Classification of fixed points of N-dimensional linear dynamical system?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the classification of fixed points in N-dimensional linear dynamical systems, particularly focusing on three-dimensional systems. Participants explore the complexities of fixed point classification as dimensions increase and the implications for both linear and nonlinear systems.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes the availability of fixed point classification for two-dimensional systems but expresses difficulty finding similar information for three-dimensional systems, suggesting that different eigenvalue combinations may indicate different fixed point types.
  • Another participant argues that the classification of fixed points in three-dimensional linear systems is less meaningful due to the complexity and prevalence of nonlinear systems that often exhibit chaotic behavior.
  • A participant mentions that their system is nonlinear but can be linearized at fixed points, asserting that stability can be inferred from the eigenvalues' real parts, drawing parallels to the two-dimensional case.
  • Another participant clarifies that while negative eigenvalues indicate asymptotic stability and positive ones indicate instability, the term "node" is typically reserved for two-dimensional systems, referencing their experience with chaotic systems in three dimensions.
  • One participant provides a detailed classification scheme for three-dimensional systems based on the nature of the eigenvalues, including terms like node, repellor, and spiral types, and references a specific book for further reading.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the utility and feasibility of classifying fixed points in three-dimensional systems, with some emphasizing the complexity and limited applicability of such classifications, while others propose specific classifications and suggest that stability concepts can extend from two to N dimensions.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the limitations of existing classifications, particularly in relation to nonlinear systems and the potential for chaotic behavior in three dimensions. The discussion reflects a range of assumptions about the relevance and application of fixed point classifications.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying dynamical systems, particularly in the context of linear and nonlinear systems, as well as researchers exploring chaos theory and stability analysis.

TokenMonkey
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I'm familiar with the classification of fixed points of linear dynamical systems in two dimensions; it's readily available in many a book, as well as good ol' Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_dynamical_system#Classification_in_two_dimensions).

However, what happens with higher-order systems, say, three-dimensional? In that case, you'll end up having three eigenvalues -- presumably, different combinations of their signs give rise to different fixed point types. Has this been investigated? I've looked at numerous books, and all I ever seem to find is classification for two dimensions.

Any help with finding a book/paper/URL dealing with this would be much appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You're having trouble finding info on it because there isn't much classification to be done. For three linear equations the types of situations that can arise are much more plentiful than in two dimensions. Most work in three-dimensional systems of diff eqs is with NONLINEAR equations that give rise to chaos. Classifying the fixed points of all 3D systems linear diff eqs would be a hell of a waste of time when the classification itself does not provide much insight. The use of the Trace-determinant plane picture of fixed points in two dimensions is to apply them to the local behavior of corresponding fixed points of nonlinear systems. But in 3D nonlinear systems give rise to chaos and thus a classification of the linear fixed points would not have much of a use.
 
Well, the thing is that my system is actually nonlinear, but linearisable at the fixed points. From what I've gathered from other forums, textbooks, and an applied-maths-educated friend, while the exact classifications may not be straightforward, stability is. More specifically, the real parts of the eigenvalues: if they are all positive, unstable node; if they are all negative, we have a stable node; if there is a mixture of positive and negative, we're at a saddle point. In this sense, the 2-D case extends to the N-D case.

Would you say this is incorrect?
 
If all of the eigenvalues are negative then the fixed point in n-dimensional space is asymptotically stable and if all three are positive then the fixed point is unstable but the term node, as far as I've heard it used in my courses, was reserved for 2D systems. When we did three dimensional systems our Professor, Steven Strogatz, focused in on his research which is in chaotic systems so in all reality I didn't see too much of any other type of three dimensional system. We worked with strange attractors and those don't have any linearisable fixed points.
 
Hi! To this subject, I have some more details to give!

With higher-order systems, let’s say three-dimensional, you have about height possible cases:
Node if all the eigenvalues are real and negative; Repellor if all positive reals; Saddle point index 1 if all real with one positive and others negatives; Saddle point index 2 if all real with rather one negative; Spiral node if one real and two complex conjugate but all of them with negative real parts; Spiral repellor if one real and two complex conjugate but all with positive real parts; Spiral saddle index 1 if one positive real and the two others complex conjugate with negative real parts and finally, Spiral saddle index 2 in case one negative real and the two others complex conjugate with positive real parts.

For more information, see Book by Julien Clinton Sprott, Chaos and Time-Series Analysis, Oxford University Press Inc., New York 2003
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
8K
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K