Does this specific SO(4) matrix have to be block-diagonal?











up vote
4
down vote

favorite
1












So I have a specific real $4times4$ matrix $mathbf{P}$ given by
begin{align}
mathbf{P}=
begin{pmatrix}
p_{11} & -p_{21} & p_{13} &-p_{23}\ p_{21} & p_{11} & p_{23} & p_{13}\p_{31} & -p_{41}& p_{33} & -p_{43}\p_{41} & p_{31} & p_{43} & p_{33}.
end{pmatrix},
end{align}

and I'm confident that if this matrix is in $SO(4)$ then it must be block-diagonal OR anti-block-diagonal i.e. if $mathbf{P}in SO(4)$ then either $p_{11}=p_{21}=p_{33}=p_{43}=0$ or $p_{13}=p_{23}=p_{31}=p_{41}=0$, but I can't seem to show this...



I've tried picking one column and generating a set of orthonormal vectors to fill the matrix, but this just gives examples where it works and I'd like to show it generally. Is this possible? Am I just missing something trivial here?










share|cite|improve this question


























    up vote
    4
    down vote

    favorite
    1












    So I have a specific real $4times4$ matrix $mathbf{P}$ given by
    begin{align}
    mathbf{P}=
    begin{pmatrix}
    p_{11} & -p_{21} & p_{13} &-p_{23}\ p_{21} & p_{11} & p_{23} & p_{13}\p_{31} & -p_{41}& p_{33} & -p_{43}\p_{41} & p_{31} & p_{43} & p_{33}.
    end{pmatrix},
    end{align}

    and I'm confident that if this matrix is in $SO(4)$ then it must be block-diagonal OR anti-block-diagonal i.e. if $mathbf{P}in SO(4)$ then either $p_{11}=p_{21}=p_{33}=p_{43}=0$ or $p_{13}=p_{23}=p_{31}=p_{41}=0$, but I can't seem to show this...



    I've tried picking one column and generating a set of orthonormal vectors to fill the matrix, but this just gives examples where it works and I'd like to show it generally. Is this possible? Am I just missing something trivial here?










    share|cite|improve this question
























      up vote
      4
      down vote

      favorite
      1









      up vote
      4
      down vote

      favorite
      1






      1





      So I have a specific real $4times4$ matrix $mathbf{P}$ given by
      begin{align}
      mathbf{P}=
      begin{pmatrix}
      p_{11} & -p_{21} & p_{13} &-p_{23}\ p_{21} & p_{11} & p_{23} & p_{13}\p_{31} & -p_{41}& p_{33} & -p_{43}\p_{41} & p_{31} & p_{43} & p_{33}.
      end{pmatrix},
      end{align}

      and I'm confident that if this matrix is in $SO(4)$ then it must be block-diagonal OR anti-block-diagonal i.e. if $mathbf{P}in SO(4)$ then either $p_{11}=p_{21}=p_{33}=p_{43}=0$ or $p_{13}=p_{23}=p_{31}=p_{41}=0$, but I can't seem to show this...



      I've tried picking one column and generating a set of orthonormal vectors to fill the matrix, but this just gives examples where it works and I'd like to show it generally. Is this possible? Am I just missing something trivial here?










      share|cite|improve this question













      So I have a specific real $4times4$ matrix $mathbf{P}$ given by
      begin{align}
      mathbf{P}=
      begin{pmatrix}
      p_{11} & -p_{21} & p_{13} &-p_{23}\ p_{21} & p_{11} & p_{23} & p_{13}\p_{31} & -p_{41}& p_{33} & -p_{43}\p_{41} & p_{31} & p_{43} & p_{33}.
      end{pmatrix},
      end{align}

      and I'm confident that if this matrix is in $SO(4)$ then it must be block-diagonal OR anti-block-diagonal i.e. if $mathbf{P}in SO(4)$ then either $p_{11}=p_{21}=p_{33}=p_{43}=0$ or $p_{13}=p_{23}=p_{31}=p_{41}=0$, but I can't seem to show this...



      I've tried picking one column and generating a set of orthonormal vectors to fill the matrix, but this just gives examples where it works and I'd like to show it generally. Is this possible? Am I just missing something trivial here?







      matrices lie-groups orthonormal






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Nov 21 at 15:02









      Falcon Reityslaite

      211




      211






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          1
          down vote













          Skip to the end for the big reveal, or read through this for the "how I got there" version.



