5
$\begingroup$

I'm studying linear algebra and I am trying to answer a question I asked myself.

Suppose $T:V\rightarrow V$ is a linear operator on a finite dimensional vector space $V$ over an algebraically closed field $K$.

Let $\lambda_1, \dots, \lambda_n$ be the eigenvalues of $T$. Let $$m_T(x)=(x-\lambda_1)^{r_1}\dots(x-\lambda_n)^{r_n}$$ be the minimal polynomial of $T$.

By the Primary Decomposition Theorem:

$$V=\ker(T-\lambda_1 I_V)^{r_1}\oplus\dots\oplus\ker(T-\lambda_nI_V)^{r_n}$$

Let $V_i=\ker(T-\lambda_i I_V)^{r_i}$. Then $T$ is $V_i$ invariant. Let $T|V_i=T_i$.Then $T_i$ is nilpotent and it's minimal polynomial is $(x-\lambda_i)^{r_i}$.

It's easy to show that for every $n\leq r_i$, $\ker (T_i-\lambda_i I_{V_i})^n=\ker (T-\lambda_iI_V)^n$. My question is: Is it also true for $n>r_i$?

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

The proof of the primary decomposition theorem or a direct argument shows that the sum

$$ \ker(T - \lambda_1 I_V)^{k_1} + \dots + \ker(T - \lambda_n I_V)^{k_n} $$

is always a direct sum $$ \ker(T - \lambda_1 I_V)^{k_1} \oplus \dots \oplus \ker(T - \lambda_n I_V)^{k_n} $$ for any $k_1, \dots, k_n \geq 0$ and distinct $\lambda_1, \dots, \lambda_n$ (only the sum doesn't necessarily add up to the whole of $V$). In other words, generalized eigenvectors that are associated with distinct eigenvalues are linearly independent.

Now note that $T_i$ is not nilpotent but $T_i - \lambda_i I_{V_i}$ is with $(T_i - \lambda_i I_{V_i})^{r_i} = 0_{V_i}$ so if $n \geq r_i$ then $\ker(T_i - \lambda_i I_{V_i})^{n} = V_i = \ker(T - \lambda_i I_V)^{r_i}$. Thus, it is sufficient to show that $V_i = \ker(T - \lambda_i I_V)^{r_i} = \ker(T - \lambda_i I_V)^n$ for $n \geq r_i$. To see this, let $w \in \ker(T - \lambda_i I_V)^n$ and decompose it as $v = v_1 + \dots + v_n$ using the direct sum decomposition guaranteed by the primary decomposition theorem. But then

$$ v - v_i + \sum_{j \neq i} v_j = 0 $$

where $v - v_i$ and each $v_j$ are generalized eigenvectors that are associated with distinct eigenvalues and so $v = v_i$ and hence $v \in V_i$.

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$

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.