Is the set ${AB-BAcolon A,Btext{ are } ntimes ntext{ matrices}}$ a subspace of all square matrices of order...












1












$begingroup$


[${AB-BA }$ , where $A_{ntimes n}$ and $B_{ntimes n}$ are square matrices] is this set a subspace of the vector space of all square matrices of order $n$.



If yes then can you please make me understand how it is closed under addition.



If not then how traceless matrices become commutators.



I have become confused after reading the comments by Alex Wertheim here
,
Can anyone make me understand?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    It is not closed under addition, hence one takes the space that is spanned by expressions of this form: span${AB - BA }$. As you pointed out, Alex Wertheim wrote that in the comment.
    $endgroup$
    – Sebastian Schulz
    Jan 9 at 21:06






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    @AnuragA: It turns out the set ${AB-BA: A, Bin operatorname{Mat}_{n}(mathbb{C})}$ is a subspace. This is because a matrix $C$ has trace zero if and only if $C$ is a commutator (this is non-trivial!). Thus, the set considered above coincides with the space of traceless matrices, which is obviously a subspace.
    $endgroup$
    – Prism
    Jan 9 at 21:06












  • $begingroup$
    It is a subspace. See math.stackexchange.com/q/181430/27978.
    $endgroup$
    – copper.hat
    Jan 9 at 21:32












  • $begingroup$
    @Prism Thanks for pointing out my error.
    $endgroup$
    – Anurag A
    Jan 9 at 22:20
















1












$begingroup$


[${AB-BA }$ , where $A_{ntimes n}$ and $B_{ntimes n}$ are square matrices] is this set a subspace of the vector space of all square matrices of order $n$.



If yes then can you please make me understand how it is closed under addition.



If not then how traceless matrices become commutators.



I have become confused after reading the comments by Alex Wertheim here
,
Can anyone make me understand?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    It is not closed under addition, hence one takes the space that is spanned by expressions of this form: span${AB - BA }$. As you pointed out, Alex Wertheim wrote that in the comment.
    $endgroup$
    – Sebastian Schulz
    Jan 9 at 21:06






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    @AnuragA: It turns out the set ${AB-BA: A, Bin operatorname{Mat}_{n}(mathbb{C})}$ is a subspace. This is because a matrix $C$ has trace zero if and only if $C$ is a commutator (this is non-trivial!). Thus, the set considered above coincides with the space of traceless matrices, which is obviously a subspace.
    $endgroup$
    – Prism
    Jan 9 at 21:06












  • $begingroup$
    It is a subspace. See math.stackexchange.com/q/181430/27978.
    $endgroup$
    – copper.hat
    Jan 9 at 21:32












  • $begingroup$
    @Prism Thanks for pointing out my error.
    $endgroup$
    – Anurag A
    Jan 9 at 22:20














1












1








1


1



$begingroup$


[${AB-BA }$ , where $A_{ntimes n}$ and $B_{ntimes n}$ are square matrices] is this set a subspace of the vector space of all square matrices of order $n$.



If yes then can you please make me understand how it is closed under addition.



If not then how traceless matrices become commutators.



I have become confused after reading the comments by Alex Wertheim here
,
Can anyone make me understand?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




[${AB-BA }$ , where $A_{ntimes n}$ and $B_{ntimes n}$ are square matrices] is this set a subspace of the vector space of all square matrices of order $n$.



If yes then can you please make me understand how it is closed under addition.



If not then how traceless matrices become commutators.



I have become confused after reading the comments by Alex Wertheim here
,
Can anyone make me understand?







linear-algebra matrices vector-spaces






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Jan 9 at 21:10









A.Γ.

22.7k32656




22.7k32656










asked Jan 9 at 20:57









cmicmi

1,109212




1,109212












  • $begingroup$
    It is not closed under addition, hence one takes the space that is spanned by expressions of this form: span${AB - BA }$. As you pointed out, Alex Wertheim wrote that in the comment.
    $endgroup$
    – Sebastian Schulz
    Jan 9 at 21:06






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    @AnuragA: It turns out the set ${AB-BA: A, Bin operatorname{Mat}_{n}(mathbb{C})}$ is a subspace. This is because a matrix $C$ has trace zero if and only if $C$ is a commutator (this is non-trivial!). Thus, the set considered above coincides with the space of traceless matrices, which is obviously a subspace.
    $endgroup$
    – Prism
    Jan 9 at 21:06












  • $begingroup$
    It is a subspace. See math.stackexchange.com/q/181430/27978.
    $endgroup$
    – copper.hat
    Jan 9 at 21:32












  • $begingroup$
    @Prism Thanks for pointing out my error.
    $endgroup$
    – Anurag A
    Jan 9 at 22:20


















  • $begingroup$
    It is not closed under addition, hence one takes the space that is spanned by expressions of this form: span${AB - BA }$. As you pointed out, Alex Wertheim wrote that in the comment.
    $endgroup$
    – Sebastian Schulz
    Jan 9 at 21:06






