Compute this determinant only using determinant properties












1












$begingroup$


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.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$

















    1












    $begingroup$


    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.










    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      1












      1








      1


      1



      $begingroup$


      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.










      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      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






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Dec 4 '18 at 22:20









      José Carlos Santos

      153k22123224




      153k22123224










      asked Dec 4 '18 at 21:41









      JoMathJoMath

      82




      82






















          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          4












          $begingroup$

          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 $x+y+z$.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            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



















          2












          $begingroup$

          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.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$





















            2












            $begingroup$

            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.
            $






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$













              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
              });


              }
              });














              draft saved

              draft discarded


















              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









              4












              $begingroup$

              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 $x+y+z$.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$













              • $begingroup$
                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
















              4












              $begingroup$

              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 $x+y+z$.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$













              • $begingroup$
                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














              4












              4








              4





              $begingroup$

              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 $x+y+z$.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$



              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 $x+y+z$.







              share|cite|improve this answer












              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer










              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


















              • $begingroup$
                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











              2












              $begingroup$

              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.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$


















                2












                $begingroup$

                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.






                share|cite|improve this answer











                $endgroup$
















                  2












                  2








                  2





                  $begingroup$

                  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.






                  share|cite|improve this answer











                  $endgroup$



                  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.







                  share|cite|improve this answer














                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer








                  edited Dec 5 '18 at 7:24

























                  answered Dec 4 '18 at 23:14









                  Jean MarieJean Marie

                  28.8k41949




                  28.8k41949























                      2












                      $begingroup$

                      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.
                      $






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$


















                        2












                        $begingroup$

                        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.
                        $






                        share|cite|improve this answer









                        $endgroup$
















                          2












                          2








                          2





                          $begingroup$

                          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.
                          $






                          share|cite|improve this answer









                          $endgroup$



                          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.
                          $







                          share|cite|improve this answer












                          share|cite|improve this answer



                          share|cite|improve this answer










                          answered Dec 9 '18 at 13:36









                          ancientmathematicianancientmathematician

                          4,4581413




                          4,4581413






























                              draft saved

                              draft discarded




















































                              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.




                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              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





















































                              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







                              Popular posts from this blog

                              Wiesbaden

                              Marschland

                              Dieringhausen