Put $d_i=\dim K_i$, including $d_0=0$. The restriction of $T^i$ to $K_{i+1}$ has kernel $K_i$, so the rank-nullity theorem givesLikewise $T^{i-1}{|}_{K_i}$ has kernel $K_{i-1}$ and hence image dimension $d_i-d_{i-1}$. But $T(K_{i+1})\subseteq K_i$, which impliesComparing dimensions yields the required concavity of the kernel dimensions of powers of a nilpotent map:

Write $K_i=\ker T^i$, with $K_0=\{0\}$. The minimal polynomial $x^m$ means $T^m=0$ and $T^{m-1}\ne 0$. Choose $w$ with $T^{m-1}w\ne 0$. For each $0\le i<m$, set $w_i=T^{m-1-i}w$. ThenThus $w_i\in K_{i+1}\setminus K_i$. Also $K_i\subseteq K_{i+1}$ because applying $T$ to zero still gives zero. Therefore the kernel dimensions of powers of a nilpotent map increase strictly until the nilpotency index:The same reasoning covers $m=1$, when the nilpotent linear map is zero on a nonzero vector space.

We prove by mathematical induction on $n=\dim V$ that every linear map on an $n$-dimensional complex vector space admits both triangular forms. For $n=0$ or $1$ this is immediate. When $n>1$, the fundamental theorem of algebra supplies an eigenvector $v$; its span $U=⟨v⟩$ is an invariant subspace.

By parts (ii) and (iii), $U^0$ has dimension $n-1$ and is an invariant subspace of the dual map $T^{\prime }$. Apply the induction hypothesis to $T^{\prime }{|}_{U^0}$ to choose a basis ${\phi }_1,\dots ,{\phi }_{n-1}$ with an upper triangular matrix. Extend it by a linear functional ${\phi }_n$ satisfying ${\phi }_n(v)=1$. Such a functional exists by basis extension, and cannot belong to $U^0$. In this basis of $V^{\prime }$, the matrix of $T^{\prime }$ has the formwhere $B$ is an upper triangular matrix; here the last diagonal entry follows by evaluating $T^{\prime }{\phi }_n$ at $v$, where $Tv=\lambda v$.

There is a basis $e_1,\dots ,e_n$ of $V$ with ${\phi }_i(e_j)={\delta }_{ij}$, since the dual basis construction gives a finite-dimensional bidual evaluation map isomorphism. In particular $e_n=v$. The matrix transpose relationship for a dual map givesa lower triangular matrix. Reversing this basis turns a lower triangular matrix into an upper triangular matrix. If $R$ is the permutation matrix reversing the order, we have provedThis completes the induction by triangularization using dual spaces.

Suppose $U$ is an invariant subspace for $T$. For $\phi \in U^0$ and $u\in U$, the dual map satisfiesbecause $Tu\in U$ and the annihilator of a vector subspace consists of the linear functionals vanishing there. ThusThis is the correspondence between invariant subspaces and annihilators.

For a vector subspace $U\subseteq V$, its annihilator of a vector subspace isLet $\dim U=k$ and $\dim V=n$. Extend a basis $u_1,\dots ,u_k$ of $U$ to a basis $u_1,\dots ,u_n$ of $V$, and let ${\epsilon }^1,\dots ,{\epsilon }^n$ be the dual basis. Every linear functional has the unique expression $\phi ={\sum }_{j=1}^n\phi (u_j){\epsilon }^j$. It belongs to $U^0$ precisely when its first $k$ coefficients vanish. ConsequentlyThe listed dual basis elements are linearly independent, so counting them proves the formula, including $U=0$ and $U=V$.

The dual space is the vector space of all linear functionals on $V$:Addition and scalar multiplication are defined pointwise. The dual map sends an output measurement back along $T$:The function composition of these linear maps is linear, and $T^{\prime }$ is linear in $\phi$. This is the algebraic dual map, so its definition involves no complex conjugation or inner product.

All calculations here take place in the finite field $F={\mathbb{F}}_3$. For the given matrix $S$, its characteristic polynomial isThe values $q(0),q(1),q(2)$ are $2,2,1$, so this quadratic polynomial has no polynomial root in $F$ and is an irreducible polynomial. Direct calculation givesNeither $S$ nor $q(S)$ is zero. The Cayley-Hamilton theorem says that the minimal polynomial divides $xq(x)$; its proper monic polynomial divisors cannot annihilate $S$, so $m_S=xq$.

