Compute this determinant only using determinant properties
$begingroup$
Compute $$begin{vmatrix}
1 & x & x^2 & x^3 \
1 & y & y^2 & y^3 \
1 & z & z^2 & z^3 \
1 & x+y+z & xy+yz+zx & xyz
end{vmatrix}$$,where $x,y,z in mathbb{R}$.
I tried to create zeroes on the first line,but this doesn't seem to work.
matrices determinant
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Compute $$begin{vmatrix}
1 & x & x^2 & x^3 \
1 & y & y^2 & y^3 \
1 & z & z^2 & z^3 \
1 & x+y+z & xy+yz+zx & xyz
end{vmatrix}$$,where $x,y,z in mathbb{R}$.
I tried to create zeroes on the first line,but this doesn't seem to work.
matrices determinant
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Compute $$begin{vmatrix}
1 & x & x^2 & x^3 \
1 & y & y^2 & y^3 \
1 & z & z^2 & z^3 \
1 & x+y+z & xy+yz+zx & xyz
end{vmatrix}$$,where $x,y,z in mathbb{R}$.
I tried to create zeroes on the first line,but this doesn't seem to work.
matrices determinant
$endgroup$
Compute $$begin{vmatrix}
1 & x & x^2 & x^3 \
1 & y & y^2 & y^3 \
1 & z & z^2 & z^3 \
1 & x+y+z & xy+yz+zx & xyz
end{vmatrix}$$,where $x,y,z in mathbb{R}$.
I tried to create zeroes on the first line,but this doesn't seem to work.
matrices determinant
matrices determinant
edited Dec 4 '18 at 22:20
José Carlos Santos
153k22123224
153k22123224
asked Dec 4 '18 at 21:41
JoMathJoMath
82
82
add a comment |
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
That determinant is $0$, because the fourth column is equal to the sum of:
- the first column times $xyz$;
- the second column times $-xy-xz-yz$;
- the third column times $x+y+z$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Can you take a look at "Remark 2" I just added to my solution, attempting to generalize the computation of this determinant to a larger number of unknowns, at least in the even case of 4 variables, I find a nice result that somewhat generalizes Vandermonde determinant. Have you seen similar results ?
$endgroup$
– Jean Marie
Dec 5 '18 at 7:29
$begingroup$
@JeanMarie, the place I'd look for something similar would be in a Symmetric Functions book.
$endgroup$
– ancientmathematician
Dec 5 '18 at 7:51
$begingroup$
@ancientmathematician You are right.
$endgroup$
– Jean Marie
Dec 5 '18 at 7:54
$begingroup$
@JeanMarie That's cute (+1) and, no, I have never seen it.
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
Dec 5 '18 at 8:48
$begingroup$
@JeanMarie, I am not sure if you had the general case, so I have given it as a solution: but of course I am indebted to you.
$endgroup$
– ancientmathematician
Dec 9 '18 at 13:36
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Here is a solution whose spirit is more "matricial" than "determinantal", but that explains the why and how of this exercice, and gives the result (determinant = 0).
Let us recall first that "the" third degree polynomial with roots $x,y,z$ can be written :
$$(t-x)(t-y)(t-z)=-xyz+(xy+yz+zx)t-(x+y+z)t^2+t^3$$
(we have chosen to use the article "the" because we comply to the classical convention with dominant coefficient is $1$).
In particular, taking $t=x$, the LHS is $0$, thus we have
$$-xyz+(xy+yz+zx)x-(x+y+z)x^2+x^3=0 tag{1}$$
Similar identities for $y$ and $z$ :
$$-xyz+(xy+yz+zx)y-(x+y+z)y^2+y^3=0 tag{2}$$
$$-xyz+(xy+yz+zx)z-(x+y+z)z^2+z^3=0 tag{3}$$
Now consider the matrix product :
$$begin{pmatrix}1 & x & x^2 & x^3 \
1 & y & y^2 & y^3 \
1 & z & z^2 & z^3 \
1 & x+y+z & xy+yz+zx & xyzend{pmatrix}begin{pmatrix}-xyz\xy+yz+zx\-(x+y+z)\1end{pmatrix}=begin{pmatrix}0\0\0\0end{pmatrix} tag{4}$$
(the three first zeros are due to identities (1), (2), (3) ; the last zero being due to terms cancellations).
What conclusion drawn from (4) ? That the image of a non zero vector is the zero vector ; as the zero vector is also sent onto the zero vector, the transformation associated with the matrix is not a bijection ; thus its determinant is zero.
Remark 1 : This is in fact very close to the (direct) solution given by @José Carlos Santos, but for the fact that the coefficients survene in a natural way.
Remark 2 : A similar result ($det M = 0$) can be generalized to any odd number of parameters (odd in order than the cancellations can be done for obtaining a zero last coefficient). In the even case with letters $x,y,z,t$, we get the following result for the analoguous determinant
$$det(M)=(t - x)(t - y)(t - z)(y - x)(z - x)(z - y)(t^2x^2 + t^2y^2 + t^2z^2 + x^2y^2 + x^2z^2 + y^2z^2)$$
which is rather simple and a kind of generalization of the Vandermonde determinant.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It seems worth giving a complete solution for the general case. Obviously I am indebted to @Jean Marie.
So let $x_1,dots, x_n$ be variables, and let $a_0,a_1, dots, a_n$ be the elementary symmetric functions in these, so that
$$
p(X):=prod_{i}(X-x_i)=sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}X^{j},
$$ and
$$
a_s=sum_{i_1<i_2<dots<i_s} x_{i_{1}}x_{i_{2}}dots x_{i_{s}}.
$$
Now consider the determinant of the $(n+1)times (n+1)$ matrix
$$
begin{bmatrix}
1 & 1 & dots & 1 & a_0\
x_1 & x_2 & dots & x_n & a_1\
vdots &vdots&ddots &vdots &vdots\
x_1^n & x_2^n & dots & x_n^n & a_n\
end{bmatrix},
$$
whose rows we label for convenience from $0$ to $n$.
As $a_0=1$ the value of the determinant will be unchanged after the following row-operation:
$$
text{replace } R_{n} text{ by }sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j} R_{j}.
$$
This means we can consider the determinant of this matrix:
$$
begin{bmatrix}
1 & 1 & dots & 1 & a_0\
x_1 & x_2 & dots & x_n & a_1\
vdots &vdots&ddots &vdots &vdots\
x_1^{n-1} & x_2^{n-1} & dots & x_n^{n-1} & a_{n-1}\
p(x_1) & p(x_2) & dots & p(x_n) & sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}a_j\
end{bmatrix},
$$
which simplifies to
$$
begin{bmatrix}
1 & 1 & dots & 1 & a_0\
x_1 & x_2 & dots & x_n & a_1\
vdots &vdots&ddots &vdots &vdots\
x_1^{n-1} & x_2^{n-1} & dots & x_n^{n-1} & a_{n-1}\
0 & 0 & dots & 0 & sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}a_j\
end{bmatrix}.
$$
The original determinant is therefore a product of the Vandermonde determinant $prod_{i<j}(x_i-x_j)$ and the symmetric function $alpha:=sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}a_j$. It is the latter that we must simplify.
In the case when $n$ is odd $alpha$ simplifies at once to $0$; the equal terms $a_{n-j}a_j$ and $a_j a_{n-j}$ have opposite sign and so cancel out.
In the case when $n=2k$ is even things are a little more complicated, but in this case (as we show below)
$$
alpha=sum_{i_1<i_2<dots<i_k} x_{i_{1}}^2 x_{i_{2}}^2 dots x_{i_{k}}^2,
$$
the $k$-th elementary symmetric function in the squares of the original variables.
To see this, note first that
$$
(-1)^n p(-X)=prod_{i}(X+x_i)=sum_{j=0}^{n} a_{n-j}X^{j},
$$
so that
$$
(sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}X^{j})(sum_{j=0}^{n} a_{n-j}X^{j})=prod_{i}(X-x_i) prod_{i}(X+x_i)=prod_{i}(X^2 - x_i^2).
$$
If we now pick out the coefficient of $X^{2k}$ on each side we have the promised $
alpha=sum_{i_1<i_2<dots<i_k} x_{i_{1}}^2 x_{i_{2}}^2 dots x_{i_{k}}^2.
$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3026218%2fcompute-this-determinant-only-using-determinant-properties%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
That determinant is $0$, because the fourth column is equal to the sum of:
- the first column times $xyz$;
- the second column times $-xy-xz-yz$;
- the third column times $x+y+z$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Can you take a look at "Remark 2" I just added to my solution, attempting to generalize the computation of this determinant to a larger number of unknowns, at least in the even case of 4 variables, I find a nice result that somewhat generalizes Vandermonde determinant. Have you seen similar results ?
$endgroup$
– Jean Marie
Dec 5 '18 at 7:29
$begingroup$
@JeanMarie, the place I'd look for something similar would be in a Symmetric Functions book.
$endgroup$
– ancientmathematician
Dec 5 '18 at 7:51
$begingroup$
@ancientmathematician You are right.
$endgroup$
– Jean Marie
Dec 5 '18 at 7:54
$begingroup$
@JeanMarie That's cute (+1) and, no, I have never seen it.
