Prove that : There exists a vector $x$ such that $Mx = x$ , where $M$ is a Markov matrix [closed]

Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Here's a proof that I found which looks pretty simple but I can't understand the last step.
(A Markov matrix is a square matrix whose columns sum to one;
$I$ is an identity matrix;
$M^T$ and $I^T$ refer to the transpose matrices)

linear-algebra eigenvalues-eigenvectors linear-transformations determinant stochastic-matrices
closed as off-topic by José Carlos Santos, Brahadeesh, Adrian Keister, Key Flex, Leucippus Aug 16 at 0:12
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." â José Carlos Santos, Brahadeesh, Adrian Keister, Key Flex, Leucippus
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Here's a proof that I found which looks pretty simple but I can't understand the last step.
(A Markov matrix is a square matrix whose columns sum to one;
$I$ is an identity matrix;
$M^T$ and $I^T$ refer to the transpose matrices)

linear-algebra eigenvalues-eigenvectors linear-transformations determinant stochastic-matrices
closed as off-topic by José Carlos Santos, Brahadeesh, Adrian Keister, Key Flex, Leucippus Aug 16 at 0:12
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." â José Carlos Santos, Brahadeesh, Adrian Keister, Key Flex, Leucippus
A quick search returns a few similar posts: Is it true that for any square row-stochastic matrix one of the eigenvalues is $1$?, Eigenvector corresponding to eigenvalue $1$ of a stochastic matrix, Proof that the largest eigenvalue of a stochastic matrix is $1$, and probably many others.
â Martin Sleziak
Aug 15 at 12:34
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Here's a proof that I found which looks pretty simple but I can't understand the last step.
(A Markov matrix is a square matrix whose columns sum to one;
$I$ is an identity matrix;
$M^T$ and $I^T$ refer to the transpose matrices)

linear-algebra eigenvalues-eigenvectors linear-transformations determinant stochastic-matrices
Here's a proof that I found which looks pretty simple but I can't understand the last step.
(A Markov matrix is a square matrix whose columns sum to one;
$I$ is an identity matrix;
$M^T$ and $I^T$ refer to the transpose matrices)

