A problem of charateristic polynomials' divisibility

In summary, the homework statement is that if AC=CB, then B divides A's characteristic polynomial. A needs to be replaced with a bigger matrix in order to prove this. The attempt at a solution is to first prove that any eigenvalue of B is an eigenvalue of A, then prove the multiplicity of any B's eigenvalue is less than or equal to that of A's. The problem is that with more matrices, it's harder to track which rows correspond to which columns.
  • #1
kof9595995
679
2

Homework Statement


A is a square matrix of size n, B is of size m, C is an m*n(typo,should be n*m) matrix and n>m ,Rank(C)=m.
if AC=CB, prove characteristic polynomial of B divides that of A.

Homework Equations


nothing

The Attempt at a Solution


I think I need to prove any eigenvalue of B is an eigenvalue of A, then prove the multiplicity of any B's eigenvalue is less than or equal to that of A's.
First part is easy to prove, if Bx=[tex]\lambda[/tex] x, then CBx=[tex]\lambda[/tex]Cx=ACx, so [tex]\lambda[/tex] is also an eigenvalue of A, with eigenvector Cx.
Second part, I'm totally stuck
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The rank of C is m, so C is onto. Now suppose you have k linearly independent eigenvectors of B with the same eigenvalue, and try to show there must be as many linearly independent eigenvectors for A

As a hint, start with the case n=m and hence C is invertible. This should give you an idea of what you're looking for for the more general case
 
  • #3
Office_Shredder said:
The rank of C is m, so C is onto. Now suppose you have k linearly independent eigenvectors of B with the same eigenvalue, and try to show there must be as many linearly independent eigenvectors for A

As a hint, start with the case n=m and hence C is invertible. This should give you an idea of what you're looking for for the more general case

C needs to be 1-1, not onto. I think C is supposed to be nxm, not mxn. And the OP is talking about algebraic multiplicity, not geometric.
 
  • #4
to Office_Shredder:
that could prove the geometric multiplicities of B's eigenvalues are less than or equal to those of A's, but I can't see what to do next with the algebraic multiplicities.
 
  • #5
to Dick:Yes, should be n*m,thanks for the correction
 
  • #6
And is there a name for matrice A,B which satisfy AC=CB?
 
  • #7
Not that I know of. And I'm still scratching my head over the problem. The obvious approach is to pick a basis {v1...vn} for R^n where {v1...vm} spans range(C). That makes C a matrix with an invertible mxm part and the rest zeros. Fine. That means A has an mxm part that is similar to B and another block that's all zeros but the other two blocks are nonzero. Do you see what I'm saying? I'm not sure where to go from here. Any ideas?
 
  • #8
What if you replaced B with a bigger matrix?
 
  • #9
Hurkyl said:
What if you replaced B with a bigger matrix?

What, like mxn? That makes CB an nxn matrix. That means I'd better make C nxn too. Ok. Now everyone is nxn. Now what? It all looks the same to me. Thanks for chiming in on this though. I could obviously use some help.
 
  • #10
Dick said:
The obvious approach is to pick a basis {v1...vn} for R^n where {v1...vm} spans range(C). That makes C a matrix with an invertible mxm part and the rest zeros.
Em..I don't get you here,why the rest entries are 0's?And I'm trying to use Jordan normal form to see whether there is some relation between corresponding entries or blocks between A and B, but still haven't got anything useful yet.
 
  • #11
Oh bonk. Nevermind.

You've proven that, after a basis change, the matrix A is block upper triangular, of the form

[tex]A = \left( \begin{matrix}B & X \\ 0 & Y \end{matrix} \right)[/tex]

right? What does that tell you about the characteristic polynomial?
 
  • #12
kof9595995 said:
Em..I don't get you here,why the rest entries are 0's?And I'm trying to use Jordan normal form to see whether there is some relation between corresponding entries or blocks between A and B, but still haven't got anything useful yet.

Because C(c1*v1+...+cn*vn)=b1*v1+...+bm*vm. Because {v1...vm} span the range of C, right? That gives you an mx(n-m) block of zeroes, doesn't it? Or maybe (n-m)xm. I'm not good at keeping track of rows vs columns.
 
  • #13
Hurkyl said:
Oh bonk. Nevermind.

You've proven that, after a basis change, the matrix A is block upper triangular, of the form

[tex]A = \left( \begin{matrix}B & X \\ 0 & Y \end{matrix} \right)[/tex]

right? What does that tell you about the characteristic polynomial?

Ok, that's good. You bonked. I didn't. I hope it means it's charpoly(A)=charpoly(B)*charpoly(Y), is it? Why can't elements in X contribute to the characteristic polynomial? Explain as if I were a child. This has been bothering me all day.
 
  • #14
Dick said:
Ok, that's good. You bonked. I didn't. I hope it means it's charpoly(A)=charpoly(B)*charpoly(Y), is it? Why can't elements in X contribute to the characteristic polynomial? Explain as if I were a child. This has been bothering me all day.
I think that's because when you transform A-[tex]\lambda[/tex]I to an upper triangular matrix A', you can fisrt make B-[tex]\lambda[/tex]I upper triangular B' and then make Y-[tex]\lambda[/tex]I upper triangular Y', and the two operations don't influence each other, so the diagonal of A' is just the direct sum of B' 's and Y' 's diagonal
 
  • #15
Dick said:
Ok, that's good. You bonked. I didn't. I hope it means it's charpoly(A)=charpoly(B)*charpoly(Y), is it? Why can't elements in X contribute to the characteristic polynomial? Explain as if I were a child. This has been bothering me all day.
Yes, that's what it means. I expect there are lots of ways of seeing that the determinant of a block-triangular matrix is the product of the determinants of its diagonal blocks. Here are the two approaches to this problem I've thought up that I think are simplest:

If we compute the determinant by doing row-reduction to turn the matrix into an upper-triangular matrix, the operations done to B and to Y are independent from each other, and X never gets to contribute to the diagonal entries in either block.

