Take the 2-minute tour ×
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.

I had a question in a recent assignment that asked if a $3\times 3$ matrix could have a null space equal to its column space... clearly no, by the rank+nullity theorem... but I have a hard time wrapping my head around the concept of such a matrix, no matter what size, even existing. How could this be possible, and does anybody have an example of such a $m\times n$ matrix?

share|improve this question
    
The question is: what does it mean the rank is zero? –  Mhenni Benghorbal Oct 3 '13 at 12:22
add comment

3 Answers 3

up vote 5 down vote accepted

The nullspace lies inside the domain, while the column space lies inside the codomain. Therefore, if the nullspace is equal to the column space, you must have $m=n$. Also, by the rank-nullity theorem, $n$ must be an even number. It follows that if $n=2k$, the nullspace must be $k$-dimensional. Denote by $\{e_1,\ldots,e_n\}$ the canonical basis of $\mathbb{F}^n$. By a change of basis, we may assume that the nullspace is spanned by $e_1, \ldots, e_k$. Therefore, if the nullspace and column space of $A$ coincide, $A$ must be similar to a matrix of the form $$ A=\pmatrix{0&B_{k\times k}\\ 0&0}, $$ where $B$ is invertible. For instance, consider $A=\pmatrix{0&1\\ 0&0}$ when $n=2$.

share|improve this answer
    
The matrix given by @GerryMyerson in the answer below does not appear to correspond to the form you suggested, although the nullspace and column space are indeed equivalent. –  jesterII Mar 10 at 3:56
    
@jesterII, it says $A$ must be similar to a matrix of a specific form. That means my matrix is $P^{-1}AP$ for some invertible matrix $P$, with $A$ being the matrix in 1551's answer. –  Gerry Myerson Mar 10 at 4:29
2  
@jesterII We have $$\pmatrix{2&4\\ -1&-2}=\pmatrix{-2&-1\\ 1&0}\pmatrix{0&1\\ 0&0}\pmatrix{-2&-1\\ 1&0}^{-1}.$$ –  user1551 Mar 10 at 5:45
add comment

$$\pmatrix{2&4\cr-1&-2\cr}$$

share|improve this answer
add comment

Let us study this question in a general setting of $n \times n$ matrices.
For a given $n \times n$ matrix $A$, we denote its nullspace by $\mathcal{N}(A)$, and its column space by $\mathcal{C}(A)$.

Recall that the orthogonal complement of a vector subspace $V$ is $$V^\perp := \{\vec{x} : \forall \vec{v} \in V.~(\vec{x}^T \vec{v} = 0) \}.$$ It is well known that for any $n\times n$ matrix $A$ it holds that $(\mathcal{N}(A))^\perp = \mathcal{R}(A)$, where $\mathcal{R}(A)$ is the row space of $A$. In particular, $\mathcal{C}(A) = \mathcal{R}(A^T)$ implies that $(\mathcal{C}(A))^\perp = \mathcal{N}(A^T)$.

Now let $A$ be any $n \times n$ matrix with $\mathcal{N}(A) = \mathcal{C}(A)$. From our preceding discussion, it is thus necessary and sufficient that $\mathcal{N}(A) = \mathcal{N}(A^T)$. We shall first show that such an $n \times n$ matrix $A$ must be of the form $$Q \left(\begin{array}{cc} X & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{array}\right) Q^T,$$ where $X$ is an $r \times r$ matrix whose rank, $r$, is equal to that of $A$, and some bordering $0$'s may be absent if $A$ is of full rank $n$.

$Proof$. Extend any given basis $\{e_{r+1},\ldots,e_n\}$ for $\mathcal{N}(A)$ to a basis $\{e_1,\ldots,e_r,e_{r+1},\ldots,e_n\}$ for $\mathbb{R}^n$. Let $P = (\vec{e}_i^T)$ and $Q = P^{-1}$. Clearly, both $P$ (as well as $Q$) is invertible since its column vectors $\{e_1,\ldots,e_n\}$ are linearly independent. Since $\mathcal{N}(A) = \mathcal{N}(A^T)$, it follows that $PAP^T = \left(\begin{array}{cc} X & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{array}\right),$ where $r(X) = r(PAP^T) = r(A) = r$. Hence $A$ is of the desired form. The proof is thus complete.

Now we establish that any $n \times n$ matrix $A$ of the above form has to satisfy the equation $$\mathcal{N}(A) = \mathcal{N}(A^T),$$ and hence the condition that $\mathcal{N}(A) = \mathcal{R}(A)$.

$Proof.$ Suppose $A = Q \left(\begin{array}{cc} X & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{array}\right) Q^T$, where $X$ is an invertible matrix with $r(X) = r(A)$. Writing the matrix $\left(\begin{array}{cc} X & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{array}\right)$ as $Y$, we have that $\vec{x} \in \mathcal{N}(A)$ iff $QYQ^T \vec{x} = 0$ iff $YQ^T \vec{x} = 0$. Now since $X$ is an invertible matrix of size $r$, the last condition is equivalent to $Y^TQ^T \vec{x} = 0$, which in turn is equivalent to $QY^TQ^T \vec{x} = 0$ iff $x \in \mathcal{N}(A^T)$. This shows that $\mathcal{N}(A) = \mathcal{N}(A^T)$.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

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.