Eigenvalue and similar matricesSimilar matrices have the same eigenvalues with the same geometric multiplicityJordan Canonical Form - Similar matrices and same minimal polynomialsSimilar matrix and eigenbasisOn similar matrices.How to prove two diagonalizable matrices are similar iff they have same eigenvalue with same multiplicity.matrices and eigenvalueFinding whether two matrices are similarare all these matrices similar?Matrix and eigenvalue questionDiagonalizable matrices with same geometric multiplicity for every eigenvalue similar?Example of 2 matrices similar but not row equivalent
Using a concentration spell on top of another spell from another spell list?
How to securely dispose of a smartphone?
Movie in a trailer park named Paradise and a boy playing a video game then being recruited by aliens to fight in space
What could a reptilian race tell by candling their eggs?
Sharing referee/AE report online to point out a grievous error in refereeing
Lifting a probability measure to the power set
Security Patch SUPEE-11155 - Possible issues?
How many photons are emitted by a lightning strike?
Why won't the ground take my seed?
Losing queen and then winning the game
Adjective for 'made of pus' or 'corrupted by pus' or something of something of pus
What is the purpose of putting a capacitor on the primary side of a step-down transformer?
Can you actually break an FPGA by programming it wrong?
Most important new papers in computational complexity
How did Lefschetz do mathematics without hands?
Ordered list of OR journals
How to organize members in a struct to waste least space on alignment?
What does the phrase "building hopping chop" mean here?
Are all commands with an optional argument fragile?
Do the 26 richest billionaires own as much wealth as the poorest 3.8 billion people?
How to get a character's limb regrown at 3rd level?
Can the Raspberry Pi 4 better distribute Python scripts to all four cores?
Who are these Discworld wizards from this picture?
Why do I need two parameters in an HTTP parameter pollution attack?
Eigenvalue and similar matrices
Similar matrices have the same eigenvalues with the same geometric multiplicityJordan Canonical Form - Similar matrices and same minimal polynomialsSimilar matrix and eigenbasisOn similar matrices.How to prove two diagonalizable matrices are similar iff they have same eigenvalue with same multiplicity.matrices and eigenvalueFinding whether two matrices are similarare all these matrices similar?Matrix and eigenvalue questionDiagonalizable matrices with same geometric multiplicity for every eigenvalue similar?Example of 2 matrices similar but not row equivalent
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
$begingroup$
if $A$ and $B$ are two $ntimes n$ matrices with same eigenvalues such that each eigenvalue has same algebraic and geometric multiplicity. Does $A$ and $B$ are similar?
If $A$ is diagnalizable then the claim is true. But does it true even when sum of geometric multiplicity is not $n$.
Please give me a hint to start with. If given a counter example, please help me to show they are not similar. Thanks
linear-algebra matrices eigenvalues-eigenvectors examples-counterexamples
asked Jun 19 at 5:15
Cloud JRCloud JR
9996 silver badges18 bronze badges
$endgroup$
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
if $A$ and $B$ are two $ntimes n$ matrices with same eigenvalues such that each eigenvalue has same algebraic and geometric multiplicity. Does $A$ and $B$ are similar?
If $A$ is diagnalizable then the claim is true. But does it true even when sum of geometric multiplicity is not $n$.
Please give me a hint to start with. If given a counter example, please help me to show they are not similar. Thanks
linear-algebra matrices eigenvalues-eigenvectors examples-counterexamples
asked Jun 19 at 5:15
Cloud JRCloud JR
9996 silver badges18 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Could someone help to clarify which answer is correct plz. Answers contradict each other
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 19 at 12:59
$begingroup$
Do you mean "there exists an eigenvalue having same algebraic and geometric multiplicity", or "for each eigenvalue, the algebraic and geometric multiplicity are the same"? Your wording makes it sound like you are asking the former, but this is so trivially false that one might assume that you are asking the latter.
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
Jun 19 at 15:11
$begingroup$
@javadba , this is not my homework problem, i know similar matrices have same eigenvalues , with same multiplicity for each eigenvalue, and i think about the converse, but I can't prove it, so i posted it here
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 20 at 22:23
$begingroup$
@Acccumulation, i am asking the latter, and i will edit it to make it precise. I'm sorry for late reply, btw
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 20 at 22:24
1
$begingroup$
@CloudJR apologies for the confusion due to my initially incorrect answer, I hope that your question has been answered.
$endgroup$
– pre-kidney
Jun 21 at 3:31
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
if $A$ and $B$ are two $ntimes n$ matrices with same eigenvalues such that each eigenvalue has same algebraic and geometric multiplicity. Does $A$ and $B$ are similar?
If $A$ is diagnalizable then the claim is true. But does it true even when sum of geometric multiplicity is not $n$.
Please give me a hint to start with. If given a counter example, please help me to show they are not similar. Thanks
linear-algebra matrices eigenvalues-eigenvectors examples-counterexamples
asked Jun 19 at 5:15
Cloud JRCloud JR
9996 silver badges18 bronze badges
$endgroup$
if $A$ and $B$ are two $ntimes n$ matrices with same eigenvalues such that each eigenvalue has same algebraic and geometric multiplicity. Does $A$ and $B$ are similar?
If $A$ is diagnalizable then the claim is true. But does it true even when sum of geometric multiplicity is not $n$.
Please give me a hint to start with. If given a counter example, please help me to show they are not similar. Thanks
linear-algebra matrices eigenvalues-eigenvectors examples-counterexamples
linear-algebra matrices eigenvalues-eigenvectors examples-counterexamples
asked Jun 19 at 5:15
Cloud JRCloud JR
9996 silver badges18 bronze badges
asked Jun 19 at 5:15
Cloud JRCloud JR
9996 silver badges18 bronze badges
edited Jun 20 at 22:25
Cloud JR
asked Jun 19 at 5:15
Cloud JRCloud JR
9996 silver badges18 bronze badges
asked Jun 19 at 5:15
Cloud JRCloud JR
9996 silver badges18 bronze badges
asked Jun 19 at 5:15
Cloud JRCloud JR
9996 silver badges18 bronze badges
9996 silver badges18 bronze badges
$begingroup$
Could someone help to clarify which answer is correct plz. Answers contradict each other
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 19 at 12:59
$begingroup$
Do you mean "there exists an eigenvalue having same algebraic and geometric multiplicity", or "for each eigenvalue, the algebraic and geometric multiplicity are the same"? Your wording makes it sound like you are asking the former, but this is so trivially false that one might assume that you are asking the latter.