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    @AnuragA: It turns out the set ${AB-BA: A, Bin operatorname{Mat}_{n}(mathbb{C})}$ is a subspace. This is because a matrix $C$ has trace zero if and only if $C$ is a commutator (this is non-trivial!). Thus, the set considered above coincides with the space of traceless matrices, which is obviously a subspace.
    $endgroup$
    – Prism
    Jan 9 at 21:06












  • $begingroup$
    It is a subspace. See math.stackexchange.com/q/181430/27978.
    $endgroup$
    – copper.hat
    Jan 9 at 21:32












  • $begingroup$
    @Prism Thanks for pointing out my error.
    $endgroup$
    – Anurag A
    Jan 9 at 22:20
















$begingroup$
It is not closed under addition, hence one takes the space that is spanned by expressions of this form: span${AB - BA }$. As you pointed out, Alex Wertheim wrote that in the comment.
$endgroup$
– Sebastian Schulz
Jan 9 at 21:06




$begingroup$
It is not closed under addition, hence one takes the space that is spanned by expressions of this form: span${AB - BA }$. As you pointed out, Alex Wertheim wrote that in the comment.
$endgroup$
– Sebastian Schulz
Jan 9 at 21:06




2




2




$begingroup$
@AnuragA: It turns out the set ${AB-BA: A, Bin operatorname{Mat}_{n}(mathbb{C})}$ is a subspace. This is because a matrix $C$ has trace zero if and only if $C$ is a commutator (this is non-trivial!). Thus, the set considered above coincides with the space of traceless matrices, which is obviously a subspace.
$endgroup$
– Prism
Jan 9 at 21:06






$begingroup$
@AnuragA: It turns out the set ${AB-BA: A, Bin operatorname{Mat}_{n}(mathbb{C})}$ is a subspace. This is because a matrix $C$ has trace zero if and only if $C$ is a commutator (this is non-trivial!). Thus, the set considered above coincides with the space of traceless matrices, which is obviously a subspace.
$endgroup$
– Prism
Jan 9 at 21:06














$begingroup$
It is a subspace. See math.stackexchange.com/q/181430/27978.
$endgroup$
– copper.hat
Jan 9 at 21:32






$begingroup$
It is a subspace. See math.stackexchange.com/q/181430/27978.
$endgroup$
– copper.hat
Jan 9 at 21:32














$begingroup$
@Prism Thanks for pointing out my error.
$endgroup$
– Anurag A
Jan 9 at 22:20




$begingroup$
@Prism Thanks for pointing out my error.
$endgroup$
– Anurag A
Jan 9 at 22:20










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















5












$begingroup$

Let $k$ be an infinite field. Then we have the following fact:



Proposition. Suppose $Cinoperatorname{Mat}_{n}(k)$ is an $ntimes n$ matrix with entries in $k$ such that $operatorname{Tr}(C)=0$. Then $C$ is a commutator, i.e. $C=AB-BA$ for some $A, Binoperatorname{Mat}_{n}(k)$.



I learnt the following elegant proof from the book Mathematical Bridges by Andreescu, Mortici and Tetiva.



Proof. We first prove the following lemma:



Lemma. If $a_1, a_2, ..., a_nin k$ are elements such that $a_1+a_2+cdots + a_n=0$, then there exist distinct elements $b_1, b_2, ..., b_nin k$ and a permutation $pi: {1, 2, ..., n}to {1, 2, ..., n}$ such that $a_i=b_i-b_{pi(i)}$ for each $i=1, 2, ..., n$.



Proof of the lemma. We proceed by strong induction on $n$. When $n=1$, this is trivial as $a_1=0$ and so we can take $b_1=1$ and $pi$ to be the identity permutation. For the inductive step, we have two cases:



Case 1. No proper subset of ${a_1, ..., a_n}$ adds up to zero.



Let $b_1$ be arbitrary. Define $b_2=b_1-a_1$. Similarly, define $b_3=b_2-a_2$, and so on. In other words, $b_{i+1} := b_{i}-a_{i}$ for $i=1, 2, ..., n-1$. By construction, $a_{i}=b_{i}-b_{i+1}$ for each $i$, so we can take the permutation $pi: {1, 2, ..., n}to {1, 2, ..., n}$ to be $pi(i)=i+1$ for $i<n$ and $pi(n)=1$. Note the assumption $a_1+a_2+cdots + a_n=0$ was used to conclude that $a_{n}=b_{n}-b_{1}$, so there is no issue when we "loop back" from $n$ to $1$. All we need to show is that $b_1, b_2, ..., b_n$ are distinct. If $b_i=b_j$ for $1leq i<jleq n$, then summing up the equalities $a_{i}=b_{i}-b_{i+1}$, $a_{i+1}=b_{i+1}-b_{i+2}$, ..., $a_{j-1}=b_{j-1}-b_{j}$ and taking advantage of the telescoping, we get $a_{i}+a_{i+1}+...+a_{j-1}=b_{i}-b_{j}=0$ which contradicts the assumption that no proper subset of ${a_1, ..., a_n}$ adds up to zero.



Case 2. Some proper subset of ${a_1, ..., a_n}$ adds up to zero.



