Prove Hermitian Matrices Satisfy ##H^2 = H^\dagger H##

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Euge
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Hermitian Matrices
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that an ##n \times n## matrix ##H## is Hermitian if and only if ##H^2 = H^\dagger H##. Participants explore various approaches, proofs, and mathematical reasoning related to this property, with a focus on linear algebra concepts such as eigenvalues, kernels, and projections.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the condition ##H^2 = H^\dagger H## is a necessary and sufficient condition for ##H## to be Hermitian.
  • Others argue that the proof could be simplified and present alternative methods to demonstrate the relationship.
  • A participant questions the validity of a proposed proof and requests clarification on the handling of subspaces in the argument.
  • There is discussion on the implications of the kernel of ##H## and ##H^\dagger##, with some suggesting that the ranks of the two matrices coincide, leading to conclusions about their kernels.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about the completeness of their arguments and seek feedback on their reasoning.
  • There is a mention of the spectral theorem for Hermitian matrices and its relevance to the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the proofs presented, with multiple competing views and approaches remaining in the discussion. There is ongoing debate about the validity and completeness of various arguments.

Contextual Notes

Some arguments rely on assumptions about the properties of Hermitian matrices and their eigenvalues, which may not be explicitly stated. The discussion also involves complex vector spaces and projections, which may introduce additional layers of complexity.

Euge
Gold Member
MHB
POTW Director
Messages
2,072
Reaction score
245
Show that an ##n\times n##-matrix ##H## is hermitian if and only if ##H^2 = H^\dagger H##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DrClaude and topsquark
Physics news on Phys.org
Only if part:

Assume ##H## is Hermitian. Then

\begin{align*}
H^\dagger = H
\end{align*}

implies

\begin{align*}
H^\dagger H = H^2 .
\end{align*}

Meaning if ##H^\dagger H \not= H^2## then ##H## couldn't be Hermitian.

If part:

Assume ##H^2 = H^\dagger H##. As ##H^2 = H^\dagger H## is Hermitian its eigenvectors form a basis for the vector space ##V = \mathbb{C}^n##. We can define an inner product. If ##\{ e_i \}_{i =1,2 \dots , n}## is an orthonormal basis for ##V##, ##u = \sum_{i=1}^n a_i e_i## and ##v = \sum_{j=1}^n b_j e_j##, then we define the inner product as:

\begin{align*}
<u,v> := \sum_{i=1}^n a_i^* b_i
\end{align*}

Obviously, ##H u = 0## implies ##H^2 u = 0##. We have

\begin{align*}
\| H u \|^2 = < H u , H u > = <u , H^\dagger H u > = <u , H^2 u>
\end{align*}

from which we have ##H^2 u = 0## implies ##H u = 0##. Therefore,

\begin{align*}
\ker (H) = \ker (H^2)
\end{align*}

Label the eigenvectors of ##H^2## with non-zero eigenvalues by ##e_\alpha## with ##\alpha = 1,2, \dots, N## (##N \leq n##). They form a basis for ##\ker (H)^\perp##. Denote the eigenvalue of ##e_\alpha## by ##\lambda_\alpha##.

Note that as ##H^2 e_\alpha = \lambda_\alpha e_\alpha##, we have that ##<u , H^2 e_\alpha> = 0## for all ##\alpha## if and only if ##u \in \ker H##. Note ##H u \in \ker H## if and only if ##Hu =0##. We have

\begin{align*}
<u , H^\dagger H^2 e_\alpha > = <u , H^3 e_\alpha> ,
\end{align*}

from which we have

\begin{align*}
<H u , H^2 e_\alpha > = <H^\dagger u , H^2 e_\alpha > .
\end{align*}

