MHB Eigenvalues are real numbers and satisfy inequality

evinda
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,741
Reaction score
0
Hello! (Wave)

Let $A$ be a $n \times n$ complex unitary matrix. I want to show that the eigenvalues $\lambda$ of the matrix $A+A^{\star}$ are real numbers that satisfy the relation $-2 \leq \lambda \leq 2$.

I have looked up the definitions and I read that a unitary matrix is a square matrix for which $AA^{+}=I$.

(The transpose matrix of $A^{\star}$ is symbolized with $A^{+}$.)

($A^{\star}$: complex conjugate)In order to show that the eigenvalues $\lambda$ of the matrix $A+A^{\star}$ are real numbers and satisfy that $-2 \leq \lambda \leq 2$, do we maybe have to find the minimal polynomial of the matrix $A+A^{\star}$ ? If so, how? Is there a relation? Or do we have to do it somehow else? (Thinking)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hey evinda!

Suppose we pick $A=\begin{pmatrix}0&-1\\ 1&0\end{pmatrix}$.
Then aren't the eigenvalues of $A+A^*$ imaginary? (Worried)

Can it be that $A+A^+$ was intended?

To find an upper magnitude of 2, did you consider that $\|A\mathbf x\| = \|\mathbf x\|$, which is a property of a unitary matrix? (Wondering)
 
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
2
Views
848
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K