Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

If $A$ is a $m \times n$ matrix and $B$ a $n \times k$ matrix, prove that


Also show when equality occurs.

share|cite|improve this question
Title is inaccurate? – Calvin Lin Jan 3 '13 at 0:02
Please edit the title to reflect the question. – Potato Jan 3 '13 at 0:06
Do you know the rank nullity theorem? – Bombyx mori Jan 3 '13 at 0:15
Have you tried working out an example? Try a few by hand and see if you can generalize it. Or you can try showing it by contradiction; though I always feel direct proofs are much more clear. – AlanH Jan 3 '13 at 1:00
Hint: Sylvester's Rank Inequality. Regards – Amzoti Jan 3 '13 at 1:43

Recall Linear Transformations Isomorphic to Matrix Space.

Using Rank–nullity theorem, $\operatorname{rank}(A)+\operatorname{nullity}(A)=n,\operatorname{rank}(B)+\operatorname{nullity}(B)=k$ and $\operatorname{rank}(AB)+\operatorname{nullity}(AB)=k.$

So, $\operatorname{rank}(A)+\operatorname{rank}(B)+\operatorname{nullity}(A)+\operatorname{nullity}(B)=n+\operatorname{rank}(AB)+\operatorname{nullity}(AB)$

$\implies \operatorname{rank}(AB)-\operatorname{rank}(A)-\operatorname{rank}(B)+n=\operatorname{nullity}(A)+\operatorname{nullity}(B)-\operatorname{nullity}(AB)$

$\geq \operatorname{nullity}(A)$[Since $Bv_2=0$ for $v_2\in Mat_{k\times 1}(F)\implies ABv_2=0$] $\geq 0.$

share|cite|improve this answer
I have a doubt in the last line of the proof. Ker(B) ⊆ker(AB) implies nullity(B) <= nullity(AB). So nullity(B)-nullity(AB) <=0 which means nullity(A)+nullity(B)-nullity(AB) <=nullity(A). But in your proof its the other-way. May I know how? – La Rias Nov 15 '15 at 6:42

As noted in the other answer, it suffices to show $\dim\ \operatorname{Ker}(A)+\dim\ \operatorname{Ker}(B) \geq \dim\ \operatorname{Ker}(AB)$. This is equivalent to showing that $\dim\ \operatorname{Ker}(AB)/\operatorname{Ker}(B) \leq \dim\ \operatorname{Ker}(A)$. To do this, use the first isomorphism theorem for vector spaces on the linear map $\operatorname{Ker}(AB) \rightarrow \operatorname{Ker}(A)$ defined by $x \mapsto Bx$. This shows that $\operatorname{Ker}(AB)/\operatorname{Ker}(B)$ is isomorphic to a subspace of $\operatorname{Ker}(A)$, which proves the inequality.

share|cite|improve this answer

We claim $\dim \ker\,A+\dim\ker B \geq \dim\ker AB$.

Let $\beta=\{\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_r \}$ be basis for $\ker B$. It is not hard to see that $\ker B\subseteq \ker AB$ so we can extend $\beta $ to basis for $\ker AB$. Suppose $\{\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_r,\alpha_{r+1},\dots,\alpha_n \ \}$ be basis for $\ker AB$. So $B(\alpha_{i})\neq 0$ for $i \in \{r<i<n+1\}$. It is easily seen that $\{B(\alpha_{r+1}),\dots,B(\alpha_{n})\}$ is linear independent. We have $\dim\ker A\geq n-r$.

$$\dim\ker A+\dim\ker B \geqslant n-r+r =n \Longrightarrow\dim\ker A+\dim\ker B \geqslant \dim\ker AB$$

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.