10.1  Generalized Eigenspaces

Chapter 9 left one gap wide open. When an operator has too few eigenvectors, its eigenspaces are too small to fill the space, and diagonalization fails. The remedy of this chapter is to enlarge each eigenspace until the enlarged pieces do fill the space. This section builds the enlargement, shows that the enlarging process stops after finitely many steps, and proves that the pieces split V whenever the characteristic polynomial splits.

10.1.1. Enlarging an eigenspace

Take the standing counterexample of Chapter 9, J=(2102)∈M2(F), and let N=J−2I. The only eigenvalue is 2, and E2(J)=kerN=span(e1) is a line: one eigenvector direction where we need two, so J is not diagonalizable over any field (Theorem 9.4.1 (e)).

Now look at what N does to the missing direction e2. One application does not kill e2, but two do: Ne2=e1,N2e2=Ne1=0. So e2 is killed by N2, and kerN2=F2 is everything. The eigenspace was too small, but the kernel of the square is as big as we could wish.

This is the whole idea. Instead of asking for vectors killed by T−λidV, ask for vectors killed by some power of T−λidV. The eigenvectors are still there (they are killed at the first step), and there may be more.

A generalized eigenvector is a vector that some power of T−λidV kills, not necessarily the first power.

10.1.2. Generalized eigenvectors and generalized eigenspaces

Definition 10.1.1 (Generalized Eigenvector)

Let V be a vector space over F, let T∈L(V) and λ∈F. A generalized eigenvector of T for λ is a vector v∈V with v≠0 such that (T−λidV)kv=0for some integer k≥1.

In words: the vector must be non-zero, exactly as for an eigenvector; the scalar λ must lie in F; and the power k is not fixed in advance — it may depend on v. Taking k=1 recovers the eigenvector condition, so every eigenvector for λ is a generalized eigenvector for λ.

Collecting all of them, together with 0, gives the space we are after.

Definition 10.1.2 (Generalized Eigenspace)

Let V be a vector space over F, let T∈L(V) and λ∈F. The generalized eigenspace of T for λ is Gλ(T):={v∈V:(T−λidV)kv=0 for some integer k≥1}=⋃k≥1ker(T−λidV)k. For A∈Mn(F) we write Gλ(A)=Gλ(TA).

So Gλ(T) consists of 0 together with all generalized eigenvectors for λ. Writing N=T−λidV for the rest of this subsection, the definition says Gλ(T)=kerN∪kerN2∪kerN3∪….

Well-definedness: it really is a subspace. A union of subspaces is almost never a subspace (Proposition 1.2.3), so this needs a check. What saves us is that the union is increasing: if Nkv=0, then Nk+1v=N(Nkv)=N0=0, so kerN⊆kerN2⊆kerN3⊆… Now use the subspace test (Theorem 1.2.1). We have 0∈kerN⊆Gλ(T), so the set is non-empty. If u,v∈Gλ(T), say Nju=0 and Nkv=0, put m=max(j,k); then u,v∈kerNm by the inclusions above, and kerNm is a subspace, so u+v and cu lie in kerNm⊆Gλ(T) for every c∈F. Hence Gλ(T) is a subspace of V.

Examples.

  • The standing counterexample. For J=(2102), we computed ker(J−2I)=span(e1) and ker(J−2I)2=F2. So G2(J)=F2, while E2(J) is only a line. The generalized eigenspace is strictly bigger than the eigenspace, and it is all of F2.
  • A diagonalizable operator gains nothing. Let A=diag(2,5) over Q. Then (A−2I)k=diag(0,3k), whose kernel is span(e1) for every k≥1. So G2(A)=E2(A)=span(e1), and likewise G5(A)=E5(A)=span(e2). Enlarging an eigenspace of a diagonalizable operator does nothing, a fact we prove in general below.
  • Differentiation. Let D∈L(F[x]≤n) be differentiation. Then Dn+1=0 (Example (Differentiation Is Nilpotent)), so every polynomial is killed by a power of D, that is, of D−0id, and G0(D)=F[x]≤n. By contrast E0(D)=kerD is the line of constants when F=R. Here the generalized eigenspace for the single eigenvalue 0 is the whole space, of dimension n+1.
  • A scalar not among the eigenvalues. For the same A=diag(2,5) and λ=7, the matrix (A−7I)k=diag((−5)k,(−2)k) is invertible, so its kernel is {0} for every k. Hence G7(A)={0}. The definition makes sense for every λ∈F, and gives the zero space unless λ is an eigenvalue.
  • A degenerate case. On a space of dimension 1, every operator is λid for one scalar λ, and Gλ=V, Gμ={0} for μ≠λ. Small as it is, this is the model for a 1×1 Jordan block.
  • No eigenvalues at all. The rotation R of R2 by a right angle has no real eigenvalue (Example (A Rotation Has No Invariant Lines)), and indeed Gλ(R)={0} for every λ∈R: if (R−λI)kv=0 with v≠0, then R−λI would not be injective, so λ would be an eigenvalue. Over C, where pR=x2+1=(x−i)(x+i) splits, Gi(R) and G−i(R) are the two eigenlines.

