Dimension of eigenspace, multiplicity of zero of char.pol.

jostpuur
Messages
2,112
Reaction score
19
Does the multiplicity of zero of characteristic polynomial restrict from above the possible dimension of the corresponding eigenspace?

For example if we have a 3x3 matrix A, and a characteristic polynomial

<br /> \textrm{det}(\lambda - A)=\lambda^2(\lambda - 1)<br />

I can see that the eigenspace corresponding to the eigenvalue \lambda=0 can be either one or two dimensional. For example

<br /> A=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 1 \\<br /> \end{array}\right)<br />

or

<br /> A=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}<br /> 0 &amp; 1 &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 1 \\<br /> \end{array}\right)<br />

What about the eigenspace corresponding to the eigenvalue \lambda=1? Is it necessarily one dimensional, or could it be two dimensional?

I'm almost sure that it must be one dimensional, but its difficult to see certainly what's happening if the matrix is not diagonalizable.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes.
If the lambda=1 eigenspace was 2d, then you could choose a basis for which
<br /> A=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}<br /> 1 &amp; 0 &amp; \cdot \\<br /> 0 &amp; 1 &amp; \cdot \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; \cdot \\<br /> \end{array}\right)<br />
- just take the first two vectors of the basis in the eigenspace.
Then, it should be clear that the determinant of
<br /> \lambda-A=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}<br /> \lambda-1 &amp; 0 &amp; \cdot \\<br /> 0 &amp; \lambda-1 &amp; \cdot \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; \cdot \\<br /> \end{array}\right)<br />
has a factor of (\lambda-1)^2, which would contradict your assumption.
 
I see.
 
That is not correct: you cannot assume that the matrix is diagonalizable. What you get tells you about the dimension of the generalized eigenspaces. But really, you need the minimal polynomial, not just the characteristic polynomial, for full information.
 
\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{matrix}2 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \\ 0 &amp; 1 &amp; 1 \\ 1 &amp; 1 &amp; 1\end{matrix}\right)

nevermind this is a strange matrix, which doesn't quite work

Wow, i just made this way harder than it needs to be...

\left(\begin{matrix}1 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \\ 0 &amp; 1 &amp; 0 \\ 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0\end{matrix}\right)

should suffice
 
Last edited:
Note, I misread Gel's post, but it's now too late to edit mine.
 
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
924
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
968
Replies
14
Views
2K
Back
Top