0
$\begingroup$

What can deduce from the given fact that the following matrices commute

$\left( \begin{array}{ccc} 0 & 0 & ... & 0 \\ 1 & 0 & ... & 0 \\ 0 & 1 & ... & 0 \\ so \,\ & on&... \end{array} \right)$ : an $n\times n$ Jordan block with diagonal $=0$

and the matrix $\left( \begin{array}{ccc} a & 0 & ... & 0 \\ b & a & ... & 0 \\ c & b & ... & 0 \\ so \,\ & on&... \end{array} \right)$: an $n\times n$ matrix where the column entries shift one place down as we move one column across

And that they are in this for wrt the same basis (which I know is not surprising since commuting matrices are simultaneously triangularizable).

What implications does this have if we interpret them as linear operators?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ The second matrix is a polynomial in the first one with $a$, $b$, $c$... as coefficients. $\endgroup$ – Henning Makholm Nov 21 '11 at 0:57
2
$\begingroup$

I just gave an answer on this an hour ago, if one of the matrices, call it $M,$ has only full Jordan blocks, as in your first matrix $ M \; \; = \; \; \left( \begin{array}{ccc} 0 & 0 & ... & 0 \\ 1 & 0 & ... & 0 \\ 0 & 1 & ... & 0 \\ so \,\ & on&... \end{array} \right)$ : an $n\times n$ Jordan block with diagonal $=0,$ then all matrices that commute with it can be written as a polynomial in $M.$ By the Cayley-Hamilton theorem this polynomial need have degree no larger than $n-1.$

Indeed, your second matrix is $$ A = a_0 I + a_1 M + a_2 M^2 + a_3 M^3 + \cdots + a_{n-1} M^{n-1},$$ with your letters $ a = a_0, \; b = a_1, \; c = a_2.$

Note that, for $M,$ the characteristic polynomial and the minimal polynomial are the same, that is, $M^n = 0$ but no lower power.

See: Commuting linear maps

$\endgroup$

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.