Non-example by minimal change. Keep A=diag(2,5) over Q and take v=(1,1). This vector is killed by a polynomial in A whose roots are eigenvalues: (A−2I)(A−5I)v=0, as one checks entry by entry. But it is a generalized eigenvector for neither eigenvalue: (A−2I)kv=(0,3k)≠0 and (A−5I)kv=((−3)k,0)≠0 for every k≥1. The failing clause is that the definition demands a power of a single factor T−λidV, not a product of different factors. (Of course v=e1+e2 is a sum of two generalized eigenvectors; that is the decomposition theorem below, not the definition.)

Why this definition. Three clauses are doing work. The vector must be non-zero, or every Gλ would contain a “generalized eigenvector” and the word would carry no information. The exponent must be allowed to grow, because nothing tells us in advance how many steps a vector needs: for D on R[x]≤n the polynomial xn needs n+1 steps. And the power is a power of one factor, which is what makes Gλ one piece attached to one eigenvalue. The name is the honest one: these are the vectors that behave like eigenvectors after enough applications of T−λidV.

Warning. Gλ(T) is usually bigger than Eλ(T), and “generalized eigenvector” includes the ordinary ones. The inclusion Eλ(T)⊆Gλ(T) always holds, and it is strict exactly when T has too few eigenvectors for λ: for J=(2102), dim⁡E2=1 and dim⁡G2=2. So a generalized eigenvector need not satisfy Tv=λv: the vector e2 satisfies Je2=e1+2e2. Conversely, do not read “generalized” as “not an eigenvector”: every eigenvector is a generalized eigenvector.

10.1.3. The kernel chain stabilizes

The definition of Gλ(T) is an infinite union, which is awkward: to decide membership we would have to try every k. In finite dimension this is an illusion. The chain kerN⊆kerN2⊆… is a chain of subspaces of V, and their dimensions cannot keep growing. Once the chain stops growing, it stops forever.

Theorem 10.1.1 (The Kernel Chain Stabilizes)

Let V be a finite-dimensional vector space over F with dim⁡V=n, let N∈L(V), and write Kk=kerNk for k≥0, so that K0={0}. Then:

  • (a) K0⊆K1⊆K2⊆…, and every Kk is N-invariant;
  • (b) if Km=Km+1 for some m≥0, then Km+j=Km for every j≥0;
  • (c) there is a least index s≥0 with Ks=Ks+1; it satisfies s≤n, the inclusions K0⊊K1⊊⋯⊊Ks are strict, and Kk=Ks for every k≥s;
  • (d) in particular kerNn=kerNn+j for every j≥0.

Idea. The only real point is (b): equality at one step propagates. Read it backwards. To put v∈Km+j+1 into Km+j, look at w=Njv. It lies in Km+1, which by hypothesis is Km, and that is exactly the statement Nm+jv=0. Then (c) and (d) are bookkeeping: while the inclusions are strict the dimensions go up by at least 1, so strictness cannot survive past step n.

Proof.

  • (a) If Nkv=0, then Nk+1v=N(Nkv)=0, so Kk⊆Kk+1. Each Kk=kerNk is the kernel of a polynomial in N, hence N-invariant by Theorem 6.7.4 (b).