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
Jun 19 at 15:11
$begingroup$
@javadba , this is not my homework problem, i know similar matrices have same eigenvalues , with same multiplicity for each eigenvalue, and i think about the converse, but I can't prove it, so i posted it here
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 20 at 22:23
$begingroup$
@Acccumulation, i am asking the latter, and i will edit it to make it precise. I'm sorry for late reply, btw
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 20 at 22:24
1
$begingroup$
@CloudJR apologies for the confusion due to my initially incorrect answer, I hope that your question has been answered.
$endgroup$
– pre-kidney
Jun 21 at 3:31
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Could someone help to clarify which answer is correct plz. Answers contradict each other
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 19 at 12:59
$begingroup$
Do you mean "there exists an eigenvalue having same algebraic and geometric multiplicity", or "for each eigenvalue, the algebraic and geometric multiplicity are the same"? Your wording makes it sound like you are asking the former, but this is so trivially false that one might assume that you are asking the latter.
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
Jun 19 at 15:11
$begingroup$
@javadba , this is not my homework problem, i know similar matrices have same eigenvalues , with same multiplicity for each eigenvalue, and i think about the converse, but I can't prove it, so i posted it here
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 20 at 22:23
$begingroup$
@Acccumulation, i am asking the latter, and i will edit it to make it precise. I'm sorry for late reply, btw
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 20 at 22:24
1
$begingroup$
@CloudJR apologies for the confusion due to my initially incorrect answer, I hope that your question has been answered.
$endgroup$
– pre-kidney
Jun 21 at 3:31
$begingroup$
Could someone help to clarify which answer is correct plz. Answers contradict each other
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 19 at 12:59
$begingroup$
Could someone help to clarify which answer is correct plz. Answers contradict each other
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 19 at 12:59
$begingroup$
Do you mean "there exists an eigenvalue having same algebraic and geometric multiplicity", or "for each eigenvalue, the algebraic and geometric multiplicity are the same"? Your wording makes it sound like you are asking the former, but this is so trivially false that one might assume that you are asking the latter.
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
Jun 19 at 15:11
$begingroup$
Do you mean "there exists an eigenvalue having same algebraic and geometric multiplicity", or "for each eigenvalue, the algebraic and geometric multiplicity are the same"? Your wording makes it sound like you are asking the former, but this is so trivially false that one might assume that you are asking the latter.
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
Jun 19 at 15:11
$begingroup$
@javadba , this is not my homework problem, i know similar matrices have same eigenvalues , with same multiplicity for each eigenvalue, and i think about the converse, but I can't prove it, so i posted it here
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 20 at 22:23
$begingroup$
@javadba , this is not my homework problem, i know similar matrices have same eigenvalues , with same multiplicity for each eigenvalue, and i think about the converse, but I can't prove it, so i posted it here
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 20 at 22:23
$begingroup$
@Acccumulation, i am asking the latter, and i will edit it to make it precise. I'm sorry for late reply, btw
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 20 at 22:24
$begingroup$
@Acccumulation, i am asking the latter, and i will edit it to make it precise. I'm sorry for late reply, btw
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 20 at 22:24
1
1
$begingroup$
@CloudJR apologies for the confusion due to my initially incorrect answer, I hope that your question has been answered.
$endgroup$
– pre-kidney
Jun 21 at 3:31
$begingroup$
@CloudJR apologies for the confusion due to my initially incorrect answer, I hope that your question has been answered.
$endgroup$
– pre-kidney
Jun 21 at 3:31
|
show 1 more comment
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
No, it's famously false. The usual counterexample is $A=beginpmatrix0&1&0&0\ 0&0&0&0\ 0&0&0&1\ 0&0&0&0endpmatrix, B=beginpmatrix0&1&0&0\ 0&0&1&0\ 0&0&0&0\ 0&0&0&0endpmatrix$
for both of which $0$ has algebraic multiplicity $4$ and geometric multiplicity $2$.
The result that holds is that two matrices $A, Bin overlineBbb F^ntimes n$, where $overlineBbb F$ is an algebraically closed field, are similar if and only if, for all $lambda in overlineBbb F$ and for all $minBbb N$, $dimker (A-lambda id)^m=dimker(B-lambda id)^m$. This condition trivializes to yours as soon as $nle 3$.
If $A,Bin Bbb F^ntimes n$ and $Bbb F$ isn't algebraically closed, then the same result holds, in the sense that they are similar if and only if they are similar as matrices in $overlineBbb F^ntimes n$ or, equivalently, if and only if $dimker p(A)^m=dimker p(B)^m$ for all $minBbb N$ and for all irreducible polynomials $pinBbb F[x]$.
answered Jun 19 at 6:07
Saucy O'PathSaucy O'Path
8,4741 gold badge9 silver badges27 bronze badges
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
I think a similar matrix has same eigenvalues, eigenvectors , algebraic and geometric multiplicities but the converse is not true. Your example is for the converse part. Am I right ?
$endgroup$
– nmasanta
Jun 19 at 6:29
$begingroup$
Your suggestion is wrong.
$endgroup$
– Saucy O'Path
Jun 19 at 6:31
1
$begingroup$
Look at the link "math.stackexchange.com/questions/8339/…" , specially in the accepted answer.
$endgroup$
– nmasanta
Jun 19 at 6:33
$begingroup$
@nmasanta $smallbeginbmatrix1&0\0&0endbmatrix$ and $frac12smallbeginbmatrix1&1\1&1endbmatrix$ are similar but do not have the same eigenvectors.
$endgroup$
– amd
Jun 19 at 7:03
1
$begingroup$
@SaucyO'Path "Your suggestion is wrong". While this is generally a good answer that comment is not helpful : pls specify why.
$endgroup$
– javadba
Jun 19 at 14:45
add a comment |
$begingroup$
[Begin Edit]
My initial answer was incorrect, but I believe it is interesting to explain how and why it is incorrect and provide some comments elaborating upon the correct answers posted here (I have left my initial incorrect answer unedited below).
The Jordan normal form classifies all matrices up to similarity transformations. It shows that matrices have a two step decomposition. The first step consists of the eigenvalues themselves, and the second step consists of the Jordan blocks corresponding to a given eigenvalue.
