Logarithm of 2x2 Matrix: A General Guide

jhendren
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
How do you take the log of a 2x2 matrix in general where all entries are non-zero
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jhendren said:
How do you take the log of a 2x2 matrix in general where all entries are non-zero

Hey jhendren and welcome to the forums.

Have you tried either (a) diagonalizing the matrix or (b) using an operator expansion based on the Taylor series of the logarithm?

The first one is based on the eigen-decomposition and the second one is based on the operator algebra results for functions of a linear operator.
 
If y= ln(x) then x= e^y. So to define the logarithm is to define the exponential and vice-versa. And it is easier to work with the exponential. Its Taylor series is \sum_{n=0}^\infty x^n/n!.

One can show that if matrix x is "diagonalizable", that is, if there exist a matrix P such that x= PDP^{-1} where D is a diagonal matrix, then that is \sum_{n= 0}^\infty (PDP^{-1})^n/n!= P\left(\sum_{n=0}^\infty D^n\right)P^{-1}. And D^n is just the diagonal matrix with the nth powers of the diagonal elements of D on it diagonal. That reduces to e^x= Pe^DP^{-1} where, now, e^D is the diagonal matrix having the exponentials of the diagonal elements of D on its diagonal.

If x is not diagonalizable, it can still be written in "Jordan Normal Form" but the exponential of that is trickier.

If, for example,
D= \begin{bmatrix}a & 0 \\ 0 & b\end{bmatrix}
then
e^D= \begin{bmatrix}e^a & 0 \\ 0 & e^b\end{bmatrix}.

If A is the "Jordan Normal Form", written as
A= \begin{bmatrix}a & 1 \\ 0 & a\end{bmatrix}
then it is easy to show that
A^n= \begin{bmatrix}a^n & na^{n-1} & 0 & a^n\end{bmatrix}
so that
e^A= \begin{bmatrix}\sum a^n/n! & sum na^{n-1}/n!\\ 0 \sum a^n/n!\end{bmatrix}= \begin{bmatrix}\sum a^n/n! & sum a^{n-1}{n!} \\ 0 & a^n/n! \end{bmatrix}
e^A= \begin{bmatrix}e^a & e^a \\ 0 & e^a\end{bmatrix}
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thread 'Determine whether ##125## is a unit in ##\mathbb{Z_471}##'
This is the question, I understand the concept, in ##\mathbb{Z_n}## an element is a is a unit if and only if gcd( a,n) =1. My understanding of backwards substitution, ... i have using Euclidean algorithm, ##471 = 3⋅121 + 108## ##121 = 1⋅108 + 13## ##108 =8⋅13+4## ##13=3⋅4+1## ##4=4⋅1+0## using back-substitution, ##1=13-3⋅4## ##=(121-1⋅108)-3(108-8⋅13)## ... ##= 121-(471-3⋅121)-3⋅471+9⋅121+24⋅121-24(471-3⋅121## ##=121-471+3⋅121-3⋅471+9⋅121+24⋅121-24⋅471+72⋅121##...
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
3K
Back
Top