A Solve Weird Matrix Equation to Get Values for P

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter maistral
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matrix Weird
maistral
Messages
235
Reaction score
17
So while I was trying to browse some notes with regard to Laplace transforms in solving systems of ODE, this matrix came up:
matrix eqn.png

I could easily just use RK4 and call it a day to nuke the systems of ODE, but this actually made me curious. Apparently one can transform the matrix DE into another form, then this appeared.

How do I get the values for P?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't think such ##P## exists. The numerical matrices on the left and right have different eigenvalues.
 
S.G. Janssens said:
I don't think such ##P## exists. The numerical matrices on the left and right have different eigenvalues.
It exists and is not unique.

I was able to obtain a possible ##P## using Mathematica. However, I do not know how to do it in a rigorous fashion.
 
What do you find for the eigenvalues of the left and right numerical matrices? For the one on the left I get one real eigenvalue and a complex-conjugate pair, while for the matrix on the right I get ##\{-3,-2,-1\}##. So these two matrices cannot be similar.

(If such ##P## would exist, it would not be unique indeed, because every nonzero multiple of ##P## would also qualify.)
 
  • Like
Likes DrClaude
S.G. Janssens said:
What do you find for the eigenvalues of the left and right numerical matrices? For the one on the left I get one real eigenvalue and a complex-conjugate pair, while for the matrix on the right I get ##\{-3,-2,-1\}##. So these two matrices cannot be similar.
I made a mistake and used +11 instead of -11 in the right matrix. My guess is that there is an error in the OP and that the two matrices differ only by the arrangement of the numerical values.
 
  • Like
Likes S.G. Janssens
assuming the stated typo, consider using the reflection matrix

##\mathbf J = \left[\begin{matrix}0 & 0 & 1\\0 & 1 & 0\\1 & 0 & 0\end{matrix}\right]##

which is a permutation matrix (and involutary)

note:
For the nice case of diagonalizable matrices with the same spectrum (and in particular the extra nice case where all eigenvalues are distinct), the general approach is
##\mathbf S^{-1} \mathbf A \mathbf S= \mathbf D ##
and
##\mathbf U^{-1} \mathbf B \mathbf U= \mathbf D ##

so
##\mathbf U^{-1} \mathbf B \mathbf U= \mathbf S^{-1} \mathbf A \mathbf S ##
## \mathbf B = \mathbf U\mathbf S^{-1} \mathbf A \mathbf S\mathbf U^{-1} ##
setting ##\mathbf P:= \mathbf S\mathbf U^{-1}##
gives
## \mathbf B = \mathbf P^{-1} \mathbf A \mathbf P ##

the fact that the eigenvalues are distinct proves that ##\mathbf P## is unique (up to rescaling)

but in this case I could just eyeball the problem as a graph isomorphism and come up with ##\mathbf J##
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes DrClaude
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
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...
##\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...
Back
Top