Eigenvalues of $2$ symmetric $4times 4$ matrices: why is one negative of the other?If the eigenvalues are...

What typically incentivizes a professor to change jobs to a lower ranking university?

Writing rule stating superpower from different root cause is bad writing

Why can't I see bouncing of a switch on an oscilloscope?

Is this a crack on the carbon frame?

The use of multiple foreign keys on same column in SQL Server

How do I create uniquely male characters?

I’m planning on buying a laser printer but concerned about the life cycle of toner in the machine

How to test if a transaction is standard without spending real money?

An academic/student plagiarism

Accidentally leaked the solution to an assignment, what to do now? (I'm the prof)

How old can references or sources in a thesis be?

Theorems that impeded progress

How is it possible to have an ability score that is less than 3?

What is the offset in a seaplane's hull?

Prove that NP is closed under karp reduction?

What does it mean to describe someone as a butt steak?

TGV timetables / schedules?

Problem of parity - Can we draw a closed path made up of 20 line segments...

Why was the small council so happy for Tyrion to become the Master of Coin?

Why doesn't H₄O²⁺ exist?

How can bays and straits be determined in a procedurally generated map?

To string or not to string

Is it important to consider tone, melody, and musical form while writing a song?

Can I ask the recruiters in my resume to put the reason why I am rejected?



Eigenvalues of $2$ symmetric $4times 4$ matrices: why is one negative of the other?


If the eigenvalues are distinct then the eigenspaces are all one dimensionalCongruence of invertible skew symmetric matricesEigenvalues of a general block hermitian matrixEigenvalues of Overlapping block diagonal matricesHow to find a symmetric matrix that transforms one ellipsoid to another?The matrix of an endomorphismA conjecture regarding the eigenvalues of real symmetric matricesProve that the span of ${M_1, M_2, M_3}$ is the set of all symmetric $2times2$ matrices.Looking for properties of, or formulae for eigenvalues of a symmetric matrix reminiscent of Toeplitz matricesDo hermitian matrices commute when they occupy they same elements but have different values?













2












$begingroup$


Consider the following symmetric matrix:



$$
M_0 =
begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 & 2 & 0 \
1 & 0 & 4 & 3 \
2 & 4 & 0 & 1 \
0 & 3 & 1 & 0
end{pmatrix}
$$



and a very similar matrix:



$$
M_1 =
begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 & 2 & 0 \
1 & 0 & -4 & 3 \
2 & -4 & 0 & 1 \
0 & 3 & 1 & 0
end{pmatrix}
$$



To my surprise, the eigenspectrum of $M_0$ and $(-M_1)$ are the same! Why would this be the case?



I also tried playing around with the values a little; for example, if the center block is $begin{pmatrix}1 & pm 4 \ pm 4 & 1end{pmatrix}$ instead, then they do not share the same eigenvalues.





Context: I was considering the Hermitian matrix of this form ($M_2$ below) and noted that this has the same property as the matrix $M_0$ from above. Thus, presumably, it has nothing to do with the fact that the middle block is complex.



$$
M_2 =
begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 & 2 & 0 \
1 & 0 & e^{ix} & 3 \
2 & e^{-ix} & 0 & 1 \
0 & 3 & 1 & 0
end{pmatrix}
$$



ps. I will accept any answer which explains the phenomenon between the real matrices. I think that would give a hint as to why $M_2$ / Hermitian matrices have the same property.



Thanks.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    It's because of all the conveniently placed zeroes.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    36 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @M.Vinay Yes, seems that way. Is there a name for such matrices or any property sticking out to you right now which would explain why this is true for symmetric matrices of this kind?
    $endgroup$
    – Troy
    33 mins ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    In my answer as currently written, I've shown that this holds for a slightly more general case (the matrix doesn't have to be symmetric/Hermitian, and may be real or complex). But I'd like to generalise still further, to higher orders. And also try to find a more big-picture explanation, as you say.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    19 mins ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    In case this helps: this would be "hollow" (zeroes at the diagonal) "pentadiagonal" or "band" symmetric matrix.
    $endgroup$
    – leonbloy
    19 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @leonbloy that certainly narrows down the search for me, thanks for the input!
    $endgroup$
    – Troy
    17 mins ago
















2












$begingroup$


Consider the following symmetric matrix:



$$
M_0 =
begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 & 2 & 0 \
1 & 0 & 4 & 3 \
2 & 4 & 0 & 1 \
0 & 3 & 1 & 0
end{pmatrix}
$$



and a very similar matrix:



$$
M_1 =
begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 & 2 & 0 \
1 & 0 & -4 & 3 \
2 & -4 & 0 & 1 \
0 & 3 & 1 & 0
end{pmatrix}
$$



To my surprise, the eigenspectrum of $M_0$ and $(-M_1)$ are the same! Why would this be the case?



I also tried playing around with the values a little; for example, if the center block is $begin{pmatrix}1 & pm 4 \ pm 4 & 1end{pmatrix}$ instead, then they do not share the same eigenvalues.





Context: I was considering the Hermitian matrix of this form ($M_2$ below) and noted that this has the same property as the matrix $M_0$ from above. Thus, presumably, it has nothing to do with the fact that the middle block is complex.



$$
M_2 =
begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 & 2 & 0 \
1 & 0 & e^{ix} & 3 \
2 & e^{-ix} & 0 & 1 \
0 & 3 & 1 & 0
end{pmatrix}
$$



ps. I will accept any answer which explains the phenomenon between the real matrices. I think that would give a hint as to why $M_2$ / Hermitian matrices have the same property.



