9.10  Spectral Mapping, Products in Both Orders, Left Eigenvectors

Once the eigenvalues of T are known, what can we say about the eigenvalues of T2, of T2−3T+I, or of any polynomial in T? And when two matrices are multiplied in the two possible orders, how are the eigenvalues of AB and BA related? This section answers both questions using the triangular forms of Section 7 and the block matrices of Chapter 8. Along the way it settles two debts: Chapter 7 showed pAB=pBA only when A is invertible, and Chapter 8 proved that vanishing traces of all powers force a matrix to be nilpotent by a long computation, with no explanation of why. We end with left eigenvectors, the eigenvectors of the transpose, which pair with ordinary eigenvectors in a useful way and prepare the Markov chains of Section 11.

9.10.1. Eigenvalues of a polynomial in T

One half of the answer needs no theory. If Tv=λv with v≠0, then Tkv=λkv for every k, and so q(T)v=q(λ)v for every q∈F[x] (Exercise (B3: Eigenvalues of powers and inverses)). So q maps eigenvalues of T to eigenvalues of q(T), over every field and in every dimension.

The other half, that every eigenvalue of q(T) arises this way, can fail. Part (c) of Exercise (B3: Eigenvalues of powers and inverses) already met the rotation R=(0−110) on R2: it has no real eigenvalue, while R2=−I has the eigenvalue −1. The eigenvalues of R that would map to −1, namely ±i, are missing from R. So we expect the full statement to need a characteristic polynomial that splits. With that hypothesis we even get the multiplicities, because a triangular form shows all the eigenvalues at once on its diagonal.

The eigenvalues of q(T) are the values of q at the eigenvalues of T, counted with multiplicity.

Theorem 9.10.1 (Spectral Mapping Theorem)

Let V be a finite-dimensional vector space over F with dim⁡V=n≥1, and let T∈L(V). Suppose pT splits over F, say pT(x)=(x−λ1)(x−λ2)⋯(x−λn), where each eigenvalue appears as often as its algebraic multiplicity. Then for every q∈F[x], pq(T)(x)=(x−q(λ1))(x−q(λ2))⋯(x−q(λn)), and consequently spec(q(T))=q(spec(T))={q(λ):λ∈spec(T)}. In particular this holds for every operator on a nonzero finite-dimensional complex space, and for every A∈Mn(C).

Idea. Choose a basis B in which T is upper triangular (Section 7). Its diagonal is λ1,…,λn. Products and sums of upper triangular matrices are upper triangular, and their diagonals are computed position by position, so q([T]BB) is upper triangular with diagonal q(λ1),…,q(λn). The characteristic polynomial of a triangular matrix is read off its diagonal.

Proof. By Theorem 9.7.2 there is a basis B of V such that U=[T]BB is upper triangular. By Theorem 9.7.4, its diagonal entries are λ1,…,λn in some order; renumbering the λi, we may assume uii=λi.

Claim. If X,Y∈Mn(F) are upper triangular, then so are X+Y, cX for c∈F, and XY, with diagonal entries xii+yii, cxii, and xiiyii.

Proof. The statements for X+Y and cX are entrywise. For the product, (XY)ij=∑k=1nxikykj (Definition 0.9.9). If i>j, every k has k<i or k≥i>j, so xik=0 or ykj=0, and the sum is 0. If i=j, the only term that can be nonzero has k≥i and k≤i, so (XY)ii=xiiyii.

By the claim and induction on k, Uk is upper triangular with diagonal entries λ1k,…,λnk (for k=0, U0=I). Writing q=∑kakxk, the claim again shows that q(U)=∑kakUk is upper triangular with diagonal entries ∑kakλik=q(λi). By Corollary 4.1.3, [q(T)]BB=q(U), so by Definition 7.10.2 and the examples after Definition 7.10.1, pq(T)=pq(U)=∏i=1n(x−q(λi)). For the spectra: by Theorem 9.2.1, μ∈F is an eigenvalue of q(T) if and only if pq(T)(μ)=∏i(μ−q(λi))=0, that is, if and only if μ=q(λi) for some i, since a product of nonzero field elements is nonzero. The λi are exactly the eigenvalues of T, each listed at least once (Theorem 9.2.1). Hence spec(q(T))={q(λ):λ∈spec(T)}. Over C, pT always splits by Corollary 6.5.5.