          Let's rewrite that as
          begin{align}
          mathbf{P}=
          begin{pmatrix}
          a & -b & p &-q\
          b & a & q & p\
          c & -d& r & -s\
          d & c & s & r.
          end{pmatrix},
          end{align}



          Orthogonality of the first and third and first and 4th columns tells us that
          begin{align}
          ap + bq + cr + ds &= 0\
          -aq + bp - cs + dr &= 0\
          end{align}

          Cross-multiply to get
          begin{align}
          apq + bq^2 + crq + dsq &= 0 \
          -apq + bp^2 - cps + dpr &= 0\
          end{align}

          and sum to get
          begin{align}
          b(p^2 + q^2) + crq - cps + dsq + dpr &= 0 \
          end{align}

          Doing the same for columns 2 against 3 and 4 gives
          begin{align}
          a(p^2 + q^2) - drq + csq + dps + cpr &= 0 \
          end{align}

          Let's factor those to get
          begin{align}
          b(p^2 + q^2) + c(rq - ps) + d(sq + pr) &= 0 \
          a(p^2 + q^2) + c(sq + pr) - d(rq - ps) &= 0 \
          end{align}

          Looking at the dot product between rows 2 and 3, we see that
          $$
          rq - ps = ad - bc
          $$

          and similarly, for rows 2 and 4, we get
          $$
          qs + pr = - (ac + bd)
          $$

          so
          begin{align}
          b(p^2 + q^2) + c(ad-bc) - d(ac + bd) &= 0 \
          a(p^2 + q^2) - c(ac + bd) - d(ad-bc) &= 0 \
          end{align}

          which simplifies to
          begin{align}
          b(p^2 + q^2) - bc^2 - bd^2 &= 0 \
          a(p^2 + q^2) - ac^2 - ad^2 &= 0 \
          end{align}

          which become
          begin{align}
          b(p^2 + q^2 - c^2 - d^2) &= 0 \
          a(p^2 + q^2 - c^2 - d^2) &= 0 \
          end{align}



          We conclude that either
          (1) $p^2 + q^2 = c^2 + d^2$ or
          (2) $a = b = 0$.



          In the second case, we have that the squared norm of the first row is $p^2 + q^2$, which must be $1$, and the squared norm of the first column is $c^2 + d^2$, which must also be $1$, hence $p^2 + q^2 = c^2 + d^2$.



          In other words, in all cases, $p^2 + q^2 = c^2 + d^2$.



          By looking at the squared norms of the first row and the 4th column, we find that
          $$
          a^2 + b^2 = r^2 + s^2
          $$

          as well.



          But nothing else obvious seems to jump out...



          ...and so I began to wonder if it was actually true, and came up with this:



          begin{align}
          mathbf{P}=
          begin{pmatrix}
          frac{1}{2} & -frac{1}{2} & 0 &-s\
          frac{1}{2} & frac{1}{2} & s & 0\
          frac{1}{2} & -frac{1}{2}& 0 & s\
          frac{1}{2} & frac{1}{2} & -s & 0
          end{pmatrix},
          end{align}

          where $s = frac{1}{sqrt{2}}$.



          That seems to be a counterexample to your conjecture. So I guess the answer to your question is "Yes, you are just missing something trivial." :)






          share|cite|improve this answer























            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%2f3007826%2fdoes-this-specific-so4-matrix-have-to-be-block-diagonal%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            1
            down vote













            Skip to the end for the big reveal, or read through this for the "how I got there" version.



            Let's rewrite that as
            begin{align}
            mathbf{P}=
            begin{pmatrix}
            a & -b & p &-q\
            b & a & q & p\
            c & -d& r & -s\
            d & c & s & r.
            end{pmatrix},
            end{align}



            Orthogonality of the first and third and first and 4th columns tells us that
            begin{align}
            ap + bq + cr + ds &= 0\
            -aq + bp - cs + dr &= 0\
            end{align}

            Cross-multiply to get
            begin{align}
            apq + bq^2 + crq + dsq &= 0 \
            -apq + bp^2 - cps + dpr &= 0\
            end{align}

            and sum to get
            begin{align}
            b(p^2 + q^2) + crq - cps + dsq + dpr &= 0 \
            end{align}