Thanks.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    It's because of all the conveniently placed zeroes.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    36 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @M.Vinay Yes, seems that way. Is there a name for such matrices or any property sticking out to you right now which would explain why this is true for symmetric matrices of this kind?
    $endgroup$
    – Troy
    33 mins ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    In my answer as currently written, I've shown that this holds for a slightly more general case (the matrix doesn't have to be symmetric/Hermitian, and may be real or complex). But I'd like to generalise still further, to higher orders. And also try to find a more big-picture explanation, as you say.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    19 mins ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    In case this helps: this would be "hollow" (zeroes at the diagonal) "pentadiagonal" or "band" symmetric matrix.
    $endgroup$
    – leonbloy
    19 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @leonbloy that certainly narrows down the search for me, thanks for the input!
    $endgroup$
    – Troy
    17 mins ago














2












2








2


1



$begingroup$


Consider the following symmetric matrix:



$$
M_0 =
begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 & 2 & 0 \
1 & 0 & 4 & 3 \
2 & 4 & 0 & 1 \
0 & 3 & 1 & 0
end{pmatrix}
$$



and a very similar matrix:



$$
M_1 =
begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 & 2 & 0 \
1 & 0 & -4 & 3 \
2 & -4 & 0 & 1 \
0 & 3 & 1 & 0
end{pmatrix}
$$



To my surprise, the eigenspectrum of $M_0$ and $(-M_1)$ are the same! Why would this be the case?



I also tried playing around with the values a little; for example, if the center block is $begin{pmatrix}1 & pm 4 \ pm 4 & 1end{pmatrix}$ instead, then they do not share the same eigenvalues.





Context: I was considering the Hermitian matrix of this form ($M_2$ below) and noted that this has the same property as the matrix $M_0$ from above. Thus, presumably, it has nothing to do with the fact that the middle block is complex.



$$
M_2 =
begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 & 2 & 0 \
1 & 0 & e^{ix} & 3 \
2 & e^{-ix} & 0 & 1 \
0 & 3 & 1 & 0
end{pmatrix}
$$



ps. I will accept any answer which explains the phenomenon between the real matrices. I think that would give a hint as to why $M_2$ / Hermitian matrices have the same property.



Thanks.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




Consider the following symmetric matrix:



$$
M_0 =
begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 & 2 & 0 \
1 & 0 & 4 & 3 \
2 & 4 & 0 & 1 \
0 & 3 & 1 & 0
end{pmatrix}
$$



and a very similar matrix:



$$
M_1 =
begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 & 2 & 0 \
1 & 0 & -4 & 3 \
2 & -4 & 0 & 1 \
0 & 3 & 1 & 0
end{pmatrix}
$$



To my surprise, the eigenspectrum of $M_0$ and $(-M_1)$ are the same! Why would this be the case?



I also tried playing around with the values a little; for example, if the center block is $begin{pmatrix}1 & pm 4 \ pm 4 & 1end{pmatrix}$ instead, then they do not share the same eigenvalues.





Context: I was considering the Hermitian matrix of this form ($M_2$ below) and noted that this has the same property as the matrix $M_0$ from above. Thus, presumably, it has nothing to do with the fact that the middle block is complex.



$$
M_2 =
begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 & 2 & 0 \
1 & 0 & e^{ix} & 3 \
2 & e^{-ix} & 0 & 1 \
0 & 3 & 1 & 0
end{pmatrix}
$$



ps. I will accept any answer which explains the phenomenon between the real matrices. I think that would give a hint as to why $M_2$ / Hermitian matrices have the same property.



Thanks.







linear-algebra matrices eigenvalues-eigenvectors symmetric-matrices






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 7 mins ago









YuiTo Cheng

2,2734937




2,2734937










asked 1 hour ago









TroyTroy

4231519




4231519












  • $begingroup$
    It's because of all the conveniently placed zeroes.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    36 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @M.Vinay Yes, seems that way. Is there a name for such matrices or any property sticking out to you right now which would explain why this is true for symmetric matrices of this kind?
    $endgroup$
    – Troy
    33 mins ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    In my answer as currently written, I've shown that this holds for a slightly more general case (the matrix doesn't have to be symmetric/Hermitian, and may be real or complex). But I'd like to generalise still further, to higher orders. And also try to find a more big-picture explanation, as you say.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    19 mins ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    In case this helps: this would be "hollow" (zeroes at the diagonal) "pentadiagonal" or "band" symmetric matrix.
    $endgroup$
    – leonbloy
    19 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @leonbloy that certainly narrows down the search for me, thanks for the input!
    $endgroup$
    – Troy
    17 mins ago


















  • $begingroup$
    It's because of all the conveniently placed zeroes.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    36 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @M.Vinay Yes, seems that way. Is there a name for such matrices or any property sticking out to you right now which would explain why this is true for symmetric matrices of this kind?
    $endgroup$
    – Troy
    33 mins ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    In my answer as currently written, I've shown that this holds for a slightly more general case (the matrix doesn't have to be symmetric/Hermitian, and may be real or complex). But I'd like to generalise still further, to higher orders. And also try to find a more big-picture explanation, as you say.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    19 mins ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    In case this helps: this would be "hollow" (zeroes at the diagonal) "pentadiagonal" or "band" symmetric matrix.
    $endgroup$
    – leonbloy
    19 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @leonbloy that certainly narrows down the search for me, thanks for the input!
    $endgroup$
    – Troy
    17 mins ago
















$begingroup$
It's because of all the conveniently placed zeroes.
$endgroup$
– M. Vinay
36 mins ago




$begingroup$
It's because of all the conveniently placed zeroes.
$endgroup$
– M. Vinay
36 mins ago












$begingroup$
@M.Vinay Yes, seems that way. Is there a name for such matrices or any property sticking out to you right now which would explain why this is true for symmetric matrices of this kind?
$endgroup$
– Troy
33 mins ago




$begingroup$
@M.Vinay Yes, seems that way. Is there a name for such matrices or any property sticking out to you right now which would explain why this is true for symmetric matrices of this kind?
$endgroup$
– Troy
33 mins ago




1




1




$begingroup$
In my answer as currently written, I've shown that this holds for a slightly more general case (the matrix doesn't have to be symmetric/Hermitian, and may be real or complex). But I'd like to generalise still further, to higher orders. And also try to find a more big-picture explanation, as you say.
$endgroup$
– M. Vinay
19 mins ago




$begingroup$
In my answer as currently written, I've shown that this holds for a slightly more general case (the matrix doesn't have to be symmetric/Hermitian, and may be real or complex). But I'd like to generalise still further, to higher orders. And also try to find a more big-picture explanation, as you say.
$endgroup$
– M. Vinay
19 mins ago




2




2




$begingroup$
In case this helps: this would be "hollow" (zeroes at the diagonal) "pentadiagonal" or "band" symmetric matrix.
$endgroup$
– leonbloy
19 mins ago




$begingroup$
In case this helps: this would be "hollow" (zeroes at the diagonal) "pentadiagonal" or "band" symmetric matrix.
$endgroup$
– leonbloy
19 mins ago












$begingroup$
@leonbloy that certainly narrows down the search for me, thanks for the input!
$endgroup$
– Troy
17 mins ago




$begingroup$
@leonbloy that certainly narrows down the search for me, thanks for the input!
$endgroup$
– Troy
17 mins ago










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















4












$begingroup$

$$-M_1=D^{-1}M_0D$$
where $D=D^{-1}$ is the diagonal matrix with diagonal entries $(-1,1,1,-1)$.
Therefore $M_0$ and $-M_1$ are conjugate, and have the same spectrum. This works
because of the zeroes in the corners of $M_0$. In general,
$$pmatrix{a_{11}&a_{12}&a_{13}&a_{14}\
a_{21}&a_{22}&a_{23}&a_{24}\
a_{31}&a_{32}&a_{33}&a_{34}\
a_{41}&a_{42}&a_{43}&a_{44}}$$

and
$$-pmatrix{-a_{11}&a_{12}&a_{13}&-a_{14}\
a_{21}&-a_{22}&-a_{23}&a_{24}\
a_{31}&-a_{32}&-a_{33}&a_{34}\
-a_{41}&-_{42}&a_{43}&-a_{44}}$$

are conjugate, for precisely the same reason.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Of course, signature matrix. This is the answer.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    11 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    okay, this is amazing.. (there's a small typo on the last line of the matrix, I can't edit since it's <6 characters long)
    $endgroup$
    – Troy
    5 mins ago





















2












$begingroup$

This is happening because of the somewhat special pattern of zeroes in this matrix. Edit: No it's not. It has everything to do with signature matrices instead, as shown in the other answer.



Let $$M_1 = begin{bmatrix}0 & a_2 & a_3 & 0\b_1 & 0 & b_3 & b_4\c_1 & c_2 & 0 & c_4\0 & d_2 & d_3 & 0end{bmatrix}, quad M_2 = begin{bmatrix}0 & a_2 & a_3 & 0\b_1 & 0 & -b_3 & b_4\c_1 & -c_2 & 0 & c_4\0 & d_2 & d_3 & 0end{bmatrix}$$



Let $(lambda, x)$ be an eigenvalue-eigenvector pair of $M_1$, where
$x = begin{bmatrix}x_1 & x_2 & x_3 & x_4end{bmatrix}^T$.
Then we can show that
$begin{bmatrix}x_1 & -x_2 & -x_3 & x_4end{bmatrix}^T$
is an eigenvector corresponding to eigenvalue $-lambda$ for $M_2$.



For,
begin{align*}
a_2 x_2 + a_3 x_3 = lambda x_1 & implies a_2 (-x_2) + a_3(-x_3) = -lambda x_1\
b_1 x_1 + b_3 x_3 + b_4 x_4 = lambda x_2 & implies b_1 x_1 - b_3(-x_3) + b_4x_4 = (-lambda)(-x_2).
end{align*}

And the cases of the third and fourth rows are obviously similar.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    oh this is promising. let me mull on this a little before I accept. thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – Troy
    19 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    The would imply that the property has no obvious generalization for larger sizes, no?
    $endgroup$
    – leonbloy
    17 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @leonbloy I think it can be done with careful placement of zeroes, but I don't know if those generalisations would be naturally interesting or too contrived. Probably the latter.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    14 mins ago



















1












$begingroup$

I'm not sure if what follows is the type of thing you're looking for, but maybe you'll find this useful.



Consider the matrix
$$
M_a =
left[begin{array}{rrrr}
0 & 1 & 2 & 0 \
1 & 0 & a & 3 \
2 & a & 0 & 1 \
0 & 3 & 1 & 0
end{array}right]
$$

The characteristic polynomials of $M_a$ and $M_{-a}$ are
begin{align*}
chi_{M_a}(t)
&= t^{4} - left(a^{2} + 15right) t^{2} - 10 , a t + 25 \
chi_{M_{-a}}(t)
&= t^{4} - left(a^{2} + 15right) t^{2} + 10 , a t + 25
end{align*}

Now, note that $lambda$ is an eigenvalue of $M_a$ if and only if
begin{align*}
0
&= chi_{M_a}(t) \
&= {lambda}^{4} - {left(a^{2} + 15right)} {lambda}^{2} - 10 , a {lambda} + 25\
&= (-lambda)^{4} - {left(a^{2} + 15right)} (-lambda)^{2} + 10 , a (-lambda) + 25 \
&= chi_{M_{-a}}(-lambda)
end{align*}

This proves that $M_{a}$ and $M_{-a}$ have eigenvalues related by negation.