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
Dec 5 '18 at 8:48
$begingroup$
@JeanMarie, I am not sure if you had the general case, so I have given it as a solution: but of course I am indebted to you.
$endgroup$
– ancientmathematician
Dec 9 '18 at 13:36
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
That determinant is $0$, because the fourth column is equal to the sum of:
- the first column times $xyz$;
- the second column times $-xy-xz-yz$;
- the third column times $x+y+z$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Can you take a look at "Remark 2" I just added to my solution, attempting to generalize the computation of this determinant to a larger number of unknowns, at least in the even case of 4 variables, I find a nice result that somewhat generalizes Vandermonde determinant. Have you seen similar results ?
$endgroup$
– Jean Marie
Dec 5 '18 at 7:29
$begingroup$
@JeanMarie, the place I'd look for something similar would be in a Symmetric Functions book.
$endgroup$
– ancientmathematician
Dec 5 '18 at 7:51
$begingroup$
@ancientmathematician You are right.
$endgroup$
– Jean Marie
Dec 5 '18 at 7:54
$begingroup$
@JeanMarie That's cute (+1) and, no, I have never seen it.
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
Dec 5 '18 at 8:48
$begingroup$
@JeanMarie, I am not sure if you had the general case, so I have given it as a solution: but of course I am indebted to you.
$endgroup$
– ancientmathematician
Dec 9 '18 at 13:36
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
That determinant is $0$, because the fourth column is equal to the sum of:
- the first column times $xyz$;
- the second column times $-xy-xz-yz$;
- the third column times $x+y+z$.
$endgroup$
That determinant is $0$, because the fourth column is equal to the sum of:
- the first column times $xyz$;
- the second column times $-xy-xz-yz$;
- the third column times $x+y+z$.
answered Dec 4 '18 at 22:17
José Carlos SantosJosé Carlos Santos
153k22123224
153k22123224
$begingroup$
Can you take a look at "Remark 2" I just added to my solution, attempting to generalize the computation of this determinant to a larger number of unknowns, at least in the even case of 4 variables, I find a nice result that somewhat generalizes Vandermonde determinant. Have you seen similar results ?
$endgroup$
– Jean Marie
Dec 5 '18 at 7:29
$begingroup$
@JeanMarie, the place I'd look for something similar would be in a Symmetric Functions book.
$endgroup$
– ancientmathematician
Dec 5 '18 at 7:51
$begingroup$
@ancientmathematician You are right.
$endgroup$
– Jean Marie
Dec 5 '18 at 7:54
$begingroup$
@JeanMarie That's cute (+1) and, no, I have never seen it.
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
Dec 5 '18 at 8:48
$begingroup$
@JeanMarie, I am not sure if you had the general case, so I have given it as a solution: but of course I am indebted to you.
$endgroup$
– ancientmathematician
Dec 9 '18 at 13:36
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Can you take a look at "Remark 2" I just added to my solution, attempting to generalize the computation of this determinant to a larger number of unknowns, at least in the even case of 4 variables, I find a nice result that somewhat generalizes Vandermonde determinant. Have you seen similar results ?
$endgroup$
– Jean Marie
Dec 5 '18 at 7:29
$begingroup$
@JeanMarie, the place I'd look for something similar would be in a Symmetric Functions book.
$endgroup$
– ancientmathematician
Dec 5 '18 at 7:51
$begingroup$
@ancientmathematician You are right.
$endgroup$
– Jean Marie
Dec 5 '18 at 7:54
$begingroup$
@JeanMarie That's cute (+1) and, no, I have never seen it.
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
Dec 5 '18 at 8:48
$begingroup$
@JeanMarie, I am not sure if you had the general case, so I have given it as a solution: but of course I am indebted to you.
$endgroup$
– ancientmathematician
Dec 9 '18 at 13:36
$begingroup$
Can you take a look at "Remark 2" I just added to my solution, attempting to generalize the computation of this determinant to a larger number of unknowns, at least in the even case of 4 variables, I find a nice result that somewhat generalizes Vandermonde determinant. Have you seen similar results ?
$endgroup$
– Jean Marie
Dec 5 '18 at 7:29
$begingroup$
Can you take a look at "Remark 2" I just added to my solution, attempting to generalize the computation of this determinant to a larger number of unknowns, at least in the even case of 4 variables, I find a nice result that somewhat generalizes Vandermonde determinant. Have you seen similar results ?
$endgroup$
– Jean Marie
Dec 5 '18 at 7:29
$begingroup$
@JeanMarie, the place I'd look for something similar would be in a Symmetric Functions book.
$endgroup$
– ancientmathematician
Dec 5 '18 at 7:51
$begingroup$
@JeanMarie, the place I'd look for something similar would be in a Symmetric Functions book.