In this case, we have ${a_1, ..., a_n}={c_1, c_2, ..., c_k}cup {d_1, d_2, ..., d_{n-k}}$ such that $c_1+c_2+cdots + c_k=0$ where $1leq k<n$. Since $a_1+a_2+cdots + a_n=0$, this forces $d_1+d_2+cdots + d_{n-k}=0$ as well. By induction hypothesis, we know that there exist permutations $sigma: {1, ..., k}to {1, ..., k}$, $tau: {1, ..., n-k}to {1, ..., n-k}$, distinct elements $lambda_1, ..., lambda_k$, and distinct elements $mu_1, mu_2, ..., mu_{n-k}$ such that $c_i=lambda_i-lambda_{sigma(i)}$ and $d_j=mu_j-mu_{tau(j)}$. We can find some $r$ such that $r+d_j neq c_i$ for every $i$ and $j$. This is where the assumption $k$ is infinite comes in. Anyways, now it is easy to "stitch" together these permutations. Simply define $b_i=lambda_i$ for each $i=1,2, ..., k$, and define $b_{k+j} = r+d_{j}$ for each $j=1, ..., n-k$. Finally, define $pi$ to be the permutation $pi(i)=sigma(i)$ for each $I=1,..., k$, and $pi(k+j)=tau(j)$ for each $j=1, ..., n-k$. The proof of the lemma is complete.



Proof of the Proposition. Let $C$ be a matrix with trace zero. Set $a_i:=c_{ii}$. Since $operatorname{Tr}(C)=0$, we get $a_1 + a_2 + ... + a_n=0$. By the lemma above, we can write $a_i=b_{i}-b_{pi(i)}$ for distinct elements $b_1, ..., b_n$ and some permutation $pi$. It is straightforward to rewrite our matrix $C$ as a difference of two matrices $C=U-L$ where $U$ is an upper triangular matrix with diagonal entries $b_1, ..., b_n$, and $L$ is a lower triangular matrix with diagonal entries $b_{pi(1)}, ..., b_{pi(n)}$. Since $U$ and $L$ have distinct eigenvalues (namely, $b_1$, ..., $b_n$), they are both diagonalizable. In fact, they share the same set of eigenvalues, so if we set $D$ to be the diagonal matrix consisting of $b_1, ..., b_n$, then $U=PDP^{-1}$ and $L=QDQ^{-1}$ for some invertible matrices $P$, and $Q$. Write $D=Q^{-1}LQ$ and substitute this into $U=PDP^{-1}$ to get
$$U=P(Q^{-1}LQ)P^{-1}=(PQ^{-1})L(PQ^{-1})^{-1}=RLR^{-1}$$
where $R=PQ^{-1}$. Thus,
$$
C = U - L = RLR^{-1}-L = RLR^{-1} - (R^{-1}R)L = (RL)R^{-1}-R^{-1}(RL)
$$

So we set $A=RL$ and $B=R^{-1}$ to get $C=AB-BA$.





As I mentioned in the comments, the proposition implies that
$$
{AB-BA: A, B inoperatorname{Mat}_{n}(k)} = {C: operatorname{Tr}(C)=0}
$$

Since the right hand side is clearly a subspace, it follows that the set on the left hand side is actually a subspace! This is kind of surprising! It says that given $AB-BA$ and $CD-DC$, it follows that $(AB-BA) + (CD - DC) = RS-SR$ for some matrices $R, S$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thank You for investing that much of time to write my answer...However I have not read it yet.. I will read it when I will have time...I hope you would help me if I face problem anywhere@Prism
    $endgroup$
    – cmi
    Jan 10 at 4:31






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @cmi You are welcome! And sure, let me know if you have any questions about the solution.
    $endgroup$
    – Prism
    Jan 10 at 4:38











Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

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
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3067935%2fis-the-set-ab-ba-colon-a-b-text-are-n-times-n-text-matrices-a-subspac%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









5












$begingroup$

Let $k$ be an infinite field. Then we have the following fact:



Proposition. Suppose $Cinoperatorname{Mat}_{n}(k)$ is an $ntimes n$ matrix with entries in $k$ such that $operatorname{Tr}(C)=0$. Then $C$ is a commutator, i.e. $C=AB-BA$ for some $A, Binoperatorname{Mat}_{n}(k)$.



I learnt the following elegant proof from the book Mathematical Bridges by Andreescu, Mortici and Tetiva.



Proof. We first prove the following lemma:



Lemma. If $a_1, a_2, ..., a_nin k$ are elements such that $a_1+a_2+cdots + a_n=0$, then there exist distinct elements $b_1, b_2, ..., b_nin k$ and a permutation $pi: {1, 2, ..., n}to {1, 2, ..., n}$ such that $a_i=b_i-b_{pi(i)}$ for each $i=1, 2, ..., n$.



Proof of the lemma. We proceed by strong induction on $n$. When $n=1$, this is trivial as $a_1=0$ and so we can take $b_1=1$ and $pi$ to be the identity permutation. For the inductive step, we have two cases:



Case 1. No proper subset of ${a_1, ..., a_n}$ adds up to zero.



