Is $rm rank ( A^-1/2 B A^-1/2 )= 1$, if $A$ is symmetric (positive definite) and full-rank, and $rm rank (B) = 1$?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Is $rm rank left( A^-1/2 B A^-1/2 right) = 1$, if $A in M_n(mathbbR)$ is symmetric (positive definite) and full-rank, but $rm rank (B) = 1 in M_n(F)$?
Numerically, it seems to be true. But, I don't know yet how to prove it analytically.
I am sorry if this question is trivial.
linear-algebra
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Is $rm rank left( A^-1/2 B A^-1/2 right) = 1$, if $A in M_n(mathbbR)$ is symmetric (positive definite) and full-rank, but $rm rank (B) = 1 in M_n(F)$?
Numerically, it seems to be true. But, I don't know yet how to prove it analytically.
I am sorry if this question is trivial.
linear-algebra
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Is $rm rank left( A^-1/2 B A^-1/2 right) = 1$, if $A in M_n(mathbbR)$ is symmetric (positive definite) and full-rank, but $rm rank (B) = 1 in M_n(F)$?
Numerically, it seems to be true. But, I don't know yet how to prove it analytically.
I am sorry if this question is trivial.
linear-algebra
Is $rm rank left( A^-1/2 B A^-1/2 right) = 1$, if $A in M_n(mathbbR)$ is symmetric (positive definite) and full-rank, but $rm rank (B) = 1 in M_n(F)$?
Numerically, it seems to be true. But, I don't know yet how to prove it analytically.
I am sorry if this question is trivial.
linear-algebra
edited Aug 23 at 11:22
Henning Makholm
229k16295526
229k16295526
asked Aug 23 at 10:31
user550103
549213
549213
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Theorem: if $A,B$ are $ntimes n$ matrices of full-rank and rank one respectively then $ABA$ is of rank one.
Proof: since $B$ is rank one it can be expressed as $$B=uv^T$$where $u$ and $v$ are two non-zero n-tuple vectors. Therefore $$ABA=Auv^TA=(Au)(A^Tv)^T$$where $Au$ and $A^Tv$ are both two other vectors and therefore their multiplication is another rank one matrix. So $ABA$ is rank one and our proof is complete. You can replace $A$ with $A^-frac12$ in your own question.
Thank you. This makes sense to me. This is what I was looking for.
â user550103
Aug 24 at 5:48
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
Multiplying by the left or right by an invertible matrix does not change the rank (or nullity).
In this case it is easy to check, $BA^-1/2$ has rank at most one, because the rank is the dimension of its image equals the image of $B$, because $A^-1/2$ is invertible and hence its image is the whole space. We see that the image of $A^-1/2BA^-1/2$ is at most one dimension. However it does not have rank zero since then it would be zero, but $A^1/2(A^-1/2BA^-1/2)A^1/2 = B neq 0$. So, it must be rank $1$.
Thank you for your explanation. I like the answer. So, +1. But I was seeking a bit more rigorous proof.
â user550103
Aug 24 at 5:48
Thanks, but in what way is it not rigorous, in your view?
â 4-ier
Aug 24 at 5:53
As I said that, I indeed like your answer. Moreover, you have given a very good geometrical view. So, I have to merge both of your proofs. If I had the possibility to accept both, then I would have done that. I hope you understand me. I sincerely appreciate your answer and efforts.
â user550103
Aug 24 at 5:59
Ok. I just interpreted 'not rigorous enough' as derogatory, because the proof is rigorous.
â 4-ier
Aug 25 at 3:39
1
I apologize if I sounded that way. So, I take back my words because I didn't mean that way.
â user550103
Aug 25 at 6:49
 |Â
show 1 more comment
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Theorem: if $A,B$ are $ntimes n$ matrices of full-rank and rank one respectively then $ABA$ is of rank one.
Proof: since $B$ is rank one it can be expressed as $$B=uv^T$$where $u$ and $v$ are two non-zero n-tuple vectors. Therefore $$ABA=Auv^TA=(Au)(A^Tv)^T$$where $Au$ and $A^Tv$ are both two other vectors and therefore their multiplication is another rank one matrix. So $ABA$ is rank one and our proof is complete. You can replace $A$ with $A^-frac12$ in your own question.
Thank you. This makes sense to me. This is what I was looking for.
â user550103
Aug 24 at 5:48
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Theorem: if $A,B$ are $ntimes n$ matrices of full-rank and rank one respectively then $ABA$ is of rank one.