Now, suppose that $M$ instead takes the form
$$
M_{a+bi}=left[begin{array}{rrrr}
0 & 1 & 2 & 0 \
1 & 0 & a + i , b & 3 \
2 & a - i , b & 0 & 1 \
0 & 3 & 1 & 0
end{array}right]
$$

In this case, the characteristic polynomials of $M_{a+bi}$ and $M_{-a+bi}$ are
begin{align*}
chi_{M_{a+bi}}(t)
&= t^{4} + left(-a^{2} - b^{2} - 15right) t^{2} - 10 , a t + 25 \
chi_{M_{-a+bi}}(t)
&= t^{4} + left(-a^{2} - b^{2} - 15right) t^{2} + 10 , a t + 25
end{align*}

A similiar argument then shows that $M_{a+bi}$ and $M_{-a+bi}$ have eigenvalues related by negation.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    thanks for the attempt; yes this is a tad too "high-level" for my use-case -- I need a slightly more general/abstracted explanation. +1 nonetheless.
    $endgroup$
    – Troy
    24 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    This does not explain if the property depends on having those non-zero elements.
    $endgroup$
    – leonbloy
    20 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @leonbloy I mean, if someone wants to edit the question so that it is more rigorously posed, then we can take a stab at it. As it stands, it's unclear what's actually being asked here.
    $endgroup$
    – Brian Fitzpatrick
    16 mins ago












Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3177640%2feigenvalues-of-2-symmetric-4-times-4-matrices-why-is-one-negative-of-the-ot%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes








3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









4












$begingroup$

$$-M_1=D^{-1}M_0D$$
where $D=D^{-1}$ is the diagonal matrix with diagonal entries $(-1,1,1,-1)$.
Therefore $M_0$ and $-M_1$ are conjugate, and have the same spectrum. This works
because of the zeroes in the corners of $M_0$. In general,
$$pmatrix{a_{11}&a_{12}&a_{13}&a_{14}\
a_{21}&a_{22}&a_{23}&a_{24}\
a_{31}&a_{32}&a_{33}&a_{34}\
a_{41}&a_{42}&a_{43}&a_{44}}$$

and
$$-pmatrix{-a_{11}&a_{12}&a_{13}&-a_{14}\
a_{21}&-a_{22}&-a_{23}&a_{24}\
a_{31}&-a_{32}&-a_{33}&a_{34}\
-a_{41}&-_{42}&a_{43}&-a_{44}}$$

are conjugate, for precisely the same reason.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Of course, signature matrix. This is the answer.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    11 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    okay, this is amazing.. (there's a small typo on the last line of the matrix, I can't edit since it's <6 characters long)
    $endgroup$
    – Troy
    5 mins ago


















4












$begingroup$

$$-M_1=D^{-1}M_0D$$
where $D=D^{-1}$ is the diagonal matrix with diagonal entries $(-1,1,1,-1)$.
Therefore $M_0$ and $-M_1$ are conjugate, and have the same spectrum. This works
because of the zeroes in the corners of $M_0$. In general,
$$pmatrix{a_{11}&a_{12}&a_{13}&a_{14}\
a_{21}&a_{22}&a_{23}&a_{24}\
a_{31}&a_{32}&a_{33}&a_{34}\
a_{41}&a_{42}&a_{43}&a_{44}}$$

and
$$-pmatrix{-a_{11}&a_{12}&a_{13}&-a_{14}\
a_{21}&-a_{22}&-a_{23}&a_{24}\
a_{31}&-a_{32}&-a_{33}&a_{34}\
-a_{41}&-_{42}&a_{43}&-a_{44}}$$

are conjugate, for precisely the same reason.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Of course, signature matrix. This is the answer.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    11 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    okay, this is amazing.. (there's a small typo on the last line of the matrix, I can't edit since it's <6 characters long)
    $endgroup$
    – Troy
    5 mins ago
















4












4








4





$begingroup$

$$-M_1=D^{-1}M_0D$$
where $D=D^{-1}$ is the diagonal matrix with diagonal entries $(-1,1,1,-1)$.
Therefore $M_0$ and $-M_1$ are conjugate, and have the same spectrum. This works
because of the zeroes in the corners of $M_0$. In general,
$$pmatrix{a_{11}&a_{12}&a_{13}&a_{14}\
a_{21}&a_{22}&a_{23}&a_{24}\
a_{31}&a_{32}&a_{33}&a_{34}\
a_{41}&a_{42}&a_{43}&a_{44}}$$

and
$$-pmatrix{-a_{11}&a_{12}&a_{13}&-a_{14}\
a_{21}&-a_{22}&-a_{23}&a_{24}\
a_{31}&-a_{32}&-a_{33}&a_{34}\
-a_{41}&-_{42}&a_{43}&-a_{44}}$$

are conjugate, for precisely the same reason.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



$$-M_1=D^{-1}M_0D$$
where $D=D^{-1}$ is the diagonal matrix with diagonal entries $(-1,1,1,-1)$.
Therefore $M_0$ and $-M_1$ are conjugate, and have the same spectrum. This works
because of the zeroes in the corners of $M_0$. In general,
$$pmatrix{a_{11}&a_{12}&a_{13}&a_{14}\
a_{21}&a_{22}&a_{23}&a_{24}\
a_{31}&a_{32}&a_{33}&a_{34}\
a_{41}&a_{42}&a_{43}&a_{44}}$$

and
$$-pmatrix{-a_{11}&a_{12}&a_{13}&-a_{14}\
a_{21}&-a_{22}&-a_{23}&a_{24}\
a_{31}&-a_{32}&-a_{33}&a_{34}\
-a_{41}&-_{42}&a_{43}&-a_{44}}$$

are conjugate, for precisely the same reason.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered 14 mins ago









