Finding the eigenspace for this value of lambda

  • Thread starter Thread starter member 731016
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Lambda Value
member 731016
Homework Statement
Please see below
Relevant Equations
Please see below
For this,
1682889535119.png

I don't understand how they solved,
1682889573062.png

Because we would have to take the inverse of both side which would give the inverse of the matrix ##2 \times 2## matrix on the left hand side which dose not have an inverse.

Dose anybody please know how they did this?

Many thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In equation form, we have ##-6 x +6 y =0 \iff x - y = 0## (dividing both sides by -6) for the first line. Likewise for the second line, ##5 x -5 y =0 \iff x - y = 0## (dividing both sides by 5). So both equations say the same thing.
Now you can see what they were doing in matrix form and why there is no need to include ##x## and ##y## where they were manipulating the augmented matrices. It really represents the same thing.
 
  • Like
Likes member 731016
There isn't a single solution for the eigenvector(s). That's why you can't invert that matrix. That's how it is with eigenvalue problems. In fact, that's how you find the eigenvalues with the characteristic equation |AI|=0, i.e. find λ that makes AI not invertable.
 
  • Like
Likes member 731016
ChiralSuperfields said:
Dose anybody please know how they did this?
Again, that's "does".

Your thread title indicates that you are to find the eigenspace for a matrix. IOW, the set of all nonzero vectors x (in ##\mathbb R^2## here) such that Ax = λx, or equivalently, ##(A - \lambda I)\mathbf x = \mathbf 0##.
In order for x to be nonzero, the determinant of ##A - \lambda I## must be zero.

I'm guessing that your textbook is probably explaining this. Are you skipping over parts of the textbook?
 
  • Like
Likes member 731016 and berkeman
Thank you @FactChecker , @DaveE and @Mark44!

I think I understand now :)

@Mark44, yes, sadly, I have to skip over parts of the textbook as the course jumps from one topic to another. Also sorry I did not see the dose again.
 
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