[HN Gopher] What is an eigenvalue? ___________________________________________________________________ What is an eigenvalue? Author : RafelMri Score : 164 points Date : 2022-11-08 10:29 UTC (12 hours ago) (HTM) web link (nhigham.com) (TXT) w3m dump (nhigham.com) | raydiatian wrote: | A far easier to digest primer on eigenvalues is available from | 3Blue1Brown [+]. His presentation format is undeniably | approachable, so much so that I think you could probably use it | to teach linear algebra and eigenvectors to 9-year olds. | | [+] https://youtu.be/PFDu9oVAE-g | mpaepper wrote: | I explained it in a more coding oriented style here: | https://www.paepper.com/blog/posts/eigenvectors_eigenvalues_... | [deleted] | hdjjhhvvhga wrote: | For a completely different approach, see this answer: | | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1avwm7/c... | oifjsidjf wrote: | I was blown away in my Digital Signal Processing (DSP) class that | eigen "values" exist for certain systems in the form of "waves". | | Basicaly you put in a wave made from multiple sine and/or cosine | waves through some function f(x) and the output is STILL a wave, | though its frequency, amplitude and phase might change. | | Technicaly if I remember correctly this applies to all complex | exponentials, since those can be rewritten in the form of e^(ix) | = cosx + i*sinx. | | This formula also beatifuly shows how rotations and the complex | exponentials are connected. | | So basicaly you don't just have eigen values, eigen vectors: you | also have eigen FUNCTIONS (sine and cosine above are the eigen | functions of f(x)). | | DSP basicaly revolves arounds functions that don't "corrupt" | wave-like inputs (wave in -> wave out). | WastingMyTime89 wrote: | I'm not sure I understand but it seems to me you are just | talking about eigenvalues in C. | | That's interesting but not particularly remarkable because | eigenvalues are defined for linear transformations of any | vector space over a field. | mrfox321 wrote: | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectrum_(functional_analysis) | bobbylarrybobby wrote: | If you're into eigenfunctions, pick up any textbook on quantum | mechanics. The hamiltonian is a linear operator whose | eigenfunctions are the stationary states of the system | ("stationary" because an isolated system in a stationary state | will never leave that state) and whose eigenvalues are the | observable values of the energy of the system. In general, | there is a correspondence between observable quantities and | Hermitian operators on wavefunctions: "measurement" is the | application of a Hermitian operator to the wavefunction, and | the values you may observe are the eigenvalues of the operator. | So, for instance, energy is quantized in some systems because | their hamiltonian has discrete eigenvalues. | sverona wrote: | In fact functions are just infinite-dimensional vectors. Almost | all of the theory goes through unchanged. This is the basic | idea of functional analysis. | constantcrying wrote: | Notably, one _very_ important part which does not go through | is that for mappings between infinite dimensional spaces | linearity does not imply continuity. (E.g. a series of | functions bounded by a constant can have arbitrarily large | derivatives) | | A large part of functional analysis is dealing with that fact | and its implication for PDEs. | OJFord wrote: | Or rather size-of-their-domain-dimensional? | ravi-delia wrote: | If you want, but you can do better. I believe, for | instance, that at least continuous functions on the reals | have a countable basis. Might even be as strong as | measurable, not sure about that. That's how, for instance, | fourier transforms work. | constantcrying wrote: | The fourier Transform essentially means that every L^2 | (the square of the function has a finite integral) is | completely "described" by an l^2 series (a series of | numbers whose sum of squares converges), which is about | the greatest piece of magic in mathematics. One _very_ | important piece here is that the term "function" is | somewhat of a lie (since the result couldn't be true if | it weren't). | | The result for measurable _functions_ (not almost | functions) shouldn 't be true (I think). I am not even | sure it is true for L^1 almost functions. | [deleted] | c-baby wrote: | Maybe I'm missing what's interesting about this, but a function | like f(z) = 5z + 2 would output a wave with changed amplitude | and phase when z = sin(x). That doesn't seem that interesting | to me, so f(z) must have some other interesting properties? | oifjsidjf wrote: | Honestly I forgot the details, but basical the ENTIRE field | of DSP stands on this fact. | | Basicaly there exist some functions into which you can feed | in sound waves and the output is guaranteed to still be a | sound wave. | | If you'd feed in a sound wave and if the function would | corrupt it you would not be able to do any digital signal | processing, since the output must be a wave. | | Sound(wave) in -> Sound(wave) out, guaranteed to always be | true. | lisper wrote: | > there exist some functions into which you can feed in | sound waves and the output is guaranteed to still be a | sound wave. | | That in and