Q.If , and are square matrices of same order, then always implies that .
You're viewing a preview — the full solution, concept, methods & PYQ mapping are locked.
Start your 14-day free trial to unlock the full solution →Matrix multiplication is not cancellative in general — does not imply unless is invertible. The statement is false.
The statement looks tempting because it mimics ordinary algebra, where if and , you can cancel to get . But matrices are not numbers. The key difference: matrix multiplication is not commutative, and more importantly, a matrix can be singular (determinant zero), meaning it has no inverse. Without an inverse, cancellation fails.
Think of it this way: if has a non-trivial nullspace, then can send two different vectors to the same result. When you multiply by a matrix , each column of is transformed by . If collapses some directions to zero, then two different columns in and could produce the same column in and .
-
What would make cancellation valid?
If is invertible (i.e., ), then multiplying both sides of on the left by gives . That works. But the problem statement says "always implies" — it must hold for every square matrix , , of the same order. That's a much stronger claim.
-
Find a counterexample.
We need a singular (non-invertible) and two different matrices and such that . The simplest choice: take as the zero matrix. Then and for any , so holds, but and can be completely different. That already disproves the statement.
But maybe you think "that's cheating — is zero". Fine, take a non-zero singular . For instance, let
This matrix kills the second coordinate. Now pick
Compute:
…
Unlock everything free for 14 days
- Full step-by-step solutions
- Concept-first explanations
- Methods, shortcuts & mistakes
- PYQ mapping + timed mock tests
Full access for 14 days. No credit card required.