Let $b_1$ be arbitrary. Define $b_2=b_1-a_1$. Similarly, define $b_3=b_2-a_2$, and so on. In other words, $b_{i+1} := b_{i}-a_{i}$ for $i=1, 2, ..., n-1$. By construction, $a_{i}=b_{i}-b_{i+1}$ for each $i$, so we can take the permutation $pi: {1, 2, ..., n}to {1, 2, ..., n}$ to be $pi(i)=i+1$ for $i<n$ and $pi(n)=1$. Note the assumption $a_1+a_2+cdots + a_n=0$ was used to conclude that $a_{n}=b_{n}-b_{1}$, so there is no issue when we "loop back" from $n$ to $1$. All we need to show is that $b_1, b_2, ..., b_n$ are distinct. If $b_i=b_j$ for $1leq i<jleq n$, then summing up the equalities $a_{i}=b_{i}-b_{i+1}$, $a_{i+1}=b_{i+1}-b_{i+2}$, ..., $a_{j-1}=b_{j-1}-b_{j}$ and taking advantage of the telescoping, we get $a_{i}+a_{i+1}+...+a_{j-1}=b_{i}-b_{j}=0$ which contradicts the assumption that no proper subset of ${a_1, ..., a_n}$ adds up to zero.



Case 2. Some proper subset of ${a_1, ..., a_n}$ adds up to zero.



In this case, we have ${a_1, ..., a_n}={c_1, c_2, ..., c_k}cup {d_1, d_2, ..., d_{n-k}}$ such that $c_1+c_2+cdots + c_k=0$ where $1leq k<n$. Since $a_1+a_2+cdots + a_n=0$, this forces $d_1+d_2+cdots + d_{n-k}=0$ as well. By induction hypothesis, we know that there exist permutations $sigma: {1, ..., k}to {1, ..., k}$, $tau: {1, ..., n-k}to {1, ..., n-k}$, distinct elements $lambda_1, ..., lambda_k$, and distinct elements $mu_1, mu_2, ..., mu_{n-k}$ such that $c_i=lambda_i-lambda_{sigma(i)}$ and $d_j=mu_j-mu_{tau(j)}$. We can find some $r$ such that $r+d_j neq c_i$ for every $i$ and $j$. This is where the assumption $k$ is infinite comes in. Anyways, now it is easy to "stitch" together these permutations. Simply define $b_i=lambda_i$ for each $i=1,2, ..., k$, and define $b_{k+j} = r+d_{j}$ for each $j=1, ..., n-k$. Finally, define $pi$ to be the permutation $pi(i)=sigma(i)$ for each $I=1,..., k$, and $pi(k+j)=tau(j)$ for each $j=1, ..., n-k$. The proof of the lemma is complete.



Proof of the Proposition. Let $C$ be a matrix with trace zero. Set $a_i:=c_{ii}$. Since $operatorname{Tr}(C)=0$, we get $a_1 + a_2 + ... + a_n=0$. By the lemma above, we can write $a_i=b_{i}-b_{pi(i)}$ for distinct elements $b_1, ..., b_n$ and some permutation $pi$. It is straightforward to rewrite our matrix $C$ as a difference of two matrices $C=U-L$ where $U$ is an upper triangular matrix with diagonal entries $b_1, ..., b_n$, and $L$ is a lower triangular matrix with diagonal entries $b_{pi(1)}, ..., b_{pi(n)}$. Since $U$ and $L$ have distinct eigenvalues (namely, $b_1$, ..., $b_n$), they are both diagonalizable. In fact, they share the same set of eigenvalues, so if we set $D$ to be the diagonal matrix consisting of $b_1, ..., b_n$, then $U=PDP^{-1}$ and $L=QDQ^{-1}$ for some invertible matrices $P$, and $Q$. Write $D=Q^{-1}LQ$ and substitute this into $U=PDP^{-1}$ to get
$$U=P(Q^{-1}LQ)P^{-1}=(PQ^{-1})L(PQ^{-1})^{-1}=RLR^{-1}$$
where $R=PQ^{-1}$. Thus,
$$
C = U - L = RLR^{-1}-L = RLR^{-1} - (R^{-1}R)L = (RL)R^{-1}-R^{-1}(RL)
$$

So we set $A=RL$ and $B=R^{-1}$ to get $C=AB-BA$.





As I mentioned in the comments, the proposition implies that
$$
{AB-BA: A, B inoperatorname{Mat}_{n}(k)} = {C: operatorname{Tr}(C)=0}
$$

Since the right hand side is clearly a subspace, it follows that the set on the left hand side is actually a subspace! This is kind of surprising! It says that given $AB-BA$ and $CD-DC$, it follows that $(AB-BA) + (CD - DC) = RS-SR$ for some matrices $R, S$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thank You for investing that much of time to write my answer...However I have not read it yet.. I will read it when I will have time...I hope you would help me if I face problem anywhere@Prism
    $endgroup$
    – cmi
    Jan 10 at 4:31






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @cmi You are welcome! And sure, let me know if you have any questions about the solution.
    $endgroup$
    – Prism
    Jan 10 at 4:38
















5












$begingroup$

Let $k$ be an infinite field. Then we have the following fact:



Proposition. Suppose $Cinoperatorname{Mat}_{n}(k)$ is an $ntimes n$ matrix with entries in $k$ such that $operatorname{Tr}(C)=0$. Then $C$ is a commutator, i.e. $C=AB-BA$ for some $A, Binoperatorname{Mat}_{n}(k)$.



