Can Matrix Norms be Used to Bound the Eigenvalues of a Matrix?

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the inequalities ||A||_1 ≤ √n ||A||_2 and ||A||_2 ≤ √n ||A||_1 for matrices A in R^n. The user attempts to apply the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality to show the relationship between the norms but questions the validity of using the max operator in this context. Additionally, a related question about bounding the triangle inequality is posed, along with a problem regarding the norm of the inverse of a matrix A. The user concludes that their approach to proving the norm of the inverse is valid, leading to the conclusion that ||A^{-1}|| ≤ 10. The discussion highlights the complexities of matrix norms and their interrelations.
garrus
Messages
16
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Show that ||A||_1 \le \sqrt{n} ||A||_2 , ||A||_2 \le \sqrt{n} ||A||_1 , where
||A||_1 = \max_{1\le j\le n}\sum_{i=1}^n |a_{ij}| \\ <br /> ||A||_2 = (p(A^TA))^\frac{1}{2} \\<br /> p(B) = \max|\lambda_B|<br />
with A,B\in \mathbb{R}^{n,n}, i,j\in[1...n] , \lambda_Athe eigenvalues of matrix A

Homework Equations


wiki page on matrix norms

The Attempt at a Solution


I figured i could go the same way in proving that ||x||_1 \le \sqrt{n} ||x||_2 , x\in \mathbb{R}^n via the Cauchy Schwartz inequality.But since the max operator is not linear, isn't it a mistake to write
<br /> <br /> ||A||_1 = \max_{1\le j\le n} \sum_{i=1}^{n}|a_{ij}| =<br /> \max_{1\le j\le n}\sum_{i=1}^{n}|a_{ij}| * 1 \le<br /> \max_{1\le j\le n} (\sum_{i=1}^{n}|a_{ij}|^2 * \sum_{i=1}^{n}1^2)^{\frac{1}{2}} ?
Any hints?

edit:
Slightly off topic question: In triangle inequality, it holds that
|a - b| >= |a| - |b| . can we also bound it from below, by |a-b| = |a +(-b)| <=|a|+|b| ?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Noone?

One another norm problem, I'm given.If you could verify / correct:
<br /> A\in\mathbb{R}^{n,n} , x\in \mathbb{R}^n. \|Ax\|\ge \frac{\|x\|}{10}<br />
and ask to show that \|A^{-1}\| \le 10
where ||\cdot|| a norm and the corresponding matrix norm derived by it.

<br /> \|Ax\|\ge \frac{\|x\|}{10} \iff \|A\| \|x\| \ge\|Ax\|\ge \frac{\|x\|}{10} \Rightarrow<br /> \|A\| \ge \frac{1}{10} (*)<br />
Only way i managed was to assert a value and lead to contradiction,but i suspect there must be a more elegant way.Let \|A^{-1}\| &gt; 10
<br /> \|A^{-1}\| &gt; 10 \iff ||A|| \|A^{-1}\| &gt; 10 \|A\| \\ but\\<br /> 1 = \|A A^{-1}\| \le \|A\| \|A^{-1}\| \\<br /> (*) \Rightarrow 10 \|A\| \ge 1<br />
, which is a contradiction, so \|A^{-1}\| &gt; 10 is false.Thus \|A^{-1}\| \le 10
 
Last edited:
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K