Proving Invertibility of Matrices A & B: AB invertible

In summary, for two nxn matrices A and B such that AB is invertible, it can be proven that both A and B are invertible by showing that if either A or B were not invertible, then AB would not be invertible. This is done by assuming that there exists a nonzero vector v such that Bv = 0 or Av = 0, which contradicts the fact that AB is invertible. Therefore, both A and B must be invertible.
  • #1
mathboy
182
0
Question: Let A and B be nxn matrices such that AB is invertible. Prove that A and B are invertible.

All I have so far is that there exists a matrix C such that
(AB)C = I and C(AB) = I.

How do I use this to show that there exists D such that AD = DA = I and that there exists E such that BE = EB = I ?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
If no such D and E exist, then there are no such D and E such that

I = EB = E(DA)B = (ED)(AB),

contradicting the existence of C. Is that correct?
 
  • #3
Are you specifically looking for a "direct" proof? If not, then the simplest argument is: A matrix is invertible if and only if its determinant is non-zero. If AB is invertible, its determinant is non-zero. Also det(AB)= det(A)det(B). For a product of two numbers to be non-zero, neither can be zero- det(A) is non-zero so A is invertible; det(B) is non-zero so B is invertible.

I would agree that a direct proof, not using the determinant, would be preferable. For that, you will have to be careful. It is NOT true, in general, that if, for two functions f and g, f(g(x)) has an inverse, then f and g separately have inverses. To prove this for matrices (i.e. representing linear transformations) you will need to use the "linearity". In particular, if B is NOT invertible, then there must exist a non-zero vector, v, such that Bv= 0. But then ABv= A(Bv)= A0= 0.
 
  • #4
mathboy said:
If no such D and E exist, then there are no such D and E such that

I = EB = E(DA)B = (ED)(AB),

contradicting the existence of C. Is that correct?
I'm not sure it makes a lot of sense to say if "no such D and E" exist, and then write an equation with D and E! As I said before, the statement "if f(g(x)) has an inverse, then f(x) and g(x) must have inverses", for general functions, f and g, is NOT true. Let g:{a, b, c}-> {x} be defined by g(a)= x, g(b)= x, g(c)= x and f:{x}-> {y} be defined by f(x)= y. Then f(g) has no inverse because it maps all of {a, b, c} into y and is not "one to one". But g DOES have an inverse.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #5
Suppose B is singular then there exists a nonzero vector v such that Bv = 0 hence
(AB)v = A(Bv) = A(0) = 0 but AB is nonsingular so v must equal zero.

Similar situation for A as well.
 

FAQ: Proving Invertibility of Matrices A & B: AB invertible

What does it mean for a matrix to be invertible?

For a matrix to be invertible, it means that it has an inverse matrix that when multiplied together, produce the identity matrix. In other words, it is possible to reverse the operations performed on the matrix and obtain the original matrix.

How can I prove that a matrix is invertible?

To prove that a matrix is invertible, you can use the determinant and the rank of the matrix. If the determinant is non-zero and the rank is equal to the number of rows or columns, then the matrix is invertible.

What is the significance of proving that two matrices, A and B, when multiplied together are invertible?

Proving that two matrices, A and B, when multiplied together are invertible shows that the two matrices have an inverse relationship. This means that the operations performed on one matrix can be reversed by operations on the other matrix.

Is it possible for one matrix to be invertible while the other is not?

Yes, it is possible for one matrix to be invertible while the other is not. This is because the invertibility of a matrix depends on its own properties, such as its determinant and rank, rather than its relationship with other matrices.

Can invertibility be proven for any size or type of matrix?

Invertibility can be proven for any square matrix, regardless of its size or type. However, non-square matrices do not have an inverse and therefore cannot be proven to be invertible.

Similar threads

Replies
40
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top