User talk:E290341

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Hello, E290341, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Determinant. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! M∧Ŝc2ħεИτlk 07:12, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Dubious addition at determinant?[edit]

Could you please add a reliable secondary source for this unsourced edit, claiming the Sarrus rule extends to n × n matrices? Other editors have been notified here and here. Thanks, M∧Ŝc2ħεИτlk 07:16, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

I have deleted the material under consideration pending clarification at Talk:Determinant#Dubious addition?. Meanwhile, a citation for this addition would be helpful, too. Deltahedron (talk) 08:45, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
The source I used was the very article linked, published in the American Mathematical Monthly. I read the article in question after developing a very similar method for finding the determinant of matrices. (I can provide a link to an image of the article, though I am unaware as to the legal requirements for doing so. I am uninterested in becoming bogged down in some sort of legal dispute. I will link to the image here, hosted on an external site for the purpose of discussion. The first image in that album is the article, the second an illustration of the method applied to 5x5 and 6x6 matrices. Here is mathematica's output for the determinant of a 6x6 matrix. The letters are not always in the same order, but they are all there with correct signs.
In the article, a rigorous proof is not provided, but it can be verified by performing the standard method for obtaining a determinant of a matrix with many rows.
I am unable provide a rigorous proof of this method, but it can be observed through the use of mathematical software capable of performing matrix operations with variables. I used mathematica.
As for the cofactor section, that was my own observation which again I cannot rigorously prove. The pattern can be verified easily. It follows from the standard method for finding cofactors. The only interesting thing about this arrangement is that the alternating positive and negative signs are applied to each element, in addition to the fact that the matrix is easy to write by hand, and possibly less likely to produce error than going through the tedious method of crossing out rows and columns. E290341 (talk) 23:38, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
If it is your own observation then it is original research which we cannot accept: we go by what is published in independent reliable sources. Deltahedron (talk) 06:42, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

E290341, you are invited to the Teahouse[edit]

Teahouse logo

Hi E290341! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Rosiestep (I'm a Teahouse host)

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:17, 3 April 2013 (UTC)