Simplifying e^{At} to Matrix Form: A General Expression?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on simplifying the matrix exponential function f(t)=e^{At} for the specific matrix A_{2,2}=\begin{bmatrix}2&1 \\-1&4 \end{bmatrix}. The derived matrix form is f(t)=e^{3t}\begin{bmatrix}1-t&t \\-t&1+t \end{bmatrix}. Participants explore the possibility of a general expression for e^{At} applicable to any size matrix, suggesting that if matrix A can be expressed as PQP^{-1} with Q being diagonal, then the series expansion can be simplified to Pe^{Qt}P^{-1}.

PREREQUISITES
  • Matrix exponentiation and properties
  • Diagonalization of matrices
  • Understanding of eigenvalues and eigenvectors
  • Matrix series expansions
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the diagonalization process for matrices
  • Learn about matrix exponentials and their applications
  • Study the Jordan form for non-diagonalizable matrices
  • Explore the series expansion of matrix functions
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, engineers, and students studying linear algebra, particularly those interested in matrix analysis and applications of matrix exponentials.

epkid08
Messages
264
Reaction score
1
I did a problem in class today that evaluated [tex]f(t)=e^{At}[/tex] for [tex]A_{2,2}=\begin{bmatrix}2&1 \\-1&4 \end{bmatrix}[/tex] to a matrix form.

The answer I got was:

[tex]f(t)=\begin{bmatrix}e^{3t}-te^{3t}&te^{3t} \\-te^{3t}&e^{3t}+te^{3t} \end{bmatrix}[/tex]

Factoring we have:

[tex]f(t)=e^{3t}\begin{bmatrix}1-t&t \\-t&1+t \end{bmatrix}[/tex]

My question is, is there some simple general expression for simplifying [tex]e^{At}[/tex] to a matrix form? Maybe something that resembles [tex]e^{tA_{2,2}}=e^{\lambda t}\begin{bmatrix}1-t&t \\-t&1+t \end{bmatrix}[/tex]

but for any size matrix.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi epkid08! :wink:

If you can write A in the form PQP-1 where Q is diagonal …

then ∑ An/n! = P(∑ Qn/n!)P-1 = PeQP-1, where eQ = … ? :smile:

(oh, and your simple form with a single exponential factor on the outside only works in thsi case because there is a double eigenvalue :wink:)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K