linear-algebra eigenvalues-eigenvectors linear-transformations determinant stochastic-matrices
edited Aug 15 at 8:24
Rodrigo de Azevedo
12.6k41751
12.6k41751
asked Aug 15 at 6:38
Vanessa
33
33
closed as off-topic by José Carlos Santos, Brahadeesh, Adrian Keister, Key Flex, Leucippus Aug 16 at 0:12
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." â José Carlos Santos, Brahadeesh, Adrian Keister, Key Flex, Leucippus
closed as off-topic by José Carlos Santos, Brahadeesh, Adrian Keister, Key Flex, Leucippus Aug 16 at 0:12
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." â José Carlos Santos, Brahadeesh, Adrian Keister, Key Flex, Leucippus
A quick search returns a few similar posts: Is it true that for any square row-stochastic matrix one of the eigenvalues is $1$?, Eigenvector corresponding to eigenvalue $1$ of a stochastic matrix, Proof that the largest eigenvalue of a stochastic matrix is $1$, and probably many others.
â Martin Sleziak
Aug 15 at 12:34
add a comment |Â
A quick search returns a few similar posts: Is it true that for any square row-stochastic matrix one of the eigenvalues is $1$?, Eigenvector corresponding to eigenvalue $1$ of a stochastic matrix, Proof that the largest eigenvalue of a stochastic matrix is $1$, and probably many others.
â Martin Sleziak
Aug 15 at 12:34
A quick search returns a few similar posts: Is it true that for any square row-stochastic matrix one of the eigenvalues is $1$?, Eigenvector corresponding to eigenvalue $1$ of a stochastic matrix, Proof that the largest eigenvalue of a stochastic matrix is $1$, and probably many others.
â Martin Sleziak
Aug 15 at 12:34
A quick search returns a few similar posts: Is it true that for any square row-stochastic matrix one of the eigenvalues is $1$?, Eigenvector corresponding to eigenvalue $1$ of a stochastic matrix, Proof that the largest eigenvalue of a stochastic matrix is $1$, and probably many others.
â Martin Sleziak
Aug 15 at 12:34
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
The determinants of a square matrix and its transpose are identical. This means that their characteristic polynomials are identical, which in turn means that they have the same eigenvalues. When you left-multiply a matrix by a vector, the result is a linear combination of the matrix rows. In particular, left-multiplying by a vector of all $1$s sums the rows of the matrix. Each column of a Markov matrix sums to $1$, therefore $mathbf 1^TM = mathbf 1^T$. Transposing, we see that $mathbf 1$ is an eigenvector of $M^T$ with eigenvalue $1$, therefore $1$ is an eigenvalue of $M$ and there must by definition exist some non-zero vector $mathbf x$ such that $Mmathbf x=mathbf x$.
Thank you so muchhhh
â Vanessa
Aug 16 at 3:38
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
I am not sure about the notations, as you only made a part of the proof available, where the notations are not defined. In fact, I probably use the reverse setup. So long story short, this might not ne a good answer, and there is no way to tell until you make the problem clear.
But if by Markov matrix you mean a non-negative square matrix whose columns (?) add up to 1, then the reason $M^T-I$ has an eigenvector is that the all $1$ vector is trivially a good example.
Im so sorry but I didn't really understand that, how do we know that the all 1 vector is an eigenvector?
â Vanessa
Aug 15 at 7:55
Could you provide more details before asking more questions, please? Is my guess about the notations correct?
â A. Pongrácz
Aug 15 at 7:59
I edited the question to add notations before I posted that comment
â Vanessa
Aug 16 at 3:32
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
The determinants of a square matrix and its transpose are identical. This means that their characteristic polynomials are identical, which in turn means that they have the same eigenvalues. When you left-multiply a matrix by a vector, the result is a linear combination of the matrix rows. In particular, left-multiplying by a vector of all $1$s sums the rows of the matrix. Each column of a Markov matrix sums to $1$, therefore $mathbf 1^TM = mathbf 1^T$. Transposing, we see that $mathbf 1$ is an eigenvector of $M^T$ with eigenvalue $1$, therefore $1$ is an eigenvalue of $M$ and there must by definition exist some non-zero vector $mathbf x$ such that $Mmathbf x=mathbf x$.
Thank you so muchhhh
â Vanessa
Aug 16 at 3:38
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
The determinants of a square matrix and its transpose are identical. This means that their characteristic polynomials are identical, which in turn means that they have the same eigenvalues. When you left-multiply a matrix by a vector, the result is a linear combination of the matrix rows. In particular, left-multiplying by a vector of all $1$s sums the rows of the matrix. Each column of a Markov matrix sums to $1$, therefore $mathbf 1^TM = mathbf 1^T$. Transposing, we see that $mathbf 1$ is an eigenvector of $M^T$ with eigenvalue $1$, therefore $1$ is an eigenvalue of $M$ and there must by definition exist some non-zero vector $mathbf x$ such that $Mmathbf x=mathbf x$.
Thank you so muchhhh
â Vanessa
Aug 16 at 3:38
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
The determinants of a square matrix and its transpose are identical. This means that their characteristic polynomials are identical, which in turn means that they have the same eigenvalues. When you left-multiply a matrix by a vector, the result is a linear combination of the matrix rows. In particular, left-multiplying by a vector of all $1$s sums the rows of the matrix. Each column of a Markov matrix sums to $1$, therefore $mathbf 1^TM = mathbf 1^T$. Transposing, we see that $mathbf 1$ is an eigenvector of $M^T$ with eigenvalue $1$, therefore $1$ is an eigenvalue of $M$ and there must by definition exist some non-zero vector $mathbf x$ such that $Mmathbf x=mathbf x$.