  • (b) Suppose Km=Km+1. We prove Km+j=Km by induction on j≥0. For j=0 there is nothing to prove. Assume Km+j=Km, and let v∈Km+j+1. Then Nm+1(Njv)=Nm+j+1v=0, so Njv∈Km+1=Km, which says Nm+jv=Nm(Njv)=0. Hence v∈Km+j=Km. Together with Km⊆Km+j+1 from (a), this gives Km+j+1=Km.

  • (c) First, some m with 0≤m≤n satisfies Km=Km+1. Otherwise Km⊊Km+1 for every m=0,1,…,n, so dim⁡Km+1≥dim⁡Km+1 for those m, and hence dim⁡Kn+1≥n+1, contradicting dim⁡Kn+1≤dim⁡V=n (Theorem 1.6.7). By the well-ordering principle (Theorem 0.2.11) there is a least such index; call it s, and s≤n. For k<s minimality gives Kk≠Kk+1, so the inclusion Kk⊆Kk+1 of (a) is strict. For k≥s, (b) gives Kk=Ks.

  • (d) Since s≤n, (c) gives Kn=Ks=Kn+j for every j≥0.

Quick check. Can kerN⊊kerN2=kerN3 happen? Can kerN=kerN2⊊kerN3 happen?

Solution. The first can: for N=(0100) on F2 we have kerN=span(e1) and kerN2=F2=kerN3, since N2=0. Here s=2.

The second cannot, by Theorem 10.1.1 (b) with m=1: equality at one step forces equality at every later step. This is why the theorem says the strict inclusions come first and the equalities after; the chain never resumes growing.

The index s will come up often enough to name. We call the least s≥0 with kerNs=kerNs+1 the stabilization index of N. Part (d) is the useful form: the chain has certainly stopped by step n=dim⁡V, whatever N is. Applying this to N=T−λidV turns the infinite union in Definition 10.1.2 into a single kernel.

Corollary 10.1.2 (The Generalized Eigenspace Is One Kernel)

Let V be a finite-dimensional vector space over F with dim⁡V=n, let T∈L(V) and λ∈F, and put N=T−λidV with stabilization index s. Then:

  • (a) Gλ(T)=kerNs=kerNn;
  • (b) Gλ(T) is T-invariant, and Eλ(T)⊆Gλ(T);
  • (c) Gλ(T)≠{0} if and only if λ is an eigenvalue of T;
  • (d) if v∈Gλ(T) is non-zero and k≥1 is least with Nkv=0, then Nk−1v is an eigenvector of T for λ.

Proof.

  • (a) Every kerNk with k≥1 is contained in kerNmax(k,n)=kerNn by Theorem 10.1.1 (a) and (d), so the union Gλ(T) equals kerNn; and kerNn=kerNs by (c) of the same theorem, since s≤n.

  • (b) By (a), Gλ(T)=kerNn is the kernel of a polynomial in T, so T maps it into itself (Theorem 6.7.4 (b)). And Eλ(T)=kerN⊆kerNn.

  • (c) (⇐) If λ is an eigenvalue, then Eλ(T)≠{0} (Theorem 9.2.1), and Eλ(T)⊆Gλ(T) by (b). (⇒) If v∈Gλ(T) is non-zero, take k≥1 least with Nkv=0, which exists by the definition of Gλ(T) and Theorem 0.2.11. Then w=Nk−1v≠0 by minimality of k (for k=1 this reads w=v≠0), while Nw=Nkv=0. So w∈kerN is non-zero and λ is an eigenvalue.

  • (d) This is the computation just made: w=Nk−1v is non-zero and lies in kerN=Eλ(T).

Part (d) is a move worth remembering: to get a genuine eigenvector out of a generalized one, apply T−λidV as many times as possible without reaching 0. It is the reason the enlargement never produces eigenvalues out of thin air, and it will start every Jordan chain in Section 2.

10.1.4. The generalized eigenspace decomposition

We can now state the payoff. Chapter 9’s primary decomposition (Theorem 9.8.1) already splits V into invariant pieces, one for each irreducible factor of mT. When pT splits, all those factors are linear, the pieces are kernels of powers of T−λiidV — and those are exactly the generalized eigenspaces. The extra information here is that the piece attached to λi has dimension aT(λi), so the sizes are read off the characteristic polynomial.

When the characteristic polynomial splits, the generalized eigenspaces fill the space, and the one for λ has dimension the algebraic multiplicity of λ.

Theorem 10.1.3 (Generalized Eigenspace Decomposition)

Let V be a finite-dimensional vector space over F with dim⁡V=n≥1, let T∈L(V), and suppose pT splits over F, with distinct eigenvalues λ1,…,λk and pT=(x−λ1)a1⋯(x−λk)ak,mT=(x−λ1)s1⋯(x−λk)sk, where ai=aT(λi) and 1≤si≤ai. Write Gi=Gλi(T) and Ni=(T−λiidV)|Gi. Then:

  • (a) Gi=ker(T−λiidV)si, and V=G1⊕G2⊕⋯⊕Gk;
  • (b) each Gi is T-invariant and non-zero, with Eλi(T)⊆Gi, and Eλi(T)=Gi if and only if si=1;
  • (c) dim⁡Gi=ai and pT|Gi=(x−λi)ai;
  • (d) Niai=0; that is, T|Gi=λiidGi+Ni with Ni nilpotent, of stabilization index si;
  • (e) if B is a basis of V obtained by writing bases B1,…,Bk of G1,…,Gk one after another, then [T]BB=[T|G1]B1B1 ⊕ … ⊕ [T|Gk]BkBk is block diagonal, with the i-th block of size ai.

Idea. Almost everything is already proved; the one new step is (a), the identification Gi=ker(T−λiidV)si. One inclusion is free, since ker(T−λi)si sits inside the union defining Gi. For the other, count. Chapter 9 says the primary piece ker(T−λi)si has dimension ai, so it is enough to show dim⁡Gi≤ai. Now Gi is invariant, and the only eigenvalue of T on Gi is λi: an eigenvector in Gi for μ is killed by (μ−λi)n, which forces μ=λi. So the characteristic polynomial of the restriction is a power of x−λi dividing pT, and its degree dim⁡Gi is at most ai.

Proof. Since pT splits and mT∣pT, Corollary 9.6.2 (b) gives the displayed factorization of mT with 1≤si≤ai. Put Vi=ker(T−λiidV)si. The polynomials x−λi are distinct monic irreducibles, so Theorem 9.8.1 applies to mT=∏i(x−λi)si and gives V=V1⊕⋯⊕Vk, with each Vi invariant and non-zero. By Corollary 9.8.4, dim⁡Vi=ai, pT|Vi=(x−λi)ai, and Eλi(T)⊆Vi with equality if and only if si=1.

Claim: Gi=Vi. Fix i and write G=Gi, λ=λi, a=ai, N=T−λidV.

(⊇) Vi=kerNsi⊆⋃j≥1kerNj=G.

(⊆) It suffices to prove dim⁡G≤a: then Vi⊆G and dim⁡Vi=a≥dim⁡G force dim⁡Vi=dim⁡G, and Theorem 1.6.8, applied to the subspace Vi of G, gives Vi=G.

First, the only eigenvalue of T|G is λ. Indeed, G is T-invariant (Corollary 10.1.2 (b)), so the restriction makes sense (Definition 9.1.2). Let μ∈F be an eigenvalue of T|G, with eigenvector v∈G, v≠0. From Tv=μv we get Nv=(μ−λ)v, hence Nnv=(μ−λ)nv by induction. But G=kerNn by Corollary 10.1.2 (a), so (μ−λ)nv=0 with v≠0, which forces the scalar (μ−λ)n to be 0 (Theorem 1.1.9), and so μ=λ, since a field has no zero divisors (Theorem 0.7.1).

