3
$\begingroup$

If a $3 \times 3$ matrix is diagonalizable and has eigenvalues $1$ and $2$ but has two eigenvectors with eigenvalue $2$, would we have the eigenvalue matrix $\begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 2 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 2 \end{pmatrix}?$

  • 1
    For a matrix to be diagonalizable, $\mathbb R^3$ has to be the direct sum of the eigenspaces. From this it follows, that if you have 2 eigenvalues, one of the two eigenspaces has to have dimension 2, and thus there have to exist two linear independent eigenvectors to that eigenvalue.2012-12-03

1 Answers 1

1

Since the linear operator described by this matrix acts on 3-dimensional space, and is known to have

  • a one-dimensional eigenspace for eigenvalue $1$, and
  • two-dimensional eigenspace for eigenvalue 2,

it is correct to conclude that the space has a basis composed of eigenvectors, and in this basis the operator has the matrix $ \begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 2 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 2 \end{pmatrix} $ up to permutation of rows.


If both eigenspaces turned out to be one-dimensional, the Jordan canonical form of this matrix could have been $ \begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 2 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 2 \end{pmatrix} $ or $ \begin{pmatrix} 1 & 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 2 \end{pmatrix} $