Proof: since $B$ is rank one it can be expressed as $$B=uv^T$$where $u$ and $v$ are two non-zero n-tuple vectors. Therefore $$ABA=Auv^TA=(Au)(A^Tv)^T$$where $Au$ and $A^Tv$ are both two other vectors and therefore their multiplication is another rank one matrix. So $ABA$ is rank one and our proof is complete. You can replace $A$ with $A^-frac12$ in your own question.
Thank you. This makes sense to me. This is what I was looking for.
â user550103
Aug 24 at 5:48
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Theorem: if $A,B$ are $ntimes n$ matrices of full-rank and rank one respectively then $ABA$ is of rank one.
Proof: since $B$ is rank one it can be expressed as $$B=uv^T$$where $u$ and $v$ are two non-zero n-tuple vectors. Therefore $$ABA=Auv^TA=(Au)(A^Tv)^T$$where $Au$ and $A^Tv$ are both two other vectors and therefore their multiplication is another rank one matrix. So $ABA$ is rank one and our proof is complete. You can replace $A$ with $A^-frac12$ in your own question.
Theorem: if $A,B$ are $ntimes n$ matrices of full-rank and rank one respectively then $ABA$ is of rank one.
Proof: since $B$ is rank one it can be expressed as $$B=uv^T$$where $u$ and $v$ are two non-zero n-tuple vectors. Therefore $$ABA=Auv^TA=(Au)(A^Tv)^T$$where $Au$ and $A^Tv$ are both two other vectors and therefore their multiplication is another rank one matrix. So $ABA$ is rank one and our proof is complete. You can replace $A$ with $A^-frac12$ in your own question.
answered Aug 23 at 11:19
Mostafa Ayaz
10.1k3730
10.1k3730
Thank you. This makes sense to me. This is what I was looking for.
â user550103
Aug 24 at 5:48
add a comment |Â
Thank you. This makes sense to me. This is what I was looking for.
â user550103
Aug 24 at 5:48
Thank you. This makes sense to me. This is what I was looking for.
â user550103
Aug 24 at 5:48
Thank you. This makes sense to me. This is what I was looking for.
â user550103
Aug 24 at 5:48
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
Multiplying by the left or right by an invertible matrix does not change the rank (or nullity).
In this case it is easy to check, $BA^-1/2$ has rank at most one, because the rank is the dimension of its image equals the image of $B$, because $A^-1/2$ is invertible and hence its image is the whole space. We see that the image of $A^-1/2BA^-1/2$ is at most one dimension. However it does not have rank zero since then it would be zero, but $A^1/2(A^-1/2BA^-1/2)A^1/2 = B neq 0$. So, it must be rank $1$.
Thank you for your explanation. I like the answer. So, +1. But I was seeking a bit more rigorous proof.
â user550103
Aug 24 at 5:48
Thanks, but in what way is it not rigorous, in your view?
â 4-ier
Aug 24 at 5:53
As I said that, I indeed like your answer. Moreover, you have given a very good geometrical view. So, I have to merge both of your proofs. If I had the possibility to accept both, then I would have done that. I hope you understand me. I sincerely appreciate your answer and efforts.
â user550103
Aug 24 at 5:59
Ok. I just interpreted 'not rigorous enough' as derogatory, because the proof is rigorous.
â 4-ier
Aug 25 at 3:39
1
I apologize if I sounded that way. So, I take back my words because I didn't mean that way.
â user550103
Aug 25 at 6:49
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
3
down vote
Multiplying by the left or right by an invertible matrix does not change the rank (or nullity).
In this case it is easy to check, $BA^-1/2$ has rank at most one, because the rank is the dimension of its image equals the image of $B$, because $A^-1/2$ is invertible and hence its image is the whole space. We see that the image of $A^-1/2BA^-1/2$ is at most one dimension. However it does not have rank zero since then it would be zero, but $A^1/2(A^-1/2BA^-1/2)A^1/2 = B neq 0$. So, it must be rank $1$.
Thank you for your explanation. I like the answer. So, +1. But I was seeking a bit more rigorous proof.
â user550103
Aug 24 at 5:48
Thanks, but in what way is it not rigorous, in your view?
â 4-ier
Aug 24 at 5:53
As I said that, I indeed like your answer. Moreover, you have given a very good geometrical view. So, I have to merge both of your proofs. If I had the possibility to accept both, then I would have done that. I hope you understand me. I sincerely appreciate your answer and efforts.
â user550103
Aug 24 at 5:59
Ok. I just interpreted 'not rigorous enough' as derogatory, because the proof is rigorous.
