You are about to erase your work on this activity. Are you sure you want to do this?
Updated Version Available
There is an updated version of this activity. If you update to the most recent version of this activity, then your current progress on this activity will be erased. Regardless, your record of completion will remain. How would you like to proceed?
Mathematical Expression Editor
The Inverse of a Matrix
Definition and Properties of Matrix Inverses
Consider the equation \(2x=6\). It takes little time to recognize that the solution to this
equation is \(x=3\). In fact, the solution is so obvious that we do not think about
the algebraic steps necessary to find it. Let’s take a look at these steps in
detail.
\[2x=6\]
\[\frac {1}{2}\times (2x)=\frac {1}{2}\times 6\]
\[(\frac {1}{2}\times 2)x=3\]
\[1x=3\]
\[x=3\]
This process utilizes many properties of real-number multiplication. In particular, we
make use of existence of multiplicative inverses. Every non-zero real number \(a\) has a
multiplicative inverse \(a^{-1}=\frac {1}{a}\) with the property that \(\frac {1}{a}\times a=a\times \frac {1}{a}=1\). We say that \(1\) is the multiplicative
identity because \(a\times 1=1\times a=a\).
Given a matrix equation \(A\vec {x}=\vec {b}\), we would like to follow a process similar to the one above
to solve this matrix equation for \(\vec {x}\).
Observe that the role of the multiplicative identity for \(n\times n\) square matrices is filled by \(I_n\)
because \(AI_n=I_nA=A\). Given an \(n\times n\) matrix \(A\), a multiplicative inverse of \(A\) would have to be some \(n\times n\)
matrix \(B\) such that
\[BA=AB=I_n\]
Assuming that such an inverse \(B\) exists, this is what the process of solving the
equation \(A\vec {x}=\vec {b}\) would look like:
\[A\vec {x}=\vec {b}\]
\[B(A\vec {x})=B\vec {b}\]
\[(BA)\vec {x}=B\vec {b}\]
\[I\vec {x}=B\vec {b}\]
\[\vec {x}=B\vec {b}\]
Let \(A\) be an \(n\times n\) matrix. An \(n\times n\) matrix \(B\) is called an inverse of \(A\) if
\[AB=BA=I\]
where \(I\) is an \(n\times n\) identity matrix. If such an inverse matrix exists, we say that \(A\) is
invertible. If an inverse does not exist, we say that \(A\) is not invertible.
It follows
directly from the way the definition is stated that if \(B\) is an inverse of \(A\), then \(A\) is an
inverse of \(B\). We say that \(A\) and \(B\) are inverses of each other.
The following theorem shows that matrix inverses are unique.
Suppose \(A\) is an invertible matrix, and \(B\) is an inverse of \(A\). Then \(B\) is unique.
Because \(B\) is an inverse of \(A\), we have:
\[AB=BA=I\]
Suppose there exists another \(n\times n\) matrix \(C\) such that
\[AC=CA=I\]
Then
\[C(AB)=CI\]
\[(CA)B=C\]
\[IB=C\]
\[B=C\]
Now that we know that a matrix \(A\) cannot have more than one inverse, we can safely
refer to the inverse of \(A\) as \(A^{-1}\).
where each \(\vec {e}_i\) is a standard unit vector of \(\RR ^n\). This gives us a system of equations \(A\vec {v}_i=\vec {e}_i\) for
each \(1\leq i\leq n\). If each \(A\vec {v}_i=\vec {e}_i\) has a unique solution, then finding these solutions will give us the
columns of the desired matrix \(B\).
First, suppose that \(\mbox {rref}(A)=I\), then we can use elementary row operations to carry each \([A|\vec {e}_i]\) to its
reduced row-echelon form.
\[[A|\vec {e}_i]\rightsquigarrow [I|\vec {v}_i]\]
Observe that the row operations that carry \(A\) to \(I\) will be the same for each \(A\vec {v}_i=\vec {e}_i\). We can,
therefore, combine the process of solving \(n\) systems of equations into a single
process
\[[A|I]\rightsquigarrow [I|B]\]
Each \(\vec {v}_i\) is a unique solution of \(A\vec {v}_i=\vec {e}_i\), and we conclude that
By Problem ??, we can reverse the elementary row operations to obtain
\[[I|B]\rightsquigarrow [A|I]\]
But the same row operations would also give us
\[[B|I]\rightsquigarrow [I|A]\]
We conclude that \(BA=I\), and \(B=A^{-1}\).
Next, suppose that \(\mbox {rref}(A)\neq I\). Then \(\mbox {rref}(A)\) must contain a row of zeros. Because one of
the rows of \(A\) was completely wiped out by elementary row operations, one
of the rows of \(A\) must be a linear combination of the other rows. Suppose
row \(p\) is a linear combination of the other rows. Then row \(p\) can be carried to
a row of zeros. But then the system \(A\vec {v}_p=\vec {e}_p\) is inconsistent. This is because \(\vec {e}_p\) has
a \(1\) as the \(p^{th}\) entry and zeros everywhere else. The \(1\) in the \(p^{th}\) spot will not be
affected by elementary row operations, and the \(p^{th}\) row will eventually look like
this
\[[0\ldots 0|1]\]
This shows that a matrix \(B\) such that \(AB=I\) does not exist, and \(A\) does not have an
inverse.
We have just proved the following theorem.
Row-reduction Method for Computing the Inverse of a Matrix Let \(A\) be a square
matrix. If it is possible to use elementary row operations to carry the augmented
matrix \([A|I]\) to \([I|B]\), then \(B=A^{-1}\). If such a reduction is not possible, then \(A\) does not have an inverse.
A square matrix \(A\) has an inverse if and only if \(\mbox {rref}(A)=I\).
Find \(A^{-1}\) or demonstrate that \(A^{-1}\) does not exist.
At this point we see that the left-hand side cannot be turned into \(I\) through
elementary row operations. We conclude that \(A^{-1}\) does not exist.
Recall that a square
matrix whose reduced row-echelon form is the identity matrix is called nonsingular.
(Definition ??) According to Corollary 11, a matrix is invertible if and only if it is
nonsingular. For this reason many linear algebra texts use the terms invertible and
nonsingular as synonyms.
Inverse of a \(2\times 2\) Matrix
We will conclude this section by discussing the inverse of a nonsingular \(2\times 2\) matrix. Let \(A=\begin{bmatrix}a&b\\c&d\end{bmatrix}\)
be a nonsingular matrix. We can find \(A^{-1}\) by using the row reduction method described
above, that is, by computing the reduced row-echelon form of \([A|I]\). Row reduction yields
the following:
Clearly, the expression for \(A^{-1}\) is defined, if and only if \(ad-bc\neq 0\). So, what happens when \(ad-bc=0\)? In
Practice Problem ?? you will be asked to fill in the steps of the row reduction
procedure that produces this formula, and show that if \(ad-bc=0\) then \(A\) does not have an
inverse.
Practice Problems
Verify that the matrix \(\begin{bmatrix} 2 & -1\\3 & -2\end{bmatrix}\) is its own inverse.
Use the row-reduction method for computing matrix inverses to explain why the
given matrix does not have an inverse.