For the question under consideration here (how much information is revealed by knowing the algebraic and geometric multiplicities), distinct eigenvalues may be treated separately from one another and thus the first step in the decomposition is not essential to the question. Thus, one may focus on a single eigenvalue, and furthermore shift the eigenvalue to $0$. This leads to considering nilpotent matrices. A matrix is nilpotent if its characteristic polynomial is $x^n$, which in particular implies that it is an $ntimes n$ matrix.
Any such matrix has eigenvalue $0$ with algebraic multiplicity $n$. Moreover, the eigenspace of $0$ coincides with the kernel of the matrix, from which one can see that the eigenspace is equal to the direct sum of the kernels of the Jordan blocks. In particular, the geometric multiplicity (=dimension of eigenspace) is equal to the number of Jordan blocks, since each has a kernel of dimension $1$.
Thus we see there are two cases where knowing the algebraic and geometric multiplicity is sufficient to reconstruct the matrix up to similarity: either when the algebraic and geometric multiplicities coincide (equivalent to diagonalizability), or when the geometric multiplicity is $1$.
[End Edit]
Yes, the knowledge of all the algebraic and geometric multiplicities of all eigenvalues of a matrix is sufficient to determine the matrix up to similarity transformations. This follows (and is equivalent to the existence of) the Jordan normal form.
answered Jun 19 at 5:22
pre-kidneypre-kidney
15.2k19 silver badges55 bronze badges
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
See the other two answers.
$endgroup$
– amd
Jun 19 at 6:57
1
$begingroup$
Dear sir, your answer contradict , other two answer , i'm confused
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 19 at 12:55
$begingroup$
You can reconstruct when the geometric multiplicity is 1 only if the matrix has only one eigenvalue
$endgroup$
– Miguel Boto
Jun 20 at 4:36
$begingroup$
@MiguelBoto knowing that the geometric multiplicity of each eigenvalue is $1$ implies that each eigenvalue consists of a single Jordan block with size given by the algebraic multiplicity. This is sufficient to determine the Jordan normal form, and hence recover the matrix up to similarity.
$endgroup$
– pre-kidney
Jun 20 at 4:40
$begingroup$
@MiguelBoto no, it is not. For example, consider the matrix $a_i,i+1=1$ and everywhere else $0$ (i.e., the $1$'s are right above the diagonal). This is not diagonalizable since the algebraic multiplicity of $0$ is $n$ but the geometric multiplicity is $1$.
$endgroup$
– pre-kidney
Jun 20 at 5:18
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
counter example:
$$beginbmatrix
-1 & 1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & -1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & -1 & 1 \
0 & 0 & 0 & -1
endbmatrix$$
$$beginbmatrix
-1 & 1 & 0 & 0\
0 & -1 & 1 & 0\
0 & 0 & -1 & 0\
0 & 0 & 0 & -1\
endbmatrix$$
these two matrices have the same eigen values and same geometric multiplicity and are not similar. The geometric multiplicity of the eigen value only tells you the number of blocks in the Jordan Normal form, the size of the largest block for each eigenvalue is the first exponent $k$ such that $dim[N(A-lambda I)^k]=m$ where $m$ is the algebraic multiplicity of the corresponding eigenvalue $lambda$
answered Jun 19 at 6:09
Miguel BotoMiguel Boto
711 silver badge7 bronze badges
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Can you prove those matrices are non similar
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 19 at 12:55
$begingroup$
@CloudJR I left a few comments on some possible arguments that they are not similar in linear algebra chatroom.
$endgroup$
– Martin Sleziak
Jun 19 at 13:46
1
$begingroup$
@CloudJR they are non similar because they are block diagonal matrixes where each block is a jordan block, therefore their jordan normal form is different and there is a theorem that states that two matrices are similar if and only if their jordan normal form coincides
$endgroup$
– Miguel Boto
Jun 19 at 15:00
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3267186%2feigenvalue-and-similar-matrices%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
No, it's famously false. The usual counterexample is $A=beginpmatrix0&1&0&0\ 0&0&0&0\ 0&0&0&1\ 0&0&0&0endpmatrix, B=beginpmatrix0&1&0&0\ 0&0&1&0\ 0&0&0&0\ 0&0&0&0endpmatrix$
for both of which $0$ has algebraic multiplicity $4$ and geometric multiplicity $2$.
The result that holds is that two matrices $A, Bin overlineBbb F^ntimes n$, where $overlineBbb F$ is an algebraically closed field, are similar if and only if, for all $lambda in overlineBbb F$ and for all $minBbb N$, $dimker (A-lambda id)^m=dimker(B-lambda id)^m$. This condition trivializes to yours as soon as $nle 3$.
If $A,Bin Bbb F^ntimes n$ and $Bbb F$ isn't algebraically closed, then the same result holds, in the sense that they are similar if and only if they are similar as matrices in $overlineBbb F^ntimes n$ or, equivalently, if and only if $dimker p(A)^m=dimker p(B)^m$ for all $minBbb N$ and for all irreducible polynomials $pinBbb F[x]$.
answered Jun 19 at 6:07
Saucy O'PathSaucy O'Path
8,4741 gold badge9 silver badges27 bronze badges
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
I think a similar matrix has same eigenvalues, eigenvectors , algebraic and geometric multiplicities but the converse is not true. Your example is for the converse part. Am I right ?
$endgroup$
– nmasanta
Jun 19 at 6:29
$begingroup$
Your suggestion is wrong.
$endgroup$
– Saucy O'Path
Jun 19 at 6:31
1
$begingroup$
Look at the link "math.stackexchange.com/questions/8339/…" , specially in the accepted answer.
$endgroup$
– nmasanta
Jun 19 at 6:33
$begingroup$
@nmasanta $smallbeginbmatrix1&0\0&0endbmatrix$ and $frac12smallbeginbmatrix1&1\1&1endbmatrix$ are similar but do not have the same eigenvectors.
$endgroup$
– amd
Jun 19 at 7:03
1
$begingroup$
@SaucyO'Path "Your suggestion is wrong". While this is generally a good answer that comment is not helpful : pls specify why.