of itself does not seem like a particularly | insightful observation. It's just _obvious_ that such | functions exist. I can think of three of them off the top | of my head: time delay, wave addition, and multiplication | by a scalar. There must be something more to it than that. | brendanclune wrote: | In math, the obvious things aren't always true and the | true things are often not obvious. | | Trivially, the identity f(x) = x satisfies the guarantee | as well. What amounts to insightful observation is the | definition and classification of these functions. In | exploring their existence in various forms, we can begin | to understand what properties these functions share. | | So the interesting part is not that this class of | function _exists_, because of course it does! Your | intuition has led you to three possible candidates. But | if we limit ourselves to only the functions that satisfy | the condition _wave-in implies wave-out_ what do they | look like as a whole? What do these guarantees buy us if | we _know_ the result will be a wave? For example, f(g(x)) | is also guaranteed to be _wave-in-wave-out_. Again, maybe | obvious, but it's a building block we can use once we've | proved it true. | c-baby wrote: | canadianfella wrote: | geysersam wrote: | It's even worse than you describe it! | | f needs to be linear, but the function in your example is not | linear. | | However, there are quite interesting linear functions. | Example: f(x(t)) = x(t-2) + 4dx/dt - \int_0^t 2x(s) ds | c-baby wrote: | 5z + 2 is linear? | lp251 wrote: | affine, not linear. describes a line that doesn't go | through the origin. that pesky shift breaks linearity | | 5(2z) + 2 != 2(5z + 2) | topaz0 wrote: | Small correction: eigenfunctions are analogous to eigenvectors, | not eigenvalues. In fact they _are_ eigenvectors, in the sense | that they are vectors in a vector space of functions (or some | restricted set of functions, e.g. continuous functions or | periodic functions). | [deleted] | [deleted] | adamnemecek wrote: | All these points fail to mention that they are fundamentally | self-relationship | | Lawvere's fixed point theorem is I think the best formulation of | the idea | https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Lawvere%27s+fixed+point+theore... | | I've been putting together a brain dump on the topic | | https://github.com/adamnemecek/adjoint/ | | Join the discord | | https://discord.gg/mr9TAhpyBW | kiernanmcgowan wrote: | Eigen-things can also be thought of "fixed values" of a "thing" | transformation. | | For example - the eigenfunction of a derivative is e^x since when | you run the derivative function on e^x you get.... e^x | Tainnor wrote: | They don't have to be fixed, a scalar multiple is allowed too. | e^ax is an eigenfunction of the derivative too. | marviel wrote: | After watching the 3blueonebrown video linked below in the | comments, I'm inclined to agree with you -- nice way of putting | it. | [deleted] | AdamH12113 wrote: | Does anyone know of an example of a simple physical system where | eigenvalues have a physical interpretation? The examples I know | of are all in quantum mechanics, which is a bit abstract for me. | 6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: | Eigenvalues of covariance matrices are a famous example. You | can get PCA from it. | cat_man wrote: | There are a couple of other comments that have mentioned | oscillation modes, vibrations, etc. The first 7 pages of this | series on sound synthesis might help give an idea of where | these might come from: | | https://drive.google.com/file/d/12SM0SAOvMq166gc8B1b81Y_S7HP... | | The third page in particular shows a plot of "amplitude" versus | "frequency" to show the "harmonic spectrum of a sawtooth wave". | The "frequencies" correspond to the modes of vibration (i.e., | sine waves of different frequency), which are the | "eigenvectors" in this case. The "amplitudes" are the relative | contribution of those vibrations to the overall sound, and | these correspond to "eigenvalues". | | The article is talking purely about constructing sounds via | synthesis, so there's not necessarily a linear system | associated with it, but there is a connection. Wave equations | represented by linear partial differential equations can often | be analyzed as a linear system that has these "modes of | vibration" (i.e., series of orthogonal sinusoids at different | frequencies). If you were to, for example, model a plucked | string (like a guitar), you can model the solution as a | weighted sum of eigenvectors (in this case, "modes of | vibration" or sinusoids of different frequencies). The | "weights" would be the eigenvalues, which determine the | spectrum and ultimately the timbre of the sound produced. | | That might seem more involved, because it's an infinite- | dimensional linear system (i.e., the vectors are functions on a | interval, rather than finite lists of numbers). It turns out, | though, that the finite-dimensional discretization of an | infinite-dimensional linear system (i.e., a partial- | differential equation approximated by a finite-dimensional | linear system) will sometimes have eigenvectors / eigenvalues | that have similar features as the infinite-dimensional