0
$\begingroup$

Consider the following:

$$ Q = \begin{pmatrix} 2 & 1 & 1 \\ 1 & 2 & 1 \\ 1 & 1 & 2 \end{pmatrix} ,\qquad X= \begin{pmatrix} x \\ y \\ z \end{pmatrix} \in \mathbb R^3 $$

I have these questions:

  1. Is $\lambda = 1$ an autovalue of $Q$? Why?

Yes, because:

$$\lambda \text{ is an autovalue of } A \iff |A - \lambda I_n | = 0$$

and in this case you have:

$$|A - \lambda I_n | = |Q - I_3 | = \begin{vmatrix} 1 & 1 & 1 \\ 1 & 1 & 1 \\ 1 & 1 & 1 \end{vmatrix} = 0$$

  1. Find all the autovalues of $Q$, and their geometric/algebraic multiplicities.

$$A \text{ is symmetric} \implies A \text{ is diagonalizable}$$

$$A \text{ is diagonalizable} \implies p_A(\lambda) \text{ is totally decomposable}$$

$$p_A(\lambda) \text{ is totally decomposable} \implies \begin{matrix}det(A) = \lambda_1 \cdot \lambda_2 \cdot \cdots \cdot \lambda_n \\ tr(A) = \lambda_1 + \lambda_2 + \cdots + \lambda_n\end{matrix}$$

Because I know $\lambda_1 = 1$:

$$ \begin{cases} \lambda_2 \cdot \lambda_3 = 4 \\ \lambda_2 + \lambda_3 = 5 \end{cases} \implies \lambda_{2,3}^2 - 5 \lambda_{2,3} + 4 = 0 \implies \lambda_2 = 1 ,\quad \lambda_3 = 4 $$

So the autovalues and the geometric/algebraic multiplicities are:

$$ \lambda_1 = 1 ,\quad \mu(1) = 2 \\ \lambda_2 = 4 ,\quad \mu(4) = 1 ,\quad m(4) = 1 $$

To find $m(1)$ I can use the following:

$$A \in\mathscr M_\mathbb R(n) \text{ is diagonalizable} \iff m(\lambda_1) + m(\lambda_2) + \cdots + m(\lambda_n) = n$$

So:

$$m(1) = n - m(4) = 3 - 1 = 2$$

  1. Find an orthogonal basis for every eigenspaces.

I suppose I have to use the Spectral Theorem, but I really don't know how to do.

UPDATE: I've tried to solve this question using the method suggested by Michael Seifert.

For the eigenvalue $\lambda_1 = 1$ I have:

$$ V_1 = Q - I_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1 & 1 & 1 \\ 1 & 1 & 1 \\ 1 & 1 & 1 \end{pmatrix} $$

$$ dim(V_1) = 3 - rk(Q - I_3) = 3 - 1 = 2 $$

So the cartesian equation of $V_1$ is:

$$ x + y + z = 0 $$

I search for the parametric equations:

$$ \begin{cases} x = \alpha \\ y = \beta \\ z = - \alpha - \beta \end{cases} $$

So a basis for $V_1$ is the following:

$$ \mathscr B_{V_1} = \begin{Bmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}1\\0\\-1\end{pmatrix},\begin{pmatrix}0\\1\\-1\end{pmatrix}\end{Bmatrix} $$

Now I can apply the Gram-Schmidt process to find the solution. The same for $\lambda_2 = 4$.

  1. Does exists a solution of $X^T Q X = 0$ with $X \neq 0$? Why?

Also for this, I don't know how to find the answer.


My questions are the following:

  1. Are (1) and (2) right?
  2. Is there a faster way to solve (1) and (2)?
  3. How can I solve (3) and (4)?
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Are you familiar with the idea of the determinant of a matrix? There's a faster way to solve (1) and (2) using them, but some contemporary texts try to avoid determinants as much as possible. $\endgroup$ – Michael Seifert Sep 5 '16 at 14:58
  • $\begingroup$ @MichaelSeifert Sorry if this is off topic but why do they avoid determinants ? $\endgroup$ – Rene Schipperus Sep 5 '16 at 15:00
  • $\begingroup$ @ReneSchipperus: the way they're presented in many linear algebra courses, they're basically black magic; and there are other ways to do calculations that might provide more intuition. See Sheldon Axler's 1995 paper "Down with Determinants!" $\endgroup$ – Michael Seifert Sep 5 '16 at 15:03
  • $\begingroup$ @MichaelSeifert That is very interesting. I have just finished my own development of the subject (which should appear soon on youtube), I present determinants as very natural, being the unique function invariant under row operations. $\endgroup$ – Rene Schipperus Sep 5 '16 at 15:07
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ For part 3, you can avoid the Gram-Schmidt process since you have a symmetric matrix and are working in $\mathbb R^3$. The eigenspaces are mutually orthogonal, so the cross product of the two basis vectors you found for $V_1$ will be in $V_4$. Take the cross product of that with one of the $V_1$ vectors and you’ll have a vector in $V_1$ that’s orthogonal to the latter. Now normalize them all. $\endgroup$ – amd Sep 5 '16 at 17:03
1
$\begingroup$