$endgroup$
– javadba
Jun 19 at 14:45
add a comment |
$begingroup$
No, it's famously false. The usual counterexample is $A=beginpmatrix0&1&0&0\ 0&0&0&0\ 0&0&0&1\ 0&0&0&0endpmatrix, B=beginpmatrix0&1&0&0\ 0&0&1&0\ 0&0&0&0\ 0&0&0&0endpmatrix$
for both of which $0$ has algebraic multiplicity $4$ and geometric multiplicity $2$.
The result that holds is that two matrices $A, Bin overlineBbb F^ntimes n$, where $overlineBbb F$ is an algebraically closed field, are similar if and only if, for all $lambda in overlineBbb F$ and for all $minBbb N$, $dimker (A-lambda id)^m=dimker(B-lambda id)^m$. This condition trivializes to yours as soon as $nle 3$.
If $A,Bin Bbb F^ntimes n$ and $Bbb F$ isn't algebraically closed, then the same result holds, in the sense that they are similar if and only if they are similar as matrices in $overlineBbb F^ntimes n$ or, equivalently, if and only if $dimker p(A)^m=dimker p(B)^m$ for all $minBbb N$ and for all irreducible polynomials $pinBbb F[x]$.
answered Jun 19 at 6:07
Saucy O'PathSaucy O'Path
8,4741 gold badge9 silver badges27 bronze badges
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
I think a similar matrix has same eigenvalues, eigenvectors , algebraic and geometric multiplicities but the converse is not true. Your example is for the converse part. Am I right ?
$endgroup$
– nmasanta
Jun 19 at 6:29
$begingroup$
Your suggestion is wrong.
$endgroup$
– Saucy O'Path
Jun 19 at 6:31
1
$begingroup$
Look at the link "math.stackexchange.com/questions/8339/…" , specially in the accepted answer.
$endgroup$
– nmasanta
Jun 19 at 6:33
$begingroup$
@nmasanta $smallbeginbmatrix1&0\0&0endbmatrix$ and $frac12smallbeginbmatrix1&1\1&1endbmatrix$ are similar but do not have the same eigenvectors.
$endgroup$
– amd
Jun 19 at 7:03
1
$begingroup$
@SaucyO'Path "Your suggestion is wrong". While this is generally a good answer that comment is not helpful : pls specify why.
$endgroup$
– javadba
Jun 19 at 14:45
add a comment |
$begingroup$
No, it's famously false. The usual counterexample is $A=beginpmatrix0&1&0&0\ 0&0&0&0\ 0&0&0&1\ 0&0&0&0endpmatrix, B=beginpmatrix0&1&0&0\ 0&0&1&0\ 0&0&0&0\ 0&0&0&0endpmatrix$
for both of which $0$ has algebraic multiplicity $4$ and geometric multiplicity $2$.
The result that holds is that two matrices $A, Bin overlineBbb F^ntimes n$, where $overlineBbb F$ is an algebraically closed field, are similar if and only if, for all $lambda in overlineBbb F$ and for all $minBbb N$, $dimker (A-lambda id)^m=dimker(B-lambda id)^m$. This condition trivializes to yours as soon as $nle 3$.
If $A,Bin Bbb F^ntimes n$ and $Bbb F$ isn't algebraically closed, then the same result holds, in the sense that they are similar if and only if they are similar as matrices in $overlineBbb F^ntimes n$ or, equivalently, if and only if $dimker p(A)^m=dimker p(B)^m$ for all $minBbb N$ and for all irreducible polynomials $pinBbb F[x]$.
answered Jun 19 at 6:07
Saucy O'PathSaucy O'Path
8,4741 gold badge9 silver badges27 bronze badges
$endgroup$
No, it's famously false. The usual counterexample is $A=beginpmatrix0&1&0&0\ 0&0&0&0\ 0&0&0&1\ 0&0&0&0endpmatrix, B=beginpmatrix0&1&0&0\ 0&0&1&0\ 0&0&0&0\ 0&0&0&0endpmatrix$
for both of which $0$ has algebraic multiplicity $4$ and geometric multiplicity $2$.
The result that holds is that two matrices $A, Bin overlineBbb F^ntimes n$, where $overlineBbb F$ is an algebraically closed field, are similar if and only if, for all $lambda in overlineBbb F$ and for all $minBbb N$, $dimker (A-lambda id)^m=dimker(B-lambda id)^m$. This condition trivializes to yours as soon as $nle 3$.
If $A,Bin Bbb F^ntimes n$ and $Bbb F$ isn't algebraically closed, then the same result holds, in the sense that they are similar if and only if they are similar as matrices in $overlineBbb F^ntimes n$ or, equivalently, if and only if $dimker p(A)^m=dimker p(B)^m$ for all $minBbb N$ and for all irreducible polynomials $pinBbb F[x]$.
answered Jun 19 at 6:07
Saucy O'PathSaucy O'Path
8,4741 gold badge9 silver badges27 bronze badges
answered Jun 19 at 6:07
Saucy O'PathSaucy O'Path
8,4741 gold badge9 silver badges27 bronze badges
answered Jun 19 at 6:07
Saucy O'PathSaucy O'Path
8,4741 gold badge9 silver badges27 bronze badges
answered Jun 19 at 6:07
Saucy O'PathSaucy O'Path
8,4741 gold badge9 silver badges27 bronze badges
8,4741 gold badge9 silver badges27 bronze badges
1
$begingroup$
I think a similar matrix has same eigenvalues, eigenvectors , algebraic and geometric multiplicities but the converse is not true. Your example is for the converse part. Am I right ?
$endgroup$
– nmasanta
Jun 19 at 6:29
$begingroup$
Your suggestion is wrong.
$endgroup$
– Saucy O'Path
Jun 19 at 6:31
1
$begingroup$
Look at the link "math.stackexchange.com/questions/8339/…" , specially in the accepted answer.
$endgroup$
– nmasanta
Jun 19 at 6:33
$begingroup$
@nmasanta $smallbeginbmatrix1&0\0&0endbmatrix$ and $frac12smallbeginbmatrix1&1\1&1endbmatrix$ are similar but do not have the same eigenvectors.
$endgroup$
– amd
Jun 19 at 7:03
1
$begingroup$
@SaucyO'Path "Your suggestion is wrong". While this is generally a good answer that comment is not helpful : pls specify why.
$endgroup$
– javadba
Jun 19 at 14:45
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
I think a similar matrix has same eigenvalues, eigenvectors , algebraic and geometric multiplicities but the converse is not true. Your example is for the converse part. Am I right ?