$endgroup$
– ancientmathematician
Dec 5 '18 at 7:51
$begingroup$
@ancientmathematician You are right.
$endgroup$
– Jean Marie
Dec 5 '18 at 7:54
$begingroup$
@ancientmathematician You are right.
$endgroup$
– Jean Marie
Dec 5 '18 at 7:54
$begingroup$
@JeanMarie That's cute (+1) and, no, I have never seen it.
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
Dec 5 '18 at 8:48
$begingroup$
@JeanMarie That's cute (+1) and, no, I have never seen it.
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
Dec 5 '18 at 8:48
$begingroup$
@JeanMarie, I am not sure if you had the general case, so I have given it as a solution: but of course I am indebted to you.
$endgroup$
– ancientmathematician
Dec 9 '18 at 13:36
$begingroup$
@JeanMarie, I am not sure if you had the general case, so I have given it as a solution: but of course I am indebted to you.
$endgroup$
– ancientmathematician
Dec 9 '18 at 13:36
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Here is a solution whose spirit is more "matricial" than "determinantal", but that explains the why and how of this exercice, and gives the result (determinant = 0).
Let us recall first that "the" third degree polynomial with roots $x,y,z$ can be written :
$$(t-x)(t-y)(t-z)=-xyz+(xy+yz+zx)t-(x+y+z)t^2+t^3$$
(we have chosen to use the article "the" because we comply to the classical convention with dominant coefficient is $1$).
In particular, taking $t=x$, the LHS is $0$, thus we have
$$-xyz+(xy+yz+zx)x-(x+y+z)x^2+x^3=0 tag{1}$$
Similar identities for $y$ and $z$ :
$$-xyz+(xy+yz+zx)y-(x+y+z)y^2+y^3=0 tag{2}$$
$$-xyz+(xy+yz+zx)z-(x+y+z)z^2+z^3=0 tag{3}$$
Now consider the matrix product :
$$begin{pmatrix}1 & x & x^2 & x^3 \
1 & y & y^2 & y^3 \
1 & z & z^2 & z^3 \
1 & x+y+z & xy+yz+zx & xyzend{pmatrix}begin{pmatrix}-xyz\xy+yz+zx\-(x+y+z)\1end{pmatrix}=begin{pmatrix}0\0\0\0end{pmatrix} tag{4}$$
(the three first zeros are due to identities (1), (2), (3) ; the last zero being due to terms cancellations).
What conclusion drawn from (4) ? That the image of a non zero vector is the zero vector ; as the zero vector is also sent onto the zero vector, the transformation associated with the matrix is not a bijection ; thus its determinant is zero.
Remark 1 : This is in fact very close to the (direct) solution given by @José Carlos Santos, but for the fact that the coefficients survene in a natural way.
Remark 2 : A similar result ($det M = 0$) can be generalized to any odd number of parameters (odd in order than the cancellations can be done for obtaining a zero last coefficient). In the even case with letters $x,y,z,t$, we get the following result for the analoguous determinant
$$det(M)=(t - x)(t - y)(t - z)(y - x)(z - x)(z - y)(t^2x^2 + t^2y^2 + t^2z^2 + x^2y^2 + x^2z^2 + y^2z^2)$$
which is rather simple and a kind of generalization of the Vandermonde determinant.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Here is a solution whose spirit is more "matricial" than "determinantal", but that explains the why and how of this exercice, and gives the result (determinant = 0).
Let us recall first that "the" third degree polynomial with roots $x,y,z$ can be written :
$$(t-x)(t-y)(t-z)=-xyz+(xy+yz+zx)t-(x+y+z)t^2+t^3$$
(we have chosen to use the article "the" because we comply to the classical convention with dominant coefficient is $1$).
In particular, taking $t=x$, the LHS is $0$, thus we have
$$-xyz+(xy+yz+zx)x-(x+y+z)x^2+x^3=0 tag{1}$$
Similar identities for $y$ and $z$ :
$$-xyz+(xy+yz+zx)y-(x+y+z)y^2+y^3=0 tag{2}$$
$$-xyz+(xy+yz+zx)z-(x+y+z)z^2+z^3=0 tag{3}$$
Now consider the matrix product :
$$begin{pmatrix}1 & x & x^2 & x^3 \
1 & y & y^2 & y^3 \
1 & z & z^2 & z^3 \
1 & x+y+z & xy+yz+zx & xyzend{pmatrix}begin{pmatrix}-xyz\xy+yz+zx\-(x+y+z)\1end{pmatrix}=begin{pmatrix}0\0\0\0end{pmatrix} tag{4}$$
(the three first zeros are due to identities (1), (2), (3) ; the last zero being due to terms cancellations).
