Minimal and characteristic polynomial

cateater2000
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
Find the characteristic and minimal polynomials of
A=[[0,1,1][1,0,1][1,1,0]] (3x3 matrix)

So when I work out my characteristic polynomial I went
det(xI-A)= det[[x,1,1][1,x,1][1,1,x]]
= x(x^2-1)-1(x-1)+1(1-x)
= x^3-3x+2
= (x+2)(x-1)^2
It's odd because I worked this out several times, and by Cayley Hamilton's theorem it says that a characterstic polynomial of a matrix is also an annihilating polynomial for that matrix, and I tried plugging in A to the characteristic polynomial and it didn't give me the 0 matrix.

My prof's answer for the characteristic polynomial is (t-2)(t+1)^2
and her minimal polynomail is (t+1)(t-2)

Which works.

I'm really confused, can someone please tell me what I did wrong.

thanks in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Note that it's det(xI - A), not det(xI + A), i.e. this line is wrong:

det(xI-A)= det[[x,1,1][1,x,1][1,1,x]]
 
How is this line wrong ??

A=[[0,1,1][1,0,1][1,1,0]]
xI=[[x,0,0][0,x,0][0,0,x]]


so xI-A=[[x-0,1,1][1,x-0,1][1,1,x-0]]
=[[x,1,1][1,x,1][1,1,x]]


I'm pretty sure this looks ok

Thanks for any help in advance
 
Last edited:
Then look again!

xI- A=[x-0,0-1,0-1][0-1,x-0,0-1][0-1,0-1,x-0]
=[x, -1, -1][-1, x, -1][-1, -1, x].
 
omg lol sorry about that
 
##\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...
Back
Top