Lord Shark the UnknownLord Shark the Unknown

108k1162135




108k1162135








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Of course, signature matrix. This is the answer.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    11 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    okay, this is amazing.. (there's a small typo on the last line of the matrix, I can't edit since it's <6 characters long)
    $endgroup$
    – Troy
    5 mins ago
















  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Of course, signature matrix. This is the answer.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    11 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    okay, this is amazing.. (there's a small typo on the last line of the matrix, I can't edit since it's <6 characters long)
    $endgroup$
    – Troy
    5 mins ago










1




1




$begingroup$
Of course, signature matrix. This is the answer.
$endgroup$
– M. Vinay
11 mins ago




$begingroup$
Of course, signature matrix. This is the answer.
$endgroup$
– M. Vinay
11 mins ago












$begingroup$
okay, this is amazing.. (there's a small typo on the last line of the matrix, I can't edit since it's <6 characters long)
$endgroup$
– Troy
5 mins ago






$begingroup$
okay, this is amazing.. (there's a small typo on the last line of the matrix, I can't edit since it's <6 characters long)
$endgroup$
– Troy
5 mins ago













2












$begingroup$

This is happening because of the somewhat special pattern of zeroes in this matrix. Edit: No it's not. It has everything to do with signature matrices instead, as shown in the other answer.



Let $$M_1 = begin{bmatrix}0 & a_2 & a_3 & 0\b_1 & 0 & b_3 & b_4\c_1 & c_2 & 0 & c_4\0 & d_2 & d_3 & 0end{bmatrix}, quad M_2 = begin{bmatrix}0 & a_2 & a_3 & 0\b_1 & 0 & -b_3 & b_4\c_1 & -c_2 & 0 & c_4\0 & d_2 & d_3 & 0end{bmatrix}$$



Let $(lambda, x)$ be an eigenvalue-eigenvector pair of $M_1$, where
$x = begin{bmatrix}x_1 & x_2 & x_3 & x_4end{bmatrix}^T$.
Then we can show that
$begin{bmatrix}x_1 & -x_2 & -x_3 & x_4end{bmatrix}^T$
is an eigenvector corresponding to eigenvalue $-lambda$ for $M_2$.



For,
begin{align*}
a_2 x_2 + a_3 x_3 = lambda x_1 & implies a_2 (-x_2) + a_3(-x_3) = -lambda x_1\
b_1 x_1 + b_3 x_3 + b_4 x_4 = lambda x_2 & implies b_1 x_1 - b_3(-x_3) + b_4x_4 = (-lambda)(-x_2).
end{align*}

And the cases of the third and fourth rows are obviously similar.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    oh this is promising. let me mull on this a little before I accept. thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – Troy
    19 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    The would imply that the property has no obvious generalization for larger sizes, no?
    $endgroup$
    – leonbloy
    17 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @leonbloy I think it can be done with careful placement of zeroes, but I don't know if those generalisations would be naturally interesting or too contrived. Probably the latter.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    14 mins ago
















2












$begingroup$

This is happening because of the somewhat special pattern of zeroes in this matrix. Edit: No it's not. It has everything to do with signature matrices instead, as shown in the other answer.



Let $$M_1 = begin{bmatrix}0 & a_2 & a_3 & 0\b_1 & 0 & b_3 & b_4\c_1 & c_2 & 0 & c_4\0 & d_2 & d_3 & 0end{bmatrix}, quad M_2 = begin{bmatrix}0 & a_2 & a_3 & 0\b_1 & 0 & -b_3 & b_4\c_1 & -c_2 & 0 & c_4\0 & d_2 & d_3 & 0end{bmatrix}$$



Let $(lambda, x)$ be an eigenvalue-eigenvector pair of $M_1$, where
$x = begin{bmatrix}x_1 & x_2 & x_3 & x_4end{bmatrix}^T$.
Then we can show that
$begin{bmatrix}x_1 & -x_2 & -x_3 & x_4end{bmatrix}^T$
is an eigenvector corresponding to eigenvalue $-lambda$ for $M_2$.



For,
begin{align*}
a_2 x_2 + a_3 x_3 = lambda x_1 & implies a_2 (-x_2) + a_3(-x_3) = -lambda x_1\
b_1 x_1 + b_3 x_3 + b_4 x_4 = lambda x_2 & implies b_1 x_1 - b_3(-x_3) + b_4x_4 = (-lambda)(-x_2).
end{align*}

And the cases of the third and fourth rows are obviously similar.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    oh this is promising. let me mull on this a little before I accept. thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – Troy
    19 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    The would imply that the property has no obvious generalization for larger sizes, no?
    $endgroup$
    – leonbloy
    17 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @leonbloy I think it can be done with careful placement of zeroes, but I don't know if those generalisations would be naturally interesting or too contrived. Probably the latter.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    14 mins ago














2












2








2





$begingroup$

This is happening because of the somewhat special pattern of zeroes in this matrix. Edit: No it's not. It has everything to do with signature matrices instead, as shown in the other answer.



