Mixing
Can a matrix be similar to a block matrix with Jordan Block or companion matrix of the non-linear irreducible...
$begingroup$
Let $A$ be $3 times 3$ real matrix with minimal polynomial $f(X)=(X-1)(X^2 +1)=X^3-X^2+X-1.$ Then By Rational Canonical Form we know that $A$ is similar to the Companion matrix of $f(X)$ which is $begin{pmatrix}0 & 0 & 1 \ 1 & 0 &-1 \ 0 &1 &1end{pmatrix}.$ Now since the ideals $(X-1)$ and $(X^2+1)$ are co-maximal in $mathbb{R}[X]$ can we say that $A$ is similar to a block matrix whose $1 times 1$ principal block is the jordan block of size $1$ corresponding to the eigenvalue $1$ and the remaining $2 times 2$ principal block is the companion matrix of the polynomial $X^2 +1,$ which is actually $begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 0 &-1 \ 0 &1 &0end{pmatrix}.$
I need your confirmation. Technically I couldn't find any mistake, but if this happens then this must be a weaker version of the Jordan Canonical Form.
Thank You.
linear-algebra abstract-algebra matrices ring-theory jordan-normal-form
asked Dec 30 '18 at 9:35
user371231user371231
377511
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $A$ be $3 times 3$ real matrix with minimal polynomial $f(X)=(X-1)(X^2 +1)=X^3-X^2+X-1.$ Then By Rational Canonical Form we know that $A$ is similar to the Companion matrix of $f(X)$ which is $begin{pmatrix}0 & 0 & 1 \ 1 & 0 &-1 \ 0 &1 &1end{pmatrix}.$ Now since the ideals $(X-1)$ and $(X^2+1)$ are co-maximal in $mathbb{R}[X]$ can we say that $A$ is similar to a block matrix whose $1 times 1$ principal block is the jordan block of size $1$ corresponding to the eigenvalue $1$ and the remaining $2 times 2$ principal block is the companion matrix of the polynomial $X^2 +1,$ which is actually $begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 0 &-1 \ 0 &1 &0end{pmatrix}.$
I need your confirmation. Technically I couldn't find any mistake, but if this happens then this must be a weaker version of the Jordan Canonical Form.
Thank You.
linear-algebra abstract-algebra matrices ring-theory jordan-normal-form
asked Dec 30 '18 at 9:35
user371231user371231
377511
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I think it is Ok. Everything follows from the Structure of Modules over PID.
$endgroup$
– user185640
Dec 30 '18 at 12:57
$begingroup$
You have reinvented the wheel. Your second matrix is (practically) the real Jordan normal form.
$endgroup$
– loup blanc
Dec 30 '18 at 18:58
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $A$ be $3 times 3$ real matrix with minimal polynomial $f(X)=(X-1)(X^2 +1)=X^3-X^2+X-1.$ Then By Rational Canonical Form we know that $A$ is similar to the Companion matrix of $f(X)$ which is $begin{pmatrix}0 & 0 & 1 \ 1 & 0 &-1 \ 0 &1 &1end{pmatrix}.$ Now since the ideals $(X-1)$ and $(X^2+1)$ are co-maximal in $mathbb{R}[X]$ can we say that $A$ is similar to a block matrix whose $1 times 1$ principal block is the jordan block of size $1$ corresponding to the eigenvalue $1$ and the remaining $2 times 2$ principal block is the companion matrix of the polynomial $X^2 +1,$ which is actually $begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 0 &-1 \ 0 &1 &0end{pmatrix}.$
I need your confirmation. Technically I couldn't find any mistake, but if this happens then this must be a weaker version of the Jordan Canonical Form.
Thank You.
linear-algebra abstract-algebra matrices ring-theory jordan-normal-form
asked Dec 30 '18 at 9:35
user371231user371231
377511
$endgroup$
Let $A$ be $3 times 3$ real matrix with minimal polynomial $f(X)=(X-1)(X^2 +1)=X^3-X^2+X-1.$ Then By Rational Canonical Form we know that $A$ is similar to the Companion matrix of $f(X)$ which is $begin{pmatrix}0 & 0 & 1 \ 1 & 0 &-1 \ 0 &1 &1end{pmatrix}.$ Now since the ideals $(X-1)$ and $(X^2+1)$ are co-maximal in $mathbb{R}[X]$ can we say that $A$ is similar to a block matrix whose $1 times 1$ principal block is the jordan block of size $1$ corresponding to the eigenvalue $1$ and the remaining $2 times 2$ principal block is the companion matrix of the polynomial $X^2 +1,$ which is actually $begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 0 &-1 \ 0 &1 &0end{pmatrix}.$
I need your confirmation. Technically I couldn't find any mistake, but if this happens then this must be a weaker version of the Jordan Canonical Form.