Now compare characteristic polynomials. G≠{0}, since λ is an eigenvalue of T (Corollary 10.1.2 (c)). If G=V, then every root of pT is an eigenvalue of T=T|G (Theorem 9.2.1), so λ is the only root; as pT splits and is monic of degree n (Theorem 7.10.2), pT=(x−λ)n and a=n=dim⁡G. If G≠V, then Theorem 9.1.3 (b) applies to the invariant subspace G and gives pT=pT|GpT¯, so pT|G is a monic divisor of pT=∏j(x−λj)aj. By Lemma 9.5.2, pT|G=∏j(x−λj)cj with 0≤cj≤aj. Its roots are the eigenvalues of T|G (Theorem 9.2.1, applied to T|G), which we just showed to be λ alone, so cj=0 for j≠i. Hence pT|G=(x−λ)ci, and comparing degrees (Theorem 7.10.2) gives dim⁡G=ci≤a. This proves the claim, and with it (a), (b) and (c), since Gi=Vi.

  • (d) By Theorem 9.8.1 (c) and the claim, mT|Gi=(x−λi)si. For an integer j≥0, the operator Nij is (x−λi)j evaluated at T|Gi, so Nij=0 if and only if (x−λi)si divides (x−λi)j (Theorem 9.5.1), that is, if and only if j≥si. Since si≤ai, this gives Niai=0, and it identifies si as the least exponent killing Ni. Hence kerNisi=Gi while kerNisi−1⊊Gi, so the stabilization index of Ni is si.

  • (e) Each Gi is invariant and non-zero, and V=⨁iGi, so Theorem 9.1.5 gives the block diagonal shape, the i-th block being [T|Gi]BiBi, of size dim⁡Gi=ai.

Read (d) again, since it is the plan for the rest of the chapter. On its generalized eigenspace, T is a scalar plus a nilpotent operator. The scalar part is as simple as an operator can be. So the only question left is what a nilpotent operator looks like in a well-chosen basis, and that is the subject of the next section. Once it is answered, (e) assembles the answers for the different eigenvalues into one matrix for T.

Two consistency checks. Summing dimensions in (a) and using (c) gives ∑iai=n, which is the degree count for a split pT. And if T is diagonalizable, then every si=1 (Theorem 9.8.2), so (b) says Gi=Eλi(T) and (a) becomes the eigenspace decomposition V=⨁iEλi(T) of Theorem 9.4.1 (c). Nothing is lost, and nothing new is gained, in the diagonalizable case.

Example (Generalized Eigenspaces of a 4×4 Matrix)

Let A=(21−1−2−33−113−13−1−31−13)∈M4(Q),pA=(x−2)3(x−5). Find E2(A), G2(A), G5(A), the stabilization index of A−2I, and the minimal polynomial. Verify Theorem 10.1.3 on this matrix.

Solution. The eigenspace. Write N=A−2I, so N=(01−1−2−31−113−11−1−31−11). Rows 2 and 4 are equal and row 3 is their negative, so the row space is spanned by rows 1 and 2, which are not proportional; hence rankN=2 and nullityN=2 (Theorem 3.5.7). The kernel is cut out by x2−x3−2x4=0,−3x1+x2−x3+x4=0. Subtracting the first equation from the second gives −3x1+3x4=0, so x1=x4, and then x2=x3+2x4. With x3=s and x4=t free, E2(A)={(t,s+2t,s,t)}=span((0,1,1,0), (1,2,0,1)),gA(2)=2. Since aA(2)=3>2, the matrix is not diagonalizable (Theorem 9.4.1 (e)).

The generalized eigenspace. Squaring, N2=9(0000−1001100−1−1001), which has rank 1, so kerN2 has dimension 3 and is the hyperplane kerN2={x:x1=x4}=span(e2, e3, e1+e4). The chain of kernels has dimensions 0,2,3 so far. Since kerN2⊆G2(A) and dim⁡G2(A)=aA(2)=3=dim⁡kerN2 by part (c) of the theorem, we get G2(A)=kerN2, and the stabilization index is s=2. One can see the stabilization by hand as well: multiplying out gives N3=3N2, so kerN3=kerN2 directly.

The second generalized eigenspace. Here aA(5)=1, so dim⁡G5(A)=1 and G5(A)=E5(A) by part (b) — its s must be 1. Solving (A−5I)x=0 gives G5(A)=E5(A)=span((0,1,−1,1)). As a check, A(0,1,−1,1)=(1+1−2, 3+1+1, −1−3−1, 1+1+3)=(0,5,−5,5).