The formula for pq(T) carries more than the spectrum. The algebraic multiplicity of μ as an eigenvalue of q(T) is the number of indices i with q(λi)=μ (Lemma 6.4.1), so several eigenvalues of T can merge into one eigenvalue of q(T), and their multiplicities add. Combined with Theorem 9.3.3, applied to q(T), whose characteristic polynomial splits by the theorem, we get the most used consequence.

Corollary 9.10.2 (Trace and Determinant of a Polynomial in T)

Under the hypotheses of Theorem 9.10.1, for every q∈F[x], trq(T)=q(λ1)+⋯+q(λn),detq(T)=q(λ1)⋯q(λn). In particular trTk=λ1k+⋯+λnk for every k∈N.

Proof. By Theorem 9.10.1, pq(T)=∏i(x−q(λi)) splits. Group equal values: if μ1,…,μs are the distinct values among the q(λi), then μj occurs exactly aq(T)(μj) times in the list (Lemma 6.4.1). By Theorem 9.3.3 applied to q(T), trq(T)=∑jaq(T)(μj)μj=∑iq(λi) and detq(T)=∏jμjaq(T)(μj)=∏iq(λi). Take q=xk for the last statement.

Example (A Polynomial in a Non-Diagonalizable Matrix)

Let A=(111201−332)∈M3(R), for which Exercise (B1: Diagonalize or show impossible) found pA=(x+1)(x−2)2 and showed that A is not diagonalizable. Without computing any eigenvectors, find pA2, trA2, and detA2. Then find pq(A) for q=x2−x−2, and decide whether q(A)=O.

Solution. The square. pA splits over R with the list λ1=−1, λ2=λ3=2. By Theorem 9.10.1 with q=x2, the list for A2 is 1,4,4, so pA2=(x−1)(x−4)2,trA2=1+4+4=9,detA2=1⋅4⋅4=16 by Corollary 9.10.2. Check. Multiplying out, A2=(044−154−334), whose trace is 0+5+4=9; and detA=(−1)⋅2⋅2=−4 by Theorem 9.3.3, so detA2=(detA)2=16 by Theorem 7.5.4.

The polynomial q. Here q=(x−2)(x+1), so q(−1)=0 and q(2)=0. The list for q(A) is 0,0,0, and pq(A)=x3: the only eigenvalue of q(A) is 0. Yet q(A)≠O. Indeed q(A)=A2−A−2I=(−333−333000), and one checks q(A)2=O. The spectral mapping theorem sees only eigenvalues, and a nonzero matrix can have 0 as its only eigenvalue. That q(A)≠O here is no accident: if q(A)=O, the minimal polynomial of A would divide (Theorem 9.5.1) (x−2)(x+1), which has distinct roots, and A would be diagonalizable by Theorem 9.8.2.

Warning. Without splitting, spectral mapping fails. For the real rotation R above, spec(R)=∅ in R, so q(spec(R))=∅ for q=x2, while spec(R2)=spec(−I)={−1}. Over C the theorem is restored: spec(R)={i,−i}, both square to −1, and pR2=(x+1)2. Also, the theorem is about eigenvalues and algebraic multiplicities only: A=diag(1,−1) has two one-dimensional eigenspaces, while A2=I has the single eigenspace R2.

Quick check. Let A∈M2(C) have eigenvalues i and −i. Find pA2 and det(A2+I).

Solution. The list for A is i,−i (two distinct roots of the degree-2 polynomial pA). By Theorem 9.10.1 with q=x2, the list for A2 is −1,−1, so pA2=(x+1)2. With q=x2+1, Corollary 9.10.2 gives det(A2+I)=q(i)q(−i)=0⋅0=0.

9.10.2. Traces of powers detect nilpotency

Chapter 8 proved, in Exercise (C2: When A commutes with [A,B]), that a matrix C over a field of characteristic 0 with trCk=0 for every k≥1 is nilpotent, by a careful argument with annihilating polynomials that gave no reason for the result. Here is the view through eigenvalues, for complex matrices. The traces of the powers are the power sums λ1k+⋯+λnk of the eigenvalues (Corollary 9.10.2), and a nilpotent matrix is one whose eigenvalues are all 0. So the question becomes: if all power sums of n complex numbers vanish, must the numbers vanish? A Vandermonde determinant says yes.

