Skip to main content
16 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Nov 23, 2021 at 8:36 review Suggested edits
Nov 23, 2021 at 13:51
Oct 5, 2017 at 17:19 history edited Ali Taghavi CC BY-SA 3.0
deleted 256 characters in body
Oct 5, 2017 at 7:10 vote accept Ali Taghavi
Oct 5, 2017 at 7:01 answer added Federico Poloni timeline score: 14
Oct 5, 2017 at 6:50 comment added Ali Taghavi @NathanielJohnston I revised the question indicating my abuse of terminology.
Oct 5, 2017 at 6:46 comment added Ali Taghavi @SergeyDovgal In my question there is no restriction on diagonal. The congugacy is assumed via real matrices not complex matrices. With such assumption, do you think the answer to my question is affirmative?
Oct 5, 2017 at 6:42 comment added Ali Taghavi @NathanielJohnston yes you are right. I called such matrix semi anti symmetric, sonce there is no restriction on the doagonal.
Oct 5, 2017 at 6:40 history edited Ali Taghavi CC BY-SA 3.0
added 97 characters in body
Oct 5, 2017 at 2:50 comment added Sergey Dovgal I also assume that only "real" basis changes are desired, because otherwise it can be proven without much effort that the statement is true.
Oct 5, 2017 at 2:39 comment added Sergey Dovgal It seems that for an identity matrix all the conjugates are also identity matrices, so the statement can be true only if there is no restriction on the diagonal, e.g. the identity matrix is defined to be antisymmetric.
Oct 5, 2017 at 0:23 comment added Nathaniel Johnston Just to be clear: there is no restriction on the diagonal of B, so this is a somewhat unusual usage of the term "antisymmetric matrix", right?
S Oct 5, 2017 at 0:13 history suggested Luc Guyot CC BY-SA 3.0
Fixed semi-antisymmetric matrix definition and spacing
Oct 4, 2017 at 22:29 review Suggested edits
S Oct 5, 2017 at 0:13
Oct 4, 2017 at 20:47 history edited Dima Pasechnik CC BY-SA 3.0
added 1 character in body
Oct 4, 2017 at 19:58 history edited Ali Taghavi CC BY-SA 3.0
edited tags
Oct 4, 2017 at 19:48 history asked Ali Taghavi CC BY-SA 3.0