The decomposition. Q4=G2(A)⊕G5(A), of dimensions 3+1=4, and the sum is direct because (0,1,−1,1)∉G2(A): its first and last coordinates are 0≠1.

The minimal polynomial. The stabilization indices are s1=2 at λ=2 and s2=1 at λ=5, and part (d) of the theorem identifies these indices as the exponents in mA, so mA=(x−2)2(x−5). Consistently, (A−2I)(A−5I)≠0: the two factors are coprime, so the kernel of the product is ker(A−2I)⊕ker(A−5I) (Theorem 6.7.5 (a)), of dimension 2+1=3<4.

A basis adapted to the splitting. Take B=(e2, e3, e1+e4, (0,1,−1,1)), a basis of G2 followed by one of G5. By part (e), [TA]BB is block diagonal with a 3×3 block and the 1×1 block (5).

Warning. The dimension of Gλ is the algebraic multiplicity, not the number of steps the chain takes. In the example, dim⁡G2=3 while the chain {0}⊊kerN⊊kerN2=G2 stabilizes after s=2 steps. The two numbers measure different things: a(λ)=dim⁡Gλ is the total size of the piece, and s is the exponent of x−λ in the minimal polynomial. All that holds in general is 1≤s≤a(λ) and g(λ)≤a(λ) (Theorem 9.3.1).

Finally, a word on what we may not yet assume. The decomposition needs pT to split, which is automatic over C (Corollary 6.5.5) but fails, for instance, for a rotation of R2, whose generalized eigenspaces over R are all {0} and certainly do not fill R2. Operators over an arbitrary field need the coarser primary decomposition of Chapter 9, whose pieces we return to in Section 6.

10.1.5. Exercises

A. Check your understanding

Exercise (A1)
  • (a) Define a generalized eigenvector and the generalized eigenspace Gλ(T).
  • (b) State what Theorem 10.1.1 says about the chain kerN⊆kerN2⊆…, including the bound on where it stabilizes.
  • (c) True or false: every generalized eigenvector of T for λ satisfies Tv=λv. Justify your answer.
  • (d) True or false: if λ is not an eigenvalue of T, then Gλ(T)={0}. Justify your answer.
  • (e) Let dim⁡V=6 and let pT=(x−1)4(x−3)2 split over F. What are dim⁡G1(T) and dim⁡G3(T)?
  • (f) In the situation of (e), what can you say about dim⁡E1(T)?

Solution.

  • (a) A generalized eigenvector of T for λ∈F is a non-zero v∈V with (T−λidV)kv=0 for some k≥1 (Definition 10.1.1); Gλ(T) is the set of all of them together with 0, that is, ⋃k≥1ker(T−λidV)k (Definition 10.1.2).

  • (b) The kernels increase; once two consecutive ones are equal, all later ones equal them; the strict inclusions come first, and the chain has stabilized by step dim⁡V, so Gλ(T)=ker(T−λidV)dim⁡V.

  • (c) False. For J=(2102), the vector e2 lies in G2(J) but Je2=e1+2e2≠2e2. Only the vectors of Eλ(T)⊆Gλ(T) satisfy the eigenvector equation.

  • (d) True, by Corollary 10.1.2 (c).

  • (e) dim⁡G1(T)=aT(1)=4 and dim⁡G3(T)=aT(3)=2 (Theorem 10.1.3 (c)).

  • (f) Only 1≤dim⁡E1(T)≤4, since E1(T)⊆G1(T) and 1≤gT(1)≤aT(1) (Theorem 9.3.1). All four values occur, as the Jordan forms of Section 3 will show.

B. Practice

Exercise (B1: Computing generalized eigenspaces)

For each operator, find all generalized eigenspaces, and compare each with the corresponding eigenspace.

  • (a) A1=(3103)∈M2(Q).
  • (b) A2=(21101−1−1−11)∈M3(R), which has mA2=(x−1)2(x−2) (Exercise (B2: Decomposing R3)).
  • (c) D∈L(R[x]≤3), differentiation.
  • (d) The rotation R=(0−110), first over R and then over C.

Solution.

  • (a) pA1=(x−3)2, so 3 is the only eigenvalue, and Gλ={0} for λ≠3 (Corollary 10.1.2 (c)). Since (A1−3I)2=0, G3(A1)=Q2, while E3(A1)=ker(0100)=span(e1) is a line.

