6.7  Polynomials of an Operator

Chapter 2 taught us to substitute an operator into a polynomial: for T∈L(V) and p∈F[x], the operator p(T) replaces each xk by Tk (Definition 2.4.2). That section used the idea for a few examples. With the arithmetic of this chapter in hand, the idea becomes a method. Divisibility, ideals, and Bézout’s identity in F[x] turn into statements about T: every operator on a finite-dimensional space satisfies a polynomial equation, the polynomials it satisfies form an ideal, and a factorization of such a polynomial into coprime pieces splits the space. The last statement, the kernel splitting lemma, is the engine that Chapter 9 will run to take operators apart.

6.7.1. Evaluating at an operator

Fix T∈L(V), where V is any vector space over F. Theorem 2.4.3 already says that substituting T respects sums and products of polynomials, and that any two polynomials in T commute. The new point of view is to treat “substitute T” as a single map from F[x] to L(V), and to ask what it preserves. Both sides are vector spaces, and both have a multiplication. The map respects all of the structure.

Theorem 6.7.1 (Evaluation at an Operator)

Let V be a vector space over F and T∈L(V). Then the map F[x]→L(V),p↦p(T), has the following properties.

  • (a) It is linear: (cp+q)(T)=cp(T)+q(T) for all p,q∈F[x] and c∈F.
  • (b) It is multiplicative and sends 1 to idV: (pq)(T)=p(T)q(T) and 1(T)=idV.
  • (c) Its image {p(T):p∈F[x]} is a subspace of L(V), closed under composition, in which any two operators commute.
  • (d) If S∈L(V) commutes with T, then S commutes with p(T) for every p∈F[x].

Proof.

  • (a) Let p=∑kakxk and q=∑kbkxk. The coefficient of xk in cp+q is cak+bk, so by Definition 2.4.2 and the vector space laws in L(V) (Theorem 2.4.1), (cp+q)(T)=∑k(cak+bk)Tk=c∑kakTk+∑kbkTk=cp(T)+q(T).

  • (b) The product rule is Theorem 2.4.3 (b). The constant polynomial 1 gives 1⋅T0=idV.

  • (c) The image of a linear map is a subspace (Theorem 2.2.2). For polynomials p,q, the composite p(T)q(T) equals (pq)(T) by (b), so it lies in the image, and p(T)q(T)=q(T)p(T) by Theorem 2.4.3 (c).

  • (d) Suppose ST=TS. We show STk=TkS by induction on k. For k=0, both sides are S. If STk=TkS, then by associativity (Theorem 2.4.2) STk+1=(STk)T=Tk(ST)=Tk(TS)=Tk+1S. For p=∑kakxk, distributivity (Theorem 2.4.2) gives Sp(T)=∑kakSTk=∑kakTkS=p(T)S.

Parts (a) and (b) together say that p↦p(T) is a homomorphism of algebras: it translates every identity built from sums, scalar multiples, and products of polynomials into the same identity for operators. (This map should not be confused with the evaluation map V→V∗∗ of Chapter 5; here we evaluate polynomials, not functionals.) Part (d) is what we will use most. It says that anything commuting with T commutes with the whole family of polynomials in T.

For matrices nothing new is needed. If V is finite-dimensional with basis B, then [p(T)]BB=p([T]BB) by Corollary 4.1.3. So every statement in this section holds verbatim for A∈Mn(F), applied to the operator TA.

Example (Two Ways to Evaluate)

Let A=(31−11)∈M2(Q). Compute p(A) for p=x2−4x+4 and q=x2−3x, once by expanding and once by factoring.

Solution. Expanding. A2=(9−13+1−3−1−1+1)=(84−40). Hence p(A)=(8−12+44−4−4+40−4+4)=O,q(A)=(8−94−3−4+30−3)=(−11−1−3). Factoring. p=(x−2)2, so p(A)=(A−2I)2 by Theorem 6.7.1 (b). Here A−2I=(11−1−1), whose square is (1−11−1−1+1−1+1)=O. Likewise q=x(x−3), so q(A)=A(A−3I)=(31−11)(01−1−2)=(−11−1−3), in agreement with the expansion. The factored form showed at a glance why p(A)=O: the matrix A−2I squares to zero.

Warning. A product of polynomials in T can vanish without either factor vanishing. In F[x], pq=0 forces p=0 or q=0 (Corollary 0.8.4). Evaluation at T does not carry this over. For the projection P(x,y)=(x,0) on F2, the polynomials p=x and q=x−1 give p(P)q(P)=P2−P=0, while p(P)=P≠0 and q(P)=P−id≠0. The map p↦p(T) respects products, but it is not injective, and it is exactly its kernel that makes this possible.