Thus, we have ##H u=0## if and only if ##H^\dagger u \in \ker H##. So if ##H u =0## then ##H H^\dagger u=0##. If ##H u \not=0## then ##H H^\dagger u \not=0##. Thus

\begin{align*}
\ker (H) = \ker (H H^\dagger)
\end{align*}

Note ##(H^\dagger)^2 = H^\dagger H = H^2## and so ##H^\dagger u=0## implies ##H^2 u=0##. We have

\begin{align*}
\| H^\dagger u \|^2 = < H^\dagger u , H^\dagger u > = <u , H H^\dagger u >
\end{align*}

from which we have ##H^2 u = 0## implies ##H^\dagger u = 0##. Thus

\begin{align*}
\ker (H^\dagger) = \ker (H^2)
\end{align*}

So from this and ##\ker (H) = \ker (H^2)##:

\begin{align*}
\ker (H) = \ker (H^\dagger) .
\end{align*}Now, assume ##u \not\in \ker (H)##, so that ##Hu \not\in \ker H## and ##H^\dagger u \not\in \ker H##. Then from

\begin{align*}
<H u , H^2 e_\alpha > = <H^\dagger u , H^2 e_\alpha >
\end{align*}

we have

\begin{align*}
<H u - H^\dagger u , \lambda_\alpha e_\alpha > = 0 .
\end{align*}

Since the ##\{ e_\alpha \}_{\alpha = 1,2, \dots , N}## form a basis for ##\ker (H)^\perp##,

\begin{align*}
H u = H^\dagger u \qquad \text{for arbitrary } u \in \ker (H)^\perp .
\end{align*}

As ##H u = H^\dagger u## for all ##u \in V##,

\begin{align*}
H = H^\dagger .
\end{align*}
 
Last edited:
Only if part:

Assume ##H## is Hermitian. Then

\begin{align*}
H^\dagger = H
\end{align*}

implies

\begin{align*}
H^\dagger H = H^2 .
\end{align*}

Meaning if ##H^\dagger H \not= H^2## then ##H## couldn't be Hermitian.

If part:

Define the Hermitian matrices

\begin{align*}
H_R = \frac{1}{2} (H + H^\dagger) \qquad \text{and} \qquad H_I = \frac{1}{2i} (H - H^\dagger)
\end{align*}

Then

\begin{align*}
H = H_R + i H_I .
\end{align*}

Note ##H^\dagger = H## if and only if ##H_I = 0##.

The assumption that ##H^2 = H^\dagger H## implies

\begin{align*}
H_I H = 0
\end{align*}

which implies

\begin{align*}
i H_I^2 = - H_I H_R .
\end{align*}

From which we obtain

\begin{align*}
[H_R , H_I] = 2 i H_I^2 \qquad (*)
\end{align*}

As ##H_I## is Hermitian its eigenvectors form a basis for ##V = \mathbb{C}^n##. Write ##H_I e_i = \lambda_i^I e_i##. Then

\begin{align*}
0 = H^\dagger H_I e_i = H_R e_i \lambda_i^I - i (\lambda_i^I)^2 e_i .
\end{align*}

Assume ##\lambda_i^I \not= 0##, then the previous equation implies

\begin{align*}
H_R e_i = i \lambda_i^I e_i .
\end{align*}

But then

\begin{align*}
[H_R , H_I] e_i = 0
\end{align*}

in contradiction to ##(*)##. Therefore, we must have ##\lambda_i^I = 0##.

Which implies ##\lambda_i^I = 0## for ##i = 1,2, \dots n##. So that

\begin{align*}
H_I u = 0
\end{align*}

for all ##u \in V##, implying:

\begin{align*}
H_I = 0 .
\end{align*}
 
@julian I didn't fully read your posts, but it looks like you're making a bit of a mountain out of a molehill.

If ##H## is Hermitian, meaning ##H=H^\dagger,## then multiply both sides by ##H## on the right to get ##H^2=H^\dagger H.##

On the other hand, if ##H^2=H^\dagger H##, then to show that ##H=H^\dagger##, you just have to check that ##||Hx-H^\dagger x||^2=\langle Hx-H^\dagger x,Hx-H^\dagger x\rangle## is always zero, which follows quickly from expanding the inner product and using the given relation.

Edit: Spoiler tags
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: malawi_glenn
Infrared said:
@julian I didn't fully read your posts, but it looks like you're making a bit of a mountain out of a molehill.

