Prove Hermitian Matrices Satisfy ##H^2 = H^\dagger H##

In summary, a Hermitian matrix is a square matrix that is equal to its own conjugate transpose. To prove that Hermitian matrices satisfy ##H^2 = H^\dagger H##, you can substitute in the definition of a Hermitian matrix for H in the equation. This proof is important because it confirms the properties of Hermitian matrices and allows for easier manipulation and computation. Examples of Hermitian matrices include the identity matrix, diagonal matrices with real numbers, and skew-Hermitian matrices. All Hermitian matrices are also symmetric matrices, but the converse is not always true.
  • #1
Euge
Gold Member
MHB
POTW Director
2,052
207
Show that an ##n\times n##-matrix ##H## is hermitian if and only if ##H^2 = H^\dagger H##.
 
  • Like
Likes DrClaude and topsquark
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Only if part:

Assume ##H## is Hermitian. Then

\begin{align*}
H^\dagger = H
\end{align*}

implies

\begin{align*}
H^\dagger H = H^2 .
\end{align*}

Meaning if ##H^\dagger H \not= H^2## then ##H## couldn't be Hermitian.

If part:

Assume ##H^2 = H^\dagger H##. As ##H^2 = H^\dagger H## is Hermitian its eigenvectors form a basis for the vector space ##V = \mathbb{C}^n##. We can define an inner product. If ##\{ e_i \}_{i =1,2 \dots , n}## is an orthonormal basis for ##V##, ##u = \sum_{i=1}^n a_i e_i## and ##v = \sum_{j=1}^n b_j e_j##, then we define the inner product as:

\begin{align*}
<u,v> := \sum_{i=1}^n a_i^* b_i
\end{align*}

Obviously, ##H u = 0## implies ##H^2 u = 0##. We have

\begin{align*}
\| H u \|^2 = < H u , H u > = <u , H^\dagger H u > = <u , H^2 u>
\end{align*}

from which we have ##H^2 u = 0## implies ##H u = 0##. Therefore,

\begin{align*}
\ker (H) = \ker (H^2)
\end{align*}

Label the eigenvectors of ##H^2## with non-zero eigenvalues by ##e_\alpha## with ##\alpha = 1,2, \dots, N## (##N \leq n##). They form a basis for ##\ker (H)^\perp##. Denote the eigenvalue of ##e_\alpha## by ##\lambda_\alpha##.

Note that as ##H^2 e_\alpha = \lambda_\alpha e_\alpha##, we have that ##<u , H^2 e_\alpha> = 0## for all ##\alpha## if and only if ##u \in \ker H##. Note ##H u \in \ker H## if and only if ##Hu =0##. We have

\begin{align*}
<u , H^\dagger H^2 e_\alpha > = <u , H^3 e_\alpha> ,
\end{align*}

from which we have

\begin{align*}
<H u , H^2 e_\alpha > = <H^\dagger u , H^2 e_\alpha > .
\end{align*}

Thus, we have ##H u=0## if and only if ##H^\dagger u \in \ker H##. So if ##H u =0## then ##H H^\dagger u=0##. If ##H u \not=0## then ##H H^\dagger u \not=0##. Thus

\begin{align*}
\ker (H) = \ker (H H^\dagger)
\end{align*}

Note ##(H^\dagger)^2 = H^\dagger H = H^2## and so ##H^\dagger u=0## implies ##H^2 u=0##. We have

\begin{align*}
\| H^\dagger u \|^2 = < H^\dagger u , H^\dagger u > = <u , H H^\dagger u >
\end{align*}

from which we have ##H^2 u = 0## implies ##H^\dagger u = 0##. Thus

\begin{align*}
\ker (H^\dagger) = \ker (H^2)
\end{align*}

So from this and ##\ker (H) = \ker (H^2)##:

\begin{align*}
\ker (H) = \ker (H^\dagger) .
\end{align*}Now, assume ##u \not\in \ker (H)##, so that ##Hu \not\in \ker H## and ##H^\dagger u \not\in \ker H##. Then from

\begin{align*}
<H u , H^2 e_\alpha > = <H^\dagger u , H^2 e_\alpha >
\end{align*}

we have

\begin{align*}
<H u - H^\dagger u , \lambda_\alpha e_\alpha > = 0 .
\end{align*}

Since the ##\{ e_\alpha \}_{\alpha = 1,2, \dots , N}## form a basis for ##\ker (H)^\perp##,

\begin{align*}
H u = H^\dagger u \qquad \text{for arbitrary } u \in \ker (H)^\perp .
\end{align*}

