MHB Proving $(T^2-I)(T-3I) = 0$ for Linear Operator $T$

Guest2
Messages
192
Reaction score
0
Problem: Let $T$ be the linear operator on $\mathbb{R}^3$ defined by

$$T(x_1, x_2, x_3)= (3x_1, x_1-x_2, 2x_1+x_2+x_3)$$

Is $T$ invertible? If so, find a rule for $T^{-1}$ like the one which defines $T$.

Prove that $(T^2-I)(T-3I) = 0.$


Attempt:

$(T|I)=\left[\begin{array}{ccc|ccc}
3 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & -1 &0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
2 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
\end{array}\right] \to \left[\begin{array}{ccc|ccc}
1 & 0 & 0 & 1/3 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 &0 & 0 & -1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & -2/3 & 1 & 0 \\
\end{array}\right] = (I|T^{-1})$

Thus $T$ is invertible as it row-reduces to $I$ and

$$T^{-1} = \left[\begin{array}{ccc}
& 1/3 & 0 & 0 \\
& 0 & -1 & 0 \\
& -2/3 & 1 & 0 \\
\end{array}\right]$$

Thus the rule is $T^{-1}(x_1, x_2, x_3) = (\frac{1}{3}x_1, -x_2, -\frac{2}{3}x_1+x_2).$

But I'm stuck on showing that $(T^2-I)(T-3I) = 0$. I could directly manipulate this, but I think I'm supposed to somehow use linearity/earlier part of the question. Is this the case? Could someone please clarify.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Guest said:
Problem: Let $T$ be the linear operator on $\mathbb{R}^3$ defined by

$$T(x_1, x_2, x_3)= (3x_1, x_1-x_2, 2x_1+x_2+x_3)$$

Is $T$ invertible? If so, find a rule for $T^{-1}$ like the one which defines $T$.

Prove that $(T^2-I)(T-3I) = 0.$


Attempt:

$(T|I)=\left[\begin{array}{ccc|ccc}
3 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & -1 &0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
2 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
\end{array}\right] \to \left[\begin{array}{ccc|ccc}
1 & 0 & 0 & 1/3 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 &0 & 0 & -1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & -2/3 & 1 & 0 \\
\end{array}\right] = (I|T^{-1})$

Thus $T$ is invertible as it row-reduces to $I$ and

$$T^{-1} = \left[\begin{array}{ccc}
& 1/3 & 0 & 0 \\
& 0 & -1 & 0 \\
& -2/3 & 1 & 0 \\
\end{array}\right]$$

Thus the rule is $T^{-1}(x_1, x_2, x_3) = (\frac{1}{3}x_1, -x_2, -\frac{2}{3}x_1+x_2).$

But I'm stuck on showing that $(T^2-I)(T-3I) = 0$. I could directly manipulate this, but I think I'm supposed to somehow use linearity/earlier part of the question. Is this the case? Could someone please clarify.

Hi Guest,

The matrix you've found for $T^{-1}$ is not actually the inverse.
In particular this shows because it's degenerate.
That is, it has a column with only zeroes.
More generally, its determinant is zero, meaning it's non-invertible.

The problem is that when you created $T$, the second row of the leftmost column should contain a $1$ instead of a $0$.

To show that $(T^2-I)(T-3I) = 0$, we might use the Caylay-Hamilton theorem, that says that the characteristic equation of a matrix also holds for the matrix itself.
Do you know what the characteristic equation is? (Wondering)
 
Hi, I like Serena,

Thanks for the reply.

The characteristic equation is $P(\lambda) = \det(\lambda I - T) = (3-\lambda)(\lambda^2-1)$

So then $P(T) = 0 \implies (3I-T)(T^2-I) = 0 \implies (T^2-I)(T-3I) = 0.$
 
To show $T$ is invertible, it suffices to show $T(v) = 0 \implies v = 0$.

This is not hard to demonstrate:

If $T(x_1,x_2,x_3) = (0,0,0)$, then $3x_1 = 0$, so $x_1 = 0$.

Now $T(0,x_2,x_3) = (0,-x_2,x_2+x_3)$, and if this is $(0,0,0)$ we must have $x_2 = 0$.

Finally, since $T(0,0,x_3) = (0,0,x_3)$ if the RHS is 0, we must have $x_3 = 0$.

Of course, this tells us $T^{-1}$ exists, but does not tell us what it IS.

But if $T(x_1,x_2,x_3) = (1,0,0)$, it follows that $(x_1,x_2,x_3) = T^{-1}(1,0,0)$, which would give us the first column of $T^{-1}$'s matrix (in the standard basis).

Equating $(3x_1,x_1-x_2,2x_1+x_2+x_3) = (1,0,0)$ gives us $x_1 = \frac{1}{3}$, which then tells us $x_2 = \frac{1}{3}$, and thus $x_3 = -1$.

Solving $T(x_1,x_2,x_3) = (0,1,0)$ and $T(x_1,x_2,x_3) = (0,0,1)$ similarly gives us the second and third columns of $T^{-1}$. You should then be able to give a similar form for $T^{-1}$ as was given for $T$.

I do not know if the Cayley-Hamilton theorem is available for you to use-that is the "lazy" way to go. Otherwise, you would have to compute the given product the "long way".

Knowing $T^3 - 3T^2 - T + 3I = 0$, does give us another way to compute $T^{-1}$:

$T^3 - 3T^2 - T = -3I$
$T(-\frac{1}{3}(T^2 - 3T - I)) = I$

so, evidently:

$T^{-1} = -\frac{1}{3}(T^2 - 2T - I)$
 
Deveno said:
...
This is such a nice method, thank you!
 
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 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
0
Views
705
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
21
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
689