What conclusion drawn from (4) ? That the image of a non zero vector is the zero vector ; as the zero vector is also sent onto the zero vector, the transformation associated with the matrix is not a bijection ; thus its determinant is zero.
Remark 1 : This is in fact very close to the (direct) solution given by @José Carlos Santos, but for the fact that the coefficients survene in a natural way.
Remark 2 : A similar result ($det M = 0$) can be generalized to any odd number of parameters (odd in order than the cancellations can be done for obtaining a zero last coefficient). In the even case with letters $x,y,z,t$, we get the following result for the analoguous determinant
$$det(M)=(t - x)(t - y)(t - z)(y - x)(z - x)(z - y)(t^2x^2 + t^2y^2 + t^2z^2 + x^2y^2 + x^2z^2 + y^2z^2)$$
which is rather simple and a kind of generalization of the Vandermonde determinant.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Here is a solution whose spirit is more "matricial" than "determinantal", but that explains the why and how of this exercice, and gives the result (determinant = 0).
Let us recall first that "the" third degree polynomial with roots $x,y,z$ can be written :
$$(t-x)(t-y)(t-z)=-xyz+(xy+yz+zx)t-(x+y+z)t^2+t^3$$
(we have chosen to use the article "the" because we comply to the classical convention with dominant coefficient is $1$).
In particular, taking $t=x$, the LHS is $0$, thus we have
$$-xyz+(xy+yz+zx)x-(x+y+z)x^2+x^3=0 tag{1}$$
Similar identities for $y$ and $z$ :
$$-xyz+(xy+yz+zx)y-(x+y+z)y^2+y^3=0 tag{2}$$
$$-xyz+(xy+yz+zx)z-(x+y+z)z^2+z^3=0 tag{3}$$
Now consider the matrix product :
$$begin{pmatrix}1 & x & x^2 & x^3 \
1 & y & y^2 & y^3 \
1 & z & z^2 & z^3 \
1 & x+y+z & xy+yz+zx & xyzend{pmatrix}begin{pmatrix}-xyz\xy+yz+zx\-(x+y+z)\1end{pmatrix}=begin{pmatrix}0\0\0\0end{pmatrix} tag{4}$$
(the three first zeros are due to identities (1), (2), (3) ; the last zero being due to terms cancellations).
What conclusion drawn from (4) ? That the image of a non zero vector is the zero vector ; as the zero vector is also sent onto the zero vector, the transformation associated with the matrix is not a bijection ; thus its determinant is zero.
Remark 1 : This is in fact very close to the (direct) solution given by @José Carlos Santos, but for the fact that the coefficients survene in a natural way.
Remark 2 : A similar result ($det M = 0$) can be generalized to any odd number of parameters (odd in order than the cancellations can be done for obtaining a zero last coefficient). In the even case with letters $x,y,z,t$, we get the following result for the analoguous determinant
$$det(M)=(t - x)(t - y)(t - z)(y - x)(z - x)(z - y)(t^2x^2 + t^2y^2 + t^2z^2 + x^2y^2 + x^2z^2 + y^2z^2)$$
which is rather simple and a kind of generalization of the Vandermonde determinant.
$endgroup$
Here is a solution whose spirit is more "matricial" than "determinantal", but that explains the why and how of this exercice, and gives the result (determinant = 0).
Let us recall first that "the" third degree polynomial with roots $x,y,z$ can be written :
$$(t-x)(t-y)(t-z)=-xyz+(xy+yz+zx)t-(x+y+z)t^2+t^3$$
(we have chosen to use the article "the" because we comply to the classical convention with dominant coefficient is $1$).
In particular, taking $t=x$, the LHS is $0$, thus we have
$$-xyz+(xy+yz+zx)x-(x+y+z)x^2+x^3=0 tag{1}$$
Similar identities for $y$ and $z$ :
$$-xyz+(xy+yz+zx)y-(x+y+z)y^2+y^3=0 tag{2}$$
$$-xyz+(xy+yz+zx)z-(x+y+z)z^2+z^3=0 tag{3}$$
Now consider the matrix product :
$$begin{pmatrix}1 & x & x^2 & x^3 \
1 & y & y^2 & y^3 \
1 & z & z^2 & z^3 \
1 & x+y+z & xy+yz+zx & xyzend{pmatrix}begin{pmatrix}-xyz\xy+yz+zx\-(x+y+z)\1end{pmatrix}=begin{pmatrix}0\0\0\0end{pmatrix} tag{4}$$
(the three first zeros are due to identities (1), (2), (3) ; the last zero being due to terms cancellations).