6.7.2. Annihilating polynomials

In Chapter 2 we saw operators satisfying polynomial equations: a projection satisfies P2−P=0, the rotation of R2 by a right angle satisfies R2+id=0 (Example (Operators That Satisfy a Polynomial)), and differentiation on F[x]≤n satisfies Dn+1=0 (Example (Differentiation Is Nilpotent)). Each such equation is a nonzero polynomial in the kernel of p↦p(T). Does every operator have one? We need a word for these polynomials.

Definition 6.7.1 (Annihilating Polynomial)

Let T∈L(V). A polynomial p∈F[x] annihilates T if p(T)=0, the zero operator on V.

For example, x2−x annihilates every projection, x2+1 annihilates the rotation R, and the zero polynomial annihilates every operator. On the zero space V={0}, even the constant 1 annihilates T, because 1(T)=idV is the zero map there. On V≠{0}, a nonzero constant c never annihilates, since cidV≠0. (The word “annihilate” is also used for the annihilator U0 of Chapter 5; the two uses share the idea “sends to zero” and nothing more.)

In finite dimension a counting argument settles existence. The space L(V) is finite-dimensional, so the powers of T cannot all be independent.

Theorem 6.7.2 (Every Operator Satisfies a Polynomial)

Let V be a finite-dimensional vector space over F with dim⁡V=n, and let T∈L(V). Then there is a nonzero p∈F[x] with deg⁡p≤n2 and p(T)=0. The same holds for every A∈Mn(F).

Proof. If n=0, the constant 1 works, as noted above. Let n≥1. By Theorem 4.1.4, dim⁡L(V)=n⋅n=n2. The list (idV,T,T2,…,Tn2) in L(V) has length n2+1>n2, so it is linearly dependent by Theorem 1.6.3 (a). Hence there are a0,…,an2∈F, not all zero, with a0idV+a1T+⋯+an2Tn2=0. The polynomial p=a0+a1x+⋯+an2xn2 is nonzero, has degree at most n2, and satisfies p(T)=0 by Definition 2.4.2. For A∈Mn(F), apply the same argument in Mn(F), which has dimension n2 (Example (Dimensions of the Running Examples)).

The bound n2 is crude. In Chapter 9, the Cayley–Hamilton Theorem will produce an annihilating polynomial of degree exactly n. The finite dimension is essential: on F[x], let S be multiplication by x, S(f)=xf. Then Sk(1)=xk, so p(S)(1)=p for every p∈F[x], and p(S)≠0 whenever p≠0.

The proof is also an algorithm: search for the first power of A that is a combination of the earlier ones. This is a question about linear dependence, which elimination answers (Theorem 3.5.10).

Example (Finding an Annihilating Polynomial)

Find a nonzero polynomial of least possible degree that annihilates B=(211010001)∈M3(Q).

Solution. Degree 1. B is not a scalar multiple of I3 (its (1,2)-entry is nonzero), so (I3,B) is independent, and no nonzero polynomial of degree at most 1 annihilates B.

Degree 2. Compute B2=(433010001). We look for a,b,c with aI3+bB+cB2=O. Reading entries: position (1,2) gives b+3c=0; position (1,1) gives a+2b+4c=0; position (2,2) gives a+b+c=0. The positions (1,3) and (3,3) repeat the (1,2) and (2,2) equations, and all other entries are 0=0. With c=1: b=−3 and a=2, and indeed 2−6+4=0. So B2−3B+2I3=O, and p=x2−3x+2=(x−1)(x−2) annihilates B. Check with the factored form: B−I3=(111000000) and B−2I3=(0110−1000−1), whose product is (01−11−1000000)=O.

The bound of Theorem 6.7.2 allowed degree 9; the search stopped at degree 2.

Annihilating polynomials are far from unique: if p annihilates T, so does every multiple qp, since (qp)(T)=q(T)p(T)=q(T)⋅0=0. In Example (Finding an Annihilating Polynomial), x3−3x2+2x annihilates B too. This closure under multiplication is the defining property of an ideal, and ideals of F[x] are completely understood (Theorem 6.2.2).

Theorem 6.7.3 (The Annihilating Polynomials Form an Ideal)

Let V be a vector space over F and T∈L(V), and let IT:={p∈F[x]:p(T)=0}.

