Proving A^n = 0 for an n x n-Matrix A

  • Thread starter Thread starter Seb97
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves proving that for an n x n matrix A, if A^N = 0 for some integer N, then A^n = 0 must also hold true. This falls within the subject area of linear algebra, specifically dealing with matrix powers and properties.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the implications of the problem statement, questioning whether the proof should hold for all integer values of n or only for n >= N. There is also a consideration of the role of matrix inverses in the proof process, with some participants expressing confusion about their relevance.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring different interpretations of the problem. Some have suggested breaking the problem into cases based on the relationship between N and n, while others are seeking clarification on the assumptions made regarding matrix properties.

Contextual Notes

There is a noted concern about the validity of using inverses in the context of the problem, as well as the potential for counterexamples that challenge the universality of the statement being proved.

Seb97
Messages
15
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


For an n x n-matrix A we have A^N = 0 for some N. Prove that A^n = 0.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


I took the inverse of A^n and multiplied across by it. and I got the Identity equal to zero. But that can't happen. Any help would be much appreciated
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
What exactly is the problem statement? Are you supposed to prove that A^n = 0 for all integer values of n? (This is not true - counterexample is the 2x2 matrix with 1 in the upper right corner and 0 elsewhere. A^2 = 0, but A^1 != 0.)
Or for all integer values of n >= N?

You said you took the inverse of A^n and did something with it. What guarantee do you have that A or A^n have inverses?
 
No that's precisely what the question says. I was hoping for a different view on it. Now I am really confused because I taught the inverses had something to do with it. What do you is the right approach or what would you do?
 
Hi Mark44
How would you prove that the rank of the matrix would be zero because if I can do that then it would be proved wouldn't it??
 
OK, it went right past me that the matrix is n x n and you're trying to show that A^n = 0.
I think you can assume that 2 <= N <= n. If N > n, then it might be possible that A^N = 0, but for a smaller exponent, n, A^n != 0. If it's not reasonable to make that assumption, you can at least break down the problem into two cases: 2 <= N <= n, and N > n.

The first case is pretty easy to prove. A^1 = whatever, A^2 = whatever, ..., A^N = 0, A^(N + 1) = A^N * A = 0*A = 0, and so on.
 
Hi Mark44

Thanks a million your a legend. I can now go to sleep tonight. Thanks again
 
You'll need to say it more elegantly than I did. I was just thinking out loud, so to speak.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K