$endgroup$
– nmasanta
Jun 19 at 6:29
$begingroup$
Your suggestion is wrong.
$endgroup$
– Saucy O'Path
Jun 19 at 6:31
1
$begingroup$
Look at the link "math.stackexchange.com/questions/8339/…" , specially in the accepted answer.
$endgroup$
– nmasanta
Jun 19 at 6:33
$begingroup$
@nmasanta $smallbeginbmatrix1&0\0&0endbmatrix$ and $frac12smallbeginbmatrix1&1\1&1endbmatrix$ are similar but do not have the same eigenvectors.
$endgroup$
– amd
Jun 19 at 7:03
1
$begingroup$
@SaucyO'Path "Your suggestion is wrong". While this is generally a good answer that comment is not helpful : pls specify why.
$endgroup$
– javadba
Jun 19 at 14:45
1
1
$begingroup$
I think a similar matrix has same eigenvalues, eigenvectors , algebraic and geometric multiplicities but the converse is not true. Your example is for the converse part. Am I right ?
$endgroup$
– nmasanta
Jun 19 at 6:29
$begingroup$
I think a similar matrix has same eigenvalues, eigenvectors , algebraic and geometric multiplicities but the converse is not true. Your example is for the converse part. Am I right ?
$endgroup$
– nmasanta
Jun 19 at 6:29
$begingroup$
Your suggestion is wrong.
$endgroup$
– Saucy O'Path
Jun 19 at 6:31
$begingroup$
Your suggestion is wrong.
$endgroup$
– Saucy O'Path
Jun 19 at 6:31
1
1
$begingroup$
Look at the link "math.stackexchange.com/questions/8339/…" , specially in the accepted answer.
$endgroup$
– nmasanta
Jun 19 at 6:33
$begingroup$
Look at the link "math.stackexchange.com/questions/8339/…" , specially in the accepted answer.
$endgroup$
– nmasanta
Jun 19 at 6:33
$begingroup$
@nmasanta $smallbeginbmatrix1&0\0&0endbmatrix$ and $frac12smallbeginbmatrix1&1\1&1endbmatrix$ are similar but do not have the same eigenvectors.
$endgroup$
– amd
Jun 19 at 7:03
$begingroup$
@nmasanta $smallbeginbmatrix1&0\0&0endbmatrix$ and $frac12smallbeginbmatrix1&1\1&1endbmatrix$ are similar but do not have the same eigenvectors.
$endgroup$
– amd
Jun 19 at 7:03
1
1
$begingroup$
@SaucyO'Path "Your suggestion is wrong". While this is generally a good answer that comment is not helpful : pls specify why.
$endgroup$
– javadba
Jun 19 at 14:45
$begingroup$
@SaucyO'Path "Your suggestion is wrong". While this is generally a good answer that comment is not helpful : pls specify why.
$endgroup$
– javadba
Jun 19 at 14:45
add a comment |
$begingroup$
[Begin Edit]
My initial answer was incorrect, but I believe it is interesting to explain how and why it is incorrect and provide some comments elaborating upon the correct answers posted here (I have left my initial incorrect answer unedited below).
The Jordan normal form classifies all matrices up to similarity transformations. It shows that matrices have a two step decomposition. The first step consists of the eigenvalues themselves, and the second step consists of the Jordan blocks corresponding to a given eigenvalue.
For the question under consideration here (how much information is revealed by knowing the algebraic and geometric multiplicities), distinct eigenvalues may be treated separately from one another and thus the first step in the decomposition is not essential to the question. Thus, one may focus on a single eigenvalue, and furthermore shift the eigenvalue to $0$. This leads to considering nilpotent matrices. A matrix is nilpotent if its characteristic polynomial is $x^n$, which in particular implies that it is an $ntimes n$ matrix.
Any such matrix has eigenvalue $0$ with algebraic multiplicity $n$. Moreover, the eigenspace of $0$ coincides with the kernel of the matrix, from which one can see that the eigenspace is equal to the direct sum of the kernels of the Jordan blocks. In particular, the geometric multiplicity (=dimension of eigenspace) is equal to the number of Jordan blocks, since each has a kernel of dimension $1$.
Thus we see there are two cases where knowing the algebraic and geometric multiplicity is sufficient to reconstruct the matrix up to similarity: either when the algebraic and geometric multiplicities coincide (equivalent to diagonalizability), or when the geometric multiplicity is $1$.
[End Edit]
Yes, the knowledge of all the algebraic and geometric multiplicities of all eigenvalues of a matrix is sufficient to determine the matrix up to similarity transformations. This follows (and is equivalent to the existence of) the Jordan normal form.
answered Jun 19 at 5:22
pre-kidneypre-kidney
15.2k19 silver badges55 bronze badges
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
See the other two answers.
$endgroup$
– amd
Jun 19 at 6:57
1
$begingroup$
Dear sir, your answer contradict , other two answer , i'm confused
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 19 at 12:55
$begingroup$
You can reconstruct when the geometric multiplicity is 1 only if the matrix has only one eigenvalue
$endgroup$
– Miguel Boto
Jun 20 at 4:36
$begingroup$
@MiguelBoto knowing that the geometric multiplicity of each eigenvalue is $1$ implies that each eigenvalue consists of a single Jordan block with size given by the algebraic multiplicity. This is sufficient to determine the Jordan normal form, and hence recover the matrix up to similarity.
$endgroup$
– pre-kidney
Jun 20 at 4:40
$begingroup$
@MiguelBoto no, it is not. For example, consider the matrix $a_i,i+1=1$ and everywhere else $0$ (i.e., the $1$'s are right above the diagonal). This is not diagonalizable since the algebraic multiplicity of $0$ is $n$ but the geometric multiplicity is $1$.
$endgroup$
– pre-kidney
Jun 20 at 5:18
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
[Begin Edit]
My initial answer was incorrect, but I believe it is interesting to explain how and why it is incorrect and provide some comments elaborating upon the correct answers posted here (I have left my initial incorrect answer unedited below).
The Jordan normal form classifies all matrices up to similarity transformations. It shows that matrices have a two step decomposition. The first step consists of the eigenvalues themselves, and the second step consists of the Jordan blocks corresponding to a given eigenvalue.
