Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Let $A$ be an upper triangular matrix and $B_{ij}$ be the matrix that results when the $i$th row and $j$th column of $A$ are deleted.

Why is it that when $i<j$, $B_{ij}$ is upper triangular?

I am not clear as to how this property will always hold for any $n\times n$ matrix.

share|improve this question
2  
Have you actually tried it on an example? If you take a 7 by 7 upper triangular matrix, say, and delete row 2 and column 5, what do you get? The general principle should be hopefully become obvious then. –  Hans Lundmark Nov 3 '11 at 7:36
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 1 down vote accepted

A matrix, $A=(a_{ij})$ is upper triangular if $a_{ij}=0$ when $i>j$ (further down rows than over columns). Assume $k<\ell$ and consider $B_{k\ell}=(b_{ij})$ (the matrix obtained by deleting the $k^{th}$-row and $\ell^{th}$-column of $A$).

We need to show that $b_{ij}=0$ for $i>j$.

Case: $i<k$ and $j<\ell$ then $b_{ij}=a_{ij}=0$ since $i>j$.

Case: $i \geq k$ and $j<\ell$ then $b_{ij}=a_{i+1,j}=0$ since $i+1>i>j$.

Case: $i \geq k$ and $j \geq \ell$ then $b_{ij}=a_{i+1,j+1}=0$ since $i+1>j+1$ because $i>j$.

Case: $i<k$ and $j \geq \ell$ is impossible since this would imply $i<k<\ell\leq j$ contradicting the fact that $j<i$.

Thus $b_{ij}=0$ for all $i>j$ and so $B_{k\ell}$ is upper-triangular.

share|improve this answer
    
Thank you, your explanation makes it clear. –  Sara Nov 11 '11 at 18:33
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.