As ##H u = H^\dagger u## for all ##u \in V##,

\begin{align*}
H = H^\dagger .
\end{align*}
 
Last edited:
  • #3
Only if part:

Assume ##H## is Hermitian. Then

\begin{align*}
H^\dagger = H
\end{align*}

implies

\begin{align*}
H^\dagger H = H^2 .
\end{align*}

Meaning if ##H^\dagger H \not= H^2## then ##H## couldn't be Hermitian.

If part:

Define the Hermitian matrices

\begin{align*}
H_R = \frac{1}{2} (H + H^\dagger) \qquad \text{and} \qquad H_I = \frac{1}{2i} (H - H^\dagger)
\end{align*}

Then

\begin{align*}
H = H_R + i H_I .
\end{align*}

Note ##H^\dagger = H## if and only if ##H_I = 0##.

The assumption that ##H^2 = H^\dagger H## implies

\begin{align*}
H_I H = 0
\end{align*}

which implies

\begin{align*}
i H_I^2 = - H_I H_R .
\end{align*}

From which we obtain

\begin{align*}
[H_R , H_I] = 2 i H_I^2 \qquad (*)
\end{align*}

As ##H_I## is Hermitian its eigenvectors form a basis for ##V = \mathbb{C}^n##. Write ##H_I e_i = \lambda_i^I e_i##. Then

\begin{align*}
0 = H^\dagger H_I e_i = H_R e_i \lambda_i^I - i (\lambda_i^I)^2 e_i .
\end{align*}

Assume ##\lambda_i^I \not= 0##, then the previous equation implies

\begin{align*}
H_R e_i = i \lambda_i^I e_i .
\end{align*}

But then

\begin{align*}
[H_R , H_I] e_i = 0
\end{align*}

in contradiction to ##(*)##. Therefore, we must have ##\lambda_i^I = 0##.

Which implies ##\lambda_i^I = 0## for ##i = 1,2, \dots n##. So that

\begin{align*}
H_I u = 0
\end{align*}

for all ##u \in V##, implying:

\begin{align*}
H_I = 0 .
\end{align*}
 
  • #4
@julian I didn't fully read your posts, but it looks like you're making a bit of a mountain out of a molehill.

If ##H## is Hermitian, meaning ##H=H^\dagger,## then multiply both sides by ##H## on the right to get ##H^2=H^\dagger H.##

On the other hand, if ##H^2=H^\dagger H##, then to show that ##H=H^\dagger##, you just have to check that ##||Hx-H^\dagger x||^2=\langle Hx-H^\dagger x,Hx-H^\dagger x\rangle## is always zero, which follows quickly from expanding the inner product and using the given relation.

Edit: Spoiler tags
 
  • Like
Likes malawi_glenn
  • #5
Infrared said:
@julian I didn't fully read your posts, but it looks like you're making a bit of a mountain out of a molehill.

If ##H## is Hermitian, meaning ##H=H^\dagger,## then multiply both sides by ##H## on the right to get ##H^2=H^\dagger H.##

On the other hand, if ##H^2=H^\dagger H##, then to show that ##H=H^\dagger##, you just have to check that ##||Hx-H^\dagger x||^2=\langle Hx-H^\dagger x,Hx-H^\dagger x\rangle## is always zero, which follows quickly from expanding the inner product and using the given relation.

Edit: Spoiler tags
I get:

\begin{align*}
\| Hx -H^\dagger x \|^2 = \langle (H H^\dagger - H^\dagger H) x , x \rangle
\end{align*}

Do we immediately know ##H## is a normal matrix?
 
Last edited:
  • #6
We can simplify my second proof:

Only if part:

Assume ##H## is Hermitian. Then ##H^\dagger = H## implies ##H^\dagger H = H^2##. Meaning if ##H^\dagger H \not= H^2## then ##H## couldn't be Hermitian.

If part:

Define the Hermitian matrices

\begin{align*}
H_R = \frac{1}{2} (H + H^\dagger) \qquad \text{and} \qquad H_I = \frac{1}{2i} (H - H^\dagger)
\end{align*}

Then

\begin{align*}
H = H_R + i H_I .
\end{align*}

Note ##H^\dagger = H## if and only if ##H_I = 0##.

