2x2 matrix A has only one eigenvalue λ with eigenvector v

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around a 2x2 matrix A with a single eigenvalue λ and its corresponding eigenvector v, alongside a non-eigenvector w. Participants clarify that if v and w were linearly dependent, w would also be an eigenvector, which contradicts the problem's conditions. This leads to the conclusion that v and w must be linearly independent. The conversation also touches on how to represent the matrix in the basis {v, w} and suggests that a suitable choice of w can simplify the representation. The overall focus is on proving the linear independence of v and w and understanding the implications for the matrix representation.
nlews
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
This is a revision problem I have come across,

I have completed the first few parts of it, but this is the last section and it seems entirely unrelated to the rest of the problem, and I can't get my head around it!

Suppose that the 2x2 matrix A has only one eigenvalue λ with eigenvector v, and that w is a non zero vector which is not an eigenvector..show that:

a) v and w are linearly independent
b) the matrix with respect to the basis {v, w} is
(λ c
0 λ)
for some c =not to 0
c) for a suitable choice of w, c = 1I am stuck.
I know how to show that the eigenvalues are linearly independent, but how do I show that these two vectors are linearly independent to each other?
as for b and c i don't know where to start! Please help!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
nlews said:
Suppose that the 2x2 matrix A has only one eigenvalue λ with eigenvector v, and that w is a non zero vector which is not an eigenvector..show that:

a) v and w are linearly independent

I know how to show that the eigenvalues are linearly independent, but how do I show that these two vectors are linearly independent to each other?

If v and w are linearly dependent, then w is a multiple of v, so obviously w is also an eigenvector.

Get some sleep! :zzz:​
 


ahh ok..so I can prove by contradiction! thank you that helps massively for part a!
 
I am studying the mathematical formalism behind non-commutative geometry approach to quantum gravity. I was reading about Hopf algebras and their Drinfeld twist with a specific example of the Moyal-Weyl twist defined as F=exp(-iλ/2θ^(μν)∂_μ⊗∂_ν) where λ is a constant parametar and θ antisymmetric constant tensor. {∂_μ} is the basis of the tangent vector space over the underlying spacetime Now, from my understanding the enveloping algebra which appears in the definition of the Hopf algebra...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
9K