I learnt the following elegant proof from the book Mathematical Bridges by Andreescu, Mortici and Tetiva.



Proof. We first prove the following lemma:



Lemma. If $a_1, a_2, ..., a_nin k$ are elements such that $a_1+a_2+cdots + a_n=0$, then there exist distinct elements $b_1, b_2, ..., b_nin k$ and a permutation $pi: {1, 2, ..., n}to {1, 2, ..., n}$ such that $a_i=b_i-b_{pi(i)}$ for each $i=1, 2, ..., n$.



Proof of the lemma. We proceed by strong induction on $n$. When $n=1$, this is trivial as $a_1=0$ and so we can take $b_1=1$ and $pi$ to be the identity permutation. For the inductive step, we have two cases:



Case 1. No proper subset of ${a_1, ..., a_n}$ adds up to zero.



Let $b_1$ be arbitrary. Define $b_2=b_1-a_1$. Similarly, define $b_3=b_2-a_2$, and so on. In other words, $b_{i+1} := b_{i}-a_{i}$ for $i=1, 2, ..., n-1$. By construction, $a_{i}=b_{i}-b_{i+1}$ for each $i$, so we can take the permutation $pi: {1, 2, ..., n}to {1, 2, ..., n}$ to be $pi(i)=i+1$ for $i<n$ and $pi(n)=1$. Note the assumption $a_1+a_2+cdots + a_n=0$ was used to conclude that $a_{n}=b_{n}-b_{1}$, so there is no issue when we "loop back" from $n$ to $1$. All we need to show is that $b_1, b_2, ..., b_n$ are distinct. If $b_i=b_j$ for $1leq i<jleq n$, then summing up the equalities $a_{i}=b_{i}-b_{i+1}$, $a_{i+1}=b_{i+1}-b_{i+2}$, ..., $a_{j-1}=b_{j-1}-b_{j}$ and taking advantage of the telescoping, we get $a_{i}+a_{i+1}+...+a_{j-1}=b_{i}-b_{j}=0$ which contradicts the assumption that no proper subset of ${a_1, ..., a_n}$ adds up to zero.



Case 2. Some proper subset of ${a_1, ..., a_n}$ adds up to zero.



In this case, we have ${a_1, ..., a_n}={c_1, c_2, ..., c_k}cup {d_1, d_2, ..., d_{n-k}}$ such that $c_1+c_2+cdots + c_k=0$ where $1leq k<n$. Since $a_1+a_2+cdots + a_n=0$, this forces $d_1+d_2+cdots + d_{n-k}=0$ as well. By induction hypothesis, we know that there exist permutations $sigma: {1, ..., k}to {1, ..., k}$, $tau: {1, ..., n-k}to {1, ..., n-k}$, distinct elements $lambda_1, ..., lambda_k$, and distinct elements $mu_1, mu_2, ..., mu_{n-k}$ such that $c_i=lambda_i-lambda_{sigma(i)}$ and $d_j=mu_j-mu_{tau(j)}$. We can find some $r$ such that $r+d_j neq c_i$ for every $i$ and $j$. This is where the assumption $k$ is infinite comes in. Anyways, now it is easy to "stitch" together these permutations. Simply define $b_i=lambda_i$ for each $i=1,2, ..., k$, and define $b_{k+j} = r+d_{j}$ for each $j=1, ..., n-k$. Finally, define $pi$ to be the permutation $pi(i)=sigma(i)$ for each $I=1,..., k$, and $pi(k+j)=tau(j)$ for each $j=1, ..., n-k$. The proof of the lemma is complete.



Proof of the Proposition. Let $C$ be a matrix with trace zero. Set $a_i:=c_{ii}$. Since $operatorname{Tr}(C)=0$, we get $a_1 + a_2 + ... + a_n=0$. By the lemma above, we can write $a_i=b_{i}-b_{pi(i)}$ for distinct elements $b_1, ..., b_n$ and some permutation $pi$. It is straightforward to rewrite our matrix $C$ as a difference of two matrices $C=U-L$ where $U$ is an upper triangular matrix with diagonal entries $b_1, ..., b_n$, and $L$ is a lower triangular matrix with diagonal entries $b_{pi(1)}, ..., b_{pi(n)}$. Since $U$ and $L$ have distinct eigenvalues (namely, $b_1$, ..., $b_n$), they are both diagonalizable. In fact, they share the same set of eigenvalues, so if we set $D$ to be the diagonal matrix consisting of $b_1, ..., b_n$, then $U=PDP^{-1}$ and $L=QDQ^{-1}$ for some invertible matrices $P$, and $Q$. Write $D=Q^{-1}LQ$ and substitute this into $U=PDP^{-1}$ to get
$$U=P(Q^{-1}LQ)P^{-1}=(PQ^{-1})L(PQ^{-1})^{-1}=RLR^{-1}$$
where $R=PQ^{-1}$. Thus,
$$
C = U - L = RLR^{-1}-L = RLR^{-1} - (R^{-1}R)L = (RL)R^{-1}-R^{-1}(RL)
$$

So we set $A=RL$ and $B=R^{-1}$ to get $C=AB-BA$.