            Doing the same for columns 2 against 3 and 4 gives
            begin{align}
            a(p^2 + q^2) - drq + csq + dps + cpr &= 0 \
            end{align}

            Let's factor those to get
            begin{align}
            b(p^2 + q^2) + c(rq - ps) + d(sq + pr) &= 0 \
            a(p^2 + q^2) + c(sq + pr) - d(rq - ps) &= 0 \
            end{align}

            Looking at the dot product between rows 2 and 3, we see that
            $$
            rq - ps = ad - bc
            $$

            and similarly, for rows 2 and 4, we get
            $$
            qs + pr = - (ac + bd)
            $$

            so
            begin{align}
            b(p^2 + q^2) + c(ad-bc) - d(ac + bd) &= 0 \
            a(p^2 + q^2) - c(ac + bd) - d(ad-bc) &= 0 \
            end{align}

            which simplifies to
            begin{align}
            b(p^2 + q^2) - bc^2 - bd^2 &= 0 \
            a(p^2 + q^2) - ac^2 - ad^2 &= 0 \
            end{align}

            which become
            begin{align}
            b(p^2 + q^2 - c^2 - d^2) &= 0 \
            a(p^2 + q^2 - c^2 - d^2) &= 0 \
            end{align}



            We conclude that either
            (1) $p^2 + q^2 = c^2 + d^2$ or
            (2) $a = b = 0$.



            In the second case, we have that the squared norm of the first row is $p^2 + q^2$, which must be $1$, and the squared norm of the first column is $c^2 + d^2$, which must also be $1$, hence $p^2 + q^2 = c^2 + d^2$.



            In other words, in all cases, $p^2 + q^2 = c^2 + d^2$.



            By looking at the squared norms of the first row and the 4th column, we find that
            $$
            a^2 + b^2 = r^2 + s^2
            $$

            as well.



            But nothing else obvious seems to jump out...



            ...and so I began to wonder if it was actually true, and came up with this:



            begin{align}
            mathbf{P}=
            begin{pmatrix}
            frac{1}{2} & -frac{1}{2} & 0 &-s\
            frac{1}{2} & frac{1}{2} & s & 0\
            frac{1}{2} & -frac{1}{2}& 0 & s\
            frac{1}{2} & frac{1}{2} & -s & 0
            end{pmatrix},
            end{align}

            where $s = frac{1}{sqrt{2}}$.



            That seems to be a counterexample to your conjecture. So I guess the answer to your question is "Yes, you are just missing something trivial." :)






            share|cite|improve this answer



























              up vote
              1
              down vote













              Skip to the end for the big reveal, or read through this for the "how I got there" version.



              Let's rewrite that as
              begin{align}
              mathbf{P}=
              begin{pmatrix}
              a & -b & p &-q\
              b & a & q & p\
              c & -d& r & -s\
              d & c & s & r.
              end{pmatrix},
              end{align}



              Orthogonality of the first and third and first and 4th columns tells us that
              begin{align}
              ap + bq + cr + ds &= 0\
              -aq + bp - cs + dr &= 0\
              end{align}

              Cross-multiply to get
              begin{align}
              apq + bq^2 + crq + dsq &= 0 \
              -apq + bp^2 - cps + dpr &= 0\
              end{align}

              and sum to get
              begin{align}
              b(p^2 + q^2) + crq - cps + dsq + dpr &= 0 \
              end{align}

              Doing the same for columns 2 against 3 and 4 gives
              begin{align}
              a(p^2 + q^2) - drq + csq + dps + cpr &= 0 \
              end{align}

              Let's factor those to get
              begin{align}
              b(p^2 + q^2) + c(rq - ps) + d(sq + pr) &= 0 \
              a(p^2 + q^2) + c(sq + pr) - d(rq - ps) &= 0 \
              end{align}

              Looking at the dot product between rows 2 and 3, we see that
              $$
              rq - ps = ad - bc
              $$

              and similarly, for rows 2 and 4, we get
              $$
              qs + pr = - (ac + bd)
              $$

              so
              begin{align}
              b(p^2 + q^2) + c(ad-bc) - d(ac + bd) &= 0 \
              a(p^2 + q^2) - c(ac + bd) - d(ad-bc) &= 0 \
              end{align}

              which simplifies to
              begin{align}
              b(p^2 + q^2) - bc^2 - bd^2 &= 0 \
              a(p^2 + q^2) - ac^2 - ad^2 &= 0 \
              end{align}

              which become
              begin{align}
              b(p^2 + q^2 - c^2 - d^2) &= 0 \
              a(p^2 + q^2 - c^2 - d^2) &= 0 \
              end{align}



              We conclude that either
              (1) $p^2 + q^2 = c^2 + d^2$ or
              (2) $a = b = 0$.



