Solving Complex Eigenvalues w/ Matrix System

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around solving for eigenvalues and eigenvectors of a matrix with complex eigenvalues, specifically λ = 1 ± 2i. Participants share strategies for manipulating the matrix to find eigenvectors, emphasizing that standard procedures still apply despite the complexity of the numbers. The conversation highlights the importance of expressing the eigenvector ratios correctly and suggests various approaches to simplify calculations, such as using the complex conjugate. Ultimately, it is noted that multiple forms of the eigenvector solutions are equivalent, and the choice of representation does not affect the final outcome. The thread concludes with reassurance that the process can be manageable without overcomplicating the steps.
cepheid
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
5,197
Reaction score
38
Hello:

-was solving for the eigenvalues of a matrix. Obtained:
\lambda = 1 \pm 2i

-substituted back into matrix to try and solve for the eigenvectors:

\left(\begin{array}{cc}2-2i & -2\\4 & -2-2i\end{array}\right) \left(\begin{array}{cc}x_1 \\ x_2 \end{array}\right) = \mathbf{0}

I'm having trouble solving this type of system. I'm just wondering what the general strategy is for tackling these types of matrices.

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The same procedures as normal will work, don't let the complex numbers intimidate you! Divide the first row by 2-2i and go from there. To make (-2)/(2-2i) nicer to handle, you can multiply the numerator and denominator by the conjugate, 2+2i.

Once in reduced form, are you able to pick out the eigenvectors?
 
I think I'm going nuts. The matrix I gave was for the eigenvalue 1+2i btw. Here's what I did:

divide row 1 by 2-2i. Then:

\frac{-2}{2-2i} \times \frac{2+2i}{2+2i} = \frac{-4-4i}{4-4i^2} = \frac{-4-4i}{4-4(-1)} = \frac{-2-2i}{4}

The matrix is now:

\left(\begin{array}{cc}1 & (-2-2i)/4 \\4 & -2-2i\end{array}\right) \left(\begin{array}{cc}\xi_1 \\ \xi_2 \end{array}\right) = \mathbf{0}

Both rows clearly represent the same equation, namely:

\xi_1 = \frac{1+i}{2}\xi_2

To me, that means:

\mathbf{\xi^{(1)}} = \left(\begin{array}{cc} \frac{1+i}{2} \\ 1 \end{array}\right)

But according to Boyce & diPrima:

\mathbf{\xi^{(1)}} = \left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 \\ 1-i \end{array}\right)

:confused:
 
Dammit! Nevermind. Those two answers are equivalent! I just had to go through a bunch more rigmarole to get it in their form! :mad: Express the ratio between xi1 and xi2 in the reverse way, and multiply by the complex conjugate yet again! (*wonders if there is some way to arrive at it in their form more directly*)
 
Instead of dividing row 1 by 2-2i, it may be easier to multiply by the right amount.

Muliply by 1+i first. This gives (2-2i)(1+i)=4 and -2(1+i)=-2-2i.
Dividing by 4, you can see immediately that the reduced form of the matrix is:

\left(\begin{array}{cc}1 &amp; <br /> -\frac{1+i}{2}\\0 &amp; 0\end{array}\right)

So \frac{1+i}{2} \choose 1 is solution. Rewrite like you did to get the other form.

If you want the 1 on top right away, you want a 1 in the upper right corner.
Start by subtracting the 1st row from the 2nd. You get 2+2i and -2i.
Multiply 2nd row by -i, you get: 2-2i and -2.
Dividing the first row by 2, you get:
\left(\begin{array}{cc}1-i &amp; <br /> -1\\0 &amp; 0\end{array}\right)

So a solution is: 1 \choose 1-i.

Row reducing complex is usually tedious.
 
cepheid said:
Dammit! Nevermind. Those two answers are equivalent! I just had to go through a bunch more rigmarole to get it in their form! :mad: Express the ratio between xi1 and xi2 in the reverse way, and multiply by the complex conjugate yet again! (*wonders if there is some way to arrive at it in their form more directly*)

Frien,there's no need to "go nuts"! :-p Try to put x_{1} =1 in the matrix equation and from the first equation u'll find x_{2}=1-i.If u put x_{2} =1 in the matrix equation and solving from the second equation u'll find your solution x_{1}=\frac{1+i}{2}.U have 2 vectors.See whether they are linear independent.They're not.So,it's irrelevant which u chose in the final solution;

Daniel.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top