Polynomial of Jordan Decomposition

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the Jordan decomposition of a matrix A, specifically exploring the relationship between a polynomial p(x) and its application to the matrix A, expressed as p(A) = Xp(Λ)X-1. Participants are tasked with understanding how to represent p(Λ) as a diagonal matrix with elements p(λj) for j=1,...,n.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the implications of applying a polynomial to A and question whether specific cases, like p(A) = A2, can be generalized. There is an exploration of how to represent polynomials more broadly and the need to prove the relationship for any polynomial.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided hints and guidance on how to approach the problem, suggesting that proving the case for powers of A could lead to a general proof for polynomials. There is an ongoing exploration of the properties of the Jordan decomposition and the implications of using different matrices.

Contextual Notes

Participants express confusion regarding the assumptions about the matrices involved in the Jordan decomposition and the implications of using different matrices for B and C. There is a discussion about the need to show that the same transformation matrix X applies across different powers of A.

azdang
Messages
80
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Let A be a real or complex nxn matrix with Jordan decomposition A = X \Lambda X^{-1} where \Lambda is a diagonal matrix with diagonal elements \lambda_1,..., \lambda_n. Show that for any polynomial p(x):
p(A)=Xp(\Lambda)X^{-1}

p(\Lambda) should really be the matrix with p(\lambda_j) on its diagonal for j=1,...,n but I couldn't figure out how to make that matrix in latex.

The Attempt at a Solution


I'm guessing there should be a way to take p of both sides and somehow extract the X and X inverse, but I can't seem to figure it out. Does anyone see anything? Thank you.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi azdang! :wink:

(for matrices etc in LaTeX, see http://www.physics.udel.edu/~dubois/lshort2e/node56.html#SECTION00850000000000000000 )

Hint: if the polynomial is A2, then A2= XΛX-1XΛX-1 = XΛ2X-1 = … ? :smile:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hey tiny-tim. Thank you for your response. Quick question: Is it okay to assume p(A) = A^2? (This would be the polynomial p(x)=x^2 right?) Can we say that because the problem say 'for any polynomial'? Or is there a more general way to prove this?

Also, I do see then that \Lambda^2=p(\Lambda), so that is all clear. Thank you very much. I'm just wondering if we should find a way to represent p(x) more generally?
 
azdang said:
Is it okay to assume p(A) = A^2?

I'm just wondering if we should find a way to represent p(x) more generally?

Yes, we need to deal with a general p(x).

So you do still need to prove it for p(A) = An, for any n …

my n = 2 was just an example for you. :wink:
 
Alright, cool.

So, we could say p(x) = xn.

Then, p(A)=An=(X \Lambda X^{-1})^n=X \Lambda X^{-1}X \Lambda X^{-1}...X \Lambda X^{-1}.

All of the X's and X-1 will cancel out except for the ones on the edges so we are left with: p(A)=X \Lambda^n X^{-1}.

So, we know p(\Lambda)=\Lambda^n. Can we say that that is equivalent to the matrix with p(\lambda_j) on its diagonal where j=1,...,n because it is a diagonal matrix?
 
just got up :zzz: …

azdang said:
… So, we know p(\Lambda)=\Lambda^n. Can we say that that is equivalent to the matrix with p(\lambda_j) on its diagonal where j=1,...,n because it is a diagonal matrix?

Yes, of course (for Λm). :wink:

(I don't think the examiner would even expect a reason for that :wink:)

And then prove that it's "additive", in the sense that if B = XΛBX-1 and C = xΛCX-1 then ΛB+C = … ? :smile:
 
I'm kind of confused by this last part. I don't really understand the subscripts on Lambda or where B and C are coming from. Thank you again, tiny-tim, for helping me get through this :)
 
azdang said:
I'm kind of confused by this last part. I don't really understand the subscripts on Lambda or where B and C are coming from. Thank you again, tiny-tim, for helping me get through this :)

I mean, if B and C are real or complex nxn matrices with Jordan decomposition B = XΛBX-1 and C = XΛCX-1 and B + C = XΛX-1 where Λ ΛB and ΛC are diagonal matrices, what is the equation relating Λ ΛB and ΛC ? :smile:
 
But we cannot be guaranteed that the X's in the Jordan decompositions for B and C are the same, can we?
 
  • #10
azdang said:
But we cannot be guaranteed that the X's in the Jordan decompositions for B and C are the same, can we?

?? :confused:

Assume they are … then prove the proposition … and then use it to answer the original question.
 
  • #11
Well then, does X\Lambda_B X^{-1} + X\Lambda_C X^{-1}=X(\Lambda_B + \Lambda_C)x^{-1}?

Then p(\Lambda_B + \Lambda_C)=p(\Lambda_B)+p(\Lambda_C), so the matrix would be the diagonal matrix with \lambda_B_j + \lambda_C_j on the diagonal, j=1,...n, right? I'm not sure if I'm understanding all this, or why we are showing it is additive. Sorry!
 
  • #12
azdang said:
Well then, does X\Lambda_B X^{-1} + X\Lambda_C X^{-1}=X(\Lambda_B + \Lambda_C)x^{-1}?

That's right! :smile:
Then p(\Lambda_B + \Lambda_C)=p(\Lambda_B)+p(\Lambda_C), so the matrix would be the diagonal matrix with \lambda_B_j + \lambda_C_j on the diagonal, j=1,...n, right? I'm not sure if I'm understanding all this, or why we are showing it is additive.

Because it's easy to prove the question for p(A) = Am, but not for p(A) = Am + Al

so we just prove it for Am, show that it's the same X for any m, and then use the theorem above to prove that it's true for any sum of powers of A, ie for any polynomial. :wink:
 
  • #13
Okay, I think I'm understanding, though I might have a hard time explaining it. One thing in what you just said that confused me, what do you mean 'show that it's the same X for any m'. I really can't thank you enough for walking me through this btw.
 
  • #14
azdang said:
One thing in what you just said that confused me, what do you mean 'show that it's the same X for any m'.

I mean, for example, A2 = XΛ2X-1 and A3 = XΛ3X-1 (and it's the same X, which was worrying you earlier :wink:)
 
  • #15
Oooh, okay. Yes, I can see right away that they are the same X!

So, I should really just show this for:
p(x)=\alpha_0+\alpha_1x+\alpha_2x^2+...+\alpha_nx^n for scalars alpha.

P.S. I totally just did this ^ and I TOTALLY get it. Again, thank you very very much!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K