Matrix Exponential Theorem: Proving Formally with Cayley-Hamilton

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter matematikawan
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Exponential Matrix
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the formal proof of the Matrix Exponential Theorem using the Cayley-Hamilton theorem. Participants explore the relationship between matrix exponentials and eigenvalues, as well as the implications for solving systems of linear differential equations. The conversation touches on various mathematical concepts, including Jordan decomposition and the convergence of series involved in the theorem.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the theorem stating that the matrix exponential can be expressed as a polynomial in the matrix A, with coefficients that are functions of t.
  • Another participant mentions the Cayley-Hamilton theorem as a rigorous foundation for the theorem but notes the challenge of proving convergence of the series involved.
  • A participant unfamiliar with the Jordan decomposition theorem expresses difficulty in finding literature for the proof and indicates a need for further assistance.
  • One participant provides a link to a proof they found online, indicating a newfound interest in Jordan decomposition and its relation to the matrix exponential.
  • There is a discussion about the efficiency of computing matrix exponentials using Jordan matrices versus the method proposed by the original theorem.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of familiarity with the concepts discussed, particularly the Jordan decomposition theorem. While some participants find the online proof helpful, others remain uncertain about the details and implications of the theorem. No consensus on a formal proof method is reached.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the need for convergence proofs for the series involved in the theorem and highlight the differences between Jordan decomposition and Jordan normal form. The discussion reflects a range of mathematical backgrounds, which influences the understanding of the concepts presented.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students and professionals interested in advanced linear algebra, particularly those studying matrix exponentials, the Cayley-Hamilton theorem, and Jordan decomposition.

matematikawan
Messages
336
Reaction score
0
Theorem
Let A be a square matrix nXn then exp(At) can be written as

<br /> exp(At)=\alpha_{n-1}A^{n-1}t^{n-1} + \alpha_{n-2}A^{n-2}t^{n-2} + ... + \alpha_1At + \alpha_0 I<br />

where \alpha_0 , \alpha_1 , ... , \alpha_{n-1} are functions of t.
Let define

r(\lambda)=\alpha_{n-1}\lambda^{n-1} + \alpha_{n-2}\lambda^{n-2} + ... + \alpha_1\lambda + \alpha_0.

If \lambda_i is an eigenvalue of At with multiplicity k, then

e^{\lambda_i }= r(\lambda_i)
e^{\lambda_i} = \frac{dr}{d\lambda}|_{\lambda=\lambda_i}
etc

Does anyone know any reference where it gives a proof for this theorem? I only know how to prove this theorem intuitively using the Cayley-Hamilton theorem. I need a formal proof. The book (Schaum Outline Series) that I got it only state the theorem.

This theorem will allowed me later to solve system of linear differential equations.

Please help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The Cayley-Hamilton theorem is rigorous. The difficulty is that the a_i are all seies which you must show converge. Do you know the Jordon decomposition theorem?

Jordon decomposition theorem
Let A be a linear operator over the field C (complex numbers can be generalizes)
The exist an invertable linear operator S (made up of the generalized eigenvectors of A) such that SA=BS where B is a direct sum of Jordan blocks.

let ' denot inverse
now we have reduced the problem to one on Jordon blocks
J=aI+H
exp(J)=exp(a)exp(H)
H^n=0 so the infinite sum has all higher terms zero
QED
 
We are computing the matrix exponential in an undergraduate engineering mathematics class. As such we never came across the Jordon decomposition theorem before. No wonder I have difficulty in finding the literatures for the proof.
Now there is a hint. I will again search the literatures or ask one of our professor of algebra.
Thanks lurflurf.


I will come back to this thread later, especially because I don't understand a word in the proof. :cry:
lurflurf said:
let ' denot inverse
now we have reduced the problem to one on Jordon blocks
J=aI+H
exp(J)=exp(a)exp(H)
H^n=0 so the infinite sum has all higher terms zero
QED

If only someone could proved the theorem using the Cayley-Hamilton theorem !:smile:
 
That professor of algebra is on leave. It's chinese new year holiday.

:smile: Searching the internet, I found the proof that I wanted.
http://web.mit.edu/2.151/www/Handouts/CayleyHamilton.pdf

Along the way I get in love with that jordan decomposition. :!) Still reading.
In fact jordan decomposition may refer to quite different concept
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_decomposition

The one given by lurflurf is Jordan normal form.

I think computing matrix exponential using Jordan matrix ( ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrix_exponential ) is less efficient compare to that using the theorem that I had stated.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
11K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K