As I mentioned in the comments, the proposition implies that
$$
{AB-BA: A, B inoperatorname{Mat}_{n}(k)} = {C: operatorname{Tr}(C)=0}
$$

Since the right hand side is clearly a subspace, it follows that the set on the left hand side is actually a subspace! This is kind of surprising! It says that given $AB-BA$ and $CD-DC$, it follows that $(AB-BA) + (CD - DC) = RS-SR$ for some matrices $R, S$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thank You for investing that much of time to write my answer...However I have not read it yet.. I will read it when I will have time...I hope you would help me if I face problem anywhere@Prism
    $endgroup$
    – cmi
    Jan 10 at 4:31






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @cmi You are welcome! And sure, let me know if you have any questions about the solution.
    $endgroup$
    – Prism
    Jan 10 at 4:38














5












5








5





$begingroup$

Let $k$ be an infinite field. Then we have the following fact:



Proposition. Suppose $Cinoperatorname{Mat}_{n}(k)$ is an $ntimes n$ matrix with entries in $k$ such that $operatorname{Tr}(C)=0$. Then $C$ is a commutator, i.e. $C=AB-BA$ for some $A, Binoperatorname{Mat}_{n}(k)$.



I learnt the following elegant proof from the book Mathematical Bridges by Andreescu, Mortici and Tetiva.



Proof. We first prove the following lemma:



Lemma. If $a_1, a_2, ..., a_nin k$ are elements such that $a_1+a_2+cdots + a_n=0$, then there exist distinct elements $b_1, b_2, ..., b_nin k$ and a permutation $pi: {1, 2, ..., n}to {1, 2, ..., n}$ such that $a_i=b_i-b_{pi(i)}$ for each $i=1, 2, ..., n$.



Proof of the lemma. We proceed by strong induction on $n$. When $n=1$, this is trivial as $a_1=0$ and so we can take $b_1=1$ and $pi$ to be the identity permutation. For the inductive step, we have two cases:



Case 1. No proper subset of ${a_1, ..., a_n}$ adds up to zero.



Let $b_1$ be arbitrary. Define $b_2=b_1-a_1$. Similarly, define $b_3=b_2-a_2$, and so on. In other words, $b_{i+1} := b_{i}-a_{i}$ for $i=1, 2, ..., n-1$. By construction, $a_{i}=b_{i}-b_{i+1}$ for each $i$, so we can take the permutation $pi: {1, 2, ..., n}to {1, 2, ..., n}$ to be $pi(i)=i+1$ for $i<n$ and $pi(n)=1$. Note the assumption $a_1+a_2+cdots + a_n=0$ was used to conclude that $a_{n}=b_{n}-b_{1}$, so there is no issue when we "loop back" from $n$ to $1$. All we need to show is that $b_1, b_2, ..., b_n$ are distinct. If $b_i=b_j$ for $1leq i<jleq n$, then summing up the equalities $a_{i}=b_{i}-b_{i+1}$, $a_{i+1}=b_{i+1}-b_{i+2}$, ..., $a_{j-1}=b_{j-1}-b_{j}$ and taking advantage of the telescoping, we get $a_{i}+a_{i+1}+...+a_{j-1}=b_{i}-b_{j}=0$ which contradicts the assumption that no proper subset of ${a_1, ..., a_n}$ adds up to zero.



Case 2. Some proper subset of ${a_1, ..., a_n}$ adds up to zero.



In this case, we have ${a_1, ..., a_n}={c_1, c_2, ..., c_k}cup {d_1, d_2, ..., d_{n-k}}$ such that $c_1+c_2+cdots + c_k=0$ where $1leq k<n$. Since $a_1+a_2+cdots + a_n=0$, this forces $d_1+d_2+cdots + d_{n-k}=0$ as well. By induction hypothesis, we know that there exist permutations $sigma: {1, ..., k}to {1, ..., k}$, $tau: {1, ..., n-k}to {1, ..., n-k}$, distinct elements $lambda_1, ..., lambda_k$, and distinct elements $mu_1, mu_2, ..., mu_{n-k}$ such that $c_i=lambda_i-lambda_{sigma(i)}$ and $d_j=mu_j-mu_{tau(j)}$. We can find some $r$ such that $r+d_j neq c_i$ for every $i$ and $j$. This is where the assumption $k$ is infinite comes in. Anyways, now it is easy to "stitch" together these permutations. Simply define $b_i=lambda_i$ for each $i=1,2, ..., k$, and define $b_{k+j} = r+d_{j}$ for each $j=1, ..., n-k$. Finally, define $pi$ to be the permutation $pi(i)=sigma(i)$ for each $I=1,..., k$, and $pi(k+j)=tau(j)$ for each $j=1, ..., n-k$. The proof of the lemma is complete.



