Quantcast

A community for students.

Here's the question you clicked on:

55 members online
  • 0 replying
  • 0 viewing

KonradZuse

  • 2 years ago

diagonalizing a matrix

  • This Question is Closed
  1. KonradZuse
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Trying to figure out how this works, wolfram is giving me a different setup than my book... http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=diagonalize+%7B%7B1%2C0%7D%2C%7B6%2C-1%7D%7D The book says p = [1/3][0] [1 ][1] and P^-1AP = [1][0] [0][-1] Which is the inverse of J...

  2. KonradZuse
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    @UnkleRhaukus any idea sir?

  3. UnkleRhaukus
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    \[S=P^{-1}\]?

  4. KonradZuse
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    crap I forgot to post what the book said h/o.

  5. KonradZuse
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    1 Attachment
  6. KonradZuse
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    @UnkleRhaukus

  7. UnkleRhaukus
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    whats your question?

  8. KonradZuse
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    I'm trying to do #14.

  9. KonradZuse
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    I'm confused on how to do this... Wolfram gives a different definition than my book, and I'm not really sure what my book is trying to show...

  10. KonradZuse
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    mhm yeah I entered that in wolfram, but I'm not sure what SJ and M are... They are different from P and A....

  11. KonradZuse
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    @lgbasallote

  12. lgbasallote
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    @KonradZuse not my habit to reply to questions already being answered

  13. UnkleRhaukus
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    i think that S and P are inverses of each other

  14. KonradZuse
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    that's what I was looking at. @iggy we are in the process yo...

  15. KonradZuse
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    but according to wolfram and the example 7 I showed above, there is no 1/3 in wolfram.... Is it just a different way to do it....?

  16. KonradZuse
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    err # 13.

  17. KonradZuse
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    yeah Idk about S and P...

  18. KonradZuse
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    it look slike J = P^-1AP just flipped around... Same thing happened when I did #15.

  19. KonradZuse
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    :(

  20. phi
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    diagonalizing a matrix M uses eigenvectors x and eigenvalues \(\lambda\) the "big equation" is \( M x = \lambda x\) if we put all the eigenvectors x into the columns of a matrix P and the eigenvalues on the diagonal of matrix \( \Lambda \) we can say \( MP = P\Lambda \) note the order we must multiply P and \( \Lambda \) to get the right result multiplying by the inverse of P we have \(\Lambda = P^{-1}MP \) This says we can diagonalize matrix M by multiplying by the eigenvector matrix P It returns a diagonal matrix with entries being the eigenvalues of M

  21. phi
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    When we do this diagonalizing, note that there is flexibility in defining an eigenvector. Eigenvectors represent a "direction", and if we scale them, they are still an eigenvector. Example: if eigenvector x= [ 1/3 1] corresponds to eigenvalue λ and we scale x by 3 to get x' = [1 3] , it is still an eigenvector associated with λ M(3x)=λ(3x) still works. We would scale x to get rid of fractions. Also, when diagonalizing, there is no forced order on the eigenvalues in matrix \(\Lambda\) The only requirement is that the eigenvalue in position n,n of matrix \(\Lambda\) corresponds to the eigenvector in column n of matrix P Often, though, people put the eigenvalues in ascending (or descending ) order. The point is we can get different variations of P and Λ, and all are correct, unless the order of the eigenvalues in Λ are stipulated to be in some order.

  22. Not the answer you are looking for?
    Search for more explanations.

    • Attachments:

Ask your own question

Sign Up
Find more explanations on OpenStudy

Your question is ready. Sign up for free to start getting answers.

spraguer (Moderator)
5 → View Detailed Profile

is replying to Can someone tell me what button the professor is hitting...

23

  • Teamwork 19 Teammate
  • Problem Solving 19 Hero
  • You have blocked this person.
  • ✔ You're a fan Checking fan status...

Thanks for being so helpful in mathematics. If you are getting quality help, make sure you spread the word about OpenStudy.

This is the testimonial you wrote.
You haven't written a testimonial for Owlfred.