The two kernels give the required primary decomposition theorem for linear maps explicitly:The determinant of the matrix with these three basis vectors as columns is $1$ in $F$, proving $W=W_1\oplus W_2$. To check these are invariant subspaces, writing $u=(1,2,0{)}^T$ and $z=(0,0,1{)}^T$ gives $Su=u+2z$ and $Sz=2u$. Hence the matrix of the restriction to $W_2$ in the basis $(u,z)$ iswith minimal polynomial $q$; the nonzero vector space $W_1$ has zero restriction and minimal polynomial $x$.

The primary decomposition theorem for linear maps starts with a linear map $T:V\to V$ on a finite-dimensional vector space over a field $F$. Factor its minimal polynomial aswhere the $p_j$ are distinct monic polynomials that are irreducible polynomials and $a_j\ge 1$. Define $V_j=\ker p_j(T{)}^{a_j}$. ThenThus the direct sum separates the irreducible polynomial factors into uniquely determined invariant subspaces. The statement works even when the minimal polynomial does not split into linear polynomials over $F$.

No. On the real vector space $V={\mathbb{R}}^2$, use the symmetric bilinear formIts matrix of a bilinear form is $\mathrm{diag}(1,-1)$, whose determinant is $-1\ne 0$, so it is a nondegenerate bilinear form. LetA vector $(s,t)$ belongs to the bilinear orthogonal complement $U^{\perp }$ exactly when $s-t=0$. HenceIn particular, the claimed direct sum fails. The isotropic vector $(1,1)$ has zero self-pairing, although it pairs nontrivially with other vectors of $V$.

The dimension identity in part (i) counts both vector subspaces but does not force their intersection of vector subspaces to be zero. For a symmetric bilinear form, $U\cap U^{\perp }$ is the radical of a bilinear form restricted to $U$. Thus the precise criterion isIndeed, trivial intersection of vector subspaces and part (i) give a sum of vector subspaces of dimension $\dim V$. A positive-definite bilinear form would guarantee this for every $U$; symmetry alone does not.

For the given nondegenerate bilinear form, define the linear mapBy part (a), $\Phi$ is a linear isomorphism. The paper's bilinear orthogonal complement uses $U$ in the first argument; with this convention,Here $U^0$ is the annihilator of a vector subspace $U$. Since $\Phi$ is a linear isomorphism, its restriction gives a linear isomorphism $U^{\perp }\to U^0$.

For completeness, choose a basis $u_1,\dots ,u_k$ of $U$ and extend it to a basis $u_1,\dots ,u_n$ of $V$. In its dual basis $u_1^{\ast },\dots ,u_n^{\ast }$, a linear functional vanishes on $U$ exactly when its first $k$ coefficients are zero. ThereforeConsequentlyThe argument includes $U=0$ and $U=V$, and requires no symmetry assumption on the bilinear form.

Take the Nilpotent Jordan blockThenSuppose that a complex matrix $B$ of size three satisfied $B^3=A$. We would have $B^9=A^3=0$, so $B$ would be a nilpotent matrix. Every eigenvalue of $B$ must then be zero: if $Bv=\theta v$ with $v\ne 0$, applying $B^9$ gives ${\theta }^{9}v=0$. Its characteristic polynomial is therefore $t^3$, and the Cayley-Hamilton theorem gives $B^3=0$. This contradicts $B^3=A\ne 0$. HenceThe obstruction is that a nilpotent matrix of size three cannot have nilpotency index greater than three.

We construct a cube root of a matrix on each Jordan block. Since $A$ is an invertible matrix over the complex numbers, its Jordan normal form isConsider one block $J_m(\lambda )=\lambda I+N$, where $N=J_m(0)$ is a Nilpotent Jordan block and $N^m=0$. Choose a complex cube root $\beta$ of $\lambda$, so ${\beta }^3=\lambda$.

We need a polynomial $q(z)$ with constant term one satisfyingThis can be constructed using only polynomial multiplication. Write $q(z)=1+{\sum }_{j=1}^{m-1}{c}_j{z}^j$. Once $c_1,\dots ,c_{j-1}$ have been chosen, the coefficient of $z^j$ in $q(z{)}^3$ is $3c_j$ plus an expression depending only on those earlier coefficients. Choose $c_j$ to make this coefficient one at $j=1$ and zero at $2\le j<m$. Division by three is possible over the complex numbers, so the recursion always succeeds. Its first coefficients areThis is the truncated binomial cube root of the identity plus a nilpotent matrix; equivalently $c_j=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{1/3}{j}\right)$, where the generalized binomial coefficient is $\alpha (\alpha -1)\cdots (\alpha -j+1)/j!$ and the empty product is one.