case. | For example, there are certain finite-difference operators that | can be written in matrix form whose eigenvectors will work out | to be sampled sinusoids. | | I'm not totally sure of the history, but I think a lot of the | interest in eigenvectors / eigenvalues as a topic in matrix | theory originated from this are (i.e., numerical solutions for | partial-differential equations that were used to model physical | systems). | CamperBob2 wrote: | Wow, that's an awesome introduction to music synthesis. | Bookmarking for future referral to others. | [deleted] | idiotsecant wrote: | Get a sheet of rubber. Grab it in both hands and stretch it. | Inspect your sheet and find a line on the sheet that you could | draw in with a marker and when you stretched the sheet the line | would grow and shrink, but would not change what it was | pointing at (probably a line from one of your hands to the | other, in this simple example) That is an eigenvector of your | sheet stretching transformation. The eigenvalue is how hard | you're stretching the sheet. | einpoklum wrote: | I'll upvote any post beginning with "get a sheet of rubber" | :-) | olddustytrail wrote: | Except the "how to have sex with a leopard" post, because | describing rubber as "protection" in such circumstances is | really stretching. | antegamisou wrote: | Most are introduced to the interplay between physics and linear | algebra through the study of the mass - spring system where the | type (real or complex), sign and amount of the eigenvalues | determine its behavior and stability. For example, complex | eigenvalues with positive real part indicate an unstable, or | chaotic, in terms of amplitude convergence oscillation. | johnbcoughlin wrote: | The speed of sound is the eigenvalue of a particular matrix | (the "flux Jacobian") in the Euler equations, the 5-component | system of partial differential equations that describe gas | dynamics. | bodhiandphysics wrote: | Take an airplane... it's dynamics are described by a series of | differential equations. We want to know if it's stable! If the | wife values of the dynamics are real and greater than 1 it's | unstable. If the eigenvalues are complex and have a modulus | greater than 1 it will oscillate instability. If one is equal | to one, it will cause everyone to vomit. | _spduchamp wrote: | I read an interview with Australian wire music composer Alan | Lamb that a stringed instrument with multiple overtones | vibrating on the string can be analyzed by breaking down the | vibration into eigenvalues, but I've never found any reference | material that explain that. I'm wondering if he was referring | to FFT. | alanbernstein wrote: | Complex exponentials are the eigenfunctions of the Fourier | transform. In other words, frequency component values are the | eigenvalues. | | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eigenfunction#Vibrating_stri. | .. | contravariant wrote: | That makes no sense, the Fourier transform of a complex | exponential is a delta function. | alanbernstein wrote: | Hmm, you're right, that should have been obvious. Thanks | for the correction. | sfpotter wrote: | See my other reply. | auxym wrote: | If you discretize the string into a bunch of tiny masses, | linked together by a bunch of tiny springs, you can build a | mass Matrix (diagonal) M and a Stiffness matrix K (element ij | = stiffness of spring that links mass I and mass j). | | I can't remember the next part exactly, you can look it up in | a textbook, but you multiply the matrices KMK, or similar, | and the eigenvalues of this are the natural frequencies of | the string. The eigenvectors represent the mode shapes, ie | the displacement of each mass element. | | The same technique is used in Finite Element Analysis to find | the modes and modeshapes of complex structures (a car frame, | a bridge, etc) | bodhiandphysics wrote: | Also in computer science.. a web sites page rank is the | eigenvalue of the connectivity matrix. | cscheid wrote: | That's not true. The page rank is read from the eigenvector, | and is the value associated with the given vertex (ie web | page). There are as many page rank values as there are web | pages, but only one eigenvector from which to read: the | dominant eigenvector of the transition matrix, which is the | one with the largest eigenvalue. So, only a single eigenvalue | for the entire pagerank computation. | bodhiandphysics wrote: | You're right!!! Acch... | contravariant wrote: | If i recall correctly you can represent a harmonic oscillator | as a linear differential equation with a 2x2 matrix. The | imaginary part of the eigenvalues of this matrix correspond to | the angular frequency of the oscillator. | | I like this example because it gives a physical meaning to both | eigenvalues and imaginary numbers. It also shows the connection | between the sine and cosine and the complex powers of e comes | from (since you can show that all three solve the differential | equation). | hn_throwaway_99 wrote: | Don't know if this counts as a "physical" system, but Google's | original PageRank algorithm famously uses eigenvectors and | eigenvalues: | https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/936757/why-is-pager... | williamcotton