8
$\begingroup$

Show, that if $\mathbf{A}= \left( \begin{array}{cc} 1&1\\ 0&1 \end{array} \right)$, $\mathbf{B}= \left( \begin{array}{cc} 0&1\\ -1&0 \end{array} \right)$ and $\mathrm{SL}(2, \mathbb{Z}) := \{ \mathbf{C}\in\mathrm{M}(2\times 2;\mathbb{Z})\, |\, \det(\mathbf{C}) = 1\}$ then $\langle\mathbf{A}, \mathbf{B}\rangle = \mathrm{SL}(2, \mathbb{Z})$.

I found this exercise in a textbook for linear algebra in a chapter about the determinant, so it should be solved rather elementarily and without any deeper understanding of group theory ($\mathrm{SL}(2, \mathbb{Z})$ is defined only for the exercise). Showing $\langle\mathbf{A}, \mathbf{B}\rangle \subseteq \mathrm{SL}(2, \mathbb{Z})$ was easy but I got stuck with the opposite direction. Any help would be appreciated.

  • 0
    Ah, I misunderstood what was meant by . My apologies.2012-06-17

1 Answers 1

12

The intuitive content is that the claimed statement roughly paraphrases into "every invertible integer matrix is a product of integer elementary row operations", with appropriate tweaks to the fact we want to stay within determinant 1 rather than $\pm 1$.

The proof of the claimed statement follows the same idea as the proof every invertible (real) matrix is a product of elementary matrices: show that elementary operations can row reduce any invertible matrix to the identity

The powers of $\mathbf{A}$ are precisely the elementary matrices that describe adding multiplies of the second row to the top row.

The powers of $\mathbf{BAB}^{3}$ are the elementary matrices that describe adding multiples of the top row to the second row.

Using these elementary row operations, any 2x2 integer matrix can be row reduced (think "Euclidean algorithm") to one of the following forms:

$ \left( \begin{matrix} x & y \\ 0 & z \end{matrix} \right) \qquad \left( \begin{matrix} x & y \\ 0 & 0 \end{matrix} \right) \qquad \left( \begin{matrix} 0 & x \\ 0 & 0 \end{matrix} \right) \qquad \left( \begin{matrix} 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{matrix} \right) $

with $0 \leq y < |z|$ in the first case, and $|x| > 0$ in all. If the original matrix was in $SL(2,\mathbf{Z})$, then only the first form is possible and we must have either $x=z=1$, and thus $y=0$.