MHB Finding Matrix D Without Calculating P Inverse: Help Appreciated!

  • Thread starter Thread starter tomc612
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Inverse Matrix
Click For Summary
To determine the diagonal matrix D without calculating the inverse of matrix P, recognize that the diagonal entries of D are simply the eigenvalues of matrix A. The matrix P, which diagonalizes A, is composed of the eigenvectors of A as its columns. Therefore, by arranging the eigenvalues in the same order as their corresponding eigenvectors in P, D can be constructed directly. This approach eliminates the need for calculating P^-1. Understanding this relationship simplifies the process of finding D significantly.
tomc612
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
Hi,
got a question I'm stuck on..

Write down a matrix P which will diagonalise A and write down the corresponding
diagonal matrix D, where D = P^-􀀀1AP. You do not have to calculate P^-1


Ive got all the eigenvalues and eigenvectors for A, and thus have the Matrix P, which has a determinant of -12 and thus P^-1 exists.

Question is how to do you determine D without calculating the inverse of P?

Any help appreciated

Tom
 
Physics news on Phys.org
tomc612 said:
Hi,
got a question I'm stuck on..

Write down a matrix P which will diagonalise A and write down the corresponding
diagonal matrix D, where D = P^-􀀀1AP. You do not have to calculate P^-1


Ive got all the eigenvalues and eigenvectors for A, and thus have the Matrix P, which has a determinant of -12 and thus P^-1 exists.

Question is how to do you determine D without calculating the inverse of P?

Any help appreciated

Tom
The entries on the main diagonal of $D$ are the eigenvalues of $A$. All the other entries in $D$ are zeros.

When you wrote down the matrix $P$, its columns were the eigenvectors of $A$ (in some order). When you write the diagonal elements of $D$, you should use the corresponding eigenvalues in the same order.
 
I am surprised that tomc612 would be given a problem like this if he had not already learned everything Opalg said!
 
I am studying the mathematical formalism behind non-commutative geometry approach to quantum gravity. I was reading about Hopf algebras and their Drinfeld twist with a specific example of the Moyal-Weyl twist defined as F=exp(-iλ/2θ^(μν)∂_μ⊗∂_ν) where λ is a constant parametar and θ antisymmetric constant tensor. {∂_μ} is the basis of the tangent vector space over the underlying spacetime Now, from my understanding the enveloping algebra which appears in the definition of the Hopf algebra...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K