Theorem 9.10.3 (Nilpotent Matrices via Eigenvalues and Traces)

Let n≥1 and A∈Mn(C). The following are equivalent:

  • (a) A is nilpotent, that is, As=O for some s≥1;
  • (b) spec(A)={0};
  • (c) pA=xn;
  • (d) An=O;
  • (e) trAk=0 for k=1,2,…,n.

The same holds for A∈Mn(F) when F is a subfield of C, such as Q or R, with spec(A) in (b) taken over C.

Idea. Plan: (a) ⇒ (b) ⇒ (c) ⇒ (d) ⇒ (a), and (c) ⇒ (e) ⇒ (b). All but one arrow are short. For (e) ⇒ (b), suppose some eigenvalue is nonzero. Group the nonzero eigenvalues into distinct values μ1,…,μr with multiplicities m1,…,mr≥1. The vanishing traces say ∑jmjμjk=0 for k=1,…,r: a square linear system for the vector (m1,…,mr), whose matrix is a Vandermonde matrix times the invertible diag(μj). So the mj would be 0, but they are positive integers, and positive integers are nonzero in C.

Proof.

  • (a) ⇒ (b). Let As=O with s≥1. If Av=λv with v≠0, then Asv=λsv by induction on s, so λsv=0 and λs=0 by Theorem 1.1.9; hence λ=0, since a product of nonzero scalars is nonzero (Theorem 0.7.1 (f)). So spec(A)⊆{0}. Conversely A is not injective: if it were, its s-fold composite As would be injective too (Theorem 0.4.3 (a)), whereas As=O is not injective on Cn≠{0}. Hence 0∈spec(A) by Theorem 9.2.1 ((b) ⇒ (a)), and spec(A)={0}.

  • (b) ⇒ (c). By Corollary 6.5.5, pA=(x−z1)⋯(x−zn) with zi∈C. Each zi is an eigenvalue (Theorem 9.2.1), hence 0, so pA=xn.

  • (c) ⇒ (d). By Corollary 9.7.3, A=PUP−1 with P invertible and U upper triangular, and by Theorem 9.7.4 the diagonal entries of U are the roots of pA=xn, all 0. Then Ue1=0 and Uej∈span(e1,…,ej−1) for j≥2, since column j of U has zeros from row j down. By induction on j, Ujej=0, hence Unej=Un−jUjej=0 for every j, and Un=O. By Proposition 4.2.6 (c), An=PUnP−1=O.

  • (d) ⇒ (a). Take s=n.

  • (e) ⇒ (e). The list of eigenvalues of A with multiplicity is 0,…,0, so by Corollary 9.10.2, trAk=0k+⋯+0k=0 for every k≥1.

  • (f) ⇒ (b). By Corollary 6.5.5, pA splits; let λ1,…,λn be the list of its roots with multiplicity. Since n≥1, spec(A) is nonempty, so it suffices to show that every λi=0. Suppose not, let μ1,…,μr (1≤r≤n) be the distinct nonzero values among the λi, and let mj≥1 be the number of indices i with λi=μj. For 1≤k≤r, the zero eigenvalues contribute 0k=0, so by Corollary 9.10.2 and (e), ∑j=1rmjμjk=trAk=0. In matrix form, Wm=0, where m=(m1,…,mr)∈Cr and W∈Mr(C) has (k,j)-entry μjk=μjk−1μj. Hence W=V(μ1,…,μr)⊤diag(μ1,…,μr), where V(μ1,…,μr) is the Vandermonde matrix with (j,k)-entry μjk−1 (Theorem 7.8.1). The μj are distinct, so V is invertible (Corollary 7.8.2), and so is V⊤, with inverse (V−1)⊤ (Theorem 0.9.5). The μj are nonzero, so diag(μ1,…,μr) is invertible. Therefore W is invertible, and m=W−10=0. But m1 is a positive integer, and m1≠0 in C. This contradiction shows that every λi=0, so spec(A)={0}.

For a subfield F⊆C, regard A as a complex matrix. Its powers, their traces, its characteristic polynomial, and the condition As=O are computed by the same arithmetic in F and in C, so (a), (c), (d), and (e) mean the same thing over F and over C, and the equivalences carry over.

In the setting of Exercise (C2: When A commutes with [A,B]), where C=[A,B] commutes with A, part (a) of that exercise gives trCk=0 for all k≥1, and for complex matrices the theorem now shows at once that Cn=O. That exercise remains the route for a general field of characteristic 0.