              In the second case, we have that the squared norm of the first row is $p^2 + q^2$, which must be $1$, and the squared norm of the first column is $c^2 + d^2$, which must also be $1$, hence $p^2 + q^2 = c^2 + d^2$.



              In other words, in all cases, $p^2 + q^2 = c^2 + d^2$.



              By looking at the squared norms of the first row and the 4th column, we find that
              $$
              a^2 + b^2 = r^2 + s^2
              $$

              as well.



              But nothing else obvious seems to jump out...



              ...and so I began to wonder if it was actually true, and came up with this:



              begin{align}
              mathbf{P}=
              begin{pmatrix}
              frac{1}{2} & -frac{1}{2} & 0 &-s\
              frac{1}{2} & frac{1}{2} & s & 0\
              frac{1}{2} & -frac{1}{2}& 0 & s\
              frac{1}{2} & frac{1}{2} & -s & 0
              end{pmatrix},
              end{align}

              where $s = frac{1}{sqrt{2}}$.



              That seems to be a counterexample to your conjecture. So I guess the answer to your question is "Yes, you are just missing something trivial." :)






              share|cite|improve this answer

























                up vote
                1
                down vote










                up vote
                1
                down vote









                Skip to the end for the big reveal, or read through this for the "how I got there" version.



                Let's rewrite that as
                begin{align}
                mathbf{P}=
                begin{pmatrix}
                a & -b & p &-q\
                b & a & q & p\
                c & -d& r & -s\
                d & c & s & r.
                end{pmatrix},
                end{align}



                Orthogonality of the first and third and first and 4th columns tells us that
                begin{align}
                ap + bq + cr + ds &= 0\
                -aq + bp - cs + dr &= 0\
                end{align}

                Cross-multiply to get
                begin{align}
                apq + bq^2 + crq + dsq &= 0 \
                -apq + bp^2 - cps + dpr &= 0\
                end{align}

                and sum to get
                begin{align}
                b(p^2 + q^2) + crq - cps + dsq + dpr &= 0 \
                end{align}

                Doing the same for columns 2 against 3 and 4 gives
                begin{align}
                a(p^2 + q^2) - drq + csq + dps + cpr &= 0 \
                end{align}

                Let's factor those to get
                begin{align}
                b(p^2 + q^2) + c(rq - ps) + d(sq + pr) &= 0 \
                a(p^2 + q^2) + c(sq + pr) - d(rq - ps) &= 0 \
                end{align}

                Looking at the dot product between rows 2 and 3, we see that
                $$
                rq - ps = ad - bc
                $$

                and similarly, for rows 2 and 4, we get
                $$
                qs + pr = - (ac + bd)
                $$

                so
                begin{align}
                b(p^2 + q^2) + c(ad-bc) - d(ac + bd) &= 0 \
                a(p^2 + q^2) - c(ac + bd) - d(ad-bc) &= 0 \
                end{align}

                which simplifies to
                begin{align}
                b(p^2 + q^2) - bc^2 - bd^2 &= 0 \
                a(p^2 + q^2) - ac^2 - ad^2 &= 0 \
                end{align}

                which become
                begin{align}
                b(p^2 + q^2 - c^2 - d^2) &= 0 \
                a(p^2 + q^2 - c^2 - d^2) &= 0 \
                end{align}



                We conclude that either
                (1) $p^2 + q^2 = c^2 + d^2$ or
                (2) $a = b = 0$.



                In the second case, we have that the squared norm of the first row is $p^2 + q^2$, which must be $1$, and the squared norm of the first column is $c^2 + d^2$, which must also be $1$, hence $p^2 + q^2 = c^2 + d^2$.



                In other words, in all cases, $p^2 + q^2 = c^2 + d^2$.



                By looking at the squared norms of the first row and the 4th column, we find that
                $$
                a^2 + b^2 = r^2 + s^2
                $$

                as well.



                But nothing else obvious seems to jump out...



