Two things are now on the table. Section 1 put every
complex operator into upper triangular form in an
orthonormal basis, and Section 3
identified the operators that commute with their
adjoints. Put them together and the chapter’s main
theorem falls out in a few lines: a triangular matrix
that is normal has nothing above the diagonal. This
section proves that, reads off the consequences, and
says exactly how much of the resulting picture is
unique.
The field is
throughout this section, and every inner product space
is finite-dimensional. The reason for insisting on is Schur’s theorem,
and behind it the Fundamental Theorem of Algebra (Theorem 6.5.1): over
an operator can
fail to have a single eigenvector, and Section 5 shows
what has to change.
Triangular
plus normal forces diagonal
Start with the smallest case, where the mechanism is
visible at a glance. Let be upper triangular. The entry of is the squared
length of the first column of , and the entry of is the squared
length of the first row: If is
normal these are equal, so and
. One entry of
one product did all the work. (This is Exercise (B3: Triangular and normal, by hand),
which you may already have done.)
The general case is the same comparison run down the
diagonal, one row at a time. Nothing is clever; the only
care needed is to use, at step , the zeros that steps
have
already produced.
Lemma
12.4.1 (A Normal Triangular Matrix Is
Diagonal)
Let be upper triangular and normal. Then
is diagonal.
Idea. For any square matrix, the
-th diagonal entry
of is the
squared length of column , and the -th diagonal entry of
is the
squared length of row . Normality says those
two lengths agree for every . For an upper
triangular matrix, column reaches only down to
the diagonal and row only rightwards from
it, so the equation compares “what sits above ” with “what sits
to the right of ”. Row has nothing above it,
so the right side must be empty too; that clears row
, which empties
the column sums one step further down, and the argument
walks down the diagonal.
Proof. For each , computing the entries of the two
products entry by entry, Since
is upper triangular, whenever , and whenever . So normality of says
(12.4.1)
We prove by induction on that for every
.
Base case . The left-hand side of Eq. 12.4.1 has the
single term , so Hence , a sum of nonnegative reals, so for every
.
Inductive step. Let and
suppose
whenever
and . In
the left-hand side of Eq. 12.4.1, every
term with
is with , hence with
; by the
inductive hypothesis, taking and , each such is . So the left-hand side
reduces to and Eq. 12.4.1 becomes
whence for every , again because a sum of nonnegative reals
vanishes only when every term does.
By induction, every entry strictly above the diagonal
is zero. Every entry strictly below it is zero because
is upper
triangular. So
is diagonal, as claimed.
Note what the proof did not need: no
eigenvector was chosen, no dimension was inducted on, no
subspace was split off. The whole argument is an
identity between two lists of nonnegative numbers. That
is why it also survives, unchanged in spirit, into the
block version used in Section 5 and the quantitative
version in Section 11.
The
theorem
Theorem
12.4.2 (Complex Spectral Theorem)
Let be a
finite-dimensional inner product space over and let . The
following are equivalent.
- (a) is normal.
- (b) has an orthonormal
basis consisting of eigenvectors of .
Idea. is a
one-line check: in such a basis the matrix of is diagonal, the matrix
of is its
conjugate transpose, and two diagonal matrices commute.
is
Schur plus the lemma: take an orthonormal basis making
the matrix triangular, observe that normality of is normality of that
matrix because the basis is orthonormal, and apply Lemma 12.4.1. A
diagonal matrix in the basis says precisely that
each vector of
is an eigenvector.
Proof. Suppose
is an orthonormal basis with for each . Then , and since
is orthonormal,
by Theorem 11.6.3.
Both products are the same diagonal matrix: Taking the matrix of an operator in a fixed
basis turns composition into matrix multiplication and
is injective (Theorem 4.1.2, Theorem 4.1.4),
so .
Suppose is
normal. By Schur’s theorem (Theorem 12.1.2)
there is an orthonormal basis of in which is upper triangular. Because
is orthonormal,
Theorem 11.6.3
gives , so the equation reads
: the matrix is normal. By Lemma 12.4.1,
is diagonal, say
. Reading off the -th column (Definition 4.1.1),
, and
because . So
is an orthonormal basis of eigenvectors of . This proves the
theorem.
Corollary
12.4.3 (Unitary Diagonalization)
Let . Then is normal if and only
if there exist a unitary and a diagonal with
A matrix admitting such a factorization is
called unitarily diagonalizable. The
diagonal of is
the list of eigenvalues of with multiplicity, in
an order that may be prescribed in advance, and the
columns of are a
corresponding orthonormal basis of eigenvectors.
Proof. Apply Theorem 12.4.2 to
the operator
on with its
standard inner product, for which the standard basis is
orthonormal.
