Proof of Cayley-Hamilton Theorem
We present multiple proofs of the Cayley--Hamilton theorem, each illuminating a different aspect of the result. The adjugate (cofactor) proof is the most elementary, while the extension-of-scalars proof is the most conceptual.
Statement
Let with characteristic polynomial . Then .
Proof 1: Via the adjugate matrix
Key idea: The adjugate matrix is a matrix whose entries are polynomials in , and the identity will give us the result when we "substitute" .
Step 1: The adjugate identity. For any matrix , we have . Applying this to :
Step 2: Expand the adjugate as a polynomial in . Each entry of is an minor of , hence a polynomial in of degree at most . So we can write:
where are matrices with entries in (independent of ).
Step 3: Expand both sides. Write . The left side is:
The right side is:
Step 4: Match coefficients. Comparing coefficients of each power of :
Step 5: Multiply and sum. Multiply the -th equation (coefficient of ) by on the left:
- : .
- : .
- : .
- : .
Wait, we need to be more careful. Multiply the equation for by :
- From : multiply by : .
- From : multiply by : .
- From : multiply by : .
- From : multiply by : .
Step 6: Telescope. Adding all these equations, the left side telescopes:
More precisely, the sum is from the last equation, but the telescoping gives:
Wait, let me re-sum. The total of the left sides is:
Actually, the positive term from the equation cancels with the negative term from the equation. So the total is .
The total of the right sides is .
Therefore .
, .
, .
So and .
The equations are:
- : .
- : , i.e., ✓.
- : , i.e., ✓.
Multiplying: , and the telescoping gives .
Proof 2: Via extension of scalars (for diagonalizable case)
Special case: Assume is diagonalizable, i.e., where .
Then , and:
Now , which has a zero in the -th diagonal entry. The product has every diagonal entry equal to zero (the -th entry is , which contains the factor ). So , hence .
The diagonalizable case is not sufficient since not all matrices are diagonalizable over . However, over (the algebraic closure), the diagonalizable matrices are dense (in the Zariski topology). Since is a polynomial identity in the entries of , and it holds on a dense set, it holds everywhere. This is the "extension of scalars" or "density" argument.
More concretely: the entries of are polynomial functions of the entries of . These polynomials vanish on all diagonalizable matrices (a Zariski-dense set), hence vanish identically.
Proof 3: Via eigenvectors
Over an algebraically closed field , let be an eigenvalue of with eigenvector . Then:
since for all , so for any polynomial .
If has linearly independent eigenvectors (i.e., is diagonalizable), then for all implies .
For non-diagonalizable : use generalized eigenvectors. If is a generalized eigenvector with , and , then a similar but more involved argument shows . Since the generalized eigenvectors span (over an algebraically closed field), .
, .
Eigenvector: , . Check: since .
Generalized eigenvector: , , but .
So . Since span , .
Verification examples
.
.
:
, so the entry of is:
✓.
Similarly, all entries vanish.
, .
(a nilpotent matrix cubed is zero).
, .
✓.
over . .
. Wait: .
So ✓.
(cyclic permutation).
, so and ✓.
Consequences revisited
By Cayley--Hamilton, the vector space contains all powers (by repeatedly using the relation ). This means:
a vector space of dimension at most . The exact dimension is , where is the minimal polynomial.
For with and :
For : .
.
Summary
The Cayley--Hamilton theorem admits several proofs, each with distinct flavor:
- Adjugate proof: Elementary, works over any commutative ring. Uses the identity and a telescoping argument.
- Density argument: Proves the result for diagonalizable matrices (where it is obvious) and extends by continuity/Zariski density to all matrices.
- Generalized eigenvector proof: Checks on each (generalized) eigenvector over the algebraic closure.
All three illuminate the same truth: the characteristic polynomial is the "identity card" of the matrix, and the matrix itself is constrained to satisfy this identity.