0
$\begingroup$

In the appendix of a book on linear and nonlinear optimization, I saw the following statement on symmetric matrices:

enter image description here

In these notes, $A$ is considered as a $n \times n$ square matrix and $E^n$ is the $n$ dimensional Euclidean space. I already know that the repeated eigenvalues of a symmetric matrix corresponds to linearly independent eigenvectors, but they are not necessarily orthogonal. Then how can be the third statement correct, if $A$ has repeated eigenvalues? I think this is a misstatement, but I wonder if there is something I am missing.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ $I$ has all repeated eigenvalues, but $\mathbb R^n$ still has an orthogonal basis containing only eigenvectors of $I$... $\endgroup$ – 5xum Apr 6 '18 at 10:46
  • $\begingroup$ Then are the eigenvalues corresponding to repeated eigenvalues are orthogonal as well, for a symmetric matrix? $\endgroup$ – Ufuk Can Bicici Apr 6 '18 at 10:57
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Ah ok, the eigenvectors for the same eigenvalue are linearly indepedenent and constitute a subspace with the dimension of the eigenvalue's multiplicity. We can pick orthogonal vectors in this subspace such that they are still eigenvectors to the matrix $A$. $\endgroup$ – Ufuk Can Bicici Apr 6 '18 at 11:04
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Exactly! And the subspace is orthogonal to any of the eigenvectors belonging to other eigenvalues. $\endgroup$ – 5xum Apr 6 '18 at 11:17
2
$\begingroup$

I understood what I was missing, so I am writing a self answer. Let a eigenvalue $\lambda$'s multiplicity be $m$ for a symmetrix matrix $A$. We have $m$ eigenvectors $x_1, \dots, x_m$, corresponding to this eigenvalue and we know that they are linearly independent. We can produce orthogonal vectors $v_1, \dots, v_m$ in the subspace spanned by $x_1, \dots, x_m$, which are all linear combinations of $x_1, \dots, x_m$. (Gram Schmidt Orthogonalization, for example). $v_1, \dots, v_m$ are still eigenvectors for $A$. Pick $v_i$ among them, for example. We have $v_i = \sum_{j=1}^{m}a_jx_j$ and not all $a_j=0$. Then we have $Av_i= A(\sum_{j=1}^{m}a_jx_j) = \sum_{j=1}^{m}a_jAx_j = \sum_{j=1}^{m}a_j\lambda x_j = \lambda v_i$.

$\endgroup$

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.