                ...and so I began to wonder if it was actually true, and came up with this:



                begin{align}
                mathbf{P}=
                begin{pmatrix}
                frac{1}{2} & -frac{1}{2} & 0 &-s\
                frac{1}{2} & frac{1}{2} & s & 0\
                frac{1}{2} & -frac{1}{2}& 0 & s\
                frac{1}{2} & frac{1}{2} & -s & 0
                end{pmatrix},
                end{align}

                where $s = frac{1}{sqrt{2}}$.



                That seems to be a counterexample to your conjecture. So I guess the answer to your question is "Yes, you are just missing something trivial." :)






                share|cite|improve this answer














                Skip to the end for the big reveal, or read through this for the "how I got there" version.



                Let's rewrite that as
                begin{align}
                mathbf{P}=
                begin{pmatrix}
                a & -b & p &-q\
                b & a & q & p\
                c & -d& r & -s\
                d & c & s & r.
                end{pmatrix},
                end{align}



                Orthogonality of the first and third and first and 4th columns tells us that
                begin{align}
                ap + bq + cr + ds &= 0\
                -aq + bp - cs + dr &= 0\
                end{align}

                Cross-multiply to get
                begin{align}
                apq + bq^2 + crq + dsq &= 0 \
                -apq + bp^2 - cps + dpr &= 0\
                end{align}

                and sum to get
                begin{align}
                b(p^2 + q^2) + crq - cps + dsq + dpr &= 0 \
                end{align}

                Doing the same for columns 2 against 3 and 4 gives
                begin{align}
                a(p^2 + q^2) - drq + csq + dps + cpr &= 0 \
                end{align}

                Let's factor those to get
                begin{align}
                b(p^2 + q^2) + c(rq - ps) + d(sq + pr) &= 0 \
                a(p^2 + q^2) + c(sq + pr) - d(rq - ps) &= 0 \
                end{align}

                Looking at the dot product between rows 2 and 3, we see that
                $$
                rq - ps = ad - bc
                $$

                and similarly, for rows 2 and 4, we get
                $$
                qs + pr = - (ac + bd)
                $$

                so
                begin{align}
                b(p^2 + q^2) + c(ad-bc) - d(ac + bd) &= 0 \
                a(p^2 + q^2) - c(ac + bd) - d(ad-bc) &= 0 \
                end{align}

                which simplifies to
                begin{align}
                b(p^2 + q^2) - bc^2 - bd^2 &= 0 \
                a(p^2 + q^2) - ac^2 - ad^2 &= 0 \
                end{align}

                which become
                begin{align}
                b(p^2 + q^2 - c^2 - d^2) &= 0 \
                a(p^2 + q^2 - c^2 - d^2) &= 0 \
                end{align}



                We conclude that either
                (1) $p^2 + q^2 = c^2 + d^2$ or
                (2) $a = b = 0$.



                In the second case, we have that the squared norm of the first row is $p^2 + q^2$, which must be $1$, and the squared norm of the first column is $c^2 + d^2$, which must also be $1$, hence $p^2 + q^2 = c^2 + d^2$.



                In other words, in all cases, $p^2 + q^2 = c^2 + d^2$.



                By looking at the squared norms of the first row and the 4th column, we find that
                $$
                a^2 + b^2 = r^2 + s^2
                $$

                as well.



                But nothing else obvious seems to jump out...



                ...and so I began to wonder if it was actually true, and came up with this:



                begin{align}
                mathbf{P}=
                begin{pmatrix}
                frac{1}{2} & -frac{1}{2} & 0 &-s\
                frac{1}{2} & frac{1}{2} & s & 0\
                frac{1}{2} & -frac{1}{2}& 0 & s\
                frac{1}{2} & frac{1}{2} & -s & 0
                end{pmatrix},
                end{align}

                where $s = frac{1}{sqrt{2}}$.



                That seems to be a counterexample to your conjecture. So I guess the answer to your question is "Yes, you are just missing something trivial." :)







                share|cite|improve this answer














                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer








                edited Nov 21 at 19:33

























                answered Nov 21 at 15:38









                John Hughes

                62.2k24090




                62.2k24090






























                    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.





                    Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                    Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                    • 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.


                    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%2f3007826%2fdoes-this-specific-so4-matrix-have-to-be-block-diagonal%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

                    Plaza Victoria

                    Brian Clough

                    Cáceres