  • (a) IT is an ideal of F[x].
  • (b) Either IT={0}, or there is a unique monic m∈F[x] with IT=⟨m⟩. In the second case, for every p∈F[x], p(T)=0⟺m∣p, and m has the least degree among the nonzero polynomials annihilating T.
  • (c) If V is finite-dimensional, then IT≠{0}, and deg⁡m≤(dim⁡V)2.

Proof.

  • (a) By Theorem 6.7.1 (a), IT is the kernel of a linear map, so it is a subspace (Theorem 2.2.1); in particular it contains 0 and is closed under addition. If p∈IT and q∈F[x], then (qp)(T)=q(T)p(T)=0 by Theorem 6.7.1 (b), so qp∈IT. By Definition 6.2.1, IT is an ideal.

  • (b) By Theorem 6.2.2, either IT={0}, or IT=⟨m⟩ for a unique monic m, which has least degree among the nonzero elements of IT. In the second case, p(T)=0 means p∈⟨m⟩, that is, p=qm for some q, that is, m∣p.

  • (c) By Theorem 6.7.2, IT contains a nonzero polynomial of degree at most (dim⁡V)2. So IT≠{0}, and deg⁡m≤(dim⁡V)2 because m has the least degree.

This monic generator is one of the most important invariants of an operator. Chapter 9 names it the minimal polynomial of T and relates its roots to eigenvalues; here it is simply “the monic generator of IT”. Part (b) turns every polynomial identity satisfied by T into a divisibility statement about one fixed polynomial.

Examples.

  • Projections. Let P be a projection with P≠0 and P≠idV. Then x2−x=x(x−1)∈IP, so the monic generator divides x(x−1). By unique factorization (Theorem 6.3.5), its monic divisors are 1, x, x−1, and x(x−1). The first three do not annihilate P: 1(P)=idV≠0, x(P)=P≠0, and (x−1)(P)=P−idV≠0. So the generator is x2−x.
  • Degenerate cases. For the identity on V≠{0}, the generator is x−1; for the zero operator on V≠{0}, it is x; on V={0}, it is 1.
  • The matrix B. In Example (Finding an Annihilating Polynomial), no nonzero polynomial of degree at most 1 annihilates B, and x2−3x+2 does, so the generator is x2−3x+2.
  • Infinite dimension. For multiplication by x on F[x], we saw that IS={0}.

Quick check. Let R(x,y)=(−y,x) be the rotation of R2 by a right angle. What is the monic generator of IR⊆R[x]?

Solution. R2=−id, so x2+1∈IR, and the generator divides x2+1. Over R, x2+1 has no root, so its only monic divisors are 1 and x2+1 (a monic divisor of degree 1 would be x−c with c a root). Since 1(R)=id≠0, the generator is x2+1.

6.7.3. Kernels of polynomials in T

The subspaces we can build from T and a polynomial p are kerp(T) and imp(T). For p=x−λ, the kernel ker(T−λidV) consists of the vectors that T merely scales by λ; for a projection, kerP and ker(P−idV) are the two pieces of the direct sum. These subspaces have a property that general subspaces lack: T does not move vectors out of them.

Theorem 6.7.4 (T Preserves Kernels and Images of Polynomials in T)
  • (a) Let R,S∈L(V) with SR=RS. Then Sv∈kerR for every v∈kerR, and Sw∈imR for every w∈imR.
  • (b) In particular, for T∈L(V) and p,q∈F[x], the operator q(T) maps kerp(T) into kerp(T) and imp(T) into imp(T). Taking q=x: T maps kerp(T) and imp(T) into themselves.

Proof.

  • (a) Let v∈kerR. Then R(Sv)=S(Rv)=S0=0, so Sv∈kerR. Let w=Ru∈imR. Then Sw=S(Ru)=R(Su)∈imR.

  • (b) By Theorem 6.7.1 (c), q(T) commutes with p(T), so (a) applies with R=p(T) and S=q(T). For q=x, q(T)=T.

In Chapter 9, a subspace that an operator maps into itself will be called an invariant subspace, and the notion will be developed properly there. For now the theorem is what matters: whenever U=kerp(T), the rule u↦Tu is an operator on U, and so is u↦q(T)u.

The inclusion can fail for subspaces not built from T. For the rotation R of the check above, R moves the x-axis to the y-axis, so the x-axis is not of the form kerp(R) or imp(R) for any p.

6.7.4. The kernel splitting lemma

Chapter 2 contains two theorems with the same shape. A projection satisfies P(P−idV)=0, and Theorem 4.5.1 splits V as imP⊕kerP. An involution in characteristic not 2 satisfies (T−idV)(T+idV)=0, and Theorem 4.5.5 splits V as ker(T−idV)⊕ker(T+idV). In both, a polynomial annihilating T factors into two pieces with no common factor, and V is the direct sum of the kernels of the pieces. In both, the projections turned out to be polynomials in T: P itself, and 12(idV+T). The general statement needs only the arithmetic of F[x].

Theorem 6.7.5 (Kernel Splitting Lemma)

Let V be a vector space over F, let T∈L(V), and let p,q∈F[x] be coprime. Choose a,b∈F[x] with ap+bq=1 (Corollary 6.2.4), and put W=ker(pq)(T),E1=b(T)q(T),E2=a(T)p(T). Then:

  • (a) W=kerp(T)⊕kerq(T);
  • (b) E1+E2=idV, and for every w∈W, the splitting of w in (a) is w=E1w+E2w,E1w∈kerp(T),E2w∈kerq(T); so E1 maps W into W and acts on W as the projection onto kerp(T) along kerq(T), and E2 acts on W as the projection onto kerq(T) along kerp(T);
  • (c) in particular, if (pq)(T)=0, then V=kerp(T)⊕kerq(T), and the projections of V onto the two summands along each other are the polynomials (bq)(T) and (ap)(T) in T.

Idea. Substitute T into Bézout’s identity: idV=a(T)p(T)+b(T)q(T). Applied to a vector w, this writes w=E1w+E2w, and it does so for every vector of V. Now look at the pieces. ① p(T) kills E1w=b(T)q(T)w, because p(T)b(T)q(T)=b(T)(pq)(T) and (pq)(T)w=0 for w∈W: the factor q in E1 combines with p to the whole product. Symmetrically q(T) kills E2w. ② If w is killed by both p(T) and q(T), then both pieces are 0, so w=0. ③ Direct sum by the intersection criterion; the projections are read off from uniqueness. Coprimality enters only through the identity ap+bq=1, and without it step ② has nothing to stand on.

Proof. Since ap+bq=1, Theorem 6.7.1 gives idV=a(T)p(T)+b(T)q(T)=E2+E1. Throughout, polynomials in T commute with each other (Theorem 6.7.1 (c)).

The kernels lie in W. If p(T)v=0, then (pq)(T)v=q(T)p(T)v=0; so kerp(T)⊆W, and likewise kerq(T)⊆W.

The pieces. Let w∈W. Then w=idVw=E1w+E2w. Moreover p(T)(E1w)=p(T)b(T)q(T)w=b(T)(pq)(T)w=b(T)0=0, so E1w∈kerp(T), and similarly q(T)(E2w)=a(T)(pq)(T)w=0, so E2w∈kerq(T). Hence W=kerp(T)+kerq(T).

The intersection. Let v∈kerp(T)∩kerq(T). Then E1v=b(T)q(T)v=0 and E2v=a(T)p(T)v=0, so v=E1v+E2v=0. By Theorem 1.7.4, the sum is direct, which proves (a).

The projections. The splitting of w∈W in (a) is unique (Definition 1.7.2), and we have exhibited it as w=E1w+E2w; this proves the formula in (b). In particular E1w∈kerp(T)⊆W, so E1 maps W into W. As an operator on W, E1 is linear, fixes every u∈kerp(T) (whose splitting is u=u+0), and kills every vector of kerq(T) (whose splitting is 0+v). By the uniqueness in Theorem 4.5.1 (b), applied to W=kerp(T)⊕kerq(T), it is the projection onto kerp(T) along kerq(T). Swapping the roles of p and q gives the statement for E2.

  • (c) If (pq)(T)=0, then W=V, and (a) and (b) become the statements in (c), with E1=(bq)(T) and E2=(ap)(T) by Theorem 6.7.1 (b). This proves the theorem.

Bézout’s coefficients a,b are not unique, but the projections on W are, by Theorem 4.5.1 (b). So different choices of a,b give polynomials bq that may differ, while (bq)(T) always does the same thing on W. When (pq)(T)=0, the lemma turns a factorization of an annihilating polynomial into a direct sum decomposition of the whole space, with explicit projections, and each summand is carried into itself by T (Theorem 6.7.4).

Example (Recovering Projections and Direct Sums)

Let P∈L(V) be a projection. Apply Theorem 6.7.5 with p=x and q=x−1, and compare with Theorem 4.5.1 (a).

