5
$\begingroup$

We know from linear algebra that if an $n \times n$ matrix $A$ over a field $k$ is diagonalizable (that is, there exists $P \in GL_n(k)$ such that $PAP^{-1}$ is a diagonal matrix), then this diagonal matrix is unique up to permutation of diagonal entries.

Are there any analogous results in the literature if we replace the field $k$ with the ring $\mathbb{Z}_{p^k}$ where $p$ is a prime and $k \geq 2$?

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ Your first sentence is missing a "then", and the parenthetical doesn't end. Did you mean to include something there? $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 26, 2018 at 1:39
  • $\begingroup$ The ring has zero divisors, so I would not expect as much uniqueness. Gerhard "Will Think About Four Elements" Paseman, 2018.06.25. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 26, 2018 at 1:44
  • $\begingroup$ I have edited the question so that it reads as a complete sentence. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 26, 2018 at 1:52
  • $\begingroup$ To Gerhard Paseman: That is an understandable assumption; indeed the JCF (with at least one nontrivial Jordan block) over such rings doesn't have 'uniqueness' in the sense that my question asks concerning diagonal matrices. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 14, 2018 at 2:46

1 Answer 1

7
$\begingroup$

The answer is yes, that you can get an analogous theorem, because $\mathbb{Z}_{p^k}$ is a local ring.

The equation $P^{-1}AP = B$ can be rewritten $AP = PB$. Write $A = \text{diag}(a), B = \text{diag}(b), a = \{a_i\}, b = \{b_j\}$. Then this implies that for any $i, j$, we have that $P_{i, j} a_i = P_{i, j} b_j$.

As $P \in GL_n(\mathbb{Z}_{p^k})$, we know that $\text{det}(P)$ must be a unit. We can write $\text{det}(P) = \sum_{\sigma \in S_n} (-1)^{\text{sgn}(\sigma)} \prod_i P_{i, \sigma(i)}$. As $\mathbb{Z}_{p^k}$ is a local ring, the set of nonunits is an additively closed, so at least one of the $\prod_i P_{i, \sigma(i)}$ must be a unit. Correspondingly, there must be some $\sigma$ such that $P_{i, \sigma(i)}$ is a unit for all $i$.

Then $P_{i, \sigma(i)} a_i = P_{i, \sigma(i)} b_{\sigma(i)}$. But $P_{i, \sigma(i)}$ is a unit for each $i$ - so we can cancel it to get $a_i = b_{\sigma(i)}$ for each $i$. Therefore, $\sigma$ is a permutation of diagonal entries that takes $A$ to $B$, and we are done.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Could you elaborate a little about about why $\sigma$ must exist as written? $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 26, 2018 at 2:57
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @BDS I have done so. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 26, 2018 at 3:02
  • $\begingroup$ Completely trivial nitpick on my part, but I think the relation should read $P_{i,j}a_{j}=P_{i,j}b_{i}$. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 5, 2024 at 17:25

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.