As ##H_I## is Hermitian its eigenvalues are real and its eigenvectors form a basis for ##V = \mathbb{C}^n##. Write ##H_I e_i = \lambda_i^I e_i##. The assumption that ##H^2 = H^\dagger H## implies

\begin{align*}
H_I H = 0
\end{align*}

which implies

\begin{align*}
0 = H^\dagger H_I e_i = H_R e_i \lambda_i^I - i (\lambda_i^I)^2 e_i .
\end{align*}

Assume ##\lambda_i^I \not= 0##, then the previous equation implies

\begin{align*}
H_R e_i = i \lambda_i^I e_i .
\end{align*}

But then this contradicts that the eigenvalues of an Hermitian matrix are real. Therefore, we must have ##\lambda_i^I = 0##.

Which implies ##\lambda_i^I = 0## for ##i = 1,2, \dots n##. So that

\begin{align*}
H_I u = 0
\end{align*}

for all ##u \in V##, implying:

\begin{align*}
H_I = 0 .
\end{align*}
 
Last edited:
  • #7
@julian You're right, I just assumed it worked out and didn't check it :) Still, I think there is a bit of a simpler solution.

It's enough to separately check that ##Hx=H^\dagger x## when ##x## is in the column space of ##H## and that ##Hx=H^\dagger x## when ##x## is orthogonal to the column space of ##H.##

The first case is true by the given condition. The second case holds because in that event, ##||Hx||^2=\langle Hx,Hx\rangle=\langle x,H^\dagger H x\rangle=\langle x,H^2 x\rangle=0## and also ##H^\dagger x=0## since the nullspace of ##H^\dagger## is the orthogonal complement of the column space of ##H.##
 
  • Like
Likes Structure seeker and julian
  • #8
I'd like it if a simpler proof is possible. Here's my try on that:

##(H-H^\dagger)H=H^2-H^\dagger H##

So if ##H=H^\dagger## we have ##H^2 = H^\dagger H##. If ##H## is invertible, multiply with the inverse for the converse statement. If not, remove from domain and image of the linear map that the matrix represents the eigenvector dimension with eigenvalue ##0## (it's clear the resulting linear map is hermitian iff ##H## is) and use induction on ##n##. The case ##n=1## is left to the reader.
 
Last edited:
  • #9
@Structure seeker That doesn't look valid (or at least complete) to me. Can you say how to remove some subspace (I can't actually figure out exactly which subspace you mean exactly) from domain and range to reduce to the case of smaller matrices?
 
  • #10
You can restrict ##H## to the subspace orthogonal to the eigenvector ##v## by projecting on this subspace. Thus you remove linear combinations of ##\{ v\}##
 
  • #11
And since the corresponding eigenvalue is ##0## and ##H=H^\dagger##, ##H## simultaneously does nothing with ##v## and lands on something orthogonal to ##v##
 
  • #12
I still don't fully understand. Here's what I understand your argument as, and correct me if I'm misreading.

It looks to me like you're taking a nonzero vector ##v## in the nullspace of ##H## and considering the subspace ##S\subset\mathbb{C}^n## that is orthogonal to ##v## and trying to restrict ##H## to a map ##H:S\to S.## I don't understand why if ##x\in S## then ##H(x)## is also in ##S## though. If you already know that ##H## was Hermitian, you could say ##\langle Hx,v\rangle=\langle x,Hv\rangle=0## but you can't use the inductive hypothesis yet because you haven't actually yet restricted your map to ##n-1## dimensional space.

Anyway, this seems very similar to the argument I gave in post 7, which I think is correct. Instead of breaking apart ##\mathbb{C}^n## into the nullspace of ##H## and its orthogonal complement, I break it apart into the columnspace of ##H## and its orthogonal complement, but this amounts to the same orthogonal decomposition in the end because ##H## is Hermitian.
 
  • Like
Likes Structure seeker
  • #13
You can use ## {H^\dagger}^2 V=H^\dagger H V=0## to prove that the kernel ##V## of ##H## is also that of ##H^\dagger## since the rank of ##H## coincides with the rank of ##H^\dagger##. That step should be inserted for arguing that ##v## is also a zero-eigenvalue eigenvector of ##H^\dagger##.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes julian
  • #14
Infrared said:
If you already know that ##H## was Hermitian, you could say ##\langle H x,v \rangle =\langle x, Hv \rangle=0##
You use this in the proof of the spectral theorem for Hermitian matrices.
 
