Calculating Eigenvalues using the Sars Method - Explained and Simplified

  • Thread starter Thread starter robertjford80
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Value
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating eigenvalues using the Sars method, focusing on the manipulation of terms involving lambda in a determinant setup.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the factoring of terms involving lambda, questioning the correctness of expressions derived from the Sars method. There are attempts to clarify the steps involved in the determinant calculation and the implications of factoring.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered clarifications regarding the factoring process and the limitations of the Sars method, suggesting alternative approaches for larger determinants. There is an acknowledgment of different interpretations of the problem setup.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the Sars method is limited to 3x3 determinants, which may influence the discussion on the appropriateness of the method for the problem at hand.

robertjford80
Messages
388
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Screenshot2012-06-10at53609AM.png



The Attempt at a Solution



Do you see where it says 3.3(1-lambda)?

Then the next row has -9 in it? It should be -9 + 9lambda, right? I'm using the Sars method (I think that's what it's called), where you copy the first two columns then take the product of three different diagonals, then subtract them from 3 other diagonals, sorry for the vague language.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi robert!

Only [itex]1-\lambda[/itex] was taken common of the two terms, and the rest was kept as it is. I don't see why you would have a [itex]+9\lambda[/itex] with it.

Let [itex](1-\lambda) = t[/itex] and keep the rest as it is. And take the t out common, what would you get??
 
i'm falling asleep, so I will have to deal with this 10 hours later.
 
robertjford80 said:
i'm falling asleep, so I will have to deal with this 10 hours later.

Good idea! :-p
 
robertjford80 said:

Homework Statement



Screenshot2012-06-10at53609AM.png



The Attempt at a Solution



Do you see where it says 3.3(1-lambda)?

Then the next row has -9 in it? It should be -9 + 9lambda, right?
No. They have factored [itex]1- \lambda[/itex] from each term first, leaving [itex](2- \lambda)(2-\lambda)- 3(3)[/itex].

I'm using the Sars method (I think that's what it's called), where you copy the first two columns then take the product of three different diagonals, then subtract them from 3 other diagonals, sorry for the vague language.
Not a very good method as it is applicable only to 3 by 3 determinants and not to larger determinants. Better to learn "expansion by rows" or "expansion by columns".

Here, it is particularly easy to expand on the last row. Then the determinant is [tex]0\left|\begin{array}{cc}3 & 0 \\ 2-\lambda & 0 \end{array}\right|- 0\left|\begin{array}{cc}2-\lambda & 0 \\ 3 & 0 \end{array}\right|+ (1- \lambda)\left|\begin{array}{cc}2-\lambda & 2 \\ 3 & 2- \lambda\end{array}\right|[/tex]
which, since the first two terms are multiplied by 0, immediately gives [itex]((2-\lambda)^2- 9)(1- \lambda)[/itex].
 
ok, I understand now.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
14K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K