Similarity Transformation of Matrices: Decide w/o Eigenvectors

  • Thread starter Thread starter ercan
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matrices
ercan
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I need help about similarity transformation in matrices.
Is there anyone who knows how can I decide whether "the two matrices having the same eigenvalues" are similar or not without using eigenvectors?

For example, following two matrices have the same characteristic polynomial. But they are not similar. Because matrix A has multiple jordan blocks for the double eigenvalue 1 while B doesn't have multiple jordan block.

A=[3 -3 -1 2;
4 -2 -3 6;
4 -3 -2 6;
3 0 -3 7]

B=[-4.6 -7 -3 -0.6;
3.4 6 2 0.4;
0.4 0 1 0.4;
-2.4 5 0 3.6]

I wonder how can I show that A and B are not similar without using their eigenvectors or without directly looking to their diagonal forms.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The minimal polynomial could be what you're looking for...

Basically, given a matrix A, then the characteristic polynomial p(x) satisfies p(A)=0. (this is the Cayley-Hamilton theorem). The smallest polynomial which still has this property is called the minimal polynomial. The minimal polynomial will always divide the characteristic polynomial.

The minimal polynomial is mostly being used to give information about the Jordan normal form and it has the advantage that you don't need to know about the (generalized) eigenvectors...
 
Go check the book: Matrix Analysis by Horn and Johnson, it answers this question exactly, or will provide sufficient information.
 
Thread 'Determine whether ##125## is a unit in ##\mathbb{Z_471}##'
This is the question, I understand the concept, in ##\mathbb{Z_n}## an element is a is a unit if and only if gcd( a,n) =1. My understanding of backwards substitution, ... i have using Euclidean algorithm, ##471 = 3⋅121 + 108## ##121 = 1⋅108 + 13## ##108 =8⋅13+4## ##13=3⋅4+1## ##4=4⋅1+0## using back-substitution, ##1=13-3⋅4## ##=(121-1⋅108)-3(108-8⋅13)## ... ##= 121-(471-3⋅121)-3⋅471+9⋅121+24⋅121-24(471-3⋅121## ##=121-471+3⋅121-3⋅471+9⋅121+24⋅121-24⋅471+72⋅121##...
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
Back
Top