0
$\begingroup$

How many involutary matrices of order 2013 and trace = 2013 exist having a57 = -1?

My Attempt: An involutary matrix is the one which satisfies : $A^2$ = I . Now, if k is an eigen value of A, then it satisfies : $k^2$ - 1 =0 which gives the possible eigen values of the involutary matrix A as 1 or -1 .

Now, for a matrix of order 2013, trace = 2013 clearly means that all it's eigen values are 1.

Now. i understand that had the condition a57 = -1 NOT been given , the IDENTITY matrix is one of the matrices satisfying the above conditions.

BUT how do i prove that the identity matrix is the only involutary matrix of order 2013 which has it's trace= 2013? Thank you.

(this question came up before diagonalization came up in the course which i am reading which i think might be early for the question to crop up :) )

$\endgroup$
0
1
$\begingroup$

You need to show, in addition to the fact that the characteristic polynomial is $(X-1)^{2013}$ which you already did, that every involution is diagonalisable. Depending on what you already know, you have two options. You can either reason that $X^2-1=(X+1)(X-1)$ splits into distinct (the question seems to imply this is not over a field of characteristic$~2$) linear factors, and any matrix that satisfies such a polynomial (equation) is diagonalisable. Or, if you dont know about that fact, you can explicitly show that for any involution$~A$, every vector can be written as a sum of eigenvectors for$~A$, so that the sum of the eigenspaces fills the whole space. For the latter, just split any vector in its parts fixed and anti-fixed under the involution : $v=\frac12(v+A\cdot v)+\frac12(v-A\cdot v)$. Of course given that there is no eigenvalue$~-1$, the term $\frac12(v-A\cdot v)$ must actually be zero here.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you Marc . Although, i have read that A would be diagonalizable in such cases, this question came up before diagonalization came up in the course. $\endgroup$ – MathMan Oct 3 '13 at 6:52
  • $\begingroup$ Well, the second argument shows that $v=\frac12(v+A\cdot v)$ for all $v$, in other words $v=A\cdot v$, once you know that $-1$ is not an eigenvalue of$~A$. $\endgroup$ – Marc van Leeuwen Oct 3 '13 at 7:05

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.