  • (b) From mA2=(x−1)2(x−2) and Theorem 10.1.3 (a), G1=ker(A2−I)2 and G2=ker(A2−2I). Chapter 9 computed these: G1=span((−1,1,0),(0,0,1)), the plane x+y=0, and G2=span((0,−1,1)). The eigenspace E1(A2)=span((−1,1,0)) is a line strictly inside G1, while E2(A2)=G2 because s2=1. All other Gλ are {0}.

  • (c) D4=0 (Example (Differentiation Is Nilpotent)), so G0(D)=R[x]≤3, of dimension 4, while E0(D)=kerD=R is the line of constants. Since pD=x4 has 0 as its only root, every other generalized eigenspace is {0}.

  • (d) Over R, pR=x2+1 has no root, so R has no eigenvalue and Gλ(R)={0} for every λ∈R. The generalized eigenspaces do not fill R2; the hypothesis that pR splits fails. Over C, pR=(x−i)(x+i) splits with a(i)=a(−i)=1, so Gi(R)=Ei(R)=span((1,−i)) and G−i(R)=E−i(R)=span((1,i)), and C2=Gi⊕G−i. (Check: R(1,−i)=(i,1)=i(1,−i).)

Exercise (B2: The image chain stabilizes too)

Let V be finite-dimensional with dim⁡V=n, and let N∈L(V).

  • (a) Prove that imN⊇imN2⊇imN3⊇…, and that each imNk is N-invariant.
  • (b) Prove that imNm=imNm+1 if and only if kerNm=kerNm+1.
  • (c) Deduce that imNn=imNn+j for every j≥0, and that the image chain stabilizes at exactly the same index s as the kernel chain.

Solution.

  • (a) imNk+1={Nk+1v:v∈V}={Nk(Nv):v∈V}⊆imNk. Each imNk is the image of a polynomial in N, hence N-invariant (Theorem 6.7.4 (b)).

  • (b) By Theorem 2.3.1, dim⁡imNk+dim⁡kerNk=n for every k. The inclusions imNm+1⊆imNm and kerNm⊆kerNm+1 are equalities exactly when the dimensions agree (Theorem 1.6.8), and dim⁡imNm=dim⁡imNm+1 if and only if dim⁡kerNm=dim⁡kerNm+1 by the displayed identity.

  • (c) By Theorem 10.1.1 (d), kerNn=kerNn+j; iterating (b) at each step from n to n+j gives imNn=imNn+j. And by (b), the least index at which two consecutive images agree is the least index at which two consecutive kernels agree, namely s.

Exercise (B3: Reading the dimensions off a triangular matrix)

Let A=(1100011000210002)∈M4(Q).

  • (a) Write down pA and the algebraic multiplicities.
  • (b) Compute E1(A), G1(A), E2(A) and G2(A), and check dim⁡Gλ=aA(λ).
  • (c) Verify that Q4=G1(A)⊕G2(A), and find mA.

Solution.

  • (a) A is upper triangular, so pA=(x−1)2(x−2)2 (Theorem 7.4.6), and aA(1)=aA(2)=2.

  • (b) A−I=(0100001000110001) has rank 3 (rows 1,2,4 are independent and row 3 is the sum of rows 2 and 4), so E1(A)=span(e1). Squaring, (A−I)2=(0010001100120001), of rank 2, with kernel span(e1,e2); so G1(A)=span(e1,e2), of dimension 2=aA(1). (Membership can be seen directly: (A−I)e2=e1 and (A−I)e1=0.)

    Similarly A−2I=(−11000−11000010000) has rank 3, so E2(A) is a line; solving gives E2(A)=span((1,1,1,0)). And (A−2I)2=(1−21001−1100000000) has rank 2; its kernel is cut out by x1−2x2+x3=0 and x2−x3+x4=0, so G2(A)=span((1,1,1,0),(−2,−1,0,1)), of dimension 2=aA(2). (Check: (A−2I)(−2,−1,0,1)=(1,1,1,0), the eigenvector.)