Solution. Coprime. 1⋅x+(−1)(x−1)=1, so we may take a=1, b=−1, and any common divisor of x and x−1 divides 1. Annihilating. (pq)(P)=P2−P=0 because P is a projection.

By Theorem 6.7.5 (c), V=kerP⊕ker(P−idV), with projection E1=b(P)q(P)=−(P−idV)=idV−P onto kerP along ker(P−idV), and E2=a(P)p(P)=P onto ker(P−idV) along kerP.

To compare, note that ker(P−idV)=imP. (⊆) If Pv=v, then v∈imP. (⊇) If v=Pu, then Pv=P2u=Pu=v. So the lemma gives V=imP⊕kerP, with P the projection onto imP along kerP: this is Theorem 4.5.1 (a). It also reproves Exercise (B2: The complementary projection), that idV−P is the complementary projection.

Example (Recovering the Involution Decomposition)

Let F have characteristic not 2, and let T∈L(V) with T2=idV. Apply Theorem 6.7.5 with p=x−1 and q=x+1, and compare with Theorem 4.5.5. What goes wrong in characteristic 2?

Solution. Coprime. Since 2≠0 in F (Definition 0.7.2), −12(x−1)+12(x+1)=1, so a=−12 and b=12 work, and a common divisor of p and q divides 1. Annihilating. (pq)(T)=T2−idV=0.

By Theorem 6.7.5 (c), V=ker(T−idV)⊕ker(T+idV)=E+⊕E−, and the projection onto E+ along E− is b(T)q(T)=12(T+idV). These are exactly the conclusions of Theorem 4.5.5. The other projection is a(T)p(T)=12(idV−T).

In characteristic 2, x+1=x−1, so p=q and gcd(p,q)=x−1≠1. The lemma does not apply, and the warning after Theorem 4.5.5 shows that the conclusion really fails there.

The lemma applies just as well when neither factor is linear, and then it finds subspaces that are not visible from single vectors.

Example (A Splitting with a Repeated Factor)

Let A=(01−1001001)∈M3(Q). Verify that A2(A−I3)=O, and use Theorem 6.7.5 with p=x2, q=x−1 to split Q3, giving both projections as polynomials in A.

Solution. The relation. A2=(000001001), and A3=A⋅A2=(000001001)=A2. So A2(A−I3)=A3−A2=O.

Bézout. x2=(x+1)(x−1)+1, so 1⋅x2+(−(x+1))(x−1)=1: take a=1, b=−(x+1). Then E1=b(A)q(A)=−(A+I3)(A−I3)=I3−A2=(10001−1000),E2=a(A)p(A)=A2. The summands. kerA2={(x,y,z):z=0}=span(e1,e2), and ker(A−I3) is cut out by −x+y−z=0, −y+z=0, 0=0, so it is span((0,1,1)). By Theorem 6.7.5 (c), Q3=span(e1,e2)⊕span((0,1,1)), and for v=(x,y,z), the splitting is E1v+E2v=(x,y−z,0)+(0,z,z). One checks directly that (x,y−z,0) has third entry 0 and (0,z,z) is a multiple of (0,1,1).

Note that kerA=span(e1) is strictly smaller than kerA2. The factor p=x2 could not be replaced by x: the polynomial x(x−1) does not annihilate A, since A2−A≠O.

Warning. Without coprimality the kernels need not fill ker(pq)(T), or even form a direct sum. Let T=TN with N=(0100) on F2, and p=q=x. Then (pq)(T)=N2=O, so ker(pq)(T)=F2. But kerp(T)=kerq(T)=kerN=span(e1). The two kernels are equal, so their sum is not direct, and span(e1)+span(e1)=span(e1)≠F2. Here gcd(x,x)=x, and no identity ax+bx=1 exists, since its left side vanishes at 0.

Quick check. Let T∈L(V) satisfy T2=3T, over a field with 3≠0. Split V with the lemma, and write the projection onto kerT as a polynomial in T.

Solution. x(x−3) annihilates T. Since 13x−13(x−3)=1, p=x and q=x−3 are coprime with a=13, b=−13. By Theorem 6.7.5 (c), V=kerT⊕ker(T−3idV), and the projection onto kerT along ker(T−3idV) is b(T)q(T)=−13(T−3idV)=idV−13T.

In Chapter 9 the lemma is used with an annihilating polynomial factored into powers of distinct irreducibles, m=p1e1⋯pkek. Distinct monic irreducibles are coprime, and so are their powers, so the lemma with k factors (Exercise (C2: Splitting with k coprime factors)) splits V into the pieces kerpi(T)ei. That is the primary decomposition, and the canonical forms of Chapter 10 are built on it.

6.7.5. Exercises

A. Check your understanding

Exercise (A1)
  • (a) State what it means that p↦p(T) is linear and multiplicative.
  • (b) True or false: if p(T)q(T)=0, then p(T)=0 or q(T)=0. Justify your answer.
  • (c) Why does every operator on a finite-dimensional space have a nonzero annihilating polynomial? Is the same true on F[x]?
  • (d) True or false: if p annihilates T and p∣q, then q annihilates T. Justify your answer.
  • (e) State the kernel splitting lemma for (pq)(T)=0, and say where coprimality is used in its proof.
  • (f) True or false: for every subspace U of V and every T∈L(V), T maps U into U. Justify your answer.

Solution.

  • (a) (cp+q)(T)=cp(T)+q(T) and (pq)(T)=p(T)q(T) for all p,q∈F[x] and c∈F (Theorem 6.7.1).

  • (b) False. For the projection P(x,y)=(x,0), P(P−id)=0 while P≠0 and P−id≠0.

  • (c) L(V) has dimension n2, so the n2+1 operators idV,T,…,Tn2 are linearly dependent, and a dependence is a nonzero annihilating polynomial (Theorem 6.7.2). On F[x], multiplication by x has no nonzero annihilating polynomial, since p(S)(1)=p.

  • (d) True. If q=hp, then q(T)=h(T)p(T)=0. This is the ideal property (Theorem 6.7.3).

  • (e) If p,q are coprime and (pq)(T)=0, then V=kerp(T)⊕kerq(T), and the projections are polynomials in T (Theorem 6.7.5). Coprimality gives ap+bq=1, hence idV=a(T)p(T)+b(T)q(T), which both produces the splitting of each vector and shows the intersection is {0}.

  • (f) False. The rotation R(x,y)=(−y,x) maps the x-axis to the y-axis. The statement is true for U=kerp(T) and U=imp(T) (Theorem 6.7.4).

B. Practice

Exercise (B1: A polynomial of a 2×2 matrix)

Let A=(123−1)∈M2(Q).

  • (a) Compute p(A) for p=x2−7 and for q=x2+x−5.
  • (b) Hence show that A is invertible and find A−1 as a polynomial in A.

Solution.

  • (a) A2=(1+62−23−36+1)=7I2. Hence p(A)=A2−7I2=O. For q, divide: q=(x2−7)+(x+2), so by Theorem 6.7.1 q(A)=p(A)+A+2I2=(3231). (Directly: 7I2+A−5I2=A+2I2.)

  • (b) From A2=7I2, A(17A)=(17A)A=I2. So A is invertible with A−1=17A=(172737−17).

Exercise (B2: An annihilating polynomial by elimination)

Let C=(00210−1012)∈M3(Q).

  • (a) Compute C2 and C3, and show that (I3,C,C2) is linearly independent.
  • (b) Find a linear dependence among I3,C,C2,C3, and hence a monic polynomial p of degree 3 with p(C)=O.
  • (c) Hence show that C is invertible and write C−1 as a polynomial in C.

Solution.

  • (a) Multiplying out, C2=(0240−10123),C3=C⋅C2=(246−101236). Let aI3+bC+cC2=O. The (2,1)-entry gives b=0; the (3,1)-entry gives c=0; then the (1,1)-entry gives a=0. So the list is independent.

  • (b) Let aI3+bC+cC2+dC3=O. Reading entries: (2,1): b−d=0; (3,1): c+2d=0; (1,1): a+2d=0. With d=1: b=1, c=−2, a=−2. Check all entries of −2I3+C−2C2+C3: row 1 is (−2+0−0+2, 0−4+4, 2−8+6)=(0,0,0); row 2 is (1−0−1, −2+0+2+0, −1−0+1)=(0,0,0); row 3 is (0−2+2, 1−4+3, −2+2−6+6)=(0,0,0). Hence p=x3−2x2+x−2=(x−2)(x2+1) satisfies p(C)=O. By (a) no nonzero polynomial of degree at most 2 annihilates C, so p is the monic generator of IC (Theorem 6.7.3).

  • (c) C3−2C2+C=2I3, that is, C(C2−2C+I3)=(C2−2C+I3)C=2I3, using Theorem 6.7.1 (c) for the second equality. Since 2≠0 in Q, C is invertible with C−1=12(C2−2C+I3)=(1210−1011200).