Warning. The characteristic matters. Over Fp, the identity Ip∈Mp(Fp) has trIpk=p⋅1=0 for every k, yet Ipk=Ip≠O. The proof above breaks exactly where it used that the positive integer m1 is nonzero in the field: here the multiplicity m1=p of the eigenvalue 1 is 0 in Fp.

9.10.3. AB and BA

Chapter 7, in Exercise (B3: AB and BA), showed that pAB=pBA for square A and B when A is invertible, because then BA=A−1(AB)A is similar to AB. Without invertibility the two products need not be similar, and for rectangular A and B they do not even have the same size: if A is m×n and B is n×m, then AB is m×m and BA is n×n. Their characteristic polynomials have degrees m and n. Multiplying by powers of x repairs the degrees, and the identity then holds in general.

Theorem 9.10.4 (AB and BA Have the Same Nonzero Eigenvalues)

Let m,n≥1, A∈Mm×n(F), and B∈Mn×m(F). Then xnpAB(x)=xmpBA(x). Consequently:

  • (a) for every λ≠0 in F, aAB(λ)=aBA(λ); in particular AB and BA have the same nonzero eigenvalues;
  • (b) if m=n, then pAB=pBA; and if m≥n, then pAB=xm−npBA.

Idea. We want one big matrix that “contains” AB and another that “contains” BA, and that are similar to each other. Put them in (m+n)×(m+n) block form: M=(ABOBO),N=(OOBBA). Both are block triangular, so their characteristic polynomials are pAB⋅xn and xm⋅pBA. The invertible block matrix S=(ImAOIn) turns one into the other: MS and SN are both (ABABABBA).

Proof. Let M,N,S∈Mm+n(F) be the block matrices displayed in the Idea, partitioned by m,n in rows and columns. By Theorem 8.1.1, MS=(AB⋅Im+OAB⋅A+OB⋅Im+OB⋅A+O)=(ABABABBA),SN=(O+ABO+A⋅BAO+BO+BA)=(ABABABBA), using associativity (Theorem 0.9.4). So MS=SN. The matrix S is invertible: by Theorem 8.1.1, (ImAOIn)(Im−AOIn)=(Im−A+AOIn)=Im+n, and Theorem 3.4.5 applies. Hence S−1MS=N, and pM=pN by Theorem 7.10.3.

Now compute both sides. The matrix xIm+n−M=(xIm−ABO−BxIn) is lower block triangular with square diagonal blocks, so by Theorem 7.8.4, which holds over the commutative ring F[x] (the remarks before Example (A 3×3 Characteristic Polynomial)), and by Theorem 7.4.6 for xIn, pM(x)=det(xIm−AB)det(xIn)=pAB(x)xn. Likewise xIm+n−N=(xImO−BxIn−BA) gives pN(x)=xmpBA(x). Since pM=pN, this proves xnpAB=xmpBA.

  • (a) Let λ≠0. Then λ is not a root of xn, so multλ(xn)=0, and similarly for xm. By Theorem 6.4.2, aAB(λ)=multλ(xnpAB)=multλ(xmpBA)=aBA(λ). A scalar is an eigenvalue exactly when its algebraic multiplicity is positive (Theorem 9.2.1, Definition 6.4.1), so the nonzero eigenvalues agree.

  • (b) If m≥n, then xnpAB=xn(xm−npBA), and canceling the nonzero polynomial xn (Corollary 0.8.4) gives pAB=xm−npBA. For m=n this is pAB=pBA.

This pays off the promise of Exercise (B3: AB and BA): pAB=pBA for all square A and B, invertible or not. Comparing coefficients (Theorem 7.10.2) recovers tr(AB)=tr(BA) and det(AB)=det(BA) once more.

The eigenvectors travel between the two products as well, and by hand. If ABw=λw with λ≠0, then BA(Bw)=B(ABw)=λBw, and Bw≠0, since A(Bw)=λw≠0. So Bw is an eigenvector of BA for the same λ: multiplying an eigenvector of AB by B produces one of BA. For λ=0 the recipe can fail, because Bw may be 0 — which is the warning below in another guise.

