Numerical value of Determinant far from what it is supposed to beNumeric values from transformFindRoot for numerical function and how to search more than one rootCan't get a numerical value for this vector operationNumerical value of an expression with a uniform step sizeNumerical evaluation after Normal?Numerical Results with replacement rulesStrange numerical valuesWhat is the acceptable error in numerical calculations?High numerical precision failingHow to extract the minimal value from NMinimize?

PTIJ: Who was the sixth set of priestly clothes for?

Are small insurances worth it?

How exactly does an Ethernet collision happen in the cable, since nodes use different circuits for Tx and Rx?

How do I increase the number of TTY consoles?

I reported the illegal activity of my boss to his boss. My boss found out. Now I am being punished. What should I do?

If sound is a longitudinal wave, why can we hear it if our ears aren't aligned with the propagation direction?

Why restrict private health insurance?

ESPP--any reason not to go all in?

Giving a career talk in my old university, how prominently should I tell students my salary?

Create chunks from an array

"If + would" conditional in present perfect tense

What does *dead* mean in *What do you mean, dead?*?

School performs periodic password audits. Is my password compromised?

Do black holes violate the conservation of mass?

What does the Digital Threat scope actually do?

Should we avoid writing fiction about historical events without extensive research?

Are these two graphs isomorphic? Why/Why not?

What is better: yes / no radio, or simple checkbox?

Will expression retain the same definition if particle is changed?

How should I solve this integral with changing parameters?

Which country has more?

Why aren't there more Gauls like Obelix?

Are all players supposed to be able to see each others' character sheets?

Having the player face themselves after the mid-game



Numerical value of Determinant far from what it is supposed to be


Numeric values from transformFindRoot for numerical function and how to search more than one rootCan't get a numerical value for this vector operationNumerical value of an expression with a uniform step sizeNumerical evaluation after Normal?Numerical Results with replacement rulesStrange numerical valuesWhat is the acceptable error in numerical calculations?High numerical precision failingHow to extract the minimal value from NMinimize?













1












$begingroup$


I have a large matrix with numerical components and want to set the determinant to zero using the parameter h (see below). Naively, I would have expected that h sets the determinant to (approximately) zero, which isn't the case. On top of that, the order of applying the rule sol seems to affects the final outcome for a reason to don't see.



My output of the code below is:



h -> -0.744736 + 4.42008 I

0.0445865 - 0.0285418 I

0.0545654 - 0.114258 I


I am not familiar with how Mathematica handles floating point numbers so that's probably where my error lies. I have also tried to increase the precision with SetPrecision, but without success.



mat=0.16 - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h - (1.35808 - 
 0.00120116 I) h^2 - (0.49603 - 0.00137214 I) h^3 - (0.11307 - 
 0.00105331 I) h^4 + (0.249794 - 0.000384238 I) h^5 - 
0.39204 h^6, -0.1711 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h - (1.15528 + 
 0.00267142 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 
 1. h^4), (0.0000353051 - 1.67323*10^-6 I) h^4, 
0, -0.1711 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h + (19.6394 - 
 0.00267142 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 1. h^4), 
0.16 - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h - (11.3534 - 
 0.00119507 I) h^2 - (0.484268 - 0.00140481 I) h^3 - (5.0714 - 
 0.00114074 I) h^4 + (0.27061 - 0.000416258 I) h^5 - 
0.42471 h^6, -0.223386 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h + (4.95742 - 
 0.00267502 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 
 1. h^4), (0.0000484431 - 2.29589*10^-6 I) h^4, (0.0000353051 - 
 1.67323*10^-6 I) h^4, -0.223386 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h + (41.4016 - 
 0.00267502 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 1. h^4), 
0.16 - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h - (29.348 - 
 0.00118803 I) h^2 - (0.470698 - 0.00144251 I) h^3 - (13.9095 - 
 0.00124106 I) h^4 + (0.294629 - 0.000453204 I) h^5 - 
0.462406 h^6, -0.234771 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h + (19.0123 - 
 0.00267319 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 
 1. h^4), 0, (0.0000484431 - 
 2.29589*10^-6 I) h^4, -0.234771 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h + (71.32 - 
 0.00267319 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 1. h^4), 
0.16 - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h - (55.3462 - 
 0.00118568 I) h^2 - (0.466163 - 0.0014551 I) h^3 - (26.6556 - 
 0.00127449 I) h^4 + (0.302655 - 0.000465551 I) h^5 - 
0.475003 h^6;
sol = Part[NSolve[Det[%] == 0, h], 1]
Det[mat /. sol]
Det[mat] /. sol





numerical-value







share|improve this question







New contributor




Nils is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    Correction: I get the output 0.118714 - 0.0526506 I (as the second output) and 0.106201 - 0.0979004 I (as the third output); sorry, used a different matrix. But the problem still stands.
    $endgroup$
    – Nils
    2 hours ago















1












$begingroup$


I have a large matrix with numerical components and want to set the determinant to zero using the parameter h (see below). Naively, I would have expected that h sets the determinant to (approximately) zero, which isn't the case. On top of that, the order of applying the rule sol seems to affects the final outcome for a reason to don't see.



My output of the code below is:



h -> -0.744736 + 4.42008 I

0.0445865 - 0.0285418 I

0.0545654 - 0.114258 I


I am not familiar with how Mathematica handles floating point numbers so that's probably where my error lies. I have also tried to increase the precision with SetPrecision, but without success.



mat=0.16 - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h - (1.35808 - 
 0.00120116 I) h^2 - (0.49603 - 0.00137214 I) h^3 - (0.11307 - 
 0.00105331 I) h^4 + (0.249794 - 0.000384238 I) h^5 - 
0.39204 h^6, -0.1711 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h - (1.15528 + 
 0.00267142 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 
 1. h^4), (0.0000353051 - 1.67323*10^-6 I) h^4, 
0, -0.1711 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h + (19.6394 - 
 0.00267142 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 1. h^4), 
0.16 - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h - (11.3534 - 
 0.00119507 I) h^2 - (0.484268 - 0.00140481 I) h^3 - (5.0714 - 
 0.00114074 I) h^4 + (0.27061 - 0.000416258 I) h^5 - 
0.42471 h^6, -0.223386 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h + (4.95742 - 
 0.00267502 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 
 1. h^4), (0.0000484431 - 2.29589*10^-6 I) h^4, (0.0000353051 - 
 1.67323*10^-6 I) h^4, -0.223386 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h + (41.4016 - 
 0.00267502 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 1. h^4), 
0.16 - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h - (29.348 - 
 0.00118803 I) h^2 - (0.470698 - 0.00144251 I) h^3 - (13.9095 - 
 0.00124106 I) h^4 + (0.294629 - 0.000453204 I) h^5 - 
0.462406 h^6, -0.234771 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h + (19.0123 - 
 0.00267319 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 
 1. h^4), 0, (0.0000484431 - 
 2.29589*10^-6 I) h^4, -0.234771 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h + (71.32 - 
 0.00267319 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 1. h^4), 
0.16 - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h - (55.3462 - 
 0.00118568 I) h^2 - (0.466163 - 0.0014551 I) h^3 - (26.6556 - 
 0.00127449 I) h^4 + (0.302655 - 0.000465551 I) h^5 - 
0.475003 h^6;
sol = Part[NSolve[Det[%] == 0, h], 1]
Det[mat /. sol]
Det[mat] /. sol





numerical-value







share|improve this question







New contributor




Nils is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    Correction: I get the output 0.118714 - 0.0526506 I (as the second output) and 0.106201 - 0.0979004 I (as the third output); sorry, used a different matrix. But the problem still stands.
    $endgroup$
    – Nils
    2 hours ago













1












1








1





$begingroup$


I have a large matrix with numerical components and want to set the determinant to zero using the parameter h (see below). Naively, I would have expected that h sets the determinant to (approximately) zero, which isn't the case. On top of that, the order of applying the rule sol seems to affects the final outcome for a reason to don't see.



My output of the code below is:



h -> -0.744736 + 4.42008 I

0.0445865 - 0.0285418 I

0.0545654 - 0.114258 I


I am not familiar with how Mathematica handles floating point numbers so that's probably where my error lies. I have also tried to increase the precision with SetPrecision, but without success.



mat=0.16 - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h - (1.35808 - 
 0.00120116 I) h^2 - (0.49603 - 0.00137214 I) h^3 - (0.11307 - 
 0.00105331 I) h^4 + (0.249794 - 0.000384238 I) h^5 - 
0.39204 h^6, -0.1711 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h - (1.15528 + 
 0.00267142 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 
 1. h^4), (0.0000353051 - 1.67323*10^-6 I) h^4, 
0, -0.1711 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h + (19.6394 - 
 0.00267142 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 1. h^4), 
0.16 - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h - (11.3534 - 
 0.00119507 I) h^2 - (0.484268 - 0.00140481 I) h^3 - (5.0714 - 
 0.00114074 I) h^4 + (0.27061 - 0.000416258 I) h^5 - 
0.42471 h^6, -0.223386 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h + (4.95742 - 
 0.00267502 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 
 1. h^4), (0.0000484431 - 2.29589*10^-6 I) h^4, (0.0000353051 - 
 1.67323*10^-6 I) h^4, -0.223386 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h + (41.4016 - 
 0.00267502 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 1. h^4), 
0.16 - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h - (29.348 - 
 0.00118803 I) h^2 - (0.470698 - 0.00144251 I) h^3 - (13.9095 - 
 0.00124106 I) h^4 + (0.294629 - 0.000453204 I) h^5 - 
0.462406 h^6, -0.234771 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h + (19.0123 - 
 0.00267319 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 
 1. h^4), 0, (0.0000484431 - 
 2.29589*10^-6 I) h^4, -0.234771 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h + (71.32 - 
 0.00267319 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 1. h^4), 
0.16 - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h - (55.3462 - 
 0.00118568 I) h^2 - (0.466163 - 0.0014551 I) h^3 - (26.6556 - 
 0.00127449 I) h^4 + (0.302655 - 0.000465551 I) h^5 - 
0.475003 h^6;
sol = Part[NSolve[Det[%] == 0, h], 1]
Det[mat /. sol]
Det[mat] /. sol





numerical-value







share|improve this question







New contributor




Nils is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$




I have a large matrix with numerical components and want to set the determinant to zero using the parameter h (see below). Naively, I would have expected that h sets the determinant to (approximately) zero, which isn't the case. On top of that, the order of applying the rule sol seems to affects the final outcome for a reason to don't see.



My output of the code below is:



h -> -0.744736 + 4.42008 I

0.0445865 - 0.0285418 I

0.0545654 - 0.114258 I


I am not familiar with how Mathematica handles floating point numbers so that's probably where my error lies. I have also tried to increase the precision with SetPrecision, but without success.



mat=0.16 - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h - (1.35808 - 
 0.00120116 I) h^2 - (0.49603 - 0.00137214 I) h^3 - (0.11307 - 
 0.00105331 I) h^4 + (0.249794 - 0.000384238 I) h^5 - 
0.39204 h^6, -0.1711 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h - (1.15528 + 
 0.00267142 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 
 1. h^4), (0.0000353051 - 1.67323*10^-6 I) h^4, 
0, -0.1711 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h + (19.6394 - 
 0.00267142 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 1. h^4), 
0.16 - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h - (11.3534 - 
 0.00119507 I) h^2 - (0.484268 - 0.00140481 I) h^3 - (5.0714 - 
 0.00114074 I) h^4 + (0.27061 - 0.000416258 I) h^5 - 
0.42471 h^6, -0.223386 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h + (4.95742 - 
 0.00267502 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 
 1. h^4), (0.0000484431 - 2.29589*10^-6 I) h^4, (0.0000353051 - 
 1.67323*10^-6 I) h^4, -0.223386 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h + (41.4016 - 
 0.00267502 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 1. h^4), 
0.16 - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h - (29.348 - 
 0.00118803 I) h^2 - (0.470698 - 0.00144251 I) h^3 - (13.9095 - 
 0.00124106 I) h^4 + (0.294629 - 0.000453204 I) h^5 - 
0.462406 h^6, -0.234771 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h + (19.0123 - 
 0.00267319 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 
 1. h^4), 0, (0.0000484431 - 
 2.29589*10^-6 I) h^4, -0.234771 h^2 ((-0.143205 + 
 0.000186623 I) - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h + (71.32 - 
 0.00267319 I) h^2 - (0.637164 - 0.0009801 I) h^3 + 1. h^4), 
0.16 - (0.36 + 0.001 I) h - (55.3462 - 
 0.00118568 I) h^2 - (0.466163 - 0.0014551 I) h^3 - (26.6556 - 
 0.00127449 I) h^4 + (0.302655 - 0.000465551 I) h^5 - 
0.475003 h^6;
sol = Part[NSolve[Det[%] == 0, h], 1]
Det[mat /. sol]
Det[mat] /. sol





numerical-value




numerical-value






share|improve this question







New contributor




Nils is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question







New contributor




Nils is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question






New contributor




Nils is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 2 hours ago









NilsNils

61




61




New contributor




Nils is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Nils is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Nils is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











  • $begingroup$
    Correction: I get the output 0.118714 - 0.0526506 I (as the second output) and 0.106201 - 0.0979004 I (as the third output); sorry, used a different matrix. But the problem still stands.
    $endgroup$
    – Nils
    2 hours ago
















  • $begingroup$
    Correction: I get the output 0.118714 - 0.0526506 I (as the second output) and 0.106201 - 0.0979004 I (as the third output); sorry, used a different matrix. But the problem still stands.
    $endgroup$
    – Nils
    2 hours ago















$begingroup$
Correction: I get the output 0.118714 - 0.0526506 I (as the second output) and 0.106201 - 0.0979004 I (as the third output); sorry, used a different matrix. But the problem still stands.
$endgroup$
– Nils
2 hours ago




$begingroup$
Correction: I get the output 0.118714 - 0.0526506 I (as the second output) and 0.106201 - 0.0979004 I (as the third output); sorry, used a different matrix. But the problem still stands.
$endgroup$
– Nils
2 hours ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

As you suspected when you mentioned SetPrecision, you are encountering numerical errors, probably catastrophic loss of precision when calculating the determinant; your calculations do in fact need to be carried out at higher precision.



If possible, you would want to use exact numbers in your matrix, or take advantage of the arbitrary-precision capabilities of Mathematica. For instance, we can convert all machine-precision numbers to arbitrary-precision ones with a number of digits of precision equal to that of common machine-precision numbers on your machine using SetPrecision (see also $MachinePrecision in the documentation):



det = Det[SetPrecision[mat, $MachinePrecision]];
sol = NSolve[det == 0, h];
det /. sol // PossibleZeroQ

(* Out: 
 True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True,
 True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True,
 True, True 
*)


As you can see, all those values of $h$ do bring your determinant reasonably close to zero, within machine-precision approximations.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$












    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    );
    );
    , "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "387"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );






    Nils is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathematica.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f192970%2fnumerical-value-of-determinant-far-from-what-it-is-supposed-to-be%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    3












    $begingroup$

    As you suspected when you mentioned SetPrecision, you are encountering numerical errors, probably catastrophic loss of precision when calculating the determinant; your calculations do in fact need to be carried out at higher precision.



    If possible, you would want to use exact numbers in your matrix, or take advantage of the arbitrary-precision capabilities of Mathematica. For instance, we can convert all machine-precision numbers to arbitrary-precision ones with a number of digits of precision equal to that of common machine-precision numbers on your machine using SetPrecision (see also $MachinePrecision in the documentation):



    det = Det[SetPrecision[mat, $MachinePrecision]];
    sol = NSolve[det == 0, h];
    det /. sol // PossibleZeroQ

    (* Out: 
     True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True,
     True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True,
     True, True 
    *)


    As you can see, all those values of $h$ do bring your determinant reasonably close to zero, within machine-precision approximations.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$

















      3












      $begingroup$

      As you suspected when you mentioned SetPrecision, you are encountering numerical errors, probably catastrophic loss of precision when calculating the determinant; your calculations do in fact need to be carried out at higher precision.



      If possible, you would want to use exact numbers in your matrix, or take advantage of the arbitrary-precision capabilities of Mathematica. For instance, we can convert all machine-precision numbers to arbitrary-precision ones with a number of digits of precision equal to that of common machine-precision numbers on your machine using SetPrecision (see also $MachinePrecision in the documentation):



      det = Det[SetPrecision[mat, $MachinePrecision]];
      sol = NSolve[det == 0, h];
      det /. sol // PossibleZeroQ

      (* Out: 
       True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True,
       True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True,
       True, True 
      *)


      As you can see, all those values of $h$ do bring your determinant reasonably close to zero, within machine-precision approximations.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$















        3












        3








        3





        $begingroup$

        As you suspected when you mentioned SetPrecision, you are encountering numerical errors, probably catastrophic loss of precision when calculating the determinant; your calculations do in fact need to be carried out at higher precision.



        If possible, you would want to use exact numbers in your matrix, or take advantage of the arbitrary-precision capabilities of Mathematica. For instance, we can convert all machine-precision numbers to arbitrary-precision ones with a number of digits of precision equal to that of common machine-precision numbers on your machine using SetPrecision (see also $MachinePrecision in the documentation):



        det = Det[SetPrecision[mat, $MachinePrecision]];
        sol = NSolve[det == 0, h];
        det /. sol // PossibleZeroQ

        (* Out: 
         True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True,
         True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True,
         True, True 
        *)


        As you can see, all those values of $h$ do bring your determinant reasonably close to zero, within machine-precision approximations.






        share|improve this answer











        $endgroup$



        As you suspected when you mentioned SetPrecision, you are encountering numerical errors, probably catastrophic loss of precision when calculating the determinant; your calculations do in fact need to be carried out at higher precision.



        If possible, you would want to use exact numbers in your matrix, or take advantage of the arbitrary-precision capabilities of Mathematica. For instance, we can convert all machine-precision numbers to arbitrary-precision ones with a number of digits of precision equal to that of common machine-precision numbers on your machine using SetPrecision (see also $MachinePrecision in the documentation):



        det = Det[SetPrecision[mat, $MachinePrecision]];
        sol = NSolve[det == 0, h];
        det /. sol // PossibleZeroQ

        (* Out: 
         True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True,
         True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True, True,
         True, True 
        *)


        As you can see, all those values of $h$ do bring your determinant reasonably close to zero, within machine-precision approximations.







        share|improve this answer














        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer








        edited 2 hours ago

























        answered 2 hours ago









        MarcoBMarcoB

        37.3k556113




        37.3k556113




















            Nils is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            Nils is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












            Nils is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











            Nils is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematica Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid …


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathematica.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f192970%2fnumerical-value-of-determinant-far-from-what-it-is-supposed-to-be%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            -

            Popular posts from this blog

            Nidaros erkebispedøme

            Image
            For det lutherske bispedømet, sjå Nidaros bispedøme. Nidaros erkebispedøme var eit katolsk erkebispedøme med sete i Nidaros. Det vart oppretta av kong Olav Kyrre mellom 1070 og 1080 som bispedøme. Bispedømet vart opphøgd til erkebispedøme i 1153. Erkebispedømet vart innstifta av pave Anastasius IV i 1154, og var i funksjon fram til reformasjonen i 1537. Erkebiskopen sitt hovudsete var Erkebispegarden, rett ved domkyrkja Nidarosdomen. Frå 1152 til 1154 var Nicholas Breakspear i Skandinavia som paveleg utsending, og organiserte opprettinga av erkesetet. Innhaldsliste 1 Utbreiing og jurisdiksjon 2 Overhyrdar 2.1 Lydbiskopar 3 Biskopar 3.1 Biskopar 3.2 Erkebiskopar Utbreiing og jurisdiksjon | Kart over den nordiske kyrkjeprovinsen (1153-1387) Erkebispedømet omfatta i tillegg til Noreg øyane i vest i Noregsveldet. Nidaros var eit metropolitanerkebispedøme med fylgjande underliggjande bispedøme suffraganar: Bjørgvin bispedøme Oslo bispedøme Hamar bispedøme Stavanger bispedøme Kirkjub
            Read more

            Birsay

            Image
            Tettstaden Birsay på Orknøyane. Ruinane av jarleplasset om lag midt i biletet. (Fotografi frå 2012) Utsikt mot Birsay og Brough of Brisay (fotografi frå 2009) Birsay er ein tettstad i eit sokn (parish) med same namn, nordvest på øya Mainland [Note 1] på Orknøyane, om lag 31 km frå Kirkwall. Staden er omtala fleire stader i Orknøyingasoga [1] , der han er kalla «Byrgesherad» (norrønt: Birgisherað ). Namnet skriv seg truleg frå elvenamnet Birgisá [2] . Innhaldsliste 1 Den gamle hovudstaden 2 Bispesetet 3 Jarlepalasset 4 Kjelder og utfyllande opplysningar 4.1 Notar 4.2 Fotnotar 4.3 Bakgrunnsstoff Den gamle hovudstaden | Hovudartikkelen for dette emnet er Torfinn Sigurdsson . Soknet er i dag i hovudsak ei jordbrukskommune men er mest kjend for dei mange kulturminna i området. Tettstaden Birsay blir gjerne omtala som «den gamle hovudstaden på Orknøyane» [3] , og ein viser då gjerne til Orknøyingasoga (kap.31) som fortel at orknøyjarlen Torfinn Sigurdsson den mektige «hadde jamleg
            Read more

            Where did Arya get these scars? Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Favourite questions and answers from the 1st quarter of 2019Why did Arya refuse to end it?Has the pronunciation of Arya Stark's name changed?Has Arya forgiven people?Why did Arya Stark lose her vision?Why can Arya still use the faces?Has the Narrow Sea become narrower?Does Arya Stark know how to make poisons outside of the House of Black and White?Why did Nymeria leave Arya?Why did Arya not kill the Lannister soldiers she encountered in the Riverlands?What is the current canonical age of Sansa, Bran and Arya Stark?

            Image
            How to translate "red flag" into Spanish? France's Public Holidays' Puzzle How did Elite on the NES work? Where can I find how to tex symbols for different fonts? In search of the origins of term censor, I hit a dead end stuck with the greek term, to censor, λογοκρίνω How to check if string is entirely made of same substring? What's called a person who works as someone who puts products on shelves in stores? What helicopter has the most rotor blades? Did war bonds have better investment alternatives during WWII? Page Layouts : 1 column , 2 columns-left , 2 columns-right , 3 column Marquee sign letters Why did Israel vote against lifting the American embargo on Cuba? What *exactly* is electrical current, voltage, and resistance? Mechanism of the formation of peracetic acid Does Prince Arnaud cause someone holding the Princess to lose? Bright yellow or light yellow? What is /etc/mtab in Linux? What is the ongoing value of the Kanban
            Read more