Diagonalize Matrix: Worked Example & Explanation

  • Thread starter Thread starter roam
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matrix
roam
Messages
1,265
Reaction score
12

Homework Statement


This is a worked example:

[PLAIN]http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/7783/44818829.gif

The Attempt at a Solution



So, in the answer I don't understand how they obtained

L= \begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & 0 \\ 3 & 1 & 0 \\ 1 & -1 & 1 \end{pmatrix}

I don't think this "L" here is the lower triangular matrix used in the LU factorization of A. Because I followed the LU decomposition algorithm and ended up with

L= \begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & 0 \\ 3 & 8 & 0 \\ 1 & 4 & 5 \end{pmatrix}

So where did they get that matrix from? Any explanation is very much appreciated.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org


You are mistaken, L is, in fact, the "L" in LU= A.
 


roam,
I don't follow this example, either. When a problem asks to diagonalize a matrix, I reflexively think of eigenvalues and eigenvectors. In this problem the entries on the main diagonal of D aren't the eigenvalues of A (which happen to be about 11.6, 2.5, and -.17).

The only thing I understand about this problem is that they have row-reduced A to an upper triangular matrix U, where
U= \begin{pmatrix}1 & 3 & 1 \\ 0 & 1 & -1 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix}

Assuming that A = LU, and noticing that U is invertible, you can solve this equation for L, with L = AU-1.
Doing this, I get
L= \begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & 0 \\ 3 & -1 & 0 \\ 1 & 1 & 5 \end{pmatrix}

I don't know how they got the diagonal matrix unless there's some technique for factoring a lower triangular matrix (L here) into another lower triangular matrix and a diagonal matrix that I don't know about. It is probably significant that their lower triangular matrix has 1's on the main diagonal.
 


It seems that this is an example of LDU decomposition. There's some stuff about it in the following lecture from MIT's Open CourseWare, including an example and an algorithm that might help you:

http://ocw.mit.edu/NR/rdonlyres/Mathematics/18-335JFall-2004/BA2C6B59-4639-4FC4-ACEF-B0362FB16CC3/0/lecture11.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top