MHB Linear Maps and Eigenvalues/Eigenvectors

  • Thread starter Thread starter joypav
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Linear
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on proving that if the kernel of the operator (T - μI)^p is non-zero, then μ is an eigenvalue of the linear transformation T. The proof demonstrates that the existence of a non-zero vector in the kernel leads to a sequence of vectors that ultimately shows μ is indeed an eigenvalue. Additionally, Problem 2 is posed, asking if a similar approach can be used to show that one of the vectors generated by (T - μI) applied to x is an eigenvector. Participants confirm that the method for Problem 2 can be approached similarly to Problem 1. The conversation emphasizes the connection between kernel properties and eigenvalues in linear maps.
joypav
Messages
149
Reaction score
0
A problem from matrix analysis. This proof seems to simple... is it correct?

Problem 1:
Suppose $T: V \rightarrow V$ is linear and $\mu \in F$. Show that if there exists a positive integer p such that $ker((T - \mu I)^p)$ $\ne \left\{ 0 \right\}$, then $\mu$ is an eigenvalue of T.

Proof:
$ker((T - \mu I)^p) \ne \left\{ 0 \right\} \implies \exists y \in ker((T - \mu I)^p), y \ne 0$
$\implies (T - \mu I)^p y = 0$

Consider,
$0 \ne y, (T - \mu I)y, (T - \mu I)^2 y , ... , (T - \mu I)^p y = 0$

Then, $\exists j, 0 < j \leq p $, the smallest positive integer so that
$(T - \mu I)^{j-1} y \ne 0$ and $(T - \mu I)^j y = 0$

Let $z=(T - \mu I)^{j-1} y$.
Then $z \ne 0$ and $(T - \mu I) z = (T - \mu I)^j y = 0$
$\implies (T - \mu I) z = 0 $
$\implies \mu$ is an eigenvalue of V.Additionally,
Problem 2:
Suppose $T: V \rightarrow V$ is linear, $\mu \in F$, $x \in V, x \ne 0$, and $(T - \mu I)^p x = 0$ for some $p \in \Bbb{N}$. Show that one of the vectors
$x, (T - \mu I) x, (T - \mu I)^2 x, ... ,(T - \mu I)^{p-1} x$
is an eigenvector of T.

Can this problem be approached similarly?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi joypav,

Everything for Problem 1 looks good, nicely done. You're correct about Problem 2 as well; it can be done in a similar fashion to Problem 1.
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K