A rank-one example. Let u,v∈Fn with n≥2. Take A=u∈Mn×1(F) and B=v⊤∈M1×n(F). Then AB=uv⊤ is n×n, and BA=v⊤u is the 1×1 matrix whose entry is the number c=v⊤u, so pBA=x−c. Applying the theorem with its m equal to our n, and its n equal to 1, gives xpuv⊤=xn(x−c), and canceling x, puv⊤(x)=xn−1(x−v⊤u). For instance, the all-ones matrix 11⊤∈Mn(R), with 1=(1,…,1), has p=xn−1(x−n): eigenvalue 0 with multiplicity n−1, and eigenvalue n. Evaluating at −1 recovers Theorem 7.8.5: det(I+uv⊤)=(−1)ndet(−I−uv⊤)=(−1)npuv⊤(−1)=(−1)n(−1)n−1(−1−v⊤u)=1+v⊤u.

Warning. The zero eigenvalue behaves differently, and AB need not be similar to BA. Take A=E12 and B=E11 in M2(F). Then AB=E12E11=O and BA=E11E12=E12. Both have p=x2, as the theorem demands. But gAB(0)=2 while gBA(0)=1, and AB=O is similar only to O, so AB≁BA. For rectangular matrices even the algebraic multiplicities of 0 differ, by |m−n|.

Quick check. Let A∈M2×5(R) and B∈M5×2(R) with pAB=x2−3x+2. What is pBA, and what are tr(BA) and det(BA)?

Solution. By Theorem 9.10.4 with m=2, n=5, x5pAB=x2pBA, so pBA=x3(x2−3x+2)=x5−3x4+2x3. By Theorem 7.10.2, tr(BA)=3 (equal to tr(AB)), and det(BA)=(−1)5⋅0=0, as it must be, since BA has rank at most 2<5.

9.10.4. Left eigenvectors

An eigenvector multiplies A from the right: Av=λv. Row vectors can multiply from the left, and in applications, especially Markov chains, the row version is often the one with a meaning.

A left eigenvector is a row that A only stretches when it acts from the right of the row.

Definition 9.10.1 (Left Eigenvector)

Let A∈Mn(F) and λ∈F. A left eigenvector of A for λ is a nonzero y∈Fn with y⊤A=λy⊤. To distinguish them, the eigenvectors of Definition 9.2.1 are also called right eigenvectors.

In words: y⊤ is a 1×n row, y⊤A is again a row, and we ask that it be a multiple of y⊤. For example, A=(1232) and y=(1,1) give y⊤A=(44)=4y⊤, so (1,1) is a left eigenvector for 4, whereas the right eigenvectors for 4 are the multiples of (2,3) (Example (Eigenvalues and Eigenspaces of a 2×2 Matrix)). For a diagonal matrix, ei is both a left and a right eigenvector for the i-th diagonal entry. And y=0 always satisfies the equation, which is why it is excluded, exactly as for right eigenvectors.

Nonexample by minimal change. For the same A, change y=(1,1) to y=(1,−1). Then y⊤A=(1−32−2)=(−20), which is not a multiple of (1−1): the row is nonzero, but the defining equation y⊤A=λy⊤ has no solution λ. Note that (1,−1) is a right eigenvector of A, for −1; the two notions do not agree.

Transposing turns the definition into one we know.

Proposition 9.10.5 (Left Eigenvectors Are Eigenvectors of the Transpose)

Let A∈Mn(F) and λ∈F.

  • (a) y is a left eigenvector of A for λ if and only if y is an eigenvector of A⊤ for λ.
  • (b) A has a left eigenvector for λ if and only if λ∈spec(A). Moreover pA⊤=pA, and aA⊤(λ)=aA(λ), gA⊤(λ)=gA(λ).

Proof.

  • (a) By Theorem 0.9.5, (y⊤A)⊤=A⊤y and (λy⊤)⊤=λy. Since transposing twice gives back the original, y⊤A=λy⊤ if and only if A⊤y=λy.

  • (b) First, pA⊤=pA: by Theorem 0.9.5, (xI−A)⊤=xI−A⊤, and transposing does not change a determinant (Theorem 7.4.5, which holds over the commutative ring F[x] by the remark after it), so pA⊤=det(xI−A⊤)=det((xI−A)⊤)=det(xI−A)=pA. Hence aA⊤(λ)=aA(λ), and spec(A⊤)=spec(A) by Theorem 9.2.1. With (a), A has a left eigenvector for λ if and only if λ∈spec(A⊤)=spec(A). Finally, A⊤−λI=(A−λI)⊤, which has the same rank as A−λI (Theorem 3.5.5), so by Theorem 3.5.7, gA⊤(λ)=n−rank(A−λI)⊤=n−rank(A−λI)=gA(λ).

