Let $V$ be a $n$-dimensional vector space over $\Bbb C$ and let $T:V\rightarrow V$ be any linear operator. Show that $T$ has a chain $V_0\subseteq V_1\subseteq\ldots \subseteq V_n=V$ of invariant subspaces such that $\dim V_i=i$ for $0\le i\le n$.

Here a subspace $U$ of $V$ is an invariant subspace of $V$ if $T(U)⊆U$ and in this case $T|_U:U→U$ is a linear operator on $U$. Please help me to solve this.

  • $\begingroup$ Do you know the Jordan canonical form? $\endgroup$ – amsmath Oct 15 '17 at 13:48
  • $\begingroup$ Yes I know it.Jordan canonical form of a matrix. But how can I proceed from there? $\endgroup$ – abcdmath Oct 15 '17 at 14:00
  • $\begingroup$ I have updated my answer and it should be alright now $\endgroup$ – Guy Fsone Oct 15 '17 at 15:35

For an elementary argument not requiring the Jordan canonical form: we argue by induction on $n$. For the base case $n=0$, the statement is trivial: the required chain is $V_0 = \{ 0 \} = V$. (If you prefer to let the base case be $n=1$, then the chain there is $\{ 0 \} \subsetneq V$.)

Now, suppose $n \ge 1$. Then since $\mathbb{C}$ is algebraically complete, $T$ has at least one eigenvector; so let $x \ne 0$ be an eigenvector. Since $T x = \lambda x$ for $\lambda$ the corresponding eigenvalue, we see that $\langle x \rangle$ is an invariant subspace of $T$. Now, consider the induced operator on the quotient space, $\bar T : V / \langle x \rangle \to V / \langle x \rangle$. This is a linear operator on an $n-1$-dimensional subspace, so by inductive hypothesis, we can find a chain $V_0 \subsetneq V_1 \subsetneq \cdots \subsetneq V_{n-1} = V / \langle x \rangle$ of $\bar T$-invariant subspaces.

Now, if $\pi : V \to V / \langle x \rangle$ is the projection operator, then we conclude that $$ \{ 0 \} \subsetneq \pi^{-1}(V_0) \subsetneq \pi^{-1}(V_1) \subsetneq \cdots \subsetneq \pi^{-1}(V_{n-1}) = V $$ is a chain satisfying the requirements.

  • $\begingroup$ Very nice and smart! Sometimes taking the quotient space is more helpful than just taking any complementary subspace (which here might not be $T$-invariant). $\endgroup$ – amsmath Oct 15 '17 at 16:57

I assume that you know the Jordan canonical form. So, let $T$ be any linear operator in $V$ and let $J$ be its Jordan canonical form (I use the one with ones above the diagonal). Then there exists a bijective linear map $S : \mathbb C^{n\times n}\to V$ such that $T = SJS^{-1}$. I claim that $V_i = \operatorname{span}\{Se_1,Se_2,\ldots,Se_i\}$ is a chain as desired. If you know already from your lecture that the subspaces $W_i = \operatorname{span}\{e_1,\ldots,e_i\}$ form an invariant chain for $J$, then you are already done (check it!). If not, check out the following:

First, $\{V_i\}$ is obviously nested and $\dim V_i = i$ as $S$ is invertible. Concerning the invariancy, let us start with $V_1 = \operatorname{span}\{Se_1\}$. We have $TSe_1 = SJe_1 = \lambda Se_1\in V_1$, where $\lambda$ is the first eigenvalue in the Jordan form. Ok, that's settled. Now, there is either a one right to $\lambda$ in the JCF or a zero. In the second case, you have as above $TSe_2 = \mu e_2$ with $\mu$ being the second eigenvalue in the JCF (which might be $\lambda$ or not). Let us look at the first case. Then $TSe_2 = SJe_2 = S(e_1+\lambda e_2) = Se_1 + \lambda Se_2\in V_2$. So, also $V_2$ is $T$-invariant.

I hope you get the idea...


Let do this by induction on the dimension:

  1. In dimension 1 it is true take $\{0\}\subset V$ with $\dim V=1$
  2. Let suppose the result is true for very subspaces $W$ of dimension $\dim U<n$ and let prove that is true for $V$ of dimension $\dim = n$ .

