Can the inverse of a matrix exponential be proven using its definition?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the inverse of the matrix exponential, specifically using its definition involving a series expansion. Participants express confusion regarding the definition of the matrix exponential and its implications, particularly in the context of nilpotent matrices.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Homework-related
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks to prove the inverse of the matrix exponential e^A, referencing a series definition provided by their instructor.
  • Another participant questions the validity of the claim that A^n = 0 for n greater than some k, suggesting that this is not generally true.
  • There is a suggestion that if A^n = 0 for n > k, then e^A can be expressed as a finite series, but this does not require proof as it is a definition.
  • One participant attempts to clarify the relationship between the elements of the matrix A and the resulting matrix B = e^A, but acknowledges that the initial formula presented may not accurately represent the matrix exponential.
  • A reference to a Wikipedia article on the nilpotent case of the matrix exponential is provided, indicating that the discussion may involve specific cases of matrices.
  • Another participant suggests that the original poster should provide the full problem statement in the homework forum for better assistance.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the validity of the definitions and claims regarding the matrix exponential. Multiple competing views remain regarding the nature of the series definition and the conditions under which it applies.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in understanding the definitions provided, particularly concerning the conditions under which A^n = 0 and the implications for the matrix exponential. The discussion reflects uncertainty about the application of the series expansion in various cases.

GregoryGr
Messages
41
Reaction score
0
I have to prove the inverse of the matrix e^A. we haven't studied exponential matrices in uni but he gave us the definition of it with the series e^A= I+A+A^2 ... A^k where A^k=0, even for numbers greater than k.
I have tried to think of a way to prove it, but neither my classmates or I found something. I looked up google etc, but all the proofs were with things that we didn't learn. Any help is welcome.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Consider this:if A={a_{ij}} then for B=e^A we have b_{ij}=e^{a_{ij}}.
 
Prove what? Not that e^A= I+ A+ A^2/2+ A^3/3!+ ... because you were given that as a definition. And not that A^n= 0 for n greater than some k because that is not generally true.

Perhaps your teacher was saying that if there exist some k, such that if A^n = 0 if n> k, then e^A= 1+ A+ A^2/2!+ A^3/3!+ ...+ A^k/k!

Either your teacher gave e^A= I+ A+ A^2/2+ A^3/3!+ ... (an infinite sum) from which it follows that if A^n= 0 for n> k that e^A= I+ A+ A^2/2+ A^3/3!+ ... + A^k/k! or your teacher, wishing to avoid the technical complications involved in defining infinite sums of matrices, just said that if A^n= 0 for n> k, then e^A= I+ A+ A^2/2+ A^3/3!+ ... + A^k/k!

In either case, it does not require "proof" because it is a definition.
 
Shyan said:
Consider this:if A={a_{ij}} then for B=e^A we have b_{ij}=e^{a_{ij}}.

This is not the matrix exponential. For example if A is diagonal then eA has the form bjj = ea_jj, but off the diagonal you still get all zeros (whereas your formula would give 1s).

Gregory, if you've been assigned an exercise you should post the problem in the homework forum, with the full problem statement as you have been given it and the work you have done to try to solve it.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K