Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Let $ X(t) $ a vector function in $ R^n $, and let A be an $ n \times n $ matrix with constant coefficients. Let us use $ D(X) $ to denote the derivative with respect to $t$ of the function $X$ (this will be the derivative at each coordinate). Does anyone know any material where the general case of the equation $ D(X) = AX $ is solved? I could not find good material for this, and I really need it.

share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

up vote 2 down vote accepted

As Didier Piau said, the solution is $X(t)=e^{tA}X(0)$ for every $t\in\mathbb R$.

Moreover, $e^{tA}$ can be computed as follows, for any $n$ by $n$ matrix $A$ with complex coefficients.

Let $X$ be an indeterminate; let $$ p(X)=\prod_{j=1}^r\ (X-a_j)^{m_j}\ \in\mathbb C[X] $$ be the minimal polynomial of $A$, where the $a_j$ are the distinct eigenvalues of $A$; and let $t$ be a real number. For each $j$ put $$ e_j(X):=e^{a_jt}\ \sum_{k=0}^{m_j-1}\ \frac{t^k}{k!}\ (X-a_j)^k, $$ and for each rational fraction fraction $f(X)$ defined at $a_j$ let $T_j(f(X))$ be the degree less than $m_j$ Taylor approximation of $f(X)$ at $X=a_j$.

Then we have $e^{tA}=e(A)$ where $e(X)\in\mathbb C[X]$ is given by $$ e(X)=\sum_j\ T_j\left(e_j(X)\frac{(X-a_j)^{m_j}}{p(X)}\right)\ \frac{p(X)}{(X-a_j)^{m_j}}\quad. $$ Moreover $e(X)$ is the only polynomial of degree less than $\deg p(X)$ which satisfies $e^{tA}=e(A)$.

EDIT. It's easy to see that $e(X)$ is the unique degree less than $\deg p(X)$ solution to the congruences $e(X)\equiv e_j(X)$ mod $(X-a_j)^{m_j}$.

The above formula for $e(X)$ is essentially contained in Article 36 of Gauss's Disquisitiones Arithmeticae. A French translation is available at Internet Archive and at Google:

Article 36 can be paraphrased as follows.

Let $A$ be a principal ideal domain; let $p_1$, ..., $p_r$ be distinct irreducible elements of $A$; let $m_1$, ... , $m_r$ be positive integers; and let $x_1$, ... , $x_r$ be elements of $A$. Then the congruences $$ x\equiv x_i\bmod p_j^{m_j} $$ for $j=1,\dots,r$, can be solved by putting $a:=p_1^{m_1}\cdots p_r^{m_r}$ and $$ x:=\sum_{j=1}^r\ T_j\left(x_j\ \frac{p_j^{m_j}}{a}\right)\cdot\frac{a}{p_j^{m_j}}\quad, $$ where $T_j(x_j\,p_j^{m_j}/a)$ is any solution $y$ to the congruence $$ \frac{a}{p_j^{m_j}}\ y\equiv x_j\bmod p_j^{m_j}. $$ Such a solution exists because $p_j$ doesn't divide $a/p_j^{m_j}$.

This applies in particular to the case $A=K[Z]$, where $K$ is a field and $Z$ an indeterminate. Then our congruences $$ x(Z)\equiv x_j(Z)\bmod p_j(Z)^{m_j}\tag{1} $$ have a unique solution $x(Z)$ satisfying $$ \deg x(Z) < \deg a(Z),\tag{2} $$ where $a(Z)$ is the product of the $p_j(Z)^{m_j}$.

Extending $K$ if necessary, we can assume $p_j(Z)=Z-a_j$, where the $a_j$ are distinct elements of $K$.

If we define $T_j(f(Z))$ as the degree less than $m_j$ Taylor approximation of $f(Z)$ at $Z=a_j$, where $f(Z)\in K(Z)$ is any rational fraction $f(Z)\in K(Z)$ defined at $a_j$, then $$ \sum_{j=1}^r\ T_j\left(x_j(Z)\ \frac{p_j(Z)^{m_j}}{a(Z)}\right)\cdot\frac{a(Z)}{p_j(Z)^{m_j}} $$ will be the solution satisfying $(2)$.

Many elementary problems boil down to solving congruences of the form $(1)$.

share|improve this answer
    
I think you will like this ;) –  user13838 Oct 4 '11 at 17:56
    
Dear @percusse: Thank you very much! –  Pierre-Yves Gaillard Oct 4 '11 at 18:17

The solution is $X(t)=\mathrm e^{tA}X(0)$ for every $t\geqslant0$, very much like in the one dimensional case. The matrix $\mathrm e^{tA}$ may be defined as $\mathrm e^{tA}=\sum\limits_{n=0}^{+\infty}\dfrac{t^n}{n!}A^n$. See here and especially this paragraph.

share|improve this answer
    
but if have this form of series, can I represent it on a matrix, in a easy way? –  August Oct 2 '11 at 13:29
    
Did you read the WP page? This paragraph answers your question. –  Did Oct 2 '11 at 13:49
    
Dear @Didier: Your link doesn't work for me. –  Pierre-Yves Gaillard Oct 2 '11 at 14:04
    
Sorry, this is the link. –  Did Oct 2 '11 at 14:12
    
@Didier: Thanks. Is it on purpose that you wrote $t\ge0$ and not $t\in\mathbb R$? –  Pierre-Yves Gaillard Oct 2 '11 at 14:16

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.