Proving det(A) > 0 for A^3 = A + 1 over R using linear algebra

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that the determinant of an n x n matrix A, satisfying the equation A^3 = A + 1, is greater than zero. The context is linear algebra, specifically focusing on properties of determinants and eigenvalues.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of the equation A^3 = A + 1, with some attempting to factor and take determinants. Questions arise about the eigenvalues of A and their relationship to the determinant. There is discussion on whether to consider eigenvalues and the continuity of the determinant function.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with various approaches being explored. Some participants suggest that the determinant cannot be zero, while others examine the behavior of the function f(x) = det(A - xI) and its implications for the eigenvalues. There is a recognition of the need to demonstrate contradictions arising from assumptions about the determinant's sign.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the eigenvalues must satisfy the polynomial equation derived from the original matrix equation. There is also mention of the continuity of the determinant function and its implications for the signs of f(0), f(1), and f(-1).

Mr Davis 97
Messages
1,461
Reaction score
44

Homework Statement


If A is an n x n matrix over R such that A^3 = A + 1, prove that det(A) > 0 .

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


So, what I've done is factor the expression to get A(A+1)(A-1) = 1, then taking the determinant of both sides, I get det(A)det(A+1)det(A-1) = 1. I thought that maybe I could argue that maybe if det(A) < 0, then this would lead to a contradiction, but that doesn't seem to be going anywhere.
Should I try to solve it without the explicit use of determinants?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What are the eigenvalues of ##\mathbf A## ?
 
StoneTemplePython said:
What are the eigenvalues of ##\mathbf A## ?
Wouldn't any eigenvalue have to satisfy the equation ##\lambda^3 = \lambda + 1##? Whose only real solution is approximately 1.3247?
 
Mr Davis 97 said:

Homework Statement


If A is an n x n matrix over R such that A^3 = A + 1, prove that det(A) > 0 .

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


So, what I've done is factor the expression to get A(A+1)(A-1) = 1, then taking the determinant of both sides, I get det(A)det(A+1)det(A-1) = 1. I thought that maybe I could argue that maybe if det(A) < 0, then this would lead to a contradiction, but that doesn't seem to be going anywhere.
Should I try to solve it without the explicit use of determinants?
The decomposition is a good starting point. It tells us that ##\det A = 0## is impossible, so only ##\det A < 0## or ##\det A > 0## are left.
Now assume ##\det A < 0## and consider the real function ##f(x)=\det (A-x \cdot 1)##. Is it continuous? Do you know something about the values at certain points? What does this mean for the other points?

Edit: I wouldn't consider eigenvalues, because you cannot be sure whether they are real or not. So eventually they don't exist.
 
Mr Davis 97 said:
Wouldn't any eigenvalue have to satisfy the equation ##\lambda^3 = \lambda + 1##? Whose only real solution is approximately 1.3247?
Indeed. So any possible determinant is a product comprised of this real root (which is positive) raised to some natural number and the product of some conjugate pairs raised to a natural number...
 
fresh_42 said:
The decomposition is a good starting point. It tells us that ##\det A = 0## is impossible, so only ##\det A < 0## or ##\det A > 0## are left.
Now assume ##\det A < 0## and consider the real function ##f(x)=\det (A-x \cdot 1)##. Is it continuous? Do you know something about the values at certain points? What does this mean for the other points?

Edit: I wouldn't consider eigenvalues, because you cannot be sure whether they are real or not. So eventually they don't exist.
What can we do with ##f(x) = \det (A - xI)##? It doesn't seem to be a very malleable expression. The only two things I see is that f(0) < 0, by supposition. How does this let us conclude things about f(1) or f(-1)?
 
Mr Davis 97 said:
What can we do with ##f(x) = \det (A - xI)##? It doesn't seem to be a very malleable expression. The only two things I see is that f(0) < 0, by supposition. How does this let us conclude things about f(1) or f(-1)?
Well, you also know ##f(0)\cdot f(-1) \cdot f(1) = 1 > 0## and all are real numbers.

Edit: You can also use @StoneTemplePython's approach with conjugate eigenvalues, if this is easier to you. My suggestion is quasi by foot using the properties of continuous real functions.
 
fresh_42 said:
Well, you also know ##f(0)\cdot f(-1) \cdot f(1) = 1 > 0## and all are real numbers.

Edit: You can also use @StoneTemplePython's approach with conjugate eigenvalues, if this is easier to you. My suggestion is quasi by foot using the properties of continuous real functions.
Well if ##f(0) < 0## it would have to be the case that ##f(1) \cdot f(-1) < 0##, which is to say that they have different signs, which would mean that we'd have to have a zero of f(x) on the interval ##[-1,1]##, right? Is this a contradiction since there are no eigenvalues of A on this interval?

Also, ##f(x)## is continuous since it is an nth degree polynomial.
 
Mr Davis 97 said:
Well if ##f(0) < 0## it would have to be the case that ##f(1) \cdot f(-1) < 0##, which is to say that they have different signs, which would mean that we'd have to have a zero of f(x) on the interval ##[-1,1]##, right? Is this a contradiction since there are no eigenvalues of A on this interval?

Also, ##f(x)## is continuous since it is an nth degree polynomial.
Yes, that's right. We have an ##x## with ##f(x)=0##. Your conclusion is basically correct. I only would try to demonstrate why this is a contradiction. Where does ##f(x)=0## lead to? Where do the eigenvalues come in here?
 
