A linear transformation T: V -> V is called nilpotent of order p if T^p = 0 and T^(p-1) is not equal to 0. If T is nilpotent, show that 1 - T is an isomorphism, where 1 denotes the identity map on V.

Any help or hints would be greatly appreciated.

Printable View

- February 3rd 2011, 08:03 PMShapeshiftNilpotent Linear Transformation
A linear transformation T: V -> V is called nilpotent of order p if T^p = 0 and T^(p-1) is not equal to 0. If T is nilpotent, show that 1 - T is an isomorphism, where 1 denotes the identity map on V.

Any help or hints would be greatly appreciated. - February 3rd 2011, 09:36 PMJose27
Consider the operator .

- February 4th 2011, 06:29 AMShapeshift
I'm not quite sure I still understand. If I add all of the T's, will I be getting a summation of T from i=1 to i=p-1?

- February 4th 2011, 06:58 AMHallsofIvy
times what?

times what? - February 4th 2011, 07:25 AMShapeshift
so x^n -y^n = (x-y)(x^n-1 + x^n-2y + x^n-3y^2 +...+ xy^n-2 + y^n-1)

so I - T^p = (I-T)(I^0 + I^-1T + I^-2T^2 +...+ IT^p-2 + T^p-1)

so then I get I - T^p = (I-T)(I + T + T^2 +...+ T^p-1)

(I-T) = (I - T^p)/(I+T+T^2+...+T^p-1)

and T^p=0, so (I-T) = I/(I+T+T^2+...+T^p-1)= I + T^-1+T-2+T^-3+...+T^1-p

which means that T has an inverse, T^-1 for T, T^-2 for T^2, etc, so T is invertible, and it is invertible iff T is one-to-one and onto, so it is isomorphic. Is this correct? - February 4th 2011, 08:42 AMtonio

I think you succeeded to make pretty cumbersome and messy something that is supposed to be pretty simple:

is invertible since

it multiplied by all that stuff withing the long parentheses is the unit transformation. Period.

The only thing still left is to explainthe second equality above (from the left) holds, since product__why__

of transformations isn't usually commutative, but in this case...

Tonio