Proof of the Proposition. Let $C$ be a matrix with trace zero. Set $a_i:=c_{ii}$. Since $operatorname{Tr}(C)=0$, we get $a_1 + a_2 + ... + a_n=0$. By the lemma above, we can write $a_i=b_{i}-b_{pi(i)}$ for distinct elements $b_1, ..., b_n$ and some permutation $pi$. It is straightforward to rewrite our matrix $C$ as a difference of two matrices $C=U-L$ where $U$ is an upper triangular matrix with diagonal entries $b_1, ..., b_n$, and $L$ is a lower triangular matrix with diagonal entries $b_{pi(1)}, ..., b_{pi(n)}$. Since $U$ and $L$ have distinct eigenvalues (namely, $b_1$, ..., $b_n$), they are both diagonalizable. In fact, they share the same set of eigenvalues, so if we set $D$ to be the diagonal matrix consisting of $b_1, ..., b_n$, then $U=PDP^{-1}$ and $L=QDQ^{-1}$ for some invertible matrices $P$, and $Q$. Write $D=Q^{-1}LQ$ and substitute this into $U=PDP^{-1}$ to get
$$U=P(Q^{-1}LQ)P^{-1}=(PQ^{-1})L(PQ^{-1})^{-1}=RLR^{-1}$$
where $R=PQ^{-1}$. Thus,
$$
C = U - L = RLR^{-1}-L = RLR^{-1} - (R^{-1}R)L = (RL)R^{-1}-R^{-1}(RL)
$$

So we set $A=RL$ and $B=R^{-1}$ to get $C=AB-BA$.





As I mentioned in the comments, the proposition implies that
$$
{AB-BA: A, B inoperatorname{Mat}_{n}(k)} = {C: operatorname{Tr}(C)=0}
$$

Since the right hand side is clearly a subspace, it follows that the set on the left hand side is actually a subspace! This is kind of surprising! It says that given $AB-BA$ and $CD-DC$, it follows that $(AB-BA) + (CD - DC) = RS-SR$ for some matrices $R, S$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$



Let $k$ be an infinite field. Then we have the following fact:



Proposition. Suppose $Cinoperatorname{Mat}_{n}(k)$ is an $ntimes n$ matrix with entries in $k$ such that $operatorname{Tr}(C)=0$. Then $C$ is a commutator, i.e. $C=AB-BA$ for some $A, Binoperatorname{Mat}_{n}(k)$.



I learnt the following elegant proof from the book Mathematical Bridges by Andreescu, Mortici and Tetiva.



Proof. We first prove the following lemma:



Lemma. If $a_1, a_2, ..., a_nin k$ are elements such that $a_1+a_2+cdots + a_n=0$, then there exist distinct elements $b_1, b_2, ..., b_nin k$ and a permutation $pi: {1, 2, ..., n}to {1, 2, ..., n}$ such that $a_i=b_i-b_{pi(i)}$ for each $i=1, 2, ..., n$.



Proof of the lemma. We proceed by strong induction on $n$. When $n=1$, this is trivial as $a_1=0$ and so we can take $b_1=1$ and $pi$ to be the identity permutation. For the inductive step, we have two cases:



Case 1. No proper subset of ${a_1, ..., a_n}$ adds up to zero.



Let $b_1$ be arbitrary. Define $b_2=b_1-a_1$. Similarly, define $b_3=b_2-a_2$, and so on. In other words, $b_{i+1} := b_{i}-a_{i}$ for $i=1, 2, ..., n-1$. By construction, $a_{i}=b_{i}-b_{i+1}$ for each $i$, so we can take the permutation $pi: {1, 2, ..., n}to {1, 2, ..., n}$ to be $pi(i)=i+1$ for $i<n$ and $pi(n)=1$. Note the assumption $a_1+a_2+cdots + a_n=0$ was used to conclude that $a_{n}=b_{n}-b_{1}$, so there is no issue when we "loop back" from $n$ to $1$. All we need to show is that $b_1, b_2, ..., b_n$ are distinct. If $b_i=b_j$ for $1leq i<jleq n$, then summing up the equalities $a_{i}=b_{i}-b_{i+1}$, $a_{i+1}=b_{i+1}-b_{i+2}$, ..., $a_{j-1}=b_{j-1}-b_{j}$ and taking advantage of the telescoping, we get $a_{i}+a_{i+1}+...+a_{j-1}=b_{i}-b_{j}=0$ which contradicts the assumption that no proper subset of ${a_1, ..., a_n}$ adds up to zero.



Case 2. Some proper subset of ${a_1, ..., a_n}$ adds up to zero.



