2
$\begingroup$

Prove square matrix over $\mathbb{Z}$ can't have $\frac{1}{4}(-3+ i \sqrt5)$ as an eigenvalue.

My proof:

  • If matrix has eigenvalue z=$\frac{1}{4}(-3+ i \sqrt5)$, then it must has eigenvalue $\frac{1}{4}(-3- i \sqrt5)$ (conjugate)
  • So, the characteristic polynom has form P=$(x-z)(x - \overline z) Q$ , where Q - some polynom over $\mathbb{R}$
  • $P= a_0x^n + a_1x^{n-1} + a_2x^{n-2} \dots + a_n$, where $a_0 \dots a_n \in \mathbb{Z}$ (because matrix over $\mathbb{Z}$)
  • $Q= q_0x^{n-2} + q_1x^{n-3} + q_2x^{n-4} \dots + q_{n-2}$, where $q_0 \dots q_n \in \mathbb{R}$
  • $(x-z)(x - \overline z) = (x-\frac{1}{4}(-3+ i \sqrt5))* (x-\frac{1}{4}(-3- i \sqrt5)) = x^2 + \frac{3}{2}x + \frac{7}{8}$
  • $q_0=1$, otherwise $P$ is not a characteristic polynom($a_0 \neq 1$)

  • But if $q_0=1$, then $a_1= \frac{3}{2}$ , contradiction


Am i right?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ $a_1 = {3 \over 2} + q_1$ $\endgroup$ – Abstraction May 26 '16 at 12:23
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, you are right. Does you have any idea to prove the theorem? $\endgroup$ – Evgeny Semyonov May 26 '16 at 12:30
2
$\begingroup$

Perhaps there's an easier, direct way, but isn't this a matter of using Gauss' Lemma?

We use two facts.

  1. the product of two primitive polynomials is primitive
  2. if $f$ is a non-zero rational polynomial, then $f = \gamma f_{1}$, where $\gamma$ is a rational number, and $f_{1}$ is a primitive polynomial with integer coefficients. The decomposition is unique up to signs

So $$ f = x^2 + \frac{3}{2}x + \frac{7}{8} = \frac{1}{8} (8 x^{2} + 12 x + 7), $$ where $f_{1} = 8 x^{2} + 12 x + 7$ is primitive, and $\gamma= 1/8$.

Now note that $Q$ has rational coefficients. (You obtain it by dividing $P$ by $x^2 + \frac{3}{2}x + \frac{7}{8}$.)

Write $Q = \delta Q_{1}$ as above, then $$ P = \gamma \delta f_{1} Q_{1}, $$ where $f_{1} Q_{1}$ has integer coefficients and it is primitive, and thus by uniqueness $\gamma \delta = \pm 1$, so that $\delta = \pm 8$, so that $8$ divides $q_{0}$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks! I did't know Gauss' Lemma. One question: why Q must has rational coefficients? $\endgroup$ – Evgeny Semyonov May 26 '16 at 13:56
  • $\begingroup$ You're welcome. As to $Q$, it is probably simpler than this, however: divide $P$ by $f = x^2 + \frac{3}{2}x + \frac{7}{8}$ to get $P = f Q + r$, with $Q, r$ with rational coefficients, and $r$ either 0, or of degree at most $1$. But clearly $r$ has two distinct roots $z, \bar{z}$, so it cannot have degree $0$ or $1$, so $r = 0$. $\endgroup$ – Andreas Caranti May 26 '16 at 14:34

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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