Finding A to the power of n without using eigenvalues

  • Thread starter Thread starter dlevanchuk
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Eigenvalues
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating A^5*u for a given 3x3 matrix A and vector u, with the user initially struggling to find a solution without using eigenvalues. They successfully verified that Au = 2u, which indicates that u is an eigenvector corresponding to the eigenvalue 2. The hint provided emphasizes the relationship between A^2u and Au, suggesting that the user can build upon their earlier result. The user realizes that they can leverage the eigenvalue relationship to simplify their calculations. This approach ultimately clarifies the connection between the two parts of the problem, leading to a better understanding of the solution.
dlevanchuk
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
Oh it gives me headache... been thinking on this problem for a while, and don't even know where to begin! Could anyone give me a hint at least?? :(

Problem:
Let A be (3x3) matrix : [ 4 -2 2; 2 4 -4; 1 1 0] and u (vector) = [1 3 2].
a) Verify that Au = 2u
I got this one without a problem.

b) Without forming A^5, calculate the vector A^5*u.
This is where I get stuck.. I've tried to search, but keep coming up with some equations that involve eigenvalues (which I haven't studied yet..). So, I am assuming that i don't have to use any of eigenvalues.. Is there any other way?
I tried to replace A matrix with [a b c; d...] values, and take first 3 powers of that, but its way too hard to keep track of everything..

So, any hint?? :(
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You know that Au = 2u.

Now what is A2u = A (A u)?

Note that numbers commute with matrices, so for example A(2u) = 2(Au).

Actually you are using eigenvalues here: when Av = c v for some (non-trivial) vector v and some number c, then we say that v is an eigenvector for the matrix A, with corresponding eigenvalue c.[/size]
 
Oh man! Thats simple! Didn't even think about relating problem a with problem b! :rolleyes: Thanks a ton! :biggrin:
 
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 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K