Prove AB and BA have the same characteristic polynomial

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves proving that for any square matrices A and B of the same size, the matrices AB and BA have the same characteristic polynomial. This falls within the subject area of linear algebra, specifically concerning matrix theory and properties of characteristic polynomials.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to use a limit argument involving a perturbation of matrix A by adding a small multiple of the identity matrix. Some participants question the validity of this approach and suggest examining the continuity of polynomials. Others propose considering specific cases, such as 2x2 matrices, to gain insight into the problem.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring different aspects of the problem. Some guidance has been offered regarding the continuity of polynomials and the implications of using limits, but there is no explicit consensus on the best approach yet.

Contextual Notes

There is a mention of needing an inverse matrix to relate A and B, which introduces additional assumptions into the discussion. The original poster seeks clarification on the use of the limit as epsilon approaches zero, indicating a potential gap in understanding the underlying concepts.

IniquiTrance
Messages
185
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Show that for any square matrices of the same size, A, B, that AB and BA have the same characteristic polynomial.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



I understand how to do this if either A or B is invertible, since they would be similar then. I saw a proof that states to take [itex]A = A + \epsilon I[/itex], so that [itex]det(A+\epsilon I) \neq 0[/itex], and then we have,

[tex]det \left((A+\epsilon I) B - \lambda I \right) = det \left((B(A+\epsilon I) - \lambda I\right)[/tex]

Since then we can use the similarity argument. We then take [itex]\epsilon\rightarrow 0[/itex].

I'm wondering if someone could please provide an accessible, but sound explanation of why we are allowed to use this [itex]\epsilon \rightarrow 0[/itex] argument.

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Can you see that the entities on either side of the equation are multivariate polynomials with respect to epsilon and lambda?
 
Hmm, somewhat. Could you please provide greater insight?
 
IniquiTrance said:
Hmm, somewhat. Could you please provide greater insight?

"Somewhat" is not good. If you really don't see it, take a simple 2x2 case and work it out.

If you do see that, then what do you know of continuity of polynomials? What is [itex]\lim_{\epsilon \rightarrow 0} P(\epsilon, \lambda)[/itex], if [itex]P(\epsilon, \lambda)[/itex] is a polynomial?
 
Hmm are you sure that's the right question? A would need some inverse C such that :

C-1AC = B

Then you could start by saying :

pB(λ) = det(B-λIn)

Then you should use what you know about B and the identity matrix In to massage the expression into pA(λ) [ Hint : Think about inverses and how they work! ]
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K