wrote: | I have a brief overview of eigenvectors as a 2D shear | transformation in this overview of PageRank: | | https://web.archive.org/web/20130728183938/williamcotton.com. | .. | hn_throwaway_99 wrote: | Oooh, this is great! Thanks very much. | FabHK wrote: | Take a linear map from some space to itself, and ask: | | What lines (through the origin) are mapped back to themselves? | Those are the eigenvectors, and the amount by which they're | elongated or shortened are the eigenvalues. | | So, if we talk about 3d space, and we rotate things - the | rotation axis is unchanged. That's an eigenvector (with | eigenvalue 1). | | If we mirror things - any vector in the mirror plane remains | unchanged, that's an eigenvector (with eigenvalue 1), the | vector perpendicular to the mirror is unchanged, but flipped, | so that's an eigenvector (with eigenvalue -1). | | If we dilate everything along the x axis by a factor of 2, say, | then the x axis is an eigenvector (with eigenvalue 2), while | the y and z axis and any vector in that plane is an eigenvector | (with eigenvalue 1). Any other vector is "tilted", so not | mapped to itself, so not an eigenvector. | MichaelZuo wrote: | What does 'through the origin' mean in a physical system? | pbhjpbhj wrote: | It means it doesn't matter where it is: you can choose the | origin, ie the point you measure from, it is arbitrary. Or | another way of saying that is you can move the system to a | different set of coordinates and it works in the same way. | | ... which means it's probably an imaginary physical system. | | Maybe a good physical example is a piece of cloth that | warps in 2D, and shrinks, when washed? Eigenvectors would | describe the warping (skew, say) and eigenvalues the | shrinkage relative to the original warp and weft. | | Steve Brunton on YouTube has really good videos on | eigenvectors & eigenvalues in context of matrix algebra | (and then applied to simultaneous differential equations); | https://youtube.com/watch?v=ZSGrJBS_qtc . | MichaelZuo wrote: | Okay, so that explains 'the origin'. | | Does 'through the origin' imply motion through 'the | origin'? | mdup wrote: | It means the eigenvalues will only give you information | about the system relatively to the center of that system. | | Before describing any system, it's up to you (your | "convention") to assert where is the zero-point of your | world and in which directions the axes (x,y,z) are | pointing. | | For instance, in the real world you can choose your 3D | coordinate system such that your mirror, as a physical | system, keeps the origin untouched (0,0,0) -> (0,0,0). If | you decide the origin is a point on the mirror, the | equations will be linear: mirror(X) = AX. However if you | setup the origin some point far from the mirror, like the | center of your eyes, the equations are no longer linear, | but affine: mirror(X) = AX+B. Looking at the values of the | "AX" part of the system would reveal you the mirroring | plane, but now shifted by an offset of "+B" -- the distance | between the mirror and your eyes -- because your choice of | coordinates was not leaving the origin intact. | DennisP wrote: | When you're rotating something, the axis of rotation. | That's the point that doesn't change in rotation ("maps to | itself"). | theGnuMe wrote: | Center of mass; the object itself. | montecarl wrote: | I think a system of springs is a good example. I think having a | bunch of springs hooked together is a bit abstract so let's | instead think of a molecule and model the bonds between the | atoms as springs. If you were to squeeze this molecule together | or try to pull it apart and then let go, it would vibrate in | some complex way. By complex I mean that it wouldn't just | bounce back along the direction that you compressed or | stretched it. | | However, if you write down the matrix of spring constants for | the system and solve for the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of | this system you can do something special. If you compress or | stretch the molecule along the direction of the one of the | eigenvectors then let go, the molecule will continue to vibrate | along that same direction. The motion will not spread out to | all other degrees of freedom. It will also vibrate with a | frequency given by the eigenvalue of that eigenvector. | | Additionally, any complex vibration of the system can be broken | down into a combination of these independent vibrational modes. | This is a simple fact because the eigenvectors form an | orthogonal basis for the space. | sampo wrote: | > Does anyone know of an example of a simple physical system | where eigenvalues have a physical interpretation? | | Oscillation modes in mass-spring systems. Here is a simple one | with 2 masses and 3 springs, so the matrix is only 2-by-2. | | https://math24.net/mass-spring-system.html | | With more than 2 masses, you don't need to arrange the masses | on a line, but you can have a 2d or 3d arrangement, with | interconnecting springs. I am sorry I failed to find an example | image. | | The theory is explained, for example, around page 479 in this | Thornton and Marion Classical Dynamics textbook. But you need | to read about Lagrangian mechanics (chapter 7) before