Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

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 $P\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$ be a nontrivial idempotent matrix: $P^2=P$, $P\neq 0$, $P\neq I,$ where $I$ is the $n\times n$ identity matrix.

What are the eigenvalues of $P$?

Let $x$ be an eigenvector of $P$, with corresponding eigenvalue $\lambda$: $$Px=\lambda x.$$ We also have $$P(Px)=P\lambda x = \lambda Px=\lambda^2x,$$ and, since $P^2=P,$ we have $$P^2x=Px\implies\lambda^2=\lambda.$$ So, $\lambda(\lambda-1)=0\implies \lambda=0$ or $\lambda=1.$

However, is it not also correct to say that, since $P$ is idempotent, we also have $$P^m=P^{m-1}P=P^{m-2}PP=P^{m-2}P=P^{m-3}P=...=P$$ for any integer $m\geq0$? If that is correct, then we also have $$P^mx=\lambda^mx,$$ and so $$\lambda^m=\lambda$$ or $\lambda(\lambda^{m-1}-1)=0\implies\lambda=0$ or $\lambda^{m-1}=1$. Is there anything wrong with saying $$\lambda=\exp\left(2\pi i\frac{k}{m-1}\right),$$ for $k=0,1,...,m-2$?

share|cite|improve this question
For $P$ such that $P^2 = P$, we of course have $P^k = P$ for $k \ge 2$, but we still have to contend with $P^2 = P$! – Robert Lewis Feb 25 '14 at 21:22
Yes, I guess that's the key. No matter what complex solutions we get for the case of $P^k=P$ so $\lambda^k=\lambda$, the only solutions that we can keep also have to satisfy $P^2=P,$ which requires $\lambda^2=\lambda$, which is only true for $\lambda=0$ or $\lambda=1$. Thanks! – Mike Bell Feb 26 '14 at 9:35
up vote 2 down vote accepted

Without appealing to other theorems or arguments, your analysis is fine until you say that $\lambda^{m-1} = 1$ therefore $\lambda = \exp 2\pi i \frac{k}{m-1}$.

The error here is that it excludes the possibility of repeated eigenvalues. That is, the set of all $\lambda \neq 0$ is not equal to the set (of unique values) generated by $\exp 2\pi i \frac{k}{m-1}$, but rather it must be a subset of the unique elements generated by $\exp 2\pi i \frac{k}{m-1}$. Since $P$ only has $n$ eigenvalues (including multiplicity), if one or more has multiplicity $> 1$, then there will be some values of $m,k$ such that $\exp 2\pi i \frac{k}{m-1}$ does not yield an eigenvalue.

So it would be more proper to say that $\lambda \subset \{\exp 2\pi i \frac{k}{m-1}\ \mid\ m,k \in \mathbb{Z}\},$ but this doesn't solve your problem.

share|cite|improve this answer

Since we have $P^2=P$ then the polynomial $x^2-x=x(x-1)$ annihilates $P$ so the set of eigenvalues of $P$ is a subset of the set of the roots of this polynomial: $$\operatorname{sp}(P)\subset\{0,1\}$$

share|cite|improve this answer
Beat me to it *shakesfist* – Emily Feb 25 '14 at 20:57
Thanks for the fast answer. What does it mean for a polynomial to annihilate P, and what is the meaning of $\mathrm{sp}(P)\subset\{0,1\}$? – Mike Bell Feb 25 '14 at 21:05
@MikeBell It is the interpretation of the Cayley-Hamilton theorem over a field. – Emily Feb 25 '14 at 21:07
Ok, now that I've thought about it more, I guess $\mathrm{sp}(P)\subset\{0,1\}$ is saying that $0,1\in$ the spectrum of $P$. But, as for the annihilation part, I guess I'll have to study the Cayley-Hamilton theorem. – Mike Bell Feb 26 '14 at 9:38
You nailed it, my friend! – amWhy Feb 26 '14 at 14:09

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.