Proof of ##g(A_1, A_2, \cdots A_n) = c g (I_1, \cdots I_n)##.

In summary, by using the three given axioms, we can prove that the output of g will change sign n times and be multiplied by m different numbers when transforming from matrix A to the identity matrix I using Gauss-Jordan elimination. This leads to the conclusion that g(A1, ..., An) = (-1)^n * c1 * ... * cm * g(I1, ..., In). However, there may be issues with the problem statement and further clarification is needed.
  • #1
Hall
351
88
Homework Statement
Let's say ##g## is function satisfying the following three axioms, where ##A_i## is any n-tuple vector and ##I_k## is the third unit vector,

1. ##g(A_1, \cdots tA_k, \cdots A_n) = t g(A_1, \cdots A_k, \cdots A_n)## for all ##t \in R## and any ##A_k##

2. ## g(A_1, \cdots A_k + C, \cdots A_n) = g(A_1\cdots A_k, \cdots A_n )+ g(A_1, \cdots, C ,\cdots A_n)## for any n-tuple vector C and any ##A_k##

3. ##g(A_1, \cdots A_n)=0 ## if for some i and j ##A_i =A_j##
Relevant Equations
In fact, those ##A_k## are rows of ##n \times n## matrix.
How can we prove that
$$
g(A_1, \cdots A_n)= c g(I_1 \cdots I_n)$$?

From the those three axioms we can prove a property of g that if any of two vectors in domain exchange their respective places the sign of output of g will be changed.

Now, do we have to argue that any matrix can be changed into identity matrix by Gauss-Jordan elimination method?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
What are your thoughts? That 3 (being alternating) means that ##g## is fully anti-symmetric is a good start. What can you say about the As in terms of the Is?

Edit: The problem is also not very well defined. What is ##c## allowed to depend on? That two numbers differ through the multiplication of a different number is not a very restrictive statement.
 
  • #3
Considering each ##A_i## as rows of n-square matrix.

Let’s say moving from the matrix A to the identity matrix I, by Gauss-Jordan Method, it takes n number of interchangement of rows and m scalars were mutliplied: ##c_1, c_2, \cdots c_m## altogether in reaching from A to I, neglecting the adding of one row to the multiple of another, we can conclude:

1. Moving from A to I, ##g(A_1, \cdots, A_n)## changed signs n times, and

2. Moving from A to I, ##g(A_1, \cdots, A_n)## got multiplied by m different numbers, they are ##c_1 \cdots c_m##.

Therefore,
$$
g(A_1 \cdots, A_n) = (-1)^n c_1 \cdots c_m g (I_1, \cdots I_n)$$

I feel like I was not very rigorous.
 
  • #4
I do not understand what you are trying to do here.
 
  • #5
This reminds me of the properties defining the determinant, only multilinear map satisfying the conditions described in the OP. Iirc, it follows immediately by applying multilinearity .
 
  • #6
I don't think the problem is very well stated. What is c? Is ## I_k ## really the 3rd unit vector for every k; that would make ## g(I_1, ..., I_n) = 0 ##. Also, please write ## , \ldots, ## instead of ## \cdots ## unless you really mean iterated multiplication.
 

FAQ: Proof of ##g(A_1, A_2, \cdots A_n) = c g (I_1, \cdots I_n)##.

What is the meaning of "Proof of ##g(A_1, A_2, \cdots A_n) = c g (I_1, \cdots I_n)##"?

The statement "Proof of ##g(A_1, A_2, \cdots A_n) = c g (I_1, \cdots I_n)##" is a mathematical expression that represents the proof of a specific relationship between two sets of variables. It states that the function g, when applied to the variables A1, A2, ..., An, is equal to the constant c multiplied by the function g applied to the variables I1, ..., In.

What is the significance of this proof?

This proof is significant because it demonstrates a mathematical relationship between two sets of variables. It can be used to solve equations, make predictions, and understand the behavior of a system.

How is this proof useful in scientific research?

This proof can be useful in scientific research because it provides a mathematical basis for understanding and analyzing data. It can be used to validate theories, make predictions, and support experimental results.

Can this proof be applied to any set of variables?

Yes, this proof can be applied to any set of variables as long as they are compatible with the function g. However, the values of the variables may change depending on the specific context and application.

How can one verify the accuracy of this proof?

The accuracy of this proof can be verified by following the steps of the proof and checking for any errors or inconsistencies. It can also be verified by applying the proof to different sets of variables and comparing the results to the expected outcome.

Back
Top