MathGroup Archive 1998

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: Numerical Determinants


In article <6nnb0k$5em at smc.vnet.net>, Paul Abbott <paul at physics.uwa.edu.au> wrote:
>Rod Pinna wrote:

>Why not?  Your problem is clearly a generalized eigenvalue problem.  For
>non-zero p you can rewrite A.x=p B.x as B.x=(1/p) A.x.  For invertible
>A you then have Inverse[A].B.x = (1/p) x which is the formula that
>you're using.
>

Which probably indicates that I should have listened better in  first
year mathematics :)

That was the idea I was following, but since it hadn't been  mentioned
as a method in a couple of the texts I consulted, I  thought that there
might be something I was missing. Basically,  everything talks about
inverting the B matrix, but then doesn't  mention what to do in B in
singular. As the above *seemed*  obvious, I thought that there might be
a reason it wasn't  mentioned.

Thanks for the advice.
Rod.


Rod Pinna
(rpinnaX at XcivilX.uwa.edu.au  Remove the X for email)



  • Prev by Date: Re: Random[Real]: How good is it? Is it better/worse than Park-Miller, etc?
  • Next by Date: Re: Getting a bitmap to display with the proper dimensions
  • Previous by thread: Re: Re: Re: coordinate transformation
  • Next by thread: Re: Numerical Determinants