The Length of a Matrix- Double Sum

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on understanding the double sum formula for calculating the length of a matrix, defined as the square root of the sum of the squares of its entries. Participants clarify that the double sum involves summing over each entry of the matrix, with the first index representing rows and the second columns. A concrete example using a 2x2 matrix illustrates that the sum of squares equals 6, regardless of the order of summation. Additionally, there is a distinction made between the terms "length" and "norm" of a matrix, with "norm" being the more accurate term for this calculation. The conversation emphasizes the importance of correctly visualizing and computing the double sum to avoid confusion.
Astrum
Messages
269
Reaction score
5
I'm really confused about the double sum given by my textbook. Here's what it says:

If A is an nxm matrix, its length is the square root of the sum of its squares of all its entries.

\left|A\right|^{2}=\sum^{n}_{i=1}\sum^{m}_{j=1}a_{i,j}^{2}

The double sum is what has me caught up. How do you visualize this, and how do you compute it?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Start working from left to right.

1. For the first sigma, set i = 1.
2. Go to the second sigma. Here, let j run from 1 to m.
3. The partial sums will be: a(1,1)^2 + a(1,2)^2 + ... + a(1,m-1)^2 + a(1,m)^2 Notice, i stays constant
4. Set i = 2
5. Go to Step 2. Repeat Step 3, adding the partial sum for i = 2 to the partial sum for i = 1
6. Repeat Steps 2 and 3 until i = n, adding the partial sums together.

Hope this helps.
 
Note that, with i= column number, j= row number \sum_i(\sum_j a^2_{ij}) means that for i= 1 you sum over all numbers in the first column, for i= 2, you sum over all numbers in the second column, etc.

That is, the double sum is the just the sum of squares of all the numbers in the matrix.
 
I'm still confused.

Let's try a concrete example. A = [\begin{matrix} 1 & 2 \\ 0 & 1 \end{matrix}]

How would you wright this out? like this:

\sum^{2}_{i=1}\sum^{2}_{i=1}a^{2}_{i,j} = (\sum^{2}_{j=1}a^{2}_{j})+(\sum^{2}_{j=1}a^{2}_{j})

But where does it go from here? What happened to the i?
 
It is not the sum of two sums, it is the sum of a sum. That is:
\sum_{i=1}^{n} \sum_{j=1}^m a_{i,j}^2 = \sum_{i=1}^{n} \left(\sum_{j=1}^m a_{i,j}^2\right)
Write the sum over j out inside the parentheses first, then sum the result over i.
In the case you raised,
\sum_{i=1}^2 \left(\sum_{j=1}^2 a_{i,j}^2\right) = \sum_{i=1}^2 (a_{i,1}^2 + a_{i, 2}^2)
 
Astrum said:
I'm still confused.

Let's try a concrete example. A = [\begin{matrix} 1 & 2 \\ 0 & 1 \end{matrix}]

How would you wright this out? like this:

\sum^{2}_{i=1}\sum^{2}_{i=1}a^{2}_{i,j} = (\sum^{2}_{j=1}a^{2}_{j})+(\sum^{2}_{j=1}a^{2}_{j})

But where does it go from here? What happened to the i?
Both indices, i and j, label the terms of the matrix. When you broke this into two sums, your first sum corresponds to i= 1 and the second to i= 2.
With this particular A, that would be (1^2+ 2^2)+ (0^2+ 1^2)= 5+ 1= 6.
Swapping i and j, that is swapping row and columns, we would get (1^2+ 0^2)+ (2^2+ 1^2)= 1+ 5= 6.

Either way, the sum is just the sum of squares or all members orf the matrix: 1^2+ 2^2+ 0^2+ 1^2= 1+ 4+ 0+ 1= 6

However, I would not call this the "length" of a matrix, I would call it the "norm".
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...

Similar threads

Back
Top