What conclusion drawn from (4) ? That the image of a non zero vector is the zero vector ; as the zero vector is also sent onto the zero vector, the transformation associated with the matrix is not a bijection ; thus its determinant is zero.
Remark 1 : This is in fact very close to the (direct) solution given by @José Carlos Santos, but for the fact that the coefficients survene in a natural way.
Remark 2 : A similar result ($det M = 0$) can be generalized to any odd number of parameters (odd in order than the cancellations can be done for obtaining a zero last coefficient). In the even case with letters $x,y,z,t$, we get the following result for the analoguous determinant
$$det(M)=(t - x)(t - y)(t - z)(y - x)(z - x)(z - y)(t^2x^2 + t^2y^2 + t^2z^2 + x^2y^2 + x^2z^2 + y^2z^2)$$
which is rather simple and a kind of generalization of the Vandermonde determinant.
edited Dec 5 '18 at 7:24
answered Dec 4 '18 at 23:14
Jean MarieJean Marie
28.8k41949
28.8k41949
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It seems worth giving a complete solution for the general case. Obviously I am indebted to @Jean Marie.
So let $x_1,dots, x_n$ be variables, and let $a_0,a_1, dots, a_n$ be the elementary symmetric functions in these, so that
$$
p(X):=prod_{i}(X-x_i)=sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}X^{j},
$$ and
$$
a_s=sum_{i_1<i_2<dots<i_s} x_{i_{1}}x_{i_{2}}dots x_{i_{s}}.
$$
Now consider the determinant of the $(n+1)times (n+1)$ matrix
$$
begin{bmatrix}
1 & 1 & dots & 1 & a_0\
x_1 & x_2 & dots & x_n & a_1\
vdots &vdots&ddots &vdots &vdots\
x_1^n & x_2^n & dots & x_n^n & a_n\
end{bmatrix},
$$
whose rows we label for convenience from $0$ to $n$.
As $a_0=1$ the value of the determinant will be unchanged after the following row-operation:
$$
text{replace } R_{n} text{ by }sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j} R_{j}.
$$
This means we can consider the determinant of this matrix:
$$
begin{bmatrix}
1 & 1 & dots & 1 & a_0\
x_1 & x_2 & dots & x_n & a_1\
vdots &vdots&ddots &vdots &vdots\
x_1^{n-1} & x_2^{n-1} & dots & x_n^{n-1} & a_{n-1}\
p(x_1) & p(x_2) & dots & p(x_n) & sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}a_j\
end{bmatrix},
$$
which simplifies to
$$
begin{bmatrix}
1 & 1 & dots & 1 & a_0\
x_1 & x_2 & dots & x_n & a_1\
vdots &vdots&ddots &vdots &vdots\
x_1^{n-1} & x_2^{n-1} & dots & x_n^{n-1} & a_{n-1}\
0 & 0 & dots & 0 & sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}a_j\
end{bmatrix}.
$$
The original determinant is therefore a product of the Vandermonde determinant $prod_{i<j}(x_i-x_j)$ and the symmetric function $alpha:=sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}a_j$. It is the latter that we must simplify.
In the case when $n$ is odd $alpha$ simplifies at once to $0$; the equal terms $a_{n-j}a_j$ and $a_j a_{n-j}$ have opposite sign and so cancel out.
In the case when $n=2k$ is even things are a little more complicated, but in this case (as we show below)
$$
alpha=sum_{i_1<i_2<dots<i_k} x_{i_{1}}^2 x_{i_{2}}^2 dots x_{i_{k}}^2,
$$
the $k$-th elementary symmetric function in the squares of the original variables.
To see this, note first that
$$
(-1)^n p(-X)=prod_{i}(X+x_i)=sum_{j=0}^{n} a_{n-j}X^{j},
$$
so that
$$
(sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}X^{j})(sum_{j=0}^{n} a_{n-j}X^{j})=prod_{i}(X-x_i) prod_{i}(X+x_i)=prod_{i}(X^2 - x_i^2).
$$
If we now pick out the coefficient of $X^{2k}$ on each side we have the promised $
alpha=sum_{i_1<i_2<dots<i_k} x_{i_{1}}^2 x_{i_{2}}^2 dots x_{i_{k}}^2.
$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It seems worth giving a complete solution for the general case. Obviously I am indebted to @Jean Marie.
So let $x_1,dots, x_n$ be variables, and let $a_0,a_1, dots, a_n$ be the elementary symmetric functions in these, so that
$$
p(X):=prod_{i}(X-x_i)=sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}X^{j},
$$ and
$$
a_s=sum_{i_1<i_2<dots<i_s} x_{i_{1}}x_{i_{2}}dots x_{i_{s}}.
$$
Now consider the determinant of the $(n+1)times (n+1)$ matrix
$$
begin{bmatrix}
1 & 1 & dots & 1 & a_0\
x_1 & x_2 & dots & x_n & a_1\
vdots &vdots&ddots &vdots &vdots\
x_1^n & x_2^n & dots & x_n^n & a_n\
end{bmatrix},
$$
whose rows we label for convenience from $0$ to $n$.