Thank You.
linear-algebra abstract-algebra matrices ring-theory jordan-normal-form
linear-algebra abstract-algebra matrices ring-theory jordan-normal-form
asked Dec 30 '18 at 9:35
user371231user371231
377511
asked Dec 30 '18 at 9:35
user371231user371231
377511
edited Dec 30 '18 at 13:06
user371231
asked Dec 30 '18 at 9:35
user371231user371231
377511
asked Dec 30 '18 at 9:35
user371231user371231
377511
asked Dec 30 '18 at 9:35
user371231user371231
377511
377511
$begingroup$
I think it is Ok. Everything follows from the Structure of Modules over PID.
$endgroup$
– user185640
Dec 30 '18 at 12:57
$begingroup$
You have reinvented the wheel. Your second matrix is (practically) the real Jordan normal form.
$endgroup$
– loup blanc
Dec 30 '18 at 18:58
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I think it is Ok. Everything follows from the Structure of Modules over PID.
$endgroup$
– user185640
Dec 30 '18 at 12:57
$begingroup$
You have reinvented the wheel. Your second matrix is (practically) the real Jordan normal form.
$endgroup$
– loup blanc
Dec 30 '18 at 18:58
$begingroup$
I think it is Ok. Everything follows from the Structure of Modules over PID.
$endgroup$
– user185640
Dec 30 '18 at 12:57
$begingroup$
I think it is Ok. Everything follows from the Structure of Modules over PID.
$endgroup$
– user185640
Dec 30 '18 at 12:57
$begingroup$
You have reinvented the wheel. Your second matrix is (practically) the real Jordan normal form.
$endgroup$
– loup blanc
Dec 30 '18 at 18:58
$begingroup$
You have reinvented the wheel. Your second matrix is (practically) the real Jordan normal form.
$endgroup$
– loup blanc
Dec 30 '18 at 18:58
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I guess the definitions may differ depending on the (text book) source / educational background, but based on my post-grad education I have the following understanding regarding the hierarchy of canonical forms. In short, the answer to your question is yes, the form you are actually referring to is the Rational Canonical Form, and the blocks are then all called hypercompanion matrices. Just note that if you had a factor $(X^2+1)^2$ you would need a 1 on the subdiagonal between the two companion matrices for $(X^2+1)$ for it to be in rational canonical form - see this answer for more...
In terms of your specific example: Considering $A$ as a matrix over the reals the form $$A'=begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 0 &-1 \ 0 &1 &0end{pmatrix}$$ (this is the second matrix you listed) is known as the rational canonical form of $A$...it generalizes the Jordan Canonical Form in the sense that a matrix over any field is similar to a matrix in rational canonical form, whereas the Jordan Canonical Form is only guaranteed for matrices over an algebraically closed field. So considering $A$ as a matrix over the reals it does not have a Jordan Canonical Form from my understanding. If a matrix has a Jordan Canonical Form then this JCF matrix would also be the Rational Canonical Form for the relevant matrix.
So if we consider $A$ as a matrix over the reals, it has rational canonical form $A'$, and it does not have a Jordan Canonical Form. If we consider $A$ as a matrix over the complex numbers, then the minimal polynomial of $A$ can be factored as $$f(X)=(X-1)(X - i)(X+i)$$ and $A$ has rational canonical form $$begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & i & 0 \ 0 &0 &-iend{pmatrix}$$ which is also its Jordan Canonical Form.
Note that the first matrix you show is not the Rational Canonical Form of $A$. The rational canonical form consists of hypercompanion matrices of the elementary divisors, which are powers of irreducible factors, and clearly $(X-1)(X^2 +1)$ is reducible. There is another canonical form where every matrix is similar to a block diagonal matrix where the blocks consist of companion matrices of the invariant polynomials - which is a "step" towards the Rational Canonical Form if you will - and this is where the matrix $$begin{pmatrix}0 & 0 & 1 \ 1 & 0 &-1 \ 0 &1 &1end{pmatrix}$$ fits in.
Just also to clarify further in terms of the question: what you call a Jordan Block corresponding to eigenvalue 1 would be called a hypercompanion matrix associated with $(X-1)$ in the context of the Rational Canonical Form...it is the same thing, but when referring to the canonical form involved here the second would be more correct.
