Undergrad Matrix Component Equation: Solving for B with Known Scalar and Indices

  • Thread starter Thread starter member 428835
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on solving the matrix equation $$A_{ij} = c B_{ij} + B_{kk} \delta_{ij}$$ for ##B##, where ##c## is a known scalar and ##\delta_{ij}## is the Kronecker Delta. The key technique discussed is taking the trace of the equation, which simplifies the problem by reducing the degrees of freedom from ##n^2## to ##1## for ##n \times n## matrices. The final expression for ##B_{ij}## is derived as $$B_{ij} = \frac{1}{c}A_{ij} - \frac{1}{c+3} A_{kk}\delta_{ij}$$, with the condition that ##c+3 \neq 0## for the solution to hold.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of matrix equations and indices
  • Familiarity with the Kronecker Delta notation
  • Knowledge of the trace operation in linear algebra
  • Basic concepts of symmetric and antisymmetric matrices
NEXT STEPS
  • Learn about the properties of the trace operation in matrix algebra
  • Study the process of diagonalizing matrices for simplification
  • Explore the implications of the Einstein summation convention in tensor calculus
  • Investigate techniques for reducing degrees of freedom in matrix equations
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physicists, and engineers working with matrix equations, particularly those involved in theoretical physics or applied mathematics requiring matrix manipulation techniques.

member 428835
Solve $$A_{ij} = c B_{ij}+B_{kk} \delta_{ij}$$ for ##B## where ##c## is a known scalar and ##i,j,k## are indices and range either ##1,2,3## and ##\delta_{ij}## which is the Kronecker Delta..

I've thought to write this into a matrix but I'm unsure what to do with the ##B_{kk}##. Any help or guidance is greatly appreciated.

(This is from a book, so not exactly homework Thanks!

Josh
 
Physics news on Phys.org
One of the very useful techniques to use when solving such matrix equations is to take the trace of the equation and then substitute the result back in. I am assuming the Einstein summation convention in being applied so that ##B_{kk}## actually means ##B_{11}+B_{22}+B_{33}##. Taking the trace yields ##A_{ii}=(c+3)B_{kk}##, so you just substitute ##B_{kk}## back in and you are done.

This technique is very useful, so hopefully you will remember it to apply to other problems.
 
  • Like
Likes member 428835
Thanks for replying Lucas! So are you saying to rewrite the equation as $$A_{ij} = c B_{ij} + \frac{c}{c+3} A_{kk} \delta_{ij} \implies \\ B_{ij} = \frac{1}{c}A_{ij} - \frac{1}{c+3} A_{kk}\delta_{ij}$$ This totally makes sense! So that I understand, you use this trick whenever you have ##X_{ii}##, right? Also, do you have any other fancy tricks? :)
 
In the first line it is ##\frac{1}{c+3}## instead of what you wrote. Apart form that it is correct. Also I just realized that ##c+3## must be different than ##0## for this to work, otherwise you find ##A## to be traceless.

joshmccraney said:
This totally makes sense! So that I understand, you use this trick whenever you have XiiXiiX_{ii}, right?

Not necessarely, although that may be a strong indicator to use it. Use it whenever you want a way to reduce the degrees of freedom of the equation. When taking the trace you reduce the freedom from ##n^2## to ##1## for ##n## by ##n## matrices.

In general a matrix will have ##n^2## components, and it can always be separated into a symmetric and antisymmetric part. The symmetric has ##n(n+1)/2## independent components while an antisymmetric part has ##n(n-1)/2## independent components. The symmetric part can be further separated into traceless part and trace. So taking the trace is analogous to computing a component of a matrix equation. You can also symmetrize or antisymmetrize to reduce the number of equations.

Another very useful technique is diagonlising one of the matrices. This can help simplify a particular problem.
 
Thanks for catching the algebra mistake, and thanks for all your help!
 
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 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K