Last edited:
  • #15
Yeah but I did try to give an independent proof, infrared's point is crystal clear and very true.
 
  • #16
Yes.
 
Last edited:
  • #17
Structure seeker said:
You can use ## {H^\dagger}^2 V=H^\dagger H V=0## to prove that the kernel ##V## of ##H## is also that of ##H^\dagger## since the rank of ##H## coincides with the rank of ##H^\dagger##. That step should be inserted for arguing that ##v## is also a zero-eigenvalue eigenvector of ##H^\dagger##.
But this still isn't right
 
  • #18
It would be good there was an easy way of proving ##\ker (H) = \ker (H^\dagger)## as this was the bulk of my solution in post #2.

If I understand you you are saying if ##\dim \ker (H) = \dim \ker (H^\dagger)## then does ##{H^\dagger}^2 \ker (H) = H^\dagger H \ker (H)## imply ##\ker (H) = \ker (H^\dagger)##? I think one issue would be you could have ##H u \not= 0## but have ##H^\dagger H u = 0##. But it was easy to establish that doesn't happen: We have ##\| H u \|^2 = <Hu,Hu> = < u , H^\dagger H u >## which means ##H^\dagger H u = 0## implies ##Hu = 0##. So in fact, ##\ker (H) = \ker (H^\dagger H)##.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Structure seeker
  • #19
No I was skipping a crucial step, sorry for that. My argument only showed what you also showed in this post
 
  • #20
No, your idea worked I think.

There are no ##u## such that ##H u \not=0## and ##H^\dagger H u =0##, so ##\ker (H) = \ker(H^\dagger H)##. It follows then from ##{H^\dagger}^2 = H^\dagger H## that ##\ker (H) = \ker ({H^\dagger}^2)##.

The second question is are there ##u## such that ##H^\dagger u \not= 0## but ##{H^\dagger}^2 u = 0##?

(i) This would be the case if ##\dim \ker ({H^\dagger}^2) > \dim \ker (H^\dagger)##,
(ii) this would not be the case if ##\dim \ker ({H^\dagger}^2) = \dim \ker (H^\dagger)##, in that case we would have ##\ker ({H^\dagger}^2) = \ker (H^\dagger)##.

As you noted ##\text{rank} (H) = \text{rank} (H^\dagger)##. This implies ##\dim \ker (H) = \dim \ker (H^\dagger)##. This together with ##\ker (H) = \ker ({H^\dagger}^2)## implies ##\dim \ker ({H^\dagger}^2) = \dim \ker (H^\dagger)##. So, altogether we have

\begin{align*}
\ker (H) = \ker ({H^\dagger}^2) = \ker (H^\dagger) .
\end{align*}
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Structure seeker
  • #21
Thanks for working that out!
 
  • #22
If we use ##\text{rank} (H) = \text{rank} (H^\dagger)## we can simplify a bit my first proof, post #2:

Only if part:

Assume ##H## is Hermitian. Then ##H^\dagger = H## implies ##H^\dagger H = H^2##. Meaning if ##H^\dagger H \not= H^2## then ##H## couldn't be Hermitian.

If part:

We have ##\| H u \|^2 = <Hu,Hu> = < u , H^\dagger H u >## which means ##H^\dagger H u = 0## implies ##Hu = 0##. So ##\ker (H) = \ker (H^\dagger H)##. It then follows from ##{H^\dagger}^2 = H^\dagger H## that ##\ker (H) = \ker ({H^\dagger}^2)##. If ##\dim \ker ({H^\dagger}^2) = \dim \ker (H^\dagger)## we would have ##\ker ({H^\dagger}^2) = \ker (H^\dagger)##. As ##\text{rank} (H) = \text{rank} (H^\dagger)##, we have ##\dim \ker (H) = \dim \ker (H^\dagger)##. This together with ##\ker (H) = \ker ({H^\dagger}^2)## implies ##\dim \ker ({H^\dagger}^2) = \dim \ker (H^\dagger)##. So, altogether we have

\begin{align*}
\ker (H) = \ker ({H^\dagger}^2) = \ker (H^\dagger)
\end{align*}

Also, note ##\ker (H^2) = \ker({H^\dagger}^2)##. As ##H^2## is Hermitian its eigenvectors form a basis for the vector space ##V = \mathbb{C}^n##. Label the eigenvectors of ##H^2## with non-zero eigenvalues by ##e_\alpha## with ##\alpha = i_1,i_2, \dots, i_N## (##N \leq n##) and corresponding eigenvalues by ##\lambda_\alpha##. These eigenvectors form a basis for ##\ker (H)^\perp = \ker (H^\dagger)^\perp##.