If you want to see more about how the rational canonical form is defined, please see this answer.
answered Jan 16 at 7:48
Christiaan HattinghChristiaan Hattingh
3,867922
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I have asked in my question if two matrices are similar over $mathbb{R}$ or not. Is it yes or no ?
$endgroup$
– user371231
Jan 16 at 10:15
1
$begingroup$
@user371231 it is yes...I have modified the answer
$endgroup$
– Christiaan Hattingh
Jan 16 at 10:31
add a comment |
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
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3056647%2fcan-a-matrix-be-similar-to-a-block-matrix-with-jordan-block-or-companion-matrix%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
$begingroup$
I guess the definitions may differ depending on the (text book) source / educational background, but based on my post-grad education I have the following understanding regarding the hierarchy of canonical forms. In short, the answer to your question is yes, the form you are actually referring to is the Rational Canonical Form, and the blocks are then all called hypercompanion matrices. Just note that if you had a factor $(X^2+1)^2$ you would need a 1 on the subdiagonal between the two companion matrices for $(X^2+1)$ for it to be in rational canonical form - see this answer for more...
In terms of your specific example: Considering $A$ as a matrix over the reals the form $$A'=begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 0 &-1 \ 0 &1 &0end{pmatrix}$$ (this is the second matrix you listed) is known as the rational canonical form of $A$...it generalizes the Jordan Canonical Form in the sense that a matrix over any field is similar to a matrix in rational canonical form, whereas the Jordan Canonical Form is only guaranteed for matrices over an algebraically closed field. So considering $A$ as a matrix over the reals it does not have a Jordan Canonical Form from my understanding. If a matrix has a Jordan Canonical Form then this JCF matrix would also be the Rational Canonical Form for the relevant matrix.
So if we consider $A$ as a matrix over the reals, it has rational canonical form $A'$, and it does not have a Jordan Canonical Form. If we consider $A$ as a matrix over the complex numbers, then the minimal polynomial of $A$ can be factored as $$f(X)=(X-1)(X - i)(X+i)$$ and $A$ has rational canonical form $$begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & i & 0 \ 0 &0 &-iend{pmatrix}$$ which is also its Jordan Canonical Form.
Note that the first matrix you show is not the Rational Canonical Form of $A$. The rational canonical form consists of hypercompanion matrices of the elementary divisors, which are powers of irreducible factors, and clearly $(X-1)(X^2 +1)$ is reducible. There is another canonical form where every matrix is similar to a block diagonal matrix where the blocks consist of companion matrices of the invariant polynomials - which is a "step" towards the Rational Canonical Form if you will - and this is where the matrix $$begin{pmatrix}0 & 0 & 1 \ 1 & 0 &-1 \ 0 &1 &1end{pmatrix}$$ fits in.
Just also to clarify further in terms of the question: what you call a Jordan Block corresponding to eigenvalue 1 would be called a hypercompanion matrix associated with $(X-1)$ in the context of the Rational Canonical Form...it is the same thing, but when referring to the canonical form involved here the second would be more correct.
If you want to see more about how the rational canonical form is defined, please see this answer.
answered Jan 16 at 7:48
Christiaan HattinghChristiaan Hattingh
3,867922
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I have asked in my question if two matrices are similar over $mathbb{R}$ or not. Is it yes or no ?
$endgroup$
– user371231
Jan 16 at 10:15
1
$begingroup$
@user371231 it is yes...I have modified the answer
$endgroup$
– Christiaan Hattingh
Jan 16 at 10:31
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I guess the definitions may differ depending on the (text book) source / educational background, but based on my post-grad education I have the following understanding regarding the hierarchy of canonical forms. In short, the answer to your question is yes, the form you are actually referring to is the Rational Canonical Form, and the blocks are then all called hypercompanion matrices. Just note that if you had a factor $(X^2+1)^2$ you would need a 1 on the subdiagonal between the two companion matrices for $(X^2+1)$ for it to be in rational canonical form - see this answer for more...
In terms of your specific example: Considering $A$ as a matrix over the reals the form $$A'=begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 0 &-1 \ 0 &1 &0end{pmatrix}$$ (this is the second matrix you listed) is known as the rational canonical form of $A$...it generalizes the Jordan Canonical Form in the sense that a matrix over any field is similar to a matrix in rational canonical form, whereas the Jordan Canonical Form is only guaranteed for matrices over an algebraically closed field. So considering $A$ as a matrix over the reals it does not have a Jordan Canonical Form from my understanding. If a matrix has a Jordan Canonical Form then this JCF matrix would also be the Rational Canonical Form for the relevant matrix.
