1
$\begingroup$

Find the general solution of $\textbf{x}^{'}=\begin{pmatrix} -1&-4\\1&-1\end{pmatrix}\textbf{x}$.

The eigenvalues I found are $-1 \pm 2i $ and I chose $-1-2i$ to be my eigenvector and found it to be $e_1=\begin{pmatrix} 2i\\-1 \end{pmatrix}$ Now plugging this in to the formula we have $$e^{-t}\begin{pmatrix} 2i \\-1 \end{pmatrix}(\cos 2t-i\sin2t)=c_1e^{-t}\begin{pmatrix} 2\sin 2t\\-\cos 2t \end{pmatrix} + c_2e^{-t}\begin{pmatrix} 2 \cos 2t\\ \sin 2t \end{pmatrix}$$ The book however has: $c_1e^{-t}\begin{pmatrix} - 2\sin 2t\\\cos 2t \end{pmatrix} + c_2e^{-t}\begin{pmatrix} 2 \cos 2t\\ \sin 2t \end{pmatrix}$. How did the signs get switched because I tried to do this with $e_2=\begin{pmatrix} -2i\\-1 \end{pmatrix}$ and all that happens is the right side becomes negative which still doesn't explain how the signs are switched.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Your $c_1$ is the negative of the book's $c_1$. $\endgroup$ – John Habert Mar 27 '14 at 17:33
  • $\begingroup$ but how did that happen is this correct? $\endgroup$ – adam Mar 27 '14 at 17:34
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Since the constants are arbitrary until you use initial conditions to solve for them, it is fine. It is a similar trick as to how you got all the $i$ terms to drop out by being absorbed into $c_2$. $\endgroup$ – John Habert Mar 27 '14 at 17:36
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks I understand that part, but what I dont understand is why they would do something random and factor out a negative 1. I understand that $\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{3}}=\dfrac{\sqrt{3}}{3}$ because we dont want radicals in the denominator. Now why factor out a $-1$? $\endgroup$ – adam Mar 27 '14 at 17:41
1
$\begingroup$

Both answers are correct. To expand on John Habert's comment, since the coefficient $c_1$ is arbitrary, your $c_1$ is the negative of the book's $c_1$. To see what I mean, replace your $c_1$ with $-c_1$: you'll get the book's answer.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Is there any particular reason why they factor out a $-1$? I just think that can be confusing to do random things like that. $\endgroup$ – adam Mar 27 '14 at 17:37
  • $\begingroup$ There is no good reason for it. Whoever worked out the solution did so in a slightly different way than you did and the final form of the answers was different, though they are the same answer. $\endgroup$ – user134824 Mar 27 '14 at 17:40
  • $\begingroup$ If this is an initial value problem, then it is possible this choice of signs makes finding $c_1,c_2$ a little easier. $\endgroup$ – John Habert Mar 27 '14 at 17:40
  • $\begingroup$ Ahhh okok I got it. $\endgroup$ – adam Mar 27 '14 at 17:42

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.