It's not necessarily faster, but another way to solve (2) involves using the determinant more directly. If $\lambda$ is an eigenvalue, we have $$ |Q - \lambda I_3| = \begin{vmatrix} 2 - \lambda & 1 & 1 \\ 1 & 2- \lambda & 1 \\ 1 & 1 & 2- \lambda \end{vmatrix} $$ $$ 0 = (2 - \lambda)\left( (2 - \lambda)^2 - 1) \right) - (2 - \lambda - 1) + (1 - (2 - \lambda)) $$ $$ 0 = 4 - 9 \lambda + 6 \lambda^2 - \lambda^3 $$ You've already been clued in that $\lambda = 1$ is a root of this polynomial, so you can factor out $(1 - \lambda)$ to get $$ 0 = (1 - \lambda)(4 - 5 \lambda + \lambda^2) $$ and the roots of the remaining factor are $\lambda = 1$ and $\lambda = 4$. In fact, this becomes $$ 0 = (1 - \lambda)^2 (4 - \lambda); $$ since 1 is a double root of the polynomial, it is an eigenvalue of $Q$ with multiplicity 2, while 4 is an eigenvalue with multiplicity 1.

As far as (3) goes, here's what I would do: if $\mathbf{v}$ is an eigenvector of $A$ with eigenvector $\lambda = 1$, then it must be the case that $$ (Q - I_3) \mathbf{v} = 0, $$ i.e., $\mathbf{v}$ must lie in the null space of $$ Q - I_3 = \begin{bmatrix} 1 & 1 & 1 \\ 1 & 1 & 1 \\ 1 & 1 & 1 \end{bmatrix} $$ You can then use the usual sorts of techniques to find the null vectors of this matrix, and use the Gram-Schmidt process (if necessary) to make the basis orthogonal. Similarly, finding the null space of $Q - 4 I_3$ will yield the eigenvector for $\lambda = 4$ (note that there will only be one up to scaling, since this eigenspace is one-dimensional.

Finally, for (4): suppose that $X$ existed such that $X^T Q X = 0$. One of the neat facts about eigenvectors of symmetric matrices is that they span the entire vector space and can be chosen to be orthogonal; so you must have $X = \alpha_1 X_{1} + \alpha_2 X_2 + \alpha_3 X_3$, where the $X_i$ vectors are all mutually orthogonal, and where the only way to get $X = 0$ is to have $\alpha_1 = \alpha_2 = \alpha_3 = 0$. Try plugging this in to the quantity $X^T Q X$ and see what it tells you.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ [2] At the beginning I'd try to solve (2) like you, but once arrived to $0=4−9\lambda+6\lambda^2−\lambda^3$ I did not know how to continue (I'm very bad with decomposition). Anyway I like the way you factor out $(1-\lambda)$, I did not really think about it. [3] I've tried to solve (3) but I'm not sure if it's correct (I've added it to my question). [4] Sorry but I not understand. $\endgroup$ – ᴜsᴇʀ Sep 5 '16 at 16:16
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @ᴜsᴇʀ: Your solution to (3) is correct, once you apply Gram-Schmidt. As far as (4) goes, I'd rather not give the entire solution away, but I've added an additional hint; hopefully it helps. $\endgroup$ – Michael Seifert Sep 5 '16 at 16:31
  • $\begingroup$ $X^T Q X = \Delta \neq 0$, where $\Delta$ is a diagonal matrix. Is this possible? $\endgroup$ – ᴜsᴇʀ Sep 5 '16 at 16:45
  • $\begingroup$ In this problem $X$ is a vector, not a matrix. $\endgroup$ – amd Sep 5 '16 at 17:07
  • $\begingroup$ @amd: If that's the case, then my answer would have to change (though the method I've outlined about should still work.) Hopefully ᴜsᴇʀ can confirm this reading. $\endgroup$ – Michael Seifert Sep 5 '16 at 18:31
1
$\begingroup$

For part 3 you want to find all vectors $(x,y,z)$ such that

$$x+y+z=0$$ that is your matrix for eigenvalue $1$ it is easy to see that the two independent solutions are $(1,0,-1)$ and $(0,1,-1)$ you then need to orthogonalize them. For the eigenvalue $4$, the matrix is $$\begin{pmatrix} -2&1&1\\1&-2&1\\1&1&-2\end{pmatrix}$$ this has rank $2$ and it gives the eigenvector $(1,1,1)$.

For the fourth part $Q$ is diagonalised by an orthogonal transfrom so it sufficed to solve this for a diagonal matrix, and it boils down to finding $x,y,z$ such that $4x^2+y^2+z^2=0$ which has only $x=y=z=0$ if you are working over the reals.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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