â 4-ier
Aug 25 at 3:39
1
I apologize if I sounded that way. So, I take back my words because I didn't mean that way.
â user550103
Aug 25 at 6:49
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
3
down vote
up vote
3
down vote
Multiplying by the left or right by an invertible matrix does not change the rank (or nullity).
In this case it is easy to check, $BA^-1/2$ has rank at most one, because the rank is the dimension of its image equals the image of $B$, because $A^-1/2$ is invertible and hence its image is the whole space. We see that the image of $A^-1/2BA^-1/2$ is at most one dimension. However it does not have rank zero since then it would be zero, but $A^1/2(A^-1/2BA^-1/2)A^1/2 = B neq 0$. So, it must be rank $1$.
Multiplying by the left or right by an invertible matrix does not change the rank (or nullity).
In this case it is easy to check, $BA^-1/2$ has rank at most one, because the rank is the dimension of its image equals the image of $B$, because $A^-1/2$ is invertible and hence its image is the whole space. We see that the image of $A^-1/2BA^-1/2$ is at most one dimension. However it does not have rank zero since then it would be zero, but $A^1/2(A^-1/2BA^-1/2)A^1/2 = B neq 0$. So, it must be rank $1$.
answered Aug 23 at 10:43
4-ier
5989
5989
Thank you for your explanation. I like the answer. So, +1. But I was seeking a bit more rigorous proof.
â user550103
Aug 24 at 5:48
Thanks, but in what way is it not rigorous, in your view?
â 4-ier
Aug 24 at 5:53
As I said that, I indeed like your answer. Moreover, you have given a very good geometrical view. So, I have to merge both of your proofs. If I had the possibility to accept both, then I would have done that. I hope you understand me. I sincerely appreciate your answer and efforts.
â user550103
Aug 24 at 5:59
Ok. I just interpreted 'not rigorous enough' as derogatory, because the proof is rigorous.
â 4-ier
Aug 25 at 3:39
1
I apologize if I sounded that way. So, I take back my words because I didn't mean that way.
â user550103
Aug 25 at 6:49
 |Â
show 1 more comment
Thank you for your explanation. I like the answer. So, +1. But I was seeking a bit more rigorous proof.
â user550103
Aug 24 at 5:48
Thanks, but in what way is it not rigorous, in your view?
â 4-ier
Aug 24 at 5:53
As I said that, I indeed like your answer. Moreover, you have given a very good geometrical view. So, I have to merge both of your proofs. If I had the possibility to accept both, then I would have done that. I hope you understand me. I sincerely appreciate your answer and efforts.
â user550103
Aug 24 at 5:59
Ok. I just interpreted 'not rigorous enough' as derogatory, because the proof is rigorous.
â 4-ier
Aug 25 at 3:39
1
I apologize if I sounded that way. So, I take back my words because I didn't mean that way.
â user550103
Aug 25 at 6:49
Thank you for your explanation. I like the answer. So, +1. But I was seeking a bit more rigorous proof.
â user550103
Aug 24 at 5:48
Thank you for your explanation. I like the answer. So, +1. But I was seeking a bit more rigorous proof.
â user550103
Aug 24 at 5:48
Thanks, but in what way is it not rigorous, in your view?
â 4-ier
Aug 24 at 5:53
Thanks, but in what way is it not rigorous, in your view?
â 4-ier
Aug 24 at 5:53
As I said that, I indeed like your answer. Moreover, you have given a very good geometrical view. So, I have to merge both of your proofs. If I had the possibility to accept both, then I would have done that. I hope you understand me. I sincerely appreciate your answer and efforts.
â user550103
Aug 24 at 5:59
As I said that, I indeed like your answer. Moreover, you have given a very good geometrical view. So, I have to merge both of your proofs. If I had the possibility to accept both, then I would have done that. I hope you understand me. I sincerely appreciate your answer and efforts.
â user550103
Aug 24 at 5:59
Ok. I just interpreted 'not rigorous enough' as derogatory, because the proof is rigorous.
â 4-ier
Aug 25 at 3:39
Ok. I just interpreted 'not rigorous enough' as derogatory, because the proof is rigorous.
â 4-ier
Aug 25 at 3:39
1
1
I apologize if I sounded that way. So, I take back my words because I didn't mean that way.
â user550103
Aug 25 at 6:49
I apologize if I sounded that way. So, I take back my words because I didn't mean that way.
â user550103
Aug 25 at 6:49
 |Â
show 1 more comment
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2891956%2fis-rm-rank-a-1-2-b-a-1-2-1-if-a-is-symmetric-positiv%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password