  • #10
fresh_42 said:
Yes, that's right. We have an ##x## with ##f(x)=0##. Your conclusion is basically correct. I only would try to demonstrate why this is a contradiction. Where does ##f(x)=0## lead to? Where do the eigenvalues come in here?
I'm not completely sure where to go with ##\det (A - xI)= 0##. Of course, the x's for which this is true are the eigenvalues of A, but I don't see how this is related to the interval [-1,1]
 
  • #11
What does it mean, if a linear function has zero determinant?
 
  • #12
fresh_42 said:
What does it mean, if a linear function has zero determinant?
That it's not invertible?
 
  • #13
Yes, and thus it has a non-trivial kernel, i.e. a vector ##v## with ##(A-x\cdot 1)(v)=0##. Now you can use ##A^3=A+1## again and apply it on ##v##.
 
  • #14
fresh_42 said:
Yes, and thus it has a non-trivial kernel, i.e. a vector ##v## with ##(A-x\cdot 1)(v)=0##. Now you can use ##A^3=A+1## again and apply it on ##v##.
All I get is that ##x## must satisfy the equation ##x^3= x+1##
 
  • #15
fresh_42 said:
The decomposition is a good starting point. It tells us that ##\det A = 0## is impossible, so only ##\det A < 0## or ##\det A > 0## are left.
Now assume ##\det A < 0## and consider the real function ##f(x)=\det (A-x \cdot 1)##. Is it continuous? Do you know something about the values at certain points? What does this mean for the other points?

Edit: I wouldn't consider eigenvalues, because you cannot be sure whether they are real or not. So eventually they don't exist.

Eigenvalues work perfectly well here. Since ##A^3 - A - I = 0##, ##p(x) = x^3 - x - 1## is the "minimal polynomial" of ##A##, and that means that its roots are all the eigenvalues of ##A##, not counting multiplicity. One of the eigenvalues is ##\lambda_1 > 0##, as we can see from the fact that ##p(x)## changes sign between ##x = 0## and large positive ##x##. Setting ##p'(x) = 0## implies that there are two stationary points, ##x = \pm 1/\sqrt{3}##, and the second-derivative test shows that ##x = -1/\sqrt{3}## is a (local) maximum, while ##x = +1/\sqrt{3}## is a local minimum. Therefore, there can be only one positive root of ##p(x) = 0##. Also, ##p(-1/\sqrt{3}) < 0##, so ##p(x)## never rises above the 0 for ##x < 0##, hence there are no negative real roots. Therefore, the other two eigenvalues are complex conjugates ##\lambda_2## and ##\lambda_3 = \overline{\lambda}_2##, hence ##\lambda_2 \times \lambda_3 > 0##. The characteristic polynomial ##c(x)## of ##A## must be a multiple of ##p(x)## but with the same roots, hence ##c(x) = (x-\lambda_1)^r (x - \lambda_2)^s (x - \lambda_3)^t##. The matrix ##A## is real, so ##c(x)## is a real polynomial and so its complex roots must come in conjugate pairs. This means that we must have have ##s = t \geq 1##. Thus, we can, indeed, determine the sign of the product of the eigenvalues.
 
Last edited:
  • #16
Mr Davis 97 said:
All I get is that ##x## must satisfy the equation ##x^3= x+1##
Yes, and this is a) the solution and b) as I said, the eigenvalue argument by foot. You get that for some real number ##x_0## between ##x=-1## and ##x=1## that it has to hold ##x_0^3-x_0-1 = 0##. Until here you have used, that the function ##f(x)## is continuous, real-valued, that
Mr Davis 97 said:
Well if ##f(0) < 0## it would have to be the case that ##f(1) \cdot f(-1) < 0##, which is to say that they have different signs
and that ##v \neq 0##.

All which is left is to calculate the real number ##x_0## or at least that it has to be greater than ##1##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Mr Davis 97
  • #17
fresh_42 said:
Yes, and this is a) the solution and b) as I said, the eigenvalue argument by foot. You get that for some real number ##x_0## between ##x=-1## and ##x=1## that it has to hold ##x_0^3-x_0-1 = 0##. Until here you have used, that the function ##f(x)## is continuous, real-valued, that

and that ##v \neq 0##.

All which is left is to calculate the real number ##x_0##.
To calculate that real number, is it okay and necessary to use software?
 
  • #18
Mr Davis 97 said:
To calculate that real number, is it okay and necessary to use software?
That's not me to decide it. I also looked it up on the Wolfram page. O.k., I had ##A+x\cdot I## and ##x_0 = -1.3...## but this doesn't make any difference. I added (basically) "or at least outside of ##[-1,1]##" to my last post. This way one could do it analytically: calculate inflection points or show that there cannot be a zero between ##-1## and ##1## or even use Cardano's formulas. It would of course make some more work than the software solution, but it's possible.

If we have the polynomial ##p(x)=x^3-x-1## then ##p(-1)=-1## and ##p(1)=-1##. Thus if it crossed the ##x-##axis in between, it would have to have a maximum ##x_m## anywhere in between with ##p(x_m)>0##. But this can easily be calculated by differentiation, solving a quadratic formula and evaluation of ##p(x_m)##. So this is one possible way without software.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Mr Davis 97

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
8K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K