Find Intersection of 3x2 Matrices Using QR Factorization

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on using QR factorization to find the intersection of two 3x2 matrices. The approach involves performing full QR factorization on both matrices, extracting the third column from each Q matrix to create a new matrix Q', which represents the normals to the planes defined by the original matrices. A subsequent QR factorization of Q' yields a third column that is orthogonal to both normal vectors, indicating the intersection. The method aligns with concepts from the course material, specifically referencing a text that confirms the orthogonality of the columns in the QR factorization. Overall, the proposed method is deemed valid and consistent with the mathematical principles discussed.
blabbate
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Figured it out.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
By any chance did you do following:

Do the full QR factorization of the two matrices. Using the third column from each 'Q' matrix, build a new matrix, call it Q'. It is composed of the normals to the planes described by the original two matrices. Do a full QR of Q'. The new QR has a third column of Q that is orthogonal to both of those normal vectors. So it is therefore in the intersection.

Is this correct? or did I make a bad assumption?
 
It seems that we are all in CSE 6643, which also seems all good according to the syllabus and working together. So, qiaoshiya, this seems like a very reasonable assumption. From your thoughts, and talking with Prof Alben, I went back through Chapter 7. On page 50 the text states "Notice that in the full QR factorization, the columns of q_j for j>n are orthogonal to range(A)." That means that the third column of Q should basically be equivalent to cross(x1, y1), which is one way of identifying a plane (use the plane's normal vector). With this, then using the 2 third columns of the Qs, then the third QR factorization would result in a vector that is perpendicular to both of the first two plane identifying vectors. That is exactly what we're are looking for.

When I first saw this problem I went through (mostly) the exercise of finding the the final vector, since I knew how to do that. Now reading that line from page 50, the two processes seem to be identical.

Other thoughts from anyone?
 
Last edited:
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
11K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K