Let $$M_1 = begin{bmatrix}0 & a_2 & a_3 & 0\b_1 & 0 & b_3 & b_4\c_1 & c_2 & 0 & c_4\0 & d_2 & d_3 & 0end{bmatrix}, quad M_2 = begin{bmatrix}0 & a_2 & a_3 & 0\b_1 & 0 & -b_3 & b_4\c_1 & -c_2 & 0 & c_4\0 & d_2 & d_3 & 0end{bmatrix}$$



Let $(lambda, x)$ be an eigenvalue-eigenvector pair of $M_1$, where
$x = begin{bmatrix}x_1 & x_2 & x_3 & x_4end{bmatrix}^T$.
Then we can show that
$begin{bmatrix}x_1 & -x_2 & -x_3 & x_4end{bmatrix}^T$
is an eigenvector corresponding to eigenvalue $-lambda$ for $M_2$.



For,
begin{align*}
a_2 x_2 + a_3 x_3 = lambda x_1 & implies a_2 (-x_2) + a_3(-x_3) = -lambda x_1\
b_1 x_1 + b_3 x_3 + b_4 x_4 = lambda x_2 & implies b_1 x_1 - b_3(-x_3) + b_4x_4 = (-lambda)(-x_2).
end{align*}

And the cases of the third and fourth rows are obviously similar.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$



This is happening because of the somewhat special pattern of zeroes in this matrix. Edit: No it's not. It has everything to do with signature matrices instead, as shown in the other answer.



Let $$M_1 = begin{bmatrix}0 & a_2 & a_3 & 0\b_1 & 0 & b_3 & b_4\c_1 & c_2 & 0 & c_4\0 & d_2 & d_3 & 0end{bmatrix}, quad M_2 = begin{bmatrix}0 & a_2 & a_3 & 0\b_1 & 0 & -b_3 & b_4\c_1 & -c_2 & 0 & c_4\0 & d_2 & d_3 & 0end{bmatrix}$$



Let $(lambda, x)$ be an eigenvalue-eigenvector pair of $M_1$, where
$x = begin{bmatrix}x_1 & x_2 & x_3 & x_4end{bmatrix}^T$.
Then we can show that
$begin{bmatrix}x_1 & -x_2 & -x_3 & x_4end{bmatrix}^T$
is an eigenvector corresponding to eigenvalue $-lambda$ for $M_2$.



For,
begin{align*}
a_2 x_2 + a_3 x_3 = lambda x_1 & implies a_2 (-x_2) + a_3(-x_3) = -lambda x_1\
b_1 x_1 + b_3 x_3 + b_4 x_4 = lambda x_2 & implies b_1 x_1 - b_3(-x_3) + b_4x_4 = (-lambda)(-x_2).
end{align*}

And the cases of the third and fourth rows are obviously similar.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited 8 mins ago

























answered 23 mins ago









M. VinayM. Vinay

7,33322136




7,33322136












  • $begingroup$
    oh this is promising. let me mull on this a little before I accept. thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – Troy
    19 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    The would imply that the property has no obvious generalization for larger sizes, no?
    $endgroup$
    – leonbloy
    17 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @leonbloy I think it can be done with careful placement of zeroes, but I don't know if those generalisations would be naturally interesting or too contrived. Probably the latter.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    14 mins ago


















  • $begingroup$
    oh this is promising. let me mull on this a little before I accept. thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – Troy
    19 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    The would imply that the property has no obvious generalization for larger sizes, no?
    $endgroup$
    – leonbloy
    17 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @leonbloy I think it can be done with careful placement of zeroes, but I don't know if those generalisations would be naturally interesting or too contrived. Probably the latter.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    14 mins ago
















$begingroup$
oh this is promising. let me mull on this a little before I accept. thanks!
$endgroup$
– Troy
19 mins ago




$begingroup$
oh this is promising. let me mull on this a little before I accept. thanks!
$endgroup$
– Troy
19 mins ago












$begingroup$
The would imply that the property has no obvious generalization for larger sizes, no?
$endgroup$
– leonbloy
17 mins ago




$begingroup$
The would imply that the property has no obvious generalization for larger sizes, no?
$endgroup$
– leonbloy
17 mins ago












$begingroup$
@leonbloy I think it can be done with careful placement of zeroes, but I don't know if those generalisations would be naturally interesting or too contrived. Probably the latter.
$endgroup$
– M. Vinay
14 mins ago




$begingroup$
@leonbloy I think it can be done with careful placement of zeroes, but I don't know if those generalisations would be naturally interesting or too contrived. Probably the latter.
$endgroup$
– M. Vinay
14 mins ago











1












$begingroup$

I'm not sure if what follows is the type of thing you're looking for, but maybe you'll find this useful.



Consider the matrix
$$
M_a =
left[begin{array}{rrrr}
0 & 1 & 2 & 0 \
1 & 0 & a & 3 \
2 & a & 0 & 1 \
0 & 3 & 1 & 0
end{array}right]
$$

The characteristic polynomials of $M_a$ and $M_{-a}$ are
begin{align*}
chi_{M_a}(t)
&= t^{4} - left(a^{2} + 15right) t^{2} - 10 , a t + 25 \
chi_{M_{-a}}(t)
&= t^{4} - left(a^{2} + 15right) t^{2} + 10 , a t + 25
end{align*}

Now, note that $lambda$ is an eigenvalue of $M_a$ if and only if
begin{align*}
0
&= chi_{M_a}(t) \
&= {lambda}^{4} - {left(a^{2} + 15right)} {lambda}^{2} - 10 , a {lambda} + 25\
&= (-lambda)^{4} - {left(a^{2} + 15right)} (-lambda)^{2} + 10 , a (-lambda) + 25 \
&= chi_{M_{-a}}(-lambda)
end{align*}

This proves that $M_{a}$ and $M_{-a}$ have eigenvalues related by negation.



