Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I'm intrigued to know how this can be found. Would anyone care to enlighten me or provide a link to a method?

    Cheers :rolleyes:

    And by hand. I know you can do it with a calculator.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Row reduction.

    set up the matrix you want to invert (A)|(I) and work to get (I)|(A^-1)

    (There are other methods)
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauss%E...an_elimination (the same as Nota's suggestion, but with some explanation)
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Ah man 3 by 3 was enough for me! (Hey that rhymes!)
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    tbh you can use the same method that use used for 3x3 extended to 4x4 but that takes forevarrr.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Totally Tom)
    tbh you can use the same method that use used for 3x3 extended to 4x4 but that takes forevarrr.
    Lol that was what I was thinking.

    Does Gauss-Jordan elimination still work?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The determinant of a square matrix,  A is always given by:

     A^{-1} = \frac{\text{adj}(A)}{\det(A)}
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jamie Innes)
    Lol that was what I was thinking.

    Does Gauss-Jordan elimination still work?
    ?

    err yes.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Same as with a 3x3.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bigmo7)
    Ah man 3 by 3 was enough for me! (Hey that rhymes!)
    Seconded. Although you do it the same way.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phugoid)
    The determinant of a square matrix,  A is always given by:

     A^{-1} = \frac{\text{adj}(A)}{\det(A)}
    You mean "inverse of a square matrix".
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DFranklin)
    You mean "inverse of a square matrix".
    Woopsies. Typo indeed.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phugoid)
    The determinant of a square matrix,  A is always given by:

     A^{-1} = \frac{\text{adj}(A)}{\det(A)}
    Sorry, what's the adj(A)?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    The adjugate matrix. Finding it is about as difficult as finding the inverse matrix though, so I don't think that's very helpful...
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zhen Lin)
    The adjugate matrix. Finding it is about as difficult as finding the inverse matrix though, so I don't think that's very helpful...
    Agreed. In fact, I've never seen someone advocate using the adjugate matrix unless they were going to then use the recursive formulation of the determinant to calculate each term. For large n, that's about as bad a plan as you can get: if memory serves you need roughly (n+1)! calculations to find the inverse that way.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Yeah, rref is the best way to do it already
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.intmath.com/Matrices-dete...rse-matrix.php have a look at this it shows how you can find the inverse of 4x4 5x5 and 6x6, finding 4x4 is basically the same as 3x3.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lnx)
    http://www.intmath.com/Matrices-dete...rse-matrix.php have a look at this it shows how you can find the inverse of 4x4 5x5 and 6x6, finding 4x4 is basically the same as 3x3.
    I can't see the method they finally use for the 4x4 matrix, but if it involves determinants or adjoint/adjugate matrices, it's almost certainly grossly inefficient.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DFranklin)
    I can't see the method they finally use for the 4x4 matrix, but if it involves determinants or adjoint/adjugate matrices, it's almost certainly grossly inefficient.
    Why?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    See post #15. Basically, to find each element of the adjugate, you need to find a 3x3 determinant. So that's 16 3x3 determinants to calculate. Each 3x3 determinant requires 12 multiplies and 5 adds, so you need 192 multiplies and 80 additions.
    If you want a 5x5 it gets worse. To find each element of the adjugate you need to find a 4x4 determinant. That's 25 4x4 determinants. Each 4x4 determinant requires finding 4 3x3 determinants, so takes at least 48 multiplies and 20 adds. So you need well over a thousand multiplies to find the adjugate.
    6x6, you need something like 9000 multiplies.

    In contrast, Gauss-Jordan elimination will solve a 6x6 matrix in a couple of hundred multiplies. 4x4 matrix will be comfortably under a hundred ops.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
Updated: July 13, 2009

University open days

  1. Norwich University of the Arts
    Postgraduate Open Days Postgraduate
    Thu, 19 Jul '18
  2. University of Sunderland
    Postgraduate Open Day Postgraduate
    Thu, 19 Jul '18
  3. Plymouth College of Art
    All MA Programmes Postgraduate
    Thu, 19 Jul '18
Poll
Is the Big Bang theory correct?
Useful resources

Make your revision easier

Maths

Maths Forum posting guidelines

Not sure where to post? Read the updated guidelines here

Equations

How to use LaTex

Writing equations the easy way

Student revising

Study habits of A* students

Top tips from students who have already aced their exams

Study Planner

Create your own Study Planner

Never miss a deadline again

Polling station sign

Thinking about a maths degree?

Chat with other maths applicants

Can you help? Study help unanswered threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.