If A and B are invertible square matrices, there exists

  • Thread starter Thread starter AntiElephant
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matrices Square
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of determinants of linear combinations of invertible matrices A and B over an algebraically closed field k. The participants are tasked with showing the existence of a scalar λ in k such that the determinant of the matrix combination det(λA + B) equals zero.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of assuming det(λA + B) is non-zero for all λ in k, leading to discussions about eigenvalues of the matrix A-1B. Questions arise regarding the validity of the argument when k is not algebraically closed.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing insights and examples to illustrate the failure of the original statement when k is not algebraically closed. Some participants have offered specific matrix examples to highlight the issue.

Contextual Notes

There is a noted concern about the implications of the field k being algebraically closed, with references to specific cases where the determinant condition may not hold, particularly when k is the field of rationals or the reals.

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?
 
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.
 
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.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K