So if we consider $A$ as a matrix over the reals, it has rational canonical form $A'$, and it does not have a Jordan Canonical Form. If we consider $A$ as a matrix over the complex numbers, then the minimal polynomial of $A$ can be factored as $$f(X)=(X-1)(X - i)(X+i)$$ and $A$ has rational canonical form $$begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & i & 0 \ 0 &0 &-iend{pmatrix}$$ which is also its Jordan Canonical Form.
Note that the first matrix you show is not the Rational Canonical Form of $A$. The rational canonical form consists of hypercompanion matrices of the elementary divisors, which are powers of irreducible factors, and clearly $(X-1)(X^2 +1)$ is reducible. There is another canonical form where every matrix is similar to a block diagonal matrix where the blocks consist of companion matrices of the invariant polynomials - which is a "step" towards the Rational Canonical Form if you will - and this is where the matrix $$begin{pmatrix}0 & 0 & 1 \ 1 & 0 &-1 \ 0 &1 &1end{pmatrix}$$ fits in.
Just also to clarify further in terms of the question: what you call a Jordan Block corresponding to eigenvalue 1 would be called a hypercompanion matrix associated with $(X-1)$ in the context of the Rational Canonical Form...it is the same thing, but when referring to the canonical form involved here the second would be more correct.
If you want to see more about how the rational canonical form is defined, please see this answer.
answered Jan 16 at 7:48
Christiaan HattinghChristiaan Hattingh
3,867922
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I have asked in my question if two matrices are similar over $mathbb{R}$ or not. Is it yes or no ?
$endgroup$
– user371231
Jan 16 at 10:15
1
$begingroup$
@user371231 it is yes...I have modified the answer
$endgroup$
– Christiaan Hattingh
Jan 16 at 10:31
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I guess the definitions may differ depending on the (text book) source / educational background, but based on my post-grad education I have the following understanding regarding the hierarchy of canonical forms. In short, the answer to your question is yes, the form you are actually referring to is the Rational Canonical Form, and the blocks are then all called hypercompanion matrices. Just note that if you had a factor $(X^2+1)^2$ you would need a 1 on the subdiagonal between the two companion matrices for $(X^2+1)$ for it to be in rational canonical form - see this answer for more...
In terms of your specific example: Considering $A$ as a matrix over the reals the form $$A'=begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 0 &-1 \ 0 &1 &0end{pmatrix}$$ (this is the second matrix you listed) is known as the rational canonical form of $A$...it generalizes the Jordan Canonical Form in the sense that a matrix over any field is similar to a matrix in rational canonical form, whereas the Jordan Canonical Form is only guaranteed for matrices over an algebraically closed field. So considering $A$ as a matrix over the reals it does not have a Jordan Canonical Form from my understanding. If a matrix has a Jordan Canonical Form then this JCF matrix would also be the Rational Canonical Form for the relevant matrix.
So if we consider $A$ as a matrix over the reals, it has rational canonical form $A'$, and it does not have a Jordan Canonical Form. If we consider $A$ as a matrix over the complex numbers, then the minimal polynomial of $A$ can be factored as $$f(X)=(X-1)(X - i)(X+i)$$ and $A$ has rational canonical form $$begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & i & 0 \ 0 &0 &-iend{pmatrix}$$ which is also its Jordan Canonical Form.
Note that the first matrix you show is not the Rational Canonical Form of $A$. The rational canonical form consists of hypercompanion matrices of the elementary divisors, which are powers of irreducible factors, and clearly $(X-1)(X^2 +1)$ is reducible. There is another canonical form where every matrix is similar to a block diagonal matrix where the blocks consist of companion matrices of the invariant polynomials - which is a "step" towards the Rational Canonical Form if you will - and this is where the matrix $$begin{pmatrix}0 & 0 & 1 \ 1 & 0 &-1 \ 0 &1 &1end{pmatrix}$$ fits in.
Just also to clarify further in terms of the question: what you call a Jordan Block corresponding to eigenvalue 1 would be called a hypercompanion matrix associated with $(X-1)$ in the context of the Rational Canonical Form...it is the same thing, but when referring to the canonical form involved here the second would be more correct.
