1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Cayley - hamilton theorem

  1. Feb 14, 2006 #1
    i met a proof to cayley hamilton theorem and have some questions.

    It uses that lambda*I - A is invertible. But lambda is surely an eigenvalue of A and 1/(lamda*I - A) is not legit so how is it legal to use that.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Feb 14, 2006 #2

    matt grime

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Writing 1/(lambda*I-A) is also not allowed.

    Why is lambda an eigenvalue? Who says so? It is just a greek letter, probably representing some scalar. As it is unles you post all of the proof who can possibly say whether it is correct or not.
     
  4. Feb 14, 2006 #3
  5. Feb 14, 2006 #4
    Also I have some questions on these topics
     

    Attached Files:

  6. Feb 14, 2006 #5
    The first sentence of the proof specifically states that "if lambda is not an eigenvalue of A"...
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2006
  7. Feb 17, 2006 #6

    0rthodontist

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    I don't know about cayley-hamilton but I do know that lambda is an eigenvalue of A iff lambda * I - A is NOT invertible.
     
  8. Feb 18, 2006 #7

    matt grime

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Hmm? What do you mean by that (in regards to this post)?
     
  9. Feb 18, 2006 #8

    0rthodontist

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Ah, I misinterpreted his post. At first reading I thought he was claiming that lambda * I - A is invertible meant that lambda was an eigenvalue of A. Now I see that he was claiming lambda was an eigenvalue of A separately from that statement.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Cayley - hamilton theorem
  1. Cayley's theorem (Replies: 1)

Loading...