For the question under consideration here (how much information is revealed by knowing the algebraic and geometric multiplicities), distinct eigenvalues may be treated separately from one another and thus the first step in the decomposition is not essential to the question. Thus, one may focus on a single eigenvalue, and furthermore shift the eigenvalue to $0$. This leads to considering nilpotent matrices. A matrix is nilpotent if its characteristic polynomial is $x^n$, which in particular implies that it is an $ntimes n$ matrix.
Any such matrix has eigenvalue $0$ with algebraic multiplicity $n$. Moreover, the eigenspace of $0$ coincides with the kernel of the matrix, from which one can see that the eigenspace is equal to the direct sum of the kernels of the Jordan blocks. In particular, the geometric multiplicity (=dimension of eigenspace) is equal to the number of Jordan blocks, since each has a kernel of dimension $1$.
Thus we see there are two cases where knowing the algebraic and geometric multiplicity is sufficient to reconstruct the matrix up to similarity: either when the algebraic and geometric multiplicities coincide (equivalent to diagonalizability), or when the geometric multiplicity is $1$.
[End Edit]
Yes, the knowledge of all the algebraic and geometric multiplicities of all eigenvalues of a matrix is sufficient to determine the matrix up to similarity transformations. This follows (and is equivalent to the existence of) the Jordan normal form.
answered Jun 19 at 5:22
pre-kidneypre-kidney
15.2k19 silver badges55 bronze badges
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
See the other two answers.
$endgroup$
– amd
Jun 19 at 6:57
1
$begingroup$
Dear sir, your answer contradict , other two answer , i'm confused
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 19 at 12:55
$begingroup$
You can reconstruct when the geometric multiplicity is 1 only if the matrix has only one eigenvalue
$endgroup$
– Miguel Boto
Jun 20 at 4:36
$begingroup$
@MiguelBoto knowing that the geometric multiplicity of each eigenvalue is $1$ implies that each eigenvalue consists of a single Jordan block with size given by the algebraic multiplicity. This is sufficient to determine the Jordan normal form, and hence recover the matrix up to similarity.
$endgroup$
– pre-kidney
Jun 20 at 4:40
$begingroup$
@MiguelBoto no, it is not. For example, consider the matrix $a_i,i+1=1$ and everywhere else $0$ (i.e., the $1$'s are right above the diagonal). This is not diagonalizable since the algebraic multiplicity of $0$ is $n$ but the geometric multiplicity is $1$.
$endgroup$
– pre-kidney
Jun 20 at 5:18
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
[Begin Edit]
My initial answer was incorrect, but I believe it is interesting to explain how and why it is incorrect and provide some comments elaborating upon the correct answers posted here (I have left my initial incorrect answer unedited below).
The Jordan normal form classifies all matrices up to similarity transformations. It shows that matrices have a two step decomposition. The first step consists of the eigenvalues themselves, and the second step consists of the Jordan blocks corresponding to a given eigenvalue.
For the question under consideration here (how much information is revealed by knowing the algebraic and geometric multiplicities), distinct eigenvalues may be treated separately from one another and thus the first step in the decomposition is not essential to the question. Thus, one may focus on a single eigenvalue, and furthermore shift the eigenvalue to $0$. This leads to considering nilpotent matrices. A matrix is nilpotent if its characteristic polynomial is $x^n$, which in particular implies that it is an $ntimes n$ matrix.
Any such matrix has eigenvalue $0$ with algebraic multiplicity $n$. Moreover, the eigenspace of $0$ coincides with the kernel of the matrix, from which one can see that the eigenspace is equal to the direct sum of the kernels of the Jordan blocks. In particular, the geometric multiplicity (=dimension of eigenspace) is equal to the number of Jordan blocks, since each has a kernel of dimension $1$.
Thus we see there are two cases where knowing the algebraic and geometric multiplicity is sufficient to reconstruct the matrix up to similarity: either when the algebraic and geometric multiplicities coincide (equivalent to diagonalizability), or when the geometric multiplicity is $1$.
[End Edit]
Yes, the knowledge of all the algebraic and geometric multiplicities of all eigenvalues of a matrix is sufficient to determine the matrix up to similarity transformations. This follows (and is equivalent to the existence of) the Jordan normal form.
answered Jun 19 at 5:22
pre-kidneypre-kidney
15.2k19 silver badges55 bronze badges
$endgroup$
[Begin Edit]
My initial answer was incorrect, but I believe it is interesting to explain how and why it is incorrect and provide some comments elaborating upon the correct answers posted here (I have left my initial incorrect answer unedited below).
The Jordan normal form classifies all matrices up to similarity transformations. It shows that matrices have a two step decomposition. The first step consists of the eigenvalues themselves, and the second step consists of the Jordan blocks corresponding to a given eigenvalue.
For the question under consideration here (how much information is revealed by knowing the algebraic and geometric multiplicities), distinct eigenvalues may be treated separately from one another and thus the first step in the decomposition is not essential to the question. Thus, one may focus on a single eigenvalue, and furthermore shift the eigenvalue to $0$. This leads to considering nilpotent matrices. A matrix is nilpotent if its characteristic polynomial is $x^n$, which in particular implies that it is an $ntimes n$ matrix.
Any such matrix has eigenvalue $0$ with algebraic multiplicity $n$. Moreover, the eigenspace of $0$ coincides with the kernel of the matrix, from which one can see that the eigenspace is equal to the direct sum of the kernels of the Jordan blocks. In particular, the geometric multiplicity (=dimension of eigenspace) is equal to the number of Jordan blocks, since each has a kernel of dimension $1$.
Thus we see there are two cases where knowing the algebraic and geometric multiplicity is sufficient to reconstruct the matrix up to similarity: either when the algebraic and geometric multiplicities coincide (equivalent to diagonalizability), or when the geometric multiplicity is $1$.
[End Edit]
Yes, the knowledge of all the algebraic and geometric multiplicities of all eigenvalues of a matrix is sufficient to determine the matrix up to similarity transformations. This follows (and is equivalent to the existence of) the Jordan normal form.
answered Jun 19 at 5:22
pre-kidneypre-kidney
15.2k19 silver badges55 bronze badges
edited Jun 20 at 4:03
answered Jun 19 at 5:22
pre-kidneypre-kidney
15.2k19 silver badges55 bronze badges
answered Jun 19 at 5:22
pre-kidneypre-kidney
15.2k19 silver badges55 bronze badges
answered Jun 19 at 5:22
pre-kidneypre-kidney
15.2k19 silver badges55 bronze badges
15.2k19 silver badges55 bronze badges
1
$begingroup$
See the other two answers.