If you want to see more about how the rational canonical form is defined, please see this answer.
answered Jan 16 at 7:48
Christiaan HattinghChristiaan Hattingh
3,867922
$endgroup$
I guess the definitions may differ depending on the (text book) source / educational background, but based on my post-grad education I have the following understanding regarding the hierarchy of canonical forms. In short, the answer to your question is yes, the form you are actually referring to is the Rational Canonical Form, and the blocks are then all called hypercompanion matrices. Just note that if you had a factor $(X^2+1)^2$ you would need a 1 on the subdiagonal between the two companion matrices for $(X^2+1)$ for it to be in rational canonical form - see this answer for more...
In terms of your specific example: Considering $A$ as a matrix over the reals the form $$A'=begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 0 &-1 \ 0 &1 &0end{pmatrix}$$ (this is the second matrix you listed) is known as the rational canonical form of $A$...it generalizes the Jordan Canonical Form in the sense that a matrix over any field is similar to a matrix in rational canonical form, whereas the Jordan Canonical Form is only guaranteed for matrices over an algebraically closed field. So considering $A$ as a matrix over the reals it does not have a Jordan Canonical Form from my understanding. If a matrix has a Jordan Canonical Form then this JCF matrix would also be the Rational Canonical Form for the relevant matrix.
So if we consider $A$ as a matrix over the reals, it has rational canonical form $A'$, and it does not have a Jordan Canonical Form. If we consider $A$ as a matrix over the complex numbers, then the minimal polynomial of $A$ can be factored as $$f(X)=(X-1)(X - i)(X+i)$$ and $A$ has rational canonical form $$begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & i & 0 \ 0 &0 &-iend{pmatrix}$$ which is also its Jordan Canonical Form.
Note that the first matrix you show is not the Rational Canonical Form of $A$. The rational canonical form consists of hypercompanion matrices of the elementary divisors, which are powers of irreducible factors, and clearly $(X-1)(X^2 +1)$ is reducible. There is another canonical form where every matrix is similar to a block diagonal matrix where the blocks consist of companion matrices of the invariant polynomials - which is a "step" towards the Rational Canonical Form if you will - and this is where the matrix $$begin{pmatrix}0 & 0 & 1 \ 1 & 0 &-1 \ 0 &1 &1end{pmatrix}$$ fits in.
Just also to clarify further in terms of the question: what you call a Jordan Block corresponding to eigenvalue 1 would be called a hypercompanion matrix associated with $(X-1)$ in the context of the Rational Canonical Form...it is the same thing, but when referring to the canonical form involved here the second would be more correct.
If you want to see more about how the rational canonical form is defined, please see this answer.
answered Jan 16 at 7:48
Christiaan HattinghChristiaan Hattingh
3,867922
edited Jan 16 at 10:58
answered Jan 16 at 7:48
Christiaan HattinghChristiaan Hattingh
3,867922
answered Jan 16 at 7:48
Christiaan HattinghChristiaan Hattingh
3,867922
answered Jan 16 at 7:48
Christiaan HattinghChristiaan Hattingh
3,867922
3,867922
$begingroup$
I have asked in my question if two matrices are similar over $mathbb{R}$ or not. Is it yes or no ?
$endgroup$
– user371231
Jan 16 at 10:15
1
$begingroup$
@user371231 it is yes...I have modified the answer
$endgroup$
– Christiaan Hattingh
Jan 16 at 10:31
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I have asked in my question if two matrices are similar over $mathbb{R}$ or not. Is it yes or no ?
$endgroup$
– user371231
Jan 16 at 10:15
1
$begingroup$
@user371231 it is yes...I have modified the answer
$endgroup$
– Christiaan Hattingh
Jan 16 at 10:31
$begingroup$
I have asked in my question if two matrices are similar over $mathbb{R}$ or not. Is it yes or no ?
$endgroup$
– user371231
Jan 16 at 10:15
$begingroup$
I have asked in my question if two matrices are similar over $mathbb{R}$ or not. Is it yes or no ?
$endgroup$
– user371231
Jan 16 at 10:15
1
1
$begingroup$
@user371231 it is yes...I have modified the answer
$endgroup$
– Christiaan Hattingh
Jan 16 at 10:31
$begingroup$
@user371231 it is yes...I have modified the answer
$endgroup$
– Christiaan Hattingh
Jan 16 at 10:31
add a comment |
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3056647%2fcan-a-matrix-be-similar-to-a-block-matrix-with-jordan-block-or-companion-matrix%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
$begingroup$
I think it is Ok. Everything follows from the Structure of Modules over PID.
$endgroup$
– user185640
Dec 30 '18 at 12:57
$begingroup$
You have reinvented the wheel. Your second matrix is (practically) the real Jordan normal form.
$endgroup$
– loup blanc
Dec 30 '18 at 18:58