Remark. For an operator T on V, left eigenvectors correspond to eigenvectors of the dual map T′ on V∗ (Chapter 5), whose matrix in the dual bases is the transpose (Theorem 5.4.2): an eigenvector of T′ is a functional φ≠0 with φ∘T=λφ.

Left and right eigenvectors for the same eigenvalue are usually unrelated, as (1,1) and (2,3) show. For different eigenvalues, though, they are always orthogonal in the sense of the plain product y⊤v.

Theorem 9.10.6 (Left and Right Eigenvectors Are Biorthogonal)

Let A∈Mn(F), let y be a left eigenvector of A for μ, and let v be a right eigenvector of A for λ. If λ≠μ, then y⊤v=0.

Proof. Compute the 1×1 matrix y⊤Av in two ways, using associativity (Theorem 0.9.4): μy⊤v=(y⊤A)v=y⊤Av=y⊤(Av)=λy⊤v. Hence (λ−μ)y⊤v=0. Since λ−μ≠0, this forces y⊤v=0 (Theorem 0.7.1).

For the example, (1,1) is a left eigenvector for 4 and (1,−1) a right eigenvector for −1, and indeed 1−1=0.

For a diagonalizable matrix the left eigenvectors come for free with the diagonalization, and they give a formula for all powers that we use in Section 11.

Proposition 9.10.7 (Expansion in Left and Right Eigenvectors)

Let A=PDP−1 with P∈Mn(F) invertible and D=diag(λ1,…,λn). Let v1,…,vn be the columns of P, and let y1⊤,…,yn⊤ be the rows of P−1. Then:

  • (a) vi is a right eigenvector and yi a left eigenvector of A for λi;
  • (b) yi⊤vj=1 if i=j and 0 if i≠j;
  • (c) for every q∈F[x], q(A)=∑i=1nq(λi)viyi⊤,in particularAk=∑i=1nλikviyi⊤(k∈N).

Proof.

  • (a) From AP=PD, column i reads Avi=λivi (Section 4), and vi≠0 because P is invertible. From P−1A=DP−1, row i reads yi⊤A=λiyi⊤ (Theorem 0.9.2), and yi≠0 because P−1 is invertible.

  • (b) The (i,j)-entry of P−1P=I is row i of P−1 times column j of P, that is, yi⊤vj.

  • (c) By Theorem 9.4.3, q(A)=Pq(D)P−1. The columns of Pq(D) are q(λi)vi, and the rows of P−1 are yi⊤, so Corollary 8.1.3 gives q(A)=∑iq(λi)viyi⊤. Take q=xk.

Part (b) is biorthogonality with a normalization: yi⊤vi=1. Part (c) splits A into rank-one pieces viyi⊤, one per eigenvalue, and each piece is simply multiplied by λik when A is raised to the power k. In the running example, P=(213−1) and D=diag(4,−1) give P−1=15(113−2), so y1=15(1,1) and y2=15(3,−2), and Ak=4k5(2233)+(−1)k5(3−2−32). For k=1 this is 15(8−38+212+312−2)=(1232), as it should be.

9.10.5. Exercises

A. Check your understanding

Exercise (A1)
  • (a) State the Spectral Mapping Theorem, including its hypothesis on pT.
  • (b) True or false: for every A∈Mn(R), every real eigenvalue of A2 is the square of a real eigenvalue of A. Justify your answer.
  • (c) True or false: if A∈M2×3(F) and B∈M3×2(F), then pAB=pBA. Justify your answer.
  • (d) True or false: for all A,B∈Mn(F), AB is similar to BA. Justify your answer.
  • (e) Define a left eigenvector of A∈Mn(F), and say how left eigenvectors of A are related to A⊤.
  • (f) True or false: a matrix A∈M3(C) with trA=trA2=trA3=0 satisfies A3=O. Justify your answer.

Solution.

  • (a) If V is finite-dimensional with dim⁡V=n≥1, T∈L(V), and pT=∏i=1n(x−λi) splits over F, then for every q∈F[x], pq(T)=∏i(x−q(λi)) and spec(q(T))=q(spec(T)) (Theorem 9.10.1).