$endgroup$
– amd
Jun 19 at 6:57
1
$begingroup$
Dear sir, your answer contradict , other two answer , i'm confused
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 19 at 12:55
$begingroup$
You can reconstruct when the geometric multiplicity is 1 only if the matrix has only one eigenvalue
$endgroup$
– Miguel Boto
Jun 20 at 4:36
$begingroup$
@MiguelBoto knowing that the geometric multiplicity of each eigenvalue is $1$ implies that each eigenvalue consists of a single Jordan block with size given by the algebraic multiplicity. This is sufficient to determine the Jordan normal form, and hence recover the matrix up to similarity.
$endgroup$
– pre-kidney
Jun 20 at 4:40
$begingroup$
@MiguelBoto no, it is not. For example, consider the matrix $a_i,i+1=1$ and everywhere else $0$ (i.e., the $1$'s are right above the diagonal). This is not diagonalizable since the algebraic multiplicity of $0$ is $n$ but the geometric multiplicity is $1$.
$endgroup$
– pre-kidney
Jun 20 at 5:18
|
show 2 more comments
1
$begingroup$
See the other two answers.
$endgroup$
– amd
Jun 19 at 6:57
1
$begingroup$
Dear sir, your answer contradict , other two answer , i'm confused
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 19 at 12:55
$begingroup$
You can reconstruct when the geometric multiplicity is 1 only if the matrix has only one eigenvalue
$endgroup$
– Miguel Boto
Jun 20 at 4:36
$begingroup$
@MiguelBoto knowing that the geometric multiplicity of each eigenvalue is $1$ implies that each eigenvalue consists of a single Jordan block with size given by the algebraic multiplicity. This is sufficient to determine the Jordan normal form, and hence recover the matrix up to similarity.
$endgroup$
– pre-kidney
Jun 20 at 4:40
$begingroup$
@MiguelBoto no, it is not. For example, consider the matrix $a_i,i+1=1$ and everywhere else $0$ (i.e., the $1$'s are right above the diagonal). This is not diagonalizable since the algebraic multiplicity of $0$ is $n$ but the geometric multiplicity is $1$.
$endgroup$
– pre-kidney
Jun 20 at 5:18
1
1
$begingroup$
See the other two answers.
$endgroup$
– amd
Jun 19 at 6:57
$begingroup$
See the other two answers.
$endgroup$
– amd
Jun 19 at 6:57
1
1
$begingroup$
Dear sir, your answer contradict , other two answer , i'm confused
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 19 at 12:55
$begingroup$
Dear sir, your answer contradict , other two answer , i'm confused
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 19 at 12:55
$begingroup$
You can reconstruct when the geometric multiplicity is 1 only if the matrix has only one eigenvalue
$endgroup$
– Miguel Boto
Jun 20 at 4:36
$begingroup$
You can reconstruct when the geometric multiplicity is 1 only if the matrix has only one eigenvalue
$endgroup$
– Miguel Boto
Jun 20 at 4:36
$begingroup$
@MiguelBoto knowing that the geometric multiplicity of each eigenvalue is $1$ implies that each eigenvalue consists of a single Jordan block with size given by the algebraic multiplicity. This is sufficient to determine the Jordan normal form, and hence recover the matrix up to similarity.
$endgroup$
– pre-kidney
Jun 20 at 4:40
$begingroup$
@MiguelBoto knowing that the geometric multiplicity of each eigenvalue is $1$ implies that each eigenvalue consists of a single Jordan block with size given by the algebraic multiplicity. This is sufficient to determine the Jordan normal form, and hence recover the matrix up to similarity.
$endgroup$
– pre-kidney
Jun 20 at 4:40
$begingroup$
@MiguelBoto no, it is not. For example, consider the matrix $a_i,i+1=1$ and everywhere else $0$ (i.e., the $1$'s are right above the diagonal). This is not diagonalizable since the algebraic multiplicity of $0$ is $n$ but the geometric multiplicity is $1$.
$endgroup$
– pre-kidney
Jun 20 at 5:18
$begingroup$
@MiguelBoto no, it is not. For example, consider the matrix $a_i,i+1=1$ and everywhere else $0$ (i.e., the $1$'s are right above the diagonal). This is not diagonalizable since the algebraic multiplicity of $0$ is $n$ but the geometric multiplicity is $1$.
$endgroup$
– pre-kidney
Jun 20 at 5:18
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
counter example:
$$beginbmatrix
-1 & 1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & -1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & -1 & 1 \
0 & 0 & 0 & -1
endbmatrix$$
$$beginbmatrix
-1 & 1 & 0 & 0\
0 & -1 & 1 & 0\
0 & 0 & -1 & 0\
0 & 0 & 0 & -1\
endbmatrix$$
these two matrices have the same eigen values and same geometric multiplicity and are not similar. The geometric multiplicity of the eigen value only tells you the number of blocks in the Jordan Normal form, the size of the largest block for each eigenvalue is the first exponent $k$ such that $dim[N(A-lambda I)^k]=m$ where $m$ is the algebraic multiplicity of the corresponding eigenvalue $lambda$
answered Jun 19 at 6:09
Miguel BotoMiguel Boto
711 silver badge7 bronze badges
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Can you prove those matrices are non similar
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 19 at 12:55
$begingroup$
@CloudJR I left a few comments on some possible arguments that they are not similar in linear algebra chatroom.
$endgroup$
– Martin Sleziak
Jun 19 at 13:46
1
$begingroup$
@CloudJR they are non similar because they are block diagonal matrixes where each block is a jordan block, therefore their jordan normal form is different and there is a theorem that states that two matrices are similar if and only if their jordan normal form coincides
$endgroup$
– Miguel Boto
Jun 19 at 15:00
add a comment |
$begingroup$
counter example:
$$beginbmatrix
-1 & 1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & -1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & -1 & 1 \
0 & 0 & 0 & -1
endbmatrix$$
$$beginbmatrix
-1 & 1 & 0 & 0\
0 & -1 & 1 & 0\
0 & 0 & -1 & 0\
0 & 0 & 0 & -1\
endbmatrix$$
these two matrices have the same eigen values and same geometric multiplicity and are not similar. The geometric multiplicity of the eigen value only tells you the number of blocks in the Jordan Normal form, the size of the largest block for each eigenvalue is the first exponent $k$ such that $dim[N(A-lambda I)^k]=m$ where $m$ is the algebraic multiplicity of the corresponding eigenvalue $lambda$
answered Jun 19 at 6:09
Miguel BotoMiguel Boto
711 silver badge7 bronze badges
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Can you prove those matrices are non similar
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 19 at 12:55
$begingroup$
@CloudJR I left a few comments on some possible arguments that they are not similar in linear algebra chatroom.
