Proof about a positive definite matrix

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Jamister
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matrix Positive Proof
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that a symmetric real matrix with positive elements cannot be positive definite under certain conditions. The focus is on the implications of specific inequalities involving the matrix's elements and their relationship to the trace of the matrix. Participants explore various methods and approaches to establish this proof, including the use of characteristic polynomials and matrix decompositions.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that a symmetric real matrix with positive elements cannot be positive definite if the inequality $$\sum_{i=1}^{N-1}a_{i,i+1}>\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^{N}a_{i,i}$$ holds.
  • Another participant suggests using the characteristic polynomial to demonstrate the existence of negative roots.
  • Some participants mention Sylvester's criterion as a method to show that the matrix is not positive definite.
  • Counterexamples are noted as insufficient to prove the claim using certain inequalities.
  • A participant suggests trying to find a vector ##x## such that ##x^T A x < 0## as a potential approach.
  • Discussion includes attempts to restrict the problem to 2x2 and 3x3 matrices to simplify the analysis.
  • One participant claims to have found a way to prove the assertion after exploring the 3x3 case.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various methods and approaches, but there is no consensus on a definitive proof or resolution of the problem. Multiple competing views and techniques are presented without agreement on a single solution.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in their approaches, including the need for specific conditions and the challenges of proving the claim with the given inequalities. Some methods discussed may not be sufficient to establish the desired result.

Jamister
Messages
58
Reaction score
4
TL;DR
A symmetric real matrix ##A## with positive elements ##a_{i,j}\geq 0## can’t be definite positive matrix
I need to prove the following:

A symmetric real matrix ##A## with positive elements ##a_{i,j}\geq 0## can’t be definite positive matrix (i.e. with only positive eigenvalues) if the following condition holds:
$$\sum_{i=1}^{N-1}a_{i,i+1}>\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^{N}a_{i,i}=\frac{1}{2}\text{Tr}(A)$$
and in addition the only non zero elements ##a_{i,j}## are those that ## i-1 \leq j \leq i+1##
Does anyone have ideas?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Jamister said:
Summary: A symmetric real matrix ##A## with positive elements ##a_{i,j}\geq 0## can’t be definite positive matrix

I need to prove the following:

A symmetric real matrix ##A## with positive elements ##a_{i,j}\geq 0## can’t be definite positive matrix (i.e. with only positive eigenvalues) if the following condition holds:
$$\sum_{i=1}^{N-1}a_{i,i+1}>\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^{N}a_{i,i}=\frac{1}{2}\text{Tr}(A)$$
Does anyone have ideas?
As per forum rules, you need to show your own efforts. So, what have you tried?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: swampwiz and Jamister
I tried many things...
1. using the characteristic polynomial to show that there are negative roots
2. using Sylvester's criterion to show the matrix is not a positive definite
3. using the inequalities ##\left|m_{i j}\right| \leq \sqrt{m_{i i} m_{j j}} \quad \forall i, j## (and it turns out these are not sufficient to show the claim, provided by counterexamples)
4. using Cholesky decomposition.
 
I added another condition to the question.
 
Can you think of a vector x such that ##x^T A x < 0##?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Jamister
Orodruin said:
Can you think of a vector x such that ##x^T A x < 0##?
I don't know...
 
Try restricting to 2x2 matrices and see if you can find a vector.
 
yes 2x2 is easy I can find. the eigenvector $$(1,-1)$$
 
I want to edit the post. why It seems like I can't do it...
 
  • #10
IIRC there is a time limit for editing posts unless you have additional privileges. For example, I can edit any of my posts but I am not completely sure which of my shiny badges is responsible 😛
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Jamister
  • #11
I want to say that the matrix is tridiagonal
Orodruin said:
IIRC there is a time limit for editing posts unless you have additional privileges. For example, I can edit any of my posts but I am not completely sure which of my shiny badges is responsible 😛
 
  • #12
Either way, what about a 3x3 matrix? Can you find a vector ##x## such that ##x^T A x## contains the relevant sums?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Jamister
  • #13
Orodruin said:
Either way, what about a 3x3 matrix? Can you find a vector ##x## such that ##x^T A x## contains the relevant sums?
great! I find a way and proved it! thank you!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: SammyS

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K