The determinants of a square matrix and its transpose are identical. This means that their characteristic polynomials are identical, which in turn means that they have the same eigenvalues. When you left-multiply a matrix by a vector, the result is a linear combination of the matrix rows. In particular, left-multiplying by a vector of all $1$s sums the rows of the matrix. Each column of a Markov matrix sums to $1$, therefore $mathbf 1^TM = mathbf 1^T$. Transposing, we see that $mathbf 1$ is an eigenvector of $M^T$ with eigenvalue $1$, therefore $1$ is an eigenvalue of $M$ and there must by definition exist some non-zero vector $mathbf x$ such that $Mmathbf x=mathbf x$.
answered Aug 15 at 8:11
amd
26.2k2944
26.2k2944
Thank you so muchhhh
â Vanessa
Aug 16 at 3:38
add a comment |Â
Thank you so muchhhh
â Vanessa
Aug 16 at 3:38
Thank you so muchhhh
â Vanessa
Aug 16 at 3:38
Thank you so muchhhh
â Vanessa
Aug 16 at 3:38
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
I am not sure about the notations, as you only made a part of the proof available, where the notations are not defined. In fact, I probably use the reverse setup. So long story short, this might not ne a good answer, and there is no way to tell until you make the problem clear.
But if by Markov matrix you mean a non-negative square matrix whose columns (?) add up to 1, then the reason $M^T-I$ has an eigenvector is that the all $1$ vector is trivially a good example.
Im so sorry but I didn't really understand that, how do we know that the all 1 vector is an eigenvector?
â Vanessa
Aug 15 at 7:55
Could you provide more details before asking more questions, please? Is my guess about the notations correct?
â A. Pongrácz
Aug 15 at 7:59
I edited the question to add notations before I posted that comment
â Vanessa
Aug 16 at 3:32
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
I am not sure about the notations, as you only made a part of the proof available, where the notations are not defined. In fact, I probably use the reverse setup. So long story short, this might not ne a good answer, and there is no way to tell until you make the problem clear.
But if by Markov matrix you mean a non-negative square matrix whose columns (?) add up to 1, then the reason $M^T-I$ has an eigenvector is that the all $1$ vector is trivially a good example.
Im so sorry but I didn't really understand that, how do we know that the all 1 vector is an eigenvector?
â Vanessa
Aug 15 at 7:55
Could you provide more details before asking more questions, please? Is my guess about the notations correct?
â A. Pongrácz
Aug 15 at 7:59
I edited the question to add notations before I posted that comment
â Vanessa
Aug 16 at 3:32
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
I am not sure about the notations, as you only made a part of the proof available, where the notations are not defined. In fact, I probably use the reverse setup. So long story short, this might not ne a good answer, and there is no way to tell until you make the problem clear.
But if by Markov matrix you mean a non-negative square matrix whose columns (?) add up to 1, then the reason $M^T-I$ has an eigenvector is that the all $1$ vector is trivially a good example.
I am not sure about the notations, as you only made a part of the proof available, where the notations are not defined. In fact, I probably use the reverse setup. So long story short, this might not ne a good answer, and there is no way to tell until you make the problem clear.
But if by Markov matrix you mean a non-negative square matrix whose columns (?) add up to 1, then the reason $M^T-I$ has an eigenvector is that the all $1$ vector is trivially a good example.
answered Aug 15 at 6:42
A. Pongrácz
3,797625
3,797625
Im so sorry but I didn't really understand that, how do we know that the all 1 vector is an eigenvector?
â Vanessa
Aug 15 at 7:55
Could you provide more details before asking more questions, please? Is my guess about the notations correct?
â A. Pongrácz
Aug 15 at 7:59
I edited the question to add notations before I posted that comment
â Vanessa
Aug 16 at 3:32
add a comment |Â
Im so sorry but I didn't really understand that, how do we know that the all 1 vector is an eigenvector?
â Vanessa
Aug 15 at 7:55
Could you provide more details before asking more questions, please? Is my guess about the notations correct?
â A. Pongrácz
Aug 15 at 7:59
I edited the question to add notations before I posted that comment
â Vanessa
Aug 16 at 3:32
Im so sorry but I didn't really understand that, how do we know that the all 1 vector is an eigenvector?
â Vanessa
Aug 15 at 7:55
Im so sorry but I didn't really understand that, how do we know that the all 1 vector is an eigenvector?
â Vanessa
Aug 15 at 7:55
Could you provide more details before asking more questions, please? Is my guess about the notations correct?
â A. Pongrácz
Aug 15 at 7:59
Could you provide more details before asking more questions, please? Is my guess about the notations correct?
â A. Pongrácz
Aug 15 at 7:59
I edited the question to add notations before I posted that comment
â Vanessa
Aug 16 at 3:32
I edited the question to add notations before I posted that comment
â Vanessa
Aug 16 at 3:32
add a comment |Â
A quick search returns a few similar posts: Is it true that for any square row-stochastic matrix one of the eigenvalues is $1$?, Eigenvector corresponding to eigenvalue $1$ of a stochastic matrix, Proof that the largest eigenvalue of a stochastic matrix is $1$, and probably many others.
â Martin Sleziak
Aug 15 at 12:34