Let be an orthonormal basis of
eigenvectors, , and let be the matrix with
these columns; it is unitary because its columns are
orthonormal (Theorem 11.7.3
(f)). Then has
-th column ,
which is the -th
column of for
. So and .
If
then , and using twice and the fact that diagonal matrices
commute.
Finally, is
similar to , so
they have the same characteristic polynomial (Theorem 7.10.3), and
the roots of are the diagonal
entries with multiplicity. Reordering the eigenvectors
reorders the columns of and the diagonal of
in the same way,
so any order may be prescribed.
Example
(Unitarily diagonalizing a Hermitian matrix)
Find a unitary and a diagonal with , for
Solution. , so is Hermitian, hence
normal, and Corollary 12.4.3
applies. Its characteristic polynomial is since . So the eigenvalues are and , both real as Theorem 12.2.1
promises.
For ,
the first row of gives ;
taking
gives , with .
For ,
the first row of gives ; taking
gives ,
with .
The two are orthogonal, as Corollary 12.3.4
predicts: Normalizing and using them as columns, and , . As a check on the arithmetic, and
.
Reading
the class off the spectrum
Once the eigenvalues sit on a diagonal, every
question about
that is invariant under a unitary change of basis
becomes a question about a list of complex numbers. Here
are three answers.
Corollary
12.4.4 (The Spectrum Decides)
Let
be normal on a finite-dimensional complex inner product
space.
- (a) is self-adjoint if and
only if every eigenvalue of is real.
- (b) is unitary if and only
if every eigenvalue of has modulus .
- (c)
is a nonnegative real number for every if and
only if every eigenvalue of is a nonnegative
real.
Idea. By Theorem 12.4.2
there is an orthonormal basis with , and then by Theorem 12.3.3.
Two operators that agree on a basis are equal, so each
of the three conditions can be tested one basis vector
at a time, where it becomes a statement about the single
number .
Proof. Fix an orthonormal basis
of eigenvectors, (Theorem 12.4.2),
and recall (Theorem 12.3.3).
Every eigenvalue of occurs among , because is the matrix of and its characteristic
polynomial is .
(a) holds if and
only if for every (Theorem 2.1.5), that
is , that is since .
A complex number equals its conjugate exactly when it is
real.
(b) , so if and
only if for every . That is what it means
for to be unitary
(Definition 11.7.2):
the equation makes injective, hence
invertible on a finite-dimensional space (Theorem 2.5.7), with
and
therefore as well.
(c) Write . Expanding both slots and using
, If every
is a
nonnegative real, this is a sum of nonnegative reals.
Taking gives , which is then a nonnegative real by
hypothesis.
Part (c) names a class that Chapter 13 takes as its
subject: the positive operators. Over
the hypothesis
of normality is not really needed in (c), because
real for every already forces
: apply Theorem 12.2.6 to
the operator , for which . Over
that shortcut
is unavailable, and Section 5 shows the quarter turn
defeating it.
The next corollary is a small shock. The adjoint is
defined through the inner product and has nothing to do
with polynomials. For a normal operator it is one
anyway.
Corollary
12.4.5 (The Adjoint of a Normal Operator Is a
Polynomial in It)
Let
be normal on a finite-dimensional complex inner product
space, with distinct eigenvalues . Then there is a polynomial of degree
less than with
.
Proof. The scalars are distinct, so by Lagrange
interpolation (Theorem 6.6.1) there
is a polynomial of degree less than with Let be an orthonormal basis of
eigenvectors (Theorem 12.4.2),
with where each is one of the . Then , the first equality because
for every , by induction
from , and the last by Theorem 12.3.3.
The operators
and agree on
a basis, hence are equal (Theorem 2.1.5).
One consequence is worth stating on its own. Any
operator that
commutes with
also commutes with every polynomial in , hence with . So for normal
operators the apparently stronger requirement “commutes
with and with
” is no
requirement at all, and Section 7 will use this to
diagonalize whole commuting families at once. The
polynomial depends on and not only on its
size: for
one may take the constant , while for the matrix the
conditions
and are
met by as one checks by substituting and .
Exactly
what is unique
The factorization is not unique, and it is worth being
precise about which parts of it are.
Unique: the set of eigenvalues , and for each
the eigenspace with its
dimension. These are defined from alone, without any
choice. Consequently the diagonal of is unique as a
list with multiplicities up to reordering: each
appears
exactly times.
Not unique: the order of the diagonal, and the matrix
. Two freedoms
create all the others. First, permuting the eigenvectors
permutes the columns of and the diagonal of
in step. Second,
within a single eigenspace of
dimension ,
any orthonormal basis of that
eigenspace will do, and there are many when : the choices are
related by the unitary maps of . For , for instance,
every unitary
satisfies . What no freedom can change is that
eigenvectors for distinct eigenvalues stay orthogonal
(Corollary 12.3.4),
so the decomposition into mutually orthogonal eigenspaces is itself
unique. Section 8 turns that decomposition into the
spectral resolution and shows it determines completely.
