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

Let $A$ be an $n\times n$ matrix such that $A^r =I$ and $A$ has exactly one eigenvalue ,then $A= \lambda I$.

My answe:

As $A$ is a $n\times n$ matrix then characteristic polynomial has degree n and also exactly one root so $p(x) = (x-a)^n$ ($p(x)$ is the char. polynomial.)

Now the minimal polynomial $m_A(x)|p(x) $ also $m_A(x) | (x^r-1) =(x-\zeta_1)...(x-\zeta_r)$ (where $\zeta_i $ are the rth roots of unity) hence $m_A(x)$ is $(x-\zeta_i)$ for some $i$. As a result $A$ is diagonalizable and $A$ is of the form $A = \lambda I$

Is this correct?

share|cite|improve this question
That looks fine, but you should be explicit about what $\lambda$ is in the last step. – Thomas Andrews Jan 22 '13 at 14:03
Also, in general, $\zeta_k$ is used for a primitive $k$th root of unity. So your choice of notation might be confusing. The answer isn't wrong, really, just a point that might throw somebody off. – Thomas Andrews Jan 22 '13 at 14:08
up vote 3 down vote accepted

It would be better to be explicit about what the $\lambda$ is in the last step.

You say "hence, ..." but you don't say the reason this step is true. What property do you need for the $\zeta_i$ to be able to make this step?

Indeed, what is the property of $x^r-1$ that you are using here, really? If, instead, the question said, $A^r-A-I=0$, would it still be true? If $A^3+4A^2+5A+2I=0$?

share|cite|improve this answer
roots of $m_A(x)$ are the eigenvalues of $A$ and $A$ has only one eigenvalue and also the roots of $x^r - 1 = 0 $ are all unique is it not enough to answer the "hence " part. – jim Jan 22 '13 at 16:22
It is enough, but you never say that the roots of $x^r-1$ are unique. In general, that is all you need - uniqueness of the roots of $x^r-1$. Turns out, you can determine if the roots of a polynomial are all unique without knowing the roots - there is a repeated root to a polynomial $q(x)$ if and only if $q(x)$ and the derivative $q'(x)$ have a common factor, and there are ways to compute the "greatest common divisor" of two polynomials without knowing roots. – Thomas Andrews Jan 22 '13 at 16:27
ya that is the definition of a separable polynomial – jim Jan 22 '13 at 16:30
Well, the definition of separable polynomial is not having repeated roots. The result about the $\gcd$ of $q(x)$ and $q'(x)$ is a theorem - that is, the ability to determine if a polynomial is separable without explicitly knowing its roots is the big trick. – Thomas Andrews Jan 22 '13 at 16:33

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.