In my syllabus we have the alternative definition of the condition of a matrix: kappa(A)=(text(max)_(norm(vec(y))=1) norm(A vec(y)))/(text(min)_(norm(vec(y))=1) norm(A vec(y))) In it, it also says that by definition of the condition of a matrix it follows that kappa(A^(-1))=kappa(A). So there is no explanation for this. Therefore, my question is: Why is kappa(A^(-1))=kappa(A)?

Zack Chase

Zack Chase

Answered question

2022-09-16

In my syllabus we have the alternative definition of the condition of a matrix:
κ ( A ) = max y = 1 A y min y = 1 A y
In it, it also says that by definition of the condition of a matrix it follows that κ ( A 1 ) = κ ( A ). So there is no explanation for this. Therefore, my question is: Why is κ ( A 1 ) = κ ( A )

Answer & Explanation

doraemonjrlf

doraemonjrlf

Beginner2022-09-17Added 8 answers

First you must accept that if A 1 doesn't exist then by convention κ ( A ) =
Once you've postulated that A 1 exists, you want to show
max x = 1 A 1 x = ( min x = 1 A x ) 1 .
To see that, take a minimizer x on the right side. Let b = A x A x ; then look at A 1 b = x A x . You picked x so that among unit vectors, A x is as small as possible, so A 1 b = 1 A x is as large as possible among unit vectors b
Intuitively, if A maps x to some much smaller vector b, then A 1 maps b back to x , which is much bigger than b. Juggling the normalizations obfuscates this intuition a little bit, I think.
ghulamu51

ghulamu51

Beginner2022-09-18Added 3 answers

For an invertable matrix, your numerator and denominator are the absolute values of the largest and smallest eigenvalues. The eigenvalues of the inverse matrix are the reciprocals of its eigenvalues.

Do you have a similar question?

Recalculate according to your conditions!

Ask your question.
Get an expert answer.

Let our experts help you. Answer in as fast as 15 minutes.

Didn't find what you were looking for?