1
$\begingroup$

Problem

Let $V$ be a finite-dimensional vector space over a field $K$ and let $T$ be a linear transformation of $V$ to itself. We define the minimum polynomial $m(x)$ of $T$. Suppose that $q(x)$ is any polynomial in $K[x]$ and that $r(x)$ is the highest common factor of $q(x)$ and $m(x)$. Show that Ker($q(T)$) = Ker($r(T)$).

Progress

$r(x)$ hcf of $q(x)$ amd $m(x)$ $\Rightarrow$ $q=f_1r$ and $m=f_2r$ for some $f_1, f_2 \in K[x]$.

Take $v \in$ Ker ($r(T)$), then $q(T)v=(f_1r)(T)v=f_1(T)(r(T)v)=f_1(T)(0)=0$.

That is, Ker$r(T) \subseteq$ Ker $q(T)$. Not sure how to show the opposite relation; any help would be greatly appreciated. Regards.

3 Answers 3

3

Use Bézout's identity: $r(x) = a(x) q(x) + b(x) m(x)$, for some $a,b \in K[x]$.

Now take $v\in \ker q(T)$. Then $r(T)v = a(T)(q(T)v)+b(T)(m(T)v) = a(T)(0)+b(T)(0) = 0$ and $v\in \ker r(T)$.

  • 0
    @TJO, the relation is for the reverse inclusion: if $v\in \ker q(T)$ then $v\in \ker r(T)$.2011-12-22
1

Note that $r = f_1 q + f_2 m$ (why? Think Euclid).

  • 0
    Cheers! Hadn't thought of dividing through by $r(x)$ and applying Bezout's result.2011-12-22
0

It is a matter of taste, but one can do without explicit mention of polynomial division (Euclid, Bezout). Since $q(t)$ is a multiple of $r(t)$ one certainly has $\ker(q(T)) \supseteq \ker(r(T))$ (as you remarked). For the opposite inclusion write $q(t)=p(t)r(t)$ and suppose $v\in\ker(q(T))$ so $p(T)(r(T)(v))=\vec0$; we wish to show that already $w=r(T)(v)=\vec0$. By definition of $r(t)$, there is no non-unit common factor of $p(t)$ and $(m/r)(t)$ but $w$ is annihilated by both $p(T)$ and by $(m/r)(T)$, so the minimal polynomial in $T$ that annihilates $w$ can only be $1$, which means that $w=\vec0$, as we wished to show.