Solving a Puzzling Problem: No A Exists for Symmetric Matrix B

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter BOS200011
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matrices Symmetric
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around identifying a 2x2 symmetric matrix B that cannot be expressed in the form B = ATA, where A is another matrix. Participants explore the properties of symmetric matrices, determinants, and eigenvalues to understand the conditions under which such a representation is not possible.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants inquire about specific examples of 2x2 symmetric matrices that cannot be expressed as B = ATA and seek explanations for the absence of such matrices.
  • One participant suggests that the nature of the eigenvalues of ATA is relevant to the discussion.
  • Another participant argues that the form of ATA does not encompass all symmetric 2x2 matrices, implying that further analysis is needed.
  • A specific matrix B is presented, and its validity as an example is questioned, with a hint towards determinants as a key factor.
  • Determinants are mentioned as a critical aspect, with examples provided of matrices that can and cannot be expressed as ATA based on their determinants.
  • Some participants note that the diagonal elements of ATA are non-negative, which could help identify matrices that cannot be expressed in the desired form.
  • There is a suggestion that the approach of examining determinants and diagonal elements may not extend to larger matrices, with a focus on eigenvalues being a more reliable method.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the sufficiency of determinants and diagonal elements for identifying matrices that cannot be expressed as ATA. There is no consensus on a definitive example or method, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the broader implications for larger matrices.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions about the properties of symmetric matrices and the implications of eigenvalues and determinants are discussed, but these remain unresolved and depend on further exploration.

BOS200011
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Give an example of a 2X2 symmetric matrix B that cannot be written as B = ATA. Give an explanation as to why no such A exists for the matrix B you have given.


I know that the product ATA is a symmetric matrix, but how could there be no such A that exists for some matrix B?

I'm really stuck on this problem, and I would appreciate it if anyone could help. Thank you so much in advance.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
What is the nature of the eigenvalues of ATA?
 
If you write

[tex]A=\begin{pmatrix}a&b\\ c&d\end{pmatrix}[/tex]

and calculate ATA, it's immediately obvious that the result is not the most general form of a symmetric 2×2 matrix. No more calculations are necessary. Just stare at the result until you get it.
 
1 2
2 3

I did out the product of ATA and came up with this matrix B that couldn't be written as such. Am I correct?
 
You are correct about the above matrix. Try to figure out why (hint: determinants).
What do you think about the following matrix:
[tex] A=\begin{pmatrix}1&10\\ 10&-1\end{pmatrix}[/tex]
 
Determinants are quite the right answer, either. Both the identity matrix and its additive inverse,

[tex]\bmatrix -1 & 0 \\ 0 & -1\endbmatrix[/tex]

have the same determinant. The identity matrix can obviously be written in the form ATA. Its additive inverse cannot.
 
The OP's task was just to find an example of a symmetric matrix that can't be expressed as ATA, and noting that det ATA≥0 is certainly a good start. It explains why

1 2
2 3

is the kind of matrix we're looking for. My idea was to note that the elements on the diagonal of ATA are ≥0. That explains both

1 10
10 -1

and

-1 0
0 -1

Not sure if there are symmetric matrices with both the determinant and the diagonal elements ≥0 that can't be written as ATA. I'm too tired to think about that right now.
 
You can get away with looking at the determinant and the diagonal elements for a 2x2. That trick won't work for anything larger than 2x2. What always works is to look at the eigenvalues, like I said in post #2. Given a real nxm matrix A, the eigenvalues of the matrix ATA are always non-negative. If any eigenvalue of some matrix B is negative then it is impossible to write B in the form ATA.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
8K