1. prove the following propositions. you may assume the following: . if a is an n × n upper or lower triangular matrix, then det (a) = a11 a22. . ann . det(ab) -det(a) det (b) for any n x n matrices a and b. det(a) det (a) for any n x n matrix a. in addition, you can assume any of the preceding propositions to the problem. for example, you may assume (a) and (b) to prove (c) (a) det (i) (b) det(ab) det (ba) (c) if a is non-singular, then det(a-1) 1/ det(a) (d) if a and b are similar, that is, there is a non-singular p with a = p-bp, then det (a) = det(b). (e) if q is an orthogonal matrix, that is, q-1-qt, then det(q) = ±1.

the size of the resulting matrix is 1-by-3.

step-by-step explanation:

the size of the two matrices given are as follows:

no .of rows of matrix 1 = 1

no .of columns of matrix 1 = 3

no .of rows of matrix 1 = 3

no .of columns of matrix 1 = 3

to find the size of the resulting matrix without actually solving the multiplication of the matrix, this is what you do:

if resulting matrix = matrix 1 * matrix 2

no. of rows of the resulting matrix = number of rows of matrix 1

no. of columns of resulting matrix = number of columns of matrix 2

note: the order of the matrices matter!

this is a very good question

step-by-step explanation:

i got a hair cut today from my mom not to flex just to flex kim jon un is one rad fellow i'd say you'd need to take the hairline in kinda like a box shape like someone rammed a lego brick into your head. from there you really need to take the top up keeping with that boxy aesthetic, finally coat the whole thing with gel if your country economics are failing or whatever you can just coat it with the starving children's food rations. about 5 orphans per strand is a good ratio. good luck with the fresh cut my dude

think about it deeply and passionately about this property

i am sorry

i will pick c put check it over to be sure

step-by-step explanation: