Matrix Multiplication and Commuting

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the conditions under which two matrices commute, specifically exploring the properties of commuting matrices, geometric interpretations, and proofs related to simultaneous diagonalizability. The scope includes theoretical aspects and mathematical reasoning.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that diagonal matrices commute, and this is a specific case of a broader property.
  • Others argue that the geometric interpretation of diagonal matrices involves stretching objects in coordinate directions, which can be commutative.
  • A participant mentions that two matrices commute if and only if they are simultaneously diagonalizable, introducing the concept of an invertible matrix that transforms them into diagonal form.
  • Another participant expresses uncertainty about proving the converse of the previously mentioned condition, particularly when both matrices are defective.
  • Some participants discuss the implications of defective matrices and the challenges in proving commutativity in such cases.
  • There is a suggestion that matrices of the form B = kA, where k is a scalar, commute with a given matrix A, illustrating a specific example of commuting matrices.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the commutativity of diagonal matrices and the concept of simultaneous diagonalizability. However, there are multiple competing views regarding the proofs and conditions under which matrices commute, particularly in the context of defective matrices, leaving the discussion unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on definitions of defective matrices and the unresolved nature of proofs regarding commutativity when both matrices are defective or infinite dimensional.

Little Devil
Why might two matrices commute? I.e Why would AB=BA because in general, matrices usually do not commute. What are the properties of matrices that do commute?
Ben
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Diagonal matrices commute.
 
I forgot to mention there is a geometrical way of looking at this - suppose the diagonal is filled with scalars, then each aii stretches any object that the matrix acts on in the i direction. For example, suppose a11 is 5, then any object acted on by the matrix will be streched by a factor of 5 in the x direction, if you are using an x,y,z coordinate system. In a diagonal matrix the eigenvalues are precisely the entries on the diagonal.
 
I completely left out the geometric intuition I sought to express - stretching in the x direction, then the y, is the same as stretching in the y direction, then the x - the two operations commute, and so do any matrices associated with the operations.
 
More generally: two matrices, A and B, commute if and only if they are "simultaneously diagonalizable": that is if there exist some invertible matrix M such that MAM-1= D1 and MBM-1= D2 where D1 and D2 are diagonal matrices (more generally, Jordan Normal Form if A and B are not diagonalizable).

It follows then that A= M-1D1M and B= M-1D2M.
Then AB= M-1D1MM-1D2M= M-1D1D2M
= M-1D2D1M (since all diagonal matrices commute)
= M-1D2MM-1D2M
= BA.
 
That is the proof I couldn't remember.
 
How does the proof in the other direction go? I fiddled around with it a bit and wasn't getting very far.
 
It wasn't a proof, just geometric intuition, given by the fact that it doesn't matter which order something is stretched in - the final result will be the same, and the fact that diagonal matrices stretch any object they act on, by the degree given by the ith eigenvalue, in the ith direction. There is an excellent geometric discussion of how eigenvalues and eigenvectors act on an object available here:
http://hverrill.net/courses/linalg/linalg8.html
I don't have anything better to add to it.
 
Ok... I can prove that if A has not defective then A and B commute iff they are simultaneously diagonalizable. Anyone know how to do it when both are defective?


Here's a sketch of what I have so far:

Assume A is not defective and finite dimensional. Then choose a basis that diagonalizes A.

The i,k-th entry in AB is AiiBik
The i,k-th entry in BA is BikAkk

So AB = BA iff, for all (i, k), Bik = 0 or Aii=Akk.


If Aii = Ajj, then A is the identity over the subspace spanned by the i-th and j-th basis vectors, so we can replace these two vectors with basis vectors that diagonalize B over that subspace.

By repeating this process, we can produce a basis that simultaneously diagonalizes both A and B.


I don't know what to do if A is defective or infinite dimensional. (though I admit not having taken a crack at modifying the above proof to use transfinite induction to tackle the infinite dimensional case) :frown:
 
  • #10
That proof should work for infinite dimensional cases as is because it already uses induction in the repetition of converting the basis vectors to basis vectors that span subspaces of B, two by two, as long as A is not defective. Proof if both A and B are defective is not easy. Good luck.
 
  • #11
rick1138 said:
Diagonal matrices commute.


this is not IFF is it?

A * B can B* A without A being diagonal
 
  • #12
Can you give me and example to find matrices commute with matrices A that we know?
 
  • #13
Tola said:
Can you give me and example to find matrices commute with matrices A that we know?

Clearly an example is all matrices for which B = kA, where k is a scalar. Then, the eigenvalues differ by a constant factor and the matrix M diagonalizes both A and B as required.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K