MHB Solving for Unit Vectors in U Given Vector 1 and Matrix S

cylers89
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
So I am given the vector 1...but I need to find vector 2 and 3, in order to find U=(v1, v2, v3), and U is a unitary matrix.

Vector 1 is: (1/2+1/2i 1/2 1/2i)^T

The example from my notes shows me how to find U, but I am also given a matrix S to start with...

Any clue where to start?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
cylers89 said:
So I am given the vector 1...but I need to find vector 2 and 3, in order to find U=(v1, v2, v3), and U is a unitary matrix.

Vector 1 is: (1/2+1/2i 1/2 1/2i)^T

The example from my notes shows me how to find U, but I am also given a matrix S to start with...

Any clue where to start?
A unitary matrix is one whose columns (or rows) form an orthonormal basis for the underlying space. So if the first column v1 is given, then you need to make that the first vector of an orthonormal basis for $\mathbb{C}^3$. The other two vectors v2 and v3 in that basis will then give you the remaining columns of U.

The standard way to construct such a basis is to start with a (non-orthnormal) basis $\{v_1,w_2,w_3\}$ and apply the Gram–Schmidt process to it. You could for example take $w_2=(0,1,0)$ and $w_3=(0,0,1).$

I don't know how the construction in your notes works, but I am guessing that if you take the matrix S to have columns v1, w2 and w3, then that construction will effectively be the same as the Gram–Schmidt construction that I would use.
 
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...
##\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...
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...
Back
Top