  • (c) The four vectors e1,e2,(1,1,1,0),(−2,−1,0,1) form a basis of Q4: the matrix with these columns is upper triangular with diagonal 1,1,1,1, hence invertible. So the sum is direct and equals Q4, as Theorem 10.1.3 (a) predicts. Both stabilization indices are 2 (the eigenspaces are lines, the generalized eigenspaces planes), so mA=(x−1)2(x−2)2=pA.

C. Going deeper

Exercise (C1: The Fitting decomposition)

Let V be finite-dimensional with dim⁡V=n, and let N∈L(V) be any operator. Put U=kerNn and W=imNn.

  • (a) Prove that U∩W={0}, and deduce V=U⊕W.
  • (b) Prove that U and W are N-invariant, that N|U is nilpotent, and that N|W is invertible.
  • (c) Identify U as a generalized eigenspace of N.
  • (d) Compute U and W for N=(0101)∈M2(Q).

Hint: for (a), if v=Nnw and Nnv=0, look at which kernel w lies in.

Solution.

  • (a) Let v∈U∩W, say v=Nnw with Nnv=0. Then N2nw=Nnv=0, so w∈kerN2n=kerNn by Theorem 10.1.1 (d), and therefore v=Nnw=0. By Theorem 2.3.1, dim⁡U+dim⁡W=n, so dim⁡(U+W)=dim⁡U+dim⁡W−dim⁡(U∩W)=n (Theorem 1.7.3), whence U+W=V (Theorem 1.6.8) and the sum is direct (Theorem 1.7.4).

  • (b) Both are invariant by Theorem 6.7.4 (b). On U we have (N|U)n=0 by definition of U, so N|U is nilpotent. On W, the map N|W:W→W is surjective: N(W)=N(imNn)=imNn+1=imNn=W by Exercise (B2: The image chain stabilizes too) (c). A surjective operator on a finite-dimensional space is invertible (Corollary 2.3.2 (e)).

  • (c) U=kerNn=G0(N), by Corollary 10.1.2 (a) with λ=0. So the Fitting decomposition splits V into the generalized eigenspace for 0 and a part on which N is invertible.

  • (d) Here n=2 and N2=(0101)=N, so U=kerN=span(e1) and W=imN=span((1,1)). Indeed Q2=span(e1)⊕span((1,1)), N is zero on U, and N(1,1)=(1,1), so N|W is the identity.

Exercise (C2: Commuting operators preserve generalized eigenspaces)

Let V be finite-dimensional, and let S,T∈L(V) with ST=TS.

  • (a) Prove that S(Gλ(T))⊆Gλ(T) for every λ∈F.
  • (b) Deduce that if pT splits, then every generalized eigenspace of T is invariant under every polynomial in T and under S, and that V has a basis in which both S and T have block diagonal matrices with blocks of sizes aT(λ1),…,aT(λk).
  • (c) Show by example that part (a) can be vacuous: find commuting S,T on Q2 and a λ with Eλ(T) a line, Gλ(T)=Q2, and S not a scalar multiple of the identity.

Solution.

  • (a) Since ST=TS, S commutes with every polynomial in T (Theorem 6.7.1 (d)), in particular with Nk, where N=T−λidV. Let v∈Gλ(T), say Nkv=0. Then Nk(Sv)=S(Nkv)=S0=0, so Sv∈kerNk⊆Gλ(T). (This is Theorem 6.7.4 (a) with R=Nk.)

  • (b) Invariance under polynomials in T is Theorem 6.7.4 (b), and invariance under S is (a). If pT splits, then V=⨁iGλi(T) with dim⁡Gλi(T)=aT(λi) (Theorem 10.1.3), and a basis assembled from bases of the summands makes both matrices block diagonal, by Theorem 9.1.5 applied to T and to S.

  • (c) Take T=(2102) and S=T. They commute, E2(T)=span(e1) is a line, G2(T)=Q2, and S is not a scalar matrix. Consistently with Theorem 9.9.1, S maps the line span(e1) into itself, and by (a) it maps G2(T)=Q2 into itself, which says nothing. The lesson is that (a) is informative only when Gλ(T)≠V.

Found a typo or a mistake? Report it, or read this page’s source

The text of this book is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0.