it makes | sense. | | https://eacpe.org/app/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Classical-D... | xhkkffbf wrote: | Think of a fun house mirror that for the sake of this example | make you look twice as tall but 20% skinnier. This can be | modeled by a two-by-two matrix with eigenvalues of 2 and 0.8. | (Indeed, it will have them on the diagonals which makes it | easier to study.) | syrrim wrote: | The vibration of a bell (say) could be modelled by a matrix, | with a state vector to represent position, velocity, and | acceleration, and the matrix modelling the differential | equations describing their evolution over time. The | eigenvectors represent a basis of the system, so that we can | describe any potential state vector as a sum of eigenvectors. | If we do so, then each step of the system can be modelled by | multiplying each of these eigenvectors by its corresponding | eigenvalue. If an eigenvalue happens to be complex, then we can | describe it in phasor form as the product of an amplitude and a | angle. The amplitude tells us how it will decay (or amplify) | over time. The angle tells us the frequency of oscillation, and | thus the note that the bell will typically sound. | qntty wrote: | Natural frequencies of mechanical systems are eigenvalues of | it's equation of motion. | _spduchamp wrote: | Any references to help me unpack what you just said there? | sfpotter wrote: | Things that vibrate have natural modes of vibration. A | particular vibrational pattern can be decomposed into a | time-varying linear combination of these modes. The modes | of vibration are eigenfunctions and the frequencies at | which they vibrate are the square root of the corresponding | eigenvalues. | | You can look up a vibrating drum head (circular membrane) | for a simple example. | bumby wrote: | _Theory of Vibration with Applications_ by William Thompson | and Marie Dillon Dahleh. | | Say you have two cars linked, with some spring constant; | | | --^^-- [c1] --^^-- [c2] --^^--| | | where '^^' is a spring and '|' is a wall. | | The motion of these cars can be written using the spring | forces in the system or, alternately, as the harmonic | motion of the undamped system with some natural frequency. | | Setting this up as two simultaneous equations (one for each | car) and solving for the roots give you the eigenvalues. | The natural frequency is the square root of the eigenvalue. | In other words, the eigenvalues help you define the natural | frequencies which can be used to characterize the motion of | the cars in the more complicated spring-mass system. | wolfi1 wrote: | Landau/Lifshitz: "Mechanics" has a chapter on small | oscillations | pvg wrote: | That's more of a further packing than an unpacking. | Although that totally should be an expression for things | that go on for too long: "Can you pack this for me | please" | planede wrote: | Moment of inertia tensor [1], and principal axes of rotation | [2]. | | Principle axes are the axes where a weightless body can rotate | around without "wobbling". These axes are orthogonal to each | other. If a rigid body has I_1 < I_2 < I_3 moments of inertia, | then rotation around the first and third axes is stable and | rotation around the second axes is unstable. | | [1] | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moment_of_inertia#Inertia_tens... | | [2] | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moment_of_inertia#Principal_ax... | atty wrote: | When dealing with the Schrodinger equation, the eigenvalues are | the energy levels of the quantum system. | ok123456 wrote: | Markov probability matrix where the entries are probabilities | of some physical event happening. | | The the eigenvectors will be the long term stable state | probabilities. | litoE wrote: | Not quite. For a Markov probability matrix, 1 is always an | eigenvalue, and all other eigenvalues are less than or equal | to 1. For each eigenvalue that is equal to 1 you get a long | term stable state probability. These distributions contain | disjoint subsets of the states, and the system will converge | to one of those subsets, depending on the initial state. The | eigenvalues that are strictly less than 1 do not add any | information to the long term state of the system. See | Stochastic Processes and Their Applications, V4 (1976) pages | 253-259. I wrote it while still in grad school. | cscheid wrote: | The values associated with each vertex on the _dominant | eigenvector_ (the eigenvector associated with the dominant | eigenvalue) are the long-term stable state probabilities. | That's from a single eigenvector, not "the eigenvectors". | ok123456 wrote: | Yeah each one is an eigenmode of the system. That's what I | meant. | crdrost wrote: | So my actual favorite first example is to do this with | Fibonacci numbers as a linear recurrence relation, but that's | not really a "physical" interpretation. Let me give you my | favorite physical one: | | The essence of special relativity is that acceleration is a bit | weirder than you think. In particular when you accelerate by | amount _a_ in some direction _x_ , even after accounting for | the usual Doppler shifts you will find that clocks separated | from you by that coordinate, appear