A Solve a nonlinear matrix equation

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around finding a second solution to the nonlinear matrix equation Ce^{At} ρ_p + (CA)^{−1} (e^{At}−I)B=0, where C, ρ_p, A, and B are constant matrices and t is a scalar variable. The original poster confirms the existence of at least one solution, t=θ_1, and seeks a method to determine if another solution, θ_0<θ_1, exists. Participants discuss the implications of matrix exponentiation and its relevance in contexts like quantum mechanics and differential equations. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding matrix forms and transformations, particularly the diagonalization process. Ultimately, the thread emphasizes the need for analytical methods to explore potential additional solutions to the equation.
rehan_eme
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
Solve a nonlinear matrix equation
Hi all,

I want to know if a second solution exists for the following math equation:

Ce^{At} ρ_p+(CA)^{−1} (e^{At}−I)B=0

Where C, ρ_p, A and B are constant matrices, 't' is scalar variable. I know that atleast one solution i.e. 〖t=θ〗_1 exists, but I want a method to determine if there is another θ_0<θ_1 that is also a (second) solution. Any anlaytical way of determining that is what I am looking for.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Latex please
 
Add my vote to the hope that LaTex might add some neaded clarity. What does a scalar to a power of a matrix even mean?
 
  • Like
Likes renormalize
DaveE said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrix_exponential

IRL you do it by transforming it to a diagonal form with eigenvalues so you don't have infinite sums.
Doesn't this show up in QM quite often? I remember seeing something to the effect of ##e^{\mathbf{X}}## before.
 
Mayhem said:
Doesn't this show up in QM quite often? I remember seeing something to the effect of ##e^{\mathbf{X}}## before.
The exponentiation comes into play whenever we want to solve a differential equation when we turn something linear into something curved, the transition from a Lie algebra to a Lie group. However, the OP didn't provide any such context, no differential equation, no vector field. It is not even clear whether ##e^{At}## converges. It looks like a flow, but it would have been nice to know for sure.
 
I have not seen it in QM, or for that matter, ever. Raising a scalar to the identity matrix returns what? (Apparently, a disgonal matrix with the scalar on the diagonal,,,guess it has to be something)
 
  • #10
Vanadium 50 said:
I have not seen it in QM, or for that matter, ever. Raising a scalar to the identity matrix returns what? (Apparently, a disgonal matrix with the scalar on the diagonal,,,guess it has to be something)
Here is what I think it should have been:

rehan_eme said:
TL;DR Summary: Solve a nonlinear matrix equation

Hi all,

I want to know if a second solution exists for the following math equation:

##Ce^{At} ρ_p + (CA)^{−1} (e^{At}−I) B=0## or ##C\exp(At) ρ_p + (CA)^{−1} (\exp(At) −I ) B=0##

Where ##C, ρ_p, A,## and ##B## are constant matrices, ##t## is a scalar variable. I know that at least one solution i.e. ##t=\theta_1## exists, but I want a method to determine if there is another ##\theta_0<\theta_1## that is also a (second) solution. Any analytical way of determining that is what I am looking for.
E.g. it could be that ##A\in \mathfrak{su}(2)## and ##e^{At}## is a flow in ##\operatorname{SU}(2).##
 
  • #11
Vanadium 50 said:
Raising a scalar to the identity matrix returns what? (Apparently, a disgonal matrix with the scalar on the diagonal,,,guess it has to be something)
This is something that appears in all but the most elementary linear algebra textbooks. As a Maclaurin expansion ##e^A = I + A + \frac {A^2}{2!} + \frac {A^3}{3!} + \dots + \frac {A^n}{n!} + \dots##.

##e^I = I + I + \frac {I^2}{2!} + \frac {I^3}{3!} + \dots + \frac {I^n}{n!} + \dots##
##= I(2 + 1/2 + 1/6 + 1/24 + \dots) = eI##
 
  • #12
Vanadium 50 said:
I have not seen it in QM, or for that matter, ever.
That's surprising to me. Maybe I'm showing my age here, but back in the day, quantum mechanics textbooks often exponentiated the time-independent, Hermetian Hamiltonian ##H## (a differential operator or a matrix, depending on the representation) of a quantum system to define the unitary operator ##T## of time evolution (e.g., see the page from Merzbacher below). Maybe the QM texts you've studied no longer use that approach?

Merzbacher QM.jpg
 

Attachments

  • Merzbacher QM.jpg
    Merzbacher QM.jpg
    68.9 KB · Views: 119

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Back
Top