Jordan Normal Form of Matrix: 65 Characters

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gregg
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Form Normal
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on deriving the Jordan Normal Form of a specific 3x3 matrix, represented as \(\begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 & 0 \\ -1 & -1 & 1 \\ -1 & 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix}\). The eigenvalues are confirmed to be 0 (with a multiplicity of three), and the corresponding eigenvector is \(\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix}\). The discussion also explores generalized eigenvectors, leading to the conclusion that the Jordan Normal Form can be achieved by constructing matrix P from the eigenvectors and generalized eigenvectors, resulting in \(P^{-1}AP\) being in Jordan Normal Form.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of eigenvalues and eigenvectors in linear algebra
  • Familiarity with Jordan Normal Form and its significance
  • Knowledge of matrix operations, including matrix multiplication and inversion
  • Concept of generalized eigenvectors and their role in matrix theory
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the process of finding Jordan Normal Form for matrices with multiple eigenvalues
  • Learn about the computation of generalized eigenvectors and their applications
  • Explore the significance of the characteristic polynomial in determining eigenvalues
  • Investigate the implications of Jordan Normal Form in solving differential equations
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics, particularly those studying linear algebra, matrix theory, and applications in differential equations. This discussion is beneficial for anyone looking to deepen their understanding of Jordan Normal Form and its derivation.

Gregg
Messages
452
Reaction score
0
[tex]\left(<br /> \begin{array}{ccc}<br /> 0 & 1 & 0 \\<br /> -1 & -1 & 1 \\<br /> -1 & 0 & 1<br /> \end{array}<br /> \right)[/tex]

The answer is

[tex]\left\{\left(<br /> \begin{array}{ccc}<br /> 1 & -1 & 0 \\<br /> 0 & 1 & -1 \\<br /> 1 & 0 & 0<br /> \end{array}<br /> \right),\left(<br /> \begin{array}{ccc}<br /> 0 & 1 & 0 \\<br /> 0 & 0 & 1 \\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0<br /> \end{array}<br /> \right)\right\}[/tex]


The first one [tex]\left( \begin{array}{c}<br /> 1 \\<br /> 0 \\<br /> 1<br /> \end{array} \right)[/tex] which is an eigenvector.

The eigenvalues are 0,0,0.

Looking at [tex]\text{Ker}(M-\lambda I)^2) =\text{Ker}(M^2)=\text{Ker}(\left(<br /> \begin{array}{ccc}<br /> -1 & -1 & 1 \\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 \\<br /> -1 & -1 & 1<br /> \end{array}<br /> \right))[/tex]

[tex]z=x+y[/tex]

For the first eigenvector [tex]\left( \begin{array}{c}<br /> 1 \\<br /> 0 \\<br /> 1<br /> \end{array} \right)[/tex] is in this generalised eigenspace [itex]E_1 \subset E_2[/itex] I thought about trying to find two vectors that produce the normal vector on that plane when crossed but that doesn't work and I'm not sure it's even the right thing to do. Can choose [tex]\left( \begin{array}{c}<br /> -1 \\<br /> 1 \\<br /> 0<br /> \end{array} \right)[/tex] for z=x+y. But [tex]\text{Ker}(M^3)=\text{Ker}(0)[/tex]

I know there is the method [itex](M-\lambda I)\vec{v}_2=\lambda \vec{v_1}[/itex] ? Do I have to use that? I'd prefer to be able to use kernels.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I found by doing [tex]A \vec{v_i} = \vec{v_{i-1}}[/tex]. But why didn't the nullspace approach work?
 
Yes, 0 is a triple eigenvalue. The characteristic equation is [itex]x^3= 0[/itex] and, since every matrix satisfies its own characteristic equation, [itex]A^3v= 0[/itex] for every vector. But, as you have found, only multiples of <1, 0, 1> are eigenvectors. That is, there is only a one dimensional subspace of eigevectors- that satisfy Av= 0. So we may have some vectors, u, such that Au is not 0 but [itex]A^2u= 0[/itex] which in turn means [itex]A(Au)= 0[/itex] which means Au must be a multiple of <1, 0, 1>.

We look for <x, y, z> such that
[tex]\begin{pmatrix}0 & 1 & 0 \\ -1 & -1 & 1\\ -1 & 0 & 1\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}x \\ y \\ z\end{pmatrix}= \begin{pmatrix}y \\-x- y+ z\\ -x+ z\end{pmatrix}= \begin{pmatrix}1 \\ 0 \\ 1\end{pmatrix}[/tex]
which gives y= 1, -x- y+ z= 0, x+ z= 0. Since y= 1, the other two equations reduce to z- x= 1. If we take x= 0, we get z= 1 so <0, 1, 1> is a "generalized" eigenvalue.

But we must have some vectors, v, such that neither [itex]Av[/itex] nor [itex]A^2v[/itex] is 0 but [itex]A^3v= 0[/itex] which means [itex]u= Av[/itex] must be such that [itex]A^2v= 0[/itex] which is what we just found:
[tex]\begin{pmatrix}0 & 1 & 0 \\ -1 & -1 & 1\\ -1 & 0 & 1\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}x \\ y \\ z\end{pmatrix}= \begin{pmatrix}y \\-x- y+ z\\ -x+ z\end{pmatrix}= \begin{pmatrix}0 \\ 1 \\ 1\end{pmatrix}[/tex]
which gives the equations y= 0, -x- y+ z= -x+ 0+ z= 1, and -x+ z= 1. Those are really the same as we had before- taking a different vaue for x, say 1 instead of 0, z= 2. A second "generalized" eigenvalue is <1, 0, 2>.

Form matrix P having those three vectors as columns. Then [itex]P^{-1}AP[/itex] is in "Jordan Normal Form".
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
4K