Let $T$ be a linear operator on a complex vector space $V$, where $n<\infty$, and let $A_1,\dots,A_m$ be the Jordan blocks of the matrix of $T$ with respect to some Jordan basis. For each $A_i$ (of size $d\times d$), there is a natural associated subspace $U_i\subseteq V$ (of dimension $d$) for which $\mathcal M(T|_{U_i})=A_i$.

We can decompose $V$ as

$$V=U_1\oplus\dots \oplus U_m,$$

which is an immediate consequence of the existence (and definition) of a Jordan basis. What is less clear is whether the subspaces $U_i$ are unique, i.e., independent of choice of Jordan basis.

Are the subspaces $U_i$ (defined above) of dimension at least two unique, i.e., independent of choice of Jordan basis?

Although it is a standard result that the Jordan matrix is unique up to reordering of blocks, this does not guarantee that these subspaces are unique. In fact, as a good warning, they definitely are not if we drop the requirement of considering only subspaces of dimension at least two. (As a counterexample, consider $T=I$ on $\mathbb C^2$ and compare the subspaces for the Jordan bases $\{(0,1),(1,0)\}$ and $\{(1,1),(1,-1)\}$.)


The subspaces are not unique. For instance, consider the transformation with matrix $$ A = \pmatrix{\lambda&1&0&0\\0&\lambda&0&0\\0&0&\lambda&1\\0&0&0&\lambda}. $$ Note that the standard basis and the basis $$ \{(1,0,-1,0),(0,1,0,-1),(1,0,1,0),(0,1,0,1)\} $$ are two Jordan bases that lead to distinct subspaces.

  • $\begingroup$ On the other hand, I believe that a similar idea with Weyr canonical form yields a unique collection of subspaces $\endgroup$ May 19 '20 at 1:25
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks. The answer makes sense, and the comment was especially helpful. It seems like the Weyr canonical form provides more clear insight into the structure of the operator's generalized eigenspaces. $\endgroup$
    – WillG
    May 19 '20 at 16:05
  • $\begingroup$ It seems that the subspace associated with the first $n$ Weyr blocks corresponding to $\lambda$ is precisely the subspace $\operatorname{null}(T-\lambda I)^n$, which is certainly independent of a basis. $\endgroup$
    – WillG
    May 19 '20 at 16:07
  • $\begingroup$ @WillG That makes sense. I haven't thought about WCF for a while so I wasn't confident. $\endgroup$ May 19 '20 at 16:43

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.