to tick at the rate 1 + _a | x_ /c2 seconds per second, where c2 is a fundamental constant. | Clocks ahead of you tick faster, clocks behind you tick slower | (and indeed appear to slow down and approach a 'wall of death,' | more technically called an 'event horizon,' at a distance c2/ | _a_. (This effect is called the 'relativity of simultaneity,' | and it is in some sense the _only_ real prediction of special | relativity, as the rest of this comment will show--the other | effects of 'time dilation' and 'length contraction' are second- | order and can be derived from this first-order effect.) | | This means that the transformation equations for moving into a | neighboring reference frame are not the ones that Galileo and | Newton proposed, t' = t x' = x - v t | | but slightly modified to (to first order in v, so only | considering small velocity changes) t' = t - | (v/c2) x x' = x - v t | | where _w_ = c _t_ is a measure of time in units of distance | using this fundamental constant. How do we generalize and get | the full solution? We can do it by looking in the eigenvector | basis. Consider new coordinates _p_ = _x_ - c _t_ and _q_ = _x_ | + c _t_ , given any ( _x_ , _t_ ) you can find a unique ( _p_ , | _q_ ) which describes it and if you want to get back those | values you would say _x_ = ( _p_ + _q_ )/2, _t_ = ( _q_ - _p_ | )/(2 c). But feed these magical coordinates that come from | eigenvectors into the above transform and it "diagonalizes", | p' = (1 + v/c) p q' = (1 - v/c) q | | and therefore if you want to make a big change in "velocity" c | ph (here instead ph turns out to be "rapidity") out of N | smaller changes, you can repeat this transform N times with | little boosts by v/c = ph/N, and you will stitch together the | full Lorentz transform out of little first-order Lorentz | transforms: p' = (1 + ph/N)^N p = e^ph p | q' = (1 - ph/N)^N q = e^{-ph} q | | Transforming back and using the hyperbolic sine and cosine, | sinh(x) = (e^x - e^{-x})/2, cosh(x) = (e^x + e^{-x})/2, the | full formula is w' = w cosh(ph) - x sinh(ph) | x' = x cosh(ph) - w sinh(ph) | | where _w_ = c _t_ is a simple time-in-units-of-meters | coordinate. Usually we denote cosh(ph) = g, sinh(ph) = g b, | which gives this the more familiar form you 'll find in | textbooks, and the identity cosh2x = 1 + sin2x gives a formula | g = 1/[?](1 - b2) for the latter... but this 'rapidity form' is | in some ways more elegant. Anyway, point stands, from the | "first-order" transform you can derive the "full" transform | just by building any large velocity change out of an infinite | number of infinitesimal velocity changes, and this is the | source of the factor g which describes time dilation and length | contraction. | | Okay, now for physical interpretation. You asked what physical | meaning these eigenvalues and eigenvectors of the Lorentz | transformation have, and the answer is this: the eigenvalues | (1, 1) and (1, -1) of the Lorentz matrix represent _light rays_ | , the p/q description we came up with above was a description | of spacetime in terms of light-ray coordinates where we | identify an event at a particular place and time with the light | rays that it casts, announcing that the event has happened, in | the +x and -x directions. On the negative side, these are also | the last light rays that were able to touch the event before it | happened, so represent "everything it could have possibly known | about" -- there is a space between these two "light cones" | which is its "relativistic present," the things that anything | which was there at the event cannot know about until the | future. | | The eigenvalues, exp(ph) = sinh(ph) + cosh(ph) = g + g b = | [?][(1 + b)/(1 - b)] and exp(-ph) = [?][(1 - b)/(1 + b)], are | the Relativistic Doppler shifts of those light rays. Indeed one | can read them as e.g. exp(-ph) = 1/g * 1/(1 + b) , here 1/(1 + | b) is the standard Doppler shift formula from nonrelativistic | physics and 1/g is the decrease in frequency due to time | dilation. | simplotek wrote: | > Does anyone know of an example of a simple physical system | where eigenvalues have a physical interpretation? | | Yep, vibration modes. Vibration frequencies represent their | eigenvalues while the shape that the structural system exhibits | when subjected to said vibration corresponds to it's | eigenvector. | | If a structural system is modelled as a linear elastic system | it's possible to apply an eigendecomposition of that system and | represent it in terms of linear combinations of it's vibration | modes/eigenvector, and consequently we can get very accurate | representations by using only a hand-full of these | eigenvectors. | | You know swing sets? We would start to swing back and forth | just by moving our legs in a particular frwquencey, and without | much effort we could move more and more? It turns out the | frequency we moved our legs was the system's vibration | frequency/eigenvalue for the vibration modes/eigenvector | representing the we swinging back and forth. | dr_dshiv wrote: | Does this relate to the normal modes or eigenmodes of a | system? | | Actually, trying to understand how eigenmodes and | eigenfrequencies -- which I understand well -- relate to | eigenvalues