$endgroup$
– Martin Sleziak
Jun 19 at 13:46
1
$begingroup$
@CloudJR they are non similar because they are block diagonal matrixes where each block is a jordan block, therefore their jordan normal form is different and there is a theorem that states that two matrices are similar if and only if their jordan normal form coincides
$endgroup$
– Miguel Boto
Jun 19 at 15:00
add a comment |
$begingroup$
counter example:
$$beginbmatrix
-1 & 1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & -1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & -1 & 1 \
0 & 0 & 0 & -1
endbmatrix$$
$$beginbmatrix
-1 & 1 & 0 & 0\
0 & -1 & 1 & 0\
0 & 0 & -1 & 0\
0 & 0 & 0 & -1\
endbmatrix$$
these two matrices have the same eigen values and same geometric multiplicity and are not similar. The geometric multiplicity of the eigen value only tells you the number of blocks in the Jordan Normal form, the size of the largest block for each eigenvalue is the first exponent $k$ such that $dim[N(A-lambda I)^k]=m$ where $m$ is the algebraic multiplicity of the corresponding eigenvalue $lambda$
answered Jun 19 at 6:09
Miguel BotoMiguel Boto
711 silver badge7 bronze badges
$endgroup$
counter example:
$$beginbmatrix
-1 & 1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & -1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & -1 & 1 \
0 & 0 & 0 & -1
endbmatrix$$
$$beginbmatrix
-1 & 1 & 0 & 0\
0 & -1 & 1 & 0\
0 & 0 & -1 & 0\
0 & 0 & 0 & -1\
endbmatrix$$
these two matrices have the same eigen values and same geometric multiplicity and are not similar. The geometric multiplicity of the eigen value only tells you the number of blocks in the Jordan Normal form, the size of the largest block for each eigenvalue is the first exponent $k$ such that $dim[N(A-lambda I)^k]=m$ where $m$ is the algebraic multiplicity of the corresponding eigenvalue $lambda$
answered Jun 19 at 6:09
Miguel BotoMiguel Boto
711 silver badge7 bronze badges
edited Jun 19 at 15:12
answered Jun 19 at 6:09
Miguel BotoMiguel Boto
711 silver badge7 bronze badges
answered Jun 19 at 6:09
Miguel BotoMiguel Boto
711 silver badge7 bronze badges
answered Jun 19 at 6:09
Miguel BotoMiguel Boto
711 silver badge7 bronze badges
711 silver badge7 bronze badges
1
$begingroup$
Can you prove those matrices are non similar
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 19 at 12:55
$begingroup$
@CloudJR I left a few comments on some possible arguments that they are not similar in linear algebra chatroom.
$endgroup$
– Martin Sleziak
Jun 19 at 13:46
1
$begingroup$
@CloudJR they are non similar because they are block diagonal matrixes where each block is a jordan block, therefore their jordan normal form is different and there is a theorem that states that two matrices are similar if and only if their jordan normal form coincides
$endgroup$
– Miguel Boto
Jun 19 at 15:00
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
Can you prove those matrices are non similar
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 19 at 12:55
$begingroup$
@CloudJR I left a few comments on some possible arguments that they are not similar in linear algebra chatroom.
$endgroup$
– Martin Sleziak
Jun 19 at 13:46
1
$begingroup$
@CloudJR they are non similar because they are block diagonal matrixes where each block is a jordan block, therefore their jordan normal form is different and there is a theorem that states that two matrices are similar if and only if their jordan normal form coincides
$endgroup$
– Miguel Boto
Jun 19 at 15:00
1
1
$begingroup$
Can you prove those matrices are non similar
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 19 at 12:55
$begingroup$
Can you prove those matrices are non similar
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 19 at 12:55
$begingroup$
@CloudJR I left a few comments on some possible arguments that they are not similar in linear algebra chatroom.
$endgroup$
– Martin Sleziak
Jun 19 at 13:46
$begingroup$
@CloudJR I left a few comments on some possible arguments that they are not similar in linear algebra chatroom.
$endgroup$
– Martin Sleziak
Jun 19 at 13:46
1
1
$begingroup$
@CloudJR they are non similar because they are block diagonal matrixes where each block is a jordan block, therefore their jordan normal form is different and there is a theorem that states that two matrices are similar if and only if their jordan normal form coincides
$endgroup$
– Miguel Boto
Jun 19 at 15:00
$begingroup$
@CloudJR they are non similar because they are block diagonal matrixes where each block is a jordan block, therefore their jordan normal form is different and there is a theorem that states that two matrices are similar if and only if their jordan normal form coincides
$endgroup$
– Miguel Boto
Jun 19 at 15:00
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3267186%2feigenvalue-and-similar-matrices%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Could someone help to clarify which answer is correct plz. Answers contradict each other
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 19 at 12:59
$begingroup$
Do you mean "there exists an eigenvalue having same algebraic and geometric multiplicity", or "for each eigenvalue, the algebraic and geometric multiplicity are the same"? Your wording makes it sound like you are asking the former, but this is so trivially false that one might assume that you are asking the latter.
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
Jun 19 at 15:11
$begingroup$
@javadba , this is not my homework problem, i know similar matrices have same eigenvalues , with same multiplicity for each eigenvalue, and i think about the converse, but I can't prove it, so i posted it here
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 20 at 22:23
$begingroup$
@Acccumulation, i am asking the latter, and i will edit it to make it precise. I'm sorry for late reply, btw
$endgroup$
– Cloud JR
Jun 20 at 22:24
1
$begingroup$
@CloudJR apologies for the confusion due to my initially incorrect answer, I hope that your question has been answered.
$endgroup$
– pre-kidney
Jun 21 at 3:31