The matrix [itex]Y - \lambda I[/itex] is an invertible matrix over the field [itex]\mathbb{R}(\lambda)[/itex] of real rational functions in the variable [itex]\lambda[/itex]. In particular, this means we can do row reduction on [itex]A - \lambda I[/itex] to eliminate the X block without modifying the diagonal blocks.
(Why is it invertible? Because its determinant is nonzero -- it's a polynomial whose leading term is 1 or -1)
 
  • #16
Hurkyl said:
Oh bonk. Nevermind.

You've proven that, after a basis change, the matrix A is block upper triangular, of the form

[tex]A = \left( \begin{matrix}B & X \\ 0 & Y \end{matrix} \right)[/tex]

right? What does that tell you about the characteristic polynomial?

Ok, I've got it. A term in the determinant has to have ONE contribution from each row and ONE from each column. If I pick one from X then I've wiped out one row and column. That means I have m-1 row choices from B and n-m-1 column choices from Y. The total is n-2 choices. But I need n-1 nonzero choices. Not enough, I have to pick one from the zero section. Thanks. I think I used to know this stuff.
 
  • #17
(Oh, and there's probably some high-falutin theorem about the fact that A is the sum of a block diagonal matrix and a nilpotent matrix that tells you the nilpotent matrix doesn't matter in problems like this)
 
  • #18
Dick said:
Because C(c1*v1+...+cn*vn)=b1*v1+...+bm*vm. Because {v1...vm} span the range of C, right? That gives you an mx(n-m) block of zeroes, doesn't it? Or maybe (n-m)xm. I'm not good at keeping track of rows vs columns.

Sorry but I still don't see how C(c1*v1+...+cn*vn)=b1*v1+...+bm*vm is deduced form AC=CB, could you explain it a little more?
 
  • #19
Ok, kof9595995, you should be set to go now. Use the basis choice for C to block out the matrices and find that the characteristic polynomial of B is a factor of the characteristic polynomial of A.
 
Last edited:
  • #20
kof9595995 said:
Sorry but I still don't see how C(c1*v1+...+cn*vn)=b1*v1+...+bm*vm is deduced form AC=CB, could you explain it a little more?

I didn't deduce that from AC=CB. I deduced that from defining {v1...vm} to be the range of C. I'm putting C in special form first. Then I'm deducing the form of A from AC=CB.
 
Last edited:
  • #21
Then I'm a little confused, are c1,c2...and b1,b2... some entries of C and B?
And if you did not deduce it from AC=CB, C can be any matrix with rank m, why must it have (n-m)*m 0's entries, I can't understand
 
Last edited:
  • #22
Imagine row reducing C. If it has n rows and rank m you wind up with an mxm section containing nonzero entries and n-m rows of zeroes. But yes, C(vk)=c1k*v1+...cmk*vm. The cij are the matrix entries. In a basis where {v1...vm} are the range of C. You know that matrix properties like the characteristic polynomial are independent of basis, right?
 
  • #23
Dick said:
You know that matrix properties like the characteristic polynomial are independent of basis, right?
Well, thanks a lot! That's the essential part I didn't get.
 
  • #24
Hi, if I want to use the new basis, then I should rewrite A, B and C all under this basis, right? But the basis is for R^n, how can I write B under this basis?
(I tried to fill B and C to n*n with 0's, and then change the basis,it seemed to be OK to get the answer.But is it necessary?)
 
  • #25
A:R^n->R^n, C:R^m->R^n. B:R^m->R^m. No, you don't need make everything nxn. The choice of basis for R^n only affects A and C. There's no need to choose a special basis for R^m. B can be anything. The point is that A has an mxm block that is similar to B. And a block of zeroes.
 
  • #26
OK, I think I get it, thanks
 

What is a characteristic polynomial?

A characteristic polynomial is a polynomial of a square matrix that is used to find the eigenvalues of the matrix. It is defined as det(A-xI), where A is the square matrix and x is an indeterminate.

What is divisibility of characteristic polynomials?

Divisibility of characteristic polynomials means that one polynomial can be divided by another without leaving a remainder. In the context of characteristic polynomials, it means that one polynomial is a multiple of another, which has important implications in the study of eigenvalues and eigenvectors.

Why is divisibility of characteristic polynomials important?

The divisibility of characteristic polynomials is important because it allows us to determine the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of a matrix, which have many applications in various fields of science and engineering. It also helps in solving systems of differential equations and understanding the behavior of dynamical systems.

How is divisibility of characteristic polynomials related to the Cayley-Hamilton theorem?

The Cayley-Hamilton theorem states that every square matrix satisfies its own characteristic polynomial. This means that the characteristic polynomial can be factored into linear factors, and the matrix can be written as a linear combination of powers of itself. This is directly related to divisibility, as it shows that the matrix can be divided by its characteristic polynomial without leaving a remainder.

Can characteristic polynomials be divisible by non-monic polynomials?

Yes, characteristic polynomials can be divisible by non-monic polynomials, which means that the leading coefficient may not be 1. However, in most cases, it is more convenient to work with monic polynomials, so the characteristic polynomial is usually divided by its leading coefficient to make it monic.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
996
Back
Top