and eigenvectors. | simplotek wrote: | > Does this relate to the normal modes or eigenmodes of a | system? | | Yes. The eigenvalues and eigenvectors of an undamped | harmonic oscillator are respectively the vibration | frequency and vibration mode. | | One major class of structural analysis techniques is modal | analysis, which determines the vibration modes and | corresponding frequencies of specific structural systems | subjected to particular boundary conditions. | [deleted] | billfruit wrote: | I do think, the term eigenvalue is rather opaque, and should be | replaced by a more plain-english terminology that readily conveys | its meaning. | Tainnor wrote: | It used to be called "proper value" in English (you can still | find that in old textbooks), but the (semi-)German word has | basically entirely replaced it. | st_goliath wrote: | As a native German speaker, I don't understand your problem. | It's very much not opaque, plain terminology that easily | conveys meaning. ;-) | | Perhaps, we should compromise and name it after Leonhard Euler? | That should clear up the confusion. | NotYourLawyer wrote: | "Characteristic value." I guess that's a little better | actually. | frozenlettuce wrote: | In romance languages you have | autovettore/autovetor/autovectore, as in "self-vector" | hdjjhhvvhga wrote: | Can you propose one? | billfruit wrote: | Linear scaling factor? | | Scale of aspect? | | Aspect factor? | | Scale along Axis? | | Axial scaling factor? | | Natural scaling? | | Propensity? | | Leaning factor? | | In geography for example(quoting from Wikipedia): | | "In physical geography and physical geology, aspect (also | known as exposure) is the compass direction or azimuth that a | terrain surface faces." | gpsx wrote: | You know what's another one from physics whose name has nothing | to do with the actual meaning - "Gedanken experiment" | gmfawcett wrote: | Huh? It literally translates to "thought experiment" in | English, which is exactly what it means. | jffry wrote: | I think you may have gotten whooshed by the joke - both | "eigenvector" and "gedankenexperiment" are mashups of a | German word and an English word | Tainnor wrote: | "Gedankenexperiment" is a fully German word, though, not | a mashup. | jxy wrote: | Try to name the bones you used to type this sentence? | vmilner wrote: | 3blue1brown on this: | | https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PFDu9oVAE-g&vl=en | raydiatian wrote: | Literally all you need. | vmilner wrote: | I think anyone starting a lin alg course could do a lot worse | than watch all his "Essence of Linear Algebra" series before | starting - then watch the relevant (c. 15 min) episodes as | you take each lecture. | jackconsidine wrote: | I was learning principal component analysis a few years back | which uses Eigenvectors to reduce feature dimensions while | minimizing information loss (sorry if I butchered this) | | I was really struggling to grok what Eigenvectors and | Eigenvalues were and found this video to be the best intuition | primer. I wish I had 3b1b when I was in high school and college | hackandthink wrote: | Machine Learning (LDA): | | "By finding eigenvectors we'll find axes of new subspace where | our life gets simpler: classes are more separated and data within | classes has lower variance." | | https://medium.com/nerd-for-tech/linear-discriminant-analysi... | _gmax0 wrote: | Also, if you come from a computing background, I think | Eigenfaces is a great, illustrative use of eigenvalues. | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eigenface | [deleted] | Waterluvian wrote: | Something that frustrates me, and maybe I'm just confessing my | stupidity, is the extra layer of indirection in any discipline | when things are named after people and not the thing's | characteristics. | | My doctor once told me "if you learn enough Latin, a lot of names | in medicine will hint at what they are, so you have less to | memorize." | | I find that these names often lend a sense of complexity to | concepts that turn out to be rather simple. In high school this | really contributed to my struggles. | | Edit: apparently Eigen isn't a person's name so I sure picked an | embarrassing moment to bring this up. | 323 wrote: | But you assume that there is one word to describe the | characteristics. | | If such a word doesn't exist, you might as well name it after a | person instead of trying to invent a new word. | [deleted] | ravi-delia wrote: | I recently embarked on a journey to come up with a math | vocabulary for Toki Pona, a lovely little artistic conlang | which deserves better than what I'm doing to it. In Toki Pona, | words are build up from simpler ones to describe a thing as it | is. A friend is 'jan pona', a person who is good (to me, the | speaker). So I've had to come up with names which describe math | topics. | | It's awful. | | You know how many same-xs there are?! Eigenvalue, eigenvector, | homomorphism, isomorphism, hom _e_ omorphism, homotopic. Which | one gets to actually be "same shape"? Worse are when well | meaning mathematicians use descriptive names anyway. Open and | closed are not mutually exclusive, giving rise to the awful | clopen (and don't pretend like ajar helps. an