  • (b) False. The rotation R=(0−110) has no real eigenvalue, while R2=−I has the real eigenvalue −1.

  • (c) False. They have different degrees, 2 and 3. The correct identity is x3pAB=x2pBA, that is, pBA=xpAB (Theorem 9.10.4).

  • (d) False. A=E12, B=E11 give AB=O and BA=E12≠O, and the only matrix similar to O is O.

  • (e) A nonzero y∈Fn with y⊤A=λy⊤ for some λ∈F. Equivalently, y is an eigenvector of A⊤ for λ (Proposition 9.10.5).

  • (f) True. By Theorem 9.10.3 with n=3, (e) ⇒ (d).

B. Practice

Exercise (B1: Eigenvalues of a polynomial in A)

Let A∈M3(C) have pA=(x−1)2(x+2).

  • (a) Find pA2+A+I, tr(A2+A+I), and det(A2+A+I). Is A2+A+I invertible?
  • (b) Find pA2+A−2I. Hence show that A2+A−2I is nilpotent.
  • (c) Find trA5 and det(A−1).

Solution. The list of eigenvalues of A with multiplicity is 1,1,−2, since pA splits.

Exercise (B2: AB and BA for a 2×3 example)

Let A=(101020) and B=(100−111).

  • (a) Compute AB, BA, pAB, and pBA, and verify that x3pAB=x2pBA.
  • (b) Hence list the eigenvalues of BA without further computation, and find an eigenvector of BA for each nonzero eigenvalue by applying B to eigenvectors of AB.

Solution.

  • (a) By row-times-column, AB=(210−2),BA=(1010−20121). AB is upper triangular, so pAB=(x−2)(x+2)=x2−4. Expanding det(xI−BA) along the second row, whose only nonzero entry is x+2 in position (2,2), pBA=(x+2)det(x−1−1−1x−1)=(x+2)((x−1)2−1)=(x+2)x(x−2)=x3−4x. Then x3pAB=x5−4x3=x2(x3−4x)=x2pBA.

  • (b) The eigenvalues of BA are the roots of x(x−2)(x+2): 0,2,−2, matching Theorem 9.10.4 (the nonzero ones are those of AB). If ABw=λw, then BA(Bw)=B(ABw)=λBw, so Bw is an eigenvector of BA as long as Bw≠0. For λ=2: w=(1,0), Bw=(1,0,1), and BA(1,0,1)=(2,0,2). For λ=−2: AB+2I=(4100) gives w=(1,−4), Bw=(1,4,−3), and BA(1,4,−3)=(1−3,−8,1+8−3)=(−2,−8,6)=−2(1,4,−3).

Exercise (B3: Left eigenvectors of a 2×2 matrix)

Let A=(01−65)∈M2(R), whose right eigenvectors (1,2) for 2 and (1,3) for 3 were found in Exercise (B1: Diagonalize or show impossible).

  • (a) Find a left eigenvector of A for each eigenvalue.
  • (b) Verify Theorem 9.10.6 for these vectors, and rescale the left eigenvectors so that yi⊤vi=1.
  • (c) Hence write Ak as a combination of two rank-one matrices, and check the formula for k=0 and k=1.

Solution.

  • (a) By Proposition 9.10.5, we need eigenvectors of A⊤=(0−615). For 2: A⊤−2I=(−2−613) gives y1=−3y2, so (3,−1). For 3: A⊤−3I=(−3−612) gives y1=−2y2, so (2,−1). Check: (3−1)A=(6−2) and (2−1)A=(6−3).

  • (b) (3,−1)⋅(1,3)=0 and (2,−1)⋅(1,2)=0, as the theorem predicts for different eigenvalues. Also (3,−1)⋅(1,2)=1 and (2,−1)⋅(1,3)=−1, so take y1=(3,−1) and y2=(−2,1).

  • (c) With P=(1123), the rows of P−1=(3−1−21) are exactly y1⊤,y2⊤, and by Proposition 9.10.7, Ak=2k(12)(3−1)+3k(13)(−21)=2k(3−16−2)+3k(−21−63). For k=0: (1001). For k=1: (6−6−2+312−18−4+9)=(01−65)=A.

C. Going deeper

Exercise (C1: Traces of powers of AB and BA)

Let A∈Mm×n(F) and B∈Mn×m(F).

