Undergrad Prove that the limit of this matrix expression is 0

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on proving that the limit of the matrix expression involving a singular matrix A approaches zero as t approaches zero. It establishes that B = A - tI is non-singular for small positive t, and utilizes the Cayley-Hamilton theorem, which states that the characteristic polynomial evaluated at A is zero. Participants explore various approaches to tackle the limit, including proof by induction, series expansion of B^{-1}, and using Jordan normal form. The limit simplifies to a form involving the adjugate of A, leading to the conclusion that it can either be 2*adj(A) or 0, depending on the parity of N. Ultimately, the limit is shown to converge to zero under the specified conditions.
lriuui0x0
Messages
101
Reaction score
25
Given a singular matrix ##A##, let ##B = A - tI## for small positive ##t## such that ##B## is non-singular. Prove that:

$$
\lim_{t\to 0} (\chi_A(B) + \det(B)I)B^{-1} = 0
$$

where ##\chi_A## is the characteristic polynomial of ##A##. Note that ##\lim_{t\to 0} \chi_A(B) = \chi_A(A) = 0## by Cayley-Hamilton theorem.

This limit involves the product of a convergent to zero function and a divergent function. I'm not sure how to transform the limit in order to prove this.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In wikipedia characteristic polynomials
----
We consider an n×n matrix A. The characteristic polynomial of A, denoted by pA(t), is the polynomial defined by[5]
{\displaystyle p_{A}(t)=\det \left(tI-A\right)}
where I denotes the n×n identity matrix.
----
Wiki says parameter of characteristic polynomial t a number though you say it B, a matrix. I am confused.
 
anuttarasammyak said:
In wikipedia characteristic polynomials
----
We consider an n×n matrix A. The characteristic polynomial of A, denoted by pA(t), is the polynomial defined by[5]
{\displaystyle p_{A}(t)=\det \left(tI-A\right)}
where I denotes the n×n identity matrix.
----
Wiki says parameter of characteristic polynomial t a number though you say it B, a matrix. I am confused.
Yes, it's passing in the matrix into the polynomial. Please check Cayley-Hamilton theorem.
 
  • Like
Likes anuttarasammyak
I don't know how to tackle the problem, but here are some ideas:
  • proof by induction
  • replacing ##B^{-1}=\dfrac{1}{A-tI}## by its series
  • using the Jordan normal form
  • the limit has to be taken for every matrix entry, so maybe choosing a single one could simplify the problem
 
Let \chi_A(x) = \sum_{n=0}^N a_nx^n. Then <br /> (\chi_A(B) + \det(B)I)B^{-1} = (a_0 + \det B)B^{-1} + \sum_{n=0}^{N-1} a_{n+1}B^{n}. Recall that B^{-1} = \frac{\operatorname{adj}(B)}{\det(B)} where \operatorname{adj}(B) is the adjugate matrix of B, and that a_0 vanishes as A is singular. This shows that the limit is finite; there is more to do to show that it vanishes.

EDIT: We also have the identity (stated here) <br /> \operatorname{adj}(-A) = \sum_{n=0}^{N-1} a_{n+1}A^n and thus <br /> \lim_{t \to 0} (\chi_A(B) + \det(B)I)B^{-1} = \operatorname{adj}(A) + \operatorname{adj}(-A) = (1 + (-1)^{N-1})\operatorname{adj}(A) which is either 2\operatorname{adj}(A) or 0 depending on whether N is odd or even.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the help!
 
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 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K