Exercise (B3: Operators with T3=T)

Let F have characteristic not 2, and let T∈L(V) with T3=T.

  • (a) Use Theorem 6.7.5 with p=x and q=x2−1 to show V=kerT⊕ker(T2−idV), with projection idV−T2 onto kerT.
  • (b) Show that V=kerT⊕ker(T−idV)⊕ker(T+idV).
  • (c) Verify that the projections onto the three summands in (b) are idV−T2, 12(T2+T), and 12(T2−T), in the sense that these three operators sum to idV and each maps V into the corresponding kernel.

Solution.

  • (a) x⋅x+(−1)(x2−1)=1: take a=x, b=−1. Then p and q are coprime, and (pq)(T)=T3−T=0. By Theorem 6.7.5 (c), V=kerT⊕ker(T2−idV), and the projection onto kerT is b(T)q(T)=−(T2−idV)=idV−T2.

  • (b) Let W=ker(T2−idV). Apply Theorem 6.7.5 (a) with p1=x−1, q1=x+1, which are coprime as in Example (Recovering the Involution Decomposition): W=ker(p1q1)(T)=ker(T−idV)⊕ker(T+idV). Write K0=kerT, K+=ker(T−idV), K−=ker(T+idV). Then V=K0+K++K− by (a). If u0+u++u−=0 with u0∈K0, u±∈K±, then u++u−∈W, so directness in (a) gives u0=0 and u++u−=0, and directness of W=K+⊕K− gives u+=u−=0. By Theorem 1.7.5 ((b) ⇒ (a)), the sum is direct.

  • (c) The sum is idV−T2+12T2+12T+12T2−12T=idV. Using T3=T: T(idV−T2)=T−T3=0; (T−idV)12(T2+T)=12(T3−T)=0; (T+idV)12(T2−T)=12(T3−T)=0. So the three operators map V into K0, K+, K− respectively. For v∈V, v is the sum of its three images, and by the uniqueness of the splitting in (b) these are the components of v. Hence each operator is the projection onto its summand along the sum of the other two.

C. Going deeper

Exercise (C1: Inverses are polynomials)

Let V be a vector space over F and T∈L(V).

  • (a) Suppose p(T)=0 for some p∈F[x] with p(0)≠0. Prove that T is invertible and that T−1=g(T) for some g∈F[x].
  • (b) Deduce that if V is finite-dimensional and T is invertible, then T−1 is a polynomial in T.
  • (c) Show that the monic generator m of IT, for V finite-dimensional and nonzero, satisfies m(0)≠0 if and only if T is invertible.

Hint: for (b), write a nonzero annihilating polynomial as xkp1 with p1(0)≠0.

Solution.

  • (a) Write p=c+xg0, where c=p(0)≠0 and g0∈F[x]. Then 0=p(T)=cidV+Tg0(T), so Tg0(T)=−cidV. Put g=−c−1g0. Then Tg(T)=idV, and g(T)T=Tg(T)=idV by Theorem 6.7.1 (c). Hence T is invertible with T−1=g(T).

  • (b) If V={0}, then T−1=idV=1(T). Otherwise, by Theorem 6.7.2 there is a nonzero p with p(T)=0. Let k be the least index with a nonzero coefficient in p; then p=xkp1 with p1(0)≠0. Now 0=p(T)=Tkp1(T). Since T is invertible, so is Tk, with inverse (T−1)k, and composing on the left with it gives p1(T)=0. By (a), T−1 is a polynomial in T.

  • (c) (⇒) If m(0)≠0, apply (a) to m. (⇐) Suppose T is invertible and m(0)=0. Then m=xm1 with m1 monic of degree deg⁡m−1, and 0=m(T)=Tm1(T). Composing with T−1 gives m1(T)=0, so m∣m1 by Theorem 6.7.3 (b). Since V≠{0}, m is not constant, so m1≠0 and deg⁡m≤deg⁡m1=deg⁡m−1 by Theorem 0.8.3, a contradiction. Hence m(0)≠0.

Exercise (C2: Splitting with k coprime factors)

Let T∈L(V), and let p1,…,pk∈F[x] be nonzero and pairwise coprime, with k≥2. Put p=p1⋯pk and W=kerp(T).