Substitute $z=N/\lambda$. The polynomial remainder is a multiple of $N^m$, hence zero. It follows thatFor $m=1$, take $q=1$, so the same construction covers single-entry blocks. Assemble the block diagonal matrix $C={⨁}_r{C}_{m_r}({\lambda }_r)$. Taking matrix powers respects these blocks, and conjugating back givesThus every invertible matrix over the complex numbers has at least one cube root of a matrix. The construction uses only finitely many matrix powers.

Write $K_j=\ker T^j$, where $T^0=I$ and $K_0=\{0\}$. These kernels satisfy $K_j\subseteq K_{j+1}$. Also $T(K_{i+1})\subseteq K_i$ and $T(K_i)\subseteq K_{i-1}$: for example, $T^i(Tv)=T^{i+1}v=0$ when $v\in K_{i+1}$. Thus the proposed linear map between quotient vector spaces is well-defined and has the formulaIf $v+K_i$ belongs to its kernel, then $Tv\in K_{i-1}$. Therefore $T^{i}v=T^{i-1}(Tv)=0$, so $v\in K_i$ and $v+K_i$ is zero. We have provedThese are the injections between successive kernel quotients. In finite dimension, they imply $\dim K_{i+1}-\dim K_i\le \dim K_i-\dim K_{i-1}$.

Surjectivity need not hold. Take a nonzero vector space $V$ and the zero linear map $T=0$. At $i=1$, we have $K_2=K_1=V$ and $K_0=0$, so

No. Over any field $F$, take $V=F^2$, let $T=I$ be the identity operator, and choose the vector subspaceBoth $U$ and the quotient vector space $V/U$ have dimension one. A one-dimensional vector space has no nonzero proper vector subspace, so neither can have a nonzero proper invariant subspace. The induced linear map on a quotient vector space is again the identity operator.

However, $L=\mathrm{span}\{e_2\}$ is another nonzero proper vector subspace of $V$, and $T(L)=L$. HenceThe hypotheses do not prevent a direct sum $V=U\oplus L$ whose two summands are invariant subspaces.

The quotient vector space $V/U$ identifies two vectors $v,w$ precisely when $v-w\in U$. Since $U$ is an invariant subspace, $T(U)\subseteq U$. ThusConsequently $T(v)+U=T(w)+U$: the output does not depend on the chosen representative. This proves that the induced linear map on a quotient vector spaceis well-defined. It is a linear map because, for scalars $a,b$,

Use the general definition of a Cartan subalgebra: a nilpotent Lie algebra that is a Lie subalgebra and equals its normalizer of a Lie subalgebra. In a semisimple Lie algebra, the stated structural fact says every Cartan subalgebra $\mathfrak{h}$ is a toral subalgebra and an abelian Lie algebra. Part (i) therefore givesConversely, suppose $\mathfrak{h}$ is a toral subalgebra and an abelian Lie algebra with $C_{\mathfrak{g}}(\mathfrak{h})=\mathfrak{h}$. An abelian Lie algebra is a nilpotent Lie algebra, because its lower central series of a Lie algebra vanishes at the second term. Part (i) gives $N_{\mathfrak{g}}(\mathfrak{h})=C_{\mathfrak{g}}(\mathfrak{h})=\mathfrak{h}$. Thus $\mathfrak{h}$ satisfies the defining conditions of a Cartan subalgebra, proving

The normalizer of a Lie subalgebra and the centralizer of a Lie subalgebra areThe second is always contained in the first. Conversely, let $x\in N_{\mathfrak{g}}(\mathfrak{a})$ and $a\in \mathfrak{a}$. Then $[a,x]\in \mathfrak{a}$, and, because $\mathfrak{a}$ is an abelian Lie algebra,By the definition of a toral subalgebra, $\mathrm{ad}a$ is diagonalizable. A diagonalizable linear map $T$ satisfies $\ker T^2=\ker T$: in an eigenbasis, both kernels consist of exactly the eigenvectors whose eigenvalue is zero. Thus $[a,x]=0$. This holds for every $a\in \mathfrak{a}$, so $x\in C_{\mathfrak{g}}(\mathfrak{a})$ andThis is the normalizer-centralizer equality for a toral abelian subalgebra; it does not require $\mathfrak{g}$ to be a semisimple Lie algebra.

Use the corrected Lie algebra representation $E=-e$, $H=h$, $F=f$ from part (i). A vector subspace is invariant under $E,H,F$ exactly when it is invariant under the printed $e,h,f$, since changing the sign of a linear map does not change its invariant subspaces. DefineThis is a nonzero proper submodule: $H$ preserves each $k{v}_i$, $F$ increases the index, $E(v_1)=0$, and $E(v_i)=-(i-1)v_{i-1}\in W$ for $i\ge 2$.