If ##H## is Hermitian, meaning ##H=H^\dagger,## then multiply both sides by ##H## on the right to get ##H^2=H^\dagger H.##

On the other hand, if ##H^2=H^\dagger H##, then to show that ##H=H^\dagger##, you just have to check that ##||Hx-H^\dagger x||^2=\langle Hx-H^\dagger x,Hx-H^\dagger x\rangle## is always zero, which follows quickly from expanding the inner product and using the given relation.

Edit: Spoiler tags
I get:

\begin{align*}
\| Hx -H^\dagger x \|^2 = \langle (H H^\dagger - H^\dagger H) x , x \rangle
\end{align*}

Do we immediately know ##H## is a normal matrix?
 
Last edited:
We can simplify my second proof:

Only if part:

Assume ##H## is Hermitian. Then ##H^\dagger = H## implies ##H^\dagger H = H^2##. Meaning if ##H^\dagger H \not= H^2## then ##H## couldn't be Hermitian.

If part:

Define the Hermitian matrices

\begin{align*}
H_R = \frac{1}{2} (H + H^\dagger) \qquad \text{and} \qquad H_I = \frac{1}{2i} (H - H^\dagger)
\end{align*}

Then

\begin{align*}
H = H_R + i H_I .
\end{align*}

Note ##H^\dagger = H## if and only if ##H_I = 0##.

As ##H_I## is Hermitian its eigenvalues are real and its eigenvectors form a basis for ##V = \mathbb{C}^n##. Write ##H_I e_i = \lambda_i^I e_i##. The assumption that ##H^2 = H^\dagger H## implies

\begin{align*}
H_I H = 0
\end{align*}

which implies

\begin{align*}
0 = H^\dagger H_I e_i = H_R e_i \lambda_i^I - i (\lambda_i^I)^2 e_i .
\end{align*}

Assume ##\lambda_i^I \not= 0##, then the previous equation implies

\begin{align*}
H_R e_i = i \lambda_i^I e_i .
\end{align*}

But then this contradicts that the eigenvalues of an Hermitian matrix are real. Therefore, we must have ##\lambda_i^I = 0##.

Which implies ##\lambda_i^I = 0## for ##i = 1,2, \dots n##. So that

\begin{align*}
H_I u = 0
\end{align*}

for all ##u \in V##, implying:

\begin{align*}
H_I = 0 .
\end{align*}
 
Last edited:
@julian You're right, I just assumed it worked out and didn't check it :) Still, I think there is a bit of a simpler solution.

It's enough to separately check that ##Hx=H^\dagger x## when ##x## is in the column space of ##H## and that ##Hx=H^\dagger x## when ##x## is orthogonal to the column space of ##H.##

The first case is true by the given condition. The second case holds because in that event, ##||Hx||^2=\langle Hx,Hx\rangle=\langle x,H^\dagger H x\rangle=\langle x,H^2 x\rangle=0## and also ##H^\dagger x=0## since the nullspace of ##H^\dagger## is the orthogonal complement of the column space of ##H.##
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Structure seeker and julian
I'd like it if a simpler proof is possible. Here's my try on that:

##(H-H^\dagger)H=H^2-H^\dagger H##

So if ##H=H^\dagger## we have ##H^2 = H^\dagger H##. If ##H## is invertible, multiply with the inverse for the converse statement. If not, remove from domain and image of the linear map that the matrix represents the eigenvector dimension with eigenvalue ##0## (it's clear the resulting linear map is hermitian iff ##H## is) and use induction on ##n##. The case ##n=1## is left to the reader.
 
Last edited:
@Structure seeker That doesn't look valid (or at least complete) to me. Can you say how to remove some subspace (I can't actually figure out exactly which subspace you mean exactly) from domain and range to reduce to the case of smaller matrices?
 
  • #10
You can restrict ##H## to the subspace orthogonal to the eigenvector ##v## by projecting on this subspace. Thus you remove linear combinations of ##\{ v\}##
 
  • #11
And since the corresponding eigenvalue is ##0## and ##H=H^\dagger##, ##H## simultaneously does nothing with ##v## and lands on something orthogonal to ##v##
 
  • #12
I still don't fully understand. Here's what I understand your argument as, and correct me if I'm misreading.

It looks to me like you're taking a nonzero vector ##v## in the nullspace of ##H## and considering the subspace ##S\subset\mathbb{C}^n## that is orthogonal to ##v## and trying to restrict ##H## to a map ##H:S\to S.## I don't understand why if ##x\in S## then ##H(x)## is also in ##S## though. If you already know that ##H## was Hermitian, you could say ##\langle Hx,v\rangle=\langle x,Hv\rangle=0## but you can't use the inductive hypothesis yet because you haven't actually yet restricted your map to ##n-1## dimensional space.

Anyway, this seems very similar to the argument I gave in post 7, which I think is correct. Instead of breaking apart ##\mathbb{C}^n## into the nullspace of ##H## and its orthogonal complement, I break it apart into the columnspace of ##H## and its orthogonal complement, but this amounts to the same orthogonal decomposition in the end because ##H## is Hermitian.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Structure seeker
  • #13
You can use ## {H^\dagger}^2 V=H^\dagger H V=0## to prove that the kernel ##V## of ##H## is also that of ##H^\dagger## since the rank of ##H## coincides with the rank of ##H^\dagger##. That step should be inserted for arguing that ##v## is also a zero-eigenvalue eigenvector of ##H^\dagger##.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: julian
  • #14
Infrared said:
If you already know that ##H## was Hermitian, you could say ##\langle H x,v \rangle =\langle x, Hv \rangle=0##
You use this in the proof of the spectral theorem for Hermitian matrices.
 
Last edited:
  • #15
Yeah but I did try to give an independent proof, infrared's point is crystal clear and very true.
 
  • #16
Yes.
 
Last edited:
  • #17
Structure seeker said:
You can use ## {H^\dagger}^2 V=H^\dagger H V=0## to prove that the kernel ##V## of ##H## is also that of ##H^\dagger## since the rank of ##H## coincides with the rank of ##H^\dagger##. That step should be inserted for arguing that ##v## is also a zero-eigenvalue eigenvector of ##H^\dagger##.
But this still isn't right
 
  • #18
It would be good there was an easy way of proving ##\ker (H) = \ker (H^\dagger)## as this was the bulk of my solution in post #2.

If I understand you you are saying if ##\dim \ker (H) = \dim \ker (H^\dagger)## then does ##{H^\dagger}^2 \ker (H) = H^\dagger H \ker (H)## imply ##\ker (H) = \ker (H^\dagger)##? I think one issue would be you could have ##H u \not= 0## but have ##H^\dagger H u = 0##. But it was easy to establish that doesn't happen: We have ##\| H u \|^2 = <Hu,Hu> = < u , H^\dagger H u >## which means ##H^\dagger H u = 0## implies ##Hu = 0##. So in fact, ##\ker (H) = \ker (H^\dagger H)##.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Structure seeker
  • #19
No I was skipping a crucial step, sorry for that. My argument only showed what you also showed in this post
 
  • #20
No, your idea worked I think.

There are no ##u## such that ##H u \not=0## and ##H^\dagger H u =0##, so ##\ker (H) = \ker(H^\dagger H)##. It follows then from ##{H^\dagger}^2 = H^\dagger H## that ##\ker (H) = \ker ({H^\dagger}^2)##.

The second question is are there ##u## such that ##H^\dagger u \not= 0## but ##{H^\dagger}^2 u = 0##?

(i) This would be the case if ##\dim \ker ({H^\dagger}^2) > \dim \ker (H^\dagger)##,
(ii) this would not be the case if ##\dim \ker ({H^\dagger}^2) = \dim \ker (H^\dagger)##, in that case we would have ##\ker ({H^\dagger}^2) = \ker (H^\dagger)##.

As you noted ##\text{rank} (H) = \text{rank} (H^\dagger)##. This implies ##\dim \ker (H) = \dim \ker (H^\dagger)##. This together with ##\ker (H) = \ker ({H^\dagger}^2)## implies ##\dim \ker ({H^\dagger}^2) = \dim \ker (H^\dagger)##. So, altogether we have

\begin{align*}
\ker (H) = \ker ({H^\dagger}^2) = \ker (H^\dagger) .
\end{align*}
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Structure seeker
  • #21
Thanks for working that out!
 
  • #22
If we use ##\text{rank} (H) = \text{rank} (H^\dagger)## we can simplify a bit my first proof, post #2:

Only if part:

Assume ##H## is Hermitian. Then ##H^\dagger = H## implies ##H^\dagger H = H^2##. Meaning if ##H^\dagger H \not= H^2## then ##H## couldn't be Hermitian.

If part:

We have ##\| H u \|^2 = <Hu,Hu> = < u , H^\dagger H u >## which means ##H^\dagger H u = 0## implies ##Hu = 0##. So ##\ker (H) = \ker (H^\dagger H)##. It then follows from ##{H^\dagger}^2 = H^\dagger H## that ##\ker (H) = \ker ({H^\dagger}^2)##. If ##\dim \ker ({H^\dagger}^2) = \dim \ker (H^\dagger)## we would have ##\ker ({H^\dagger}^2) = \ker (H^\dagger)##. As ##\text{rank} (H) = \text{rank} (H^\dagger)##, we have ##\dim \ker (H) = \dim \ker (H^\dagger)##. This together with ##\ker (H) = \ker ({H^\dagger}^2)## implies ##\dim \ker ({H^\dagger}^2) = \dim \ker (H^\dagger)##. So, altogether we have

\begin{align*}
\ker (H) = \ker ({H^\dagger}^2) = \ker (H^\dagger)
\end{align*}

Also, note ##\ker (H^2) = \ker({H^\dagger}^2)##. As ##H^2## is Hermitian its eigenvectors form a basis for the vector space ##V = \mathbb{C}^n##. Label the eigenvectors of ##H^2## with non-zero eigenvalues by ##e_\alpha## with ##\alpha = i_1,i_2, \dots, i_N## (##N \leq n##) and corresponding eigenvalues by ##\lambda_\alpha##. These eigenvectors form a basis for ##\ker (H)^\perp = \ker (H^\dagger)^\perp##.

Assume ##u \not\in \ker (H)##, then ##Hu \not\in \ker (H)## and ##H^\dagger u \not\in \ker (H^\dagger)## (as ##\ker (H) = \ker (H^2)## and ##\ker (H^\dagger) = \ker ({H^\dagger}^2)##). From ##<u , H^\dagger H^2 e_\alpha > = <u , H^3 e_\alpha >## we have:

\begin{align*}
<H u , H^2 e_\alpha > = <H^\dagger u , H^2 e_\alpha >
\end{align*}

or

\begin{align*}
<H u - H^\dagger u , \lambda_\alpha e_\alpha > = 0 .
\end{align*}

Since the ##\{ e_\alpha \}_{\alpha = i_1,i_2, \dots , i_N}## form a basis for ##\ker (H)^\perp##,

\begin{align*}
H u = H^\dagger u \qquad \text{for arbitrary } u \in \ker (H)^\perp .
\end{align*}

As ##H u = H^\dagger u## for all ##u \in V##,

\begin{align*}
H = H^\dagger .
\end{align*}
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Structure seeker
  • #23
Given complex ##n\times n## matrices ##A## and ##B##, let ##(A,B) = \operatorname{trace}(A^\dagger B)##. This defines an inner product on the vector space of such matrices. Hence, if ##H^2 = H^\dagger H##, then $$\|H - H^\dagger\|^2 = \|H\|^2 - 2\operatorname{Re}(H,H^\dagger) + \|H^\dagger\|^2 = 2\|H\|^2 - 2\operatorname{Re}\operatorname{trace}(H^2)$$ The condition ##H^2 = H^\dagger H## forces ##\operatorname{trace}(H^2) = \|H\|^2##, so the right-most expression in the above equation equals ##2\|H\|^2 - 2\|H\|^2##, i.e., zero.

Conversely, if ##H## is Hermitian, then ##H^2 = HH = H^\dagger H##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: julian and Structure seeker

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
946