Characteristic polynomial for nilpotent matrix.

Click For Summary
To show that the characteristic polynomial (cp) of a nilpotent matrix A is p(x) = x^n when dim A = n, it is essential to demonstrate that A^k = 0 for k = n. The Cayley-Hamilton theorem indicates that p(A) = 0, leading to the conclusion that if p(A) is not x^n, it must be a nontrivial polynomial of degree n, which results in a contradiction regarding eigenvalues. Specifically, since all eigenvalues of A must satisfy λ^n = 0, it confirms that they are all zero. The discussion emphasizes the importance of correctly interpreting the relationship between the matrix and its characteristic polynomial. Understanding these properties is crucial for analyzing nilpotent matrices.
anastasis
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



How do I show that the cp is p(x)=x^n, dimA=n?

Homework Equations



A^k=0 for some k (obviously need to show k=n); p(A)=0

The Attempt at a Solution



p(A)=0 <=> A^n + ... + det(A)=0
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How do I show that the cp of A is p(x)=x^n, dimA=n?
 
i see that p(A)=0 and that p(A)=A^n +...+det(A) BUT I'm still a bit confused by some details. A is nilpotent <=> A^k=0 ... must show k=n for one thing.
 
anastasis said:
i see that p(A)=0 and that p(A)=A^n +...+det(A) BUT I'm still a bit confused by some details. A is nilpotent <=> A^k=0 ... must show k=n for one thing.

Suppose p(A) is not xn. Then it is some nontrivial (not xn) polynomial of degree n, which implies A satisfies said polynomial. Show that this leads to a contradiction.
 
Suppose \lambda is an eigenvalue of A: that is, Av= \lambda v for some non-zero vector v. Then A^2v= \lamba Av= \lambda^2 v and, continuing like that A^n v= \lambda^n v= 0[/itex]. Actually, that proves that all eigenvalues are 0 but what you need is that all eigenvalues satisfy \lambda^n= 0.
 
This was also posted under "Mathematics- Abstract and Linear Algebra". I have merged the threads here.
 
I am almost always tempted to correct the theorem statement as

"... satisfies the matrix version of the characteristic polynomial"

since the right hand side zeros of the the two cases are different objects. But it is a technical puristic bla bla. I know!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
48
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
3K