Thank you for uploading this and being thorough in your explanation! This method is by far the best and easiest to remember when trying to find the det(A). Thank you so much for this wonderful explanation! Please keep up the wonderful work and do more stuff like this for other topics!
Of course❤, it is very useful🎉 for many peoples like me. I am not a topper still i will subscribe your channel because you showed me many of matrix and determinate rules in just a few second and i am very impressed.😢 Thank you to upload such a nice video. I will support you. And one last thing that I'm indian and my mother tongue is Gujarati not English still I'll watch your videos.❤
Hey! Do you have any tips when the matrix doesn't have such easy numbers? I had this one task where I had to multiply R2 with stuff like (-1/3 R3). This amounted in a matrix with entries like "-9/15", "5/3" etc. Although I got the right answer, the Gaussian elimination was hairy af, and it was hard noticing what row operations I needed to do.
Can you shiw us how to make the conjugate matrix of the first matrix (matrix A) and it's inverse matrix A^-1 using this trick, for a matrix of order 4x4 or 5x5?
If we have to multiply any row by a constant and then add or subtract it from another row, do we also have to multiply the determinant by the constant??
your method doesn't work completely. I only swapped rows once, so determinant went from + to - and yet the correct value for the determinant was a positive in the end. The multiplying the diagonal was fine but the sign was incorrect.
Indeed. But don't forget about the negative sign that step 2 of the row reduction generated. So det(A) = -(3)(-1)(-2)(3)(1) or -18. I think of it like this. Every time you swap rows, it cost 1 negative.
@@mathbyprofc8791 Thank you for responding. I thought about it and saw how I was confused about determinants (overlooked that determinants change signs when rows are swapped).
![[UNCUT] เก็บ "สจ.โต้ง" เอี่ยวมาเฟีย รู้ตัวคนบงการ ก่อนสั่งลั่นไก I คนดังนั่งเคลียร์ I 13 ธ.ค.67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/o-J_p62D40w/mqdefault.jpg)
thank you for putting this up. You have helped a generation.
My pleasure!
Thank you for uploading this and being thorough in your explanation! This method is by far the best and easiest to remember when trying to find the det(A). Thank you so much for this wonderful explanation! Please keep up the wonderful work and do more stuff like this for other topics!
thank u , people like u make the life better
This was like the easiest tutorial I've seen
Do the rules apply for column operations and swaps
Of course❤, it is very useful🎉 for many peoples like me. I am not a topper still i will subscribe your channel because you showed me many of matrix and determinate rules in just a few second and i am very impressed.😢 Thank you to upload such a nice video. I will support you. And one last thing that I'm indian and my mother tongue is Gujarati not English still I'll watch your videos.❤
if you multiply a row , shouldnt that affect your determinant? like if I for some reason needed to multiply row 3 by 1/2
Yes, if you multiply a row with factor x, you need to devide the determinant by x.
@@kylitrixgames4980that will affect the whole matrix, we're talking about a row.
I think, if you use x+y or x-y that will not affect determinate but if you multiply or divide row that will affect.❤
is this ok for 6x6 and 7x7 and so on....
Hey! Do you have any tips when the matrix doesn't have such easy numbers? I had this one task where I had to multiply R2 with stuff like (-1/3 R3). This amounted in a matrix with entries like "-9/15", "5/3" etc. Although I got the right answer, the Gaussian elimination was hairy af, and it was hard noticing what row operations I needed to do.
No way to avoid it saddly.
If you do two swaps in the same move does the sign stay the same or change?
stays the same
@@naulyd Thanks
Can we apply it for lower triangular matrices?
Can we?
Determinant of transpose is equal to the determinant of matrix right?
For any triangular and diagonal matrix, det is the multiplication of the diagonal elements
Can any matrix of any nxn order turn into a triangular matrix?
Yes, any nxn matrix can be reduced to an upper triangular matrix. You just need to choose your operations diligently.
What if you don’t have enough zeros to place?
Isn't row and coloum operations like that supposed to affect the value of the determinat?
Very nice ideas
Thank you soo much. This really helped me loads
Thank u so much sir may God bless you
Can you shiw us how to make the conjugate matrix of the first matrix (matrix A) and it's inverse matrix A^-1 using this trick, for a matrix of order 4x4 or 5x5?
why is it negative though?
If we have to multiply any row by a constant and then add or subtract it from another row, do we also have to multiply the determinant by the constant??
I think if you multiply a row by a constant, you have to divide your determinant by that constant at the end
You can use this method to find the determinant of a matrix of any order!
could this be applied for det(A-λI) to find the characteristic polynomial?
Don't do this for a 3x3 or less buddy. But yes you could
Wonderfull😍👍
I have same but 4 intead of 1 in the 5th row i use another method but the video is very good thx
Brilliant!thank you!
I like it but didn't understand
Thank u sir
are you mike boyd?
It is not widely known but all people with Scottish accents are secretly the same person
Thanks a lot
Thanks
your method doesn't work completely. I only swapped rows once, so determinant went from + to - and yet the correct value for the determinant was a positive in the end. The multiplying the diagonal was fine but the sign was incorrect.
The determinant had a negative in front of it: det(A) = -(3)(-1)(-2)(3)(1) = -18
reminds me of REF
Love u sir
thank you!!!!!!!!
Isn't it +18?
No
Uhm.
Very helpful video, but shouldn't (3)(-1)(-2)(3)(1) give you +18?
Indeed. But don't forget about the negative sign that step 2 of the row reduction generated. So det(A) = -(3)(-1)(-2)(3)(1) or -18. I think of it like this. Every time you swap rows, it cost 1 negative.
@@mathbyprofc8791 Thank you for responding. I thought about it and saw how I was confused about determinants (overlooked that determinants change signs when rows are swapped).