  • (a) Prove that B(AB)k−1A=(BA)k for every k≥1, and deduce that tr((AB)k)=tr((BA)k).
  • (b) Now let F=C. Give a second proof of the trace identity from Theorem 9.10.4 and Corollary 9.10.2.

Solution.

  • (a) By induction on k. For k=1 both sides are BA. If B(AB)k−1A=(BA)k, then by associativity B(AB)kA=B(AB)k−1(AB)A=(B(AB)k−1A)(BA)=(BA)k(BA)=(BA)k+1. Now (AB)k=A(B(AB)k−1), with A of size m×n and B(AB)k−1 of size n×m. By Theorem 0.9.6 (3), tr((AB)k)=tr(A⋅B(AB)k−1)=tr(B(AB)k−1⋅A)=tr((BA)k).

  • (b) Over C, pAB and pBA split. Suppose m≥n (otherwise swap the roles of A and B). By Theorem 9.10.4, pAB=xm−npBA, so if λ1,…,λn is the list of eigenvalues of BA with multiplicity, then the list for AB is λ1,…,λn together with m−n zeros. For k≥1 the zeros contribute 0k=0, so by Corollary 9.10.2, tr((AB)k)=∑iλik=tr((BA)k).

Exercise (C2: Adding a commuting nilpotent matrix)

Let A,N∈Mn(C), n≥1, with AN=NA and N nilpotent.

  • (a) Prove that pA+N=pA; in particular spec(A+N)=spec(A) and det(A+N)=detA.
  • (b) Deduce that if A is invertible, so is A+N.
  • (c) Show that (a) fails without AN=NA.

Hint: triangularize A and N together.

Solution.

  • (a) By Theorem 9.9.4 there is an invertible P with U=P−1AP and U′=P−1NP upper triangular. Since N is nilpotent, spec(N)={0} (Exercise (C2: Nilpotent operators)), so every diagonal entry of U′ is 0 by Theorem 9.7.4. Then P−1(A+N)P=U+U′ is upper triangular with the same diagonal as U. By Theorem 7.10.3 and the examples after Definition 7.10.1, pA+N=pU+U′=∏i(x−uii)=pU=pA. Equal characteristic polynomials have the same roots (Theorem 9.2.1) and the same constant term (−1)ndet (Theorem 7.10.2).

  • (b) By (a), det(A+N)=detA≠0, so A+N is invertible (Theorem 7.5.3).

  • (c) Let A=(0010) and N=(0100). Both are nilpotent, so pA=x2, but A+N=(0110) has p=x2−1 and eigenvalues ±1. Here AN=(0001)≠(1000)=NA.

Exercise (C3: How many traces, and which field?)
  • (a) Let ω=e2πi/3∈C and C=diag(1,ω,ω2). Show that trC=trC2=0 but C is not nilpotent. Explain why this does not contradict Theorem 9.10.3.
  • (b) Let n≥2. Give a matrix C∈Mn(C) with trCk=0 for k=1,…,n−1 that is not nilpotent.
  • (c) Let A,B∈Mn(C) and suppose C=AB−BA commutes with A. Prove that Cn=O.
  • (d) Over F2, find a nonnilpotent C∈M2(F2) with trCk=0 for every k≥1.

Solution.

  • (a) ω3=1 and ω≠1, so 0=ω3−1=(ω−1)(ω2+ω+1) gives 1+ω+ω2=0. Hence trC=1+ω+ω2=0, and trC2=1+ω2+ω4=1+ω2+ω=0. But Ck=diag(1,ωk,ω2k)≠O for every k. No contradiction: the theorem, for n=3, requires trCk=0 for k=1,2,3, and trC3=1+1+1=3≠0.

  • (b) Let ζ=e2πi/n and C=diag(1,ζ,…,ζn−1). For 1≤k≤n−1, ζk≠1 and (ζk)n=1, so trCk=∑j=0n−1(ζk)j=(ζk)n−1ζk−1=0 by the geometric sum. But Ck has the entry 1 in position (1,1) for all k, so C is not nilpotent.

  • (c) By Exercise (C2: When A commutes with [A,B]) (a), trCk=0 for every k≥1, in particular for k=1,…,n. By Theorem 9.10.3 ((e) ⇒ (d)), Cn=O.

  • (d) C=I2: trCk=1+1=0 in F2 for every k, and Ck=I2≠O.

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.