In this case, we have ${a_1, ..., a_n}={c_1, c_2, ..., c_k}cup {d_1, d_2, ..., d_{n-k}}$ such that $c_1+c_2+cdots + c_k=0$ where $1leq k<n$. Since $a_1+a_2+cdots + a_n=0$, this forces $d_1+d_2+cdots + d_{n-k}=0$ as well. By induction hypothesis, we know that there exist permutations $sigma: {1, ..., k}to {1, ..., k}$, $tau: {1, ..., n-k}to {1, ..., n-k}$, distinct elements $lambda_1, ..., lambda_k$, and distinct elements $mu_1, mu_2, ..., mu_{n-k}$ such that $c_i=lambda_i-lambda_{sigma(i)}$ and $d_j=mu_j-mu_{tau(j)}$. We can find some $r$ such that $r+d_j neq c_i$ for every $i$ and $j$. This is where the assumption $k$ is infinite comes in. Anyways, now it is easy to "stitch" together these permutations. Simply define $b_i=lambda_i$ for each $i=1,2, ..., k$, and define $b_{k+j} = r+d_{j}$ for each $j=1, ..., n-k$. Finally, define $pi$ to be the permutation $pi(i)=sigma(i)$ for each $I=1,..., k$, and $pi(k+j)=tau(j)$ for each $j=1, ..., n-k$. The proof of the lemma is complete.



Proof of the Proposition. Let $C$ be a matrix with trace zero. Set $a_i:=c_{ii}$. Since $operatorname{Tr}(C)=0$, we get $a_1 + a_2 + ... + a_n=0$. By the lemma above, we can write $a_i=b_{i}-b_{pi(i)}$ for distinct elements $b_1, ..., b_n$ and some permutation $pi$. It is straightforward to rewrite our matrix $C$ as a difference of two matrices $C=U-L$ where $U$ is an upper triangular matrix with diagonal entries $b_1, ..., b_n$, and $L$ is a lower triangular matrix with diagonal entries $b_{pi(1)}, ..., b_{pi(n)}$. Since $U$ and $L$ have distinct eigenvalues (namely, $b_1$, ..., $b_n$), they are both diagonalizable. In fact, they share the same set of eigenvalues, so if we set $D$ to be the diagonal matrix consisting of $b_1, ..., b_n$, then $U=PDP^{-1}$ and $L=QDQ^{-1}$ for some invertible matrices $P$, and $Q$. Write $D=Q^{-1}LQ$ and substitute this into $U=PDP^{-1}$ to get
$$U=P(Q^{-1}LQ)P^{-1}=(PQ^{-1})L(PQ^{-1})^{-1}=RLR^{-1}$$
where $R=PQ^{-1}$. Thus,
$$
C = U - L = RLR^{-1}-L = RLR^{-1} - (R^{-1}R)L = (RL)R^{-1}-R^{-1}(RL)
$$

So we set $A=RL$ and $B=R^{-1}$ to get $C=AB-BA$.





As I mentioned in the comments, the proposition implies that
$$
{AB-BA: A, B inoperatorname{Mat}_{n}(k)} = {C: operatorname{Tr}(C)=0}
$$

Since the right hand side is clearly a subspace, it follows that the set on the left hand side is actually a subspace! This is kind of surprising! It says that given $AB-BA$ and $CD-DC$, it follows that $(AB-BA) + (CD - DC) = RS-SR$ for some matrices $R, S$.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited Jan 9 at 22:03

























answered Jan 9 at 21:53









PrismPrism

4,80431878




4,80431878












  • $begingroup$
    Thank You for investing that much of time to write my answer...However I have not read it yet.. I will read it when I will have time...I hope you would help me if I face problem anywhere@Prism
    $endgroup$
    – cmi
    Jan 10 at 4:31






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @cmi You are welcome! And sure, let me know if you have any questions about the solution.
    $endgroup$
    – Prism
    Jan 10 at 4:38


















  • $begingroup$
    Thank You for investing that much of time to write my answer...However I have not read it yet.. I will read it when I will have time...I hope you would help me if I face problem anywhere@Prism
    $endgroup$
    – cmi
    Jan 10 at 4:31






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @cmi You are welcome! And sure, let me know if you have any questions about the solution.
    $endgroup$
    – Prism
    Jan 10 at 4:38
















$begingroup$
Thank You for investing that much of time to write my answer...However I have not read it yet.. I will read it when I will have time...I hope you would help me if I face problem anywhere@Prism
$endgroup$
– cmi
Jan 10 at 4:31




$begingroup$
Thank You for investing that much of time to write my answer...However I have not read it yet.. I will read it when I will have time...I hope you would help me if I face problem anywhere@Prism
$endgroup$
– cmi
Jan 10 at 4:31




1




1




$begingroup$
@cmi You are welcome! And sure, let me know if you have any questions about the solution.
$endgroup$
– Prism
Jan 10 at 4:38




$begingroup$
@cmi You are welcome! And sure, let me know if you have any questions about the solution.
$endgroup$
– Prism
Jan 10 at 4:38


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































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.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3067935%2fis-the-set-ab-ba-colon-a-b-text-are-n-times-n-text-matrices-a-subspac%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

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







Popular posts from this blog

Mario Kart Wii

What does “Dominus providebit” mean?

The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth/Afterbirth