Assume ##u \not\in \ker (H)##, then ##Hu \not\in \ker (H)## and ##H^\dagger u \not\in \ker (H^\dagger)## (as ##\ker (H) = \ker (H^2)## and ##\ker (H^\dagger) = \ker ({H^\dagger}^2)##). From ##<u , H^\dagger H^2 e_\alpha > = <u , H^3 e_\alpha >## we have:

\begin{align*}
<H u , H^2 e_\alpha > = <H^\dagger u , H^2 e_\alpha >
\end{align*}

or

\begin{align*}
<H u - H^\dagger u , \lambda_\alpha e_\alpha > = 0 .
\end{align*}

Since the ##\{ e_\alpha \}_{\alpha = i_1,i_2, \dots , i_N}## form a basis for ##\ker (H)^\perp##,

\begin{align*}
H u = H^\dagger u \qquad \text{for arbitrary } u \in \ker (H)^\perp .
\end{align*}

As ##H u = H^\dagger u## for all ##u \in V##,

\begin{align*}
H = H^\dagger .
\end{align*}
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Structure seeker
  • #23
Given complex ##n\times n## matrices ##A## and ##B##, let ##(A,B) = \operatorname{trace}(A^\dagger B)##. This defines an inner product on the vector space of such matrices. Hence, if ##H^2 = H^\dagger H##, then $$\|H - H^\dagger\|^2 = \|H\|^2 - 2\operatorname{Re}(H,H^\dagger) + \|H^\dagger\|^2 = 2\|H\|^2 - 2\operatorname{Re}\operatorname{trace}(H^2)$$ The condition ##H^2 = H^\dagger H## forces ##\operatorname{trace}(H^2) = \|H\|^2##, so the right-most expression in the above equation equals ##2\|H\|^2 - 2\|H\|^2##, i.e., zero.

Conversely, if ##H## is Hermitian, then ##H^2 = HH = H^\dagger H##.
 
  • Like
Likes julian and Structure seeker

1. What is a Hermitian matrix?

A Hermitian matrix is a square matrix that is equal to its own conjugate transpose. In other words, the elements above the main diagonal are the complex conjugates of the elements below the main diagonal.

2. How do you prove that a Hermitian matrix satisfies ##H^2 = H^\dagger H##?

To prove this, we can use the definition of a Hermitian matrix and the properties of matrix multiplication. First, we can write out the left side of the equation as ##H^2 = HH##. Then, we can use the definition of a Hermitian matrix to rewrite the right side as ##H^\dagger H = H^*H##. Finally, we can use the properties of matrix multiplication to show that ##HH = H^*H##, proving that ##H^2 = H^\dagger H##.

3. Why is it important to prove that Hermitian matrices satisfy ##H^2 = H^\dagger H##?

This property is important because it allows us to simplify calculations and proofs involving Hermitian matrices. It also helps us to better understand the properties and behavior of these matrices.

4. Can you give an example of a Hermitian matrix that satisfies ##H^2 = H^\dagger H##?

One example of a Hermitian matrix that satisfies this property is the identity matrix, which is equal to its own conjugate transpose and also its own square.

5. How is the property ##H^2 = H^\dagger H## related to the eigenvalues of a Hermitian matrix?

The eigenvalues of a Hermitian matrix are always real numbers. This property can be proven using the fact that ##H^2 = H^\dagger H##, which shows that the eigenvalues of ##H^2## are the squares of the eigenvalues of ##H##. Since the eigenvalues of ##H^2## are real, this means that the eigenvalues of ##H## must also be real.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
702
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
4
Views
597
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
707
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
2
Views
579
Replies
93
Views
9K
Replies
9
Views
1K
Back
Top