How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
is triangularisable iff its minimal polynomial splits iff its characteristic polynomial splits
Statement
Let be an endomorphism of a finite-dimensional vector space over . The following are equivalent:
- is triangularisable over ;
- the minimal polynomial is a product of linear factors in ;
- the characteristic polynomial is a product of linear factors in .
For , both polynomials are , the empty product, and the empty basis triangularises .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A finite-dimensional -vector space and an endomorphism .
An ordered basis gives an upper-triangular matrix exactly when its initial spans form a complete invariant flag (Complete invariant flags are equivalent to upper-triangular matrices).
For a -invariant subspace , (For invariant , ).
A monic irreducible polynomial divides if and only if it divides (The minimal and characteristic polynomials have exactly the same monic irreducible factors).
The eigenvalues of over are exactly the roots in of (For every finite-dimensional space, is exactly the set of roots in of ).
A basis of a subspace followed by representatives of a quotient basis is a basis of the whole space (A quotient basis lifts to a basis adapted to ).
Proof
If is triangularisable, then is upper triangular and its determinant is the product of its diagonal entries , so splits; by [L3], splits exactly when splits.
If , the empty basis and the polynomial give all three conditions.
Assume , that splits, and that the reverse implication holds in smaller dimensions; choose a root of , then [L4] supplies a nonzero eigenvector , and is a one-dimensional invariant subspace.
By [L2], , so splits; the induction hypothesis triangularises on , and [L5] lifts its triangular basis after to a basis whose initial spans are -invariant, so [L1] triangularises .
Step 1.1 gives , while steps 1.2-2.1 give in every finite dimension, completing all three equivalences.
Depends on
- Complete invariant flags are equivalent to upper-triangular matrices
- For invariant $W$, $\chi_T=\chi_{T|_W}\chi_{\bar T}$
- The minimal and characteristic polynomials have exactly the same monic irreducible factors
- For every finite-dimensional space, $\sigma_F(T)$ is exactly the set of roots in $F$ of $\chi_T$
- A quotient basis lifts to a basis adapted to $W$
Used by
- Every finite-dimensional endomorphism over an algebraically closed field is triangularisable Corollary
- A split 3×3 operator that is triangularisable but not diagonalisable Example
- FALSE: Every endomorphism has a commuting diagonal-plus-nilpotent decomposition over its base field False statement
- FALSE: Every finite-dimensional endomorphism is triangularisable over its base field False statement
- A commuting split family is simultaneously triangularisable Theorem
- Characterisations of a nilpotent endomorphism Theorem
Dependency tree · next 3 levels
Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 73 results over 18 levels. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, and this result sits at the bottom with a heavier outline. Click the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- S. Axler, Linear Algebra Done Right, 4th ed., Result 5.44 (standard reference, not scraped)
- K. Hoffman and R. Kunze, Linear Algebra, 2nd ed., Theorem 5 in Section 6.4 (standard reference, not scraped)