Now, suppose that $M$ instead takes the form
$$
M_{a+bi}=left[begin{array}{rrrr}
0 & 1 & 2 & 0 \
1 & 0 & a + i , b & 3 \
2 & a - i , b & 0 & 1 \
0 & 3 & 1 & 0
end{array}right]
$$

In this case, the characteristic polynomials of $M_{a+bi}$ and $M_{-a+bi}$ are
begin{align*}
chi_{M_{a+bi}}(t)
&= t^{4} + left(-a^{2} - b^{2} - 15right) t^{2} - 10 , a t + 25 \
chi_{M_{-a+bi}}(t)
&= t^{4} + left(-a^{2} - b^{2} - 15right) t^{2} + 10 , a t + 25
end{align*}

A similiar argument then shows that $M_{a+bi}$ and $M_{-a+bi}$ have eigenvalues related by negation.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    thanks for the attempt; yes this is a tad too "high-level" for my use-case -- I need a slightly more general/abstracted explanation. +1 nonetheless.
    $endgroup$
    – Troy
    24 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    This does not explain if the property depends on having those non-zero elements.
    $endgroup$
    – leonbloy
    20 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @leonbloy I mean, if someone wants to edit the question so that it is more rigorously posed, then we can take a stab at it. As it stands, it's unclear what's actually being asked here.
    $endgroup$
    – Brian Fitzpatrick
    16 mins ago
















1












$begingroup$

I'm not sure if what follows is the type of thing you're looking for, but maybe you'll find this useful.



Consider the matrix
$$
M_a =
left[begin{array}{rrrr}
0 & 1 & 2 & 0 \
1 & 0 & a & 3 \
2 & a & 0 & 1 \
0 & 3 & 1 & 0
end{array}right]
$$

The characteristic polynomials of $M_a$ and $M_{-a}$ are
begin{align*}
chi_{M_a}(t)
&= t^{4} - left(a^{2} + 15right) t^{2} - 10 , a t + 25 \
chi_{M_{-a}}(t)
&= t^{4} - left(a^{2} + 15right) t^{2} + 10 , a t + 25
end{align*}

Now, note that $lambda$ is an eigenvalue of $M_a$ if and only if
begin{align*}
0
&= chi_{M_a}(t) \
&= {lambda}^{4} - {left(a^{2} + 15right)} {lambda}^{2} - 10 , a {lambda} + 25\
&= (-lambda)^{4} - {left(a^{2} + 15right)} (-lambda)^{2} + 10 , a (-lambda) + 25 \
&= chi_{M_{-a}}(-lambda)
end{align*}

This proves that $M_{a}$ and $M_{-a}$ have eigenvalues related by negation.



Now, suppose that $M$ instead takes the form
$$
M_{a+bi}=left[begin{array}{rrrr}
0 & 1 & 2 & 0 \
1 & 0 & a + i , b & 3 \
2 & a - i , b & 0 & 1 \
0 & 3 & 1 & 0
end{array}right]
$$

In this case, the characteristic polynomials of $M_{a+bi}$ and $M_{-a+bi}$ are
begin{align*}
chi_{M_{a+bi}}(t)
&= t^{4} + left(-a^{2} - b^{2} - 15right) t^{2} - 10 , a t + 25 \
chi_{M_{-a+bi}}(t)
&= t^{4} + left(-a^{2} - b^{2} - 15right) t^{2} + 10 , a t + 25
end{align*}

A similiar argument then shows that $M_{a+bi}$ and $M_{-a+bi}$ have eigenvalues related by negation.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    thanks for the attempt; yes this is a tad too "high-level" for my use-case -- I need a slightly more general/abstracted explanation. +1 nonetheless.
    $endgroup$
    – Troy
    24 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    This does not explain if the property depends on having those non-zero elements.
    $endgroup$
    – leonbloy
    20 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @leonbloy I mean, if someone wants to edit the question so that it is more rigorously posed, then we can take a stab at it. As it stands, it's unclear what's actually being asked here.
    $endgroup$
    – Brian Fitzpatrick
    16 mins ago














1












1








1





$begingroup$

I'm not sure if what follows is the type of thing you're looking for, but maybe you'll find this useful.



Consider the matrix
$$
M_a =
left[begin{array}{rrrr}
0 & 1 & 2 & 0 \
1 & 0 & a & 3 \
2 & a & 0 & 1 \
0 & 3 & 1 & 0
end{array}right]
$$

The characteristic polynomials of $M_a$ and $M_{-a}$ are
begin{align*}
chi_{M_a}(t)
&= t^{4} - left(a^{2} + 15right) t^{2} - 10 , a t + 25 \
chi_{M_{-a}}(t)
&= t^{4} - left(a^{2} + 15right) t^{2} + 10 , a t + 25
end{align*}

Now, note that $lambda$ is an eigenvalue of $M_a$ if and only if
begin{align*}
0
&= chi_{M_a}(t) \
&= {lambda}^{4} - {left(a^{2} + 15right)} {lambda}^{2} - 10 , a {lambda} + 25\
&= (-lambda)^{4} - {left(a^{2} + 15right)} (-lambda)^{2} + 10 , a (-lambda) + 25 \
&= chi_{M_{-a}}(-lambda)
end{align*}

This proves that $M_{a}$ and $M_{-a}$ have eigenvalues related by negation.