ajar door is an | open door!). Groups, rings, and fields all sort of bring to | mind the objects they describe, but only after you know the | archetypal examples. Math is the study of giving the same name | to different things, and that gives rise to more names than | there are short descriptions. | | So do you know what I did? Whenever I could, I used a real | person's name. It freed up a limited vocabulary, and gave | enough wiggle room to translate most undergrad math without too | much loss. I suspect a similar thing is in play with math. | Maybe the category theory people have abstractions to usefully | describe "same-functions" without confusion. But in general, | things are named poorly because it's genuinely a hard task. | jpmattia wrote: | > _is the extra layer of indirection in any discipline when | things are named after people and not the thing's | characteristics._ | | "Eigen" in German has same English root as "own": "Eigenvalue" | is Germanglish for "Own/inherent value", so meets your spec of | naming a thing after its characteristics, as long as "naming" | is allowed to be in multiple languages. | filmor wrote: | It doesn't mean "same". It means "own" in the sense of | "inherent" or "characteristic". | jpmattia wrote: | Fair enough, edited. | DocTomoe wrote: | A common language fosters research and common understanding. | | In IT, that language is English. In diplomacy, before | interpreters were plentiful, that language was French. And in | many classical, medieval-era sciences, that language was Latin | (as a commonly-understood language that came from it's ease of | being learned by romance-language speakers and being rather | relevant in the (then church-run) universities). | | So, there's no indirection intended. It's just an artefact of | the past - an artefact that helps Chinese, Spanish and American | doctors communicate (in broad strokes) even today. | constantcrying wrote: | It is sometimes very hard to name things well. The name either | becomes so unspecific that it is just as useless, or it gets so | long that nobody will use it. | | This gets worse the "deeper" the math goes, but _for me_ it | never was a real problem, as you usually learn the definition | together with the name. | cogman10 wrote: | You see this sort of thing crop up in chemistry. | | For really simple compounds, names are more or less settled | and consistent (with some exceptions). | | But as soon as your compound starts to get more complex | (think organic chemistry) all the sudden, it becomes nigh | impossible to consistently name things. There are tons of | compounds with the same chemical formula that are regionally | named differently. Even worse, there are tons of compounds | with the same chemical formula that are actually different | things due to how the compound is arranged. (Good ole carbon | chains). | martin_balsam wrote: | But it is named after its characteristic, albeit in German | Waterluvian wrote: | Well... boy did I pick the wrong example to bring this up | with. Alas, I'll leave my shame here for all to see. | sfpotter wrote: | If you learn a lot of math, a lot of names will hint at what | they are so you have less to memorize. :-) | Waterluvian wrote: | Except when some smart jerk discovered like eight different | things! | jpmattia wrote: | And then we have Grothendieck's prime (57), just to keep | life interesting. | BlueTemplar wrote: | Mandatory not-Euler's : | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_things_named_after_Le | o... | jks wrote: | My favorite is the "Lemma that is not Burnside's". Also | known as the orbit-counting theorem, the Polya-Burnside | lemma, the Cauchy-Frobenius lemma, and of course Burnside's | lemma. | ragnese wrote: | Or when a smart jerk discovered a thing, and then | discovered another thing based on the first thing: | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramond%E2%80%93Ramond_field | ProjectArcturis wrote: | Who is this explainer aimed at? If you can understand the first | sentence, you probably already know what an eigenvalue is. | [deleted] | 3qz wrote: | Jyaif wrote: | Right, but it's great to refresh your memory about eigenvalues. | CamperBob2 wrote: | The thing about Higham is that he's sort of a one-man Wikipedia | of linear algebra. Many of the terms that he uses also have | their own pages that (eventually) break the concepts down into | comprehensible terms. | | See https://nhigham.com/index-of-what-is-articles/ for a useful | listing. Or, in an alternative form, | https://github.com/higham/what-is . Notice that if you go all | the way back up the rabbit hole you'll find user-friendly | articles like "What is a matrix?" that clearly define the terms | used farther down. | | I really dig Higham's pedagogic style, in case it's not | obvious. | techwizrd wrote: | Often, papers or terse textbooks will list a definition like | the first sentence without the added detail below. I think this | is great for undergraduate students or folks who'd like to | refresh their memory a bit on eigenvalues, how they're derived, | and what they may imply. I certainly found it helpful. | Kalanos wrote: | You lost us at lambda ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-11-08 23:00 UTC)