# Show there is no $A$ s.t. $A^2 =$ $\begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 \\ \end{pmatrix}$ [closed]

Show there is no matrix such that its square is equal to \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 \\ \end{pmatrix}

If you have an idea...

## closed as off-topic by Aqua, José Carlos Santos, GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會, MathOverview, Claude LeiboviciJan 13 '18 at 15:22

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

• "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – Aqua, José Carlos Santos, GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會, MathOverview, Claude Leibovici
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

In order to allow $A^2$ to have $0$ as eigenvalue with algebraic multiplicity $2$, $A$ itself must have $0$ as eigenvalue with algebraic multiplicity $2.$ But then the characteristic polynomial of $A$ is $\chi_A(t)=t^2$ and due to the Cayley-Hamilton theorem, $A^2=\chi_A(A)=0.$

Let $\begin{pmatrix}a&b\\c&d\end{pmatrix}^2 = \begin{pmatrix}0&1\\0&0\end{pmatrix}$, i.e. $\begin{pmatrix}a^2+bc&ab+bd\\ac+cd&bc+d^2\end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix}0&1\\0&0\end{pmatrix}$.

So, we obtain: $$\begin{cases} a^2+bc &=& 0 \\ ab+bd &=& 1 \\ ac+cd &=& 0 \\ bc+d^2 &=& 0 \end{cases}$$

From the second equation, $b(a+d) = 1$ and $c(a+d) = 0$. Either $c=0$ or $a+d=0$, but $b(a+d) = 1$, so $a+d \ne 0$, so $c=0$.

From the first equation, $a^2+bc = 0$, but since $c=0$ we have $a^2=0$, i.e. $a=0$.

From the last equation, $bc+d^2 = 0$, but since $c=0$ we have $d^2=0$, i.e. $d=0$.

Therefore, $a+d=0$, contradiction.

• Thanks. We can calculate directly, but there is not a more astute method? – user371663 Jan 6 '18 at 12:13
• Why not just convince yourself by a calculation? If you do such a calculation yourself, then you will really remember this later on. – Dietrich Burde Jan 6 '18 at 15:52

Such a matrix $A=\pmatrix{a&b\\c&d}$ would commute with $\pmatrix{0&1\\0&0}$. This means that $A=\pmatrix{a&b\\0&a}$. But then $A^2=\pmatrix{a^2&2ab\\0&a^2}$ which cannot equal $\pmatrix{0&1\\0&0}$.

Hint: Suppose there is such a matrix, $A=\begin{pmatrix} a & b \\ c&d\end{pmatrix}$. Then $$A^2=\begin{pmatrix}a^2+bc & b(a+d) \\ c(a+d) & bc+d^2\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 \\ \end{pmatrix}.$$

What can you deduce?

Assume $A^2=\begin{pmatrix}0&1\\0&0\end{pmatrix}$. Then the rank of $A$ is $1$ (it can not be $2$ or $0$). That is, $$A=\begin{pmatrix}a&b\\ak&bk\end{pmatrix},\;A^2=\begin{pmatrix}a^2+abk&ab+b^2k\\a^2k+abk&abk+b^2k^2\end{pmatrix}$$

Then $a^2+abk=0$ but $ab+b^2k=1$. Or $a(a+bk)=0$, $b(a+bk)=1$. So $a=0$ and $bk\neq 0$. But also $abk+b^2k^2=0$, a contradiction.

Set $$A=\begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 \\ \end{pmatrix}$$ $A$ has two zero eigenvalues and its characteristic equation is $\lambda^2=0$ and so any matrix $B$ such that $B^2=A$ has two 0 eigenvalues. Therefore $B$ has the same characteristic equation as of $A$ and according to Cayley-Hamilton theorem we must have $$B^2=0=A$$ which is a contradiction. So there exists no $B$ such that $B^2=A$.

The matrix $$B=\begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 \\ \end{pmatrix}$$ is nilpotent with $B^2=0$. Hence $A^2=B$ says that $A$ is nilpotent, too, so that $A^2=0$. This is a contradiction, because $B\neq 0$.

• You use Cayley-Hamilton implicitly. – user371663 Jan 6 '18 at 14:11
• @Lukas I use that a nilpotent matrix of size $n$ satisfies $A^n=0$. This can be proved without Cayley-Hamilton. – Dietrich Burde Jan 6 '18 at 15:29
• Yes Indeed, the fact it is similar to a strict triangular is sufficient (so it seems there is reduction implicitly). Unless it can be proved without, I don't know. – user371663 Jan 6 '18 at 15:48

If $A^2$ is as stated, then $(A^2)^2=0$ can be verified directly. Therefore, the minimum polynomial for $A$ must divide $\lambda^4$, and must be of order $0,1,2$. So $\lambda^2=0$ must hold regardless of which case is true, and this is a contradiction.