We must rule out submodules consisting only of mixtures of weight vectors. Let $U\ne 0$ be any submodule, and choose $u={\sum }_{j\in S}{a}_j{v}_j\in U$ with $S$ finite and every $a_j\ne 0$. The eigenvalues $-2j$ of $H$ are distinct. For $i\in S$, the Lagrange interpolation polynomialsatisfies $p_i(H)u=a_i{v}_i$. Since $U$ is invariant under $H$, it is invariant under every polynomial in $H$, so $v_i\in U$.

If $i=0$, repeated applications of $F$ give $F^m{v}_0=m!v_m$, and $U=V$. If $i\ge 1$, repeated applications of $E$ give a nonzero multiple of $v_1$, because the successive coefficients $-(i-1),\dots ,-1$ are nonzero in characteristic zero. Repeated applications of $F$ to $v_1$ then give every $v_j$ with $j\ge 1$, so $W\subseteq U$.

Finally, if such a $U$ contains any vector outside $W$, that vector has a nonzero coefficient of $v_0$; the same polynomial interpolation extracts $v_0$, forcing $U=V$. Hence the complete list of submodules is $0,W,V$. In particular, $W$ is a simple module. The quotient module $V/W$ has basis ${\overline{v}}_0$; $E{\overline{v}}_0=H{\overline{v}}_0=0$ and $F{\overline{v}}_0={\overline{v}}_1=0$. It is the one-dimensional trivial Lie algebra representation.

The module extension does not split. If $V=W\oplus U$ for a submodule $U$, then $U$ would be a one-dimensional trivial Lie algebra representation, since it maps isomorphically to $V/W$. But $\ker H=k{v}_0$ and $F{v}_0=v_1\ne 0$, so no such $U$ exists. ThusHere semisimple module means a direct sum of modules that are simple modules, equivalently a module in which every submodule has a complementary submodule. This is the nonsplit zero-weight Verma extension for sl2: rescaling to $w_i=i!v_i$ gives $F{w}_i=w_{i+1}$ and $E{w}_i=i(1-i)w_{i-1}$. Its infinite-dimensional vector space is outside the hypotheses of the Weyl complete reducibility theorem.

There is a sign error in the printed assertion under the standard sl2 triple convention. Work first with the operators exactly as printed. Since the $v_i$ form a Hamel basis, their prescribed images extend to linear maps on $V$; each vector is a finite linear combination of basis vectors.

For $i\ge 1$, the operator commutators with $h$ areAt $i=0$, the first identity holds because both sides vanish; the second holds because $hf(v_0)=-2v_1$ and $fh(v_0)=0$. On the other hand, for $i\ge 1$,At $i=0$, both $ef(v_0)=e(v_1)=0$ and $fe(v_0)=0$, so this identity also holds. Thus the actual relations areIn particular, $[e,f]v_1=2v_1\ne -2v_1=h{v}_1$ in characteristic zero; the requested equality cannot hold as printed. Settingcorrects the sign and gives $[H,E]=2E$, $[H,F]=-2F$, $[E,F]=H$. These are the standard sl2 triple relations, so the standard basis of the sl2 Lie algebra acts on $V$ by $E,H,F$, giving a Lie algebra representation.

For completeness, these operators are linearly independent: applying $aE+bH+cF=0$ to $v_0$ gives $c=0$; applying it to $v_1$ then gives $b=0$; applying it to $v_2$ gives $a=0$. Hence the printed operators span a Lie subalgebra isomorphic to the sl2 Lie algebra, even though their printed normalization fails. Replacing the coefficient $i-1$ in the printed definition of $e(v_i)$ by $1-i$ is one equivalent way to repair the statement.

For the Lie algebra two-cocycle ${\alpha }_c$ of part (i), the central extension of a Lie algebra has a basis $x,y,z$ and Lie bracketsPut $y^{\prime }=y+cz$. This is still a basis together with $x,z$, andConsequently $⟨x,y^{\prime }⟩$ is a Lie subalgebra isomorphic to the affine Lie algebra of the line. It commutes with $kz$ and has zero intersection with $kz$, so both summands are ideals of a Lie algebra andThis also holds for the stricter equivalence of central extensions of a Lie algebra. Indeed, choose the linear functional $t$ with $t(x)=0$, $t(y)=c$. Since $[x,y]=y$ in $\mathfrak{s}$, the change of section in part (a) gives ${\alpha }_c^{\prime }(x,y)=c-t(y)=0$. Thus every Lie algebra two-cocycle here is a Lie algebra two-coboundary, so $H^2(\mathfrak{s},k)=0$ in Lie algebra cohomology. The explicit map from the split central extension of a Lie algebra sends $x$ to $x$, $y$ to $y+cz$, and $z$ to $z$; it fixes the central line and induces the identity on the quotient Lie algebra.