Quick check. The matrix is
normal. Write down two different unitary matrices with , and
explain why, for with the order of the diagonal fixed, the
freedom shrinks to a single unit-modulus scalar on each
column.
Solution. Take and ; more generally works for
any , because and
. The freedom comes from the
two-dimensional eigenspace , inside which every orthonormal
basis is as good as any other. For each
eigenspace is a line, and a line has exactly two unit
vectors over
and a circle of them over ; the residual freedom
is only the scalar factor of modulus in each column, which
changes but not
the decomposition into eigenspaces.
Warning. “Diagonalizable”
and “unitarily diagonalizable” are different
conditions. Every unitarily diagonalizable
matrix is diagonalizable, because is in particular
invertible. The converse fails, and it fails for
matrices as small and as ordinary as . Having distinct eigenvalues
guarantees diagonalizability (Corollary 9.4.2) and
guarantees nothing about orthogonality.
Example
(Diagonalizable, and no orthonormal eigenbasis)
For , find an invertible with diagonal, and
show that no orthogonal makes diagonal.
Solution. The matrix is upper
triangular, so its eigenvalues are the diagonal entries
and (Theorem 7.4.6). For
, has kernel spanned
by . For
, has kernel
spanned by .
Two distinct eigenvalues in dimension give a basis of
eigenvectors (Corollary 9.4.2), so
with Now suppose were
diagonal with
orthogonal. Then would be normal by Corollary 12.4.3.
But so is
not normal and no such exists. The
obstruction is visible without any theory: the
eigenvectors are and , the eigenspaces
are lines and therefore the only candidates for
eigenvector directions, and . There simply is no orthogonal pair of
eigenvectors to build from.
Exercises
A. Check your
understanding
Exercise
(A1)
- (a) State the
complex spectral theorem, including every hypothesis,
and state its matrix form.
- (b) What goes wrong
with the proof if the field is ? Name the exact
step.
- (c) True or false: a
matrix in
with distinct
eigenvalues is unitarily diagonalizable. Justify your
answer.
- (d) Let be normal
with as a list with multiplicity. Is the
unitary in
determined by
and the order of ? What is
determined?
- (e) A normal
operator
satisfies . What can you say about its
eigenvalues?
- (f) Explain why Lemma 12.4.1
cannot be weakened to “a normal matrix with some of its
below-diagonal entries zero is diagonal”.
Solution.
(a) For a
finite-dimensional inner product space over and : is normal if and only
if has an
orthonormal basis of eigenvectors of (Theorem 12.4.2).
Matrix form: is normal if and only if with
unitary and
diagonal (Corollary 12.4.3).
(b) Schur’s
theorem. It needs an eigenvalue at every stage of its
induction, which over comes from Theorem 6.5.1; over
an operator may
have none at all, and then there is no triangular form
to start from.
(c) False. has the distinct
eigenvalues and
and is not
normal, hence is not unitarily diagonalizable (Example (Diagonalizable, and no orthonormal eigenbasis)).
(d) No. The
eigenspace
is two-dimensional, and replacing its orthonormal basis
by any other one changes while leaving alone. What is
determined: , the eigenspaces and , their
dimensions and
, and their mutual
orthogonality.
(e) By Theorem 12.3.3,
gives , while gives . Hence . Taking moduli, , so is
or . If ,
multiplying by gives , that is . So every
eigenvalue lies in .
(f) The lemma
uses triangularity at every index, not
at a few places: the comparison of row and column
lengths at step
is informative only because the whole of column below the diagonal is
already known to vanish. Zeros in some of those
positions buy nothing. The circulant is normal and has zeros in
positions and
, two of the
three places below its diagonal, and it is not
diagonal.
B. Practice
Exercise
(B1: Unitarily diagonalize)
For each matrix, find a unitary and a diagonal with .
- (a) .
- (b) .
Solution.
- (a) , so is Hermitian and
normal. Its characteristic polynomial is , with roots and .
For :
, and
the first row gives ; take , .
For :
, and the
first row gives ; take , .
They are orthogonal: .
Hence
- (b) is unitary (Example (Which of these are normal?)
(c)), hence normal. Here and , so the characteristic polynomial is , with
roots both of modulus , as Corollary 12.4.4
(b) requires. For , the equation reads , that is , so . For
the same line gives , so . These
are orthogonal, so Here
is real orthogonal even though is not real.
Exercise
(B2: A circulant, diagonalized)
Let , so and , and let
- (a) Verify that
is normal.
