All eigenvalues 0 implies nilpotent

  • Thread starter Thread starter altcmdesc
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Eigenvalues
Click For Summary
If a linear operator T has all eigenvalues equal to 0, it must be nilpotent. The Cayley-Hamilton theorem typically provides a straightforward proof, but alternatives exist without using it. The discussion highlights the challenge of proving nilpotency when the vector space is not over an algebraically closed field, as certain characteristic polynomials may lack roots. A key point raised is that a restricted map of T could be bijective without having eigenvalues, complicating the argument. Ultimately, the definition of having all eigenvalues equal to zero is questioned, particularly with examples that demonstrate exceptions.
altcmdesc
Messages
64
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


How would I go about proving that if a linear operator T\colon V\to V has all eigenvalues equal to 0, then T must be nilpotent?

The Attempt at a Solution



I know that this follows trivially from the Cayley-Hamilton theorem (the characteristic polynomial is x^n and hence T^n=0), but, unfortunately, I'm not allowed to use that theorem. How else could I go about proving this? I've been trying to show that any vector in V is also in the kernel of some power of T and hence T is nilpotent, but I'm getting stuck.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
T^(k+1)(V) is a subset of T^k(V), right? If T isn't nilpotent then you eventually have a k such that T^(k+1)(V)=T^k(V) with T^k(V) not {0}. Consider the restricted map T:T^k(V)->T^k(V). What can you say about it?
 
Is it that the restricted map doesn't have any eigenvalues/eigenvectors and is bijective? Am I on the right track?
 
Last edited:
You are on the right track. Yes, the restricted T is bijective. It must have an eigenvector. What can you say about the corresponding eigenvalue?
 
Why must the restricted map have an eigenvector? I know where to go from there, but I can't seem to understand why that must be true since there isn't any assumption made that the base field of the vector space V is algebraically closed.
 
Last edited:
The restricted T maps the vector space T^m(V) to itself. Look at it's characteristic polynomial. It must have a root r, mustn't it? That means r*I-T is singular.
 
My point is that if the vector space is over the reals, for example, not every characteristic polynomial has roots (e.g. x^2+1), so if T^m(V) isn't over an algebraically closed field, we don't necessarily have that the restricted map has an eigenvalue...right?
 
altcmdesc said:
My point is that if the vector space is over the reals, for example, not every characteristic polynomial has roots (e.g. x^2+1), so if T^m(V) isn't over an algebraically closed field, we don't necessarily have that the restricted map has an eigenvalue...right?

Right. But then what exactly do you mean by "T has all eigenvalues equal to zero"? Take the matrix T=[[0,0,0],[0,0,-1],[0,1,0]]. T has one REAL eigenvalue and that's 0. T is not nilpotent. I don't think I would describe T as having all eigenvalues equal to 0.
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K