  • (a) Use Theorem 6.6.4 to find e1,…,ek∈F[x] with ei≡1(modpi) and ei≡0(modpj) for j≠i. Show that p∣e1+⋯+ek−1 and that p∣piei for each i.
  • (b) Prove that for every w∈W, w=e1(T)w+⋯+ek(T)w with ei(T)w∈kerpi(T).
  • (c) Prove that W=kerp1(T)⊕⋯⊕kerpk(T), and that ei(T) is the identity on kerpi(T) and zero on kerpj(T) for j≠i.
  • (d) Deduce: if p(T)=0, then V=kerp1(T)⊕⋯⊕kerpk(T), and the projection onto the i-th summand along the others is the polynomial ei(T).

Hint: for the second divisibility in (a), use Lemma 6.6.3 (b).

Solution.

  • (a) By Theorem 6.6.4 (a), applied to the pairwise coprime moduli p1,…,pk with ri=1 and rj=0 for j≠i, such an ei exists. The sum s=e1+⋯+ek satisfies s≡1(modpj) for each j, since exactly one summand is ≡1 and the others are ≡0. The constant 1 satisfies the same congruences, so s≡1(modp) by Theorem 6.6.4 (b). For the second claim, pj∣ei for every j≠i, and these pj are pairwise coprime, so ∏j≠ipj∣ei by Lemma 6.6.3 (b). Multiplying by pi, p∣piei.

  • (b) Write e1+⋯+ek=1+hp and piei=hip. By Theorem 6.7.1, for w∈W, e1(T)w+⋯+ek(T)w=w+h(T)p(T)w=w,pi(T)(ei(T)w)=hi(T)p(T)w=0.

  • (c) Each kerpi(T)⊆W, since p(T)=(∏j≠ipj)(T)pi(T). With (b), W=kerp1(T)+⋯+kerpk(T). Let uj∈kerpj(T). For j≠i, pj∣ei, say ei=gpj, so ei(T)uj=g(T)pj(T)uj=0. And ei=1+g′pi, so ei(T)ui=ui+g′(T)pi(T)ui=ui. This proves the second statement. Now suppose u1+⋯+uk=0 with uj∈kerpj(T). Applying ei(T) gives ui=0, for each i. By Theorem 1.7.5 ((b) ⇒ (a)), the sum is direct.

  • (d) If p(T)=0, then W=V. By (c), V is the direct sum, and ei(T)∈L(V) is the identity on the i-th summand and zero on the others. For v=u1+⋯+uk, ei(T)v=ui, which is the projection onto kerpi(T) along the sum of the other summands. For k=2 this is Theorem 6.7.5 (c).

Exercise (C3: The same rotation over R and over C)

Let A=(0−110), so that A2+I2=O.

  • (a) Over C, apply Theorem 6.7.5 to TA on C2 with p=x−i and q=x+i. Find both kernels and write the projection onto ker(A−iI2) as a polynomial in A.
  • (b) Over R, show that the only subspaces of R2 that TA maps into themselves are {0} and R2. Explain why this matches the fact that x2+1 admits no factorization into coprime nonconstant factors in R[x].

Solution.

  • (a) (x+i)−(x−i)=2i, so i2(x−i)−i2(x+i)=i2(−2i)=1: take a=i2 and b=−i2. So p,q are coprime, and (pq)(A)=A2+I2=O. By Theorem 6.7.5 (c), C2=ker(A−iI2)⊕ker(A+iI2). Solving, (A−iI2)(z,w)=(−iz−w, z−iw)=0 gives w=−iz, so ker(A−iI2)=span((1,−i)); similarly ker(A+iI2)=span((1,i)). The projection onto ker(A−iI2) is b(A)q(A)=−i2(A+iI2)=12(I2−iA)=(12i2−i212). Check: it sends (1,−i) to (12+12, −i2−i2)=(1,−i) and (1,i) to (12−12, −i2+i2)=0.

  • (b) A subspace of R2 other than {0} and R2 has dimension 1 (Theorem 1.6.7), so it is span(v) with v=(s,t)≠0. If Av∈span(v), then (−t,s)=c(s,t) for some c∈R, so −t=cs and s=ct, giving s=−c2s and t=−c2t. Since 1+c2>0, s=t=0, a contradiction. So only {0} and R2 are mapped into themselves.

Over R, x2+1 has no root, so its only monic divisors are 1 and x2+1, and the only factorizations x2+1=pq into monic factors have p=1 or q=1. The lemma then gives only kerp(T)⊕kerq(T)={0}⊕R2, and by (b) there is no finer splitting into subspaces preserved by TA at all. Enlarging the field to C creates the coprime factors x∓i, and with them the splitting of (a).

Found a typo or a mistake? Report it, or read this page’s source

The text of this book is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0.