- (b) Show that is an eigenvector of
for , and find the
eigenvalue.
- (c) Deduce a unitary
with diagonal, and
write down the diagonal explicitly.
Solution.
(a) Both products
are the same matrix: (The entries are dot products of pairs of
rows, respectively columns, of ; cyclic shifting makes
the two lists agree.)
(b) Write before normalizing. Then Using , the second entry is and the third is , since . So , and the eigenvalue is
.
(c) The three
vectors are orthonormal: each
has norm , and for , because is a
cube root of unity and for such . Taking with columns , using . Section 9 shows
that this one matrix diagonalizes
every circulant.
Exercise
(B3: Decide unitary diagonalizability)
Determine which of the following matrices are
unitarily diagonalizable over , and which are merely
diagonalizable. Justify your answer.
- (a) .
- (b) .
- (c) .
- (d) .
Solution.
(a) Unitarily
diagonalizable: the matrix is skew-symmetric, hence
skew-adjoint over and normal, so Corollary 12.4.3
applies. (Its eigenvalues are .)
(b) Neither.
Comparing
entries, and , so
is not normal. It is not even diagonalizable: the only
eigenvalue is and
has rank , so
(Theorem 9.4.1).
(c)
Diagonalizable but not unitarily: the eigenvalues and are distinct (Corollary 9.4.2),
while , so is not
normal.
(d) Unitarily
diagonalizable: the matrix is a permutation matrix, so
its columns are orthonormal and it is unitary, hence
normal. (Its eigenvalues are the cube roots of
unity.)
C. Going deeper
Exercise
(C1: Operators of finite order)
Let
be normal on a finite-dimensional complex inner product
space, and suppose for some integer .
- (a) Prove that every
eigenvalue of is
a -th root of
unity.
- (b) Deduce that
is unitary and
unitarily diagonalizable.
- (c) Show that the
hypothesis “normal” cannot be dropped from (b) by
exhibiting a with
that
is not unitary.
Solution.
(a) If with ,
then (Exercise (B3: Eigenvalues of powers and inverses)
(a)) and , so and .
(b) Every -th root of unity has
modulus , so is unitary by Corollary 12.4.4
(b), and it is unitarily diagonalizable by Theorem 12.4.2
because it is normal.
(c) On take . Then , so has order ; but its second column
has norm
, so
is not unitary
(Theorem 11.7.3
(f)). It is still diagonalizable, with eigenvalues and ; what fails is only
the orthogonality of the eigenvectors.
Exercise
(C2: Same spectrum, same multiplicities)
Let be normal, and suppose they have the
same eigenvalues with the same multiplicities, that is,
the same characteristic polynomial.
- (a) Prove that there
is a unitary
with (one says and are unitarily
similar).
- (b) Give two
matrices in with the same
characteristic polynomial that are not unitarily
similar, and say which hypothesis of (a) they
violate.
- (c) Deduce that two
normal matrices are unitarily similar if and only if
they are similar.
Solution.
(a) By Corollary 12.4.3
write and with unitary and diagonal. The
diagonals of and
are the
eigenvalue lists of and with multiplicity,
which agree as multisets; and the order on the diagonal
may be prescribed, so we may choose the eigenvector
orderings to make . Then and is
unitary because is closed under
products and inverses (Proposition 11.7.4).
(b) and both have
characteristic polynomial ; they are not even
similar, since similar matrices have equal rank. A pair
that is similar but not unitarily similar: and . In both
cases the violated hypothesis is normality of one of the
two matrices.
(c) A unitary
similarity is a similarity. Similar
matrices have the same characteristic polynomial (Theorem 7.10.3), so
if both are normal, (a) upgrades the similarity to a
unitary one.
Exercise
(C3: Normality cannot be dropped)
Corollary 12.4.4
reads the class of a normal operator
off its spectrum. This exercise shows that each part
fails without that hypothesis.
- (a) Give with both
eigenvalues real that is not Hermitian.
- (b) Give with both
eigenvalues of modulus that is not
unitary.
- (c) Over , give with
for every whose
eigenvalues are not nonnegative reals. Why does no such
example exist over ?
Solution.
(a) has eigenvalues and and is not Hermitian,
since . It is not normal (Example (Diagonalizable, and no orthonormal eigenbasis)).
(b) has as its only eigenvalue,
of modulus , and
is not unitary: its second column has norm . Again it is not
normal, the
entries of
and being
and .
(c) Take the
quarter turn . For every , yet
has no real eigenvalue at all; over its eigenvalues are
, which are
not nonnegative reals. Over no such example
exists: if for every then by Theorem 12.2.6,
and more generally
real for every forces to be self-adjoint,
hence normal, by applying Theorem 12.2.6 to
. Real
scalars are not enough to detect an operator over , and they are over
.