The Unapologetic Mathematician

Mathematics for the interested outsider

Almost Upper-Triangular Matrices

Over an algebraically closed field we can always find an upper-triangular matrix for any linear endomorphism. Over the real numbers we’re not quite so lucky, but we can come close.

Let T:V\rightarrow V be a linear transformation from a real vector space V of dimension d to itself. We might not be able to find an eigenvector — a one-dimensional invariant subspace — but we know that we can find either a one-dimensional or a two-dimensional invariant subspace U_1\subseteq V. Just like before we get an action of T on the quotient space V/U_1. Why? Because if we have two representatives v and w of the same vector in the quotient space, then we can write w=v+u. Acting by T, we find Tw=Tv+Tu. And since Tu\in U_1, the vectors Tv and Tw are again equivalent in the quotient space.

Now we can find a subspace \hat{U}_2\subseteq V/U_1 which is invariant under this action of T. Is this an invariant subspace of V? No, it’s not even a subspace of V. But we could pick some U_2\subseteq V containing a unique representative for each vector in \hat{U}_2. For instance, we could pick a basis of \hat{U}_2, a representative for each basis vector, and let U_2 be the span of these representatives. Is this an invariant subspace? Still, the answer is no. Let’s say u\in U_2 is the identified representative of \hat{u}\in\hat{U}_2. Then all we know is that Tu is a representative of T\hat{u}, not that it’s the identified representative. It could have some components spilling out into U_1.

As we proceed, picking up either a one- or two-dimensional subspace at each step, we can pick a basis of each subspace. The action of T sends each basis vector into the current subspace and possibly earlier subspaces. Writing it all out, we get a matrix that looks like

\displaystyle\begin{pmatrix}A_1&&*\\&\ddots&\\{0}&&A_m\end{pmatrix}

where each A_j is either a 1\times1 matrix or a 2\times2 matrix with no eigenvalues. The 1\times1 blocks come from the one-dimensional invariant subspaces in the construction, while the 2\times2 blocks come from the two-dimensional invariant subspaces in the construction, though they may not be invariant once we put them back into V. Above the diagonal we have no control (yet) over the entries, but below the diagonal almost all the entries are zero. The only exceptions are in the 2\times2 blocks, where we poke just barely down by one row.

We can note here that if there are n\leq m two-dimensional blocks and m-n one-dimensional blocks, then the total number of columns will be 2n+(m-n)=n+m=d. Thus we must have at least \lceil\frac{d}{2}\rceil blocks, and at most d blocks. The latter extreme corresponds to an actual upper-triangular matrix.

About these ads

April 1, 2009 - Posted by | Algebra, Linear Algebra

8 Comments »

  1. [...] we don’t always have an upper-triangular matrix, but we can always find a matrix that’s almost upper-triangular. That is, one that looks [...]

    Pingback by The Characteristic Polynomial of a Real Linear Transformation « The Unapologetic Mathematician | April 2, 2009 | Reply

  2. [...] two-dimensional invariant subspace on which has no eigenvalues. This corresponds to a block in an almost upper-triangular representation of . So we’ll just assume for the moment that has dimension [...]

    Pingback by Eigenvectors of an Eigenpair « The Unapologetic Mathematician | April 3, 2009 | Reply

  3. [...] if is a real vector space of any finite dimension we know we can find an almost upper-triangular form. This form is highly non-unique, but there are some patterns we can exploit as we move [...]

    Pingback by Generalized Eigenvectors of an Eigenpair « The Unapologetic Mathematician | April 6, 2009 | Reply

  4. [...] The Multiplicity of an Eigenpair As usual, let be a linear transformation on a real vector space of dimension . We know that can be put into an almost upper-triangular form [...]

    Pingback by The Multiplicity of an Eigenpair « The Unapologetic Mathematician | April 8, 2009 | Reply

  5. [...] We know that we can put into the almost upper-triangular form [...]

    Pingback by Real Inner Products « The Unapologetic Mathematician | April 15, 2009 | Reply

  6. [...] vsaka realna matrika podobna realni zgornje trikotni matriki, npr. . Velja pa . Lahko pa za matriko dosežemo še več: [...]

    Pingback by Predavanje LA.15: Zgornje trikotne matrike « igor’s math Blog | April 25, 2009 | Reply

  7. [...] not be able to put the transformation into an upper-triangular form. But we can put it into an almost upper-triangular form. The determinant is then the product of the determinants of the blocks along the diagonal. The [...]

    Pingback by The Determinant of a Positive-Definite Transformation « The Unapologetic Mathematician | August 3, 2009 | Reply

  8. [...] vsaka realna matrika podobna realni zgornje trikotni matriki, npr. . Velja pa . Lahko pa za matriko dosežemo še več: [...]

    Pingback by Predavanje LA010.7: Lastne vrednosti « igor's math Blog | April 9, 2010 | Reply


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 391 other followers

%d bloggers like this: