SOLUTION: suppose that V is finite-dimensional space and T:V->V is a linear operator. 1. prove that rank(T^k+1) <= rank(T^k) 2. Prove that there exists k in N such that rank(T^k+1)=rank(

Algebra ->  College  -> Linear Algebra -> SOLUTION: suppose that V is finite-dimensional space and T:V->V is a linear operator. 1. prove that rank(T^k+1) <= rank(T^k) 2. Prove that there exists k in N such that rank(T^k+1)=rank(      Log On


   



Question 1136203: suppose that V is finite-dimensional space and T:V->V is a linear operator.
1. prove that rank(T^k+1) <= rank(T^k)
2. Prove that there exists k in N such that rank(T^k+1)=rank(T^k)
I know that R(T^k+1) ⊆ R(T^k) for any k. We can choose v ∈ R(T^k+1).Then for some c, (T^k+1)c = v. But T^k(Tc) = v, so v ∈ R(T^k). How would I proceed with this? any help is appreciated.

Answer by ikleyn(52797) About Me  (Show Source):
You can put this solution on YOUR website!
.

            Unfortunately,  I don't know, what exactly is your level in Linear Algebra.

            Nevertheless,  I will try to explain the solution in simple terms.


You have a linear map (operator) T from a finite-dimensional linear space V to itself.


rank(T)  is the dimension of the image of the space V under this transformation.


T%5Ek are the degrees of the operator T, what you can interpret as sequential iterations of T.


Then it is clear that rank%28T%5Ek%29 can not rise up.  

It only can go down - not necessary strictly down at each step/iteration.

Not necessary in monotonic way down. But not rise up, in any case.



There are two typical examples.



One example is when the matrix of T is zero everywhere, except one diagonal above the major diagonal.

    In this case,  rank%28T%5Ek%29  decreases monotonically at each step/iteration till 0 (zero) 
    after n iterations, where n = dim(V).


The other example is an operator of projection to a subspace.  Than rank%28T%5Ek%29 stabilizes on some positive value at some step.

    (and this value is, OBVIOUSLY, the dimension of the image of T).



So, after my explanations, n.1 is just proved/explained (using my fingers).



n.2 also becomes evident now, meaning stabilization of values of rank%28T%5Ek%29.

    This stabilization can be achieved at some positive value of rank%28T%5Ek%29, or at the zero value 

    (which means then that the operator T and its matrix is/are nilpotent).