Show A = UDU(dagger) can be written as f(A) = Uf(D)U(dagger)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Smazmbazm
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the representation of a diagonalizable square matrix \( A \) in the form \( A = UDU^\dagger \), where \( U \) is a unitary matrix and \( D \) is a diagonal matrix. Participants are tasked with showing that a function of \( A \), defined by a power series, can also be expressed as \( f(A) = Uf(D)U^\dagger \).

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants express uncertainty about how to manipulate the power series for \( A \) to relate it to \( D \). There is discussion on whether the same properties of powers apply to \( D \) as they do to \( A \). Some participants attempt to rewrite the function \( f(A) \) in terms of \( D \) and question the correctness of their expressions.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of how to express \( f(A) \) in terms of \( D \). Some participants have suggested starting from the expression \( Uf(D)U^\dagger \) and manipulating it to see if it can lead to \( f(A) \). Guidance has been offered regarding the notation and structure of the expressions being used.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the assumption that they need to prove the equality \( f(A) = Uf(D)U^\dagger \) without assuming it holds initially. There is also a note on the standard practices for notation in linear operator multiplication.

Smazmbazm
Messages
45
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A diagonalisable square matrix A can be written [itex]A = UDU\dagger[/itex], where U is a unitary matrix and D is diagonal. Show that nay function of A defined by a power series,

[itex]f(A) = f_{0}I + f_{1}A + f_{2}A^{2} + ... + f_{n}A^{n} + ...[/itex]

can be expressed as [itex]f(A) = Uf(D)U\dagger[/itex]

The Attempt at a Solution



Not sure where to start. I know one can repeat a linear operator to get results such as [itex]A^{0} = 1, A^{1} = A, A^{2} = AA[/itex] but how do you show that for D? Are we simply doing the same? [itex]D^{0} = 1, D^{1} = D, D^{2} = DD[/itex]

So [itex]f(A) = U * f_{0}I + f_{1}D + f_{2}D^{2} + ... + f_{n}D^{n} + ... * U\dagger[/itex] ?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Smazmbazm said:

Homework Statement



A diagonalisable square matrix A can be written [itex]A = UDU\dagger[/itex], where U is a unitary matrix and D is diagonal. Show that nay function of A defined by a power series,

[itex]f(A) = f_{0}I + f_{1}A + f_{2}A^{2} + ... + f_{n}A^{n} + ...[/itex]

can be expressed as [itex]f(A) = Uf(D)U\dagger[/itex]

The Attempt at a Solution



Not sure where to start. I know one can repeat a linear operator to get results such as [itex]A^{0} = 1, A^{1} = A, A^{2} = AA[/itex] but how do you show that for D? Are we simply doing the same? [itex]D^{0} = 1, D^{1} = D, D^{2} = DD[/itex]

So [itex]f(A) = U * f_{0}I + f_{1}D + f_{2}D^{2} + ... + f_{n}D^{n} + ... * U\dagger[/itex] ?

Thanks
That last line is messed up in some way. If you meant to start the right-hand side with ##U(\dots## and end it with ##\dots)U^\dagger##, then you have just written down the equality you're supposed to prove. But yes, that thing in the middle is ##f(D)##. So it can't be a bad idea to try to use that (the definition of ##f(D)##) to rewrite ##Uf(D)U^\dagger## in some way.
 
Should it look like this,

[itex]f(A) = U*f_{0}I*U\dagger + U*f_{1}D*U\dagger + U*f_{2}D^{2}*U\dagger + ... + U*f_{n}D^{n}*U\dagger + ...[/itex] ?
 
I assumed that you you were trying to write down the equality ##f(A)=Uf(D)U^\dagger##, with ##f(D)=1+f_0 D+\cdots+f_n D^n+\cdots##. You obviously can't assume that the former equality holds, since that's what you want to prove, but you can start
$$Uf(D)U^\dagger=U\left(1+f_0 D+\cdots+f_n D^n+\cdots\right)U^\dagger,$$ to see if you can end up with ##f(A)##. The right-hand side above can be written the way you just wrote it, but I wouldn't use ##*## for multiplication. It's standard to not use any symbol at all, and if you want to use one, it should be ##\circ##, since multiplication of linear operators is just composition of functions.
 
Ok got it. Thanks for your help, Fredrik
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K