As $a_0=1$ the value of the determinant will be unchanged after the following row-operation:
$$
text{replace } R_{n} text{ by }sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j} R_{j}.
$$
This means we can consider the determinant of this matrix:
$$
begin{bmatrix}
1 & 1 & dots & 1 & a_0\
x_1 & x_2 & dots & x_n & a_1\
vdots &vdots&ddots &vdots &vdots\
x_1^{n-1} & x_2^{n-1} & dots & x_n^{n-1} & a_{n-1}\
p(x_1) & p(x_2) & dots & p(x_n) & sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}a_j\
end{bmatrix},
$$
which simplifies to
$$
begin{bmatrix}
1 & 1 & dots & 1 & a_0\
x_1 & x_2 & dots & x_n & a_1\
vdots &vdots&ddots &vdots &vdots\
x_1^{n-1} & x_2^{n-1} & dots & x_n^{n-1} & a_{n-1}\
0 & 0 & dots & 0 & sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}a_j\
end{bmatrix}.
$$
The original determinant is therefore a product of the Vandermonde determinant $prod_{i<j}(x_i-x_j)$ and the symmetric function $alpha:=sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}a_j$. It is the latter that we must simplify.
In the case when $n$ is odd $alpha$ simplifies at once to $0$; the equal terms $a_{n-j}a_j$ and $a_j a_{n-j}$ have opposite sign and so cancel out.
In the case when $n=2k$ is even things are a little more complicated, but in this case (as we show below)
$$
alpha=sum_{i_1<i_2<dots<i_k} x_{i_{1}}^2 x_{i_{2}}^2 dots x_{i_{k}}^2,
$$
the $k$-th elementary symmetric function in the squares of the original variables.
To see this, note first that
$$
(-1)^n p(-X)=prod_{i}(X+x_i)=sum_{j=0}^{n} a_{n-j}X^{j},
$$
so that
$$
(sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}X^{j})(sum_{j=0}^{n} a_{n-j}X^{j})=prod_{i}(X-x_i) prod_{i}(X+x_i)=prod_{i}(X^2 - x_i^2).
$$
If we now pick out the coefficient of $X^{2k}$ on each side we have the promised $
alpha=sum_{i_1<i_2<dots<i_k} x_{i_{1}}^2 x_{i_{2}}^2 dots x_{i_{k}}^2.
$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It seems worth giving a complete solution for the general case. Obviously I am indebted to @Jean Marie.
So let $x_1,dots, x_n$ be variables, and let $a_0,a_1, dots, a_n$ be the elementary symmetric functions in these, so that
$$
p(X):=prod_{i}(X-x_i)=sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}X^{j},
$$ and
$$
a_s=sum_{i_1<i_2<dots<i_s} x_{i_{1}}x_{i_{2}}dots x_{i_{s}}.
$$
Now consider the determinant of the $(n+1)times (n+1)$ matrix
$$
begin{bmatrix}
1 & 1 & dots & 1 & a_0\
x_1 & x_2 & dots & x_n & a_1\
vdots &vdots&ddots &vdots &vdots\
x_1^n & x_2^n & dots & x_n^n & a_n\
end{bmatrix},
$$
whose rows we label for convenience from $0$ to $n$.
As $a_0=1$ the value of the determinant will be unchanged after the following row-operation:
$$
text{replace } R_{n} text{ by }sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j} R_{j}.
$$
This means we can consider the determinant of this matrix:
$$
begin{bmatrix}
1 & 1 & dots & 1 & a_0\
x_1 & x_2 & dots & x_n & a_1\
vdots &vdots&ddots &vdots &vdots\
x_1^{n-1} & x_2^{n-1} & dots & x_n^{n-1} & a_{n-1}\
p(x_1) & p(x_2) & dots & p(x_n) & sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}a_j\
end{bmatrix},
$$
which simplifies to
$$
begin{bmatrix}
1 & 1 & dots & 1 & a_0\
x_1 & x_2 & dots & x_n & a_1\
vdots &vdots&ddots &vdots &vdots\
x_1^{n-1} & x_2^{n-1} & dots & x_n^{n-1} & a_{n-1}\
0 & 0 & dots & 0 & sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}a_j\
end{bmatrix}.
$$
The original determinant is therefore a product of the Vandermonde determinant $prod_{i<j}(x_i-x_j)$ and the symmetric function $alpha:=sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}a_j$. It is the latter that we must simplify.