Since we are in complex space $T$ has eigenvalues and can decompose as direct sum of eigen-spaces that is

$$V= \bigoplus_{i =1}^{p} E_{\lambda_i}\equiv E_{\lambda_1}\oplus U$$ where we suppose that $T$ that has $p>1$ eigenvalues and let $$U = \bigoplus_{i =2}^{p} E_{\lambda_i}$$ $$T =T_1\oplus T'$$ Where $T_1 =T|_{E_{\lambda_1}}$ and $T' =T|_{U}$ .

We asume $p>1:$ We recall and it is easy to show that $T( E_{\lambda_i})\subset E_{\lambda_i} $ since

$$T(\ker (T-\lambda_iI))\subset \ker (T-\lambda_iI)$$

Hence One see that $$ T( E_{\lambda_1})\subset E_{\lambda_1} $$ and $$T( U)\subset U $$ since $p>1$ we have that $$r =\dim E_{\lambda_1} <n~~~and ~~~n-r =\dim U <n$$ Whence By asumption of induction,there are two chain $$\color{green}{W_0⊆W_1⊆....⊆W_r=W}$$ such that $\dim W_i = i,~~i= 0,1,\cdots ,r$ and $T_1(W_i)\subset W_i$ and $$\color{blue}{U_0⊆U_1⊆....⊆U_{n-r}=U}$$ such that $\dim U_i = i,~~i= 0,1,\cdots ,n-r$ and $T'(U_i)\subset U_i$

Now consider the chain

$$ \color{blue}{W_0\oplus U_0⊆W_0\oplus U_1⊆....⊆}\color{red}{W_0\oplus U_{n-r} =U\oplus W_0} \color{green}{\subset W_1\oplus U ⊆...⊆W_r\oplus U =W\oplus U=V}$$

That is $$ \begin{cases} \color{blue}{V_i~~~~~= W_0\oplus U_i}&\text{if}~~0\le i \le n-r\\ \color{green}{V_{n-r+i} = U\oplus W_i} &\text{if}~~0\le i \le r \end{cases} $$

  • For $0\le i \le n-r$ we have $\color{blue}{V_i =W_0\oplus U_i }$ then $\color{blue}{T(V_i) = T_1(W_0)\oplus T'(U_i) \subset W_0\oplus U_i = V_i}$ $$\color{blue}{\dim V_i = \dim U_i +\dim W_0 = i}$$
  • For $0\le i \le r$ we have $\color{green}{V_{n-r+i} =W_i\oplus U }$ then $\color{green}{T(V_i) = T_1(W_i)\oplus T'(U) \subset W_i\oplus U = V_{n-r+i}}$

and since,$\dim U=n-r$ and $\dim W_i =i$ we have $$\color{green}{\dim V_{n-r+i} = \dim U +\dim W_{i} = n-r+i}$$ - We have the chain $$V_0⊆V_1⊆....⊆V_{n}=V$$ - $T(V_i)\subset V_i$

The cases where $p= 1$ is obvious since in that cases, it means $$V= \bigoplus_{i =1}^{p} E_{\lambda_i}=E_{\lambda_i} =\ker (T-\lambda_1 I)$$

i.e $$T= \lambda_1I$$ take $$V_i=\{v_1,v_2,\cdots,v_i\}$$

Where $\{v_1,v_2,\cdots,v_n\}$ is any basis of $V$

  • $\begingroup$ Sir what is $f$ here? $\endgroup$ – abcdmath Oct 15 '17 at 13:29
  • $\begingroup$ But how is $\ker T^n=V$ $\endgroup$ – Learnmore Oct 15 '17 at 13:38
  • $\begingroup$ Sir, do you mean that $T(Ker T)=Ker T²$. Then by your assumption $V_2⊆V_1$ which is opposite. Please elaborate it. $\endgroup$ – abcdmath Oct 15 '17 at 13:39
  • $\begingroup$ You go out from a nilpotent operator. But $T$ is any operator. Also, $\dim V_i = i$ is required. $\endgroup$ – amsmath Oct 15 '17 at 13:45
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Nope. Try to do this with$$T = \begin{pmatrix}0 & 1\\0 & 0\end{pmatrix}$$. Good luck! $\endgroup$ – amsmath Oct 15 '17 at 16:48

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.