How Accurate Are the Bounds for Eigenvalues in Circulant Matrices?

EngWiPy
Messages
1,361
Reaction score
61
Hi,

I have the following equation:

\gamma=\frac{1}{\frac{1}{N}\sum_{n=1}^N|\lambda_n|^{-2}}

where lambdas are the eigenvalues of an N-by-N circulant matrix A.

I used two properties to bound the above equation:

\frac{1}{N}\sum_{n=1}^N|\lambda_n|^{-2}\geq\left(\prod_{n=1}^N|\lambda_n|^{-2}\right)^{1/N}

\sum_{n=1}^N|\lambda_n|^{-2}\leq\left(\sum_{n=1}^N|\lambda_n|^{2}\right)^{-1}

Are these two bounds correct?

Thanks
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
The first one is a a statement that the arithmetic mean bounds the geometric mean (true).

The second is false - simple example: 2 terms on the left 1 + 2 = 3. Right side is 1/(1+1/2) = 2/3.
 
mathman said:
The first one is a a statement that the arithmetic mean bounds the geometric mean (true).

The second is false - simple example: 2 terms on the left 1 + 2 = 3. Right side is 1/(1+1/2) = 2/3.

But we have the identity for the trace that:

\sum_{n=1}^N\lambda_n^k=\text{Tr}\left(\mathbf{A}^k\right)\leq\left[\text{Tr}\left(\mathbf{A}\right)\right]^k=\left(\sum_{n=1}^N\lambda_n\right)^k

or it just works for k>=1?
 
I am not familiar with the trace equation, but as my example shows, what you propose is just wrong. It may be that your guess is correct, k is positive integer.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top