What is the Next Step for Finding Linearly Independent Eigenvectors?

  • Thread starter Thread starter trap101
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the diagonalizability of specific matrices, particularly focusing on the conditions under which a matrix can be diagonalized based on its eigenvalues and eigenvectors. The subject area includes linear algebra concepts related to eigenvalues, eigenvectors, and matrix diagonalization.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the conditions for diagonalizability of matrices with repeated eigenvalues and the necessity of finding linearly independent eigenvectors. There are attempts to derive eigenvalues and corresponding eigenvectors, with questions about the implications of certain values (e.g., when b = 0) on the diagonalizability of the matrices.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring various interpretations of the conditions for diagonalizability. Some guidance has been provided regarding the relationship between the algebraic multiplicity of eigenvalues and the requirement for linearly independent eigenvectors. There is no explicit consensus yet, as participants continue to question and clarify their understanding of the concepts involved.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of homework rules, which may limit the information they can use or the methods they can apply. There are discussions about the implications of specific values of matrix elements on the existence of eigenvectors and the dimensionality of eigenspaces.

trap101
Messages
339
Reaction score
0
Show that matrix A = \begin{bmatrix} a&b \\0&a \end{bmatrix} in M2 x 2(R) is diagonalizable iff b = 0

Attempt: Now I tried to solve for the eigenvalues and eigenvectors, which gave me a matrix of this form: \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix}

but this matrix won't provide me with any information to show diagonalizability. What am I missing?


Quest 2: Find the necessary and sufficient conditions on the real numbers a,b,c for the matrix:
\begin{bmatrix} 1 & a & b\\ 0 & 1 & C \\ 0 & 0 & 2 \end{bmatrix} to be diagonalizable.

Attempt: Now for this one I also solved for the eigenvlues which were: λ1 = 1, λ2 = 1, λ3 = 2

So the problematic eigenvalues will be the one of multiplicity 2, i.e λ = 1.

So this means I'd have to obtain two linearly independent eigenvectors for λ = 1.

I tried solving and got to this matrix: \begin{bmatrix} 0 & a & b \\ 0&0&c \\ 0&0 & 1 \end{bmatrix}

But I won't be able to find two linearly independent eigenvectors from setting any of the variables equal to anything...I don't think. What's the next step?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
trap101 said:
Show that matrix A = \begin{bmatrix} a&b \\0&a \end{bmatrix} in M2 x 2(R) is diagonalizable iff b = 0

Attempt: Now I tried to solve for the eigenvalues and eigenvectors, which gave me a matrix of this form: \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix}

but this matrix won't provide me with any information to show diagonalizability. What am I missing?
b=0 ->
well this one is as the matrix is already diagonal

A is diagonalisable ->
well what do you get for the chracteristic equation

hint: i get a repeated eigenvalue - this means the eigenspace must span R^2 for the matrix to be diagonalisable - can you show this is only possible when b=0?
 
For your first question, I am assuming you obtained the characteristic polynomial of [itex](\lambda - a)^2 = 0[/itex].

So we know we have a repeated eigenvalue.

[tex] \begin{bmatrix}<br /> 0 & b\\<br /> 0 & 0<br /> \end{bmatrix}[/tex]

Nothing extreme has been done. Simply following the protocol to diagonalize.

What does this matrix tell us?

For one, [itex]x_1[/itex] is a free variable. If b isn't a free a variable, how many eigenvectors would we have?
 
If b isn't a free variable, then I only have one eigenvector, but my multiplicity is 2 which implies that the matirx isn't diagonalizable. but if b = 0 as in the question then i obtain a diagonal matrix. As for showing it, the only way I could show it is if I obtain the 0 matrix that I talked about below.
 
trap101 said:
If b isn't a free variable, then I only have one eigenvector, but my multiplicity is 2 which implies that the matirx isn't diagonalizable. but if b = 0 as in the question then i obtain a diagonal matrix. As for showing it, the only way I could show it is if I obtain the 0 matrix that I talked about below.

The only value that allows x_2 to be a free variable is 0. With out it, you said you only have one eigenvector. You need n eigenvectors for a nxn matrix. If you only have 1 eigenvector, you have a problem. How does knowing this not help you?
 
ok so you get [itex]\lambda = a[/itex] with algebraic multiplicity 2

to be diagonalisable you have to have and eigenspace that spans R^2, and as such there exists two linearly independent eigenvectors

so you can represent your eigenvectors as (1,0)^T and (1,0)^T, and x(1,0)^T +y(1,0)^T =(x,y)^T is still an eignevector

then, any eigenvector (x,y)^T must then satisfy
[tex] \begin{bmatrix} a&b \\0&a \end{bmatrix}\begin{bmatrix} x \\y \end{bmatrix} = a \begin{bmatrix} x \\ y\end{bmatrix}[/tex]

which gives
[tex] \begin{bmatrix} ax+by = ax\\ay =ay \end{bmatrix}[/tex]

so what constraints does [itex]b \neq 0[/itex] give?
 
Last edited:
lanedance said:
ok so you get [itex]\lambda = a[/itex] with algebraic multiplicity 2

to be diagonalisable you have to have and eigenspace that spans R^2, and as such there exists two linearly independent eigenvectors

so you can represent your eigenvectors as (1,0)^T and (1,0)^T, and x(1,0)^T +y(1,0)^T =(x,y)^T is still an eignevector

then, any eigenvector (x,y)^T must then satisfy
[tex] \begin{bmatrix} a&b \\0&a \end{bmatrix}\begin{bmatrix} x \\y \end{bmatrix} = a \begin{bmatrix} x \\ y\end{bmatrix}[/tex]

which gives
[tex] \begin{bmatrix} ax+by = ax\\ay =ay \end{bmatrix}[/tex]

so what constraints does [itex]b \neq 0[/itex] give?

I don't think I follow... what is the (1,0)^T? What's the raised to the T part?
 
it means "transpose" and just means we are talking about a column vector, rather than a row vector (since we're dealing with matrices, where rows and columns are different things).
 
lanedance said:
ok so you get [itex]\lambda = a[/itex] with algebraic multiplicity 2

to be diagonalisable you have to have and eigenspace that spans R^2, and as such there exists two linearly independent eigenvectors

so you can represent your eigenvectors as (1,0)^T and (1,0)^T, and x(1,0)^T +y(1,0)^T =(x,y)^T is still an eignevector

then, any eigenvector (x,y)^T must then satisfy
[tex] \begin{bmatrix} a&b \\0&a \end{bmatrix}\begin{bmatrix} x \\y \end{bmatrix} = a \begin{bmatrix} x \\ y\end{bmatrix}[/tex]

which gives
[tex] \begin{bmatrix} ax+by = ax\\ay =ay \end{bmatrix}[/tex]

so what constraints does [itex]b \neq 0[/itex] give?



Well simplifying I obtain y = 0, does this mean y has to equal zero in order for the expression to be satisfied? but if that happens then ay = ay becomes 0 = 0
 
  • #10
ok so if y = 0, what is the dimension of the eigenspace (how many linearly independent eigenvectors do you have?)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K