In the case when $n$ is odd $alpha$ simplifies at once to $0$; the equal terms $a_{n-j}a_j$ and $a_j a_{n-j}$ have opposite sign and so cancel out.
In the case when $n=2k$ is even things are a little more complicated, but in this case (as we show below)
$$
alpha=sum_{i_1<i_2<dots<i_k} x_{i_{1}}^2 x_{i_{2}}^2 dots x_{i_{k}}^2,
$$
the $k$-th elementary symmetric function in the squares of the original variables.
To see this, note first that
$$
(-1)^n p(-X)=prod_{i}(X+x_i)=sum_{j=0}^{n} a_{n-j}X^{j},
$$
so that
$$
(sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}X^{j})(sum_{j=0}^{n} a_{n-j}X^{j})=prod_{i}(X-x_i) prod_{i}(X+x_i)=prod_{i}(X^2 - x_i^2).
$$
If we now pick out the coefficient of $X^{2k}$ on each side we have the promised $
alpha=sum_{i_1<i_2<dots<i_k} x_{i_{1}}^2 x_{i_{2}}^2 dots x_{i_{k}}^2.
$
$endgroup$
It seems worth giving a complete solution for the general case. Obviously I am indebted to @Jean Marie.
So let $x_1,dots, x_n$ be variables, and let $a_0,a_1, dots, a_n$ be the elementary symmetric functions in these, so that
$$
p(X):=prod_{i}(X-x_i)=sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}X^{j},
$$ and
$$
a_s=sum_{i_1<i_2<dots<i_s} x_{i_{1}}x_{i_{2}}dots x_{i_{s}}.
$$
Now consider the determinant of the $(n+1)times (n+1)$ matrix
$$
begin{bmatrix}
1 & 1 & dots & 1 & a_0\
x_1 & x_2 & dots & x_n & a_1\
vdots &vdots&ddots &vdots &vdots\
x_1^n & x_2^n & dots & x_n^n & a_n\
end{bmatrix},
$$
whose rows we label for convenience from $0$ to $n$.
As $a_0=1$ the value of the determinant will be unchanged after the following row-operation:
$$
text{replace } R_{n} text{ by }sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j} R_{j}.
$$
This means we can consider the determinant of this matrix:
$$
begin{bmatrix}
1 & 1 & dots & 1 & a_0\
x_1 & x_2 & dots & x_n & a_1\
vdots &vdots&ddots &vdots &vdots\
x_1^{n-1} & x_2^{n-1} & dots & x_n^{n-1} & a_{n-1}\
p(x_1) & p(x_2) & dots & p(x_n) & sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}a_j\
end{bmatrix},
$$
which simplifies to
$$
begin{bmatrix}
1 & 1 & dots & 1 & a_0\
x_1 & x_2 & dots & x_n & a_1\
vdots &vdots&ddots &vdots &vdots\
x_1^{n-1} & x_2^{n-1} & dots & x_n^{n-1} & a_{n-1}\
0 & 0 & dots & 0 & sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}a_j\
end{bmatrix}.
$$
The original determinant is therefore a product of the Vandermonde determinant $prod_{i<j}(x_i-x_j)$ and the symmetric function $alpha:=sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}a_j$. It is the latter that we must simplify.
In the case when $n$ is odd $alpha$ simplifies at once to $0$; the equal terms $a_{n-j}a_j$ and $a_j a_{n-j}$ have opposite sign and so cancel out.
In the case when $n=2k$ is even things are a little more complicated, but in this case (as we show below)
$$
alpha=sum_{i_1<i_2<dots<i_k} x_{i_{1}}^2 x_{i_{2}}^2 dots x_{i_{k}}^2,
$$
the $k$-th elementary symmetric function in the squares of the original variables.
To see this, note first that
$$
(-1)^n p(-X)=prod_{i}(X+x_i)=sum_{j=0}^{n} a_{n-j}X^{j},
$$
so that
$$
(sum_{j=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-j}a_{n-j}X^{j})(sum_{j=0}^{n} a_{n-j}X^{j})=prod_{i}(X-x_i) prod_{i}(X+x_i)=prod_{i}(X^2 - x_i^2).
$$
If we now pick out the coefficient of $X^{2k}$ on each side we have the promised $
alpha=sum_{i_1<i_2<dots<i_k} x_{i_{1}}^2 x_{i_{2}}^2 dots x_{i_{k}}^2.
$
answered Dec 9 '18 at 13:36
ancientmathematicianancientmathematician
4,4581413
4,4581413
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3026218%2fcompute-this-determinant-only-using-determinant-properties%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown