I am reading Schaum's outlines linear algebra, and have reached an explanation of the following lemma:(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Let ##T:V→V## be a linear operator whose minimal polynomial is ##f(t)^n## where ##f(t)## is a monic irreducible polynomial. Then V is the direct sum

##V=Z(v_1,T)⊕...⊕Z(v_r,T)##

of T-cyclic subspaces ##Z(v_i,T)## with corresponding T-annihilators

##f(t)^{n_1}, f(t)^{n_2},..., f(t)^{n_r}, n=n_1≥n_2≥...≥n_r##

Any other decomposition of V into T-cyclic subspaces has the same number of components and the same set of T-annihilators.

Now, it seems that while writing the explanation for this lemma the writer forgot the concept of explaining one's arguments when presenting a proof, which resulted in a long explanation which goes from one conclusion to the next without explaining how, which naturally was rather frustrating. If anyone could present the proof for this lemma to me, I would be very grateful.

Should you require it I can also copy the proof from the book (page 343 problem 10.31).

Thanks in advance to all the helpers.

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# I Proving a lemma on decomposition of V to T-cyclic subspace

Have something to add?

Draft saved
Draft deleted

Loading...

Similar Threads - Proving lemma decomposition | Date |
---|---|

I Proving that an operator is unbounded | Feb 8, 2018 |

I Proving a set is linearly independant | Apr 14, 2017 |

A lemma in proving Sylow's theorem | Apr 12, 2015 |

Lemma used to prove Von Staudt's Theorem | Oct 21, 2013 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**