{a(\frac{ad}{c}-b)}{b} &amp; 0 &amp;\frac{ad}{bc} &amp; \frac{-1}{c} \\ 0 &amp; \frac{ad}{c}-b &amp; -1 &amp; \frac{a}{c} \end{pmatrix}
 
alright, so now we have a matrix with zeros along the anti-diagonal. the inverse doesn't equal the inverse given by the 2x2 inverse formula. what went wrong?
 
  • #10
You still have to set the diagonal elements to 1: simply multiply the top row by b/(a(ad/c-b)) and the bottom row by 1/(ad/c-b)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
11K