1
$\begingroup$

I saw in the book "Linear algebra done right" (by S. Axler) that all complex operator has a Jordan form. The proof is based on the fact that all complex operator is upper triangular (i.e. there is a basis s.t. the matrix is upper triangular). My questions are the following :

  • 1) Could you give me an example of operator that is not upper triangular (I guess such an operator has no eigenvalue... may be an operator with $x^2+1$ as polynomial characteristic ?)

  • 2) If an operator has at least one eigenvalue, does it has a Jordan form ? (in the proof of Axler it's indeed based on the fact that it has an eigenvalue, but also on the fact that the characteristic polynomial is of the form $(x-\lambda _1)^{m_1}...(x-\lambda _n)^{m_n}$ (btw how do you call such a form ? in french we say "scindé" but I didn't find an english equivalent on wikipedia). So I guess that a characteristic polynomial of the form $x^2+x+1$ will not have a Jordan form even not a upper triangular form... but these are just supposition, and if anyone can confirm or not, I would be very happe :)

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I think that "polynôme scindé" in french means "polynomial splits into linear factors" in englich. $\endgroup$ – user296113 Aug 8 '18 at 20:47
  • $\begingroup$ I guess I would emphasize that a real matrix with complex eigenvalues does possess a Jordan form if we allow complex numbers. This would cover your $x^2 + x + 1$ example, trace $-1$ and determinant $1$ will do it, so $$ \left( \begin{array}{cc} 0 & 1 \\ -1 & -1 \end{array} \right) $$ $\endgroup$ – Will Jagy Aug 8 '18 at 21:10
3
$\begingroup$

Consider the map $T\colon\mathbb{R}^2\longrightarrow\mathbb{R}^2$ defined by $T(x,y)=(-y,x)$. There is no basis of $\mathbb{R}^2$ such that the matrix of $T$ with respect to that basis is upper triangular. Note that, as you suspected, $T$ has no (real) eigenvalues.

And the map $U\colon\mathbb{R}^3\longrightarrow\mathbb{R}^3$ defined by $U(x,y,z)=(-y,x,0)$ has one eigenvalue ($0$), but no Jordan form.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ So Will Jaggy was not correct ? (because he look to say the opposite, i.e. that all endomorphism has a jordan form) $\endgroup$ – user352653 Aug 8 '18 at 22:16
  • $\begingroup$ @user352653 It has no Jordan form over the reals. Every complex endomorphism of a finite-dimensional complex vector space has a Jordan form over the complex field. $\endgroup$ – José Carlos Santos Aug 8 '18 at 22:19
  • $\begingroup$ So do you agree with the fact that a matrix with polynomial characteristic $x^2+x+1$ has no jordan form, right ? $\endgroup$ – user352653 Aug 9 '18 at 9:39
  • $\begingroup$ @user352653 It has no Jordan form with real entries. $\endgroup$ – José Carlos Santos Aug 9 '18 at 10:33

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.