Now, suppose that $M$ instead takes the form
$$
M_{a+bi}=left[begin{array}{rrrr}
0 & 1 & 2 & 0 \
1 & 0 & a + i , b & 3 \
2 & a - i , b & 0 & 1 \
0 & 3 & 1 & 0
end{array}right]
$$

In this case, the characteristic polynomials of $M_{a+bi}$ and $M_{-a+bi}$ are
begin{align*}
chi_{M_{a+bi}}(t)
&= t^{4} + left(-a^{2} - b^{2} - 15right) t^{2} - 10 , a t + 25 \
chi_{M_{-a+bi}}(t)
&= t^{4} + left(-a^{2} - b^{2} - 15right) t^{2} + 10 , a t + 25
end{align*}

A similiar argument then shows that $M_{a+bi}$ and $M_{-a+bi}$ have eigenvalues related by negation.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$



I'm not sure if what follows is the type of thing you're looking for, but maybe you'll find this useful.



Consider the matrix
$$
M_a =
left[begin{array}{rrrr}
0 & 1 & 2 & 0 \
1 & 0 & a & 3 \
2 & a & 0 & 1 \
0 & 3 & 1 & 0
end{array}right]
$$

The characteristic polynomials of $M_a$ and $M_{-a}$ are
begin{align*}
chi_{M_a}(t)
&= t^{4} - left(a^{2} + 15right) t^{2} - 10 , a t + 25 \
chi_{M_{-a}}(t)
&= t^{4} - left(a^{2} + 15right) t^{2} + 10 , a t + 25
end{align*}

Now, note that $lambda$ is an eigenvalue of $M_a$ if and only if
begin{align*}
0
&= chi_{M_a}(t) \
&= {lambda}^{4} - {left(a^{2} + 15right)} {lambda}^{2} - 10 , a {lambda} + 25\
&= (-lambda)^{4} - {left(a^{2} + 15right)} (-lambda)^{2} + 10 , a (-lambda) + 25 \
&= chi_{M_{-a}}(-lambda)
end{align*}

This proves that $M_{a}$ and $M_{-a}$ have eigenvalues related by negation.



Now, suppose that $M$ instead takes the form
$$
M_{a+bi}=left[begin{array}{rrrr}
0 & 1 & 2 & 0 \
1 & 0 & a + i , b & 3 \
2 & a - i , b & 0 & 1 \
0 & 3 & 1 & 0
end{array}right]
$$

In this case, the characteristic polynomials of $M_{a+bi}$ and $M_{-a+bi}$ are
begin{align*}
chi_{M_{a+bi}}(t)
&= t^{4} + left(-a^{2} - b^{2} - 15right) t^{2} - 10 , a t + 25 \
chi_{M_{-a+bi}}(t)
&= t^{4} + left(-a^{2} - b^{2} - 15right) t^{2} + 10 , a t + 25
end{align*}

A similiar argument then shows that $M_{a+bi}$ and $M_{-a+bi}$ have eigenvalues related by negation.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited 22 mins ago

























answered 31 mins ago









Brian FitzpatrickBrian Fitzpatrick

21.8k42959




21.8k42959












  • $begingroup$
    thanks for the attempt; yes this is a tad too "high-level" for my use-case -- I need a slightly more general/abstracted explanation. +1 nonetheless.
    $endgroup$
    – Troy
    24 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    This does not explain if the property depends on having those non-zero elements.
    $endgroup$
    – leonbloy
    20 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @leonbloy I mean, if someone wants to edit the question so that it is more rigorously posed, then we can take a stab at it. As it stands, it's unclear what's actually being asked here.
    $endgroup$
    – Brian Fitzpatrick
    16 mins ago


















  • $begingroup$
    thanks for the attempt; yes this is a tad too "high-level" for my use-case -- I need a slightly more general/abstracted explanation. +1 nonetheless.
    $endgroup$
    – Troy
    24 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    This does not explain if the property depends on having those non-zero elements.
    $endgroup$
    – leonbloy
    20 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @leonbloy I mean, if someone wants to edit the question so that it is more rigorously posed, then we can take a stab at it. As it stands, it's unclear what's actually being asked here.
    $endgroup$
    – Brian Fitzpatrick
    16 mins ago
















$begingroup$
thanks for the attempt; yes this is a tad too "high-level" for my use-case -- I need a slightly more general/abstracted explanation. +1 nonetheless.
$endgroup$
– Troy
24 mins ago




$begingroup$
thanks for the attempt; yes this is a tad too "high-level" for my use-case -- I need a slightly more general/abstracted explanation. +1 nonetheless.
$endgroup$
– Troy
24 mins ago












$begingroup$
This does not explain if the property depends on having those non-zero elements.
$endgroup$
– leonbloy
20 mins ago




$begingroup$
This does not explain if the property depends on having those non-zero elements.
$endgroup$
– leonbloy
20 mins ago












$begingroup$
@leonbloy I mean, if someone wants to edit the question so that it is more rigorously posed, then we can take a stab at it. As it stands, it's unclear what's actually being asked here.
$endgroup$
– Brian Fitzpatrick
16 mins ago




$begingroup$
@leonbloy I mean, if someone wants to edit the question so that it is more rigorously posed, then we can take a stab at it. As it stands, it's unclear what's actually being asked here.
$endgroup$
– Brian Fitzpatrick
16 mins ago


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3177640%2feigenvalues-of-2-symmetric-4-times-4-matrices-why-is-one-negative-of-the-ot%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

“%fieldName is a required field.”, in Magento2 REST API Call for GET Method Type The Next...

How to change City field to a dropdown in Checkout step Magento 2Magento 2 : How to change UI field(s)...

夢乃愛華...