If A and B are invertible square matrices, there exists

  • Thread starter Thread starter AntiElephant
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matrices Square
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
5 replies · 2K views
AntiElephant
Messages
25
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



If A and B are invertible matrices over an algebraically closed field [itex]k[/itex], show there exists [itex]\lambda \in k[/itex] such that [itex]det(\lambda A + B) = 0[/itex].

The Attempt at a Solution



Can anyone agree with the following short proof? I tried looking online for a confirmation, but I wasn't exactly sure how to search exactly for this problem.

Suppose [itex]det(\lambda A + B) \neq 0 ~~\forall \lambda \in k[/itex]

Since [itex]det(A^{-1}) \neq 0[/itex], then

[itex]det(A^{-1}(\lambda A + B)) = det(\lambda I + A^{-1}B) = det(A^{-1}B - (-\lambda)I) \neq 0 ~~\forall \lambda \in k[/itex]So [itex]-\lambda[/itex] is not an eigenvalue for [itex]A^{-1}B[/itex] for all [itex]-\lambda \in k[/itex]. i.e. [itex]\lambda[/itex] is not an eigenvalue of [itex]A^{-1}B[/itex] for all [itex]\lambda \in k[/itex]. Since [itex]k[/itex] is algebraically closed this cannot be the case.

Is this okay? I guess it is not necessarily true when [itex]k[/itex] is not algebraically closed?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
AntiElephant said:

Homework Statement



If A and B are invertible matrices over an algebraically closed field [itex]k[/itex], show there exists [itex]\lambda \in k[/itex] such that [itex]det(\lambda A + B)[/itex].
? What are you asked to show about [itex]det(\lambda A+ B)[/itex]? You have a subject with no verb!

The Attempt at a Solution



Can anyone agree with the following short proof? I tried looking online for a confirmation, but I wasn't exactly sure how to search exactly for this problem.

Suppose [itex]det(\lambda A + B) \neq 0 ~~\forall \lambda \in k[/itex]

Since [itex]det(A^{-1}) \neq 0[/itex], then

[itex]det(A^{-1}(\lambda A + B)) = det(\lambda I + A^{-1}B) = det(A^{-1}B - (-\lambda)I) \neq 0 ~~\forall \lambda \in k[/itex]So [itex]-\lambda[/itex] is not an eigenvalue for [itex]A^{-1}B[/itex] for all [itex]-\lambda \in k[/itex]. i.e. [itex]\lambda[/itex] is not an eigenvalue of [itex]A^{-1}B[/itex] for all [itex]\lambda \in k[/itex]. Since [itex]k[/itex] is algebraically closed this cannot be the case.

Is this okay? I guess it is not necessarily true when [itex]k[/itex] is not algebraically closed?
 
My bad...early morning. Edited.
 
AntiElephant said:
I guess it is not necessarily true when [itex]k[/itex] is not algebraically closed?

You bet it can fail. Take A=[[0,1],[1,0]] and B=[[2,0],[0,1]]. What goes wrong if k is the field of rationals?
 
D H said:
I didn't see that last bit about what happens when k is not algebraically closed. It can also fail with the reals. Just construct your matrices so the eigenvalues of A-1B are complex.

Sure. But that's because the reals aren't algebraically closed. The det gives you a real polynomial. If it has no real roots, you are out of luck.