Why Is My Matrix Not Diagonalizing Correctly?

  • Thread starter Thread starter NavalChicken
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matrix
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around the issue of diagonalizing a matrix A, specifically the matrix A = [[0, 0, -2], [1, 2, 1], [1, 0, 3]]. The user initially struggles with obtaining the correct diagonal form D after calculating the eigenvectors and the matrix P. After some back-and-forth, it is revealed that the problem stemmed from the incorrect order of matrix multiplication, specifically using PAP^(-1) instead of P^(-1)AP. Once the user corrected the order, they achieved the expected diagonal matrix D = diag(2, 2, 1). The discussion highlights the importance of proper matrix multiplication order in diagonalization.
NavalChicken
Messages
17
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


This is part of a larger problem of finding e^A, where <br /> <br /> <br /> A = \left[ \begin{array}{ccc} 0 &amp; 0 &amp; -2 \\ 1 &amp; 2 &amp; 1 \\ 1 &amp; 0 &amp; 3 \end{array} \right]<br /> <br />


Homework Equations


-


The Attempt at a Solution




I generally have no problems with diagonalising a matrix, however, in this case I just can't seem to get it to work. I've got the eigenvectors to be (-1, 0, 1)^T, (0, 1, 0)^T, (-2, 1, 1)^T

Once carried through the steps of finding P, A, P^{-2} and finding the diagonal, I come out with

D = \left[ \begin{array}{ccc} 2 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \\ 0 &amp; 2 &amp; 2 \\ 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 1 \end{array} \right]

I've checked it on wolframalpha and on maple and both confirm that my inverse is correct and following through the multiplication both come out with the same result. Chances are I've just made a silly mistake somewhere. Can someone help me spot it?

Thankyou
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You mean you did D=P^(-1)AP where P is the matrix whose columns are the eigenvectors, right? I did the same thing and got D=diag(2,2,1). What did you get for P^(-1)?
 
Sorry, I did mean P^{-1}

Which I had as:

<br /> <br /> \left[ \begin{array}{ccc} 1 &amp; 0 &amp; 2 \\ 1 &amp; 1 &amp; 1 \\ -1 &amp; 0 &amp; -1 \end{array} \right]
 
Looks right.

With P:
\left[ \begin{array}{ccc} -1 &amp; 0 &amp; -2 \\ 0 &amp; 1 &amp; 1 \\ 1 &amp; 0 &amp; -1 \end{array} \right] <br />

I get P^(-1)AP=diag(2,2,1). I do notice that if I do PAP^(-1) I get your off diagonal result D. That's not the right order.
 
Last edited:
Oh, yes, it was down to wrong order. Very silly!

Thanks for clearing that up
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K