MHB Comparing Matrices: A-B>0 Positive Definite?

  • Thread starter Thread starter matqkks
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matrices
matqkks
Messages
280
Reaction score
5
Can we compare matrices?
If A-B>0 is positive definite, can we say A>B?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
matqkks said:
Can we compare matrices? If A-B>0 is positive definite, can we say A>B?

If you mean $A>B\Leftrightarrow a_{ij}>b_{ij}$ for all $i,j$, that is not true. Choose for example $A=\begin{bmatrix}{\;\;1}&{-1}\\{-1}&{\;\;2}\end{bmatrix}$ and $B=\begin{bmatrix}{0}&{0}\\{0}&{0}\end{bmatrix}$.

Edit: Or perhaps you take as a definition $A>B$ if and only if $A-B$ is positive definitite and you want to study the properties of $(\mathbb{R}^{n\times n},>)$. Could you specify?
 
Last edited:
I meant A-B is positive definite.
Don't not mean your first definition.
K
 
matqkks said:
I meant A-B is positive definite. Don't not mean your first definition.

I know that you meant $A-B$ definite positive, but the problem is that I don't understand the exact meaning of your question.

$(a)$ If you define $A>B$ iff $a_{ij}>b_{ij}$ then, it is false that $A-B$ positive definite iff $A>B$.

$(b)$ If you define $A>B$ iff $A-B$ is definite positive, of course the definition has sense. You get a relation on $\mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$ i.e. a subset of $\mathbb{R}^{n\times n}\times \mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$.
 
You'd probably want to check transitivity. So, let's say that $A>B$ and $B>C$. Then, by your definition, you'd have that $A-B$ and $B-C$ are both positive definite. From this, can you prove that $A-C$ is positive definite? That would imply that $A>C$, which is what you need for transitivity.

So let's see. By the definition of positive definite, it must be that $\forall z\in\mathbb{R}^{n},$ $z^{T}(A-B)z>0$, and $z^{T}(B-C)z>0$. Adding positives to positives yields that
$$z^{T}(A-B)z+z^{T}(B-C)z>0,$$
and hence
$$z^{T}[(A-B)z+(B-C)z]=z^{T}[A-B+B-C]z=z^{T}[A-C]z>0,$$
as required. Therefore, $A-C$ is positive definite, so $A>C$; you have transitivity, unless I made a mistake somewhere.
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K