Sketching Graphs using Eigenvalues

  • Thread starter Thread starter Offlinedoctor
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Eigenvalues Graphs
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around finding the principal axes of the conic equation 5x² + 4xy + 5y² = 9 using eigenvalues and eigenvectors. The eigenvalues obtained are 3 and 7, leading to confusion about the correct form of the new equation and the normalization of eigenvectors. It is clarified that the principal axes represent directions rather than specific vectors, meaning normalization is not necessary. Additionally, the conversation shifts to diagonalization of a matrix, emphasizing the need to find eigenvalues and eigenvectors to determine if a matrix is diagonalizable, with the example provided concluding that the matrix is not diagonalizable due to the dimension of its eigenspace. Understanding these concepts is crucial for accurately sketching conic sections and analyzing matrices.
Offlinedoctor
Messages
12
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


For the conic, 5x2+4xy+5y2=9, find the direction of the principal axes, sketch the curve.

I found the eigenvalues as
3,7 but have no idea whether the 'new' equation is
3(x')2+7(y')2
or
7(x')2+3(y')2
is there a way to determine which 'way' it goes?

I took a guess and just continued using the first formula:
I found the eigenvectors by substituting the eigenvalues and got:

λ=3, V1 = (-1,1)
λ=7, V2 = (1,1)

I then thought the principal axes would therefore be:
1/√2 (-1,1) and 1/√2 (1,1)
yet the answer seems to indicate the principal axes as, (1,-1) and (1,1), why is that? I thought you had to normalise the vectors to find the principal axes..
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Offlinedoctor said:
no idea whether the 'new' equation is
3(x')2+7(y')2
or
7(x')2+3(y')2
is there a way to determine which 'way' it goes?
x' and y' are just names. They don't relate in any particular way to x and y respectively. Might as well be u and v. So the two versions you offer are really the same.
I then thought the principal axes would therefore be:
1/√2 (-1,1) and 1/√2 (1,1)
yet the answer seems to indicate the principal axes as, (1,-1) and (1,1), why is that?
They're just directions. I don't see any requirement for them to be normalised.
 
Offlinedoctor said:

Homework Statement


For the conic, 5x2+4xy+5y2=9, find the direction of the principal axes, sketch the curve.

I found the eigenvalues as
3,7 but have no idea whether the 'new' equation is
3(x')2+7(y')2
or
7(x')2+3(y')2
is there a way to determine which 'way' it goes?

I took a guess and just continued using the first formula:
I found the eigenvectors by substituting the eigenvalues and got:

λ=3, V1 = (-1,1)
λ=7, V2 = (1,1)

I then thought the principal axes would therefore be:
1/√2 (-1,1) and 1/√2 (1,1)
yet the answer seems to indicate the principal axes as, (1,-1) and (1,1), why is that? I thought you had to normalise the vectors to find the principal axes..
"Axes" are lines not vectors- they do not have a specific length nor can they be written as vectors. The axes are neither "(1/\sqrt{2})(-1, 1)" and (1/\sqrt{2})(1, 1) nor "(-1, 1) and (1, 1)". The axes are lines in the directions of those vectors: y= -x in the direction of (-1, 1) and y= x in the direction of (1, 1).
 
Okay, that seems to make more sense. So does order really not matter after we've found the eigenvalues?

Also, I asked my lecturer this, but she couldn't properly explain the concept of diagonlisation using nullity.
Example.
|2 1 0|
|0 2 0|
|0 0 -3|

I'm trying to determine whether that is diagonizable or not, but have trouble understanding how to do it using the rank, nullity theorem.
 
You can't "using the rank, nullity theorem". You have to actually find the eigenvalues and then try to find the eigenvectors. Since the matrix here is diagonal, its eigenvalues are just 2 and -3, the numbers on the diagonal. There will be a one dimensional subspace of eigenvectors corresponding to eigenvalue 3 but we do not know yet if the eigenspace corresponding to eigenvalue 2 has dimension one or two. If it has dimension two, then there are two independent vectors in it and, adding an eigenvector corresponding to eigenvalue 3 gives a basis for R3 and the matrix, written in that basis, is diagonal. If it has dimension 1, the matrix cannot be diagonalized.
If \begin{bmatrix}x \\ y \\ z \end{bmatrix} is an eigenvalue corresponding to eigenvalue 2, then we must have
\begin{bmatrix}2 & 2 & 0 \\ 0 & 2 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & -3\end{bmatrix}\begin{bmatrix}x \\ y \\ z \end{bmatrix}= 2\begin{bmatrix}x \\ y \\ z \end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}2x+ 2y \\ 2y \\ -3z \end{bmatrix}= \begin{bmatrix}2x \\ 2y \\ 2z\end{bmatrix}

which is equivalent to the three equations 2x+ 2y= 2x, 2y= 2y, and -3z= 2z. The first equation says y= 0 and the third equation says z= 0. x is undetermined so eigenvectors corresponding to eigenvalue 2 are all multiples of \begin{bmatrix}1 \\ 0 \\ 0 \end{bmatrix}. The eigenspace has dimension 1 so the matrix is NOT diagonalizable.
 
I picked up this problem from the Schaum's series book titled "College Mathematics" by Ayres/Schmidt. It is a solved problem in the book. But what surprised me was that the solution to this problem was given in one line without any explanation. I could, therefore, not understand how the given one-line solution was reached. The one-line solution in the book says: The equation is ##x \cos{\omega} +y \sin{\omega} - 5 = 0##, ##\omega## being the parameter. From my side, the only thing I could...
Back
Top